Which is better? >The protagonist of the first game is the

File: emo fag.jpg (333KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

333KB, 1024x576px

>>376759475
Why not both?

File: ow.jpg (64KB, 351x470px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 351x470px

#2

Second one

I like seeing villains redeem themselves or at least show a reasonable side instead of just being LOL PURE EVIL

>>376760513
He could still be evil, playing as a bad guy to balance out the good the good guy did would be an interesting plot

>>376759561

Why did they make his head so small?

File: 1494155769071m.jpg (70KB, 1024x555px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 1024x555px

They're both really cool. But I think I prefer antagonist being the protagonist in the sequel.

In this case though are they reformed or an anti hero? Or are we just playing them doing their questionable/bad shit?

It's all about them complex antagonists who want to protect the earth

File: bellowing.png (742KB, 707x598px) Image search: [Google]

742KB, 707x598px

>the protagonist becomes a shambling mad horror that is a minor/secret boss in the next game

>>376761185
Name 1 (1) game that does this

File: Che pensive.jpg (14KB, 188x240px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 188x240px

>>376761976
Damn, giving me Pokemon Gold and Silver flashbacks.

>>376759475
I like both.

I prefer the first, in the sense of the protagonist being a secret boss or something in the next game. SMT did it all the time, and it was great.