next »

[JMStark]

I don't know if it makes me hate the antagonist, but perhaps the most frustrating thing a character can do is act out of complete irrationality, especially knowingly. Unfortunately, this is more common of badly written protagonists rather than well written antagonists.

Antagonists that gleefully subvert the values and morals of the audience should fair pretty well in garnering hatred. Though too much evil will break the suspension of disbelief.

[Sir Wolf]

--perhaps the most frustrating thing a character can do is act out of complete irrationality, especially knowingly.

What do you think of characters like Joker from Batman, whose main "point" is the irrationality?

[JMStark]

Well, isn't the reaction of frustration the exact thing that is trying to be extracted from me by the writer in such cases? Frustration, just like hate, is not a pleasent emotion. But experienced in the overall whole of a narrative it can serve a larger purpose. And such, while not pleasurable, I am not condemning the writer for making me feel frustration (that is, when it is intentionally and carefully done). In the case of the Joker, the pain he applys to Batman is shared with the audience. And thus, the Joker is a villian who is easy to hate (though also easy to love as well, which points to the idea that perhaps the best antagonists are more complex than simple hate-bags). If the author is wielding frustration with control, it can be a powerful tool. I just lament the many times it is unintentionally provoked by bad writing and bad characters, leading to bad experiences.

[DustyDrake]

usually when i play games i like the antagonist more than the protagonist

the only antagonists i don't like are the ones that are stupid or goofy rather than evil or intelligent. example: ozzie from chrono trigger

i think it's easier to make an antagonist "annoying" than to make the player dislike the antagonist for his evil deeds, because typically we don't care about what who dies since we know it's just a videogame. example: i didn't hate sephiroth for killing aeris at all, i was happy to get rid of her

i prefer games where the antagonist is intelligent and deceptive and manipulative, and mostly stays in the background and is rarely shown, but also has nobility is only doing evil things for what they see as some greater good. example: krelian in xenogears, or leon silverberg in the suikoden games; or another way to put it is i prefer liking the antagonist over disliking the antagonist

Like this guy?

[Muz]

Antagonist hating is really easy with a MMO.

In most single player games, it seems scripted, though. Like I don't care what he does, it's all part of the story. It's easier to hate a reality show contestant than a supervillain in a movie because of this.

I think you have to humanize them somehow, make them believable as real characters. Then introduce something the player would really disagree with. You'd have to make it so it doesn't become scripted, like maybe have a really emo character who turns on you if you say the wrong things (like Myron in Fallout). I also hated Yoshimo in Baldur's Gate 2 because I trusted him! Gave him good stuff, put a lot of effort into leveling him up, then suddenly he turns on me.

Betrayal works well in games because you're putting effort into something and suddenly they betray your trust. Like maybe you can have a banker who borrows money and gives you tons of excuses when you ask for it back. Or someone who just kills off the best characters in your party.

Sengoku Rance (18+) did that really well.. some characters were hard to get, and the villains were downright brutal. The game actually told you that characters were meant to die, so you eventually stop savescumming and live with it. But you get really pissed when the character you spent half the game bringing up is killed.

[Richard Kain]

Making an antagonist that you hate is easy, it always has been. Vilification is a time-honored tradition, and has been refined over the centuries. There are certain types of behavior that are universally regarded with disdain. Pulling out any of these in your narrative is a sure-fire way to get your audience to hate a particular character.

I would point to Game of Thrones as a recent example. Specifically, I would point to the character of Joffrey. George Martin does a great job of making this character despicable. Joffrey is not especially capable by himself. But his every action seems intentionally crafted to encourage the readers to loathe him. He is petty, vain, vicious, vindictive, and rather dim. He isn't even competent at being villainous, and all the audience is left with is annoyance and disgust. In almost every way, Joffrey is the perfect "hatable" villain.

One key component of his loathsomeness is the fact that the author never, ever jumps into Joffrey's point of view. While the novels in the Song of Ice and Fire series jump between character perspectives in every chapter, Joffrey is never given a chapter of his own. We never see the story through his eyes. Even monstrous characters can be humanized somewhat if the audience is better informed of their personal perspective. If you want to demonize an antagonist, make sure to avoid telling the story from their perspective.

I would like to briefly re-emphasize the point of competence. Characters that are good at what they do are easier for the audience to like. A truly despicable character should be as incompetent as possible.

Some writers might assume that this means that the villain should also fail. Not so. A sure-fire way to encourage hatred is to have your villain succeed, in spite of their own incompetence. This turn of events is always seen as unfair, and is a wonderful way of stoking the fires of hatred. Just as everyone loves an underdog, everyone despises when someone wins because of an overwhelming advantage. This is also in keeping with the portrayal of Joffrey. He regularly gets to win, and enjoy the spoils of victory, without ever contributing to success.

[Muz]

If you want to demonize an antagonist, make sure to avoid telling the story from their perspective.

Disagree somewhat. I think humanized antagonists are believable.. the ones who are plain evil seem shallow. It's a little different between games and other media - with games, the experience is personal. Everyone expects a movie to be scripted, but people hate it when games are scripted.

Make them too competent and it starts to seem like cheating.

I'd say the key to a good villain is to have the player understand them, but disagree. I think Lord Frollo from Hunchback of Notre Dame was the best villain ever made. You understood him perfectly, but he was just... wrong. You could sympathize with him, you can understand his love/lust (but he refuses to call himself lustful. He'd push your beliefs to an extreme fanaticism.

Traits like arrogance really help in pulling it off too, the kind of person who refuses to admit to being wrong. If you want to make them overcompetent, their Achilles Heel could be their arrogance, a refusal to do something any other way.

Or some could be just completely selfish. Like the typical capitalist, who destroys everything around him for a little personal gain. Make it a little personal, maybe have a little tax every level where the king takes like 30% of your adventuring bounty, and have guards around your area complain about how much the king takes.

[Richard Kain]

Disagree somewhat. I think humanized antagonists are believable.. the ones who are plain evil seem shallow. It's a little different between games and other media - with games, the experience is personal. Everyone expects a movie to be scripted, but people hate it when games are scripted.

The discussion isn't about making believable antagonists. It's about making hateful antagonists. And nothing takes the edge off a good hate like understanding. Providing perspective for an antagonist is a great way to flesh out their character and make them more believable. But it will also make it easier for the audience to sympathize with them, no matter how monstrous their actions or twisted their motivations. The more you inform your audience about your antagonist, the harder it becomes to hate them.

We're not talking about making "good" antagonists. A villain that you want to last and become a major character doesn't really need to be hated. It's quite possible for such villains to be loved by the audience, and even to upstage the protagonists. There is no rule against this.

But sometimes, you need to make use of a villain who's only function is to inspire hatred in the audience. That's what I'm trying to get at here. There are specific methods you can use to really inspire loathing in the audience. And one of the biggest is to limit potential understanding or empathy for the target of antagonism.

[Muz]

Yeah, I mean, that's where I disagree. Pretty much every antagonist that I hate is someone who I can understand. An antagonist that I don't understand is usually just a plot hole. Even true when you look at it IRL.


E.g.
Antagonist kidnaps princess (for no reason) - no hate
Antagonist kidnaps princess to rape her. Or to sacrifice her for personal youth. Or because he's a creepy lonely stalker guy who dresses her nice and chains her trying to stockholm syndrome her - a little more hate


I think the most shocking antagonist I've ever faced in a game was in Live a Live, that final boss guy. He was a former player character, so you understood him perfectly, you understand why he's so angry and bitter. You'd completely sympathize with him, because you play as him before he became evil. He tries to kill off your other player characters, point out how they were also selfish and evil. You end up hating him because he's a fucking hypocrite. Also because he's tough to beat.

An article on that guy I found through google. (also has a lot of great case studies on hateable villains)

[Razz]

I'm not sure if this is a surefire way to make somebody hate the villain, but this almost always works for me:

Make the villain weak in some way, be it through cowardice, arrogance, fear, and so on. This is the first step, show a flaw that they are incapable of coping with. This shows that they are relatable, making them easier to hate.

If the villain is effective in what they do, this unlocks some kind of psychological keyhole in my mind, because I know that they are weak. Therefore they shouldn't be a problem, yet they are. Kind of like a fly that's buzzing around your head.

[Graham-]

I like that idea, from Mustafa.

Villains with a human weakness make them relatable, then justify their behaviour (the negative kind). When you see a villain like that you get fired up because you can relate their flaw to the issues that you have to deal with because of them. In your head you're like, "fuck. if they just saw life this way then I/others wouldn't have to deal with this problem."

[louisdeb]

I end up hating antagonists if they're simply dicks, as opposed to being evil (okay I guess the difference between them is hard to see but hear me out).

If the antagonist is just plain rude, where it's not funny, or witty, then I'm going to hate the antagonist. Because he / she's a dick.

But give me some funny, clever antagonist, who makes the game more fun (I would say ironically but this is really the role of the antagonist), rather than a chore.

So yeah, that's kind of the most common dividing point between me liking and disliking the antagonist. (I don't have any examples to hand, sorry).

[TacoBell_Lord]

Everyone says Kefka & Sephiroth but I actually adore their insanity much like Genesis from Crisis Core, Kadaj from Advent Children & Sydney from Vagrant Story...their execution was perfect, they stomped around the world like they didn't care, I wanted to follow them & leave my party behind.

The antagonist that irked me was  actually Emperor Gesthal from FF6 because he was a lying bastard, I cheered when Kefka tossed him to his fate but angry I didn't do myself. Hojo from FF7. Also Smithy from Super Mario RPG & Queen Brahne from FF9. Lastly RIVAL from Pokemon Blue &..the Grim Reaper from any Castlevania game.

[Graham-]

@Muz and Kain

You guys are disagreeing over terms. Antagonists you hate are beings that you can't sympathize with, otherwise you will stop hating them.

Muz, you are talking about making an antagonist that is a real person, who isn't flat. I agree that doing that is very important. If you can't see the antagonist as a human being then you can't get any feelings going towards him(/her) at all. But this is a different idea than seeing the world from his perspective.

A good villain has to make sense to the writer. That's the important bit. You, the writer, must relate. If you only do so a little it will knock the edge off of your creation.

No writer ever sympathizes completely with their antagonist, I'm sure. Complete sympathy is just like a holy grail to dream about. ... but one day someone will do it.

The audience however must only see a piece of what the antagonist is going through if you want to generate hate/anger/etc. If they see the whole thing then the antagonist may still remain the antagonist but become something to empathize with.

There is a careful balance to achieve.

Sometimes you want the audience to be conflicted, in which case you want the audience to sympathize with some of the things the antagonist does but not understand the others.

You need to show just enough of a person to get someone to relate but not enough to stop them from feeling hate. (yeah!) All the people we hate in real life are ones we can relate to in some big way but don't understand in some other big way.

Speaking from personal experience.... Married couples (parents) often hate each other more than anyone if things go sour. They hate the person they understand very well but also don't understand. If you fix the understanding the hate disappears.

Note. You do not need to hate the antagonist for the antagonist to be compelling. He just has to be a breathing force that prevents you from reaching your goals.

[JWK5]

No one ever said you're supposed to hate the antagonist. A good antagonist isn't one you hate, a good antagonist is a worthy adversary to the protagonist. This can be anything from a friendly rival to a murderous oppressor. The job of the antagonist is to draw out the very worst and best of the protagonist and expose his strengths and weaknesses (and vice versa).

The antagonist doesn't even have to be human or sentient, it can be a beast, a force of nature, the elements, etc.

[Graham-]

Sometimes hate is nice. Hate is like fear or humour. It's one more ingredient for the mixing pot.

You can use it or not use it. Normally I just think about characters that are interesting and varied. I think about hate but I don't normally try to construct it.

In the end all you care about is engagement. I suppose it comes down to the mechanics, maybe. Different feelings suit different games. "Rage" induction might be good for a boxer, at least some of the time.

I like the idea of playing with the player's interpretation with the antagonist, like: I make the player feel one way, then make them feel another and just move the needle around, just to show 'em how variable their feelings can be based on perception.

But that's me.

[Evan Balster]

What you understand,
you can forgive.


Do you want to forgive?

[iammonshushu]

The job of the antagonist is to draw out the very worst and best of the protagonist and expose his strengths and weaknesses (and vice versa).

Totally agree. The best (worst?) antagonists I've seen in games are the ones that change the opinion or actions of the protagonist. Like in Uncharted 2, Lazarevic didn't inspire hatred or disgust in or of himself, but because he made Drake change from indifference to heroism you changed your view of him too.

[ink.inc]

trunchbull

[Muz]

Hmm... I think horror movies have been quite good at inspiring hatred. A horror movie often makes you hate the protagonist, and sometimes sympathize with the antagonist, such that you feel good when the monster kills the hero's slutty girlfriend. It's such a strong trope that you can almost predict who gets killed by how much you hate the protagonists.

Some useful ways include:

• Killing animals - it's easier and more logical than killing people and shows what the character would do if they could get away with anything.
• Being ruthless to people close to them - they beat up their children (out of love), slap their wives, takes money from under the bed of his dying father.
• Sluts/whores - I think women relate to them differently than men. They're willing to drop all morals and self-worth for a little personal gain.
• Ruthless to poor people, natives... have them shoot or rob the poor at will, maybe even burn down their houses for fun or rape their women. Basically illustrate that if they can get away with being evil, they just don't see anything wrong with being evil.
• Spoiled brats who take a lot from everyone, and act like they deserve it
• Spoiled brats who throw tantrums when they don't get what they want... and then get what they want.
• Liars who reach the top by backstabbing a close friend and stealing credit for other people's work.

My favorite form of this were the SAW movies. They just had these utterly fucked up protagonists. You'd also hate the antagonist for being too extreme with their vigilante methods. It neatly subverts the trope that everyone you hate will die, because you'll hate all the main characters of the movie.