Why just Delita?
- Topic Archived
- Page 1 of 2
Duke Larg and Goltana were willing to continue the civil war when it quite clear that they cannot continue on especially with the economy being what it is. They were both motivated by greed and a lust for power that they were willing to continue to tax the poor in order to fund the war. Their economy could no longer support them but they continued the war anyway causing the people to revolt.
Dycedarg was also motivated by greed and killed his own father and best friend in order to put Beoulve on top.
Gafgarion is a mercenary who will kill even children if paid to do so.
Folmarv who doesn''t really have a personality other than being an evil knight templar is manipulating all of them to revive Ultima/St. Ajora.
The Lucavi are pretty much evil incarnate as they use the Zodiac Stones to manipulate everyone so that they can destroy the world/
There even worse villains and antagonists than Delita yet fans single out Delita as the 'true evil' in the series. Why single out Delita when there worst villains out there in the game?
I don't think I've heard many people singling him out. I actually LOVE Delita, and is one of my favorite video game characters. He's one of the few "villains" whose motivations actually make sense. And is a great embodiment of the mantra the "ends justifying the means".
Pretty simple, Delita is Ramza's foil.
Ramza overcomes all those people you mention without compromising himself.
Delita had the same potential as Ramza, but he instead becomes the same type of monster he was supposedly fighting. Even then, he ultimately doesn't accomplish much of anything beyond taking credit for what Ramza accomplished.
So, Delita does very little to actually impact anything going on, so, all he really ever does is take credit from the one person that always treated him with respect and murder numerous people, some of which deserved it, some of which didn't.
Delita is also a straight villain. He has a Freudian Excuse, that's it. You could make some argument for him being an anti-villain, but he is a borderline case at best.
For comparison, Wiegraf, early on, is a straight anti-hero. Later in the story, Wiegraf flips to an anti-villain.
Because those people are idiots and don't bother to think before they post. Delita is as gray as any character can get. Yes, he did use a lot of underhanded tactics to get to his goal but in the end can you really say an era of peace wasn't what Ivalice really needed?
Even then, he ultimately doesn't accomplish much of anything beyond taking credit for what Ramza accomplished.
Is this before or after the corrupted nobles kicked the bucket?
And an anti-villain would imply they are not villains. I don't see how the hell Wiegraf giving into the desires of Belial can not count as evil.
Katawa Shoujo: The visual novel that defies and kicks logic to the curb.
Official contender to fight for Lilly as waifu.
I thought people said that Argath was the monster (in which case they're quite right).
There are definitely worse characters than Delita out there.
Anticipating the following: Tales of Xillia (PS3), FF X/X-2 HD (PS3)
There are worse villains in the game but Delita isn't the monster that everyone makes him out to be. He is an antagonist but he is not an outright although he is a lot better at hiding it than most people.
Delita is a monster of his own creation, that is why it is so tragic. By his early 20s he has made himself into a vicious, manipulative beast.
Spoiler warning for those unaware, just in case.
Born from a low class family, but he was taken in by Ramza's, and despite the ridicule he must have experienced he let his actions speak louder than their words. He had aspirations of furthering his military career and a sense of nobility and justice here and there. All of that changed with the appearance of Argath and then the death of his sister, during which he threatened the life of his only true friend and threw away the relationship they had held sacred for years. Fast forward a bit, he finds himself being manipulated by the church, but he allows this, looking for a chance to over throw them and the nobles who so wronged him, and of course he bumps into Ramza once more.
Delita could have came clean, he could have put his thoughts of vengeance and manipulation aside, but instead he brushed off Ramza's earnest elation to see his friend still /alive/. From then on, he waits, sure he may have fallen for Ovelia, but he sought to use her as well and then Ramza once he realized how powerful of a tool his friend would be if pointed in the right direction. Delita simply stood there and watched the world beneath him crumble due to mostly Ramza's efforts, sometimes speaking of his departed sister or of his love for Ovelia, but I struggle to see how he could have cared for either of them. If he really cared for those he loved, then he wouldn't have brushed off Ramza and then consequently used him to further his own efforts. When Delita became king, he thought it would probably make him happy, but it didn't, still everyone who wronged him was dead, along with those who cared for him.
The last scene in the game honestly breaks my heart each time I see it, and I have seen it several, several time. Each time I think about if Delita didn't let Argath's words wound him, or if he decided to give up his vendetta for power once he ran into Ramza again. The war could have been stopped, and while he did stop it, he did so at the expense of everyone around him. I see him as the worst monster because he could have been a completely different person, and the country would have been all the better for it.
And of course, history only remembers him, not the actual man who fought to put an end to the chaos. As for the others, Goltana, Larg, the church, they were corrupt and had been so for years. While they were despicable, they primarily operated on greed and a lust for power and had done so for quite some time, while Delita takes only two to three years to decide to throw away everything he had ever learned and everyone who ever cared for him.
Let's see you dance sucka, you got nothin' on me!
I see as more of a monster in the sense that he wasn't a murdering slavering beast who thinks only of destruction. He coldly calculated everything, killed his opposition, and manipulated a woman into loving him so he could use her then later murder her when her part was done. All premeditated and amazing. He used anyone and everything, and steered them into a direction he wanted, taking away their ability to choose for the most part which is a terrible thing to do. He was much more evil than the Lucavi. His goals may have been lofty but the way he got there wasn't.
I friggin love the guy! So evil, so good.
That was the greatest post I have ever read on these boards, Effy. I laughed, I cried, I ate a whole gallon of ice cream.
Still, Delita isn't a monster the same way Folmarv, The Lucavi, Dycedarg, Argath and Ultima are. Delita is still an antagonist but he is hardly the only villain in the game but I suppose that Delita would something along the lines of pragmatist.
What a beautiful impression!
My own thought was that Ramza and Delita never stopped being best friends.
While Delita had to take drastic measures to prove his considerable worth, Ramza was free to find the truth as he saw it because of his noble advantages. I still see Delita as a hero, not an antihero, As king, he was able to unite Ivalice by earning his place instead of being born to it. Ramza and his unswerving devotion to the truth were simply factors in Delita's decision-making (and Balmafula's crass remarks about it cut him to the bone).
The fact that Ramza was unable to take credit for his deeds and instead made his best friend king speaks more to our humanity's preference for bull-pucky over real, clean virtue.
And Ramza being OK with that is what tells us how we should behave with our own virtue.
Dude! You totally squeenixed on my couch!
Add user to Ignore List after reporting