How to Write the Perfect Villain

[Infinitron]

GameStar asked some RPG devs this question: http://www.gamestar.de/artikel/der-...acher-von-the-witcher-3-und-mehr,3316440.html

Here are a few responses (via Google Translate):

He has changed the world

Chris Avellone, Narrative Designer
( Pathfinder: Kingmaker , Fallout 2 , Knights of the Old Republic 2 )

Better authors than I have found that a hero is only as good as his opponent - if the antagonist is weak, it also degrades the hero's triumph. I consciously use the word "antagonist" because a rival is sometimes more exciting than a villain.

A good opponent consists of several parts - he has a strong background story (so that he does not exist exclusively during the game, but has a past that stretches before the beginning of the game), he has already stamped the world (the player Can see in figures and environments in the game world what the villain has done - this is especially effective as a harbinger of how he will change them when he gets the chance) and, most importantly, the player can play an active role In the fate of the villain (what we tried at Pathfinder: Kingmaker with every villain in each chapter).

If the player does not just experience a fight or roll-out challenge, but can actively intervene in the course of his opponent's plans, this makes him a more important part of the story of the antagonist, thus reinforcing the bond between the two figures.

He is doing something horrible to the player

Brian Fargo, Founder of InXile Entertainment
( Wasteland Series, Fallout )

I think the most effective way to create a villain that you really want to defeat is to let the player do something negative in the course of the gameplay - or the companions who have the authors that he loves them. There must be individuals who are important to the player, not faceless masses.

An interim sequence, in which the antagonist rages under unknown characters , creates no emotional bond. In so many games, you are not even interacting with the enemy until the final, and very often no emotion is associated with it. If Darth Vader were to appear in Star Wars just before the end, the entire effect would be lost.

If, on the other hand, Vader appears in the first level, then his best game moment ever comes out

And lastly, we like to make sure that the villain follows a world vision, according to which he does the right thing, and even if only in his own distorted logic.

He is a product of his world

Josh Sawyer, Senior Designer, Obsidian
( Pillars of Eternity and Pillars 2 , Fallout: New Vegas )

Everyone expects something different from a good villain. Some people prefer their opponents to be brutal, sadistic and incomprehensible. They want the completely strange evil, perhaps because they want to hate the character without any restraint.

But I prefer rogues who may be an antagonist, but the players can understand and perhaps even like them. Because I tend to postmodern thinking, I would also like to make the player understand that even villains are a product of their world.

From the story that the player creates through his fight against the villain, a new world emerges. And this, for its part, will create a new generation of "heroes", "rogues" and all others around them.

He is the dark reflection of the hero

Colin McComb, Creative Lead, InXile Entertainment
( Planescape: Torment , Torment: Tides of Numenera )

An antagonist should be powerful, smart, and the player character must always be one or two steps ahead. It must challenge the player so that the player always dances on the edge of futility when fighting the villain - other, better heroes have already tried to conquer him and failed, and the villain has only grown stronger. Show the strength of the villain as early as possible and make him appear invincible.

Personally, I believe that a villain should be a reflection of the player's character. A dark reflection, but with recognizable and comprehensible properties. The rogue could in another time be the logical next step on the path of the hero - driven to success at any cost, without regard for the lives of others, always making sure that their own decisions are the right one for all. In other circumstances, the hero and the villain could even find some similarities. The path to the side of the antagonist should be a constant temptation.

He deserved to win

Gavin Jurgens-Fyhrie, lead author, inXile Entertainment
( Torment: Tides of Numenera , Diablo 3 )

A villain must be better than the hero. If the hero is smart, the villain must be smarter. If the hero is tough, the rogue must be almost bulletproof. After every encounter with the villain, the hero should be surprised that he has survived at all.

And yet the villain is not just for the hero. Rogues are by definition success stories. They have suffered terrible losses and have set themselves the task of putting things back in order - at any cost. They have been working on this for years, while the hero has kept sheep in his remote mountain village.

In other words, villains are characters who deserve to win. Even if their goals are terrible and the hero has only a tiny chance to stop them.

 

[Mackerel]

Because I tend to postmodern thinking, I would also like to make the player understand that even villains are a product of their world.

lol, Sawyer

 

[SCO]

There is a interesting villain in Azrael's Tear. The funny part is this: He's all about that 'he has already stamped the world (the player Can see in figures and environments in the game world what the villain has done)' because he's not even in the game. He already left others to deal with his bull and went to better/worse things, and every singular villain in the actual game is someone damaged by him.

Pretty effective at stimulating imagination.

 

[Roguey]

In so many games, you are not even interacting with the enemy until the final, and very often no emotion is associated with it. If Darth Vader were to appear in Star Wars just before the end, the entire effect would be lost.

Fargo says this, yet in both Wastelands you don't meet the antagonist until the absolute very end.

But I prefer rogues who may be an antagonist, but the players can understand and perhaps even like them.

 

[ga♥]

In Numenera you get the big cockroach at the beginning though.
If you consider that the antagonist anyway.

 

[Roguey]

In Numenera you get the big cockroach at the beginning though.
If you consider that the antagonist anyway.

ToN was the Colin Show, for better or worse.

 

[ga♥]

In Numenera you get the big cockroach at the beginning though.
If you consider that the antagonist anyway.

ToN was the Colin Show, for better or worse.

And Wasteland 2 was...Fargo's show?

 

[Roguey]

And Wasteland 2 was...Fargo's show?

He was definitely the face of the project, not so much Keenan or Long.

 

[ga♥]

And Wasteland 2 was...Fargo's show?

He was definitely the face of the project, not so much Keenan or Long.

I didn't even play it. Did he contribute to the writings?

 

[Roguey]

I didn't even play it. Did he contribute to the writings?

He contributed design ideas such as

 

[Azarkon]

Five qualities were listed, now we should see which of the most popular CRPG villains fit the list.

The Master

Has changed the world? Yes, the Master created the super mutants and was responsible for much of the post-apocalyptic political and religious world.
Did terrible shit to the player? Not unless you think the world he created was responsible for the player being kicked out of his vault.
Is a product of his world? Yes, the Master could never have risen to the power before the apocalypse. He is the sort of opportunist who thrives in a post-apocalyptic world and who sees his mission as the only way to thrive in such a world.
Is a dark reflection of the hero? Yes, the Master was kicked out of his vault much like the player, and wandered the land until he used his wits and luck to become who he was, just like the player.
Deserves to win? Yes, the Master came from a humble background and through sheer will and intelligence, became the ruler of the waste lands. He was only defeated by another like him - the player character - coming from under the radar and beating his super mutants.

Sarevok

Has changed the world? Yes, he set off a chain of events that led to the iron shortage, the ascendance of the Iron Throne, and the take over of Candlekeep.
Did terrible shit to the player? Sort of, he killed Gorion, the player's guardian, and sent assassins after him, but here we have to assume the player cares about Gorion, a character he barely knows.
Is a product of his world? Yes, he was raised as a merchant lord's son, and discovered his Bhaalspawn blood which led him to his actions.
Is a dark reflection of the hero? Pretty much.
Deserves to win? Maybe? He had a smart plan but couldn't account for the player character surviving despite knowing the threat the player represented throughout the game. Probably should've spent more money on effective assassins.

Irenicus

Has changed the world? For a wizard of his power, Irenicus didn't do much to change the world. He failed to become a god, killed a bunch of Cowled Wizards, and attacked an elven city but not successfully.
Did terrible shit to the player? Yes, he tortured the player and stole the player's birth right.
Is a product of his world? Not exactly. While his personal tragedy led him to pursue the player character, his original desire to become a god doesn't fit the typical elven wizard background and he seems quite eccentric.
Is a dark reflection of the hero? Yes, like Sarevok, he reflects the player's evil, power hungry side, especially since the player is destined to become a god.
Deserves to win? Not exactly. He was powerful, but failed to make full use of his power. It's not explained why he allows the player to live after he took his soul.

The Transcendent One

Has changed the world? Sort of. The Transcendent One does less than most of the player's incarnations. He does send shadows to kill off key characters, but otherwise doesn't do much.
Did terrible shit to the player? Yes, he kills the player again and again so as to make him forget.
Is a product of his world? I suppose. The Transcendent One exists to remind the player that nothing can change the nature of a man - that is, he is the representation of the player's past evil deeds and his guilt.
Is a dark reflection of the hero? Not exactly, but the incarnations are.
Deserves to win? No. The Transcendent One didn't do much to get to where he is, and while he successfully made the player die countless times in the past, it's not certain who he accomplishes this by just sending weak shadows.

Thaos

Has changed the world? Yes. Thaos has engineered the downfall of entire civilizations and wiped out cities. He is responsible for the Hollowing of the Dyrwood.
Did terrible shit to the player? He caused the player to Awaken, but that's by accident. It wasn't Thaos's intent. The player is insignificant to Thaos and not worth his time.
Is a product of his world? Yes. Thaos is one of the last members of an ancient civilization that discovered there were no gods, and his entire ideology and drive is shaped by this discovery.
Is a dark reflection of the hero? No. Thaos and the player doesn't have a lot to do with each other. Again, to Thaos the player is insignificant, and while the player may have opposed him in the past, this is not developed.
Deserves to win? I guess? Thaos seems to have always succeeded up until the player came along, and with all the ancient knowledge and power at his disposal, no wonder. Yet, his decisions towards the end of the game leave much to be desired; he doesn't feel like he deserves to win over the player given his many advantages.

And that's all I have the time to do, for now.

 

[ga♥]

The Trascendent One is the best villain ever. With the best last encounter.

 

[HoboForEternity]

i agree most with sawyer and MCA

neutral: fargo

dislike: Mccomb and the other guy

 

[MasPingon]

At first when I looked at it I thought those short descriptions are about each developer, they fit very nice, especially Fargo's.

But I prefer rogues who may be an antagonist, but the players can understand and perhaps even like them. Because I tend to postmodern thinking, I would also like to make the player understand that even villains are a product of their world.

I hate this postmodern bullshit, it goes in pair with SJW propaganda. You want to make a great villain which is a product of his world? Take a look at Bloody Baron, that's how you do it, without making a victim of the torturer. It is obvious that enviroment takes an important role in particular person behaviour, but don't blame society for every human action, god damn paternalistic hipster.

 

[Saark]

Fargo says this, yet in both Wastelands you don't meet the antagonist until the absolute very end.

Never played Wasteland 1 so I don't know when the villain first shows itself to the player there, but in Wasteland 2 there's a giant "InXile Entertainment" logo right after starting the game.

 

[Viata]

 

[Saark]

It's surprising how well all the other titles and pictures match too. (except for the last one)

 

[Goral]

you don't meet the antagonist

You don't meet him but you hear about him and can see the results of his actions quite early in the game. He basically fits to what MCA said:

A good opponent consists of several parts - he has a strong background story (so that he does not exist exclusively during the game, but has a past that stretches before the beginning of the game), he has already stamped the world (the player Can see in figures and environments in the game world what the villain has done - this is especially effective as a harbinger of how he will change them when he gets the chance) and, most importantly, the player can play an active role In the fate of the villain

 

[Commissar Draco]

nobody deserves anything more than they can grab with their own two hands, Gavin
if the hero succeeded then his Wille zur Macht must have been demonstrably greater than that of the villain

Liked what Avelone said too and Fargo approach gives your PC the more realistic motivation and drive than highly idealistic one; Colin MacCuck and Sawyer are just (post)modernist empty talk and forcing PC to be a Messianic figure; both are very bsb. Fallout New Vegas was the breath of fresh air where after dealing with Benny it was the Courier who decided whose your antagonist and Villain in Story and History book was; even if the game design steered you to help NCR and fight Caeasar route.

 

[Neanderthal]

Best villains or antagonists for me are characters who i've wanted to play as, which is good thing about Nameless I suppose, you get to do that.

 

[Infinitron]

Can somebody who knows German read the link and tell us whether the Google Translation is accurate?

 

[Alkarl]

At first when I looked at it I thought those short descriptions are about each developer, they fit very nice, especially Fargo's.

But I prefer rogues who may be an antagonist, but the players can understand and perhaps even like them. Because I tend to postmodern thinking, I would also like to make the player understand that even villains are a product of their world.

I hate this postmodern bullshit, it goes in pair with SJW propaganda. You want to make a great villain which is a product of his world? Take a look at Bloody Baron, that's how you do it, without making a victim of the torturer. It is obvious that enviroment takes an important role in particular person behaviour, but don't blame society for every human action, god damn paternalistic hipster.

Yeah, same here. It's a bit early, I'm on my phone, and my eyes haven't quite adjusted to the small text. Thought this was a list of candidates.

As far as I'm concerned, they're all qualified, especially the two pirates at the bottom of the list.

Also, I don't care if they're a product of their environment, just make them successful. Successful>Sympathetic.

 

[Prehistorik]

It's like a captcha, find a non-dev in a list :D

 

[Drog Black Tooth]

I don't really like the idea of a clear cut protagonist vs antagonist scenario. You watch the cutscene introducing the villain in question and go all like "yeah, so this is the guy I get to kill at the end of this game, mhhhm". Cheapens the whole experience.

But what're you gonna do about it?

In some Japanese games they have an adversary (often in addition to a cartoony be all end all villain). That guy/gal is usually very similar to the protagonist, but just playing for the other team. This means competition, and competition plays well into the whole video game mechanic. E.g. Albus from Castlevania: Order of Ecclesia comes to mind.

 

[Viata]

Albus from Castlevania: Order of Ecclesia comes to mind.

Althought a weaker game, Dawn of Sorrow had the same thing, you have Dmitrii and Dario as two of the Dark Lord candidate. It's just that Albus was way better done.