126 réponses à ce sujet

[Apollo Starflare]

shepard_lives wrote...

Brockololly wrote...

And have them voiced by Jeremy Irons or Ian McShane.

I'm with this guy.

You have my axe! (I concur, particularly in regards to Ian McShane).

But yeah, I really like magnificent bastards, but a good villain can be almost anything depending on the writing and plot etc.

[In Exile]

AmstradHero wrote...

I couldn't disagree more with the idea that the ideal villain is the player's character, and I'd like to know how anyone thinks this can be pulled off. It can work in films and books, but I don't possibly see how it can work in an RPG because the player is (playing) the protagonist.

You would have to make it so the player is the apparent villain. Set the plot around having to destroy or otherwise shatter some part of the world other that society depends on, to avoid even greater consequences. For example, some highly advanced magical society is using some energy generator technique that will lead to the death of everything within a few centuries; the players work to stop this, at the cost of the collapse of society and millions of deaths, famine, etc.

I think it only works as well intention extreemism.

[yuri102010]

I would love to see a villain that you can't fully defeat at the end of the game and it could be used for a new game plus. After a whole new story has been complete the villain dies in a epic explosion but some how survives and slumbers until something or someone frees him from his resting place and takes over the person who frees him and starts a new campaign of destruction. I think that would be too epic wouldn't it?

[evilhouseboat]

My favourite villains are ones that use full measures (breaking bad ref). A villain that is smart and does what they need to do to survive or win etc.

[Kasces]

I think some of most engaging villains are only villains because their heroes failed them, especially when their hero was the hero.

Ultimately, however, it depends on the story. Like someone already said, villains are plot devices so if the plot is phenomenal the villain probably will be too.

[Johnny Chaos]

I always thought shepard from modern warefare 2 was a excellent villian because an event turned him bad. maybe a event in DA2 will turn one of your companions bad.

[Fadook]

A villain who actually comes across as a genuine threat would be nice. All too often the main villain is built up to be incredibly skilled and dangerous but then fails to live up to their reputation. Notable exceptions that spring to mind are Sun Li from Jade Empire and Sephiroth from FF7. A couple of things made those guys standout: 1) there were moments in the game which showed how tough they were; 2) they had a personal connection to the main character. The problem I had with Loghain was that he and the Warden are total strangers so I felt to no personal animosity towards him.

[Crimson Invictus]

While I'm not convinced it might be the perfect villain, one who manages to convince the PC they're a close ally and a friend before ultimately betraying them would seem interesting. Especially if done in a dismissive manner, the more powerless the villain can make the PC feel when they finally "turn" the more effective, or at least annoying, it should be.

Especially if it is made clear the villain doesn't even consider the PC a threat, that they are insignificant and beneath notice.

Modifié par Liana Nighthawk, 27 novembre 2010 - 06:33 .

[In Exile]

Liana Nighthawk wrote...

While I'm not convinced it might be the perfect villain, one who manages to convince the PC they're a close ally and a friend before ultimately betraying them would seem interesting. Especially if done in a dismissive manner, the more powerless the villain can make the PC feel when they finally "turn" the more effective, or at least annoying, it should be.

Especially if it is made clear the villain doesn't even consider the PC a threat, that they are insignificant and beneath notice.

If they want an NPC villain then the game has to allow the player to discover them. Otherwise it's just a plot twist for the sake of a plot twist, and that isn't very job. There was a fair bit of evidence Master Li was shady in JE, for example.

[Crimson Invictus]

In Exile wrote...
 There was a fair bit of evidence Master Li was shady in JE, for example.

Your example is lost on me, I've never managed to stick with JE.

[In Exile]

Liana Nighthawk wrote...
Your example is lost on me, I've never managed to stick with JE.

Basically, there was an NPC in JE that betrays the player as a villian somewhat like you discuss, but there is evidence available for the player to start doubting, which the player is never allowed to actually realize in-game. I think that traitor NPCs make it possible to discover they are traitors.

[MadLaughter]

More fanhating from the powers that be..

[AmstradHero]

Drakereaver wrote...

well Knights of the old repuplic did that and it didnt turn out horrible wrong.

No. You were a villain before the game starts. But you are not the game's villain - that's Darth Malak. There's a very big difference.

In Exile wrote...

Basically, there was an NPC in JE that betrays the player as a villian somewhat like you discuss, but there is
evidence available for the player to start doubting, which the player is never allowed to actually realize in-game. I think that traitor NPCs make it possible to discover they are traitors.

And this is the problem with traitor plot twists, much like obvious traps in games. You as a player have deduced that what you are doing is a bad idea based purely on in-game information, so you as a character should also be suspicious. Yet you have absolutely no choice but to walk into the trap because it's the only way to progress the game.

In Jade Empire I didn't think it was so bad, because there was really nothing you could have done anyway. You can't instantly re-learn all your training and technique, and you're already being hunted. I really do have to play through Jade Empire again so I can give a good analysis of him for a new post in my antagonist series on my blog. Yes, I have thought about and looked at what makes a good villain in a fair amount of detail.

Modifié par AmstradHero, 27 novembre 2010 - 09:37 .

[Nerevar-as]

JE wasn´t that obvious in a first play. He made one - two strange things, but nothing which screamed villain. Even the most obvious clue about the PC style seemed to be a trick to make him/her a better fighter.

[Some Geth]

 I want a villain that can do this  .

[Johnny Chaos]

Al Mualim from Assassins Creed was an interesting villian. he basically uses Altair to wipe out competition.

villians are getting to be the same, i like when villians have motivation for something

Modifié par Johnny Chaos, 27 novembre 2010 - 10:21 .

[Bryy_Miller]

Fadook wrote...
The problem I had with Loghain was that he and the Warden are total strangers so I felt to no personal animosity towards him.

Well, he did kind of turn tail and run, abandoning Ostagar to its doom.

Modifié par Bryy_Miller, 27 novembre 2010 - 10:53 .

[Elvhen Veluthil]

Chris Avellone from Obsidian wrote some interesting things about this topic at his blog:

Is it your opinion that the antagonist in a game needs to have a certain type of morality in order for the game to be successful?



No, but I think any antagonist with a philosophical or moral outlook is considered a deeper character and tends to engender more respect from players. Heroes, in my opinion, are only as strong as their adversaries, and that extends to moral and ethical conflicts as well.



Can you foresee any potential risk or reward in designing an antagonist/villain that goes against your perception of a typical such character?



I think the rewards are great by doing this - players, while they take comfort in some archetypes, also appreciate being surprised and challenged by adversaries morally and ethically. Gary Gygax once raised the point that it wouldn't be surprising if two Lawful Good nations went to war, for example, and a world that allows for realistic conflicts such as these just seem richer than standard fantasy fare.



Do you consider the antagonist's/villains motives and personality to be important?



Incredibly important. Without these, there is no villain, and a purposeless or emotionally shallow villain is not one that players can respect - it's more akin to fighting a force of nature than a personality, and while that can work (Sauron), it's much more interesting to fight someone with motives that run deep and also are understandable in context of the situation (Gollum).

[Fadook]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

Fadook wrote...
The problem I had with Loghain was that he and the Warden are total strangers so I felt to no personal animosity towards him.

Well, he did kind of turn tail and run, abandoning Ostagar to its doom.

Yes, but you'd had limited interaction with him before; there's no personal connection.

[Bryy_Miller]

The personal connection is that he ran from his post, killing your friend. All throughout the game, Loghain's shadow is over you. He's the sheriff of Nottingham. I totally get what you are saying, and it is valid to have a villain that at least has met or fought with the main character once or twice, but Loghain was everywhere in Origins. You couldn't walk two feet without feeling the ripples of his actions.

[Johnny Chaos]

Loghain was good and all, but I didn't feel sorry for him like I did Saren and other BW villians. DAO villians seemed paranoid Arl Howe, Loghain, Marjolaine etc.

[Kroaks]

AmstradHero wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

The ideal villain is always the player character.

I couldn't disagree more with the idea that the ideal villain is the player's character, and I'd like to know how anyone thinks this can be pulled off. It can work in films and books, but I don't possibly see how it can work in an RPG because the player is (playing) the protagonist.

I especially don't see how you can argue this point Sylvius, because your tastes demand that you be allowed to dictate every action and every minutiae of its rationale for the character you are playing.  Unless you're specifically playing someone who is trying to be a villain, this would simply not be possible.

I'd say that every narrative should involve conflict of some sort for the protagonist, be it internal (inside a character) or external (between two or more characters). In an RPG you cannot force the player to have any sort of internal conflict because then they're not roleplaying, they're being given a role. Thus there must be conflict with an external force. Therefore there must be an antagonist (or villain to use the terminology of this thread) on which to base this conflict.

If I played a game and *I* turned out to be the villain at the end of it all... well, I wouldn't be impressed.

I would be different from you there, if someon could make an argument about a character who did all the normally heroic choices and had good reasons for what they did and what they did lacked any of the usual "moral" quandries you might see occasionally, if someone could make an argument about that character that they were a villain and it was effective enough that I couldn't really argue against it?

That would impress me.

But it would require an extremely good argument and a very interesting way of looking at the world I suspect.

[Anomander Rake]

I feel that a good villain is one that you can understand in some way and feel sorry for.

[Bryy_Miller]

I think the word you're looking for is "sympathize".

[Vena_86]

-understandable motives, no black and white bad guy

-interesting back story

-characteristic appearance, preferably intimidating too

-a skilled voice actor with a characteristic voice (one you would always recognize)