Personally, I hate it, Dood.

A strong believer in justice here, and listening to stories, reading comics,
or just unsolved mystery murders altogether where the bad guy gets away
with it just feels wrong. Like a book missing its last pages and events just
stopping at their worst. With the bad guy getting everything they wanted
while leaving bodies in their wake. It's horrible for those like me who
believe those who hurt others will be hurt themselves,
"What goes around comes around." and that just not happening.

I can get that it's that horribleness that makes it a compelling story,
Mix things up and all that but, that doesn't change that feeling of real
unsatisfaction. the bad guy never being defeated because he's just
too strong seems like dark wish fulfillment, Saying that as long as you
have the power it doesn't matter who you hurt along the way and honestly,
I feel that's a horrible note to leave on, Dood.
╹ ╹)

Though!

Those are just my thoughts and opinions, Honestly really curious
about those who like stories about the bad guy winning over the
good guy winning, What's the appeal that does it for ya, Dood?
╹‿╹)

What are your thoughts on the Bad Guy winning in stories, Dood?
Love it or Hate it?
◠‿╹)~★

It depends. There are many different types of bad guys with many different goals. Depending on the specifics, I could end up rooting for the "bad guy". I wouldn't mind a bad guy like this "winning", for instance. An antagonist "winning" doesn't necessarily mean they get "everything they wanted while leaving bodies in their wake", either. A bad guy could win without harming anyone, depending on what they were after and how they ended up trying to achieve it.

If you think about it, the bad guy always wins. The villain is in the right from their own perspective, after all.

As for your point about bad actors never getting their comeuppance... well, how many unsolved murders are there, still? I find the villain winning, especially given how many stories set up just how ridiculous the odds are for the hero to win, more believable in most cases. Tyrants come into power and don't leave until they die of old age, innocents are killed in the name of whatever the cause of the day is, cities burn as collateral damage, life sucks.

You should, completely and utterly, avoid the entire genre of "Cosmic Horror", by the way. They heroes never win, it's something of a staple of that entire field.

watsit said:
It depends. There are many different types of bad guys with many different goals. Depending on the specifics, I could end up rooting for the "bad guy". I wouldn't mind a bad guy like this "winning", for instance. An antagonist "winning" doesn't necessarily mean they get "everything they wanted while leaving bodies in their wake", either. A bad guy could win without harming anyone, depending on what they were after and how they ended up trying to achieve it.

Interesting point, and one heck of a bad guy you got there, Dood~!
◠‿╹)~★

Totally, My main definition of bad guys here would be on the caliber of your Thanos's, Joker's, Yujiro's-
For a lack of a better word, Super Villans that do bad for the sheer heck of it!

There are lighter calibers of bad guys like your Light Yagami's, Lex Luthor's, Orcoimaru's-
That have an undercurrent of complexity to their character, where their choices aren't bad
per se but more morally questionable for the goal they're trying to achieve.
╹‿╹)

Either way, Seeing them go unpunished on the same level they've harmed others on
or at least go uncalled-out spices my biz like no one's business. Personally, I wouldn't
have found those stories half as interesting as I do now if they weren't reformed/faced
their judgment in the end. Seeing justice go unserved while the bad guy just gets
away with all they've done, learning nothing but how to be even more horrible
just feels wrong, ya know, Dood?

But that's just me, ╹‿╹)

If you don't mind me asking, what are the primary elements you
enjoy in an good Antagonist winning story? I personally find the
ending tricky. I like my enemies to end up more positive in the
end then negative, You, Dood?

votp said:
If you think about it, the bad guy always wins. The villain is in the right from their own perspective, after all.

As for your point about bad actors never getting their comeuppance... well, how many unsolved murders are there, still? I find the villain winning, especially given how many stories set up just how ridiculous the odds are for the hero to win, more believable in most cases. Tyrants come into power and don't leave until they die of old age, innocents are killed in the name of whatever the cause of the day is, cities burn as collateral damage, life sucks.

You should, completely and utterly, avoid the entire genre of "Cosmic Horror", by the way. They heroes never win, it's something of a staple of that entire field.

Too late, Dood T‿T)
Already seen Junji Ito's and Lovecrafts' biz. While I really don't like the bad "Thing" winning,
At that point it's more like saying a tornado is a bad guy, It just happens, and the positive
comes from surviving the disaster rather than fighting it, Ya know, Dood

Gotta say I'm a bigger fan of Lovecrafts' biz since peeps lose their cookies slowly over time
and it's pretty cool to see the saddle slide into madness!
=‿=)

And it's because of that horribleness that I love optimistic stories, Like no matter
how bad things are there's always some hope striving to make a change for the
better, Dood! Just because Life sucks doesn't mean we should just roll over and
take it, Be proactive, Dood! Take life by the horns and tell yourself~!

It will work out, Dood~! ╹‿╹)

notkastar said:
Personally, I hate it, Dood.

A strong believer in justice here, and listening to stories, reading comics,
or just unsolved mystery murders altogether where the bad guy gets away
with it just feels wrong. Like a book missing its last pages and events just
stopping at their worst. With the bad guy getting everything they wanted
while leaving bodies in their wake. It's horrible for those like me who
believe those who hurt others will be hurt themselves,
"What goes around comes around." and that just not happening.

=(.

It is horrible, Dood... I agree. I really do not know how to begin to answer you trully impacting thread... so maybe I will start by the end: Maybe Evil never really "wins".

We hate to see, or even the mere concept of "evil winning", because we are social, civilized creatures. And societies cannot survive in depravity. There is no society were, in schools it is taught: "You should lie, you should steal, and you should kill to advance in life". Or maybe, there have been such societies, but they don't lasted long, or even left any traces.

Now, as @VotP said, we do see dictators and evil people that seems to get away with it, yes. And people suffers because of them. And we feel pitty for the victims.... but maybe many of these "victims" were the ones that in the first place, rised and applauded the dictator, or didn't stand against the thug, when united, they could had. So is OK to pitty them, but heeding also for the whole story.

Even when evil seems to win, so many times more it loses... and humanity as a whole, seems to advance. Maybe not everywhere, every time... but things improve in the long run, at least from our current perspective.

Is evil the wolf that chase and kills the fawn to eat? For the longest time, the wolf in western culture as been the incarnation of Evil, and so it is portrayed in fables. But nowadays, the trully civilized man, sees the wolf as an element of equilibrium and of beauty... in sites like this, specially. Is in there advance or not?

There, what seemed like a clear cut distinction of Good vs Evil, holds no longer. Maybe, what we see as "injustice" now, we could see in a different light later, from a different perspective. Maybe we will see, that something looked as "injustice", because our perspective was "childish".

So entertain this possibility: Maybe, in real life, Evil and Injustice never ever really "wins", if you contemplate it from a sufficiently wider perspective.

--------------------------------------

On the other hand, I have this idea that we Furries are particularily "sensitive people", that want to find solace in Universes that, in general, are more happier and "just" that what we could find in "the real world". We could make stories and share stories that reflect such values.

Certainly, in recent times there has been movies that pretend to show the story from the perspective of the villain , or antiheroes . Surely it will be interesting to read theories about those cultural trends.

I think one of the key elements here is the perspective and context. So yeah, you can mark me down for "it depends" too.

Are we following the hero the entire time? Is the hero even the protagonist? How much do we know about the villain?
Are we talking about the bad guy of a single story or the bad guy of the fictional universe? What are the themes of the story (if any)?
and so on.

Specifics aside, I think bad guys winning can be good since it adds more excitement and suspense. The hero usually wins in the end and that's pretty predictable (which is fine mind you, there's a reason people keep doing and watching it). That said, I'm more interested in the protagonist than anything. If we're following a hero protagonist and he loses, it's a bit too bitter of a pill to swallow for me. Or at least unless it's done really well.

popoto said:
I think one of the key elements here is the perspective and context. So yeah, you can mark me down for "it depends" too.

Are we following the hero the entire time? Is the hero even the protagonist? How much do we know about the villain?
Are we talking about the bad guy of a single story or the bad guy of the fictional universe? What are the themes of the story (if any)?
and so on.

Specifics aside, I think bad guys winning can be good since it adds more excitement and suspense. The hero usually wins in the end and that's pretty predictable (which is fine mind you, there's a reason people keep doing and watching it). That said, I'm more interested in the protagonist than anything. If we're following a hero protagonist and he loses, it's a bit too bitter of a pill to swallow for me. Or at least unless it's done really well.

Totally get ya, Dood!

By bad guy, I meant in a more general sense
of the word. like your archetypal Villain whose
plan is to take over the world or to do bad for
the sake of it. Like the early versions of the Joker, Dood
╹‿╹)

And that's a super interesting perspective
that I share some feeling with, Dood!

Yes, more times than not the hero wins in the end
but, that in its self, even though done before,
is a satisfying payoff. It shows that their efforts
didn't only help the people around them but
their efforts helped themselves in the end, Dood!
◠‿◠)

Having a story where you follow the hero
protagonist, seeing what they've gone through,
seeing how they always put their best foot forward,
and all that jazz just for them not to make it in the
end is incredibly unsatisfying, Dood.
= =)

It's compelling if done right as you said,
maybe showing how the villain has gone
through just as much as they've had.
Maybe even forcing the protagonist into a
borderline unwinnable scenario-

Jojo Part 6 Spoilers~!
Like Pucci did to the Jojo group

But honestly, I would find it even more compelling
if the heroes pulled off a win at the end of the day.
Sure it would be predictable but, it's not really about
the good guys winning at that point but how they would
do it that would be even more interesting, ya know, Dood!
◠‿╹)~★

mexicanfurry said:
Super detailed Reply was quite a good read, Dood!

Quite the point of view you got there!
Gave me a lot of food for thought, Thanks, Dood!
◠‿╹)~★

Though I gotta tell ya, meant more in
the fictional sense of the bad guy winning.
╹‿╹)

Like if the Joker ultimately kills Batman as we know him,
letting his chaos run free as he systematically
picks off every superhero that could stop him till
he's the only peep around and the story just
ending there. That would be so unsatisfying!
He wins, through murder and a lack of morals
he gets everything while destroying everything,
Dood!

That's just horrible, to me personally I mean,
the bad guy winning is just bad. Compelling and
interesting if you know what you're getting into but
bitter nonetheless ya know, Dood!

I don't need all stories to end with happily ever afters all around, but if the bad guy just straight-up wins my reaction is usually something like this.

Furthermore, while I don't dispute their artistic validity, I'm not really fond of antihero-based shows like Breaking Bad. One of my favorite franchises is Star Trek, because it's about people who always want to do the right thing, even if they don't always agree about what exactly that is.

vulpes_artifex said:
I don't need all stories to end with happily ever afters all around, but if the bad guy just straight-up wins my reaction is usually something like this.

Oh my gosh, this resonates with me on so many levels, Dood!
I completely agree with this kid, If I knew that ending was gonna
let the bad guy go scot-free I wouldn't want to hear the story
in the first place. =‿=)~★

(Or I would at least know to prepare myself for some serious injustice, Dood)

Getting attached to the characters just for that to happen?
Just a can of beans I don't wanna open, ya know?

Furthermore, while I don't dispute their artistic validity, I'm not really fond of antihero-based shows like Breaking Bad. One of my favorite franchises is Star Trek, because it's about people who always want to do the right thing, even if they don't always agree about what exactly that is.

Same again, Dood.
While I haven't had the pleasure of watching either series, (Comic and Anime fan here ◠‿╹)~★
Morally questionable or bad for the sake of some good just doesn't do it for me, Dood.

My favorite stories always tend to be more (from what it sounds like ╹‿╹) star trek-esque!
Where the peeps' main flaws are that they always set out to do the right thing, even if the
right thing can cause them to butt heads with others, they still go for it out of a genuine want
for making the world a better place, Dood!

A Story where they catch the bad guys, Dood! ◠‿◠)

I will say I do quite like in games, moreso than other media, where the villain wins, especially if said villain is you. The original Fable, Knights of the Old Republic 1&2, Jade Empire, Overlord (1 moreso than the later entries), Starsiege, Ace Combat 3, Armored Core 4, and the like all have fairly enjoyable protagonist-villain endings as examples. In other media it can seem like the story is cut short if told through the heroes' perspectives, and a villain-protagonist is not common to see in other media to begin with... I'm genuinely wracking my brain to think of any non-interactive content that specifically follows the other side, all that's coming to mind are crime/heist flicks where they generally try to lighten up the protagonist anyway though. American Psycho and A Clockwork Orange, I guess? Dunno, perhaps if you were shown more direct aftermath of the villain's victory in the media in question, rather than it just ending fairly abruptly as most fiction that ends that way tends to, you might enjoy it more. Hope springs eternal-type shit where it's clear another hero will eventually rise.

... Hm, now I have the craving for a slasher/monster flick filmed entirely from the perspective/following behind the monster/villain and detailing their thoughts and activities as they pick off horny, drunken, teenage potheads.

votp said:
I will say I do quite like in games, moreso than other media, where the villain wins, especially if said villain is you. The original Fable, Knights of the Old Republic 1&2, Jade Empire, Overlord (1 moreso than the later entries), Starsiege, Ace Combat 3, Armored Core 4, and the like all have fairly enjoyable protagonist-villain endings as examples. In other media it can seem like the story is cut short if told through the heroes' perspectives, and a villain-protagonist is not common to see in other media to begin with... I'm genuinely wracking my brain to think of any non-interactive content that specifically follows the other side, all that's coming to mind are crime/heist flicks where they generally try to lighten up the protagonist anyway though. American Psycho and A Clockwork Orange, I guess? Dunno, perhaps if you were shown more direct aftermath of the villain's victory in the media in question, rather than it just ending fairly abruptly as most fiction that ends that way tends to, you might enjoy it more. Hope springs eternal-type shit where it's clear another hero will eventually rise.

... Hm, now I have the craving for a slasher/monster flick filmed entirely from the perspective/following behind the monster/villain and detailing their thoughts and activities as they pick off horny, drunken, teenage potheads.

(Peep you should totally try "Infernax" If you like games with evil endings.
Not my cup of punch since the game likes to pick on peeps who
like to be the good guy but, still a pretty solid game still. =‿=)~★

Oh, I couldn't be the villain in any of those games, Dood. ◠‿◠;)
No judgment! Playing the bad guy if you want to is fine, They put
it in the game for a reason! just not for me personally, I want to
Play The Hero!

Someone who would literally go out of their way whether it was
saving the world or collecting all 100 of the lady's lost cats to be
as kind as possible, Dood.
╹‿╹)

Heck I would even load my last save that I forgot to save over
for hours if I accidentally hit a citizen, Dood.
T‿T;)

(Huge reason I don't play cyberpunk 2077, It looks cool but, you
just can't be a good guy. They literally won't let you, Dood. =‿=)

American Psycho is brilliant and if Clockwork Orange is anything like it
I'd watch it! And Honestly, if I saw the direct aftermath of the Villian's
complete victory explained and expanded on I'd probably dislike it more.
Wanting them taken down a peg or one thousand as it's explained how
clearly they've won. Overlord Thanos is a great example of this since
it follows him from start to finish and in the end-

Spoilers for Overlord Thanos, Dood
he wins, gets everything he wants, It's explained how happy he is getting everything, and boom ending!

Sure there may be hope popping up in the end at some point
but without that shown, it feels really unsatisfying for me. Even
though it was a complete story, without that it'll always feel
incomplete, Dood. Like stopping in the middle of a sen-

Oh, and ever heard of Rob Zombie?
Herd his movies are exactly what
you're describing having a craving for, Dood
╹‿╹)

Rob Zombie is a good as a musician, not so much as a director, in my opinion. His takes on the classic slashers are... questionable, at best.

Clockwork Orange, the movie, is worth watching the same as any Kubrick film. Just remember, there are no punches pulled in terms of content.

I find it delightful in games to be the evilest bastard possible, I find it hilarious, part of why I enjoyed playing EVE for as long as I did; few things more amusing than knowing the horror of miners as you drop right next to them in a Naglfar and watch them panic trying to get away before you blow them into space dust. SS13 used to be hilarious for sheer cruelty potential, the port-a-poo comes to mind.

Depends on the story: OldBoy wouldn't have been as much of a classic if the bad guy hadn't "won", but something like Voldemort winning in Harry Potter would feel like a decade long waste of time and make the entire cast look like idiots. For example, I never understood how a house with such a staunch history of racial supremacy was never dissolved at Hogwarts, so Voldemort winning by recruiting straight from the house would pretty bad on everyone.

It's intention and quality that matters most.

If you think about it, sometimes the difference between hero and villain is who's telling the story. Technically, Robin Hood and his Merry Men, those legendary heroes of England, are villains. They're outright thieves, poachers, kidnappers, and outlaws, none of which they're remotely remorseful about. By the laws of England at the time and even ours now, they're a gang of criminals. What they had going for them was a corrupt authority (namely the Sheriff of Nottingham) and an unpopular monarch (Prince John*) to make them heroes for the disaffected commoners. And he essentially "won" when King Richard I finally bothered to get back home.
_____________

• Though he really wasn't that much worse than many other British monarchs and was arguably better at the job than his brother Richard I was, who spent less than six months in England after becoming king, usually leading armies on foreign soil or spending time in captivity until the ransom was paid. The high taxes of the time weren't because of John's love of money but because Richard needed the money for his armies and ransom. Between the two monarchs, who was really more of a bad guy?

clawstripe said:
If you think about it, sometimes the difference between hero and villain is who's telling the story. Technically, Robin Hood and his Merry Men, those legendary heroes of England, are villains. They're outright thieves, poachers, kidnappers, and outlaws, none of which they're remotely remorseful about. By the laws of England at the time and even ours now, they're a gang of criminals. What they had going for them was a corrupt authority (namely the Sheriff of Nottingham) and an unpopular monarch (Prince John*) to make them heroes for the disaffected commoners. And he essentially "won" when King Richard I finally bothered to get back home.
_____________

• Though he really wasn't that much worse than many other British monarchs and was arguably better at the job than his brother Richard I was, who spent less than six months in England after becoming king, usually leading armies on foreign soil or spending time in captivity until the ransom was paid. The high taxes of the time weren't because of John's love of money but because Richard needed the money for his armies and ransom. Between the two monarchs, who was really more of a bad guy?

You're leaving out that the money stole he gave to the poor, which puts the crimes you mentioned into a somewhat different context. Furthermore, John is generally considered a pretty bad monarch (and a cruel person), even after historians re-evaluated him.

vulpes_artifex said:
You're leaving out that the money stole he gave to the poor, which puts the crimes you mentioned into a somewhat different context.

Much like how a few mob bosses, like Al Capone, frequently donated some of the proceeds of their criminal empires to their communities, thus adding one more obstacle for federal authorities to get to them? As I said above, whether someone is the hero or the villain can change depending on who is telling the story. Someone who does crimes for noble reasons doesn't make them any less of a criminal, even when they're better than those who make and enforce the laws.

Furthermore, John is generally considered a pretty bad monarch (and a cruel person), even after historians re-evaluated him.

I know. He's the only British monarch who hasn't a later namesake. Richard wasn't much better. He just wasn't the one staying at home and doing his things to his subjects, so wasn't actively drawing their discontent. Would you be more irked at a leader off in some distant land who needs a bunch of money or the guy tasked with shaking you down for it?

To put it simply, in my perspective, the notion of good and bad are mere inventions to help us live in a society.

One could say, “Ah! But you would be sad if someone decided to rape/murder/rob you of your things! That would be evil, aye?”. The thing is, being “evil” just means selfishness to the extreme, and justifying their means with their goal. A murderer/robber/rapist would do this things to either get rid of the evidence or feel the pleasure of killing as a mental psychopath, profit off of the risk they took, and once again pleasure their own sick mind. In the end, with no regards to how I felt.

Villains work the same way - they find people to worship for then and work for the littlest reward possible, and otherwise look for any means to get to their endgame, which can often be fueled by trauma or a weird, fucked up moral compass (another great invention that means close to nothing for me.

The world works if everything is balanced. Ecosystems, for example, could be destroyed in its entirety by the simple presence of an invading species (even a plant.) Similarly, think about how “good” and “bad” need their own balance. There will always be mentally deranged people as long as mankind walks on this planet.

Bad guys sometimes win. It’s okay. But the good guys win too, and somewhat unrealistically, much more often than the bad guys (weird exceptions aside :P)

That being said, I’m someone who worries too much about other people and ends up leaving myself behind (possible hero complex???), so, yes, I have a preference for a “morally just” winner. But I’m okay with either being winners. It’s a story, after all.

depends how hard they had to fight for it, if there was no challenge, was always one step ahead, and just toyed with everyone, then no, that guy can go fuck himself. but, if he had to fight for it, never gives up despite suffering through loss after loss after loss, properly develop himself, have a backstory thats relatable, and barely succeeded by the skin of his teeth, then yeah, i'll give 'em that one.