When Will We See A True Antagonist Again?

[ClaudX]

In the last few games, the antagonists have been somewhat lacking. When you think of antagonist, you think of someone who has caused trouble for the protagonist on a personal level (maybe you think of an antagonist differently, but that's what I think of an antagonist). You grow to hate the antagonist throughout the storyline, not just because the antagonist is a jerk and deserves to die, but because of how they treat the protagonist. In III, we hated Catalina because she led Claude into a loving relationship and then left him to die in Liberty City. Claude wanted to exact revenge on Catalina so badly, that he'd do anything, but more importantly, we wanted to help him achieve this. In Vice City,we know Sonny set Tommy up and that Tommy wanted to get payback. Throughout the game, we felt the need to help Tommy with this. And in SA, we know that Tenpenny and Smoke caused the death of CJ's mother and tried to bring the Grove down to its knees. We wanted to make Smoke and Tenpenny pay for what they did. However, once we reached LCS, the antagonist became lacking in the properties of a true antagonist. He was in two missions and we never felt a strong urge to take him out. He was just the leader of another mafia, big deal. In VCS, although the antagonists were somewhat better than LCS, there was something that didn't make us hate them. Yeah, Martinez and the Mendez brothers wanted to kill Victor and take over his business. Every other gang in the city wanted to do the same thing, but they just weren't as powerful as the Mendez brothers. Now in IV I felt like the game wanted us to grow to hate the antagonists, but it wasn't executed as good as the game thought it was. Dimitri was just some Russian guy who tried to sell Niko over to Bulgarin. That's basically him in a nutshell. And Pegorino only wanted Niko dead because he didn't want to do the deal with Dimitri. The hate that should've been there, just wasn't there. V, oh man, V. In my opinion, V has some of the worst antagonists throughout the series. Steve Haines was just another corrupt FIB agent who used the protagonists. We've seen corrupt members of the law throughout the entire series, but why make one a main antagonist? For Devin Weston, I felt that the only protagonist that was led to hate him was Michael, after all Weston did to him and his family. That’s still only one protagonist that was driven to hate him, making him a very weak antagonist. The same can be said for Stretch. Only Franklin should’ve hated him, so why did Michael kill him? Wei Cheng was one antagonist that had potential. He caused all three protagonists trouble, although Trevor was the root of the trouble for Michael and Franklin. My main point is, when will the GTA series see a true antagonist once again? An antagonist who we grow to hate throughout the story because they continually cause trouble for the protagonist on a personal level. Will GTA VI return with a strong antagonist? I hope so. What are your thoughts on this topic?

[BLOOD]

Bill Gray,The Lost and Damned (2009)?

Edited April 10, 2014 by Blood-Is-in-Diamond

[ClaudX]

Bill Gray,The Lost and Damned (2009)?

I missed the EFLC antagonists by accident. I didn't that all antagonists were lacking, but just most. Billy Gray (Grey?) was an exception in my eyes.

[El Zodape]

I thought Dmitri was pretty good and that Sonny was pretty lame (I completely forgot about him until the last mission). No one can compare to the all mighty Tenpenny, though.

 

I think they'll get the antagonists right in VI. They f*cked up big time in V, they can't do worse than that.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

... can they?

[HOW'S ANNIE?]

I actually liked Dimitri as an antagonist, he even went as far as to kidnap Niko's cousin to get back at him.

 

And, as stated before, you forgot Billy Grey. As much as I like Dimitri, Billy was probably the best antagonist the series has seen.

[Drunken Cowboy]

I liked Sonny, Dimitri, Billy, and Big Smoke... And the thing they have in common is that they all started out as your friend and mentor... Weird how that device works out.

[UrbanAdventuring]

The antagonist of GTA V is GTA Online. It stole all the buyable properties, ownable cars, and other things that would make the single player game great.

[BLOOD]

The antagonist of GTA V is GTA Online. It stole all the buyable properties, ownable cars, and other things that would make the single player game great.

Lol

[SilentSeas]

Dimitri was just some Russian guy who tried to sell Niko over to Bulgarin. That's basically him in a nutshell.

 

I couldn't disagree more, I thought that Dimitri made for a brilliant antagonist. The man was a cold-toned snake who was willing to betray everyone who he had ever called a friend just for the sake of money. The word loyalty meant absolutely nothing to him, as was shown over and over from the betrayal of Faustin right up until the very end. His use throughout the story was well balanced too, his presence was subtle at times but he wasn't afraid to be proactive in his hunt for Niko, as smoking him out of Hove Beach and setting up Roman's kidnapping showed.

[Algonquin Assassin]

Even though Dimitri wasn't introduced until sometime after the story started I still thought his role was shear brilliance. The way he used Niko for personal gain and stabbed him in the back, then playing cat and mouse games with him.

 

His taunting of Niko just made me want to end his existence. Excellent antagonist. I don't know wtf happened in GTA V to go so far backwards.

Edited April 12, 2014 by SonOfLiberty

[Drunken Cowboy]

I will admit that making Jimmy P the final final antagonist was a bit anti-climactic if you chose "Revenge", and I assume most people did. they should have made that final kill on Happiness Island Dimitri regardless of which ending you chose.

[DarrinPA]

When Will We See A True Antagonist Again?

Once they stop with the multiple endings.

[Real_Badgirl]

If you ask me, the only subpar antagonists are Steve and Devin. Neither of them felt very threatening, they were just characters I wanted to kill simply because they're douchebags, nothing more.

 

In my opinion, the rest of the antagonists do a good job at making you hate them for what they've done to the protagonists and other characters. Steve and Devin on the other hand, failed to do this.

[Johnny Spaz]

Even Vlad was a better villain then Devin.

[ExtremoMania]

I'm kinda disagreeing of the OP about on Dimitri's role as an antagonist. He's by far the brilliant antagonist I've seen after Billy Grey and Frank Tenpenny, whose personality is rigid that even Niko couldn't sense upon his betrayal. He's willing to betray anyone even his closest friend just to assume control of his agenda wherein the word 'loyalty' doesn't exist to him. He would also go as far as to ruin Niko's life and his family and friends throughout the story. He's a c*nt who deserves to be respected as a man capable of dominating the culture and using them for his personal gain. Truly is, Dimitri is the best antagonist in the series so far.

 

I'm expecting something big on the next GTA antagonist. They should continue incorporating the idea of multiple protagonist, with either two or only one antagonist, whose personality incorporates that of the past GTA antagonist except in V, would make it truly suitable for a better story.

[ClaudX]

I'm kinda disagreeing of the OP about on Dimitri's role as an antagonist. He's by far the brilliant antagonist I've seen after Billy Grey and Frank Tenpenny, whose personality is rigid that even Niko couldn't sense upon his betrayal. He's willing to betray anyone even his closest friend just to assume control of his agenda wherein the word 'loyalty' doesn't exist to him. He would also go as far as to ruin Niko's life and his family and friends throughout the story. He's a c*nt who deserves to be respected as a man capable of dominating the culture and using them for his personal gain. Truly is, Dimitri is the best antagonist in the series so far.

 

I'm expecting something big on the next GTA antagonist. They should continue incorporating the idea of multiple protagonist, with either two or only one antagonist, whose personality incorporates that of the past GTA antagonist except in V, would make it truly suitable for a better story.

But Dimirti was really set up as an antagonist. Many people chose the Revenge, I assume, so that makes the ultimate antagonist Pegorino. Instead of getting the true revenge like you do in a Revenger's Tragedy, you kill Dimirti on a ship of heroin. Where's the glorious climax there? It's just bad writing by Rockstar. Instead of Pegorino being one of the big antagonists, they should've made a separate, smaller mission, where you kill him. Dimitri should've been the big ending where Niko really gets his revenge. It was a really short end for a good antagonist. A good climax would've made Dimirti better than he was.

[ExtremoMania]

 

I'm kinda disagreeing of the OP about on Dimitri's role as an antagonist. He's by far the brilliant antagonist I've seen after Billy Grey and Frank Tenpenny, whose personality is rigid that even Niko couldn't sense upon his betrayal. He's willing to betray anyone even his closest friend just to assume control of his agenda wherein the word 'loyalty' doesn't exist to him. He would also go as far as to ruin Niko's life and his family and friends throughout the story. He's a c*nt who deserves to be respected as a man capable of dominating the culture and using them for his personal gain. Truly is, Dimitri is the best antagonist in the series so far.

 

I'm expecting something big on the next GTA antagonist. They should continue incorporating the idea of multiple protagonist, with either two or only one antagonist, whose personality incorporates that of the past GTA antagonist except in V, would make it truly suitable for a better story.

But Dimirti was really set up as an antagonist. Many people chose the Revenge, I assume, so that makes the ultimate antagonist Pegorino. Instead of getting the true revenge like you do in a Revenger's Tragedy, you kill Dimirti on a ship of heroin. Where's the glorious climax there? It's just bad writing by Rockstar. Instead of Pegorino being one of the big antagonists, they should've made a separate, smaller mission, where you kill him. Dimitri should've been the big ending where Niko really gets his revenge. It was a really short end for a good antagonist. A good climax would've made Dimirti better than he was.

 

Yes, many people choose Revenge instead because they don't want Roman to be killed. Actually on the angle, the Revenge is also the conquest of Niko's vendetta against Dimitri which truly also depicted a glorious scene of avenging the man who betrayed you.

 

It would've made it clear that multiple endings just made the story so bad. That's why I conclude that in the next GTA game, they should remove the idea of multiple endings instead and focus the penultimate ending with a precise angle of execution.

[El Zodape]

I disagree. Multiple endings are cool, bad writing is not.

 

Of course, if they still can't write multiple endings properly, they better sitck to one ending.

Edited April 13, 2014 by Zodape

[I<3GTAV]

That's one thing GTA V lacked in, Devin Weston didn't seem evil, he seemed like a vagina douche.

[DCBlackbird]

My problem is that their antagonist are more symbolic than threatening now. Dimitri is supposed to contrast yet compliment Niko Bellic. A weak man but willing to kill one of their own if the money's good. Billy Grey a omen of what the Lost was doomed to face, Ray Bulgarin wasn't actually that bad. Devin Weston is the whole American Dream at it's worst put into a man. Sure it sounds cool on paper but....

[XxX19Dude95XxX]

I disagree. Multiple endings are cool, bad writing is not.

 

Of course, if they still can't write multiple endings properly, they better sitck to one ending.

i say get rid of them i mean it was cool in 4 but in 5

it was just stupid not to pick C i mean come on who in there right

mind picks a or b

 

Edited April 19, 2014 by bikerman3