143 réponses à ce sujet

[Asari Goddess]

If you consider Vorcha as men then yes they do

 

[Statichands]

Correction: Some men just want to feel their muscle burn

 

[Spacepunk01]

Some men just want to watch the world burn

 

No one who is evil thinks of themselves as evil; they always believe they're doing good.

 

  -- George Lucas

 

The joker actually had motives. He wanted to prove that the world is a dark place and that people - given the right incentives - will do evil things. He wanted to break Batman's spirit by showing him that these people aren't worth saving - that he is fighting a lost cause.

 

This is just the way life works. Nobody goes out into the world and decides that: I'm going to be evil. Why would anyone do that? It's meaningless. Moreover, why would anyone want such a boring villain in the first place? A villain with no motives other than creating destruction and destroying lives is a nobody.

 

Darth Sidious (Star Wars) was evil, most people will agree. Well, he didn't consider himself evil. He believed in what he did. This is what makes him a great villain. I don't know if it's possible for a sentient being to decide to be evil. There is always a reason why people do what they do and it's never black and white.

[Ahglock]

I disagree. I think many people go out to be evil. They may have other motives like greed or a lust for power but many people look At themselves see evil and are totally fine with that


And really dark side characters frequently are cackling evil for evils sake. Muahahah dark side, unlimited power dark side.

[Laughing_Man]

I disagree. I think many people go out to be evil. They may have other motives like greed or a lust for power but many people look At themselves see evil and are totally fine with that.

 

I have to agree. Some of them may point to others as more evil than them, perhaps as a way to feel better about themselves,

but are aware at the end of the day that they are the actual monsters that everyone fears.

 

There is a rush in this kind of feeling, in the knowledge that everyone fears you because of who and what you are.

 

They embrace the "evil", as something that makes them unique, sometimes they think of themselves as the only truly free people,

free of morals, inhibitions, etc.

 

Sometimes the reasoning is different in origin, and comes from a religious source that aims to redefine accepted notions of "Evil", "Good", "Mercy", etc.

 

Modern liberal "progressive" thinking has trouble accepting that some people simply relish this "freedom",

and are not open to any kind of reasonable and peaceful dialogue, but that will not change reality.

[Kynare]

Someone like the Major from Hellsing?

Someone who has to be killed because he has to be killed. You don't even need to consider the reason for it, or if it's morally right. (Of course, wanting to destroy an equally bloodthirsty vampire is a perfectly reasonable motive... still, he's a little too insane to live.)

 

I'd be okay with an enemy like that. As long as they still make the character interesting and not just some common trope who's there to make the hero feel good about themselves.

[Laughing_Man]

Someone like the Major from Hellsing?

 

What exactly is this?

 

Anyway, this is over the top on purpose, perhaps somewhat ironic even.

I think that you can have a perfectly terrifying evil villain even without resorting to this.

[Former_Fiend]

The Joker doesn't work in a vacuum. He works in his environment. Most of Batman's iconic villains work because they reflect certain aspects of his character - Two-Face represents the duality between Batman and Bruce Wayne. Scarecrow represents his use of fear. The Riddler represents his intelligence and detective skills. 

 

The Joker represents all of Batman reflected back; his negative, his equal and opposite reaction. Batman is dark, Joker is bright. Batman is dour, Joker is comedic. I could go on, but the point is that they are two men who are equally as insane as the other, but took their insanity to different places.

 

The Joker works for the same reason any comedian works; because he has the right straightman to play off of. And I don't know that Bioware's structure of allowing us to determine our character's personality to an extent allows for them to have the PC be a proper foil to a Joker-style villain. They tried having Kai Leng be Shepard's foil - N7, cyborg, traitor to the alliance, loyal to the Cerberus ideal. But ultimately that fell very flat and Kai Leng proved hugely unpopular. 

 

For another example you can look to Fallout: New Vegas, specifically the Lonesome Road DLC, where they tried taking Ulysses and turning him into a foil for the Courier, but that didn't work well because the Courier was such a blank slate in terms of personality, abilities, outlook, and backstory. There were other reasons, but it's hard to make a compelling foil to a character as open-ended as many western RPG characters are.

 

The other aspect that makes the Joker an iconic character is that he's a very easy role to play. He's an actor's role. You get into the Joker and you get to be pure id, just go crazy, cut loose, and have fun. Any half decent actor can make that wonderfully entertaining, and the Joker has been played by some of the best actors in Hollywood. Video games are a slightly less forgiving medium in this regard - Bioware's always very vocal about their word budget and having to write around that. A lot of the Joker's best stuff has come from actors improvising and making decisions that aren't necessarily viable in a dialogue heavy game like the kind Bioware makes. 

 

Aside from that, I just don't know if this is the game to have a Joke-esque villain in. Granted, we still don't have a firm grasp of the plot, but common sense and logic dictates that if anything, this game more than any other game Bioware has produced to date demands a sympathetic villain with justifications for their actions. The "Europeans exploring the Americas" parallels aren't hard to draw here; having the natives being resistant to colonization is an inherently sympathetic motivation for an antagonist. 

[Kynare]

What exactly is this?

 

Anyway, this is over the top on purpose, perhaps somewhat ironic even.

I think that you can have a perfectly terrifying evil villain even without resorting to this.

 

They could resort to that. I mean, imagine that, except for a whole series. Hahahahaha I would want to kill him so badly.

(It's Hellsing Ultimate. Anime.)

[AlanC9]

The Joker represents all of Batman reflected back; his negative, his equal and opposite reaction. Batman is dark, Joker is bright. Batman is dour, Joker is comedic. I could go on, but the point is that they are two men who are equally as insane as the other, but took their insanity to different places.
 
The Joker works for the same reason any comedian works; because he has the right straightman to play off of.

This is made explicit in The Dark Knight Returns, where the Joker is catatonic while Batman's in retirement. Which makes that nutjob psychiatrist kinda sorta right -- there's a sense in which Batman really is causing the Joker's crimes.

[Iakus]

I disagree. I think many people go out to be evil. They may have other motives like greed or a lust for power but many people look At themselves see evil and are totally fine with that
 

I'm a monster.  What I do is evil.  I have no illusions about it, but it must be done.

 

the Operative  

[agonis]

I'm a monster.What I do is evil. I have no illusions about it, but it must be done.

 

the Operative  

 

"Heirs for the King, you see. Future of the state and so forth..." - Inquisitor Glokta. He knows he is an *******.

("The First Law-Trilogy" by Joe Abercrombie)

[AlanC9]

I'm a monster.What I do is evil. I have no illusions about it, but it must be done.
 
the Operative  

This sort of thing drives some philosophers nuts. It's a serious problem if you expect a moral system to be coherent and guide actions, of course.

[Iakus]

This sort of thing drives some philosophers nuts. It's a serious problem if you expect a moral system to be coherent and guide actions, of course.

I think it's what "Renegade" was supposed to be:  An adherence to a goal regardless of ethics or morality.  "The ends justify the means"

[Laughing_Man]

I think it's what "Renegade" was supposed to be:  An adherence to a goal regardless of ethics or morality.  "The ends justify the means"

 

"Supposed" being the operative word.

In reality it was more like the straw-men that was supposed to demonstrate how pragmatism is actually evil.

[AlanC9]

I think it's what "Renegade" was supposed to be:  An adherence to a goal regardless of ethics or morality.  "The ends justify the means"

Well, that's the thing. If the goal is morally necessary, then so are the necessary means. That's what I meant by coherence -- unless someone's going full-on deontologist or full-on utilitarian, it's fairly easy to set up a situation where an action is both morally prohibited and morally necessary.

Of course, you still gotta do something. The Operative's just decided to live with the contradiction himself, rather than let someone else carry that load.

The problem with Renegade in actual practice is that the Renegade choices typically fail on Renegade terms.

[Lonely Heart Poet]

I don't want black and white -kind of situation. Every character must have a well thought background. That is the reason why this series is popular.

[Iakus]

Well, that's the thing. If the goal is morally necessary, then so are the necessary means. That's what I meant by coherence -- unless someone's going full-on deontologist or full-on utilitarian, it's fairly easy to set up a situation where an action is both morally prohibited and morally necessary.

Of course, you still gotta do something. The Operative's just decided to live with the contradiction himself, rather than let someone else carry that load.

The problem with Renegade in actual practice is that the Renegade choices typically fail on Renegade terms.

Well, yeah, Renegade was largely Evil for the Lulz when it seems it was supposed to be "Doesn't care about Niceties"

 

As for the Operative, yeah his goal to create "a world without sin" meant he had to take the sins upon himself.  Do deplorable things so others don't have to.  But he made no bones about doing evil things and being a "monster", even to the point of killing children.  It's just to him they were necessary for the "greater good".  He doesn't sweat "prohibited"  when his "better worlds" are endangered.

[Il Divo]

I think it's what "Renegade" was supposed to be:  An adherence to a goal regardless of ethics or morality.  "The ends justify the means"

 

Not to mention, lacking in sadism. That was the key that made the Operative a great character (in my opinion). He was dispassionate about his work, rather than relishing in the destruction.
 

[Lady Artifice]

The Joker doesn't work in a vacuum. He works in his environment. Most of Batman's iconic villains work because they reflect certain aspects of his character - Two-Face represents the duality between Batman and Bruce Wayne. Scarecrow represents his use of fear. The Riddler represents his intelligence and detective skills. 

 

The Joker represents all of Batman reflected back; his negative, his equal and opposite reaction. Batman is dark, Joker is bright. Batman is dour, Joker is comedic. I could go on, but the point is that they are two men who are equally as insane as the other, but took their insanity to different places.

 

The Joker works for the same reason any comedian works; because he has the right straightman to play off of. And I don't know that Bioware's structure of allowing us to determine our character's personality to an extent allows for them to have the PC be a proper foil to a Joker-style villain. They tried having Kai Leng be Shepard's foil - N7, cyborg, traitor to the alliance, loyal to the Cerberus ideal. But ultimately that fell very flat and Kai Leng proved hugely unpopular. 

 

For another example you can look to Fallout: New Vegas, specifically the Lonesome Road DLC, where they tried taking Ulysses and turning him into a foil for the Courier, but that didn't work well because the Courier was such a blank slate in terms of personality, abilities, outlook, and backstory. There were other reasons, but it's hard to make a compelling foil to a character as open-ended as many western RPG characters are.

 

The other aspect that makes the Joker an iconic character is that he's a very easy role to play. He's an actor's role. You get into the Joker and you get to be pure id, just go crazy, cut loose, and have fun. Any half decent actor can make that wonderfully entertaining, and the Joker has been played by some of the best actors in Hollywood. Video games are a slightly less forgiving medium in this regard - Bioware's always very vocal about their word budget and having to write around that. A lot of the Joker's best stuff has come from actors improvising and making decisions that aren't necessarily viable in a dialogue heavy game like the kind Bioware makes. 

 

Aside from that, I just don't know if this is the game to have a Joke-esque villain in. Granted, we still don't have a firm grasp of the plot, but common sense and logic dictates that if anything, this game more than any other game Bioware has produced to date demands a sympathetic villain with justifications for their actions. The "Europeans exploring the Americas" parallels aren't hard to draw here; having the natives being resistant to colonization is an inherently sympathetic motivation for an antagonist. 

 

Sometimes I wonder if Kai Leng could have worked a little better if he had been established as a foil to Shepard much earlier, like in a shown origin at the beginning of ME1. 

 

I'd like it if they actually developed a peer of the protagonist into an antagonist. They don't have to start out as friendly for it to work, they could leave the nature of that relationship up to how the player interacts with the other character, and then we could watch circumstances evolve to place them on opposing sides of the table, with opposing goals. I love the idea of the level of hostility or baggage involved being partially up to the player. 

[Laughing_Man]

Sometimes I wonder if Kai Leng could have worked a little better if he had been established as a foil to Shepard much earlier, like in a shown origin at the beginning of ME1. 

 

I'd like it if they actually developed a peer of the protagonist into an antagonist. They don't have to start out as friendly for it to work, they could leave the nature of that relationship up to how the player interacts with the other character, and then we could watch circumstances evolve to place them on opposing sides of the table, with opposing goals. I love the idea of the level of hostility or baggage involved being partially up to the player. 

 

Could be an interesting idea.

 

As for Kai Lang, you can't paste an anime villain into mass effect complete with the overly dramatic poses, the hair, and the sword,

without annoying most of the fans. You gotta have some self respect.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

As for Kai Lang, you can't paste an anime villain into mass effect complete with the overly dramatic poses, the hair, and the sword,

without annoying most of the fans. You gotta have some self respect.

Hey, calling Kai Leng an anime villain is an insult to anime villains. 

[Laughing_Man]

Hey, calling Kai Leng an anime villain is an insult to anime villains. 

 

The look is very much what I would expect from Japanese entertainment and or anime.

(I'm hardly an expert on anime, but the style is very easy to recognize)

[Hanako Ikezawa]

The look is very much what I would expect from Japanese entertainment and or anime.

(I'm hardly an expert on anime, but the style is very easy to recognize)

The look kinda(not really) but anime villains, or most at least, are a lot more developed than Kai Leng.

[Laughing_Man]

The look kinda(not really) but anime villains, or most at least, are a lot more developed than Kai Leng.

 

Think back: KL jumping on the roof of an air car, overly dramatic pose, lowered head, hair somewhat obscuring his face, that's not anime style?...

(not to mention that he looks suspiciously similar to Raiden from MGR:R)

 

As for villain development, I'll take your word for it. (I hope you don't mean the obligatory tragedy in their past that is supposed to give them the excuse...)