Give me videogames where the villain honestly, in a non-memeing sense, did NOTHING wrong.
>Hard-mode: The Villain's motives are so compelling that the player is actually rooting for them
>Dante-Must-Die mode: The game lets you SIDE with the compelling villain.
Other urls found in this thread:
What is the point in such a character, other than to undermine the role of the player/hero?
Your picture isn't relevant, right? Because he sold out his principles to a transdimensional lich so he could get the upper hand and "shockingly" was betrayed. He was completely right about strength of self and that the world needed powerful leaders, but then he went and fucked up big time.
To show that the world is more elaborate than you think. There's more than just black and white and it's not always what it seems. It's also better to have a mindset of your own instead of blindly following orders.
Live A Live
dragon's dogma
legacy of kain, all of them(except maybe the first and blood omen 2, it's arguable)
To make a story that isn't black and white?? Also, who doesn't like to root for a villain who isn't your stereotypical asshole??
nier.
i still wish i could have sided with shadowlord,
Bioshock Infinite, I think the game was secretly meant to convince you to side with Comstock
I think we all know the answer
...
I never realized before but Baelsar's helmet horns have earrings what the fuck
A good Antagonist is still going to be an antagonist
In a story, they are used as a way to oppose the protagonist, and always will oppose them. But that doesn't mean they can't be understandable in their actions, and you can be encouraged to have pity for what needed to be done
Dagoth Ur is a nice example of this. He definitely needs to be ended, or else he will screw over Tamriel as a whole with Corprus. But you can't help but be sympathetic for his desires.
A good Antagonist can both invoke sympathy and understanding, while also giving a player determination as to why they must be stopped.
To make people feel better about participating in oppression. "Oh, the evil man is more complicated than you think"
Pagan min. While he did some fucked up shit, he didn't argue that it wasn't fucked. He did it regardless because it kept kurat from exploding completely into either a drug state or a traditionalist theocracy. People died sure without him kurat is definitely worse
What? No!
Ganon is a dick who lusts for power just for the sake of it. He kills people just because!
>legacy of kain
The villains are the transdimensional fucking shits and Mobius, not the vampires.
Dark Souls features a final boss villain that literally does nothing for the entire course of the game.
Ganondorf is doomed by destiny to be the reincarnation of a godlike malicious entity
Doesn't mean he can't lament the circumstances
he was a 56 year old veteran desperate to get back in favor with the emperor.
The funny thing is, if you just sit still and let that one dude be tortured, the game ends with you going out to get fucked up with him in a helicopter while AC/DC plays in the background.
Most of the Templars in AC1 except for the fat fuck and Al Mualim. When you give them the old stibbity stab they tell your their plans and they actually make sense.
Richter did nothing wrong.
if you're rooting for the villain then they fucked up storytelling 101
if you think he's right or you find his motives sympathetic that's fine if not encouraged, but if you're rooting for him to win then they did a shitty job making the protagonist likeable
of course this becomes complicated with video games, since the line between player and protagonist gets blurred.
i suspect that while the idea of a game where you can't win and you die trying to stop the villain might sound good on paper, but it would aggravate the fuck out of most people. you know how people flip their shit when your character is super powered but then gets captured in a cutscene by a couple of the same hundreds of dudes you've just killed? imagine that, except that's how the game ends.
no one would enjoy that.
as a story it might be cool. as a game people would *hate* it.
there's a sort of middle ground in games like Halo:Reach where you do a cool sort of last stand and then die trying against overwhelming odds. but that's not where the villain wins. you technically won that, you accomplished your objectives and then died heroes. that is an acceptable "bad ending" sort of deal.
L I T E R A L L Y