Why Dishonored 2 doesnot have corvo as sole protagonist?

[RedDeadFred]

How for can you a WOMAN! I donot! When I go peepee with my boyween I always think about videogames that also go peepee with their boyween and when I think there is one that insnt I do a cry. Remove please.

The fact that so many people treated this as a real post is legitimately weird.

Also what's with all the Corvo hate? Is there a reason it doesn't make sense for him to be in Dishonored 2? (I didn't actually beat the first one)

Thank you for making me chuckle. People are treating it as a real post because of who is making the post. B-Cell has a way of sounding utterly sincere when he makes these kinds of topics.

I don't hate that Corvo is in the game, but I understand where people are coming from when they say that his story was finished in the first game. The epilogue sequence talks about how Corvo is at Emily's side as she leads the nation and how even after his death, she'll remember him as more than just the Royal Protector.

I suppose you could just take the first game's ending as the Outsider making assumptions about what will happen, but even if that's not the case, I don't think the narration is so specific that it rules out Corvo going on another big mission in the future.

 

[Asita]

Also what's with all the Corvo hate? Is there a reason it doesn't make sense for him to be in Dishonored 2? (I didn't actually beat the first one)

Eh...a weak one. Corvo's story was told in Dishonored, and due to some directorial decisions he wasn't exactly a strong character in his own right. Cue Dishonored 2 where fifteen years have passed and he is still a bodyguard, but this time his charge seems every bit as capable as he is. Narratively speaking, Corvo would have best been suited to either die (thereby further emphasizing the need for self-reliance in his former charge), or act as a supporting character as that charge evolves into a leader. From a story standpoint, the setup was perfect for a coming of age story for Emily, and Corvo being an alternate playable character divides the narrative focus at the very least.

 

[Gethsemani_v1legacy]

Also what's with all the Corvo hate? Is there a reason it doesn't make sense for him to be in Dishonored 2? (I didn't actually beat the first one)

Asita nails it. In this thread, I think, a lot of us are simply rhetorically turning the tables on the OP, who felt that Emily was the unnecessary character. We have simply pointed out that of the two protagonists Corvo is the one with the weaker claim to actually being in the game, since the main narrative revolves around Emily's claim to the throne.

 

[happyninja42]

Also what's with all the Corvo hate? Is there a reason it doesn't make sense for him to be in Dishonored 2? (I didn't actually beat the first one)

Eh...a weak one. Corvo's story was told in Dishonored, and due to some directorial decisions he wasn't exactly a strong character in his own right. Cue Dishonored 2 where fifteen years have passed and he is still a bodyguard, but this time his charge seems every bit as capable as he is. Narratively speaking, Corvo would have best been suited to either die (thereby further emphasizing the need for self-reliance in his former charge), or act as a supporting character as that charge evolves into a leader. From a story standpoint, the setup was perfect for a coming of age story for Emily, and Corvo being an alternate playable character divides the narrative focus at the very least.

I think there is something to be said from the mystical side of things, that Corvo would be involved. If the events of DH 2 are again involving the dark magics of the Outsider, trying to push events in a specific direction, Corvo, being an agent with a lot invested in that ballgame, does make sense he would show up.

Sort of like not having Darth Vader show up for Episodes 4-6, simply because "his story" was told in the prequels. Sure, the main focus is Luke and the other rebels, but not having Vader in that story would feel a little odd.

Granted, it's somewhat different with him being a protagonist, but I can see having Corvo included, given his personal investment in Emily, as well as being a literal hand of the Outsider.

 

[Asita]

Also what's with all the Corvo hate? Is there a reason it doesn't make sense for him to be in Dishonored 2? (I didn't actually beat the first one)

Eh...a weak one. Corvo's story was told in Dishonored, and due to some directorial decisions he wasn't exactly a strong character in his own right. Cue Dishonored 2 where fifteen years have passed and he is still a bodyguard, but this time his charge seems every bit as capable as he is. Narratively speaking, Corvo would have best been suited to either die (thereby further emphasizing the need for self-reliance in his former charge), or act as a supporting character as that charge evolves into a leader. From a story standpoint, the setup was perfect for a coming of age story for Emily, and Corvo being an alternate playable character divides the narrative focus at the very least.

I think there is something to be said from the mystical side of things, that Corvo would be involved. If the events of DH 2 are again involving the dark magics of the Outsider, trying to push events in a specific direction, Corvo, being an agent with a lot invested in that ballgame, does make sense he would show up.

Sort of like not having Darth Vader show up for Episodes 4-6, simply because "his story" was told in the prequels. Sure, the main focus is Luke and the other rebels, but not having Vader in that story would feel a little odd.

Granted, it's somewhat different with him being a protagonist, but I can see having Corvo included, given his personal investment in Emily, as well as being a literal hand of the Outsider.

Involved, sure. I'm just saying that - given what we know about Dishonored 2 - by rights he should have been Obi-Wan or Vader instead of sharing top billing with Luke. That he should have been in a supporting role rather than as the protagonist/deuteragonist, much less a focal character.

 

[The Madman]

On one hand Emily clearly has the greater stake in the story, at least from what we've seen in the promotional stuff, and makes sense as the obvious protagonist in Dishonored 2. Add in that she's got some awesome looking new powers and it should be a no-brainer to play the story from her perspective firstly...

But then they went and hired Stephen Russell as Corvo. Freakin Stephen 'Master Thief' Russell. Now I can't help but want to play as Garr- I mean Corvo. Ugg, the indecision is killing me.

As for why anyone would complain about there being an option of choosing who to play in the first place, I don't know. It's pretty awesome that you'll be able to play the campaign from multiple perspectives as well as using different gameplay style with different consequences. More isn't always better, but in this case I don't see any downside whatsoever and I trust Arkane to make a great game as they haven't let me down yet.

 

[happyninja42]

snip

Involved, sure. I'm just saying that - given what we know about Dishonored 2 - by rights he should have been Obi-Wan or Vader instead of sharing top billing with Luke. That he should have been in a supporting role rather than as the protagonist/deuteragonist, much less a focal character.[/quote]

Well, considering, from what I've heard at least, the game is you can play from either viewpoint, there is nothing stopping you from simply not playing as Corvo, and sticking to Emily. And in that playthrough, I believe he would only be a supporting character.

I don't know, I just don't see a problem here. It reminds me of how Resident Evil 2 would switch focus from the two leads. And in that game, I thought it actually worked pretty well. Two simultaneous storylines moving along parallel to each other.