Do Adult games need an Antagonist?

[HarveyD]

So an antagonist can range from the villian or bad guy in a fantasy setting to the love rival or bully in a modern day setting.

Rape and combat focused games obviously need bad guys so let's ignore those. There's plenty of use for antogonists in vanilla fiction as well. But in the adult VNs posted here, where the point is usually to get the reader off, are antagonists needed? Do they make porn games better?

 

[DawnCry]

It depends, if you want a good story you usually need an antagonist, it can serve as a rival or something to defeat, perhaps to even push the storyline forward.

I mean, if you just want to have a light VN with sexy times then you don't need it, but when you have a RPG, strategy game... you usually need enemies, rivals, other nations...

It doesn't mean that the antagonist has to try to have sex with the girls but rather that he does a good job on motivating the MC to do something.

 

[DownTheDrain]

That depends a lot on the genre.

Obviously a management style game doesn't need one, nor do regular dating sims or most trainers.
Classic VNs and RPGs usually have one or several antagonists, not because they're absolutely necessary but because they make it a lot easier to tell a compelling story.

A well-written antagonist can raise the stakes, introduce a change of pace and give the player somewhat of a challenge.
Of course a badly designed archenemy can ruin the whole thing, especially if they force players into situations, or fetishes, that they're not comfortable with.

 

[khumak]

I don't think it's absolutely required but I think the plot tends to be pretty weak if there is no antagonist. Without any antagonist you basically have an adult version of The Sims or a VN where the MC is basically guaranteed to win. Having an antagonist allows you to make a game where MC has to "earn it".

 

[GDS]

yes
evil people make games better

 

[KarissaPresents]

I'd argue that adult games are usually exempt from needing antagonists. Especially for the casual erotic games like brothel simulators or whatever. I wouldn't say that an antagonist necessarily makes a game better.

 

[exer]

It entirely depends on the game.

If you want to make a compelling story, an antagonist could be helpful. For example, if you wanted to do a story about a failing marriage, having an antagonist try and swoop in could be fitting. Especially if you're into NTR.
A good story doesn't always need a specific antagonist though, just obstacles for the character(s) to overcome. Using the same example, you could just have the marriage failing and the obstacle is to fix it. Or it could be about the aftermath of a divorce, and the obstacle is to move on.

If you want to make a game centered around gameplay, then for the most part you don't really need an antagonist. You just need fun gameplay. An antagonist can still be useful, but it entirely depends on the game. If you have a game where you have to run a shop, having an antagonist who's trying to get the shop to fail so they can buy it would be helpful. However, if you're making a game where you run a brothel, and the point is just essentially to train and collect, then you don't really need anyone trying to shut it down. That kind of thing could actually make the game less fun. It ultimately depends on how it's implemented and the game itself though.

Like all game design, there is no one definitive answer. An antagonist works for some games, and it doesn't work for others. It entirely depends on the story and the execution. Adult games in general are able to work without them, which makes them somewhat unique.

 

[polywog]

 

[khumak]

I'd argue that adult games are usually exempt from needing antagonists. Especially for the casual erotic games like brothel simulators or whatever. I wouldn't say that an antagonist necessarily makes a game better.

I would say even a game likea brothell simulator would benefit from an antagonist. If you don't have one, what is the consequence for doing a poor job of running your brothel? You make less money? Who cares? Do you actually lose the game if you run out of money? How is that handled? Is there some dramatic scene for that scenario or you just get a game over popup when your money goes negative?

Wouldn't it be more interesting if you owe money to the big bad loan shark or something and if you can't pay him he's going to send his goons to bust you up or make off with your wife or something? That's a more tangible and interesting consequence for failing than oops, I ran out of money, game over. There are plenty of other interesting scenarios you could come up with for overcoming whatever sort of adversary you want to put in there. That was just a convenient example that would IMO be superior to what you would typically run into with a brothel sim that has no adversary.

 

[polywog]

Antagonist doesn't mean "bad guy" antagonist comes from the Greek word antagonistēs, which means “opponent,” “competitor,” or “rival.” and you can't have a "Game" without one, certainly not an adult game.

You must be registered to see the links

An antagonist is usually a character or a group of characters that oppose the story’s main character, but not always.
An antagonist may also be a force or institution, government, or creature with which the protagonist must contend.
The antagonist may be natural disasters, like earthquakes, storms, fires, plagues, famines, or asteroids.
or it could be your own inner demons, and fears that need to be overcome. Adversity, diversity, inequity, inequality, the list goes on and on.

The girl in the game could be the antagonist, her clothing obviously, maybe she has a dog, or a pet dragon.

 

[Silentce]

Life without any hardships or struggles would be boring. A story with no antagonist where you get everything you want without any effort sounds boring. Even if the object of the game is to "fuck all dem chicks." Imagine a game where you just walked up to ta random lady and were like "Hi, you don't know me but you're hot. Lets fuck" and she was just like sure and that was the whole of the game in a nutshell. i personally would not play it nor call it a game. Some people might disagree, and I am sure there are plenty of people who would like that game or even want a game like that, but for me having some soft of struggle makes a game worth playing and the prize all the more rewarding when you get it.

 

[guesswhosback]

Antagonist? for what? to cuck you? NO THANKS!

 

[Sphere42]

If you mean "antagonist" as in human or heavily anthropomorphised then definitely not. Going with the brothel example it would probably be enhanced by antagonistic forces in the more general sense but those could be impersonal things such as your girls and ultimately yourself simply starving to death. On average if you're going for broad mass appeal character-driven stories with personal antagonists tend to fare better but that doesn't mean they actually are better.

Since many adult games have less effort and skill invested in the non-porn components I would definitely advise against adding antagonists if your core vision/story does not involve any by default. A badly written antagonist tends to do more harm than having none at all by distracting from the sexy in my experience.

 

[SkyRebel]

Spoiler: Guess who?

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

 

[Deleted member 167032]

I guess Eric from BB just showed us why we need em...

 

[Ataios]

In general no. Most scenarios do better without one and they certainly do better without an antagonist in the shape of rival lover.

I can imagine a couple of scenarios where an antagonist can make the story of an adult game more interesting. In most of these cases, the player character would be the villain though. I could imagine a game where you play a dominant lesbian about to lure a hot milf into sexual submission and that woman's son (no incest involved) is trying everything to protect his mother. Any game where you play or summon a succubus will certainly have some room for wannabe demon hunters.

 

[Rythan25]

Nope... triangle is one of my favorite games and it had no stupid unnecessary drama, or sense of danger, no "fear of losing your women"... that crap is not needed to make a good game...

I suppose if your a bad writer and cant make a decent romance story, than yes... its an easy way to make the game more intriguing to the general audience... but in that case as Mr Meseeks said "your failures are your own, old man !!".

 

[DownTheDrain]

I suppose if your a bad writer

If using an antagonist of any kind made you a bad writer there'd be very little "good" literature left.

 

[hameleona]

As with most things - yes, a story usually is better if there is an antagonist in it. Especially if the genre is something as fantasy or sci-fy. But it depends a lot on the skill of the writer and designer for that antagonist to be good. A passive antagonist is usually useless - if the opposing force, the force driving the conflict is just there but never messes with you in any way - it's not really an antagonist. At the same time an antagonist that is way too overwhelming (oh, hi there Eric) quickly turns in to the one driving the story and in a game such a character only strips from the agency of the player.

 

[Ataios]

If using an antagonist of any kind made you a bad writer there'd be very little "good" literature left.

This is specifically about adult games. No one denied that other forms of literature need antagonists. Does heroic fantasy need antagonists? Yes, because without a villain, there is no need for heroes. Porn games are fairly different. There is need for either villains nor heroes when it comes to sex and there is no need for animosity either.