They are, if they're written well, and the steps they take to get there are interesting, with a lot of twists and turns. Unfortunately Zelda is not the best example of this, even though there has been room for a lot of complexity for quite some time, but they never explore how Ganondorf might have gotten into the king's good graces, for example.
Are there actually any vidya villains who are committed to "selfless evil", as in they don't even enjoy what they are doing but are compelled to make everything worse to no one's benefit?
That doesn't make sense. Why would someone intentionally go to great lengths to make things worse for themselves and everyone with no ulterior motives like they're being threatened, or the ends justify the means?
Because evil isn't self-serving acts, people do all kinds of things for personal benefit or enjoyment yet we don't categorically condemn all of those things as evil. Therefore, evil at its purest isn't personal or petty.
>personal benefit or enjoyment
These are all motives. We're talking about a villain who does these things without any of these motives. Not even greater good type motives, or "i'm being threatened" motives. . Everything they do makes things worse for everyone including themselves.
Marche is the epitome of this >The real world gets isekai'd into a fantasy dimension >Marche's terminally wheelchair-bound brother Doned can now walk and enjoy life >Their autistic friend Mewt is now the (vaguely) tyrannical emperor >Mewt shuts down dissent to his rule and goes on (mostly harmless) powertrips with lawmaking >In return, his rule makes sure that the world is a literal utopia where nobody can get murdered and the way everything works is fairly egalitarian outside of that >Out of Marche's entire friend group, Marche has had the fewest "real-world" problems and has relatively little to gain or lose from going back >Despite this, Marche goes on a crusade to destroy the utopia because he is irrationally convinced that it's "not real and we need to face the hardships of REAL life" >Doned obviously resists >Marche guilt-trips him about the fact that their parents gave Doned all the attention for his illness, and poor Marche never got any attention at all! >Marche causes the apocalypse for no reason and makes everything revert back to the real world >Now people can get killed again, Doned is back in his wheelchair, Mewt is once again an outcast with a broken family, and Marche is still normal with the fewest problems out of anyone >In the end, the game lazily justifies Marche's sociopathy post-hoc, saying that "uhhhh the fantasy utopia was evil anyway"
You're a fricking moron. The whole point was that the book was literally siphoning people's immortal souls and a good chunk of the people pulled into it were turned into shit like Zombies. Marche was right.
>the book was literally siphoning people's immortal souls
This was only a cop-out reveal near the very end you fricking moron. Not only is it shitty writing but Marche had no idea about it and it can't be used to justify his actions >a good chunk of the people pulled into it were turned into shit like Zombies
The game explicitly states that this only happened to people who were already pieces of shit even in the real world. In which case, frick 'em. Small price to pay
>it's okay for children to be turned into shambling undead abominations because i didn't like them!!! >this is the type of soulless moron that thinks marche wasn't 100% right
5 months ago
Anonymous
If it comes down to it, yes, I would put my own family over others. That's called not being a bugman.
5 months ago
Anonymous
your family was in no immediate danger until you put them in the device that sucks their souls
5 months ago
Anonymous
Like I said this is a cop-out reveal that completely circumvents the true ethical dilemma. Not an argument you dumb Black person.
5 months ago
Anonymous
it being a "cop out" doesn't change marche being right
5 months ago
Anonymous
Only because the writers realized he was a sociopath for the whole game and needed him to be somehow right in the end. It doesn't retroactively justify his point of view. Cope.
>Villain whose motives are a mystery and seem almost insane at times
This is based if their motives are actually clear and well-defined, but kept secret from the player.
I mean yeah that’s kind of the point, in a series with very on the nose names his takes the fricking cake. He’s not supposed to be an elder god tier villain you agree with he’s unironically more like joker
The best part is that he basically radicalizes his own crew into thinking it's something that makes sense.
Tying it all back to the absolute state of Erusea as a nation: Namely that revanchist extremists are in control. It's villainous on a lot of levels, which is pretty nice.
Either well written bad guy or a stereotypical villain. Not all games need to have an overwritten bad guy, sometimes it’s nice to just fight a guy who wants to frick everything up cause it’s fun.
My man Vincent only wanted to put an end to the tyranny of the Occuria and the pro-nobility backwardness of his empire, rather than a merit-based system.
Lost Judgment >villain's motives are understandable even if somewhat deranged, but the hero is so fricking shit at arguing against him that you end up siding with the villain instead
>villain's motives are understandable even if somewhat deranged, but the hero is so fricking shit at arguing against him that you end up siding with the villain instead
I loved Kuwana vs. Yagami. Both really cool dudes with their hearts completely set on justice as they see it. Their battles were and I hate this word, epic.
I love this shitpost template, it's a lot of fun, but it's also not strictly indicative of what makes a good villain. Writing for a villain is not such a simplistic task that you can define what makes a villain "good" or "bad" based on a single criteria. To keep things simple though, I'll try to define three broad categories of traits which come together to make an engaging villain. >Depth
How fleshed out the character is, especially regarding their motivations and methods. What a character wants isn't as important as the audience understanding why. That said, going for a more specific or unique motivation can help make a villain feel more distinct. Power or wealth are fine motivations, sure, but what makes them fine is also their weakness. They're generic, everyone wants power and everyone wants wealth. >Presentation
A character's personality, design, and the performance of whoever is portraying them. Good presentation can salvage a boring idea and make it into something exceptional. Look at Eggman, the dude is boring as frick conceptually but has had so many creative and fun takes over his existence that he's become one of the most beloved vidya villains of all time. >Cohesion
How well the villain fits the narrative and tone of the story they're being inserted into. Characters are ultimately tools that a storyteller utilizes to tell their story, so a villain can still be great if the fulfill a pivotal narrative function that helps to push the game's core themes. Lavos isn't a terribly interesting villain on its own, but the inevitability it represents makes for a tremendous goal to overcome and a phenomenal final confrontation. It's a very inspired choice of villain to build a time travel story around.
Is the top guy Ozymandias or whatever his name is? I just started reading watchmen so...thanks for the spoiler I guess lmao. No idea why this dude is being featured on a videogame board.
Evil for evil's sake makes the best villains
Yes
They are, if they're written well, and the steps they take to get there are interesting, with a lot of twists and turns. Unfortunately Zelda is not the best example of this, even though there has been room for a lot of complexity for quite some time, but they never explore how Ganondorf might have gotten into the king's good graces, for example.
Are there actually any vidya villains who are committed to "selfless evil", as in they don't even enjoy what they are doing but are compelled to make everything worse to no one's benefit?
Probably the clown from ff6 but I didn't play it
That doesn't make sense. Why would someone intentionally go to great lengths to make things worse for themselves and everyone with no ulterior motives like they're being threatened, or the ends justify the means?
Because evil isn't self-serving acts, people do all kinds of things for personal benefit or enjoyment yet we don't categorically condemn all of those things as evil. Therefore, evil at its purest isn't personal or petty.
>personal benefit or enjoyment
These are all motives. We're talking about a villain who does these things without any of these motives. Not even greater good type motives, or "i'm being threatened" motives. . Everything they do makes things worse for everyone including themselves.
That’s what the player does in Elden Ring if they side with the dung eater, arguably the dung eater fits the bill too
Marche from FFTA
My boy Harrim is a hero who does this.
I should actually give the game a go for him, he was the only party member i liked
Marche is the epitome of this
>The real world gets isekai'd into a fantasy dimension
>Marche's terminally wheelchair-bound brother Doned can now walk and enjoy life
>Their autistic friend Mewt is now the (vaguely) tyrannical emperor
>Mewt shuts down dissent to his rule and goes on (mostly harmless) powertrips with lawmaking
>In return, his rule makes sure that the world is a literal utopia where nobody can get murdered and the way everything works is fairly egalitarian outside of that
>Out of Marche's entire friend group, Marche has had the fewest "real-world" problems and has relatively little to gain or lose from going back
>Despite this, Marche goes on a crusade to destroy the utopia because he is irrationally convinced that it's "not real and we need to face the hardships of REAL life"
>Doned obviously resists
>Marche guilt-trips him about the fact that their parents gave Doned all the attention for his illness, and poor Marche never got any attention at all!
>Marche causes the apocalypse for no reason and makes everything revert back to the real world
>Now people can get killed again, Doned is back in his wheelchair, Mewt is once again an outcast with a broken family, and Marche is still normal with the fewest problems out of anyone
>In the end, the game lazily justifies Marche's sociopathy post-hoc, saying that "uhhhh the fantasy utopia was evil anyway"
You're a fricking moron. The whole point was that the book was literally siphoning people's immortal souls and a good chunk of the people pulled into it were turned into shit like Zombies. Marche was right.
>the book was literally siphoning people's immortal souls
This was only a cop-out reveal near the very end you fricking moron. Not only is it shitty writing but Marche had no idea about it and it can't be used to justify his actions
>a good chunk of the people pulled into it were turned into shit like Zombies
The game explicitly states that this only happened to people who were already pieces of shit even in the real world. In which case, frick 'em. Small price to pay
>it's okay for children to be turned into shambling undead abominations because i didn't like them!!!
>this is the type of soulless moron that thinks marche wasn't 100% right
If it comes down to it, yes, I would put my own family over others. That's called not being a bugman.
your family was in no immediate danger until you put them in the device that sucks their souls
Like I said this is a cop-out reveal that completely circumvents the true ethical dilemma. Not an argument you dumb Black person.
it being a "cop out" doesn't change marche being right
Only because the writers realized he was a sociopath for the whole game and needed him to be somehow right in the end. It doesn't retroactively justify his point of view. Cope.
I prefer villains who are just fricking sadistic
>Villain whose motives are a mystery and seem almost insane at times
This is based if their motives are actually clear and well-defined, but kept secret from the player.
someone post teh meme one where the guy goes to prison for pizza or some shit
>shit tier
elder god tier
meh tier
high tier
great tier
>great tier
shit tier
>high tier
mid tier
The impact they make on the player, even one note villains can become memorable from a solid delivery or even just a hard boss fight.
an inexhaustible appetite for food
Everyone who read watchmen agrees with Veidt's motives so he's truly the best
Did they ever try to make Ganondorf sympathetic outside of Wind Waker?
No, and that's a good thing.
>Ozymandias
>good motives
He was a good character but you cannot tell me he had good motives. No fricking way that shit was ever going to work.
I mean yeah that’s kind of the point, in a series with very on the nose names his takes the fricking cake. He’s not supposed to be an elder god tier villain you agree with he’s unironically more like joker
>he just wants to kill a million people like making a good skate trick
Fricking based
The best part is that he basically radicalizes his own crew into thinking it's something that makes sense.
Tying it all back to the absolute state of Erusea as a nation: Namely that revanchist extremists are in control. It's villainous on a lot of levels, which is pretty nice.
Either well written bad guy or a stereotypical villain. Not all games need to have an overwritten bad guy, sometimes it’s nice to just fight a guy who wants to frick everything up cause it’s fun.
>ganondorf
>brown ginger israelite
>evil for evil’s sake
Seems pretty accurate to me
So:
Elder:
FFXII
Great:
XVI Barnabas
High:
XV
VII
IX
Mid:
XVI again Ultima
Meh, possibly shit:
VI
My man Vincent only wanted to put an end to the tyranny of the Occuria and the pro-nobility backwardness of his empire, rather than a merit-based system.
Or vayne ;P
complex motives
Lost Judgment
>villain's motives are understandable even if somewhat deranged, but the hero is so fricking shit at arguing against him that you end up siding with the villain instead
>villain's motives are understandable even if somewhat deranged, but the hero is so fricking shit at arguing against him that you end up siding with the villain instead
I loved Kuwana vs. Yagami. Both really cool dudes with their hearts completely set on justice as they see it. Their battles were and I hate this word, epic.
I love this shitpost template, it's a lot of fun, but it's also not strictly indicative of what makes a good villain. Writing for a villain is not such a simplistic task that you can define what makes a villain "good" or "bad" based on a single criteria. To keep things simple though, I'll try to define three broad categories of traits which come together to make an engaging villain.
>Depth
How fleshed out the character is, especially regarding their motivations and methods. What a character wants isn't as important as the audience understanding why. That said, going for a more specific or unique motivation can help make a villain feel more distinct. Power or wealth are fine motivations, sure, but what makes them fine is also their weakness. They're generic, everyone wants power and everyone wants wealth.
>Presentation
A character's personality, design, and the performance of whoever is portraying them. Good presentation can salvage a boring idea and make it into something exceptional. Look at Eggman, the dude is boring as frick conceptually but has had so many creative and fun takes over his existence that he's become one of the most beloved vidya villains of all time.
>Cohesion
How well the villain fits the narrative and tone of the story they're being inserted into. Characters are ultimately tools that a storyteller utilizes to tell their story, so a villain can still be great if the fulfill a pivotal narrative function that helps to push the game's core themes. Lavos isn't a terribly interesting villain on its own, but the inevitability it represents makes for a tremendous goal to overcome and a phenomenal final confrontation. It's a very inspired choice of villain to build a time travel story around.
>not vriska edit
tears in rain
someone who's like
>"Yeah, I'm an evil dickhead. Gonna cry?"
Reddit tier discussion, You make a villain and its either good or not whatever the background is.
Is the top guy Ozymandias or whatever his name is? I just started reading watchmen so...thanks for the spoiler I guess lmao. No idea why this dude is being featured on a videogame board.
the image is ancient
>what makes a good villain?
when it's a sexy woman who lusts for me and tries to persuade me to do evil things with her