Big Bad - II: What Makes a Good Villain? - Extra Credits
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 9 фев 2025
- Villains are people too. A compelling narrative villain does not just do evil things for the sake of being evil, but because their view of the world or the actions they've taken within it drive them to make choices which they see as necessary, or even good. Instead of just a big boss monster to defeat, these antagonist types force the protagonist to make choices and challenge how they see the world.
Subscribe for new episodes every Wednesday!
bit.ly/SubToEC (---More below)
___________
Get your Extra Credits gear at the store! bit.ly/ExtraStore
Play games with us on Extra Play! bit.ly/WatchEXP
Watch more episodes from this season of Extra Credits! bit.ly/2wvhPeo Contribute community subtitles to Extra Credits: www.youtube.com...
Talk to us on Twitter (@ExtraCreditz): bit.ly/ECTweet
Follow us on Facebook: bit.ly/ECFBPage
Get our list of recommended games on Steam: bit.ly/ECCurator
_________
Would you like James to speak at your school or organization? For info, contact us at: contact@extra-credits.net
_________
♪ Intro Music: "Penguin Cap" by CarboHydroM
bit.ly/1eIHTDS
♪ Outro Music: "Son of Chaos" by Xaleph
bit.ly/1CTxXol
![Felix "Unfair" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Oswujxm2Ag0/mqdefault.jpg)
"So why did you level the earth to the ground?"
" *I...JUST...HATE...CHOCOLATE* "
😂😂
0:17 "How are you working red and green with a pencil?" hahaha
Every
Villain
Is
Lemons
HUUUUHHHH!! EEEEEEVVILLLLLL
+Blizzic But its not the lemon's fault; life made the lemons. Train the lemons in pyromancy and throw life out into the streets and make it eat bits of its charred house!
Unacceptable
As an aspiring writer I try to live by a offhand qoute I can't remember who said(If anyone could tell me who said this, awesome on you), but it's something I say practically as a mantra. "The only difference between a villain and a hero is one. bad. day."
You either die a hero. Or live long enough to see yourself become a villain.
It's a quote from the Joker. From "The Killing Joke"
"So... I see you received the free ticket I sent you. I'm glad. I did so want you to be here. You see it doesn't matter if you catch me and send me back to the asylum... Gordon's been driven mad. I've proved my point. I've demonstrated there's no difference between me and everyone else! All it takes is one bad day to reduce the sanest man alive to lunacy. That's how far the world is from where I am. Just one bad day. You had a bad day once, am I right? I know I am. I can tell. You had a bad day and everything changed. Why else would you dress up as a flying rat? You had a bad day, and it drove you as crazy as everybody else... Only you won't admit it! You have to keep pretending that life makes sense, that there's some point to all this struggling! God you make me want to puke. I mean, what is it with you? What made you what you are? Girlfriend killed by the mob, maybe? Brother carved up by some mugger? Something like that, I bet. Something like that... Something like that happened to me, you know. I... I'm not exactly sure what it was. Sometimes I remember it one way, sometimes another... If I'm going to have a past, I prefer it to be multiple choice! Ha ha ha! But my point is... My point is, I went crazy. When I saw what a black, awful joke the world was, I went crazy as a coot! I admit it! Why can't you? I mean, you're not unintelligent! You must see the reality of the situation. Do you know how many times we've come close to world war three over a flock of geese on a computer screen? Do you know what triggered the last world war? An argument over how many telegraph poles Germany owed its war debt creditors! Telegraph poles! Ha ha ha ha HA! It's all a joke! Everything anybody ever valued or struggled for... it's all a monstrous, demented gag! So why can't you see the funny side? Why aren't you laughing?"
Another quote you might like (I've seen it on the cover of "Black Book of Arda" - which is basically a Silmarillion re-written from the opposite perspective - so I'm not sure who is the acutual author)
"The Story always show the Good as the the Victor, because the story it is the Victor who writes the Story..."
It's a Joker quote. He says something like that after believing he's caused Gordon to go mad.
Funny thing is: He's actually kinda wrong. IIRC Gordon doesn't go mad.
And generally I don't believe that a person's actions can be driven by one singular event. Even Bruce isn't driven by one event but rather a monumental event followed by a spree of bad days. His parents' death was a catalyst, but in a reactive soup known as Gotham.
One bad day is not enough, if you ask me. Always strive to make it at least 3 or 4. If a villain needs to believe the world is shit, one bad day won't do. Nagato from Naruto is a great example of this. His parents are killed when he's a child, his dog dies during a battle, his country is ravaged and laid to waste by war, and after he and his friends have caused an uprising their group is betrayed and his best friend commits suicide in order to protect the rest of the group. We can believe him when he says he believes that peace can only come through pain and terror, because that's almost all he knows at this point.
Or you could just make him an asshole to begin with. Some people are like that in the real world too, so why not in videogames.
terisian
It's more or less a reference to the Joker's origins. In one day he lost his wife, his kid, his job, and because of Batman-- His face and sanity. Good writers characterize Joker as a villain who knows and is willing to commit acts that are evil. He won't hide it. But he's doing it because he feels the world is hypocritical and he wants everyone on his level. Which again, he's fully aware is wrong.
"Some men aren't looking for anything logical, like money. They can't be bought, bullied, reasoned or negotiated with. Some men just want to watch the world burn."- Alfred
While I agree with many points in the video, saying something along the lines of "A villain who is evil for the sake of villainy is bad" isn't true. I believe only the best writers could make a good villain who is evil JUST to be evil.
I think it's good to note that you don't necessarily have to have a relatable villain. Someone you know that is just plain evil (that still has good characterization) can be a nice break from the moral ambiguity of other villains
One villain that is IMHO MASSIVELY overlooked in gaming is Wilfre of the Drawn to Life series. Who manages to be both a mechanics villain who on the surface is a simple "evil guy who wants to rule the world" deal, in order to please the games younger audiences, but is honestly one of the most tragic characters I can think of, with a lot of depth and complexity for those willing to look for it. And, ironically considering his design, when you finish the game and truly think about it, it gets DARK. Wilfre is effectively a part of an imaginary world (where the game takes place) inside the head of a young child who went into a coma during a car crash. Yes, this is a kids game. He realizes this, and steals away a book that effectively makes you God (it's what the god of said world used to create it) because if you get your hands on it, the child will wake up and his entire world will stop existing. Naturally, no one believes him, so he decides to make a villain out of himself so as not to harm the innocence of the people of his world, and fights you with all the stereotypical evil monologues he can and committing every attrocity he needs to, furthering and furthering himself from society and exiling himself to his own area of twisted madness, all to stop the "hero" from erasing everything he loves.
+maximyth100 Damn you for making me cry over that game again.
.
+maximyth100 One of the best written characters I've seen in general in video games. His motives drive him to oppose the player, and make him appear bad, but he is not evil, he's actually more of a hero. He tries to save his entire world, and he gets no thanks for it too. And the hard part about it is that it makes the player almost a villain of sorts. Puts into perspective a lot of other media where we see "unimaginable evil" appear and impose on our world, where to them our world is worth less than a dream and so they bear no guilt in destroying it.
+maximyth100
Wow, that's the best "it was all a dream/in your head" twist I've ever heard of. That truly is a damn good story that villain has: he's self-aware dream that's afraid to not exist. Sounds almost like FFX, but better.
+maximyth100 Another game that has a similar concept going on is The Whispered World. The villain turns out to be the "desire" of the child to stay asleep in their coma.
maximyth100 I haven't read ur comment completely yet, because I want to know if it has spoilers.
"Is it right to arrest this hacker who only steals from the rich and corrupt?"
That, but replace hacker with Australian
and replace arrest with execute, and you got yourself a Ned Kelly.
And an excellent villain whose arrestvand execution will only benefit society. . .at one fell swoop we rid ourselves of a horse thief, a violent thug who murdered policemen and a thief. . . . . . . . Id say stick with the hacker because you get to keep the moral quandary: there ia no moral quandary with ned kelly because he was a violent thug who lied and stole his way into infamy. No loss to society when you put a bullet through him.
Excellent points! : )
Something I see often and wanted to add. Rarely is a female villain's motivation greed or power lust or something on that line. Most of the time, it's because she was previously victimized or wants to remain beautiful 5ever like a pretty protagonist. (E.g. the recent Maleficent movie.) I'm interested in seeing more female villains with drives that aren't victim-based.
I'm also interested in seeing more female heroes whose drives aren't victim based for that matter too. xD
Kreia from the video game "Knights of the old republic 2" is a villain who isn't victimized, though you would probably have to play the game to understand why she is the villain and what kind of villain she is.
I definitely know there are examples of female villains that aren't victimized but the ones who are happen a bit too often for my liking. I don't know it's like, "Even when the female character isn't the damsel in distress or fridged, she is still a victim" and it gets exhausting.
SuperMetropolice Beat me to it. Kreia might be my favorite antagonist of all fiction.
Pretty much every hero male or females drive comes from being victim based, batman, hell even Kratos the manliest man of them all has a tragic past that led to the man he became. It's a common story element to give both heros and villains a tragic story so we can see what led them into becoming who they are today. Are you saying that you want a bland female villain who just wants to watch the world burn for no reason, check out Tyr from the breath of fire series.
Their tragic pasts have to do with other people getting hurt. With batman it's his parents, with kratos it's his daughter and wife.
With female characters it is them themselves that get brutally hurt.
I want to play a game where you start out captured by the bad guys and they say "join us, and we can rule the world together!" then you say "okay, yeah let's do it!" then you play the rest of the game being the bad guy, fighting against the good guys and trying to complete your plan.
Round protagonists are rare in games. I don't know any.
Handsome Jack fills this role pretty well I think.
+SoylentGamer Mostly. The only reason he doesn't is because of how villainous he is. Seriously, most of the game he just calls you up to say how much of a bad guy you are and laugh at you. I like the character moments he does have,
*SPOILER*
like with his daughter, but most of the time he's just an annoying, arrogant Jack-ass. I like that he did have good intentions, but he was just too bad guy-like to be believable or relateable on his quest.
Note, I've only been through Borderlands 2, so this might not be a credible opinion. Missed opportunity in my book.
Matthew Barwood Yeah play TPS and you'll feel so different about jack
+SoylentGamer If only the problems of money didn't exist... Oh well, I'll see when I get there
Matthew Barwood best of luck for you
+Matthew Barwood a really good way to get a look at Jack in TPS is through the game theory video. they talk alot about some subtle things that happen.
0:54 "What drives them?" I'm gonna have nightmares for months.
way?
+Canadian bajur wat*
"You are the bandit, and I am the goddamn hero!"
Every Villain Is Lemons.
I have questions
ALSO KNOWN AS EVIL
So this is what life truly gives you
Always
Both are sweet for ones but bitter for others
Has anyone here played Super Paper Mario? Count Bleck, the main villain of the game is an amazing antagonist. Without spoiling the game too much, he starts off appearing to be a mechanic villain, but becomes a narrative villain as the story progresses. It's really interesting.
This is a bit of an old comment, but I felt the need to say that Count Bleck is one of the best tragic villains that I've seen in a video game.
I was looking for a comment about him. I totally agree with you.
Anyone else think of Saren from Mass Effect? While his hatred of humans is a bit heavy-handed, his motivations are conveyed to the player with incredible efficiency. In particular, Shepard's confrontations on Virmire and The Citadel are excellent. Watch those two scenes again and pay attention to how much time Saren spends justifying his actions.
Also, considering how he ends up, I can't help but feel sorry for the guy.
Yeah, his human hating wasn't shown or justified in any interesting way, but otherwise I thought him to be an excellent villain.
The Illusive Man could also have been great if they hadn't made him unnecessarily stupid and evil in ME3. The Cerberus way had always been subterfuge, so why did they need to be cartoonishly evil?
After ME2, they were in a great position PR-wise, they'd just helped save humanity from the collectors, so why not pretend like they'd simply been psychotics rogues with hearts of gold and save the double cross for later in the game, maybe after you'd actually started thinking they might have turned a new leaf.
There'd be room for you to feel very conflicted about fighting alongside them, sure they fought the collectors, but they also fund crazy and unethical experiments, and the Illusive Man seemed quite cross when you destroyed the collector base.
What's this, Kai Leng just saved your life but Anderson says he's a maniac, who will I believe? All kinds of interesting plot points could be created with a Cerberus and an Illusive man who were as unknowable as they were in ME2, they seem evil, but why fight them if their goals are/seem to be the same as mine?
Maybe the Illusive Man never betrays you unless you choose not to control the reapers at the end, and maybe Anderson won't allow you to do anything but to destroy them, so the "good" ending would be to sacrifice all three of you to meld man and machine. (the the color ending was stupid, but if it had to be done, make it more interesting)
Certainly, I couldn't help but think of Saren throughout the entire video! =D
Really while the reapers act as an unknowable omnipotent force for the sake of the setting, the supporting villains (Saren in particular) do really well in opposing the player in a way that's more meaningful than "cause I'm evil..." Much in the same way the relationship between Lavos and all the supporting villains from Chrono Trigger move through the story opposing the protagonists.
Definitely, In a way, Saren was a good guy, but misguided. He wanted to save the galaxy too, but his approach turned out to be wrong in the end.
For a time Illusive man was similar, but after they indoctrinated him, he lost all his charm and character. He became just an evil enemy that you have to defeat. He would be more believable if in ME3 his actions actually benefited humans in any way, which they didn't.
I really liked that in Mass Effect, you could talk Saren down during the final battle, resulting in him choosing to end his life, rather than become a puppet. It really showed the character of Shepard and of Saren, though then he got Husked and we fought anyway but I won't hold "need to have a final boss" against a game.
I do not agree that Saren is a good narrative villain. Once do Anderson mention that Saren doesn't like humanity as a whole (Shortly after you wake up from Eden Prime mission). Later Anderson assures you that Saren wants to destroy the entire human race, suspecting that these Reapers are an means to that end (after the first hearing where Saren shrugs of evidence presented by Shepard & Co).
I can get behind Saren hating humans, but why? Did we kill his dog or what? Even if he hates humans for whatever reason(s), why would Saren turn to the Reapers to extract revenge? Couldn't he flex his Specter status from the shadows and make life miserable for humanity instead?
Neither of these questions are answered in the game itself. At least not in the main narrative. Can't speak for the Codex as I never really studied it in detail. Regardless, such an important plot element should not be buried as a footnote in a "read it when you feel like it" codex.
Because of this I feel that Saren comes across as a villain built on sand. There is no foundation, no origin story. We're told Saren is bad news and whatever he's after therefore must also be bad. The Reapers could be super cute fluffy space bunnies and they'd still be considered evil, because Saren is interested in them.
I am well aware of the saying, "A truly evil person does not think of himself as evil," but the only time this was successfully pulled off was the Joker in the Dark Knight movie. Joker was committing his crimes just to bring mass chaos to society, even down to the level of the gangs and crime bosses. He was being evil just for the sake of being evil. The whole movie centered around the famous line, "Some people just want to see the world burn."
I don't think the Joker necessarily believes he's evil. He claims he just wants to cause chaos for its own sake, but his actions don't line up with this. He wants the world to burn because he genuinely believes it deserves to burn. His whole goal in the movie is to convince the people of Gotham that they are evil.
Watch the film "The Rock"
The 'bad guys' are doing it to try and force the Government to take care of war Veterans like they promised.
He isn't from a game, but another example would be Bill Cipher from Gravity Falls.
While I mostly agree with this video, I do feel that if you make the villain too sympathetic without that being your intent, you may lead to some cognitive dissonance. Sympathy is a great tool, but sometimes what you want to aim for is more of a feeling of understanding them, which isn't quite the same.
Sympathy has a connotation of "oh I feel bad for this person and want them to succeed," and again, that can be great, but if you don't build your mechanics around that, you might end up forcing the player, who now wants the "villain" to do well, in to killing thrm. Often times, with prerecorded dialogue, the player character may speak as though they had no mercy while the player had nothing but mercy.
Understanding is more like knowing where a villain is coming from, seeing the logic in their argument, but fundamentally understanding that what they are doing is still irredeemable as well. If a grief-stricken doctor who has turned to twisted experiments on people already dying to save a lot more people while also being very polite and having a personal stake in their work elicits sympathy, then a doctor trying to force people in to their program to "improve" their lives by giving them chainsaw arms is understandable; cool program and all, but you're torturing unwilling subjects with lots to lose in to having their body mutilated and possibly dying. That's still really wrong.
Tl;dr not every villain has to be sympathetic, but villains should still have a depth of character past pure evil.
Handsome Jack is a great narrative villain. "You're the bad guy, and I'm the goddamn hero!" I love that guys motivation. It makes sense too.
I remember a point at the end of a game where the main villain is pushed into a portal he opened earlier by your friend (who was working against the villain in his organisation) mid monologue.
Genius
I got quite a chuckle out of the part showing the chocolate-hating villain actually committing to his motive.
A true monster
>Mentions protagonist becoming antagonist
>Doesn't show Spec Ops: The Line
>gj
+redder876543 Glad I wasn't the only one that thought of this.
+redder876543 they have 2 whole videos based on it
This is positively wonderful for a DM for most any pen and paper rpg. 10/10.
Mr freeze is this kind of villains the only reason he did what he did was to save his wife
I use this video in designing books I write. This is so good at detailing how to create a well thought out villain in a story. This video is not only perfect for video games, but for stories too!
Totally agree, i have been writing stories for like... a week or so but i never thought of that for the villain, this video helped me so much, nowi know how to make a good story AND THEN a good game, by the way how are your stories
going so far, do you have a website that you use to post them or not? Id like to see what you came up with and what i can add in mine if i see something really great. :)
Honestly this video works better for books than games simply because a book needs a solid narritive villian (if there is a villian) while games can broaden the spectrum on what a good villian is
Personally, I think Hades, from Kid Icarus: Uprising is a fantastic villain. He's not doing it so he can have supreme power. He just super twisted, and aims to screw around with everything, backed up by his line "Earth is my flower to plunder!". He knows what he's doing is evil, and he embraces it in such a nonchalant way! The way he interacts with everyone, it's just so perfect! Half the time, he just doesn't care! It doesn't matter to him that the Forces of Nature took out Thanatos, they'll just keep going without somebody giving orders.
Gosh dang, I love Uprising!
He's evil... I KNOW he put that mimicutie there!
Indeed he is a magnificent villain, but I would argue he's a mechanics villain, not a narrative villain. I mean, most of the buildup to his fight is just stressing how tough he is. And everything he does until the end is throw critters at you and cause every other character headaches. And he just does it for the evulz. Great as he may be, he's not a good example of narrative villain
I think that surprisingly the Pokémon games do this sort of thing a little too well. Take Giovanni and Silver. The 2 main antagonists in Red, Blue, and Yellow, their remakes, and Silver, Gold, and Crystal, and their remakes respectively. In the first few games Giovanni just kinda seems like the paper thin charecter that Nintendo was known for at the time. Contrarily Silver showed a lot of progress as the game went on starting off as brash and abrasive, then becoming friendly to you and his Pokémon. In the remakes of Silver and Gold it got even deeper. It's revealed that Team Rocket was, at least in part, founded so that Giovanni could support his family, with Silver being his son. And when Red showed him that how he was supporting them was wrong he ended up abandoning them. This gives Giovanni a clear motive and Silver a reason to be so hateful. Not only to the player but to Team Rocket especially, which went unexplained for a long time. And we also don't see them develop just through dialogue. At the middle of the game/end of the first region Silver has a Crobat. Something you can only get through high friendship. And after defeating Lance you can team up with Silver to battle Lance and Claire. The Pokémon series builds up amazing villains.
And some not so amazing ones.
Real life evil is a thing, though. In the Nazi concentration camps there was a officer that liked to drown prisoners in the latrines in the mornings because he thought it was fun.
These soldiers was also driven by self-preservation because if they were not proving themselves dedicatead and efficent enough they would get sent to the front where they would have to actually fight to survive.
So when sadism is without reigns and it teams up with self-interest it can produce genuine human evil.
What they were saying is that people don't see themselves as evil. Not that evil doesn't exist. Though, 'Good' and 'Evil' tends to boil down to 'Things I like/find appealing' and 'Things I don't like/find disturbing' So, you could make the argument that as a subjective quality it doesn't really exist either.
My point is that there are people that enjoy being a jerk for the sake of being a jerk because they get a kick out of it.
ArkhanNightman yes but they don't see themselves as evil. They either ignore the fact that what they're doing is wrong or they truly believe that what they're doing is fine
ARTHAS YES OH MY GOD MY FAVORITE his warcraft 3 arc was one of the best in gaming imo
One of my favorite Narrative Villains is originally a Mechanics Villain: Ganon from Wind Waker. The only reason that he became someone with the intent to conquer Hyrule was because his homeland was a no man's land, while Hyrule was teeming with life. Everyone he knew and cared for died there with Ganon not being able to do anything. So he turned his sights to Hyrule out of spite. The way he's portrayed in the game really has me sympathetic towards him and shows that he's a truly well done villain.
And then I had the rug yanked out from under me by Egoraptor with him saying that it's all just mystic babble talk that no one cares for... -_-
Honestly I think that's more of a mechanics villain with a good narrative built around him. Most, if not all, of his character is informed by the gameplay, rather than the other way around.
I also think that a good narrative villain should feel like they've been off doing their own stuff while they're not on screen. Ganon gives the impression that he just waits in his fortress until Link finally shows up with the Triforce.
I agree with Gabriel. Nintendo is one of the worst consistent offenders of bad/lazy story telling. The best "narrative" villian from the Zelda series I think is Skull Kid from Majora's Mask. He actually had a life before and after the game. He went around causing havoc and screwed around with people's lives. With understandable reasons but grew out of control when he stole the mask. He even had friends. You see the aftermath of his mischief all over the game world as you play through the game and meet his various victims.
With Ganondorf if he's not trapped in some inter-dimension portal he's just moping around in some throne room waiting for Link to just find him.
Gabriel Munn To be fair, Link showing up with the Triforce is exactly the reason why Ganondorf waited in his tower. I can think of no better way to obtain a wish-granting treasure than to have your enemy personally deliver the final piece to you in your own territory. He pulled the same gambit in Ocarina of Time, too, now that I mention it.
But anywho, +K4RN4GE911, I agree that Wind Waker Ganondorf is probably my favorite incarnation of him simply due to how tragically sympathetic he is as a character. Skull Kid, as well (arguably, anyway, since one could make the case that he wasn't in control of himself when he had Majora's Mask and wasn't strictly the main antagonist...).
On the topic of Zelda villains, though, Ghirahim is probably my favorite, but for different reasons. Not only is he competent and determined, he's also comical yet brutal--major Kefka vibes. Nothing he does, in my memory, ever contradicts his main motivation, as Dan described in the video, and he goes to any length to fulfill it. Not only that, but he also serves as a sharp personality foil to one of the protagonists, so that's another point to him. Add the foreshadowing on top of it, and you have yourself another great villain.
Another great narrative Nintendo villain is Count Bleck from Super Paper Mario.
You can have both a mechanics and a narrative villain. 3:45 is a great example. The religious guy is the narrative villain and the ancient power is the mechanics villain.
Absolutely. A Link Between Worlds is a great example, with Yuga being more of a mechanics villain and Hilda being a narrative one.
Or maybe the ancient power is the force of nature villain. Who knows.
It just occurred to me...
Kid Icarus: Uprising has separate characters for these types of villains. The underworld gods are mechanic villains (though, they have amazingly written character and contribute to plot development). Meanwhile, Viridi can be seen as the main narrative villain - someone who doesn't act as a "final boss", but rather, someone who adds to one of the central themes of the story by questioning the value of the protagonists' ideas and actions, and getting in their way with her own quest against the mechanic villains.
Maybe this "third side" structure could be a lot of help in getting game story writers get around the "big bad" and create more truly engaging and real villains.
An idea for a Narrative villain is that in life, they have suffered so much tragedy that they feel nothing can help them, and so they inflict suffering on others so that they might feel better. It's a classic saying: Hurt People Hurt Others.
I always love writing for villains they can be the most interesting characters
bustedprius Thanks
I know it's supposed to be helpful mostly for people interested in making games but I'm in the middle of writing a comic and it's just wonderful how much these videos had helped me too AvA
Thanks for playing my music for the outro btw -
I’ve watched this video 5 times now and yet, I still don’t understand how I would go about making a narrative villain.
10 times now.
Lol me too.
It's meant as a rough starting point, not an extensive guide. ^^
0:16 So... how ARE you marking red and green with a pencil?
Ohh shit you've busted EC!!!!
0:30 I WARNED YOU ABOUT STAIRS BRO!!!! I TOLD YOU DOG!
Homestuck XD
I honestly never expected *that* coming up on youtube's comments. It's gone even more meta than it already was.
We're doing this, bro. We're making this happen.
the best villains are the ones you want to agree with.
+Bryan Leong That's not true. Emperor Palpatine from Star Wars is freakin' awesome, and he's as 1-dimensionally evil as evil can get.
It's just that he encompasses such a gapingly *diverse* range of evil intent, that he breaks through the wall that typically constrains mundane, 1-dimensional villains and manages to become interesting!
Sympathy is the go-to, but it's apparently not the end-all of villain design.
+Mystery Yoghurt You mean how he brought order to a galaxy full of strife and lawlessness? Where entire droid military organizations can be constructed to terrorize the galaxy right under the nose of the ruling government with the ruling powers to scared and weak to do anything about it? Where entire clone armies can be generated in secret because of the lack of government oversight?
Palpatine's empire immediately attacked dissent, even in the form of the rebel alliance, which struggled for decades to gain a viable footing in the galactic civil war. When things got out of hand, Palpatine did something about it. He built the god damn Death Star to try and save the galaxy from a bunch of lawless vigilante teenagers who thought they knew better, despite a sore lack of understanding on how to actually run a government.
A concept clearly proven as true in Episode 7 and the fact that the resistance is not part of the Republic military, or the fact that the First Order was allowed to develop to the level it did in the first place. Palpatine never would of allowed that kind of shit to happen on his watch. Hell, if it wasn't for some god damn force sensitive mutant teenager firing a torpedo into a 4 meter wide exhaust port, the rebellion would of been crushed once and for all, order being restored to the entire galaxy. A working, united economy, plenty of jobs for anyone willing to work them and a structured society where crime was only really viable in the outer rim and even then, the gangster leaders and cartels were all reigned in to some level by the Empire despite their physical distance from the core worlds.
No, Palpatine was a strong leader willing to do what needed to be done to bring order to a galaxy in chaos. The only reason there was such conflict is because of the number of people who weren't willing to commit themselves to social integration because the governing body needed to do things like tax the populace because they were actually doing shit, fixing problems and fighting crime.
In fact, the so called totalitarian tendencies of the empire and their strict economic policies were only as intense as they were because of the necessity to fuel a war effort due to the constant need to suppress armed terrorist activities, something the Empire actually did actively, where as the Republic had no problem letting an entire militarized organization develop and start knocking off planets before they actually did anything. Even when that did start to happen, it took them DECADES to engage the threat on an active level, instead choosing to send a mere two Jedi to fight an entire planetary war.
Bunch of dudes start trying to blow up the planetary government, during Palpatine's reign? He would of had a dozen star destroyers up in that bitch wrecking every-fucking-body. That's how he rolled, no bullshit, take out the whole planet if you gotta. Palpatine is the Andrew Jackson of the Star Wars universe. Perhaps not a perfect man, perhaps not entirely without moral faults, but a man with a vision to build a better, more advanced society and the strength of leadership to make the hard decisions necessary to make it happen.
At least he wasn't a bitch like the Repubic's vaunted Jedi that remained after the purge. "Oh woe is me, I don't have a vastly unfair advantage or a privileged life in society anymore, better go live in a fucking cave in the desert/swamp rather than try and do anything about with my mother fucking super powers". What? The rebellion wasn't down to support a jedi training unit? Couldn't maybe make a Jedi Commando unit to combat Imperial Inquisitors? Really?
Bullshit, they're just a bunch of cowards, that's why the republic didn't work out in the first place and it's the same reason the New Republic and it's lack of will to act on the First Order's aggression (instead condemning Leia as a war monger and forcing her to create her own private military, "The Resistance") had the entirety of it's core systems ANNIHILATED in one shot along with their fleet. They were so busy playing pussy foot politics and demilitarizing to try and make some sort of statement that they didn't even notice the PLANET SIZED WEAPON that the first order was constructing just a few light years away.
Palpatine is a hero. Anakin/Vader is actually just a COMPLETE asshole. Luke is a fucking assinine know it all teenager. Same with Leia. Ben and Yoda are cowardly bitches who make young teens do their dirty work for them cause god forbid they don't get the special treatment in society they once had, no, just better to extricate yourself from society entirely. Vader was the one doing the Jedi hunting. What, Yoda couldn't take him? Ben just got done kicking his ass, he was still young back then, how come he didn't do something about it?
tl;dr Palpatine was the real hero of the series, a hero amongst cowards.
+PerfectChaosZeta That was the best goddamned analysis of the star wars events and the people within them, I agree 100%
Essentially the whole light/darkside of the force mumbo jumbo was clearly just a plot device to make the main "heros" more likeable and the main "villans" more opposable.
And when you really think about it, that little rebellion group that consisted of 90% of the main cast would easily have been killed by the empire if plot mechanics didnt dictate that all storm troopers/empire personell should be completely incompetent and unable to shoot straight.
By all rights those vastly untrained rebel scum should have been mown down by the highly trained and regimented empire troops, right at the start.
PerfectChaosZeta Palpatine isn't doing the Empire for the good of the common man. He's doing it to gain otherwordly influence over the Dark Side and (possibly) transcend death. In fact, he loathes the mundane world.
The Force in Star Wars is a living thing. You have to kind've appease it, otherwise you can't get the most out of it. Wanton slaughter is just one of those Sith rituals apprentices do to open the door; and masters do to keep the juices flowing.
It's not evil. It's just one of those things.
+Robert R I completely disagree. Palpatine was very three dimensional when you really dive into his lore. Not to mention that he actually kinda did bring peace to the galaxy by consolidating the republic's power. He ended the war and united two opposing factions. The Empire also had outlawed slavery in numerous systems and brought economic stability to the Galaxy for the most part. Palpatine's goal may have ultimately been power but he knew how to satisfy those who needed satisfaction and pacify those he felt needed to be pacified. The whole thing with Alderaan is a bit more complex but he rewarded grandly and punished harshly.
Fascinating. This is the episode I've been waiting for, for a long time.
Thank you.
My favorite narrative villain is Saren from Mass Effect. He's simply trying to save organics from extinction.
"Is submission not preferable to extinction?" - Saren
Speaking of villain, can you please make an episode on villain decay (and how to avoid it even though it is almost necessary due to the main character's progression, story line, etc)? For example, the reapers in Mass Effect 3 just feel so much weaker than what the Mass Effect 1 story would lead gamers to expect.
I remember I developed a true hate for Saren. Much more deep than what the reapers ever made me feel. Specially after I had to sacrifice either Alenko or Ashley. That was the moment I was like "Fuck this guy, I'm going to fucking destroy him!"
Me watching this to write something that isn’t a game.
Same
Why am i bad? Because i am evil
-Doofensmirts
İ think thats not right spelling but anyways
Actually, a villain that is said to have a certain motive but routinely acts counter to it would be interesting if done right.
What you're describing would either be a hypocrite villain - a character who lies, sometimes even to themselves, about their motivation in order to achieve another, usually more selfish motive - or a misunderstood villain, whose actions appear to be based on one motive but, in fact, lead to another, one usually unknown to the protagonists.
You keep wondering throughout the game then at the final battle, bam, everything comes full circle
you know who's a fantastic narrative villain? (ok, this isn't exactly game-related, but oh well, it's a good example)
prince zuko from avatar: the last airbender.
so. zuko is hell bent on capturing the avatar. in the beginning, all we know is "to regain his honor." why must he regain his honor? because his father banished him for speaking out of turn. why did he speak out of turn? because he was speaking his mind and sharing what he believed in; what he thought was right. zuko is seen in many more episodes, and character development is built a lot around him. heck, some of us might even root for him at times!we start understanding zuko as a character,and he seems more human, more fleshed out and real.
then, it's a turning point. zuko confronts his father and speaks his mind yet again. he tells him his intentions: joining the avatar and helping him defeat the firelord. then he leaves to go find the avatar and his friends.
however, it isn't easy. they don't trust him, which is understandable because of all the horrible things he has done to them. however, when he risks his life to help them, they start trusting him more and more, until, of course, it's the finale.
this is a fantastic example of a well thought-out narrative villain. (at least for the first 2 books) even though he isn't from a game, looking at non-game villains are a good way to try and be able to build better narrative villains in games.
Very insightful.
Dylanica thank you
+Misty Wind Zuko is my second favorite character in the entire series, and being second to Toph is not an insult.
Steve Neiman haha no way. toph is awesome. although zuko is my favorite.
+Misty Wind
I agree that Zuko is a fantastically well thought out character (and he is my favorite after Iroh) but he's not a villain. He's an anti-hero.
I think a better example of a good villain would be Amon. He has an immediately clear motivation and it's actually decently sympathetic. He is incredibly powerful and terrifying. And then, you slowly get to learn more about him. But, as that happens, he only seems to get stronger and gains more success. And then, finally, his collection of puppet strings gets tied up and he gets exposed. And even at the very end, he is being characterized as a real person, but also a monster.
Wow. Even before watching and knowing what a Narrative villain is, I already have 2:40-3:07 completely part of his character on the game I'm currently developing. Nice video!
The Master from Fallout 1 is one of the best Villains that blurs the line between Narrative and Mechanic Villains. You can fight him out right and blow up the church. Or convince him his mission to unite Humanity through mutation via the Forced Evolution Virus would result in the extinction of mankind due to sterilization side effect of the FEV in humans. While he is a monster in appearance and personalities, his overall goal to ensure humanity's survival in the radioactive wasteland can be viewed as somewhat noble. The ability to resist radiation sickness and death would be a useful attribute coupled with enhanced strength and longevity. Which is why you can join him.
Same with Colonel Autumn from fallout 3, He wants to use the water purification device to help the enclave make America the once great country it was before the bombs fell, you can just kill him or tell him to give up and leave peacefully and allow the water to go to everyone in need. There's also Ulysses where you can convince him in the errors of his ways and and stop him from blowing up the Mojave wasteland area and make him an ally for a short time, after which you can decide where one of the nukes goes, Legion or NCR, then he exiles himself.
I think though, something they might have forgotten to bring up is that the two aren't mutually exclusive. For example, you could theoretically combine Andrew Ryan and Dr. Wily together and have a character who mostly talks to you about their motivations and such, but when they're cornered they get into a friggin' tank. Glados is probably a good example of this. Or you could have two different villains, one being mechanical and the other narrative. IE: an aging evil dictator who happens to have a pet dragon or something they'll throw at you during the end of the game. An example of this would be New Vegas with Ceasar's Legion.
No. Colonel Autumn was crap. A poor character and a poor boss because Bethesda. Like Mankar Camoran.
Better examples are found in Vegas with the faction leaders embodying the factions.
Lanius is a brutal warlord with a Shakespearian streak. The high ideals and savagery of the Legion
General Oliver is a blustering fool with eyes bigger than his belly but also lacks the nerve to take the risks himself. Perfectly encapsulating the feeble democratic NCR.
And House is an arrogant, aloof but not cruel technocrat. Walling himself up in his own amusement park, safeguarded by his creations, trying to rebuild the old world but in reality the man behind the curtain is a relic himself in a coffin shaped apparatus.
Oh yes, the Master was incredibly well written.
Once you look through his horrible exterior, you see a disillusioned creature, disgusted with his own deformity, who does horrible things, all while hoping that they are ultimately good.
I love how you can simply explain the flaws in his plans to him and he will humor you, just to find out how one, easily overlooked flaw has turned him from a flawed messiah to a terrible tyrant.
Kev Dee No, Colonel Autumn was a terrible example of a villain. The Master had noble goals, trying to create a mankind fit for a new world, all while allowing the old mankind to go peacefully into the night. Autumn was a self-rightious monster, who wanted to wipe out the population, because of their minor flaws.
Fallout 3 was a good game, but compared to Fallout 1 and 2, it was a terrible sequel. They completely misunderstood the workings of the Brotherhood of Steel, the Super Mutants, the Enclave and how those things work together.
***** F3 was a good amusement park and a great exploratory post-apoc game. Not what I would call a great rpg. That's where it falls flat. A pretty big area sadly
I don't even create games and I don't even know how to code much but I still love this show. It really makes you think about the development of games and what makes great games and what makes terrible ones. I do often use what I learn from these videos in conversation and sometimes even to write things yet I generally watch them for the enjoyment.
Thank you, Extra Credits, for providing hours of great videos and knowledge for free. Feel free to pat yourselves on the back/s, you deserve it!
0:18 lol the checkbox at the bottom ☺
My thoughts exactly 😂
So a way to simplify
Mechanics: Evil for sake of Evil
Narrative: Fleshed-out, more human villians
A mechanucs villain does not necessarily even have to be evil. Just something that stands in your way at the end and makes you feel powerful when you win.
I’m making a villain at the moment who is pretty... well, not bad. he would be seen as evil even though he murders since, well... when i tried to describe him to my coworker i did it in completely philosophical opinions like ”he doesn’t see death as something to fear, but only as the highest form of punishment” and stuff like that. only now do i realize he fits surprisingly well with his... them, s-, spirit... animal... it sounds stupid but it makes sense!
he is a jellyfish
...
WHERE DID I GO WRONG
I always loved how this was used in "I have no mouth but I must scream.", the main antagonist feels like there getting revenge by making you suffer as much as the human race made it suffer.
I haven’t watched the whole video yet, but I think I have an example of a narrative villain explaining his motive.
Dominus Ghaul from Destiny 2. There’s a scene with 2 other characters (well, one’s practically unconscious, but he’s still there), and Ghaul is talking to his friend/second in command.
I hope I didn’t spoil too much!
Honestly, role playing has helped out a lot with my character design. It's one thing to plop a character into a scene. It's another to have another person constantly going, "But why?" and forcing you to answer in the character of your villain
A good alternative to making motives and whatnot is to make the villain gravity
I've finally gotten around to writing a D&D campaign. I cannot understate how helpful your videos have been and how much they have influenced me to write a better campaign.
A good example of a character moment is actually from Bendy and the ink machine, The minor antagonist Sammy Lawrence has gone insane and tries to sell your soul to Bendy. I know it sounds really stupid but it is just a really good moment in a game that really is all about avoiding ink monsters, it's just awesome when you see a character that thinks he does is right, only to be backstabbed by the one he adores.
Those are some very good points you made about him, and I think he would be a great villain along with Bendy. Personally I felt he was killed of to soon and a lot of potential was wasted. But who knows, he might just make a comeback.
Brian Ngoma Thanks man
No prob. Another thing I just realized that makes Sammy a good villain and just a great concept that should be implemented more often IMO is the idea that Sammy is not only a massive zealot for Bendy, but the fact that he is betrayed by the one he loves and is willing to die for is pure genius. And the villain doesn't even have to die in that situation for it to be impactful. Just look at Syndrome from the Incredibles. He wanted to be like his idol so much that when he was told, by his idol himself, that he couldn't, it sent him down a dark path that made him the villain he was by the time of the movie. It could be a brilliant backstory and show us the motives behind that villain's actions.
just a little commentary on the "motivation" point, though: I'm a fan of creating rational "villain" characters, or ones that we can somewhat emotionally relate to - to a degree - but in this world, there ARE people who really want nothing but make the world a worse place. Hatred and destruction are what they get their highs from. Some people really do just want to see the world burn.
That part I agree with you on. There are some people so psychologically warped as to destroy things simply because they can and enjoy it. Sometimes we want everyone to have a rational motivation because we want to believe that reason can fix every problem. Evil that simply enjoys being evil cannot be reasoned into good behavior, and we like to think everyone can be redeemed.
Narratively speaking, it can often be interesting to place that sort of character as a primary henchman, destroying things at the main villain's direction but forever at a risk for going off-script into a destructive frenzy that can cause the main villain as many headaches as it does the protagonist. Alternately, they sometimes crop up usefully as third party problems, suddenly applying extra tension to the protagonist (or even both sides) by giving him or her two unrelated problems to solve and perhaps getting in the way of other plans.
0:16 how are you marking red and green with a pencil
kien le That might be something else that resembles a pencil
you are forbidden
I'll be delighted to fight a villain who hates chocolates honestly and idk why
It's chocolate; self-explanatory.
HANDSOME JACK. AHHH he's such a good villin. because if you look at it. you are his bad guy. he has real reasons to dislike you and trick you. he's human (spoilers RIGHT HERE) when you kill angel his daughter. he threatens you again and again and eventually resorts to begging you "please don't kill my baby girl" it makes you feel bad. then you learn in other games that he WAS the good guy. but after being shot in the back and fucked over again and again. He turns to the villin behind a mask of his own face. really look at him and use him. borderlands is one of my favorite games because of this.
Xayah The Violet Harpy dam you deat me to it
Xayah The Violet Harpy he enslaved and abused Angel her entire life and probably killed her mother. Angel was begging the Vault Hunters to be killed. Do you really think Jack actually cared about Angel?
This channel always motivates me until I realize that I don't have any game Dev skills. I can't wait for college.
My all time favorite end-game boss (not technically a villain) is Lord Gwyn from Dark Souls. When you beat him, you don't feel triumph or glory. What you feel is much more complicated. What you defeated was a fraction of his former self, divided by the four great lords. You don't feel like a hero for defeating him for some noble cause... you have simply acted out the course of nature, and can either succeed Lord Gwyn and kindle the flame, or start a new age of darkness. This boss fight is so much more meaningful if you know the lore beforehand.
***** All game endings don't have to fall under a specific category in order to affect the person being exposed to it. Most villains do make you feel accomplished when you beat them, but it doesn't mean game developers can't deviate from that. Also, Gwyn was never intended to be a "villain", rather than the lord of cinder that the main character was destined to succeed. The game is lore-driven, not plot-driven, and the final battle was a good way to express that.
+San Shinobi I felt a bunch of trumpth
This outro music is exactly what I was hoping for.
Also, the big bad Kefka is pretty much a villain who is evil for the sake of evil and he is widely adored. However, he has a LOT of character and I think that's what makes up for it. That aside, I also think it's in the simplicity of his goals that the player can rally against him.
You should do a big bad episode on villains like Kefka.
I think there are two reasons why Kefka makes a great villain despite his simplistic motivations. First, for the entire first act of the game, he only appears to be the henchman of the larger evil of The Empire. He doesn't appear to be "THE Antagonist" and so doesn't have to carry that narrative weight from the word go.
Second, while he is evil for the sake of evil, the evil he perpetrates starts in very concrete terms and ramps up from there. He doesn't start off screaming that he wants to destroy the world, he starts off by enslaving the mind of a girl to use her power, setting a castle on fire to extort information, and poisoning the water supply of a castle to end a boring siege without concern for collateral damage. In each case he has clear reasons for doing what he's doing, even if it all ultimately stems from his twisted evil mind. It's only later that he works up to subverting the very order of creation and seeking the death of all things because he's a nihilistic psychopath.
Ooh, I just remembered a good example of a narrative villain that thinks their in the right: The original versions of Team Magma and Team Aqua from Pokemon Ruby, Sapphire, and Emerald both thought they were doing good in the world. One wants to expand the landmass so that there is more space for humans and pokemon, while the other wants to make the ocean grow to help the pokemon that live in the sea thrive. Their both antagonists, but both truly believe that they're the one in the right, the other is evil, and you're just some kid trying to stop them from making the world a better place..
I got chills when you were giving examples of flawed villains. Love a good narrative!
also that ending music is my favorite OCR!
Fun idea: You knock a boss down to almost no health. In runs a puppy, it loves on the guy, and you're forced to reconcile the enemy's possible lack of evil, or other motives. And if you hurt the puppy he gets fully healed, mega damage, and goes completely apeshit on you.
What breed? Just curious.
I think golden retriever, beagle or pitbull.
Noyz Gaming a Weiner dog. duh
what if you create a bad guy who tells you 30 percent of his story and then when you complete the normal game you can play as the bad guy and then you see 100 percent of his story
I'm no game designer or writer but that sounds interesting.
"How are you marking red and green with a pencil" XD
As a writer, I say this should be useful to every type of story writing with a villain.
Another thing to note is that the protagonist is the villain in the eyes of the antagonist.
As a writer myself... *slow, appreciative clap of approval.*
I think you should take a look at Arvis (or Alvis, whatever translation you prefer) from Fire Emblem Genealogy of the Holy War. He is one of the most well written villains I’ve seen in a video game and definitely deserves more recognition than he’s gotten.
To be fair, I don’t recognize any Fire Emblem character that’s not in Smash.
That’s understandable. (To be fair, the game I mentioned is only available in the U.S. through emulators) but seriously, Genealogy of the Holy War is an absolutely amazing game. If you can get your hands on an emulator, I would recommend it.
Even though I am not a game designer I am a writer of word stories and the talk about narrative villains has helped me with a series I'm working on so thank you.
Frau Engel is a good example of a narrative villain.
I have to say, most of my favorite villains are the ones where you would go:
"I would join that side."
I always love those types of villains as they show the true side of War.
The idea of fighting for what you believe in.
In war you kill so many people with their own beliefs and families, ideals and dreams, and both sides look at the other as 'the bad guy.' I've noticed that many players of video games, when they transfer into table top games, tend to be what I call 'murder hobos.' This is because most of them are used to mechanic-y villains, or just barging through games without really thinking about the consequences of their actions.
Yet when you finally grab some of them by the shoulders and really show them who they're killing, and it's always an amazing feeling when they look at their blood stained hands and ask themselves "Did I do the right thing?"
This is why the villains in Pokemon Black and White and Sun and Moon are so good and way less nonsensical than the others.
I was surprised not to see Andrew Ryan mentioned as a great narrative villain. The way that you come to know and learn about Ryan through short clips and the opinions of others really was incredible and made Bioshock's twist all the more shocking and engaging!
yes most villains should be relatable BUt there can be exceptions such as a selfish sociopath (ie: handsome jack) or a psychopathic sadist (ie: freddie cruger, carnage, the joker). with these types of villains is absolutely crucial that their behaviors be consistent
I still love watching these characters for dungeons and dragons design. It's amazing how much d&d overlaps with video games. Both tell a story.
To me, the greatest "villain" of all time is Big Boss from Metal Gear Solid. I put villain in quotations because honestly, you can make a pretty solid argument that he's not actually a villain, which makes him an amazing villain if that makes any sense. You get to see and experience his turning point from Naked Snake to the Big Boss during Operation Snake Eater as he's forced to hunt down and kill his old mentor and somewhat mother figure, watching him build his own army and strive to make his Outer Heaven a reality. He's not necessarily evil, hes just doing what he thinks is best for him and the people around him, even if it means defying the government and putting a bullseye on his back. Maybe I'm biased because Snake Eater is my favorite game in the series, but Big Boss is IMO the most fleshed out, interesting "villains" I can remember.
One way I love to see the protagonist learn of the villain's true intentions, is through the means of overhearing a conversation that was meant to be private. Hearing their enemy talk about their goals to someone they trust, completely unaware that someone is listening. I feel like it can amp up so much drama and leave the hero questioning their own goals, especially if the antagonist's intentions have a genuine force behind them.
what if the protagonist is also the villain but not like reverse horror but like bojack horse man or rick and morty. except now its a video game
Call of Juarez: Gunslinger is a pretty good example of this, in the story if the game you play as Silas Greaves who kills hundreds on his quest for revenge. However the game is played through flashbacks and Silas is constantly talking about regretting what he has done.
Oh yeah also literally all of the GTA’s fit this bill.
if you wanna be a villain number one
Are you a real villian?
have you ever caught a good guy like a real superhero?
alright i see that i will have to teach you how to be villans!
*SAXAPHONE SOLO*
You cant talk about games where the player becomes the villain and questions if he's right and not mention Spec Ops: the line
That tune at the end got me vibin'.
I think you're confusing antagonist and villain. Antagonist is anyone who opposes the protagonist. Villain is a specific role.
That's why he brings up "Not every series needs a villain", and brings up instances like Pokemon (Gary is an antagonist, not a villain).
on the topic of storytelling efficiency, I’m reminded of a story from a scriptwriting book:
in the 50s or thereabouts, a scriptwriter was having trouble introducing the fact that a marriage was in trouble. he had an 8-minute scene, which was much too long for the format. so his boss brought in a writer from the silent era, who put together the following scene:
the couple gets into an elevator, and the man doesn’t take off his hat. (this is when hats were a thing, and that was a bit rude)
two floors on, a pretty woman gets onto the elevator, and the man takes off his hat.
his wife scowls at him.
Ironically enough one of the all time epic stories (Lord of the Rings) has some of the worst, 2-dimensional villains of all time. The orcs are an evil race because...shut up they just are.
Dennis Williams But the focus was on the protagonists and their various routes of character development and thematic exploration with the Orcs and Sauron representing a total force of destruction whereas the heroes are splintered and fight with one another.
CH Gorog I'm just saying :)
Besides good, complex villains can only improve a story.
Dennis Williams LOTR takes inspiration from the Bible, and demonizes industrialization. Its objective was to give some sort of mythology that properly belongs to England, not to make a philosophical plot which would bring enlightenment. Really, most of the great stories that have a poor villain have a justification for it.
*****
Tolkien would make a pretty epic dungeon master...
Dennis Williams I wonder if the forces of evil in Lord of the Rings couldn't be classified more in a sort of "force of nature" category rather than an in-focus, specific villain? That the protagonists' struggle is more about overcoming a challenge rather than a specific enemy? I mean, we all know that foe does have a name, but his actual presence I suspect was made deliberately nebulous.
Or perhaps Sauron just wanted to be SEEN as such so he would seem more unstoppable? I honestly don't know.
I confess I'm FAR from the one to really comment on these things seeing as how I've not actually read the books! You Tolkien experts would know far better than I. But it was just a sense I got just now. I invite you who know better than I to tell me how I'm right or wrong about this idea.
It's really fascinating to watch this discussion. I studied writing plays in college and watching some of the same ideas be discussed from the perspective of gaming is really exciting!
One of the best villain's I know of was due to his reasoning. Basically it baked down to the question of "if you could undo all the wrong you've ever done, wouldn't you do it?" Well, he believed he found a way, though it required him to commit more wrongs to do it. Know of whom I speak?
Man, both the game and the series have a lot of potential. The series was too damn beautiful stuck with some "main villain", and the game's combat system/items got too much patches , make it clumsily executed and nonsensical.
I'm assuming Nox, if not he is another excellent villain who fits your definition.
Arthas.
Captain Harlock?
***** This work too, but not his quote he was mention of.
Nice choice of an outro music for a villain themed episode. :)
Shinra Electric Power Company, unselfishly answering the planets growing need for energy, grotesque experiments and city-sized cannons.
When you started talking about the player feeling that they were not necessarily in the right against the villians, I immediately thought of nier, during the first playthrough you hear the enemies as incoherent noise and so think that they are mindless monsters, but by second playthrough you still hear noise however you also get speech text displaying what they saying which by the way is mostly them screaming in fear or yelling at you to go away and leave them alone. (I felt so bad for killing them.)
The fact that they are gonna delve deeper into this kind of subject makes me all the more glad I'm subscribed ^^
I'm into what makes a good narrative, if I do become a dev, I was hoping these videos could at least point me in the right direction when I start making my own games :3 I have a few story driven games in mind :3 and hopefully become real one day :D
IN MY OPINION the greatest villain of all time is The Lich King/Arthas. I have yet to see another game where you start out playing as a run of the mill Disney prince but as the game progresses you watch helplessly as your own character slowly falls away from the Light until he becomes the very thing he tried to defeat. Unlike other games that have tried this your character doesn't automatically die/take over the world when they become the villain instead they start out as the underdog to other villains. As you the player continue following the characters journey you watch as they rise through the ranks killing the very people the character wanted to protect until they literally become the abandonment of evil and you can no longer control him but now must kill him. Yet at this point you have come to know the character so well that you feel sorry for him and your emotions always conflict every time he is on screen. You know he's the villain but you also know he was once this great warrior that you the player watched grow from the very beginning almost like a son. In fact deep down you the player actually want the character to succeed you want to surrender and let him win.
Kerrigan did it first. It's a Blizzard thing.
wherethetatosat Thats true Blizzard does seem to have a hard on for turning people evil. I feel like the Lich King was the best one out of all of them.
well at least kerrigan came around. And it was a more direct conversion compared to Arthas' bad decision making
you either die a hero or live long enough to become the villain
The best thing about arthas is that he is never truly gone. EVERYTHING he did goes back to his oath to protect people no matter what. All goes back to invincible.
I can't believe you managed to get through this episode without mentioning Big Boss. That deserves a medal, I couldn't have done it.
What about handsome jack he is both a mechanical villain and a narrative villain
This was not only a good episode for the medium of gaming, but can also be quite useful for literature and storytelling in general. Great episode guys
Vaas definitely takes the cake on this one
Extra Credits I have found your videos very inspiring, so thank you. One day people will thank you for being made possible the next generation of game developers to design those good games.