Why do some stories end without the good guy winning?

It might be part of a symbolic or metaphorical representation. Or perhaps it's just a random design decision to add an element of surprise or mystery to the cartoon.

There could be various reasons. Maybe the setting is such that shoes aren't necessary, or it's a way to show his carefree or unique nature. It could also be a visual cue for something specific in the story.

It could be to add complexity and surprise. Making a seemingly good character turn bad shakes up the plot and keeps readers engaged.

Sometimes it's to add a twist and make the story more interesting. It challenges the usual expectations and keeps viewers on their toes.

Well, 'The End' is like a final stamp on a story. It's a clear and unambiguous statement that tells us the tale is over. It's a common and recognizable way to wrap things up and leave no room for confusion about whether there might be more to come.

There could be various reasons. Maybe the author lost inspiration or faced creative blocks.

I think it might be because 30 marks a certain milestone or it's a tradition within that particular news organization. It's hard to say for sure without knowing more about their internal policies.

Sometimes, it's a way to shock the reader and make a stronger impact. Starting at the end adds an element of surprise and makes the story more memorable.

Sometimes, the meeting of lovers marks the fulfillment of a central goal or theme. After that, there might not be enough material to sustain the story without it feeling forced or losing its charm.

Not too often. It's a risky move for a story. But when done well, it can make for a really interesting and thought-provoking plot. It challenges our assumptions and makes us question our notions of good and bad.