Villainous Motivation
Edited By RaceKickfist
If theres one thing that can make or break a story for me its the motivations of the antagonist. There are so many games out there you'd think that more than a few of them would deviate from the "rule the world/ immortality/ change the world because of revenge for loss/ etc" motivation set. I can understand how naturally you can build a game around a threat stemming from villains whose motivations consist of "RULE THE WORLD! ARGH!" And I can see the allure of the clear-cut good vs evil themes that come from those particular motivations. I can also see how easily accepted and instantly recognizable those themes are to the audience in this day and age (what with the over-saturation of said themes and all). So I understand how they are so prevalent in video games and stories. And since the interwebernets grant me a big fat virtual soapbox i'll boldly as why.
So the writer has been given a task to create this narrative that is intended to do many things: Build an appealing world, create appealing characters, and move the plot forward in a fluid and engrossing manner. To me the most important question is "how come this stuff is happening?" I'm an artsy guy, so I can really appreciate the work thats gone into the aesthetics and stylish design of the worlds and characters. As a computer animator, I cant help but dig myself into the animation of all the characters, the subtle nuances in the cutscenes, the acting choices and posing, how BA it looks when that dude's axe of contemptuous tastelessness shears the carapace of a giant scorpion that has boobs for some reason. But without some sort of motivation its all just a tech demo. or an alpha build at best.
this is coming out short at all. sorry, I'll try to get to the dang point.
I think ruling the world is a stupid reason for somebody to strive for power. Why would you want to rule the world? You'd be responsible for everyone on the planet. Every little BS thing that goes wrong is either because of you, or you're expected to fix it. And you might think "well, who cares about the peons? let 'em rot! I'm KING, baby!" which is a definite stance to take. But to what end? the peons "rot," and end up killing themselves. and the planet goes to chaos all around you while you're sitting in your tower not DOING anything. pretty soon its just you in a pretty place. congratulations, you've reduced your world to a tech demo!
Maybe I'm exaggerating, but it seems that these conquering villains havent thought this thing through very well. They love that goal-orientation of "conquer this, then I conquer THAT! and then muhahahahah!" Sure, that journey can be exciting. but its a journey that ends. It ends with you in a lonely tower, ultimately king over a people of one. unless, you know, you WANT to help settle land disputes and office worker grievances for the rest of your life. and oh, whats that?
you also cant friggin' die?
Immortality is even more ridiculous. ESPECIALLY when paired with ruling the world. Twilight is dumb, but I think stephanie meyer nailed it when she showed just how effing BORING everything is. living forever is boring. twilight is BORING. dakota fanning looks like a MR F with her off-center red contacts.
the riff-trax for the twilight flicks are very choice, btw.
I'll spare you any more and expound on this later, since I'm a long-winded kind of fool.
If theres one thing that can make or break a story for me its the motivations of the antagonist. There are so many games out there you'd think that more than a few of them would deviate from the "rule the world/ immortality/ change the world because of revenge for loss/ etc" motivation set. I can understand how naturally you can build a game around a threat stemming from villains whose motivations consist of "RULE THE WORLD! ARGH!" And I can see the allure of the clear-cut good vs evil themes that come from those particular motivations. I can also see how easily accepted and instantly recognizable those themes are to the audience in this day and age (what with the over-saturation of said themes and all). So I understand how they are so prevalent in video games and stories. And since the interwebernets grant me a big fat virtual soapbox i'll boldly as why.
So the writer has been given a task to create this narrative that is intended to do many things: Build an appealing world, create appealing characters, and move the plot forward in a fluid and engrossing manner. To me the most important question is "how come this stuff is happening?" I'm an artsy guy, so I can really appreciate the work thats gone into the aesthetics and stylish design of the worlds and characters. As a computer animator, I cant help but dig myself into the animation of all the characters, the subtle nuances in the cutscenes, the acting choices and posing, how BA it looks when that dude's axe of contemptuous tastelessness shears the carapace of a giant scorpion that has boobs for some reason. But without some sort of motivation its all just a tech demo. or an alpha build at best.
this is coming out short at all. sorry, I'll try to get to the dang point.
I think ruling the world is a stupid reason for somebody to strive for power. Why would you want to rule the world? You'd be responsible for everyone on the planet. Every little BS thing that goes wrong is either because of you, or you're expected to fix it. And you might think "well, who cares about the peons? let 'em rot! I'm KING, baby!" which is a definite stance to take. But to what end? the peons "rot," and end up killing themselves. and the planet goes to chaos all around you while you're sitting in your tower not DOING anything. pretty soon its just you in a pretty place. congratulations, you've reduced your world to a tech demo!
Maybe I'm exaggerating, but it seems that these conquering villains havent thought this thing through very well. They love that goal-orientation of "conquer this, then I conquer THAT! and then muhahahahah!" Sure, that journey can be exciting. but its a journey that ends. It ends with you in a lonely tower, ultimately king over a people of one. unless, you know, you WANT to help settle land disputes and office worker grievances for the rest of your life. and oh, whats that?
you also cant friggin' die?
Immortality is even more ridiculous. ESPECIALLY when paired with ruling the world. Twilight is dumb, but I think stephanie meyer nailed it when she showed just how effing BORING everything is. living forever is boring. twilight is BORING. dakota fanning looks like a MR F with her off-center red contacts.
the riff-trax for the twilight flicks are very choice, btw.
I'll spare you any more and expound on this later, since I'm a long-winded kind of fool.
Immortality is pretty much in the same boat too.
@RaceKickfist said:" Don't forget the rising favourite of ''Purging the world for the greater good'' motive. "
Even though this is technically not correct, I think when @Abyssfull mentions ''Purging the world for the greater good'', this is referring to Eugenics. Its what the Nazi's were trying to do, although its worth mentioning that this is an extreme example of what Eugenics is used for." @Abyssfull: yeah whats up with THAT one? then its all "reshape the world in MY image!" or some such. except you forget when you have a planet of like, you and 8 trusty henchmen (hopefully one's a smurfette) you're not going to see anything except a bunch of inbred trash for grandkids. "
*googles "eugenics"*" @Abyssfull said:
@RaceKickfist said:" Don't forget the rising favourite of ''Purging the world for the greater good'' motive. "
Even though this is technically not correct, I think when @Abyssfull mentions ''Purging the world for the greater good'', this is referring to Eugenics. "" @Abyssfull: yeah whats up with THAT one? then its all "reshape the world in MY image!" or some such. except you forget when you have a planet of like, you and 8 trusty henchmen (hopefully one's a smurfette) you're not going to see anything except a bunch of inbred trash for grandkids. "
ohhhhhhhh....
yeah prolly, lol.
Like you said in the OP game developers try hard to make a story easy to identify with, something easy to comprehend and that will sell accordingly. The more complicated and far-fetched the story is the less likely it will happen. Look at FFXII, where Square tried to make more of a political intrigue story, and was presented with accusations of weak story.
That's why i think we're still sticking with fps invoking the Second World War and War of the Worlds, and rpgs with generic stories. In this day and age, almost every story or though has been in some degree seen elsewhere. So without alienating a major slice of the gamers, presenting something new is kind of risky and hard, even as some people want change most are against it.
About the motivations of the villains, I think they mimic the ones that lead the history of the world, and drive humanity. World conquering was a dream since before Genghis Khan, immortality was sought after by alchemistry, witches, druids, sorcerers, princes, kings, entire civilizations (look at the egyptians) and religions.
" Like you said in the OP game developers try hard to make a story easy to identify with, something easy to comprehend and that will sell accordingly. The more complicated and far-fetched the story is the less likely it will happen. Look at FFXII, where Square tried to make more of a political intrigue story, and was presented with accusations of weak story. That's why i think we're still sticking with fps invoking the Second World War and War of the Worlds, and rpgs with generic stories. In this day and age, almost every story or though has been in some degree seen elsewhere. So without alienating a major slice of the gamers, presenting something new is kind of risky and hard, even as some people want change most are against it. About the motivations of the villains, I think they mimic the ones that lead the history of the world, and drive humanity. World conquering was a dream since before Genghis Khan, immortality was sought after by alchemistry, witches, druids, sorcerers, princes, kings, entire civilizations (look at the egyptians) and religions. "agreed.
I totally understand the concern about investing in a risky venture; an idea that could potentially bomb. And yes, the themes discussed are easily identifiable, hence easily produced, packaged, and consumed. Im sure the immortal world-conquering villain will always have a home and healthy career.
Despite that and the fact that everything's been done already, I'd still like to see some risks taken. They wouldnt even have to be huge. Just some twists that break convention. I remember how in FFVII, SPOILER WARNING: Click here to reveal hidden content. , and how it blew some people's minds. Maybe if I cant get new villain motivations (until I make my own game. with bigger, more powerful boobs) I could settle for some broken conventions.
they stabbed Aeris, and vicariously us, in the heart
aeris was killed
im gonna need to block off more than 5 hours.
" @Mrnitropb: i had no idea what your talking about and so i googled it. im gonna need to block off more than 5 hours. "heh heh heh. I suggest Doing it for the Evulz as a good jumping off point for villainous motivations
Personally I'm sick of fighting for/against things on a planetary, or continental, scale. If my journey takes me across that kind of distance fine, but I'm tired of always being the chosen one or the last defense against the enemy. I don't care how good you are, if an entire army can't take out something then how the hell can one guy/girl and a small rag tag group of misfits/cranky old timers out of retirement for one last go/half naked strippers with guns/swords do it? You honestly mean to tell me that in your entire army that in some cases span dozens of galaxies and thousands of planets you didn't have a few extremely talented people to cherry pick a squad from besides the one I'm in? At the very least throw a few B-teams at the problem in the off chance one of them get's lucky and finds something the others don't or god forbid your A-team gets wiped out.
And yes, I understand all the reasons that they do this, but I'm tired of having my video game stories being written down so the lowest mindset can understand it. Video games are at the stage of story development where comic books where in the 60's and 70's.The idea that it's mostly just kids or simple folk reading them so the stories are very simple and straight forward. I want them to move into where comics where starting to go in the 80's-90's and today where we have extremely well written and complex stories for all ages and some just for adults. God knows I loved me games like Dragon Age, around 400+ hours of game time and still going, and Mass Effect 2, but even they are far from being anything more complex then a Sci-fi or fantasy novel written for kids/early teens that you might have had to read for an English class assignment in middle school.
There are some games like that. Generally follow the uproars and dissatisfied fans as they are a good indicative of a game with some unusual conventions." @Jeust said:
agreed." Like you said in the OP game developers try hard to make a story easy to identify with, something easy to comprehend and that will sell accordingly. The more complicated and far-fetched the story is the less likely it will happen. Look at FFXII, where Square tried to make more of a political intrigue story, and was presented with accusations of weak story. That's why i think we're still sticking with fps invoking the Second World War and War of the Worlds, and rpgs with generic stories. In this day and age, almost every story or though has been in some degree seen elsewhere. So without alienating a major slice of the gamers, presenting something new is kind of risky and hard, even as some people want change most are against it. About the motivations of the villains, I think they mimic the ones that lead the history of the world, and drive humanity. World conquering was a dream since before Genghis Khan, immortality was sought after by alchemistry, witches, druids, sorcerers, princes, kings, entire civilizations (look at the egyptians) and religions. "
I totally understand the concern about investing in a risky venture; an idea that could potentially bomb. And yes, the themes discussed are easily identifiable, hence easily produced, packaged, and consumed. Im sure the immortal world-conquering villain will always have a home and healthy career.
Despite that and the fact that everything's been done already, I'd still like to see some risks taken. They wouldnt even have to be huge. Just some twists that break convention. I remember how in FFVII, SPOILER WARNING: Click here to reveal hidden content. , and how it blew some people's minds. Maybe if I cant get new villain motivations (until I make my own game. with bigger, more powerful boobs) I could settle for some broken conventions.they stabbed Aeris, and vicariously us, in the heart
"aeris was killed
For example, look at Alan Wake and its end. Most people labelled the story bananas, and the end just as preparation for the dlc, because it didn't ended in "happy forever ever after".
@Mrnitropb:
Nice website. Thanks!
Interesting take on the antagonist problem in video games.
Crusader is bang on, videogame writing is what comics were in the 60s and 70s. With Bendis, Brubaker and Ellis we've moved waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay beyond that.
Being a massive comic book fan, I would point out that the great villains always have a reason to do what they do. In most cases ruling the world is a means to an end (which quickly becomes the end)
Take Magneto. He wants to control the world so that the mutant population is dominant over the human due to what happened to him as a Jew during the war. He's scared of humans and thus attempts to create a world where humans can be controlled.
My personal favourite Dr Doom. Doom is a genius in the mould of Lex Luthor. If he was top of the tree, he would be the good guy, but Clark or Reed are always in the way. Thus in trying to prove that they are the best, they lose sight of the fact that they are making things worse.
Then you have the Joker, who is chaos incarnate. True Chaos. As rational beings chaos is intrinsically evil to humans. Morality/ethics/law all come from the need to construct an ordered world. Joker comes along a destabilises that order and shows it for the thinly veiled notion that it is. Two-face shows the duality of man and how, with a little bit of pressure, anyone can lose it.
My point is that all truly great villains are more than their plots and they tend to have a mental instability of some kind.
Villainous plots need to be a means to an end not the end itself (I'm looking at you Uncharted 2). This is something that is currently missing in the video game medium to a degree.
Only one i can think of off the top of my head is Organisation XIII in KH2. Beyond all the FF and Disney crap, you had villains that were sympathetic and you understood why they did what they did.
as for happily ever after...personally I've always seen that as an American thing. You need to have it all end well and have closure.
In the decent UK stuff, everyone dies and nobody wins. Not really. There are very few happy endings in reality. Perhaps that's why games and films need them.
" Personally I'm sick of fighting for/against things on a planetary, or continental, scale. If my journey takes me across that kind of distance fine, but I'm tired of always being the chosen one or the last defense against the enemy.You know that's actually part of the reason I'm kind of holding high hopes for Spec Ops: The Line. Its just about a place where shit went bad, and there's a guy who may (or may not) be making things much worse, and you and your dudes have to go there and end the problem. And it seems to be a very gray-area kind of game, with lots of lose-mission/lose-your-soul decisions to be made. Sadly there doesn't seem to be a boat to never get out of.
" Like you said in the OP game developers try hard to make a story easy to identify with, something easy to comprehend and that will sell accordingly. The more complicated and far-fetched the story is the less likely it will happen. Look at FFXII, where Square tried to make more of a political intrigue story, and was presented with accusations of weak story. That's why i think we're still sticking with fps invoking the Second World War and War of the Worlds, and rpgs with generic stories. In this day and age, almost every story or though has been in some degree seen elsewhere. So without alienating a major slice of the gamers, presenting something new is kind of risky and hard, even as some people want change most are against it. About the motivations of the villains, I think they mimic the ones that lead the history of the world, and drive humanity. World conquering was a dream since before Genghis Khan, immortality was sought after by alchemistry, witches, druids, sorcerers, princes, kings, entire civilizations (look at the egyptians) and religions. "@RaceKickfist said:
" @Jeust said:It's just as much of a risk to do something that's been done than it is to go with something unheard of. Something that's been done before can (and has) completely bomb due to no one being interested in more of the same. If you look at the counterpart as far as story (movies), the ones that went for new blew everything out of the water. Shitty examples but (Matrix, Harry Potter, blah blah blah you get the point). Sure there are certain elements that are used in all movies, but that doesn't control the story." Like you said in the OP game developers try hard to make a story easy to identify with, something easy to comprehend and that will sell accordingly. The more complicated and far-fetched the story is the less likely it will happen. Look at FFXII, where Square tried to make more of a political intrigue story, and was presented with accusations of weak story. That's why i think we're still sticking with fps invoking the Second World War and War of the Worlds, and rpgs with generic stories. In this day and age, almost every story or though has been in some degree seen elsewhere. So without alienating a major slice of the gamers, presenting something new is kind of risky and hard, even as some people want change most are against it. About the motivations of the villains, I think they mimic the ones that lead the history of the world, and drive humanity. World conquering was a dream since before Genghis Khan, immortality was sought after by alchemistry, witches, druids, sorcerers, princes, kings, entire civilizations (look at the egyptians) and religions. "agreed.
I totally understand the concern about investing in a risky venture; an idea that could potentially bomb. And yes, the themes discussed are easily identifiable, hence easily produced, packaged, and consumed. Im sure the immortal world-conquering villain will always have a home and healthy career.
Despite that and the fact that everything's been done already, I'd still like to see some risks taken. They wouldnt even have to be huge. Just some twists that break convention. I remember how in FFVII, SPOILER WARNING: Click here to reveal hidden content. , and how it blew some people's minds. Maybe if I cant get new villain motivations (until I make my own game. with bigger, more powerful boobs) I could settle for some broken conventions.they stabbed Aeris, and vicariously us, in the heart
"aeris was killed
" @Jeust said:And what about the "Action Thriller" Remedy went with Alan Wake? Something new has the power to be confusing to the buyer, and that is a risk. And something that has been done before won't bomb that easily. Look at most genres, the narratives are very stale." Like you said in the OP game developers try hard to make a story easy to identify with, something easy to comprehend and that will sell accordingly. The more complicated and far-fetched the story is the less likely it will happen. Look at FFXII, where Square tried to make more of a political intrigue story, and was presented with accusations of weak story. That's why i think we're still sticking with fps invoking the Second World War and War of the Worlds, and rpgs with generic stories. In this day and age, almost every story or though has been in some degree seen elsewhere. So without alienating a major slice of the gamers, presenting something new is kind of risky and hard, even as some people want change most are against it. About the motivations of the villains, I think they mimic the ones that lead the history of the world, and drive humanity. World conquering was a dream since before Genghis Khan, immortality was sought after by alchemistry, witches, druids, sorcerers, princes, kings, entire civilizations (look at the egyptians) and religions. "@RaceKickfist said:" @Jeust said:It's just as much of a risk to do something that's been done than it is to go with something unheard of. Something that's been done before can (and has) completely bomb due to no one being interested in more of the same. If you look at the counterpart as far as story (movies), the ones that went for new blew everything out of the water. Shitty examples but (Matrix, Harry Potter, blah blah blah you get the point). Sure there are certain elements that are used in all movies, but that doesn't control the story. "" Like you said in the OP game developers try hard to make a story easy to identify with, something easy to comprehend and that will sell accordingly. The more complicated and far-fetched the story is the less likely it will happen. Look at FFXII, where Square tried to make more of a political intrigue story, and was presented with accusations of weak story. That's why i think we're still sticking with fps invoking the Second World War and War of the Worlds, and rpgs with generic stories. In this day and age, almost every story or though has been in some degree seen elsewhere. So without alienating a major slice of the gamers, presenting something new is kind of risky and hard, even as some people want change most are against it. About the motivations of the villains, I think they mimic the ones that lead the history of the world, and drive humanity. World conquering was a dream since before Genghis Khan, immortality was sought after by alchemistry, witches, druids, sorcerers, princes, kings, entire civilizations (look at the egyptians) and religions. "agreed.
I totally understand the concern about investing in a risky venture; an idea that could potentially bomb. And yes, the themes discussed are easily identifiable, hence easily produced, packaged, and consumed. Im sure the immortal world-conquering villain will always have a home and healthy career.
Despite that and the fact that everything's been done already, I'd still like to see some risks taken. They wouldnt even have to be huge. Just some twists that break convention. I remember how in FFVII, SPOILER WARNING: Click here to reveal hidden content. , and how it blew some people's minds. Maybe if I cant get new villain motivations (until I make my own game. with bigger, more powerful boobs) I could settle for some broken conventions.they stabbed Aeris, and vicariously us, in the heart
"aeris was killed
what that solution is i havent a clue. take money out of the picture? thats kind of dumb.
I guess the best we have is to bypass the AAA-game structure completely. indie games are risky ventures as well, but handled wisely can get huge (castle crashers ftw) plus theres always the clever punks in the modding community!
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment