Does it make sense to refer to Doctor Octopus as the game's main antagonist?
He doesn't take up the role of an antagonist until the final arc of the game: Mister Negative, while taking a secondary role, is closer to the definition of a "main antagonist". That's the reason why I labeled him as the main antagonist of the final arc. GuillermoIE (talk) 21:13, April 22, 2019 (UTC)
- He's literally the final boss of the game. Much of the game's plot is primarily focused on building him up as the main villain, hence why he only becomes an antagonist towards the final arc of the game. You would technically be correct in saying "Doctor Octopus is the main antagonist of the final arc of Marvel's Spider-Man", but it would just be needlessly overspecific and could also come off as a bit misleading.—Reg Boy (talk) 02:25, April 23, 2019 (UTC)
- What about the phrase "is one of the leading main antagonists of Marvel's Spider-Man." JAH 23:38, April 23, 2019 (UTC)
Just because he's the final boss doesn't mean he's the main antagonist: Two-Face is the final villain Batman faces in The Dark Knight, but he's definitely not the main antagonist of the movie. The main antagonist is the person who is the primary adversary of the protagonist. I think that referring to Octavius as the game's main antagonist is quite misleading: while the second arc of the game features his descent into villainy, and he is certainly the greatest threat in the final arc, the first two arcs feature him as a supporting protagonist. To refer him as simply "the main antagonist" doesn't do the character justice, especially when you factor in his relationship with Peter. GuillermoIE (talk) 22:55, April 23, 2019 (UTC)