Recurring Villains

[Dr. Mechano]

While Dr. Ivo "Eggman" Robotnik continues to hold his own as the most frequent antagonist of the handheld titles, the 3D games have exclusively been dominated by nobody. Each 3D title features a new villain who appears, gets defeated, and is never seen again (Chaos and Metal Sonic do reappear, but not as main antagonists).

While one-shot villains are fine sometimes, might Sonic fare better with a rotating cast of recurring villains? So far the only villains to appear more than once are (obviously) Dr. Eggman, and his counterpart Dr. Eggman Nega, who played main villain in both Sonic Rivals games (And co-villain with Eggman in the Rush series).

This could solve several potential dilemas, particularly in the 3D games.

1.) Eggman, being part of this rotation, probably would finally get final boss status in a 3D game.

2.) One-shot villains that the audience barely has any time to get used to would become far less common.

3.) Multiple villains per game. Remember Sonic Triple Trouble? Eggman and Fang were two separate antagonists, adding a layer of complexity to the story. True, the modern games do this with "Eggman and the current monster", but with recurring foes, there could be more complex character interaction- Not just between the heroes and villains, but between the rivalling villain parties as well. Obviously, Eggman would continue to appear in almost every game whether he's the main antagonist or not, as he already is doing, but the main antagonist being a familiar face (Eggman or otherwise) would be a nice change.

Old baddies like Grand Battle Kuku, Fang the Sniper, and Wendy Witchcart could potentially be revived- But of course, simply reusing some future villains(And fleshing them out a bit) could also work in this manner.

It's just an idea, in any case- But I think it's a move that would be good for Sonic, for Eggman, and for the storyline at large in the long run. Any thoughts on this?

Edited May 24, 2009 by El Gran Gordo

[Frozen Nitrogen]

I am behind this idea many hundreds of percent. Its advantages are obvious in terms of continuity and character development, and its drawbacks... none?

[BakingBluePotatoe]

Yeah... what ever happened to Nack/Fang/Whoever?

Maybe he can be an antagonist for Knuckles... maybe add Rouge as a rival-ish antagonist-ish thingy. (in other words, she's definatly not helping you, but she sure as hell isn't on the other guy's side either. {She's after Nack/Fang/Whoever as well.. mainly cuz HE HAZ DE EMERALD!! ZOMG O_O})

Think of it. They're all treasue hunters. Why not?

Yeah...

[Illuminous_Orb]

There's GUN, but they hardly count as much of anything.

I too fully support other villains beside Eggman.

[Dr. Mechano]

There's GUN, but they hardly count as much of anything.

GUN is technically a "good" party.

I too fully support other villains beside Eggman.

And that isn't really my point. We already have non-Eggman villains- But we have the type that show up, have almost no personality, and then get killed off. They also tend to be huge, god-like things.

I'm talking about a recurring cast of "normal" villains, who would be more comparable to Eggman than to the big generic monsters. (More personality development, etc.) This is one reason I brought up Grand Battle Kuku, Fang, and Witchcart- These three seem like, if revived for 3D, they'd have colorful personalities and dialog beyond the typical "ROAR" of most Sonic one-shot villains. Future villains in a similar vein to those as well.

And to reiterate, I see this as something that would actually help Eggman, as the idea of a rogues gallery would increase his main villain roles, being Sonic's archenemy and all.

Edited May 24, 2009 by El Gran Gordo

[Illuminous_Orb]

Obviously, leaving very little in a post can leave interpretation to be a little difficult.

But I was merely agreeing. >.>

Edited May 24, 2009 by Emerl

[Rusty Spy]

In order for this to go into full swing, the series needs to introduce more recurring villains. So far, the only recurring villains at this point are, as you've already stated, Eggman and Nega, and also Metal Sonic to an extent. There's not a whole lot of villains in the series to keep this idea fresh.

With what we have currently, the actual conflict would have to be the main focus rather than actual villains, which would somewhat defeat the purpose of having the same villains all the time beside possible character development when a new villain could accomplish the same thing.

I'm not saying that I prefer the "Monster of the Week" template we have now for villains, but if there isn't a wider variety of recurring villains, the whole thing would be running solely on the novelty of seeing the villain rather than improvement to the story or conflicts.

[BakingBluePotatoe]

There's GUN, but they hardly count as much of anything.

I too fully support other villains beside Eggman.

it really depends on the plot. In SA2 they're annoying (but totally against you either way), but in ShTH it depends on your own path. (if you're dark, you're public enemy Number 1 and therefore they're you enemy, if you're good, they're you allies... I think in neuteral they're just after for no reason.)

Not sure about 06 or any of the newer games... but since Shadow works for GUN... I would assume they're not gonna bug you...

I think in Chronicles they're on your side for the most part.

Edited May 24, 2009 by Blue Streak

[Candescence]

YES. Brilliant idea! I do say mysel-

Old baddies like Grand Battle Kuku, Fang the Sniper, and Wendy Witchcart

I think you just mentioned an example of a human in the old games who ISN'T Eggman.

[Illuminous_Orb]

it really depends on the plot. In SA2 they're annoying (but totally against you either way), but in ShTH it depends on your own path. (if you're dark, you're public enemy Number 1 and therefore they're you enemy, if you're good, they're you allies... I think in neuteral they're just after for no reason.)

Not sure about 06 or any of the newer games... but since Shadow works for GUN... I would assume they're not gonna bug you...

I think in Chronicles they're on your side for the most part.

I always found the GUN plots confusing either way. First they're mad at Sonic and don't trust them at all, and in Shadow, the GUN Commander goes out of his way to try and kill Shadow in one of the story trees. Not to mention they also fought you in the very same game as bosses, as well in SA2.

They don't show much consistency in which way they are rooting for, or against you. The large shift in being really nice and overall nice guys in Chronicles really threw me off compared to what they have done beforehand. There was no real indication they would be on your side and came pretty much out of nowhere, besides the interpretation of Shadow saving the world in ShtH. Then again he did just that in the previous 3D game and were all up in Shadow to no end.

Blahh... topic derailment achieved.

[Dr. Mechano]

YES. Brilliant idea! I do say mysel-

I think you just mentioned an example of a human in the old games who ISN'T Eggman.

I did!

And I think she could potentially be a very funny antagonist- Her and her wacky brigade of henchmen seem like they'd be interesting to see with dialog.

[Rusty Spy]

I did!

And I think she could potentially be a very funny antagonist- Her and her wacky brigade of henchmen seem like they'd be interesting to see with dialog.

Yeah, I could imagine her being a ridiculous character that everyone just gets a "WTF" expression every time that encounter her. Sort of like Captain Whisker, only 10 times more ridiculous.

[Candescence]

I always found the GUN plots confusing either way. First they're mad at Sonic and don't trust them at all, and in Shadow, the GUN Commander goes out of his way to try and kill Shadow in one of the story trees. Not to mention they also fought you in the very same game as bosses, as well in SA2.

They don't show much consistency in which way they are rooting for, or against you. The large shift in being really nice and overall nice guys in Chronicles really threw me off compared to what they have done beforehand. There was no real indication they would be on your side and came pretty much out of nowhere, besides the interpretation of Shadow saving the world in ShtH. Then again he did just that in the previous 3D game and were all up in Shadow to no end.

Blahh... topic derailment achieved.

It's pretty simple to understand if you see how the progression of attitudes go along... It's best to pay attention to the GUN commander. By the way, that guy needs a proper name.

SA2: GUN is portrayed as a bunch of corrupt jackasses who would love nothing more than new weapons of mass destruction and cover up anything threatening to them. This is before the commander is introduced.

Shadow: Their crimes are still prominent, but the commander is introduced as somewho who has a specific vendetta against Shadow, considering he had a sibling-like relationship with Maria. At the end, he comes to terms with the reality of it and recognizes Gerald as a good man.

Chronicles: The guy is still serious, but he's a jerk with a heart of gold. He seems to have cleaned up GUN's act by now and GUN is a proper good-guy organization.

Yeah, I could imagine her being a ridiculous character that everyone just gets a "WTF" expression every time that encounter her. Sort of like Captain Whisker, only 10 times more ridiculous.

She could also act a bit like Gruntilda the Witch from Banjo. You can never get tired of her... Perhaps her rhymes, of course. I remember her trying to break that habit was amusing.

There's a lot of extra material that Sonic Team could make use of, rather than coming up with new characters.

Edited May 24, 2009 by Soma Cruz

[Badnik Zero]

Interesting idea. I had hopes for at least the Storybook series, that we'd see a recurring Erazor, as some kind of malevolent entity of pages. But Black Knight didn't turn out that way.

I'd nominate Black Doom if he wasn't such a typical evil overlord in his debut game. I think he has the most potential for this kind of role, but being an alien makes him unappealing for the Sonic series. There was Shadow, but he's a good guy now, and GUN is usually on Sonic's side. I think GUN has a chance to become an enemy now and then, but I dunno how people would feel about that. Then there was Nega, but he's just another Eggman. I don't think that counts. Hmm...

Most of the alternate baddies in the Archie comics while I was reading them didn't seem too appealing. Neither did Witchcart. Ixis Nagus the wizard, and Mammoth Mogul are all I can remember. Mogul was my favorite just because he had a nifty suit and was a woolly mammoth, and he pulled a neat trick with the Master Emerald or something. Enerjak and the Dark Legion were the best by far, but they were more Knuckles' enemies, and they're an import to Chronicles now.

I don't think many villains could really measure up to Eggman's appeal or gimmick. He's a master inventor of robots. What else could be so cool in Sonic's world? Wizards are cheap compared to an Egg Fleet.

Short of Erazor returning, or the Nocturnus getting a larger role, a decision like this could be disastrous. I'm for the idea, but it'd be a major turn for the series. A villain of Eggman's caliber is hard to come up with. Anything less than him and people would feel like they did about the Werehog, an unwelcome gimmick. A furry villain is something I'd enjoy, however.

Edited May 25, 2009 by Badnikz

[Blacklightning]

I'm really not convinced an approach like this could work for long. Most Ninty franchises do this all the time, and ultimately it just gets too damn predictable in the long run. Not matter WHAT happens in the long run, you can pretty much bloody guarantee that Ridely, Ganondorf or Bowser are going to be there even if they are never fucking hinted at throughout of the course of the game. It's simply pathetic.

Don't get me wrong, over the short term this approach would work fine, but it's bound to get just as stale and predictable as the existing Super Sonic final boss fight in almost every game thus far. Use it in moderation and sure, it'll work.

[Dr. Mechano]

Not matter WHAT happens in the long run, you can pretty much bloody guarantee that Ridely, Ganondorf or Bowser are going to be there even if they are never fucking hinted at throughout of the course of the game. It's simply pathetic.

What's pathetic about them "being there" exactly? Multiple antagonists aren't a bad thing. And also, Ganon's pretty much the only "recurring" villain in Zelda- The rest, like Sonic, are one-shots.

Eggman manages to "be there" every time, a trend I want to see continue no matter what his role is.

[Candescence]

I'm really not convinced an approach like this could work for long. Most Ninty franchises do this all the time, and ultimately it just gets too damn predictable in the long run. Not matter WHAT happens in the long run, you can pretty much bloody guarantee that Ridely, Ganondorf or Bowser are going to be there even if they are never fucking hinted at throughout of the course of the game. It's simply pathetic.

Don't get me wrong, over the short term this approach would work fine, but it's bound to get just as stale and predictable as the existing Super Sonic final boss fight in almost every game thus far. Use it in moderation and sure, it'll work.

To be fair, Mario tends to give the "main villain" role to villains other than Bowser in the RPGs, even if the guy does appear - much like the Sonic series, actually. Super Mario RPG kick-started the trend with Smithy. The M&L games have Cackletta (interestingly enough she

possesses Bowser, so this is a twist on it

, the Shroobs and Fawful (ABOUT TIME). The Paper Mario games first gave the villain role to Bowser, then went back to new villains with the Shadow Queen, and then Count Bleck (

actually, Dimentio

). But still...

[Dr. Mechano]

To be fair, Mario tends to give the "main villain" role to villains other than Bowser in the RPGs, even if the guy does appear - much like the Sonic series, actually. Super Mario RPG kick-started the trend with Smithy. The M&L games have Cackletta (interestingly enough she

possesses Bowser, so this is a twist on it

, the Shroobs and Fawful (ABOUT TIME). The Paper Mario games first gave the villain role to Bowser, then went back to new villains with the Shadow Queen, and then Count Bleck (

actually, Dimentio

). But still...

And none of these examples are recurring villains... Except for Fawful, who started out as a henchman rather than full villain anyway.

Mario's only recurring villains besides Bowser are Wario, Donkey Kong, and Foreman Spike. And their recurring roles are few and far between, in a villainous capacity at least.

[Blacklightning]

What's pathetic about them "being there" exactly? Multiple antagonists aren't a bad thing. And also, Ganon's pretty much the only "recurring" villain in Zelda- The rest, like Sonic, are one-shots.

It's moreso the fact that their appearance is too damn predictable to have any kind of meaningful impact anymore. This holds especially true for

Twilight Princess

, where Ganon was intended to be the big plot twist right at the end of the game, but anyone with half a memory of every other Zelda game in existence would see it coming a mile away and facepalm at the very thought that this was actually supposed to be some kind of surprise. The fact that he was apparently thrown in the game for NO REASON AT ALL aside from this and some kind of fanservice really irritates the hell out of me, when previously we actually had a fairly unique Zelda plot on our hands.

I've got no problem with recurring villains "being there" so to speak, but like I said it's an approach that's not going to work consistently and over the long term. Gotta moderate it to keep some kind of suspense about their appearances, see.

Eggman manages to "be there" every time, a trend I want to see continue no matter what his role is.

And I wouldn't expect any less of you or the franchise. Edited May 25, 2009 by Blacklightning

[Dr. Mechano]

And I wouldn't expect any less of you or the franchise.

It helps that he's a legitimate character in his own right, capable of being more than just "a villain" for a given game, you know.

Because of this, he can still contribute to the story even when he isn't the main antagonist. I fail to see the problem with his near-perfect attendance record.

Furthermore, by having more villains like him- as opposed to the "Appear once and die forever" type- we could have other characters who routinely appear, also developing. "Villains as characters" is more appealing to me than "Villains as plot devices."

Edited May 25, 2009 by El Gran Gordo

[Candescence]

It's moreso the fact that their appearance is too damn predictable to have any kind of meaningful impact anymore. This holds especially true for

Twilight Princess

, where Ganon was intended to be the big plot twist right at the end of the game, but anyone with half a memory of every other Zelda game in existence would see it coming a mile away and facepalm at the very thought that this was actually supposed to be some kind of surprise. The fact that he was apparently thrown in the game for NO REASON AT ALL aside from this and some kind of fanservice really irritates the hell out of me, when previously we actually had a fairly unique Zelda plot on our hands.

I've got no problem with recurring villains "being there" so to speak, but like I said it's an approach that's not going to work consistently and over the long term. Gotta moderate it to keep some kind of suspense about their appearances, see.

Funny you should mention that, Nintendo more or less confirmed that Ganondorf was be appearing AGES before Twilight Princess was even released. Besides, I don't think Ganon was meant to be the twist - I believe the real twist was

Zant himself, revealing himself to be the batshit crazy loon that he really was as opposed to the generic badass evil overlord.

I believe a good moderation is required if one wants to appease those who get sick of seeing the same characters as villains - have old characters take the villain role half the time, and introduce other new villains every so often to mix things up. Sounds good to me.

Edited May 25, 2009 by Soma Cruz

[SuperStingray]

I'm really not convinced an approach like this could work for long. Most Ninty franchises do this all the time, and ultimately it just gets too damn predictable in the long run. Not matter WHAT happens in the long run, you can pretty much bloody guarantee that Ridely, Ganondorf or Bowser are going to be there even if they are never fucking hinted at throughout of the course of the game. It's simply pathetic.

Don't get me wrong, over the short term this approach would work fine, but it's bound to get just as stale and predictable as the existing Super Sonic final boss fight in almost every game thus far. Use it in moderation and sure, it'll work.

The difference is that if you go through a cycle of different yet still recurring villains, they all get their chance in the limelight but it never grows stale. If you look at, say, Batman, the Joker is only one of many different villains he fights but that doesn't mean there has to be a brand new villain each time.

[batson]

Most people here seem to be missing the most obvious choice for a secondary, recurring villain: Metal Sonic! They just need to give him back his sentience, have him break free of Eggman's control, and viola, a great classic character that we are all already familiar with and attached to is upgraded as an ever cooler, independent supervillain.

Man, that would be so awesome. I can imagine that Metal Sonic's plan's would be much more focused specifically on killing Sonic or making his life miserable than Eggman's (since Eggman mostly just seem to want to conquer the world and actually want as little as possible to do with Sonic). Of course, a part of his motive would also be to conquer the world and create his "robot kingdom", perhaps by wiping out all living beings and replace them with robot slaves. Sonic's battles with Metal Sonic could probably be made to feel much more serious in tone than his battles with Eggman, considering Eggman is so damn "nice" these days while Metal could still remain an utterly heartless monster.

[Dr. Mechano]

Man, that would be so awesome. I can imagine that Metal Sonic's plan's would be much more focused specifically on killing Sonic or making his life miserable than Eggman's (since Eggman mostly just seem to want to conquer the world and actually want as little as possible to do with Sonic). Of course, a part of his motive would also be to conquer the world and create his "robot kingdom", perhaps by wiping out all living beings and replace them with robot slaves. Sonic's battles with Metal Sonic could probably be made to feel much more serious in tone than his battles with Eggman, considering Eggman is so damn "nice" these days while Metal could still remain an utterly heartless monster.

How nice is Eggman is does not indicate a lack of threat level.

After all, Sonic is "nice", and still a threatening foe to his enemies. The same can apply to Eggman, even as a villain.

Edited May 25, 2009 by El Gran Gordo

[Badnik Zero]

I think the best way to go would be the Nocturnus. They're certainly the most intriguing villains in a long while, though they're trapped in the Chronicles storyline. I wonder how Sega will treat those characters in the future. Shade at the Olympic Games?

Edited May 25, 2009 by Badnikz