Have DC and Marvel superheroes outworn their welcome? | |
Comic books are altogether a different medium than video games. And, like you said, the famous superheroes of DC and Marvel have mostly been around for much longer than Mario or Link. Superman was the first of them, and he's been around for what, 70+ years now? These characters are true cultural icons to level where video game characters are little more than passing fads compared to them. Personally I don't find the two situations to be similar at all, for a few reasons: 1) The comic book heroes are actual fleshed out characters with actual narratives, personalities, and histories. Mario, Link, and Kirby have practically zero personality short of "Oh no I fell down a pit!" They never seem to move beyond basic reactions to their situations; they are blank slates, which don't tend to have as much impact. People can say "I like Superman because he fights for humanity even though he's not human, he believes in good, and he never gives up!" The most you can really say about Kirby is "I like Kirby because he's pink and adorable!" 2) Actual narratives and storylines. I'm sure most Nintendo fans are gawking at me, leaping for their keyboards to type how Nintendo games have totally deep and complex storylines, but from what I've seen, they really don't. They may have a few changes and add a couple of new characters, but the story always seems to be the same, just in a different location. Mario fights Bowser to save the princess, but this time IN SPAAAAACE!! Link fights Ganon to save the princess but this time he's a WOLLLLLLF!!! Kirby fights King Dedede but this time... no, it's pretty much the same as last time. I'm not saying these make the games bad, but they don't make them very substantial. Comic storylines, for better or worse, are usually very substantial. 3) Comics HAVE gone through losses in popularity, several times. After the Golden Age of comics, comics were declining in sales big time until Barry Allen (the 2nd Flash) started the Silver age and kicked sales back up. So don't assume that just because comic book characters have been around for a long time means we've never lost interest, because we have, and they had to CHANGE THINGS to get us back. Sooner or later Nintendo will probably have to change too if they want to survive. For now, their rather large amounts of dedicated fans is enough, but I doubt that will always be the case. That's how I see it. If it matters, I played Nintendo games sometimes when I was a kid, but I didn't "grow up" with them like most Nintendo fans did. I mostly had Sega systems until I got my Xbox, and for handhelds all I ever really played was Pokémon. EDIT: I just want to point this out:
Pretty sure you've only been waiting since you completed Twilight Princess for the 6th or 7th time. That's a far-cry from "forever," friend. ;D | |
They must be worn out because two of the most wanted and anticipated movies this year are the The dark knight rises and The Avengers, oh wait that would mean they arent. Mario and Link however do need to step aside for awhile and give some other nintendo franchises some sun, like pikmin, wheres my pikmin. It was pikmins 10 year anniversary and did it get a game? No Zelda did, again. Doesnt help that I dont care for either Mario or Link as characters or their games(play). | |
For the core audience definitely not. This material has only been present for the last six or seven years on this level and is very fresh in comparison to other common themes drained dry by Hollywood. | |
DC, sure. DC sucks ass, and by god do they know it. Marvel, however, is just fantastic. | |
For a minute I thought this was about their films. | |
I read a fair number of comics, and I do feel that Marvel and DC are treading water a fair bit. They each have characters that have remained popular for well over half a century, and not without good reason, because these characters are noble or heroic or relatably flawed or whatnot. My issue is that these characters have starred in a book at least once a month for thousands of issues, and only so much character growth can happen before you're out of ideas. Then reboots happen, but these reboots show the same characters which will generally eventually return to their pre-reboot life. This sort of stagnation could be offset by introducing new and interesting characters, and I think that Marvel and DC regularly introduce characters who, given time, could be as good as Batman or Spiderman, but I feel like Marvel/DC are less willing to take risks on these new characters today. Back in the 60s, X-men was put on hiatus after about 60 issues because it wasn't very popular. After a few years, Marvel chose not to cancel it and came back with the all-new, all-different line-up and things took off from there. With the lower readership these days, I feel like the big names aren't in a position to be patient with a lesser title, so they just shuffle around the big name characters and throw in tie-ins and crossovers left and right to keep people interested, even if storytelling and characterization are not great as a result. For example, there was a New X-men offshoot that followed the lives of the students at the X-men school and it had a big cast and generally enjoyable characters and it mixed traditional adventuring with some slower stuff about what it's like to be one of the last remaining mutants and just how they lived, and I liked it a lot. With poor readership and the constant flux of the X-men universe, these characters were all relegated to background roles and generally ignored once the X-men school was closed, while a new, inferior (in my book) generation of young X-men was introduced for us to read about. I feel like the superhero story has been examined and expanded and subverted to death, to the point where my favorite stories are the ones where the characters may all be superpowered, but they sit around and do normal things and only occasionally does the superpowered aspect come into play. At this point, I realize that I like comics more than I like superhero stories and branch out into smaller companies with more focus on storytelling, but I think that Marvel and DC still have a lot of potential in their characters and their creative teams, and readers should support them as they take risks to deliver fresher ideas instead of clinging to the umpteenth fight between Spiderman and Dr Octopus | |
I actually think that comics are currently in another golden age at the moment, and have been since Civil War/Sinestro Corps respectively. Plus, Hollywood is on a winning streak right now with superhero movies. | |
I never welcomed them in the first place :P. The only 2 superhero films I would call good would be Unbrakeable(which isn't by DC or Marvel, it's an original screeplay) and Spiderman 2. As for the comics, I tried reading an X-Men comic once, but it was so terrible that I stopped reading. | |
It's been said that Mario is as recognizable now as Mickey Mouse.
Right, and thus surely more re-hashed and stale.
Right, which is why your criticism of Nintendo characters completely falls flat. This is not a video game. Not all video games are jRPGs. Not all characters need all that character development you speak of. They are video games, not comic books or movies. And characters like Mario and Link have just as much character development as icons like Mickey Mouse. If not more so. And if you've ever played Skyward Sword, Zelda has a pretty decent amount of depth.
And Nintendo is selling as many copies as ever right now. Despite some gamers claiming that that gamers don't care about Nintendo anymore. Super Mario Galaxy has sold almost as many copies as Super Mario 64. With Super Mario 64 selling a little over 11 million. And Super Mario Galaxy selling a little over 10 million. | |
I feel that they are seriously running out of things to do, and there really isn't anything that can be done to fix that. I think we need to see more superheroes, like new stand alone stories regarding new superheroes. inFAMOUS was a start and we need to establish new things more, I'm tired of "Batman punches the crazy person then acts really angry." | |
The problem here is with the qualifiers of this question. The Nintendo franchises aren't stale because they're old, they're stale because they have little new to offer people in each 'new' installment. We see exactly the same recurring characters, acting in exactly the same way, doing exactly the same things to achieve exactly the same goal. Now in Comic Books characters change, a lot. People die, get crippled, gain new powers, loose their powers, make new alligences, new enemies. Each new story is designed to be different from the previous one, that should keep them fresh as there will always be more stories to tell.
I'll just quote you because I think your points need to be shown again, they hit the nail directly on the head. Comic books haven't gotten stale in 60+ years of writing because they are literary works that rely on the interactions of hundreds of fully fleshed out characters with independent philosophies, motives, and personalities, in millions of situations that can be as variable as a universal apocalypse or a bank robbery. Within these stories we see character arcs, exploration of philosophy, humour, action, love. Videogames are different. They rely on gameplay as much (if not more) than plot or character development. Mario is practically a placeholder in most of his games, in fact in many games you can choose to play as Luigi - a completely different character, and it won't alter the plot a single bit. So that is pretty much zero character development. Add to that the same plotline rehashed religiously (save the princess!) and almost identical gameplay (oh, this version of Mario is different because you get a water pistol) And it gets very stale very fast. Slap a $60 pricetag on it, and people get very critical if they think it's just the last game with as little change as possible to exploit them. | |
But video games don't NEED plot. New Nintendo games often add new gamplay mechanics of different varieties. New Nintendo titles have a wealth of new things to offer players with new titles. As much as comics books do. | |
Sorry, But I got to ask, are effeminate teen boys in even more predictable scenarios more entertaining somehow? OT: However if you considered Marvel just before that acquisition, Marvel was always more centered around teenage sensibilities. DC did this weird balancing act of aiming for the younger kids and preteens while also courting the young adult crowd. Marvel even after the House of M, Still has entirely too large of a stable of chars, while DC has entirely too large of a stable of story arcs. (seriously, I like batman and all but how many books can you produce about him, the bat family or the rogues gallery?) Marvels chars on an individual level are much weaker than DCs, But DCs chars end up doing more illogical /eyerolling /facepalming things. However I dont really think they have overstayed their welcome. Comic books have always been centered for kids teens and young adults. So with the exception of the rabid fanboy they are designed with the purpose that you will grow out of them. So by the time you get to the point of taking them too seriously you should actually be moving onward to other things. It is what it is. | |
Well, at the guys are hot and they don't wear spandex.:P Franken Fran is my kind of comic, personally. It can be predictable sometimes, but not painfully so. Also, the lack of need for constant world saving adventure in manga is a lot of what brought me in. Not just the fact I never did want to see a bunch of spandex clad musclemen and ridiculous curvy women go out and fight crime or save the earth time after time. I'd rather read a good, actionless romance many times. Or a just plain horror story. Also, I don't think "too many characters" was ever a problem with Marvel. I think it was where they excelled. Instead of rehashing Batman and Superman all day, they were being creative and creating new characters. | |
If comics were the same as they were in the 30s then yeah they'd be really really stale. Of course anyone with eyes can see that Action Comics #1 and the newest issue of Batman and night and day. A sif any other medium, if you continue to do new things and change things up you can reinvent yourself and "innovate". The same basic idea, alien from space with superpowers, can be told in a plethora of different way and can lead to numerous different stories. As with games, I feel that so long as you do new things with the same idea you never grow "old" or "stale." As comics have changed over their lifetime in order to meet the changing world, so too can any character. | |
You're just saying things that have no weight behind them, so excuse me for doubting your claims. Nobody really cares about Mickey Mouse anymore because he's literally been the same character for a century. That's why he's been delegated to a toddler's show and NONE of his programs beyond that ever seem to pan out. The last one I can even remember was House of Mouse, and that show was not terribly good outside of the Goofy segments. He's nothing more than a mascot now; it doesn't matter how "recognizable" he is. And "it's been said" is not a proper source, or a source at all. Length of time in existence doesn't automatically equal a greater level of staleness. Characters still popular today like Greek and Norse mythological figures and Sherlock Holmes have been around for a hell of a lot longer than Superman. And like I've said, the comic book heroes HAVE been refreshed, reimagined, and sometimes replaced before multiple times. They DO get old, just like everything else. Superman is NOT NEARLY the same character he was when first printed. I certainly don't think I was criticizing the Nintendo characters. I was stating a fact. Blank slates are what they are. They have a few mannerisms and yells for when they fall down pits, but they never change. They never learn. They never SPEAK. I agree, though, that they have had the same amount of character development as Mickey Mouse, which is to say almost none. I'm not, repeat, NOT saying this is necessarily a bad thing. It's just not as substantial as actual characters with actual narratives. If you like them, that's fine, but don't try and pretend to like them for things they clearly are not. And I'm not sure your point on sales is totally valid either. I'm sure it's true, but I'm also sure that the lower price and higher accessibility of the Wii which led to many more sales had a certain degree of influence on the number of Mario games sold. My point isn't that Nintendo sucks or their characters are bad or that you should feel bad for being a fan. My point is simply that comparing them to comic book superheroes doesn't really work. | |
Comic books go through regular reboots. This can be a change in their powers, a replacement character taking up the mantle of a particular hero, a revival of past incarnations of a hero, or any combination thereof. One of the most notable from recent history is Blackest Night, when many of the deceased DC heroes were revived and the rules governing the Green Lantern Corp. were drastically altered (they can kill now.) Those reboots keep the heroes fresh. Mario and Link, while they may get different stories, are always the same basic character. Superheroes are constantly evolving and changing. There have been several different Earth Green Lanterns, Batmans, Robins, and even teams. | |
For the most part you're correct about Kirby and Mario. But the Legend of Zelda storylines are pretty dynamic. There is a basic formula that boils down to "Link fights Ganon to save Zelda" but there are several examples of games that toss out the formula completely like Majora's mask (Where you are using time travel to delay and hopefull stop the destruction of the area from a cursed moon) among a few others. It's true the majority of LoZ games share the 'save the princess' model, but you shouldn't disregard those in the series that try something completely new. And this particular series is known for trying something a bit new all of the time, even if you're still link passing through dungeons. On another note, I would argue that Nintendo's characters could potentially have more lasting appeal. The problem with investing yourself to Superman or Spiderman is that their comic canon goes so far back that you would need almost encyclopedic knowledge in order to understand exactly who they are. It's true that a lot of people only like Spiderman because of his spider powers or Superman because of his powers, but if you want to understand their 'personalities' and such that people rant on about in relation to characters you better be ready to get your wiki and study decades of comics, because otherwise they are just as simple as Mario or Kirby. Nintendo characters on the other hand may not have lots of complexity, but that works in Nintendo's favor. If you see and want to understand Superman's character, you'll need to study for it. But just Mario's appearance says a lot about him. If you play one level in Super Mario 64 and see Mario's Mannerisms you have a good idea of the kind of character he is. This also makes him easy to identify with. If you don't study Superman extensively, then he's just "A guy who fights bad guys with lots of super powers". You don't need to study Mario to understand and connect with him in some way. | |
I think that the comic industries are too afraid to introduce new characters and KEEP them in the story. Personally, I am getting tired of Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, and all the rest because they never change. Batman Beyond was amazing because we got to see a new Batman. The New Teen Titans was a hit because it introduced new characters, mainly Raven and Starfire. Rebooting the entire DC universe would have been the perfect time to change things up. Maybe there isn't even a Batman now. Instead, we still have the main characters, just slightly different. They're not going to end up being anything special I'm afraid. Of course, trying to change characters (Batman gets married, Spider Man puts down his mask, the X-men are finally treated like equals) causes untold amounts of rage because it doesn't stay true to the source material. As such, we are stuck with never changing characters, popular heroes and villains that never stay dead, and a world that is never truly endangers, but is never truly safe either. Sure, we get alternate universes and different timelines, but the main universe, the main timeline, nothing ever changes forever. | |
even if they are the same charachters they go through different writers styles and Ideas I read comics but I havnt touched any of the superheros except for Batman..they just dont interest me | |
No, because every so often the comics change a bit and come out with a new take on the superheroes. I mean look at how batman has gone from the whole hippy Adam West/ Golden age to the dark gritty era that we have now. Or the take of superman in Smallville. | |
no. Without Marvel and Dc we have what to support the industry? Dark Horse? Image? I know there are a bunch of companies out there, but none of them produce the amount, and scope of material Marvel and DC do. We NEED them for the industry to have any legs at all. I haven't been in a comic book store in over 2 years, but i do follow comics online on CBR and such. I think the issue with Marvel and DC is that things seem a bit stale. No one is willing to take a shot and stick with a new character or group. They just seem to give existing characters and groups MORE books... i get a bunch of X-Books, but just how many spiderman/batman/superman books do we need? I appreciate smaller companies trying to break the mold, but with those two juggernauts out there, it's a pretty thick glass ceiling for new ideas/companies. | |
DC, maybe. Marvel, no. Marvel stories are already somewhat relatable - every character is flawed in one way or another. They're not the outdated paragons of good that DC characters are. The one marvel hero that was anything like the DC counterparts turned out to be a schizophrenic druggy. With Marvel, if a character needs to change, they change, whether that be a change in team status, location, motivations, whatever. With DC, when a character needs to change, first their entire world or heck the universe must change so that the character can stay pretty much the same, just a few years younger/older. Any Marvel hero that's not Avengers or Avengers - affiliated is automatically a domestic terrorist until they prove otherwise. This by itself draws fast comparisons to the current political climate. | |
Well...there's some truth to that, IMHO. DC recently rebooted to start eveyrthing agian from the ground up, because the existing stories were rather complicated and convoluted. Unfortunately, they erased all the social progress made in this time, and gave everyone who wasn't as close as possibly to straight white male a good kicking. I've never found the old names that interesting, TBH. The bat-family> Batman, the super____s > superman etc. And even then, most of the stories are just waffle. Maybe entertaining waffle, but very rarely with any great depth to them, though there are a number of exceptions. | |
Yep. That seems to be the case, for sure. They certainly didn't make CYBORG into a founding member of the JUSTICE LEAGUE this go around. And they never created two all new members of the Teen Titans named Bunker who was both Hispanic and gay and Skitter who is black, not to mention Solstice, who is Indian. Nor does Steel get the spotlight in several Action Comics issues, to the point where it's basically half Superman and half John Henry Irons. And they also never gave Static his own series (though it was cancelled for low sales, I believe). And of course they never invented Batman Inc., a highly praised series that features "Batmen" from all around the world of various races and cultures like Nightrunner (a Sunni Muslim) in Paris or Batwing (an African) in the Congo. Because that would all be CRAZY. And that's not even all that I could have mentioned. Please, dude, be more ignorant. I'd love it if everyone on Earth was as easy to prove absolutely fucking wrong as you right now. | |
Ok, I was exagerating there, they do have a number of people who aren't straight white males, but the otherwhelming majority leans that way more than it did before the reboot. And don't get me started on Voodoo or Waller or Starfire. Did they bring Batman Inc back? I thought the reboot killed that off. | |
Yea, they are bringing it back I believe next month. | |
I remember in Nintendo topics a while back, the Nintendo bashers, how anyone can be a Nintendo basher, is beyond me. Said that what's wrong with Nintendo is that they don't make enough "new IP", but instead, keep making Mario games, Zelda games, Pokemon games, and ect.
I couldn't disagree more. I had been waiting forever for Skyward Sword like a great many people.
But either way, it begged the question. If old beloved characters are no longer worthy just because they're old, have been used for years, and are somehow outdated. Doesn't that also apply as much so, if not more, to old Marvel and DC superheroes? DC heroes especially. They're even older than the Marvel stuff.
Have Batman, Superman, Spiderman, the X-Men, and other staples of American comics outstayed their welcome? It is similar or different from Nintendo franchises like Super Mario and Zelda? And why or why not? I'd be curious as to hear some argument for and against old DC and Marvel characters once again. Because if there's anything that's been re-hashed more than Nintendo, it's the DC folks.
Personally, I dropped the stuff when I was young. Not only because I quickly grew tired of them. And I started reading manga instead. Or Western comics without those sorts. It never really was my thing. All these musclebound cheesy dudes and predictable scenarios, I quickly lost interest in it. Oh, and bizarrely square faces, too. I did kind of get into the X-Men at one point, moreso than any other superhero comic staple. They had Jubilee who I always through was awesome. But if that's your niche, that's your niche. I don't think these folks should go away for people who like them.