Games Where The 'Antagonist/Villian' Wins (Or Was Right)?

[Alex Baas]

There isn't a single ending in ME3 where the Reapers don't achieve a victory of some sort and a complete victory with Refuse. Yet there is also no ending where Shepard achieves a clear victory. So Bioware gave the antagonists a clear win but not the protagonist.

I never realised how much that annoys me.

I was the opposite. I played the original ending of ME 3 and once I realized this I loved it. But then again I did write a detective short story where the protagonist dies half way through the story in some random unrelated incident.

 

[votemarvel]

I got the Mass Effect Happy Ending Mod (PC) which changes how the game ends. Shepard lives, wins, and kills the Reapers (but no other synthetics). And since Andromeda ignores the ending of ME3, head-canon wins.

I prefer John P's alternate version myself. Lets you keep the Catalyst stuff but makes High EMS Destroy a clear win for Shepard

I was the opposite. I played the original ending of ME 3 and once I realized this I loved it. But then again I did write a detective short story where the protagonist dies halfway through the story in some random unrelated incident.

I always felt that in the shipped endings they were going for a bittersweet feel, they just forgot to add the sweetner to it. I don't love or hate they shipped endings really, I get from of a 'meh' feeling from them as it is clear that Bioware made little effort to make them distinct from each other.

Personally I feel that if Bioware had a clear win for the Reapers along a sliding scale, then the same should have been done for Shepard.

Anyway we are getting off-topic. Heading to another Bioware game would Dragon Age: Origins not have a antagonistic victory? If you let Loghain survive and his daughter remain on the throne, you've given him access to one of the world's most powerful and influential groups in the Grey Wardens and ensured his bloodline remains in control of his homeland.

 

[RealRT]

It makes sense the way they made it. Not the way some fans expected it to, though.
And what's to despise, really? Don't choose it.

I don't know any details about the original plan other than it had something to do with.. dark materia and whatnot?
Related to that quest in ME2 with the dying star.

I despise it for being a "fuck you" to everyone who didn't like the shitty writing of the original endings. IE most of the playerbase. All under the pretense of throwing them a bone. And of course it makes sense the way they made it, the game is rigged so it makes sense. Despite the fact that one of the main themes of the series is that allied together you can do pretty much anything.

From what I heard, in the original ending it was to be revealed that the widespread use of mass effect-based technology increases the amount of dark energy in the galaxy and stars start dying faster: the Reapers were created to deal with this problem. In the end Shepard would have to choose whether or not to sacrifice a fuckton of people to create a new Reaper that would be able to deal with it once and for all.

 

[Sonmi]

No mention of Shadow of the Colossus in this thread? For shame, people, for shame.

I have to say that my favourite game with the antagonist winning would be the 2008 Prince of Persia. The game has a plethora of flaws, but the ending is beautiful, and sad. The Prince's love for Elika leads to him fucking up everything for everyone, and unleashing the evil he just defeated.

 

[Joccaren]

Warcraft 3, the Frozen Throne. Even after you 'win' the final mission and defeat Arthas's armies, the now mad and evil king takes Frostmourne and duels with Illidan, who while overall a morally grey character is at this point essentially fighting to save the world [Even if his actual reasons are more "Don't let the demons kill me and they want their servant punished"]. Arthas wins, Illidan is almost killed, and the fallen Prince ascends to become the Lich King. Evil wins the day. Even in Reign of Chaos, evil won against the human realms in the end. Lordaeron is fallen, and the survivors have fled to Kalimdor to rebuild. Yeah, overall they defeated the demon invasion at the end, but that's only one faction of evil, and while the demons were defeated, throughout WC3 the undead win again and again.

Illidan winning isnt good news. Its the Burning Legion getting the powers of the Lich King and having a second go at destroying Azeroth as the frozen throne melts and Illidan wins KilJadens favor and becomes a true demon.

Eeeh, it wouldn't have been good news either way [And either way the bad guys win TBH, ever since the human campaign in RoC they'd won], but honestly I'd say the organised Lich King and his legions are worse news than a chaotic period for the undead with no real leader before the Burning Legion assimilated the Lich King's power and took command, and even then there'd likely be significant splinter groups like the Forsaken that'd be in place. Don't know how WoW has treated all the actors, but I get the feeling of not all that well. Letting the Lich King live and get more powerful though? Yeah, definite loss for the Alliance and Horde, as is the demons getting more powerful, though at least they're still stuck away from Azeroth for a little.
Additionally Illidan becoming full demon is questionably a bad thing. He has a history of misusing power, however a large part of his arc through the game was coming to terms with this, and understanding that power wasn't the only thing that mattered to him. Even were he to reach full demonhood, its unlikely he would have gone to war with Azeroth. Given his character post release from imprisonment, I'd say its equally likely he could have honoured his promise with Malfurion, and instead helped Kalimdor at the very least stand against the Horde.

That said, we'll never know, as he lost the fight, and the Lich King merged with Arthas, which definitely wasn't a good outcome for anyone but the Lich King.

 

[FalloutJack]

Snip

I'm ignoring that because it's just splitting hairs. The games count and it's terrible that none of you mentioned them.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

Snip

I'm ignoring that because it's just splitting hairs. The games count and it's terrible that none of you mentioned them.

That's not splitting hairs, villain =/= antagonist.

 

[FalloutJack]

Snip

I'm ignoring that because it's just splitting hairs. The games count and it's terrible that none of you mentioned them.

That's not splitting hairs, villain =/= antagonist.

Not in Jack's universe. In my view, villain protagonist may be the hero of his story, but he's still the one antagonizing. To be antagonist is to antagonize, as in be the threat. Villains are a threat, ergo they're the antagonist even if they're the main character. Even if Humans Are Bastards, an alien out to harvest our brains and kill en masse is still the bad guy while the main character, still the antagonist. What you find is that the rule is not absolute. So, you're splitting hairs and DAS counts.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

Snip

I'm ignoring that because it's just splitting hairs. The games count and it's terrible that none of you mentioned them.

That's not splitting hairs, villain =/= antagonist.

Not in Jack's universe. In my view, villain protagonist may be the hero of his story, but he's still the one antagonizing. To be antagonist is to antagonize, as in be the threat. Villains are a threat, ergo they're the antagonist even if they're the main character. Even if Humans Are Bastards, an alien out to harvest our brains and kill en masse is still the bad guy while the main character, still the antagonist. What you find is that the rule is not absolute. So, you're splitting hairs and DAS counts.

But as you're trying to harvest brains, the humans are trying to stop you. They "antagonize" you, if you will.

 

[Sonmi]

Oh, also forgot into a particularly annoying one.

Dragon Age II.

Anders wins and gets the civil war you attempt to prevent during the whole game. I'm not sure if the game meant for us to sympathize with him, but as far as I am concerned, he's much more the villain/antagonist of this shit game than either the Arishok, Orsino, or Meredith was.

In fact, his actions (and those of pretty much every mage in the game) kind of point to Meredith being right from the get-go.

 

[DoPo]

Snip

I'm ignoring that because it's just splitting hairs. The games count and it's terrible that none of you mentioned them.

That's not splitting hairs, villain =/= antagonist.

Not in Jack's universe. In my view, villain protagonist may be the hero of his story, but he's still the one antagonizing. To be antagonist is to antagonize, as in be the threat. Villains are a threat, ergo they're the antagonist even if they're the main character. Even if Humans Are Bastards, an alien out to harvest our brains and kill en masse is still the bad guy while the main character, still the antagonist. What you find is that the rule is not absolute. So, you're splitting hairs and DAS counts.

That's not how the terms work, though. An antagonist opposes the protagonist, regardless of who is the "villain". It could actually be either, neither[footnote]imagine the police being after the main character because he was framed. The police aren't "evil", they are there to uphold the law and ultimately oppose evil.[/footnote] or both[footnote]An unrepenting murderer who is pursued by an unscrupulous assassin[/footnote] and the terms don't change. Reason being that's their purpose - not changing to suit arbitrary morality.

 

[2HF]

Basically every old game was technically like this. The enemy firing missiles at you in missile command always wins. The ghosts always end up punking pac-man, and you cannot hunt every duck.

Other than that, yeah, I can't think of a whole lot.

Clearly you aren't Billy Mitchell playing Pac-man, or my father playing Duck Hunt sitting all casual way back on the couch just poppin ducks like it aint no thing.

 

[WhiteFangofWhoa]

Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater.
Big Boss has lost his innocence. The American branch of the Philosophers gained control of the legacy, and will become the far more ruthless Patriots.

Final Fantasy XII, kind of.
Vayne died, but with your help he succeeded in his goal of breaking the Occuria's grip on the history of man. The Empire (tm) was not destroyed or even reduced, merely given a less warlike Emperor.

Mega Man Zero 2.
Again the villain died, but not before he killed Mega Man X, tricked half the resistance army into a suicide mission, and unleashed the Dark Elf, who (unwillingly) causes a near-genocide in the next game and is the signal for the two most evil beings in the entire franchise to emerge into the light.

Lots of 'bad endings' in games, but it would take all day to list those. Could probably find some more in prequels like Halo: Reach or Crisis Core.

 

[Chronologist]

Spoiler

Divinity 2: The Dragon Knight Saga. Your entire goal throughout the game has been to bring the Big Bad's wife back from the dead, because they are cursed so that one is always in hell while the other is alive. Thus, reviving her would kill the otherwise nigh-omnipotent Big Bad. At the end of the game you find out that she's been manipulating you the entire time, and instead of him getting thrown into hell for all eternity, YOU are. Cue the implied destruction of the world. It was so poorly received that they had to create an expansion just to ret-con this ending. I was honestly shocked at this ending, because not only is it one where the villains win, but the world is actually WORSE OFF because of the protagonist's actions.

 

[Smithnikov_v1legacy]

Hotline Miami 2.

I was a little sad since there's virtually no player agency in how the whole sad saga finally ends in

Spoiler

one massive nuclear attack after an off screen character's actions that the player has nothing to do with.

Not a big fan of nihilistic endings, even if guys as awesome as Dennaton, the men I consider the greatest dev team going today, do it.

 

[gsilver]

Lisa

Spoiler

Buzzo gets exactly what he wants: the complete and total destruction of the player character and the death of most of what remains of humanity

Spoiler

Of course, in the sequel/DLC, he realizes that this wasn't what he really wanted: He wanted to make things *right* which was impossible.

 

[CaitSeith]

Spoiler: Mass Effect 3 (extended ending)

Mass Effect 3 (extended ending), if you refuse to make the choice, or you shoot the "god-child", you get an ending where the Reapers win, and the only vestige from your crew is a beacon and Liara's recording with the Crucible blueprints.

No matter what you choose, you choose it on their terms

That too (if you see an awful tri-flavor Deux Ex Machina as the antagonist).

Like Deus Ex (or 2 or HR)

Dude, spoilers!

Just kidding... in part. I haven't played any of those three (they are still in my backlog), so I can't tell how awful they are compared to ME3.

 

[FalloutJack]

But as you're trying to harvest brains, the humans are trying to stop you. They "antagonize" you, if you will.

Like being slapped by wet paper. I know what you're trying to say, but I'm the one terrorizing the cities and destroying the humans, and they're not evil. My man Crypto is an invader from space with no viable authority who has killed, destroyed, humiliated, broken governments, become President (illegally), fed humanity to itself, and committed genocide on a competing villain race who wanted the Earth to themselves. He's also a wisecracking, hostile-tempered, Jack Nicholson expy. Who's the antagonist?

Snip

This is why I'm saying you're splitting hairs. Because the act of doing so leaves you at odds with a hybrid example. The reversal of roles can, will, and does happen. The issue is point of view. The villain is most-definitely the antagonist no matter what position he's in, because those poor people he's murdering by the thousands are certainly the victims of some antagonizing behavior. DAS may be about saving the Furon race, but we all know that Crypto is in it for the funsies. He LIKES messing with people.

Incidentally, I'm gonna add the Saints to the list, from Saint's Row games. There is no way that they're anything but bad, no matter how much competition they cut down along the way. Johnny Gat lives to antagonize and I run over thousands of people every time I play. At best, characters like this are technically protagonist, in like name only. They are the bad guys and they antagonize. Case closed.

 

[Wdbisl]

Persona 2 Innocent Sin. This is kinda hard to explain especially since I watched a let's play a long time ago, but you find out your whole party are basically pons between Philemon and Nyarlathotep. Basically Philemon and Nyarlathstep are manifestations of humanity's opposing feelings. Philemon explains that their being tested to see if humans can find a higher purpose while holding contradictory feelings. Nyarlathotep wins by killing a party member and fulfilling a prophesy; the whole world is destroyed. Philemon offers the party a chance to change everything by never allowing them to meet as children and erasing all their memories. Before he does this you have two dialog choices of either thanking Philemon for doing this or to hit him. Afterword it ends with the opening of the game with no one knowing each other. It does have a sequel called eternal punishment, but I won't say anything about that one.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

But as you're trying to harvest brains, the humans are trying to stop you. They "antagonize" you, if you will.

Like being slapped by wet paper. I know what you're trying to say, but I'm the one terrorizing the cities and destroying the humans, and they're not evil. My man Crypto is an invader from space with no viable authority who has killed, destroyed, humiliated, broken governments, become President (illegally), fed humanity to itself, and committed genocide on a competing villain race who wanted the Earth to themselves. He's also a wisecracking, hostile-tempered, Jack Nicholson expy. Who's the antagonist?

Snip

This is why I'm saying you're splitting hairs. Because the act of doing so leaves you at odds with a hybrid example. The reversal of roles can, will, and does happen. The issue is point of view. The villain is most-definitely the antagonist no matter what position he's in, because those poor people he's murdering by the thousands are certainly the victims of some antagonizing behavior. DAS may be about saving the Furon race, but we all know that Crypto is in it for the funsies. He LIKES messing with people.

Incidentally, I'm gonna add the Saints to the list, from Saint's Row games. There is no way that they're anything but bad, no matter how much competition they cut down along the way. Johnny Gat lives to antagonize and I run over thousands of people every time I play. At best, characters like this are technically protagonist, in like name only. They are the bad guys and they antagonize. Case closed.

Efficacy isn't how you determine the antagonist. Neither is morality. If you have a story where both sides are good or both sides are evil, your method wouldn't work to determine the antagonist. The antagonist is defined as the force opposed to the protagonist, which is who we follow as the audience.