126 réponses à ce sujet

[Victoriaa]

A villain who doesn't tell you all about his evil plans just before he's about to kill you, giving your companions time to rescue you.

Jebus that's annoying.



Also.. Would be cool if the villain isn't necessarily obvious to the hero.



Anyone played Dreamfall? I think they did a great job when creating the "enemy".

[Kroaks]

Another way to do it is; that instead of it being the "player" that is the villain.



Have it be one of your companions who is essentially molded by your actions throughout the game and not have it be just one "individual" that depending on how you do it.



The villain could be any of your NPC's or even a sub-character and thus depending on how you play the game, the "villain" could have notably different motivation, powers, abilities and minions/party members helping it out.

[Johnny Chaos]

i can almost see Alistair become a villian depending on how the landsmeet turned out

[General Malor]

The perfect villain is one that is collected, cool, a great tactician and subtly dangerous.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Reedemabiltiy has nothing to do with villany. "BEST" villain? Waht does best mean in this context? Doesn't it depend on what you expect from a villain? And doesn't that change depending on the person anad genre?



A comedic, incompetent villain is good in a comedic, light-hearted setting. But in a serious one, it would suck. A villain can be a poor, pittiable soul who believes he's doing the right thing..or not. A power-hungry tyrant can also be a good villain. Not every villain needs a sad back story. "Feeling sorry for" is not a must-have requirement for a villain..after all, the villain is there to be defeated, and I want to feel good about striking the bad guy down, not sad...Or do I?



See my point? A villain is a combination of elements. No single element is a MUST-HAVE, CAN'T GO ON WITHOUT IT!

Rather, it's how those elements combine that make a good villain.

[Celies]

Jon Irenicus.

[Aermas]

Lawful Evil Lawyers

[Wereparrot]

I can appreciate both forms of villain: the pure evil (eg Morgoth, Voldemort) or the self-righteous (eg Loghain, Logan). By way of comparison of the latter two, I would say that Loghain, despite his good intentions, was guilty of treason and it is to his credit that he does not deny or contest that his punishment is death. His wanting to defeat the blight is commendable; his means and his treason is not. More commendable is his apparent wish to safeguard the throne for his daughter over Alastair ( I thouroughly resent being pressured into accepting him as king by Eamon [even though I don't have to], because no bastard has ever acceded to the throne in any kingdom anywhere in the world). (I know William I was a bastard, but he was also a userper). Fable III's Logan, on the other hand, was a king pressured into making decisions based on an what had previously been revealed to him by Theresa. When you have succeded him, he reveals this to you, and the decisions you make as monarch mostly have a clear moral yes/no outcome, although you feel sympathy towards the previous king in that if you take the morally correct decision, you may endanger your people in the longterm, even to the point of annihilation.

For me, since the main reason that Loghain opposed was because he assumed that I wanted to crown someone who in the real world would have no claim to the throne, Loghain is a quite superfluous villain.

[KJandrew]

One that is likeable and charismatic but at the same time ruthless and a great tactician.

And no more "Before i leave and assume that my over complicated machine/inept henchmen kill you i will reveal my plans"

it should someone who can convince that what they are doing is right and that you're in the wrong

[nightcobra]

KJandrew wrote...

One that is likeable and charismatic but at the same time ruthless and a great tactician.
And no more "Before i leave and assume that my over complicated machine/inept henchmen kill you i will reveal my plans"
it should someone who can convince that what they are doing is right and that you're in the wrong

maybe a villain like griffith from berserk but with more of a manly appearance than an effeminate look.

[Shady314]

I find the best villains tend to be a foil to the hero.

[hitorihanzo]

I disagree with a few of the comments here. A truly evil villain can be much more engaging as long as he / she is charismatic, competent, and fearless. Someone referenced The Dark Knight earlier, and I think that they were right on the money. The Joker sure didn't think that he was doing the right thing. Matter of fact, morality never came into it.

[ErichHartmann]

General Malor wrote...

The perfect villain is one that is collected, cool, a great tactician and subtly dangerous.

Attributes of the perfect hero too. 

[Urazz]

I expect my villains to wear a top hate and a  monacle and have a handle bar mustache.  They'll do a standard super villain laugh and twirl their mustache when applicable. Sadly Bioware disappoints me regularly in their games on that part. 

[Revan312]

Really the perfect villain has already been created, Darth Plainview

[Alamar2078]

I've always liked "the thinking man's villain". One whose power isn't in physical strength, magic, etc. but is a genious and can manipulate a situation from behind the scenes so you never [should] see them coming. Heck the villain that can get the good guys to do their work for them are some of the best of all.



I may not get much agreement but I always like David Xanatos (sp?) from the Gargoyles cartoons. Not a perfect villain but much better than your run-of-the-mill villain.

[Ulicus]

The very best villains for me are always those who have some sort of personal connection to the protagonist. Whether it's a former friendship, pupil/master, romance or familial relationship. That's why I'd always take Sarevok over Irenicus, even though the latter was considerably better written from a technical standpoint. It comes down to personal preference. I focus less on the "type" of villain than I do how they relate to the protagonist.

S'also why I'd choose BG1's plot over BG2's. As excellent as the sequel was, it felt like an extended side-quest: ultimately peripheral to the main thrust of the Bhaalspawn narrative.

Still, that doesn't mean I don't enjoy villains without any pre-existing connection.

Modifié par Ulicus, 29 novembre 2010 - 11:59 .

[Vylan Antagonist]

Slidell505 wrote...


You mean like Dastardly something another from that show from the 70s? Crap what was it called?

Dudley Dooright. I did it, you're welcome America.

Snidely Whiplash is the moustache-twirling, Curses-Foiled-Again guy. And he makes a great villain for a cartoon in the same way that Wile E. Coyote does, I guess, in that he's cartoonishly doomed to perpetual failure. Dr. Horrible is a nice reversal of this archetype.

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.

Shadow of the Colossus begs to differ.

Planescape Torment deserves mention as well, since the villain was literally yourself. Talk about being your own worst enemy!

Modifié par Vylan Antagonist, 30 novembre 2010 - 12:15 .

[AmstradHero]

Never played Shadow of the Colossus, so I can't comment - but isn't it also NOT an RPG? ie There the game has one set story that you can never vary? In that case, then it's potentially possible to make the protagonist the villain, albeit very difficult to do well.

I *knew* someone would bring up Torment, but in that case *you* as the player aren't the villain in the game. The Transcendent One fills that role. The distinction is important.

[Insomniak]

Mythrael wrote...

The best villians are always the ones who believe that they are the ones on the right side and persuing good and feeling righteous about it.

I think that's part of what made Loghain such a great villain in the first game...

Wereparrot wrote... 

For me, since the main reason that Loghain opposed was because he assumed that I wanted to crown someone who in the real world would have no claim to the throne, Loghain is a quite superfluous villain.

I don't think that was the main reason - I believe he was more concerned with an invasion from Orlais. After all, he fought in the last war with them, and it was this experience that made him prejudiced toward any assistance from Orlais; consequently leading to his many insecurities and lack of rational thought. That's not to say your assertion is invalid, however, because if another laid claim to the throne (as Alistair did), they could have possibly invited the supposedly "treacherous" Orlesians back into Fereldan... i.e. Loghain though he was protecting his nation and its people - harldy superfluous if you ask me 

Idk though... I dig "extreme" personalities, the insane especially make for interesting villains - like the Joker in The Dark Knight.
 
In the end, I suppose it's all a matter of taste, but I'm sure BioWare will not disappoint.

Modifié par javajedi217, 30 novembre 2010 - 08:29 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Let us note that Ferelden is not a carbon copy of the middle ages...And there existed different rights of succession. So Alistair not having a valid claim on the throne is not correct.



It is correct that Loghain saw Orlais as a threat. His massive ego led him to think he is the only one fit to defend Ferelden, no matter the cost. Hit ultimate goal was noble, but his actions and methods were deplorable.

[nightcobra]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Let us note that Ferelden is not a carbon copy of the middle ages...And there existed different rights of succession. So Alistair not having a valid claim on the throne is not correct.

It is correct that Loghain saw Orlais as a threat. His massive ego led him to think he is the only one fit to defend Ferelden, no matter the cost. Hit ultimate goal was noble, but his actions and methods were deplorable.

i spared his life, although i pratically ruined his life doing it and yet he still regards me as his best friend.

let's see:

i made him a grey warden, an order he has a degree of animosity against due to their near mythic/fairytale status 
i married his daughter to a grey warden who is also the brother of the man he betrayed at the battle of ostagar
he was sent to orlais afterwards, i imagine he didn't like those news
i took his lands and title as my boon.

i'm a good guy:devil:

[Wereparrot]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

And there existed different rights of succession..

Has this been previously stated? I'm sorry, it really annoys me, especially since Alastair then has to marry a noblewoman. It is ironic that Prince William will be the first king not to marry a nobe, but if he had a bastard son, that son would never be king, so the two cultures, though sharing some of the same features and customs, are ridiculously contrasted in this. I would at least expect the two cultures to be similar in constitution. It is more important in a monarchy for the king to be a legitimate heir because it shows his father/mother to be responsible, than for a noble/noble marriage.

Although I've said all this, I think Loghain was a good villain and very well portrayed; I just think that half his argument was flawed, and as for Orlais, his concerns were entirely understandable, although there still should have been room to work with the Wardens, not against them. 

[Wulfram]

The important thing is that the villain seems like an effective and credible threat. Which is quite difficult when they're most likely going to end up having all their plans ruined by those meddling PCs.

[marshalleck]

Best villains: Paladins. The more sanctimonious and preachy, the better (worse?)



They never fail to raise my ire.