Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

RPG Villains

Darth Roxor

Royal Dongsmith
Staff Member
Joined
May 29, 2008
Messages
1,878,585
Location
Djibouti
As we all know, most types of video games are nothing without a good plot, a bad guy doing nefarious deeds that plague the whole village/country/world/galaxy and a grand showdown where the bad guy gets booted, you get the answers, the gold and the women. But my question here is this: How do you like your archnemesis and your showdown served for you?

As for the villain: Do you like him as the typical psychotic destroyer of everything in sight (ex. Darth Malak of KotOR)? There's no single villain but a whole organisation that's plotting against the world (ex. The Enclave of Fallout 2)? The villain is an idealist that wants to change the world to his vision no matter what (again, The Enclave, Fallout 2)? Or perhaps, the bad guy is a mysterious figure that threatens the whole world, but almost nothing is said about him before confronting him, and even after that, and nearly all you have are assumptions (ex. Darth Nihilus, KotOR2)? He stays constantly in the shadows, and he is unraveled near the ending, after exposing that the grand evil-doer you were chasing all the time was actually but a pawn in the hands of this one (ex. Makala, Betrayal at Krondor)? Or maybe he is not even a villain so to speak, also a mysterious presence, that even though it doesn't do any harm to the world itself, it has answers you need and nothing will stop you from reaching them (ex. The Transcendent One, PS:T)?

As for the showdown: The typical Hollywood happy ending (as in, you get the money, the women, the world is saved, woohoo!)? A 'tragic irony' that shows that after destroying the villain, an even bigger evil is set upon the land (Diablo I could be an example, I think)? Do you like all the answers given to you on a plate at the end, or do you prefer to have your own assumptions based on the research throughout the game? A happy ending or a bad ending? An open-ending/cliffhanger that leaves place for assumptions/sequels or a definite ending? Do you prefer to kick the boss's arse (as in most of the games) or have an epic and long dialogue that lets you totally avoid combat (again, PS:T)?

Those are only some example I could think of, I guess there are lots of others, feel free to post yours.

Anyway, my favourite bosses are these 'mysterious' ones. Those that seem to appear out of nowhere and cause menace upon unsuspecting people. They have a lot of backstory behind them, and it is only up to you find it through long and careful research. Mysterious bosses are a lot more interesting to work against and uncover their motives than the 'psychotic destroyers' which I find to be shallow.
My favourite endings are also those that leave a lot of loose ends, they don't tell you everything, and leave a lot of place for future continuations. Finding out informations yourself and using them to interpret the ending is a lot more immersive and 'personal' than getting all the answers from the boss.
 

SpaceKungFuMan

Scholar
Joined
Nov 19, 2007
Messages
253
My preference is for well developed villians, who are actually fleshed out enough to even be party members. Kreia was an outstanding villian. Failing that, combinations of your archetype work well, like the Master (shadowy figure/organization most of the game, turns out to be an idealoug).

What I want to play more than anything is a game where at the end you find out YOU are the villian, and everything you thought was heroic and chivalrous was either the product of a warped world view from being inundated with propaganda or a mental illness. There were plenty of Nazi's who thought they were heroes for their service to the Third Reich. And when I say you find out you're the villian, I mean you REALLY are the villian. The final boss is the more traditional hero, and at the end you kill him, fully knowing he's the force for "good" in the game world. You never go off to fight the "true evil". The hero dies, the world ends. This is victory.

Come to think of it, this would be a great direction for Alpha Protocol or a game with that sort of setting to go in.
 

Mareus

Magister
Joined
Apr 5, 2008
Messages
1,404
Location
Atlantis
SpaceKungFuMan said:
My preference is for well developed villians, who are actually fleshed out enough to even be party members. Kreia was an outstanding villian. Failing that, combinations of your archetype work well, like the Master (shadowy figure/organization most of the game, turns out to be an idealoug).

What I want to play more than anything is a game where at the end you find out YOU are the villian, and everything you thought was heroic and chivalrous was either the product of a warped world view from being inundated with propaganda or a mental illness. There were plenty of Nazi's who thought they were heroes for their service to the Third Reich. And when I say you find out you're the villian, I mean you REALLY are the villian. The final boss is the more traditional hero, and at the end you kill him, fully knowing he's the force for "good" in the game world. You never go off to fight the "true evil". The hero dies, the world ends. This is victory.

Come to think of it, this would be a great direction for Alpha Protocol or a game with that sort of setting to go in.

Hehe, this is something I am actually working on with RPG maker VX, but with one difference. I want to make choices in the game so based on what you decide will shape the world. So when you bring the world to it's end it will really be your fault and it will be because you believed you are doing the right thing.. It's still far from finished, because it's just a one man project and with my job and a girl and a kid I wish I could meet some enthusiast to help me out a bit. The way it's going I may as well give up soon.
 

SpaceKungFuMan

Scholar
Joined
Nov 19, 2007
Messages
253
Mareus said:
Hehe, this is something I am actually working on with RPG maker VX, but with one difference. I want to make choices in the game so based on what you decide will shape the world. So when you bring the world to it's end it will really be your fault and it will be because you believed you are doing the right thing.. It's still far from finished, because it's just a one man project and with my job and a girl and a kid I wish I could meet some enthusiast to help me out a bit. The way it's going I may as well give up soon.

Maybe you should make the game more public to the codex, with design docs and what not. That could get you the help you need to finish.
 

Mareus

Magister
Joined
Apr 5, 2008
Messages
1,404
Location
Atlantis
SpaceKungFuMan said:
Mareus said:
Hehe, this is something I am actually working on with RPG maker VX, but with one difference. I want to make choices in the game so based on what you decide will shape the world. So when you bring the world to it's end it will really be your fault and it will be because you believed you are doing the right thing.. It's still far from finished, because it's just a one man project and with my job and a girl and a kid I wish I could meet some enthusiast to help me out a bit. The way it's going I may as well give up soon.

Maybe you should make the game more public to the codex, with design docs and what not. That could get you the help you need to finish.
I thought of that, but I wish to create something concrete before I come out and ask for help. I don't expect anyone to help me based just on what I say. When I actually create something that I think people here will find interesting then I will open up more. Besides, people here hate JPRG's and there is just so much you can do with RPG Maker VX. But you can make some pretty good dialogs with it and even choices and consequences.
 

SpaceKungFuMan

Scholar
Joined
Nov 19, 2007
Messages
253
I think RPGmaker is generally recognized here as a great alternative to programming a game. When it became clear that American Hare would never materialize, several people recommended RPGmaker.
 

Solohk

Scholar
Joined
Aug 15, 2006
Messages
289
Location
Madam Lil's
I prefer villains that have real motivations rather than the type that stand in the balcony of their fortress laughing at nothing while twirling their mustache. To me it doesn't matter so much what their goal is but why they are doing what they are doing.

I prefer non-traditional endings. 99% of all stories have the hero saving the day and getting the girl and there are zero consequences to anything they've done. I liked the ending to Children of Men, loved the end to There Will Be Blood, and even liked the ending the The Dark Tower which I know most people hate.

I'd really like to see some game endings that really fuck with you. I'd like to see a game that ends with the villain being right. Of course you realize this after you kill him. Or as previously mentioned I'd like to see a game where you realize you are the villain. I think this could be done in several ways.

One such idea I've had is one where you think you are a valiant hero vanquishing evil. But I'd like to drop some subtle hints, such as "nightmares" the protaganist has that relate to what he is actually doing. Most people would think it was your standard story however, you'd have some people that beat it and say to themselves "wait a minute... Was this just a giant hallucination from a criminally insane individual?"

Or another would be turning the whole hero/villain routine on it's head. You play as a member of some marginalized race, say an orc, who is losing a war against the more standard races (humans, elves, etc). You are desperately trying to save your way of life, your culture, and the antagonist is the classic RPG hero. Of course, classic RPG heroes are sociopathic genocidal racists (butchering kobolds, orcs, and other such inferior beings).
 

Chefe

Erudite
Joined
Feb 26, 2005
Messages
4,731
The types you listed all have their strengths. It really depends on the game.

Destroyer of everything: Great for heavy action games where a fantastic shodown fight is expected. You don't want a sappy villian who goes through a ton of dialog. You want someone who destroys mountains and ravages villages, unleashes waves of monsters, and could wipe the floor with you if you didn't have your party to back you up. You want to kick their ass to hell and back, and back to hell again, so you can proclaim that you are the ultimate badass.

Organization: Good for tactical games with a lot of world politics. A single villian would be totally out of place here, as would a motive to be bad just for the hell of it. It's usually more about money or some other tangable ideal, since there's multiple antagonists involved, and something has to hold them together.

Idealistic: Honestly, every villian should be this, bar none. Otherwise they're just another mindless orc who attacks because you walked on the screen.

Mysterious figure: Good for a game where there's more focus on solving social problems between characters or freeform world exploration. The head of all that is good or all that is bad isn't really an issue, but is there only so there's some sort of long-term goal to look forward to.

"I'm the real badguy!" Plot Twister: Hasn't this been done to death already? This is the worst possible option, since you've spent the entire game chasing one guy, and you end up caring about him, not the new idiot that proclaims himself as the ultimate bad. We might as well call this the cop-out villian.

Transcendent: Excellent for a game where your character and his personal struggle is the center. The world isn't really in any danger, but you are on a quest for your own reasons.

As for endings, there needs to be some kind of ending. Cliffhangers are stupid, and do nothing except say "hey! buy the sequel to find out what happens next!" There needs to be a wrap up, or it's nothing more than another dumb Stephen King "I really didn't feel like finishing this story, so make up your own ending" ending. Final shodowns are cool, as are the Fallout/Arcanum type where a summary is given of what happens in the future based on the actions you took.


Now, my personal favorite type of villian is the one I never see. This villian is more of an antagonist. He has a reason for stopping you that isn't simply because you're getting in the way of his world domination. He has his own backstory and struggles, and you can sympathize with him, or reluctantly kill him (meaning you kill him only because you have to, or to ease his suffering, but you don't enjoy it). An antagonist that you can pity and relate to. An antagonist who you can find a common ground with that's much deeper than you both wanting to be evil. This villian truly believes he is doing the right thing for the greater good, and you are the real evil, or you are someone who needs to be "saved." I believe this kind of antagonist could be incorporated into any of the above archetypes if done with finesse and respect towards the type of game.
 

Murk

Arcane
Joined
Jan 17, 2008
Messages
13,459
Rhett Butler's post is good, to add without going into much detail - I'd prefer villains that are more human and not some doomsday device.
 

Unradscorpion

Arbiter
Joined
May 19, 2008
Messages
1,488
It was a long time since the antagonist was on equal moral grounds as you. It's usually the case of you being a hero, or in some cases the plot twists so that you are a monster and the villain is actually a completely misunderstood victim of your ways.
You could have cases where you are both generals in war, or rival knights, or anything similar, it could allow you to be either a hero, villain or a neutral rival. And you need just one antagonistic character.
 

Darth Roxor

Royal Dongsmith
Staff Member
Joined
May 29, 2008
Messages
1,878,585
Location
Djibouti
Destroyer of everything: Great for heavy action games where a fantastic shodown fight is expected. You don't want a sappy villian who goes through a ton of dialog. You want someone who destroys mountains and ravages villages, unleashes waves of monsters, and could wipe the floor with you if you didn't have your party to back you up. You want to kick their ass to hell and back, and back to hell again, so you can proclaim that you are the ultimate badass.

Well, I kind of figured as much too, but I think we all know that classic RPGs shouldn't be "heavy action games" :wink:

as are the Fallout/Arcanum type where a summary is given of what happens in the future based on the actions you took.

Yeah, I also like that very much, 'cause it shows that everything you do might have a consequence some day in the future or some quest you've done but "nothing happened" finally shows itself.

Now, my personal favorite type of villian is the one I never see. This villian is more of an antagonist. He has a reason for stopping you that isn't simply because you're getting in the way of his world domination. He has his own backstory and struggles, and you can sympathize with him, or reluctantly kill him (meaning you kill him only because you have to, or to ease his suffering, but you don't enjoy it). An antagonist that you can pity and relate to. An antagonist who you can find a common ground with that's much deeper than you both wanting to be evil. This villian truly believes he is doing the right thing for the greater good, and you are the real evil, or you are someone who needs to be "saved." I believe this kind of antagonist could be incorporated into any of the above archetypes if done with finesse and respect towards the type of game.

Well, Kreia from KotOR2 matches this description perfectly I think.
 

RK47

collides like two planets pulled by gravity
Patron
Joined
Feb 23, 2006
Messages
28,396
Location
Not Here
Dead State Divinity: Original Sin
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Villains

should give you plenty of ideas

Well Intentioned Extremist

"He was just... well, like a lot of madmen. Somewhat accurate view of the problem, really insane view of the solution."
- Kid Radd

A villain who has an overall goal which the heroes can appreciate in principle, such as saving the environment or protecting a minority. However, it is the methods the villain uses (such as mass murder) which are the problem; despite any sympathy they may have with his cause, the heroes have no choice but to stop him. Taken to extremes, he may fully believe that Utopia Justifies The Means.
Sounds like that Arcanum Dude.
 

ghostdog

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Dec 31, 2007
Messages
11,101
I'll agree with the antagonistic villain, it's the most interesting and realistic type of "villain".

Another overly used type of villain that hasn't yet been mentioned , is the one that ends being a close relative of yours. Mostly you father and sometimes your brother.

- [hoo] Luke , I'm your father [hooo]
- NOOOOOOOooooooooooooo !!!!!
 

Mareus

Magister
Joined
Apr 5, 2008
Messages
1,404
Location
Atlantis
Has anyone ever wanted to play a villian like Fredy, Jason or Micheal Myers? You know... sneaking into houses, playing with a potential victim by calling on the phone and than just breathing into the phone. Appearing and then just disappearing. I know it sounds a bit sick, but whenever I watch those movies it seems to me they are just killing people because of lulz.
 

SilasMalkav

Educated
Joined
Nov 30, 2006
Messages
78
Darth Roxor said:
As we all know, most types of video games are nothing without a good plot, a bad guy doing nefarious deeds that plague the whole village/country/world/galaxy and a grand showdown where the bad guy gets booted, you get the answers, the gold and the women.

Isn't that a contradiction? Sure that would be a plot, but good? If you have to have a villain, I'd agree that it should be a fully developed character that has their own realistic motivations for doing things.

I'd quite like a game where you find out that your parents have died, and a group of rebels say that an "evil" empire did it. In the end you find out that both the rebels and the empire are both as bad as each other, and that neither side is responsible for your parents demise. But by then you're probably in too deep to be able to back out.
 

JarlFrank

I like Thief THIS much
Patron
Joined
Jan 4, 2007
Messages
33,267
Location
KA.DINGIR.RA.KI
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
What about a game where you defeat the villain, or, better say, antagonist, in the end [yes, in German sentences you often get so many commas in a row] and then notice that the consequences of killing him are actually bad. It was still an evil person, and it was a morally good thing to stop him, but in the end the world falls into chaos because of his death. Now that would be pretty awesome and make you think if it was really right to kill him. Sure, you prevented much evil, but still, that guy was important for the balance of your world.
 

Helton

Arcane
Joined
Jan 29, 2007
Messages
6,789
Location
Starbase Delta
JarlFrank said:
What about a game where you defeat the villain, or, better say, antagonist, in the end [yes, in German sentences you often get so many commas in a row] and then notice that the consequences of killing him are actually bad. It was still an evil person, and it was a morally good thing to stop him, but in the end the world falls into chaos because of his death. Now that would be pretty awesome and make you think if it was really right to kill him. Sure, you prevented much evil, but still, that guy was important for the balance of your world.

Morrowind?
 

Darth Roxor

Royal Dongsmith
Staff Member
Joined
May 29, 2008
Messages
1,878,585
Location
Djibouti
You know, it's actually quite depressing that there are so many possibilities of having a believable, deep, interesting, unique and just plain awesome villain in various games, but mostly the developers shove the easiest, most shallow and overused ones everywhere.
 

Gragt

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Nov 1, 2007
Messages
1,864,860
Location
Dans Ton Cul
Serpent in the Staglands Divinity: Original Sin
JarlFrank said:
What about a game where you defeat the villain, or, better say, antagonist, in the end [yes, in German sentences you often get so many commas in a row] and then notice that the consequences of killing him are actually bad. It was still an evil person, and it was a morally good thing to stop him, but in the end the world falls into chaos because of his death. Now that would be pretty awesome and make you think if it was really right to kill him. Sure, you prevented much evil, but still, that guy was important for the balance of your world.

That reminds me of the original endings for Junktown: if you get rid of Gizmo, Killian would actually rule the city with an iron fist and crush people under harsh and strict rules. If you got rid of Killian, Gizmo's rule would actually lead to an era of freedom for Junktown
 

Dire Roach

Prophet
Joined
Feb 28, 2007
Messages
1,592
Location
Machete-Knight Academy
Here's one thing that bothers me: in a typical "good" ending, after the protagonist has survived a trip through hell in order to save the day, everyone is happy that the world didn't end and they decide to go back to their homes to live happily ever after. It assumes that the protagonist is totally satisfied with what has been accomplished and expects no other rewards than that of being able to live a safer or more mundane way of life.

Why are there so few happy endings that cater to selfish heroes? You risked your neck countless times in order to save the world, how can you accept getting nothing in return? The "getting the girl" cliché is a step in this direction, but it is shallow and unimaginative. The "getting the gold" cliché never seems to be used creatively, either; we know that the hero is now extremely rich, but what does the hero do with all that money besides making the usual purchase of a palace filled with sex slaves? Do you have a powerful and politically influential status in your society now? How about getting an apology from those who thought you would fail or have wronged you in some manner in the past?

Selfish heroes who have become embittered by a lack of compensation for their efforts make good candidates for future villains.
 

Murk

Arcane
Joined
Jan 17, 2008
Messages
13,459
Kain opted for world-emperor, and the sequels went that route too.
 

Chefe

Erudite
Joined
Feb 26, 2005
Messages
4,731
Helton said:
JarlFrank said:
What about a game where you defeat the villain, or, better say, antagonist, in the end [yes, in German sentences you often get so many commas in a row] and then notice that the consequences of killing him are actually bad. It was still an evil person, and it was a morally good thing to stop him, but in the end the world falls into chaos because of his death. Now that would be pretty awesome and make you think if it was really right to kill him. Sure, you prevented much evil, but still, that guy was important for the balance of your world.

Morrowind?

I was thinking of Saddam when I read that, but Morrowind is a good example. Dagoth Ur was a great villian, and could even be considered a tragic hero. It's a pity the developers seemed to realize this, but didn't expand on it in any gameplay related ways, instead trying to turn him into a regular ol' baddie.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom