In a general sense I'd say either someone with understandable/relatable goals and reason why he would be go to villain lengths to achieve them, or someone dispicable who is at least fun to watch.
Most stuff in between is just rebel without a cause or cruelty for cruelty's sake.
>never killed a single person
>literally whole planet loves him
>a great ruler
> Within three years, Sinbad had abolished slavery, encouraged the prohibition of conscription and developed a spherical economy; Yunan stated that it was Sinbad's true objective. He unified the currency of every county that was affiliated with the International Alliance using a system similar to the Kou Empire's "Huang". This caused free migration between countries which flourished businesses. Finally, after all that was done, Sinbad chose to abdicate his throne as the king of Sindria.
But he is halfway fallen to deprevity and is against Alladin
Let me give you a villian that actually is has a reason for his actions and isn't an asshole for the sake of being one.
Ehh, Char's kinda mid tier, seeing as his war is one of both a retaliation against humanity and against Amuro. However his complexity makes him the best.
Come on, you don't love assholes?
Dio isn't a good villian though.
Another example I would give is
I think Griffith is a pretty damn good villain. I hate him to death, and he's one of those characters I would kill with my own 2 hands if I could, but the fact that I legit care enough to hate him that much is a sign that he was written well.
Not the only determining factor by any means, but often, the best written characters are those that elicit an actual emotional response in the reader/watcher.
>le edgy evil man who kills kids, women and animals for no reason
DIO might not be a good villain, but I've always found him to be an entertaining antagonist.
Is that SAO's Aji Tae? It's been a few years, but I don't remember him being a particularly good villain. I do remember the final chapters, though.
I still think the explosion was a shitshow.
To be honest Dio's motives for his action are weak and in part 3 he was pretty much a saturday morning villain.
He just has probably the highest amount of references within the series in a large timespan compared to any other villain in the medium (maybe tied with Griffith) and comes off as charismatic.
I don't know but I like these guys
He wanted everyone to be a demon because he felt human nature would cause anguish and strife throughout time. So he did a purge.
I felt he was well written 3/4 but the last quarter is my problem when he just kills everyone.
The hate has sort of fallen down with fantasia for me.
He is basically a different character and doesn't seem happy or sad. He seems hollow.
It feels like Femto died during conviction.
Nah man. That is more insanity.
Evil is knowing the consequences and caring about the other people and still doing what is best for you.
Say what you want about how Berserk has changed but Griffith is a good example.
>Faggy cat guy who follows the leader's beck and
>Maniac nazi guy who just wants to kill everyone
>Weirdo scientist guy who follows the leader's beck and call
>Random werewolf silent guy
Remind me where the good villain is?
I think it's just that the whole "I've achieved everything I wanted" part of Griffith's story has been taking so long and we've yet to see the turning point of that, which is most likely "you took everything from me" or "I had everything but felt nothing".
To me it's just Berserk's plot running too slow and focusing on too many characters.
Also someone change this one to anime?
>ranking villains on accomplishment alone
>Gary being a villain when he's literally just a rival
Awful list Anon. Really, really awful. Don't try to correct any other lists with your shit taste
>Does the villain have goals that make sense in his own context?
>Does the villain have shades of character beyond just being "the villain"?
>Does the villain provoke an emotional response in the viewer?
>Will the villains eventual downfall serve as a message to the viewer about the dangers of an unchecked flaw/way of life?
>Will this message relate to the struggles of the hero, who overcomes the same flaws the villain succumbed to?
If yes to all, you have a top tier villain on your hands
Well the problem is One Piece has a villain, a Chaotic Good/Lawful Evil antagonist, a True Neutral mentor/rival and possibly more we don't know about because we're only 55-60% done the series
This chart should be removed from the internet for the harm its caused in creating thousands of hack amateur """""writers""""" and braindead fans who think making the villain "LE SECRET GOOD GUY ALL ALONG XD" is the pinnacle of literature.
Sinbad might not be an actual villain, but he's going to fuck up somewhere and allow the villains to bring harm to the world, even if he himself ins't willing.
Pretty sure the main thing that chart's pointing out is what makes a good villain is having a good motivation for being a villain not just being evil or wanting power because lol evil exdee.
But entertain me, what makes a good villain if not just that?
What I liked most was thinking back before he was revealed all the theories on how he was naruto's father or naruto himself or some shit like that.
The akatsuki were the best part of naruto.
Not anon, but I wish they could handle his redemption better though. The whole "my pain is greater than yours" felt cheap, preachy, and pretentious- especially how Naruto changed his mind through "believe in me!"
>Is the villain a cute fuckable bishie who takes it up the ass?
If yes, 10/10 villain.
I have genuinely no idea why he opposed them. Did he even have some sort of endgame? I can't remember.
Why were they even fighting? Was it just because Graham was a criminal and needed to be arrested?
That was kishi's whole problem. He tried to make every villain redeemable in some way. I feel if he just let pain be a man so twisted by his fucking friend dying that would have been fine, but he brought everyone back at the end and that felt cheap.
The same thing happened to Madara somewhat, But at least he stayed that way till the end.
This is so subjective.
I'd argue Kefka is a great villain, he was made to be insane by scientific experiments and tragically kills uncountable amounts of life to the point his hedonistic ways cause him to be bored with life itself. Finding Nihilism to be the only real answer.
Griffith isn't bad either, simply a man with a dream who is forced into such maddening desperation he would sacrifice everything he loved to acquire said dream. Turning into a creature that only wears Griffiths face as a mask, not really being him at all anymore.
My personal favorite is Genma from Ninja Scroll. No shitty edgy backstory, just a mercenary team of ninjas who coincidently happens to want revenge against the protagonist. It's simple, effective, and clear.
It's a warriors battle drawn to an anime.
The Bleach and Naruto villains in your picture were both horrible and try hard.
They were both born into power from a young age and only grew in power (even before whatever deus ex machina made them turn evil).
Hardly any character development for either.
Madara was the only good think Kishi did in like 12 years or some shit like that?
Claiming a villain should have depth beyond "i'm evil teehee" is perfectly fine, in fact it's totally agreeable. But rather than follow this through to claiming a good villain has the same level of nuance as the hero, this chart takes it the wrong conclusion and starts outright stating that for a villain to be great they need to surpass the hero in moral ground. At which point why should the viewer even care about the hero at all, why not just swap the perspective around seeing as the other side clearly has a better story to tell.
But we can ignore that because the chart is also bullshit at its core. a lot of these "elder god tier" villains (because i've seen many more examples of this tired meme) were not in fact morally right at all as the source material so often points out, and the chart creator is just being an edgy contrarian.
Villains should be cautionary tales as much as heros should be examples of personal triumph against all odds.
Madara was the glorious finale of the trainwreck that was Naruto though. The guy was a fucking rollercoaster of bullshit who pretty much pushed the whole ending into satire. It was ridiculous and Ioved every panel of it.
>Naruto: "We are trying to have a serious dialogue about feelings and friendship here!"
>Madara: "Naruto Imma gonna let you finish but I just want you to know that I got guy's face implanted on my chest."
The guy was so ham he turned into Lady Gaga's baconsuit.
But that's the thing. Instead of giving us a coherent finale to such a long story, instead of giving us an actual compelling villain who has at least somewhat relatable goals and ambitions, who directly challenges what the MC stands for like Pain did, Kishi just went the way of Kubo and decided to spend the home stretch of his manga trolling everyone, including his Big Bad. You can say it was an entertaining novelty, but as far as getting the reader immersed in the plot and invested in the villain, it failed on all fronts.
But I wanna make sweet love to the faggy cat he's so cute
>MC's feels from the start the guy is dangerous and cannot read him
>Villain grows through the story and tries to understand himself
>Makes interesting moves the other villains in the story can't
>Slowly gets built up to be the main and final rival
>Epic 1v1 fight with the MC
This guy was awesome in Fate/Zero
That's good advice as well, but extreme emphasis should be place on the fact that he is the hero in "HIS OWN STORY" not the story as a whole. This can be used to make a hero more tragic, because they mistakenly believe their actions are justified, or more repugnant, because despite the horrible things they do they continue to believe that they are the ones in the right.
Just had to post this my favorite line in the whole series and my favorite character.
We'll have to see but Sinbad is literally not a villain as of now.
Personally i think someone who's smart enough to erase all the world's problems in 3 years must have some plan in mind to counter Arba's shit considering he took her in too.
Not that guy, but I only started reading it a couple of weeks ago and am up to the "Tower of Conviction" arc or whatever it's called with the inquisitor guy and his band of merry torturers. Does Griffith ever get fucked up or has that not happened yet?
I'm a massive newfag to Anime and Manga in general.
Tywin Lannister was such an excellent villain. He was completely ruthless in destroying anyone he perceived as an enemy, and made his children's lives a living hell (without even going into detail on Tyrion) while constantly preaching about "family". His demise was entirely by his own hands reaping the seeds he had sown, but in his mind everything he had done was all perfectly justified in sending the family name higher.
But because his goals of seeing the Lannister name live on forever would boil down to "lust for power" the chart plants him firmly in SHIT TIER.
After that arc Griffith becomes 10000x more hate inducing as we start to see how little he cares about what he did to the original hawks. and his story lines become the most frustratingly unfair things to witness in the world.
He did receive one small, but satisfying piece of payback from an old friend in the recent chapters though.
Okay, thanks, but one more question. What are the odds the author is going to drop dead at some point before he finishes the story? Reading the entire thing just to have it end abruptly with no closure would be frustrating enough to make me rip my dick off.
Posts about Miura dying are just memeing or parroting year old posts that used to be jokes. He's just turned 50 and has no health problems so he easily has another 10 years of work in him, probably more considering his work ethic. More than enough time to finish given his current pace.
Best villains are the ones who are just batshit insane in a fun way like Dio or Johan.
The factors that make a good villain are the same factors that make a good character in general but with the added requirement of a character willing to do terrible things to further his or her motives (if there is a motive to begin with).
how about villains that carries whole show?
Contradictional type of villain who you despise/hate and at the same type you feel sorry and/or have a sympathy to him.
Under this "type" perfectly falls Kumagawa.
Worst villains are evil because "evil". Best villains are evil due to their mad grasp for power, money, or some other attainable thing. A real motive is what drives good villainy and good heroism.
He arguably goes to shit at the end, but for most of the first season he's fantastic.
Sorry it's not anime.
>Having a little fun with his powers before moving on to his ultimate goal of achieving heaven.
It is worrying that you connect sexual attraction to villainy.
Lets talk about your mother.
Yhwach is one dimensional and came out of nowhere.
Aizen is shit to except for the part when he was defeated by Ichigo and talks about how strong people like him and Ichigo should strive to change the world rather than accept it.
It rationalized his actions for the first time in the series and it made sense in the context of the supposed flaws of soul society (shown in the rukia rescue arc).
But of course Kubo did nothing to expand that concept.
Trash villains. Only one had potential.
Where would this guy fall under? because he kind of fits all categories
also Squealer best
Kano came out of fucking nowhere and destroyed the lives of eveyone. He's batshit fucking crazy and thinks that the world is just his imagination. He forced people to go into his twisted idea of Texhnolyzation, which is pretty much genocide.
they were living but had given up on fighting to survive. they were practically dead already.
This but only because he killed most of the irrelevant characters that ended up being effectively written out of the series by the end anyways. Also his solution to the whole ninja way thing was the only tenable one.
Not true. Yeah he's not complex but he's so unnaturally evil and such a complete bastard that you can't say he's shit. He's ridiculously evil too Hell, he fucking made a kid's life miserable just because he could and views himself as superior whilst trying to destroy an entire bloodline. He's fun as fuck.
>Yhwach is one dimensional and came out of nowhere.
Aizen is one dimensional too. Hell, we don't even know why he's there in the first place. Yhwach has been more fleshed out, and has done more in the story, in far less time than Aizen. Like you said, both are trash in comparison to other villains, even in Shounen, but Aizen is the absolute bottom of the barrel, while Yhwach is just mediocre.
Good villain is one that can be sympathized. His motive clear and follow-able even by a regular character in series.
>Hao - Shaman King
>Griffith - Berserk
>Kotomine Kirei - Fate series
>Good villain is one that can be sympathized. His motive clear and follow-able even by a regular character in series
Not always. What about Johan? I guess you can say his past and what his mother did makes him sympathetic but his motives are far from clear and follow-able. In fact, they are interpretive. But that doesn't make him any less of an excellent villain.
You dont need a deep, reasonable motive to make a villain good. Take Dio into account. He is just a power hungry vampire and is still really enjoyable.
I think it depends on many things.
Also, Sinbad is not a villain. He is at best an antagonist and maybe not even that. He is a really interesting character.
I think what makes Part 1 Dio and Johan such a great villain is that they have a deep conection with the hero.
The theme that they have intertwined fates and that both the hero and the villain shape the other is what I think makes a good villain.
>MC of the series STATES he's not a villain admits he has made the world better
Sorry you can't be a villain if you've literally done nothing wrong and everyone in the world is happy you are the ruler and improved the world.
Because it's your own head cannon that thinks he's a villain.
There are far more examples in the series you could call a villain but you choose to pick a guy who many people in the verse are happy with.
A villain is a character who does evil things for evil purposes.
Sindbad is not a villain. He maybe considered an antagonist. Antagonist opposes the hero, Alladin. Doesn't have to make them evil to do so. The real villain is the qt milf.
>Tywin Lannister was such an excellent villain.
Tywin was the hero Westeros needed, and the one it deserved.
Martin making him fug Shae was the worst thing done to his character.
If they're entertaining, memorable, or are a legitimate rival to the protagonist.
Even a villian with a shitty motivation can be well received if they're at least fun to watch.
A good villain is someone who is hard to fault. Someone who makes more sense then the heroes. A fallen hero.
A good villain is one who directly challenges the hero both physically and philosophically, someone who presents an obstacle for the hero to overcome, but not before plunging them into their darkest hour of doubt and self-analysis.
Agreed. Pain was an amazing villain because of his backstory and his motivations as a protagonist. His motives made sense, and you could see the logic behind his actions. His goals left you with a question about morals, about sacrifices for the greater good, and if humans can ever stop fighting. He was a thinking mans' villain. His whole goal with turning the Tailed Beasts into a weapon of mass destruction was a harken back to World War II and the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and how only after experiencing extreme loss did the Japanese Empire truly understand the terror of war. Masashi Kishimoto talked about how his grandfather’s war stories inspired this.
It’s a shame Naruto’s quality took an extreme dip after this, because Pain really was the pinnacle of Naruto.
Nagato trusted Naruto with ending wars and realized by wiping out the Leaf village, he'd only create more bitter, resentful people like him so he saved their lives. What's so shitty about that?
>What's so shitty about that?
Bringing back everyone alive ruined the ending. Literally means everything before was pointless and all those fights where people actually died like Kakashi lose their value.
I agree that Madara was a bad villain, but Aizen was a great villain, mostly because of how devious he was in his plots within the Soul Society, and how completely calm and collected he was.
Parallels with the MC
R2 did a lot of things wrong but it did make Jerimiah my favorite CG character.
What matters most is how entertaining they are as a character. Flash and Pizazz are what make them memorable at the end of the day, and what is most important for them. Having great motivations doesn't matter when no one remembers the character once the show is done.
Take good old freezer here, there is basically no depth behind the guy, evil for evil sake, yet he's arguably the most iconic villain in all of anime. Only character who can really argue that spot is Char. They both have what people really want in a villain. Show Freezer comes in transforms and is intermediating as fuck with his 1 million power level. Char comes in on a red zaku going three times as fast and basically kicks the main character in early. That's how you make a villain you make them seem like a real and competent threat.
>Cruset in shit tier
Cruset was the best fucking thing about Seed.
He wanted to watch the world burn, which is something I can identify with if we're talking about SEED. That part where he trolls the fuck out of Kira by killing Fllay is hilarious.
My standard for villains is Johan. You can't put him in a box. He's evil because he represents both every good trait people aspire to have ( beauty, success, intelligence, power) but acts in every way that can be considered vile without going overboard like kicking a cat.
>telling a child to go find his mother in the Red Light District just because he's bored
>giving money stolen to a drug addict because he doesn't need money
>telling children to go play a game of dare on the roof to see the beauty of the world and become like him
>set up elaborate games to see if people can kill him and escaping by doing as little as possible
Johan is just the best villain.
I like this sort of listing but it's very limiting.
Ozimandiaz doesn't deserve to be Mid Tier.
High tier is shit
>hurrrr I have a grudge against you and just you
It can be done well, but not always.
Surprised none has said this but light is a good villain and it shows his descend into madness.
You also get introduced to his strongest suit which is his intellect, so unlike generic evil bad guys he does not remain a mystery. You already know how strong, what his perspective is on the case and why he does those things.
And the mangaka nailed it, i cant honestly remember any better villains then light.. Maybe johan from monster...
Nagato was an absolute pussy. I would appreciate Pain alot more if he remained like he did when we didn't know who Nagato was.
Konan a qt too.
We either love him like En or we hate him like Griffith
But I love Griffith. I honestly believe he will redeem himself in the end.