Times where the hero seems like the villain

Recommended Videos

King Billi

New member
Jul 11, 2012
595
0
0
Dango said:
Uncharted's Nathan Drake (as well as the rest of the cast)is a pretty god damned terrible person, they even bring it up at the end of the second game, followed by pretending it didn't happen. All in all he's killed more and done way worse than any of his villains without much moral justification.
In what way has he done way worse than any of the villians? Seriously? Sure he's killed a load of people but no one that wasn't trying to kill him first.

I really don't get where this argument that Nathan Drake is supposed to be some kind of mass murderer comes from. The people he kills are no different than Storm Troopers or the Nazis in Indiana Jones, hell in the first game he's literally just killing the same five guys over and over again.

The fact that Uncharted is a video game does make the body count a bit ridiculous I will grant but to be honest when I first played 'Drakes Fortune' and I realised just how many guys I was mowing down my first thought wasn't how this made Nathan Drake a mass murderer it was why the hell did these pirates bring so many damn reinforcements? Were they seriously planning on splitting the treasure 10,000 ways?
 

themyrmidon

New member
Sep 28, 2009
243
0
0
Daenerys Targaryen in Game of Thrones/ASoIaF.

Next to the Starks she's obviously being set up as the "good guy" on the show, but I can't help but hate her guts.
- She thinks she has the right to rule the 7 kingdoms, even though she has no memory of being there.
- The Targaryens had only been there 300 years, enough to be a dynasty but hardly that well established.
- The only reason she can even be in contention is her dragons, which she can no longer control.
- Even if she does take back the kingdoms she is cursed and unable to produce an heir, her line would end in ~50 years.
- All of her decision making has been knee-jerk reaction to what she felt was right, after she conquers her third city the first two fall into ruin again.
- She is building an army of foreign former slaves to take Westeros.
- She has a good thing going across the narrow sea, but is thinking about throwing it all away for a land she doesn't really have any tie to.
- It is still not for certain that she's not just as insane as her brother.

Through 1/4 of ADwD: I hate that my favorite major house, the Martells, will side with her, and that my least favorite house, the Greyjoys, have the most potential to stop her.
 

Gottesstrafe

New member
Oct 23, 2010
881
0
0
theNater said:
Gottesstrafe said:
The book doesn't transport the main cast to an alternate world, it transforms the entire town into Mewt's video game fantasy. Everything, citizens included.
That's an interesting theory, but even if it's true, Marche is still a jerk. He either doesn't know this(in which case every objection raised by the other posters stands) or he does know it but decides to beat up his friends rather than explaining it to them.
Theory? It's on the back of the box art and in the instruction booklet. Even the opening cut scene establishes this when it shows people transforming into monsters/otherkin, if the name of the land wasn't a big enough hint. And "beat up his friends rather than explaining it to them"? He doesn't lie in wait for them in a dark alley and bash them over the head with a lead pipe, he's constantly trying to explain to them the situation. He doesn't even fight them unless it's out of self-defense, all the while still trying to talk them out of it. Besides, he's flat out told that the world won't change as long as someone still wants it to exist the way it is (in other words convince them otherwise). He's not some Frank Underwood-level manipulator and grand schemer, nor does he attempt to torture them into submission or shiv them in a Jagd. He basically asserts to them that they know it's wrong, and they agree. The world wouldn't change back unless they no longer desired to be apart of it, and he wouldn't have been able to convince them of that unless they acknowledged it on some level. And that's the key to it, isn't it? Deep down they knew it was wrong, that's why they stopped trying to oppose him. Some of them even took on an active role in helping him out.

And honestly, how is Marche more of a jerk than the entitled shit Mewt turned into in the span of five minutes from the opening cut scene? One of the main villains you fight is even the embodiment of his dark side for christ's sake.
 

Lupine

New member
Apr 26, 2014
112
0
0
MeChaNiZ3D said:
As far as Batman goes, he's at most a grey area, he always works with the intention of fighting evil, and in my opinion the selection of villains being some for their own criminal reasons and some specifically to fuck with Batman is one of the more interesting things about the franchise. I wouldn't call him appearing to be a villain at any point, although he may indirectly be causing harm (that he is also dealing with, however).

Elfgore said:
Lelough from Code Geass is a pretty easy choice. I mean he leads a terrorist group, he does some very questionable things, and he seems very egotistical. As I watched the series, I truly thought of him as a selfish man who was doing all of this not for his sister. But to fulfill his own desire for power. Then the last episode happened and all of that doubt was blown away.
I've often wondered if the events of the last episode excuse all of his actions up to that point. My tendency is towards that they do, but at the same time he did indirectly kill a LOT of people. This is compounded by Euphemia, who is sort of a foil for Lelouch, working towards peace, and you wonder if Lelouch hadn't intervened if it would have been better.
That was my feeling on the entire series. When and how Euphemia died. Yeah, I was done with Lelough in any shape or form. I get that he didn't believe in her approach and it is revealed that he sort of has a point when we finally understand what the Emperor was up to all this time, but that doesn't in the least excuse what he did (even if it wasn't intentional) and pretty much from that point I wanted Suzaku to put a bullet in him.

As for not being able to blame him...oh, no I was totally able to blame him...he was being an ass to her because she didn't totally agree with his point of view. So instead of explaining to her, why what she was doing wouldn't have the effect that she was hoping for, he instead goes into "I can make you do anything..." Still his fault.
 

Grace_Omega

New member
Dec 7, 2013
120
0
0
I'm reading the first Sword of Truth book by Terry Goodkind (Wizard's First Rule) and holy shit are the protagonists awful.

They seem to spend more time discussing hypothetical scenarios in which they might have to murder each other than they do confronting the Evil Overlord. At one point the main love interest befriends a young boy and mopes a bit because if there was some reason why killing him in cold blood would advance their goal of saving the world she would totally be prepared to do it. Keep in mind there is absolutely no suggestion that such a scenario would ever happen, but she still clenches her jaw and thinks "yes, I would brutally slaughter this cute little boy if I had to". Who the fuck thinks like that? It makes her seem like a violent sociopath.

Richard, the main character, is even worse. The magic of his sword regularly sends him into bouts of murderous rage, supposedly so he can kill whoever he needs to without suffering from mental damage. "Whoever he needs to" at one point includes a group of old men who wouldn't give him information he needed, although he just about manages to stop himself from decapitating them.

This is one of those giant fantasy bricks that's padded to fuck, but instead of rambling travel scenes or pointless world-building it's stuffed with endless conversations in which the characters talk about what steely-eyed badasses they are and how they would totally murder each other in a heartbeat if any of them showed the slightest sign of treachery and they'll kill absolutely anyone they need to save the world. AND THEN NONE OF THAT EVER ACTUALLY BECOMES RELEVANT, at least at the point I'm at 75% of the way through the book. Instead there's a ton of mushy conversations about what great friends everyone is and how oh so in love Richard and Kahlan are, which makes it sound as if they just enjoy fantasizing about senseless violence.

And this is just the first book. Apparently later on there's an infamous scene where Richard kills a group of "evil pacifists".
 

Animyr

New member
Jan 11, 2011
385
0
0
I was hoping the Sword of Truth would be here, and I'm so glad it is. I actually really like it for the unintentional comedy.

Grace_Omega said:
I'm reading the first Sword of Truth book by Terry Goodkind (Wizard's First Rule) and holy shit are the protagonists awful.
And it gets so, so, so much worse from there. Or better, depending on how you look at it. Honestly, in retrospect the First Book was, though uneven, a somewhat promising start.

jademunky said:
The objectivist themes are only in the subtext at this point, they are not yet being crammed down the readers throat.
Actually, it felt shoehorned in. I remember the characters mentioning out of nowhere how the evil wizard king believes that "nothing should grow higher then the shortest stalk" or something, when the evil kingdom is a hereditary monarchy that is arguably a meritocracy too (the powerful wizards are in charge because of their power) and the king is revered as a demigod, so what made them think the evil wizard was some sort of militant marxist?

Rhetorical question; it's because the author says he is.
 

Kecunk

New member
Feb 8, 2011
101
0
0
Panzer Camper said:
I'm going with Gundam Wing. I've just started watching it now (at episode 4) and the good guys seem to murder soldiers in their sleep, even trainees. I'm a reservist so maybe this hits a little close to home but they seem to slaughter people for no real reason other than "they're soldiers so who cares". I don't hate it and don't want to make this some sort of weird social justice thing I just think these heroes are kind of monsters.
Its been a while since I watched gundam wing so I don't really remember everything 100% but I think what you say is kinda part of the story The gundam pilots are basically brainwashed (well brainwashed in the sense that they've lived their whole lives only exposed to one point of view of the conflict)I don't want to spoil anything but they learn the error of their ways later on in the series
 

Relish in Chaos

New member
Mar 7, 2012
2,660
0
0
Superman in Man of Steel. I don?t want to beat a dead horse, but seriously, the movie seems to just overlook the fact of how much unnecessary destruction Clark causes to Metropolis during his fight with Zod. ?Protector of Earth? he was not.

Goku in Dragon Ball. If you?ve read the series and see the sheer amount of times he?s allowed such villains as Vegeta to escape just so he can fulfil his battle addiction and ?fight them again sometime?, you should agree with me. I know he?s basically a man-child and Dragon Ball?s heroes are only heroes in as much as they?re just martial artists with superhuman powers who tend to get themselves embroiled in fights with villains who happen to want to destroy the planet or something (Gohan ? especially when he?s the Great Saiyaman - is the closest we get to a bonafide hero, which is ironic since he never liked fighting in the first place), but it?s really to an unhealthy degree that Goku prides a battle with a worthy opponent over the lives of his family and friends, even after he?s been shown the danger of said action.

Ranma in Ranma ½. I haven?t read the manga in a long while, but I just always thought he was a cocky little shit that, like Goku, seemed to create the majority of the problems he tried to solve. Same goes for Akane, who borderline-abuses Ranma because she's the most fucking tsundere character in existence.

Integra from Hellsing. Technically, the antihero Alucard is the protagonist of the series, but Integra is still classed as a ?hero?. There?s one scene in the series that kind of made me think, ?Even if it?s justified, you still gave your vampire assassin an order to slaughter a crew of innocent, deceived human beings who were just doing their jobs based on the info they?d been given. They weren?t even fucking vampires?. (Good, I said that without technically spoiling anything.)

Solbasa said:
Light Yagami, from Death Note, acting like a villain throughout the entire series.
He's a mass murderer with a God complex. Not to mention the fact that he's a genius, and will do whatever it takes not to be caught by the police. He uses the Death Note he finds to rid the world of its criminals - seemingly a noble pursuit, sure, but it quickly turns questionable when the God complex kicks in and people you like start dying as a result of his overly convoluted (albeit awesomely put together) plans.
The difference is that Light is meant to be a villain protagonist. The series made it clear, even shortly after the beginning that, while we may be willing to root for him just so we can see his cat-and-mouse game with L, he's an immature narcissist who early on kills a guy (Lind L. Tailor, right?) just because he thought he was the same detective that was questioning his moral authority.

In this series, it's clear that, while he has his flaws, L is meant to be the hero. He's just not the protagonist, so there's less focus on his ideals (if any; even Near seems to care more about the morality or lack thereof of Light's actions than L, who sees Light as his mental equal).

ImperialSunlight said:
In Death Note, I find both L and Near to be... kind of intended to be heroic in a sense, despite being antagonists. At least in the end. But they have little qualm with torture or inhumane treatment and (especially Near) treat serious cases like a game to be won. "If you can't win the game, If you can't solve the puzzle, then you're just a loser", is a rather telling quote from him. And of course Light is obvious, though he clearly wasn't meant to seem like a hero (besides, contrary to what's stated earlier in the thread, his god complex is obvious from the first episode). Really, I think Matsuda is the real hero of Death Note.
OK, yeah, this I agree with. It seemed like Near cared more about getting revenge on Light for
killing L
than stopping Light from killing people (I do think Near respected L, even if that quote implies otherwise; I think Near was just stating a fact but not caring about the tactless nature of how he said it, since he's that kind of character), even if he disagreed with Light imposing his own morals on the rest of the world. But yeah, Matsuda was the closest to a pure hero we got, as well as the closest to a relatable protagonist character.
 

Thyunda

New member
May 4, 2009
2,955
0
0
Mcoffey said:
Thyunda said:
Mcoffey said:
Thyunda said:
Mcoffey said:
I read a book once called "The Last Templar". It was about modern day templars trying to find the diary of Jesus Christ. The story was pretty decent adventure romp, until the very end when they discover actual proof that Christ was just a mortal man. And then the main characters throw it into the sea. This was supposed to be some turning point for the main character, who was an atheist who didn't like organized religion. After spending time in a village of christians who weren't assholes, she decides that believing in Christ is too important for people, and it's what allows them to be good. It pissed me the hell off when I read it, because it assumes that the only reason people are decent is because God expects it of them. Fuck that.
Is...is that what you took from that? I would have thought that the action was down to the fact that a lot of decent people are Christians and there's literally no reason to tear their lives up just for the sake of being 'correct'.
A lot of people used to comfortable that the world was flat and the sun revolved around us. That doesn't mean we bury and ignore truth in the name of stability.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_Flat_Earth

No they didn't.
Does that change my point any? A bitter truth is always better in the long run than a sweet lie.
Are you going to provide some evidence of this? Some that I won't just disprove out of hand?
 

Elvis Starburst

Unprofessional Rant Artist
Legacy
Aug 9, 2011
2,821
805
118
Elfgore said:
Lelough from Code Geass is a pretty easy choice. I mean he leads a terrorist group, he does some very questionable things, and he seems very egotistical. As I watched the series, I truly thought of him as a selfish man who was doing all of this not for his sister. But to fulfill his own desire for power. Then the last episode happened and all of that doubt was blown away.
Am I wrong for still rooting for him cause I loved his character, and at least agreed Charles was being a bigger dick?

OT: Yeah, gonna go with this one too cause I lack any other choices. I still felt Lelouche was at least trying to do the better thing, even if his means weren't always right.
 

Thyunda

New member
May 4, 2009
2,955
0
0
Mcoffey said:
Thyunda said:
Mcoffey said:
Thyunda said:
Mcoffey said:
Thyunda said:
Mcoffey said:
I read a book once called "The Last Templar". It was about modern day templars trying to find the diary of Jesus Christ. The story was pretty decent adventure romp, until the very end when they discover actual proof that Christ was just a mortal man. And then the main characters throw it into the sea. This was supposed to be some turning point for the main character, who was an atheist who didn't like organized religion. After spending time in a village of christians who weren't assholes, she decides that believing in Christ is too important for people, and it's what allows them to be good. It pissed me the hell off when I read it, because it assumes that the only reason people are decent is because God expects it of them. Fuck that.
Is...is that what you took from that? I would have thought that the action was down to the fact that a lot of decent people are Christians and there's literally no reason to tear their lives up just for the sake of being 'correct'.
A lot of people used to comfortable that the world was flat and the sun revolved around us. That doesn't mean we bury and ignore truth in the name of stability.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_Flat_Earth

No they didn't.
Does that change my point any? A bitter truth is always better in the long run than a sweet lie.
Are you going to provide some evidence of this? Some that I won't just disprove out of hand?
Holy shit dude. Fucking forget about it. This argument is really stupid. I didnt like the ending. Deal.
So...would you have rather I kept quiet and let you give your opinion unchallenged?
 

Shocksplicer

New member
Apr 10, 2011
891
0
0
Steve Waltz said:
What on Earth? Two pages and 63 posts and NOBODY has mentioned Captain Walker from Spec Ops: The Line? God, the things he did in the short game was 50 times worse than most of the stuff mentioned here.

Seriously, 47 totally innocent civilians and several soldiers he BURNED ALIVE with white phosphorous -- Something that I took for granted in Alpha Protocol. Then he wastes the rest of the water supply in Dubai so mostly everyone will die of dehydration, soon. Urgh, and those are just the mandatory evil things Walker does, there are some choices in the game that makes him do even MORE dastardly things.

I mean, seriously, he did so many TRULY evil things that, in the end, he has the option to kill himself and I couldn't put the trigger to my chin fast enough.
It's a thread about characters you're SUPPOSED to like, but DON'T. You're supposed to think he's a lunatic by the end.

OT: Most of the main characters in Lost, especially Jack and Kate.
Just about the entire cast of Glee at one point or another.
The main characters of 24 could get a bit TOO torture happy at times...
 

Ambitiousmould

Why does it say I'm premium now?
Apr 22, 2012
447
0
0
I have been re-playing Just Cause 2 recently, and I realised something. Scorpio is basically a terrorist in the employ of the USA. I mean yes, Baby Panay is clearly an arsehole dictator, but Scorpio's cause is far from just here because he isn't fighting for revolution or freedom, he is fighting because:
There is a huge oil field that the US (among others) want. I mean yes in the end he does nuke it, but simply removing a much needed resource probably wasn't the best way to go.
Then there's the means. Basically he blows things up regardless of consequence. Including radio towers and fuel supplies, which are most definitely things that the people need. And the random gunfights he starts in the streets. Then all the innocents that will be killed by the government because of some made-up link to him used to fill some quota for killing "traitors" and I have a sneaking suspicion that he doesn't lose sleep over that. If anyone is the hero in that game it is 'Bolo Santosi, leader of the revolutionary army known as The Reapers'.

Imagine it from someone else's point of view. For instance, imagine 2 Panauan pipeline workers, talking and working when suddenly...
'Oh my god! Is that that bastard Scropio?! Every time he comes by the fucking police turn up, shooting everything, taking people away after - that's if he doesn't bloody blow them up first! And what the shit is he doing to that pipe?!'
Which is followed by an explosion as destroys a piece of pipeline and therefore the livelihoods of about 50000 people who work on that pipe and/or need the fuel it carries.
'Well that's fucking great, now I'm out of a job. And now what is he doing? OI! PRICK! GET OFF THAT WATER TOWER! WE'RE IN THE FUCKING DESERT, DIPSHIT, WE NEED THAT PISSING WAT-'
BANG!
'Oh well now we're all going to die of thirst. How is this dickhead better than our pissshit government? Talk about out of the fucking frying pan.'

He just reaps wanton destruction for his own and the Agency's selfish wants. Not that it doesn't make a great game, but still.