I agree with Hase on this topic, and the point brought up by Garott (both which I''ll expand on).

A villain should never ever EVER be a cliche character. He has to be someone the audience (or player, in this case) will look at and WANT to kill. A player is driven to play a game the same as the character is driven to defeat the villain - a player doesn''t play just to "see the end," he plays so that he can tell his friends "I killed Sephiroth/Kefka/whomever" last week, he was "Difficult/semi-difficult/Kefka-difficult" (not difficult at all...).

A player has to be driven in exactly the same way as the character is. I agree with Garott, who used Kefka as an example. Kefka is, without a doubt, the most beautifully created villain, at least in the FF series. He''s insane, but not to the point that a player can simply say "There''s no other reason he''s doing it." He''s witty, even cooky at times, and you do have a good laugh at him. But when it comes down to it, he exhibits that trait of complete and utter evil within him. He doesn''t give a damn about who he kills and who gets in his way in his pursuit. A villain is greedy, manipulative and a complete megalomaniac - this is true of almost every villain ever created. Kefka has all those traits and some more to boot. He''s an absolutely sadistic villain, and that brings a player to both love and hate him, because he''s both a tragic case, and a person you can loathe for being who he is.

Originality is always good in a villain, cliche is not something that should be apparant. However, you will find it quite difficult to find a villain who is not:
A) Greedy.
B) Megalomaniacal.
C) Manipulative.

A villain can have some kind of a heart, like Magus in Chrono Trigger. He might not have always been evil, it might have been triggered by an event. But he will always have a goal, there will always be greed in his nature, and most often than not, his goal is power.

If your main villain doesn''t exhibit some form of greed, then he has no real purpose within the game. The entire reason a character goes after a villain is to stop him from fulfilling his evil plans. To stop him from gaining that which he lusts after.

Original villains are always good, people who turn into traitors at a stage in the game, however these types of people should not be the MAIN villain. He could be a minion of the main villain. He could be a villain because he was forced to be. But the main villain should always be precisely what his title is: villainous. He''s evil, he''s nasty, he''ll sell his own mother for two cents.

My last example, Hase mentoined Darth Vader. He has some of Kefka''s traits in that it isn''t really his fault that he''s evil (forgive me if I don''t give too many examples - Star Wars isn''t that known to me). But he has that drive, that greed and megalomania and utter disregard for anyone who gets in his way. He''s bitter at the world, which can always be a good trait, but more than that he''s blinded by greed and lust for power.

Hope this has helped somehow.

-----------------
Matthew Myers
Executive Producer
MAZE Interactive Entertainment
Fierce Legends Software
-----------------

I''ll just comment on a few villians I''ve found particularly evil, and why.... BTW, spoilers below.

Kefka was classic. I agree with practically everything said about him. When you first run into him, he''s an annoying dolt who just grates on your nerves. Then you realize he takes himself seriously, and is serious in his evil ambitions. About the time he poisons the castle--and laughs about it (with jokes that you find yourself not wanting to laugh at, but laughing non-the-less,) you realize YOU need to take him seriously. But I didn''t start loathing him until he started taking out *Espers* and giggling at how warm their crystallized hulls were to the touch. Ooooh, that was just DIRTY EVIL.....

From the non-videogame realm, Vegeta (from Dragonball Z) is usually held as a "cool" villian, and I like him. He has one primary, deep, driving characteristic (in his case his utter arrogance) that impresses you simply because he uses it to beat people over the head as much as he uses raw power.

Lastly, the villian in the movie "Patriot" (starring Mel Gibson) was one I loathed. "Stupid boy." That just rubbed me the wrong way. Then his calculated taunt--"I remember you, that farm, with that stupid boy." (Of course, it wouldn''t have meant as much to us if they hadn''t shown how much the taunt hurt his brother.) What clinched it for me... and made him one of my all-time favorite (in the bad sense) movie villains was when 1) he burned the town, including Gabriel''s wife, and 2) when Gabriel''s vengence was thwarted by the man killing him and relishing the fight. I wanted him dead SOOO bad.

Well, those are some thoughts. If you could combine those three characters into a game villian, I don''t see how he could be less than legendary.

RJ

quote: If you want to make a good villain you might wanna look up a few storytelling books. The point of a good villain is not a certain cliché, it´s about power and character. A good villain is believable, has goals the player can relate to. No single trait will make a good villain.

Nicely said Hase. But you''re missing half the pieces of the puzzle.


"We know who you are, now I know who I am."

- quote from Unbreakable

Well the movie has gotten a lot of bad reviews but personally I believe Shymalan''s work has merits. Villain can be defined with attributes inherent from being "evil". But he can also be defined very loosely as the opposite of the "good" hero, which ALL stories must contain. Please note that these two does not mean the same thing.

Well, if anyone understands what I''m saying, please continue reading... It is possible to develop a villain out of nowhere by first concentrate building the ultimate "good" super-hero that everyone would believe . Once you''ve done that, all the hero needs to do is to simply point a finger at anyone, say the word "he is evil", and have the slightest reasonable cause to back up the argument, the audience will ultimately accept that it is true. (I believe the only reason Unbreakable failed is due to the people of modern society couldn''t related to the hero and believe in it.) Let me try if this might explain it a little better.

Do you remember you dream girl? Yes, the one with the gorgeous body, the spring flower smell, and the exquisite face. Do you remember how smart, funny, caring, and artistic she was? Do you remember the tears in her eye when she tells you that she was wronged by a certain "evil" someone that you''ve never heard before? Yes, the "evil" one that is always planing the treacherous plots behind your girl''s back with the evil eye stares and the dirty claws ready to tear down other''s throat. Did you believe what your girl said? Well more than 80% of the teenage boys and the majority of the male population would actually believe every single word of it. They would automatically put themselves into the shoes of the supposive "hero" against the "villain". They would do it without even knowing a single fact and proof that this villain actually performed any evil acts toward the dream girl. Heck, there''s even a chance that the villain never existed at all even.

Am I making any sense here? A good villain isn''t just about traits, power, and believable. It is also about how the other characters/npc viewed them in conjunction with evil deeds and personality the players can relate to.

Btw..
Kefka was a joke for a real villain. He''s just a lame poser compared to the Joker in the Batman comics. Heck, Joker even have a better, more convincing back story. I''m gonna get so much flame for this saying this one woohoo. ^_^

Vegeta is only a half decent villain not because he lacks a good background, but because Goku''s attitude and personality is ridiculously unrealistic. Yea that''s right, Goku puts down Vegeta''s "evilness".

Magus/Janus from Chrono trigger was a real villain... But Lavos was just a complete screw up that ruined the game.

I won''t make too much comments on Darth Vader, I''m reserving them untill the future movies or if I get bored to the point with nothing to do and pickup the books to read. Anyway, from the original Star Wars trilogy, I don''t think he would qualify as a good villain. He was sololy developed as the opposite of Luke and lacks a lot of the background stories for audiences to relate to. But hey, that''s what the new trilogy are for isn''t it?

quote:
Did Hannibal ever go around stealing little kids'' dogs?

How was Hannibal a ''villian''?

------------
- outRider -

quote: Original post by Mooglez

Nicely said Hase. But you''re missing half the pieces of the puzzle.

Of course I am, but there´s no such thing as a recipe for a good villain. Personally I liked those villains best who could have just as easily been the heroes... it also makes for a much more interesting story if the two sides (good/evil) are not as clearly defined or just a matter of perspective.
As with any character a villain only works in context, and a lot of it depends not on who or what he is but on how he is presented. The Oz examples were pretty good, here you see that it doesn´t matter what the villain does, but how it is described. My personal opinion: this particular scene of the wizard of Oz is much more powerful than the scene in Star Wars where Alderan is destroyed. It´s never about the size of the crime, it´s how its committed.
It also makes for an interesting twist if the villain is presented only indirectly. You never see him, you only hear people talking about him, or see the outcome of what he has supposedly done. Then, near the climax you can let the player see the villain doing something which is completely out of keeping whith what he´s been told before. And you haven´t even lied to the player because all of what he´s learned before was based on hearsay. These are the moments where clever players get the kind of rewarding "I knew it" experience.

And I don´t think that you necessarily have to show your villain doing evil things. You can let the villain reflect on what he´s done, or let another character tell a story (but I guess that´s what you meant anyway). It´s much more effective to show the outcome of the villains deeds. It´s like horror films, the most scary things are the ones you don´t see.

For instance you might have your villain wipe out a town, now it would of course make for a cool cutscene to show what´s happened, but it is far more effective to let the player stumble across the town, see the burnt villages and the corpses of the townsfolk hanging from the trees, blood smeared over the walls... and then to top things off the player encounters a little girl hidden in a closet who can tell him her experience of the massacre.

<br><br>I think every characteristic you (zsoft) listed would make a very cliched villian, and not one especially interesting anymore. go for something the complete opposite. <br><br>In religion (western, christianity) who is the ultimate bad guy? satan, of course. Read paradise lost, book i, to get a feel for how to make a villian. <br><br>For those of you who haven''t read it, Milton describes (at great length) Satan basically as a beautiful (or ''beautifully masculine'', if that makes sense) angel, fallen. Satan acts like Spartacus or Braveheart, rousing his downtrodden followers into action, to fight against his oppressors. Satan speaks eloquently and is charming. Physically attractive and powerful; at first Satan appears to be what most people would idealize for a great mythical General, leader of the people. Without even realizing it readers of paradise lost are drawn to him as a character. That is the great part of Satan as an antagonist. The reader is attracted, much against their will, to him. Only once we meet his daughter/lover Sin and their offspring do we really get a sense of his true character.<br><br>Games need characters like this; ambiguous. We have so many black and white characters; he is definitely evil, that other guy definitely good, blah blah blah. More ambiguous characters create more complex relationships, and allow for better stories.<br><br>Same goes for heroes too. Morally ambiguous or conflicted characters in general are more interesting. Watch A Clockwork Orange if you want to find out how to do it right. <br><br><(o)>

...one more thought...

Empathy, not just sympathy, can be an important element in creating a villian. Give it motivation that the player can relate to, and understand.

Examples might be again Satan in Paradise Lost; trying to fight back to where he was, recover from his exile and defeat his oppressor. Or maybe, in the spirit of the holidays, the Grinch. There is a simple character that we as an audience can still feel for. He is bad yes, that is what makes him the antagonist, but he has reasons (in the new one anyways).

<(o)>

The BORG

Seriously... they have a point of view (other races are imperfect...)

They have unstoppableness (if that''s a word).

They are scary looking

They scarily grow in numbers... (they don''t actually kill, it''s kinda freaky)

People have ALWAYS feared the song killing the father.. it''s everywhere... we create machines, they become faster/better and threaten us. Student becomes better than teacher. That random story where the guy kills his father and ends up marrying his mom...

It''s everywhere..

Fear

Borg scare me..

-Gelf

I personally feel the best villians are the ones who believe they are doing good. None of the good villians in the past just sit around talking to themselves saying, "Damn I''m evil" Well maybe one or 2 but to get a villian that will really fill the part he must "see" himself/herself as the answer to the problem. And anyone that is against him/her must be part of the problem. So in short, the evil character will not consider him/herself evil but righteous in cause.

Grellin - IGP

I have to agree with the last post. A villain that I feel is most effective is one whom believes is doing good even though it is quite obvious that they are not. Perfect example Bin Laden. He feels what he is doing is a result of America and the western world''s views on the Middle East, and our support for Israel. He has committed atrocities that everyone else whom is not an extremist under his wing can see are wrong.