Villains you felt sympathy for, but felt you weren't meant to?

[EvilMaggot]

does the Sons of Anarchy count ?

 

[mariosonicfan5]

I personally felt bad for Bob in the original Batman movie. He's just this main henchman guy the whole movie then Joker just freaking shoots him. Don't get me wrong that was one of the most hilarious parts of the movie but still.

 

[Jarek Mace]

Almost everyone I killed in Kingdoms of Amalur.
Literally because, it just wasn't supposed to happen.

 

[Eisenfaust]

It doesn't help that their main idea to make themselves stronger is to constantly kill each other, to the point where they decided "you know what? Let's make it so that there's only two Sith at a time a master and a student, and eventually the student has to kill the master". I can practically hear Darwin ripping his beard off in anger.

I do have to admit that I like the Sith code though, there's potential there for a good anti-villian, but like someone else mentioned, the
Sith are practically Always Chaotic Evil and sometimes Chaotic Stupid.

Ehhhhh to a degree, the Rule of Two makes sense/works... discounting the diminishing effects of aging, the student would only be able to kill the master when they are stronger/more powerful, which leads to more and more powerful sith lords in the long run (or it should, anyway)... Each student has to be strong enough to defeat their master, who was strong enough to defeat THEIR master, etc... the current apprentice must essentially surpass every previous master to become the new one

Its comparatively great as the previous system was shockingly awful - everyone still killed their masters because they're power hungry bastards, but they ganged up to do it... no one student had to be stronger than the master, only the group did, at which point you have a group of crappy students with no master to improve them, and then the group turns on each other and bam! you're left with one sith who is shit in comparison to the master... who then gets murdered by a group of their own students, etc, essentially devolving the order... The rule of two concentrates power in the next generation, as opposed to spreading it out/weakening it. Its essentially darwinism at its finest...

OT: as for me, I'd probably say Cassandra De Vries from Perfect Dark... Sure, she does some bad things, allies with bad "people", etc, but is just trying to be business savvy and

Spoiler

ended up being double crossed, so she sacrificed herself to set Joanna free and ulimately get revenge... noble, badass, pulling dick moves to the real enemy, even in death... love it!

 

[Erttheking]

It doesn't help that their main idea to make themselves stronger is to constantly kill each other, to the point where they decided "you know what? Let's make it so that there's only two Sith at a time a master and a student, and eventually the student has to kill the master". I can practically hear Darwin ripping his beard off in anger.

I do have to admit that I like the Sith code though, there's potential there for a good anti-villian, but like someone else mentioned, the
Sith are practically Always Chaotic Evil and sometimes Chaotic Stupid.

Ehhhhh to a degree, the Rule of Two makes sense/works... discounting the diminishing effects of aging, the student would only be able to kill the master when they are stronger/more powerful, which leads to more and more powerful sith lords in the long run (or it should, anyway)... Each student has to be strong enough to defeat their master, who was strong enough to defeat THEIR master, etc... the current apprentice must essentially surpass every previous master to become the new one

Its comparatively great as the previous system was shockingly awful - everyone still killed their masters because they're power hungry bastards, but they ganged up to do it... no one student had to be stronger than the master, only the group did, at which point you have a group of crappy students with no master to improve them, and then the group turns on each other and bam! you're left with one sith who is shit in comparison to the master... who then gets murdered by a group of their own students, etc, essentially devolving the order... The rule of two concentrates power in the next generation, as opposed to spreading it out/weakening it. Its essentially darwinism at its finest...

OT: as for me, I'd probably say Cassandra De Vries from Perfect Dark... Sure, she does some bad things, allies with bad "people", etc, but is just trying to be business savvy and

Spoiler

ended up being double crossed, so she sacrificed herself to set Joanna free and ulimately get revenge... noble, badass, pulling dick moves to the real enemy, even in death... love it!

Well here's an idea, why don't they just STOP killing each other? It's the main reason I don't like the Sith they can't have an established order unless it's based around killing each other. The rule of two is only a good plan by comparison to the crappy old one. Also with there only being two Sith at a time it wouldn't be that hard for...say, a thousand Jedi to gang up on them.

 

[Eisenfaust]

It doesn't help that their main idea to make themselves stronger is to constantly kill each other, to the point where they decided "you know what? Let's make it so that there's only two Sith at a time a master and a student, and eventually the student has to kill the master". I can practically hear Darwin ripping his beard off in anger.

I do have to admit that I like the Sith code though, there's potential there for a good anti-villian, but like someone else mentioned, the
Sith are practically Always Chaotic Evil and sometimes Chaotic Stupid.

Ehhhhh to a degree, the Rule of Two makes sense/works... discounting the diminishing effects of aging, the student would only be able to kill the master when they are stronger/more powerful, which leads to more and more powerful sith lords in the long run (or it should, anyway)... Each student has to be strong enough to defeat their master, who was strong enough to defeat THEIR master, etc... the current apprentice must essentially surpass every previous master to become the new one

Its comparatively great as the previous system was shockingly awful - everyone still killed their masters because they're power hungry bastards, but they ganged up to do it... no one student had to be stronger than the master, only the group did, at which point you have a group of crappy students with no master to improve them, and then the group turns on each other and bam! you're left with one sith who is shit in comparison to the master... who then gets murdered by a group of their own students, etc, essentially devolving the order... The rule of two concentrates power in the next generation, as opposed to spreading it out/weakening it. Its essentially darwinism at its finest...

OT: as for me, I'd probably say Cassandra De Vries from Perfect Dark... Sure, she does some bad things, allies with bad "people", etc, but is just trying to be business savvy and

Spoiler

ended up being double crossed, so she sacrificed herself to set Joanna free and ulimately get revenge... noble, badass, pulling dick moves to the real enemy, even in death... love it!

Well here's an idea, why don't they just STOP killing each other? It's the main reason I don't like the Sith they can't have an established order unless it's based around killing each other.

Because killing your superiors is the fastest way to move up in the world when the heirarchy is filled with overly emotional, overly ambitious psychopaths... the dark side is a little corruptive, and when you're relying on your own passion for strength, you tend to look inward... pride, ambition, jealousy, no restrictions on murder... obviously I'm not saying the it's perfect, you're right in that the system is still fucked up so I'm not really behind the Sith either... but the Rule of Two should be remarkably efficient (pride leading to the drive to become better, enough to become master, etc)...

I'm also against the sith in a way similar to this, in that in the 1000 years of the rule of two, they still don't seem to be that great in comparison to the jedi masters, just in terms of battle prowess... they should be much better

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

I feel a lot of Chaos Space Marines are quite a misunderstood bunch and aren't as bad as they are made out to be. Maybe just led a little astray.

I...Umm...whaaaat? Do you mean the CSM during the Horus Heresy or During M41?

While the Heresy era Chaos Marines have some sympathy going for them, the "current" ones don't have that excuse, I mean, serving literal gods who freely admit "evil and proud" and are among the worst things in the W40k universe doesn't buy them any extra points.

OT: Emperor Palpatine

Mainly due to the events that followed his death as he was the only one who had seen the Vong coming, and to be honest, if he did have all those years to build up the Imperial military, very many of all those lives lost during the war would have been saved.Oh well, atleast the dumbass rebels got what was coming for them.

Yes I do mean pre-Heresy.

 

[Ignatz_Zwakh]

The humans in "Avatar". SO wanted those blighters to win, despite the soundtrack and script telling me to do otherwise.

 

[Dresos]

A lot of villains, the most recent is probably Bluebird from Fate Zero.

 

[Connor Wiebe]

Galbatorix from Eragon.
Dude is hardly ever mentioned, we never actually SEE him doing anything evil. How do I know he did everything he's rumored to do? Maybe it's all just dragon rider propaganda.

Maybe he has a renegade general on the loose and that's why his minions are slaughtering villages.

(Apparently he does something evil in the final book, which I haven't read, but could probably chalk up to a nervous breakdown due to the heroes bugging him so much).

He stops Eragon trying to murder him :/
thats the big evil thing he does from what i remember.
he didnt want to die and that's evil.

OT: Jigsaw from saw.
by the 7th movie i found him the most likable character simply because he died 4 movies ago and was the only one out of all 7 m

Actually he forces Eragon and Murtagh to fight to the death. And if i remeber correctly, attempts to kill all the dragons.

 

[Zorg Machine]

Basically everyone from the wheel of time series.

Spoiler: not really spoiling any major details but I've read up until fires of heaven

All they wanted to do was to become immortal and rule the world. Besides, as soon as they are defeated and imprisoned all the "good guys" literally break the world. And Shai'tan? the guy has been imprisoned throughout the multiverse since the beginning of time...
And the seanchan would be the smartest people in the world if it wasn't for the fact that they put magicish women in charge of imprisoning the magic women.

Oh and also Avatar. The "protagonist" never mentions the fact that the humans need the mineral to survive. He never even suggests that the Na'vi should let the humans dig in order for them to save earth.

Imagine Aragorn just marrying a ghost lady instead of bringing them to save minas tirith.

 

[Ledan]

Azula from Avatar the Last Airbender. Thought she was the most awesome character, felt kinda sad when she lost in the end.
Loki from the viking mythology, and in the movie. Hes not evil, hes just mischievous.

Now, I agree that Loki is far too often played as a villain, and having no knowledge of the Marvel Thor (at the time I saw the movie) I was briefly hopeful that Loki would just be a trickster. But saying he's not evil in the movie? Dude starts a war with the frost giants, tries to kill his father and perma-exile his brother. And remember, his plan started before he even knew he was a frost giant.

I know... but I still felt sad when he "died". I can't explain why, which is the topic of this thread.

 

[Ledan]

Azula from Avatar the Last Airbender. Thought she was the most awesome character, felt kinda sad when she lost in the end.
Loki from the viking mythology, and in the movie. Hes not evil, hes just mischievous.

Well maybe he started out as mischievous, but he definitely takes a turn for the worse in Mythology. How else can you explain killing Baldur?

A practical joke gone bad. Baldur was the "golden child", completely perfect. And then he becomes invincible. Loki wants to take him down a peg, but unfortunately Baldur dies instead of being grievously wounded.

 

[JWRosser]

Creepers.

Living for eons, getting along with the zombies, cows and pigs. Then one day, mysterious men suddenly appear, and start chopping down forests, digging up deserts and scouring caves, ruining the Creepers' natural habitat. And they only way they can think of avenging their land is by committing suicide.

 

[Tonjac]

Teyrn Logain from the first dragonage game is what springs to mind for me.

I never really saw him as being greedy for power. From the novels its written out that he was the guy keeping Fereldan together during King Marrics breakdown after the queen died.
Then Marric dies and the new king is so hungry for glory that he sacrifices good war-strategy for direct assaults and unplanned grand stands, just because that's what singers will remember.

Just because the grey wardens and Cailen happend to be right about the arch-demon being real, that doesnt mean that there were any reason to believe a disgraced order that had been free-loading for centuries.
So even on that part Logain could be argued to be in the right. Acting as if this was a normal invasion by an inferior enemy, just like it had been for the past 400years.

Logain did some pretty harsh things after he gained power, but every one of them seems to be explainable and to some extent, justifiable.

(My Human noble still joyfully killed him though, bloody bastard giving my lands to the Howes!)

Your supposed to sympathize with him though

Yes and no, if you kill him first chance you get the game only gives you hints about his justifications.
I agree though that in the grand scope of the story he's ment for you to grow to like or respecthim.

 

[Strain42]

Someone may have already mentioned this, but I need to address a certain villain from the video game Persona 4 (Persona 4 AND Persona 4: Golden spoilers ahoy)

Spoiler

Adachi. This guy really is the strongest case I have ever had of a character that I just hate to love. He has virtually NO likable qualities. He's a misogynist, a sociopath, a murderer, a rapist, a corrupt cop, a total scumbag from start to finish who really only has one tiny moment of redemption throughout the entire story.

To pour salt into the already open wound here, the new port, Persona 4: Golden lets the player now bond with Adachi over the course of the story. At the end of the game, the player even has the option of not telling your friends who the murderer is, and basically siding with Adachi.

Before the character leaves town, they go to the police station to ask him about it. They briefly chat, and there is only one piece of evidence that ties Adachi to the crime, a threatening letter he wrote, which the player has the option to burn.

Do you know what happens if you burn it? Does Adachi thank you, does he see you as an ally? The one person who understands him who he can trust? NOPE. That's not our Adachi. He MOCKS you. He laughs hysterically and tells you he can't believe you just did that and that you were basically his pawn the entire time.

Again, there is virtually NOTHING to like about this guy. He's the epitome of a sleazebag...and yet I adore him. I love everything about his character.

Just look at that mocking laughing face...anyone in their right mind should want to just punch him in the face. And I totally do...I do totally want to punch him in the face.

But even beating him to a pulp won't change the fact that I just plain hate to love his character

 

[applesandoranges]

edit

 

[Erttheking]

Oh, another villain that I thought of that I just love.
http://media.animevice.com/uploads/0/124/11088-alexander.jpg
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMEN!

I can't explain it but there's something I just love about this guy. Maybe it's because Alucard (while awesome) is pretty much a boring invincible hero, and Anderson is the only one that gives him a run for his money. Also he dual wields bayonets, that's just fucking awesome.

 

[pppppppppppppppppp]

I rarely feel bad for the main villain, but I'm always sympathetic for the lower ranking people. (see: Stormtroopers, Fire Nation Soldiers, pretty everyone in war videogames, ect)

Odds are most of them are just trying to feed their families or following societal demands, yet the "heroes" kill them like cannon fodder without a second thought.

In fact, it bugs me when the henchmen get ignored, but the dickhead behind the whole operation gets sympathy because he has daddy issues or whatever.