46 replies to this topic

[Furetchen]

2.Sympathy:
3.Likeable villan:

While I agree these are both important to a degree, please don't make it so that they're actually more sympathetic characters than your protagonists...

[The Big Kazam]

While I agree these are both important to a degree, please don't make it so that they're actually more sympathetic characters than your protagonists...

Unless that's what the writer(s) are going for.

And I think they did that in Metal Gear Solid 3. I think...

Edited by Ein Silver Rose, 26 July 2012 - 03:23 AM.

[Furetchen]

Well yeah, I guess. But if you do it accidentally, that's just sloppy and usually fatal to the reader having any real engagement to the story.

[SlayerX]

Ashera? I believe her motives became quite clear to everyone in that game...she didn't try to hide herself at all haha.

I meant Sephiran... I didn't feel like putting spoilers for that eventhough by this point everybody knows.

[PK Gaming]

They need to have lots of charisma, devilishly intelligent, powerful, manipulative and truly evil. Megatron from beast wars (don't laugh) is the ideal villain for me. He's always in control of the situation, is the smartest character in the series (Tarantulus is a genius yes, but some of his actions are downright stupid) and is ruthlessly powerful. Charisma makes him interesting (instead of being a dull boring villain) and he'll even crack a joke or smile in specific circumstances.

[kdanger]

It really depends on the context. If it's a story that's trying to stick to reality, it's going to be harder to pull off a puppy-kicking card-carrying villain, but if the creators are aware of their own ridiculousness and don't mind it's easier to get away with a villain who's just plain evil. Likewise dependent on context is whether the villain is funny or serious, likable and relatable or just someone who's fun to hate. Really whether a villain works is a matter of the skill of the writer, not the character's makeup itself.

Granted, there are some things that are hard to do well, like having the villain be significantly less intelligent than the hero which tends to get boring pretty quickly unless handled right, but mostly it's just how you handle the traits of the villain within the context of the story.

(Got some personal pet peeves, though. Getting sick of the villain who is mentally unbalanced and that unbalance is treated as wholly and unsympathetically evil. Also getting sick of the villain who is misogynist/racist/homophobic/sexually abusive for no reason other than making them more evil, and that's never really confronted in story except for an "oh look how evil they are for doing this!" Both are lazy writing and tend to cause problems. They can be well-written but I'm probably not going to like them much.)

[eclipse]

Kuja is the best looking dude in FF9?

Sure............?

FF9 has a mix of nonhumans, demi-humans, and humans, and the cast ranged from scary to sexy, with some of the scarier-guys on your side and some of the better-looking ones on the opposite side. It's a refreshing change from certain other titles in the series where the entire cast looks like they were hired out of a modeling agency. Or a certain SRPG series where most of the good guys look decent to amazing, and most of the bad guys look decent to ugly.

[tenkiforecast]

You need the right tone for a flat-out evil villain to work. FF5 is, again, a great example. The game does not take itself seriously AT ALL, and that's why "Yar I'm a tree" Exdeath works.

In serious games, make sure that the villains are competent (Megaman Battle Network has... issues with this) and have a motivation that is not base. Final Fantasy Tactics works this in very well (except for the Demons, I think). Each side is grasping for power and control of Ivalice while using the peasants and noble families as their pawns. Delita decides to break out of the lower class and end the subjugation towards people like him. Ramza just wants the war to end. It's a fantasy version of the War of the Roses from European History, just told differently with varying motivations. This is an example of how history can help write the plot.

[Anouleth]

I like it when they're evil. Give me Ashnard and Lekain over Lyon's wishy-washy lameness any day.

[Liz]

I LIKE VILLAINS WHO CHEW THE SCENERY!!!!!!!!!!!

in all honesty, i don't really have a particular preference, as long as they're memorable. some villains are just to cookie-cutter that it's kind of sad.

so yeah, if you're gonna have a traditional villain who is being a jerk just for teh evulz, then they should be bamftastic. if it's a more involved villain, then they should be complex and junk.

i dunno

[Gold Vanguard]

I LIKE VILLAINS WHO CHEW THE SCENERY!!!!!!!!!!!

in all honesty, i don't really have a particular preference, as long as they're memorable. some villains are just to cookie-cutter that it's kind of sad.

so yeah, if you're gonna have a traditional villain who is being a jerk just for teh evulz, then they should be bamftastic. if it's a more involved villain, then they should be complex and junk.

i dunno

You mean like this....

[Rehab]

I like rivals as villains. The "We are not so different, you and I" and the "Don't you DARE compare us" back-and-forths can be a bit wearisome, being exact opposites on everything might get to be a bit much, the writers implying heavy value judgments can mess with it, and there's doubtless a jillion other ways to screw it up, but I think I'm generally geared to enjoy watching two people who clearly have the same goal show contrasting/conflicting methods of achieving it, and being aware of it.


With a Big Bad evil-as-fvck villain, I think I'd prefer they share some things with Manfloy/froy/whatever. Somebody who has an understandable reason, if not a well-adjusted one, for having a radically different value system from their counterparts/the audience. Competency that becomes plot armor can be annoying, of course, but a convincing success rate is probably necessary to help me take a villain like this seriously. Self-awareness usually doesn't hurt, either.

("I WANT (insert verb if necessary) ALL THE THINGS BECAUSE FUCK YOU" < "I WANT (insert) ALL THE THINGS BECAUSE IT'S MY ONLY REAL OPTION" < "I WANT (insert) ALL THE THINGS BECAUSE EVERYONE ELSE ALWAYS FUCKS EVERYTHING UP")

Failing all that, some entertaining lines can save almost anybody.


I think one way to put it is that I like when the villain's setup contrasts with and/or says something about their universe.

Edited by Rehab, 26 July 2012 - 04:50 PM.

[Gold Vanguard]

I like rivals as villains. The "We are not so different, you and I" and the "Don't you DARE compare us" back-and-forths can be a bit wearisome, being exact opposites on everything might get to be a bit much, the writers implying heavy value judgments can mess with it, and there's doubtless a jillion other ways to screw it up, but I think I'm generally geared to enjoy watching two people who clearly have the same goal show contrasting/conflicting methods of achieving it, and being aware of it.


With a Big Bad evil-as-fvck villain, I think I'd prefer they share some things with Manfloy/froy/whatever. Somebody who has an understandable reason, if not a well-adjusted one, for having a radically different value system from their counterparts/the audience. Competency that becomes plot armor can be annoying, of course, but a convincing success rate is probably necessary to help me take a villain like this seriously. Self-awareness usually doesn't hurt, either.

("I WANT (insert verb if necessary) ALL THE THINGS BECAUSE FUCK YOU" < "I WANT (insert) ALL THE THINGS BECAUSE IT'S MY ONLY REAL OPTION" < "I WANT (insert) ALL THE THINGS BECAUSE EVERYONE ELSE ALWAYS FUCKS EVERYTHING UP")

Failing all that, some good lines would be nice.


I think one way to put it is that I like when the villain's setup contrasts with and/or says something about their universe.

I think 3 bad guys fit most of that

[Rehab]

Yeah, Wario, Bison, Robotnik and Bowser are usually entertainingly hamtastic, and Ganondorf does tend to have reasons behind his drive, I can have fun with all of them. I kinda think Wario's a little out of place there, in a way, though. He usually just has a chronic aversion to not getting paid. Great art regardless, though!

Edited by Rehab, 26 July 2012 - 05:03 PM.

[SeverIan]

-Easy to beat even without having their pattern/attacks down very well: pathetic villain.
-Easy to beat once I get their pattern/attacks down OK, and it only takes me one or two fights to comprehend the boss: OK villain.
-Easy to beat once I get the boss down, and it takes me several battles to understand the boss: Great villain.
-The boss has at least one attack which I suck too much to be able to dodge/counter/block effectively, and my ability to win the battle relies on the boss not using this attack more often than aveage: amazing villain.
-See above, but the boss uses this attack frequently enough that I can't beat it: use item "untouchable."

[Gold Vanguard]

-Easy to beat even without having their pattern/attacks down very well: pathetic villain.
-Easy to beat once I get their pattern/attacks down OK, and it only takes me one or two fights to comprehend the boss: OK villain.
-Easy to beat once I get the boss down, and it takes me several battles to understand the boss: Great villain.
-The boss has at least one attack which I suck too much to be able to dodge/counter/block effectively, and my ability to win the battle relies on the boss not using this attack more often than aveage: amazing villain.
-See above, but the boss uses this attack frequently enough that I can't beat it: use item "untouchable."

The fourth one sounds like the Black Knight SO much from POR. The only way to beat him was that you prayed he didn't use Luna becasue if he did, your FLUXED. That or if Ike used Aether.

[Rehab]

-Easy to beat even without having their pattern/attacks down very well: pathetic villain.
-Easy to beat once I get their pattern/attacks down OK, and it only takes me one or two fights to comprehend the boss: OK villain.
-Easy to beat once I get the boss down, and it takes me several battles to understand the boss: Great villain.
-The boss has at least one attack which I suck too much to be able to dodge/counter/block effectively, and my ability to win the battle relies on the boss not using this attack more often than aveage: amazing villain.
-See above, but the boss uses this attack frequently enough that I can't beat it: use item "untouchable."

My favorite is when, on top of threatening normal attack patterns, they have an awesome, intimidating attack that can be countered with split-frame timing to great effect, and will afterwards says something along the lines of

[Florina Stark]

Ashera? I believe her motives became quite clear to everyone in that game...she didn't try to hide herself at all haha.

He meant Sephiran. And i agree. I like chessmaster villains too.

[Thor Odinson]

I like villains that could invoke some type of emotion and make the audience feel...for lack of a better word...involved? about their part. I'm cool with both super-evil types and sympathetic types, as long as they're written well enough to convey that respectively. I also like ones with clear, fleshed out backstory and motives rather than "lolol let's do this for no reason whatsoever".

[The Big Kazam]

I like villains that could invoke some type of emotion and make the audience feel...for lack of a better word...involved? about their part. I'm cool with both super-evil types and sympathetic types, as long as they're written well enough to convey that respectively. I also like ones with clear, fleshed out backstory and motives rather than "lolol let's do this for no reason whatsoever".

I'd like see an antagonist do terrible things for no specified reason. That actually seems rather interesting since too many antagonists have motives or reasons for their actions. :c