RPG plot cliche

[Menegrothx]

I just realized that quite many JRPGs have villains whose ultimate motivation is basically "mankind would be happier if it didnt exist, so I should destroy the whole planet/universe/turn every one into shadows(Persona)". I also recall seeing some animes with similiar villains, DBZ being the most notable of them. At the top of my head I can't think of any WRPG that has a similiar villain. Is that some kind of Japanese cultural/religious thing or are there any WRPGs out there with similiar bad guys?

[isiolia]

Mass Effect series possibly.

[Flake]

The villains from Fall Out and Fall Out 2 were pretty much the same, too.

[Valkyrie-Favor]

That's how the vast, vast majority of villains are actually. They either want to take some kingdom over or destroy everything. It's everywhere and really difficult to think of one that isn't this way. Even my esteemed Valkyrie Profile...although VP2 has a great villain I think you'll enjoy. In VP:C you are the villain, but you suck.

Most WRPGs I've played involve a villain wresting power, too. The only RPG series that has consistently interesting villains is...Mario!

[Menegrothx]

I've got to say that the few RPGs where there is no villain or ultimate evil like U IV and PS:T feel so much more awesome when so many RPGs follow the kill the big bad guy to win the game-formula.

That's how the vast, vast majority of villains are actually. They either want to take some kingdom over or destroy everything. It's everywhere and really difficult to think of one that isn't this way.

Taking over a kingdom is logical. Destroying the planet you live on isn't because it hurts you as much as it hurts every one else. It comes down to destroying everything for the sake of being evil because you're an evil character or destroying everything for the sake of others (which is in theory an altruistic action). Either way the evildoer doesn't really benefit from the act of destroying everything.

The villains from Fall Out and Fall Out 2 were pretty much the same, too.

I've never finished those games even though I've spent quite a lot of time messing around in them. I'm a bit surprised (and disappointed) to hear that, the moral choiches in the Fallout games are rarely binary.

[Xeogred]

Laugh if you will but I think ExDeath is one of the best villains in this department. But I like when villains are over the edge like in his case, and he wanted to destroy everything including himself, bringing the world to nothingness. So it wasn't really him being the cliche' ruler of the world, like boring Kefka in his tower. ExDeath was more extreme, haha.

It does seem to be a trope in JRPG's though. Doesn't bother me much, but at the same time I can say the stories that stand out the most to me in JRPG's are games with bigger casts and gray line enemies. Series like Suikoden, where Luca Blight isn't even the main villain, or most of the Xeno games where you never even fight the main antagonist (I like that), these kind of setups are far more interesting to me and not so black and white.

I think when a main antagonist doesn't turn into some insane monster at the end and you end up not even fighting them, that makes them more human and easier to relate too. You can maybe uncover their morals or really see where they're coming from, like in the case of Xenogears or Suikoden II.

I guess Fire Emblem and the Tactics Ogre series gets a bit like this, very complicated storylines with lots of different characters/factions. I wish I saw more JRPG's like these, instead of the typical kids on an adventure saving the world from the Cloud of Darkness, lol.

[Valkyrie-Favor]

I love Tactics Ogre, but it falls pretty squarely in the taking-over-kingdoms territory. At least it didn't go overboard like Final Fantasy Tactics. Were the Lucavi really necessary?

[Xeogred]

All the reason why I personally prefer TO to FFT, it stayed more grounded and didn't throw goofy twists like that. I've beaten FFT a few times and it always feels like it really slips up towards the end.

It does fall into that ruling cliche' a bit, although I guess I just like the fact that in games like these there usually isn't a single main enemy and the enemies are playing each other as well, so there's a lot of dynamics going on.

[pierrot]

It does seem to be a trope in JRPG's though. Doesn't bother me much, but at the same time I can say the stories that stand out the most to me in JRPG's are games with bigger casts and gray line enemies. Series like Suikoden, where Luca Blight isn't even the main villain, or most of the Xeno games where you never even fight the main antagonist (I like that), these kind of setups are far more interesting to me and not so black and white.

I was just going to mention Suikoden, although from III on they kind of strayed a bit.

Really, I think it boils down to a dearth of good story telling in Japanese media of all kinds. Anime and manga in particular, more often than not, rely on extremely formulaic plot devices and character types, and hackneyed messages. Beltway JRPGs just fall into this trap. I personally can't stand it, but a lot of RPG fans these days in Japan are 'maniacs' who are mostly interested in stylized, 'cool' looking characters in a mechanically sound game. It's not all bad, I just think of a lot of JRPGs as the story telling equivalent of junk food.

[Betamax001]

It's a shame JRPGs are so cliched, because I like them so much. I started playing Arc Rise Fantasia on the Wii, and it seems very cliched so far. It is still pretty good, but it reminds me of other games that they obviously are drawing inspiration from. I wonder if it is the fantasy genre the games use? Maybe it makes it more obvious.