Why doesn't Batman just make a non-lethal gun?

Originally posted by fascistcrusader
We're discussing characters, its 4 to 2. Neo prefers Marvel characters so he should be included on the Marvel side of the vote.

No. We were talking about preferring DC in general. That's your quote I replied to.

Originally posted by fascistcrusader
He3's not exactly invicncible if that power can be taken away by a norma human like Bruce Wayne if he has a piece of kryptonite. That makes him a bit useless, now doesn't it, kind of like having poison darts that all you enemies are immune to.

Oh yeah, now "not being invincible" makes a bad character? And no, it doesn't really make him useless, as can be seen by the many, many Comics where he achieves something...so that's bullshit-

Originally posted by fascistcrusader
Characters like Potlegalization Man, KeepourboysinIraq Man and Wonder Woman are pretty shallow. In my opinion shallowness and political pandering make for a bad character.

You do realize that there are women that are quite focussed on Women's rights and are vocal feminists. To think that one of those women could be superpowered and how that would be is hardly shallow. Especially cause her background story explains it quite well. I don't really care for Wonder Woman myself, just don't like most of her stories (they can be quite good sometimes), but to call her a bad character again is just your opinion...it doesn't universally make a bad character at all.

Originally posted by fascistcrusader

Plastic Man, interesting? Bwahahahaha! Reed is an extremely interesting character, having super intellect, an interesting personality, and the stretchy thing. Plastic only has 1 out of 3 of those.

Opinion. Plastic Man is not lame to me and he's not lame to his fans. And again, not being super intelligent is not a sign of lameness.

Originally posted by fascistcrusader
Oh no, not the dreaded ALL CAPS! Once again, plastic man is Richards sans the intellect and interesting persona, that is lame. And I never said Marvel didn 't have crappy characters, only that their crappy characters aren't big name players, while DC has one great franchise with the rest of it being quite boring.

He's not. He's Richards with an interesting personality, and without the stupid "he's so awesome smart that everything works out for him". (but again, it's just opinion)

Originally posted by fascistcrusader
Why don't you go to a local shopping center and ask people who their favorite superhero is. I can almost guarantee you the only DC characters you'll here are Supes and Bats.

Yeah, those probably 500 times more often than any DC (oh, see what I did there, invent a scenario and pretend I know it's outcome)

Originally posted by fascistcrusader
Its not really debatable. We can compare these things via factors like popularity, and using that we can see that Marvel is more well liked among the general populace and the vast majority of comic book fans I know.

Prove it already. As far as I know Marvel and DCs sales go back and forth over time, who is winning right know I am not sure, but it doesn't really matter. Cause you are arguing that DC characters are silly, not that they are less liked.

Originally posted by fascistcrusader
My personal preference is based on universal factors such as character depth and likability. While you can hold any opinion you like, there are objective factors to consider. Aquaman is almost universally mocked for a reason.

Haha, right, and mine is based on random choice. Aquaman is mocked because he's superpowers are weak (Namor probably would be if he was better known) and his costume was kinda gay. Not because his character lacks depths, it a) doesn't and b) people don't ****ing know anything about Aquaman beyond "Haha, he talks to fish and wears Orange".

Originally posted by fascistcrusader
Go forth and ask everyone, they'll tell you. Also, consider that Marvel has a whole lot more heroes that are widely recognized. Most people have never heard of major DC characters like the Green Lantern, Plastic Man, etc, while A large number of Marvel characters are household names.

Could we stop with the arguments at popularity. It has no point.

Originally posted by fascistcrusader
And unluckily for you, people tend to prefer the better product.

Hahaha, you are delusional. I notice your avatar and sig....so...Titanic better than Star Wars, is it?

OMG...

Personally, I prefer greatly Marvel universe than DC universe for numerous reasons (characters, mood, concepts, etc...) but I don't denigrate DC because Superman, Batman, Green Lantern, The Flash, etc... are superheroes of my childhood.

The most important isn't to know if Marvel is better than DC and vice versa, the most important is to feel pleasure reading a good story whichever the editor.

Originally posted by Bardamu
OMG...

Personally, I prefer greatly Marvel universe than DC universe for numerous reasons (characters, mood, concepts, etc...) but I don't denigrate DC because Superman, Batman, Green Lantern, The Flash, etc... are superheroes of my childhood.

The most important isn't to know if Marvel is better than DC and vice versa, the most important is to feel pleasure reading a good story whichever the editor.

I agree with that.

No. We were talking about preferring DC in general. That's your quote I replied to.

If we're speaking in general then why have we been discussing nothing but characters?

Oh yeah, now "not being invincible" makes a bad character? And no, it doesn't really make him useless, as can be seen by the many, many Comics where he achieves something...so that's bullshit-

Yeah, because he sure has stopped Lex Luthor once and for all. Isn't it strange that Superman is so incredibly powerful but his enemy is simply a bald business man, and he can't hurt him because of a little rock?

You do realize that there are women that are quite focussed on Women's rights and are vocal feminists. To think that one of those women could be superpowered and how that would be is hardly shallow. Especially cause her background story explains it quite well. I don't really care for Wonder Woman myself, just don't like most of her stories (they can be quite good sometimes), but to call her a bad character again is just your opinion...it doesn't universally make a bad character at all.

I shudder to think of a screeching owl like Gloria Steinem developing superpowers, ughh.

And to defend a character you yourself find bad, that's just silly. Would you defend a character like AIDSawarenesss man or DrillANWR man?

Opinion. Plastic Man is not lame to me and he's not lame to his fans. And again, not being super intelligent is not a sign of lameness.

It is when you have no other useful powers. Plastic man is a terribly silly concept, Marvel took it and gave it a purpose.

He's not. He's Richards with an interesting personality, and without the stupid "he's so awesome smart that everything works out for him". (but again, it's just opinion)

He's useless, which explains his small fanbase. Reed, on the other hand, is the source of many significant discoveries and creations in the Marvel universe. Plastic Man still just stretches.

Yeah, those probably 500 times more often than any DC (oh, see what I did there, invent a scenario and pretend I know it's outcome)

You might think you're pretending, but you're close to the truth. I don't a single person who has a favorite superhero from DC that isn't suopes or bats. In all my years of discussing this, with people at my old middle school, then my old high school, now in my college, at religious functions, etc, no one has ever said green lantern, aquaman, plastic man, wonder woman, etc is my favorite superhero, and this includes a group of hundreds of people. Online its a similar story, the only DC characters that are consistently ranked as favorites are Superman and Batman.

Hahaha, you are delusional. I notice your avatar and sig....so...Titanic better than Star Wars, is it?

It might be more well enjoyed than the theatrical run of A New Hope, but the franchise in total makes Titanic look minuscule.

I agree with that.

As do I, actually when you get down to it nothing about comics is important, but its fun to discuss the pros and cons of Marvel and DC.

To get back on point...

May I please draw your attention to Batman #0 (Oct 1994). Bruce Wayne has recovered the Mantle of the Bat from Jean Paul Valley. He is in the Bat cave:

"Some things, here in the cave at least, have changed."

"His forensic equipment lies smashed and swept aside, replaced by a shooting gallery."

"And whether the targets were designed for Bat-blades or bullets, the very notion of such a gallery strikes him as a perversion of every ideal he has sought to honor and hone..."

"He is reminded, in a red haze, of the gun."

"The hated shattering gun..."

The above describes perfectly, to me, why Bruce Wayne will not allow Batman to use a gun to fight crime.

All of Marvel's uninteresting characters were probably the ones Marvel, themselve's created. Their well known characters are likely just rip-offs of Dc's and Image's characters.

Parts of Deadpool look like they were ripped off from Spawn and changed abit.

Originally posted by The Heap
All of Marvel's uninteresting characters were probably the ones Marvel, themselve's created. Their well known characters are likely just rip-offs of Dc's and Image's characters.

Parts of Deadpool look like they were ripped off from Spawn and changed abit.

Originally posted by The Heap
All of Marvel's uninteresting characters were probably the ones Marvel, themselve's created. Their well known characters are likely just rip-offs of Dc's and Image's characters.

Parts of Deadpool look like they were ripped off from Spawn and changed abit.

1. Deadpool came before Spawn.
2. They are absolutely nothing alike in any way, shape, or form.

Originally posted by fascistcrusader
If we're speaking in general then why have we been discussing nothing but characters?

We were discussing characters. But this particular part was about you saying that a majority in this thread prefers Marvel. So we were discussing that.

Originally posted by fascistcrusader
Yeah, because he sure has stopped Lex Luthor once and for all. Isn't it strange that Superman is so incredibly powerful but his enemy is simply a bald business man, and he can't hurt him because of a little rock?

Actually, Superman can't hurt Luthor because Superman doesn't break the law. Not because of Kryptonite.

Originally posted by fascistcrusader
I shudder to think of a screeching owl like Gloria Steinem developing superpowers, ughh.

And to defend a character you yourself find bad, that's just silly. Would you defend a character like AIDSawarenesss man or DrillANWR man?

Hmm, I guess I would if the person said NAACPman sucks cause he's a negro (cause that would be a stupid reason). Besides, I said she can be well written, she just usually isn't. Similar to X-Men and Spider Man, imo.

Originally posted by fascistcrusader
It is when you have no other useful powers. Plastic man is a terribly silly concept, Marvel took it and gave it a purpose.

Marvel made it a more popular character, so? Doesn't make Plastic Man a bad character. Is Rorschach a worse character because ****ing Captain America is more popular?

Originally posted by fascistcrusader
He's useless, which explains his small fanbase. Reed, on the other hand, is the source of many significant discoveries and creations in the Marvel universe. Plastic Man still just stretches.

So?

Originally posted by fascistcrusader
You might think you're pretending, but you're close to the truth. I don't a single person who has a favorite superhero from DC that isn't suopes or bats. In all my years of discussing this, with people at my old middle school, then my old high school, now in my college, at religious functions, etc, no one has ever said green lantern, aquaman, plastic man, wonder woman, etc is my favorite superhero, and this includes a group of hundreds of people. Online its a similar story, the only DC characters that are consistently ranked as favorites are Superman and Batman.

Well, it's hard to compete with Batman (since that's factually the best character of either Marvel or DC). But I personally quite like Green Lantern and Flash. Oh and I still want stats, please.

Originally posted by fascistcrusader
It might be more well enjoyed than the theatrical run of A New Hope, but the franchise in total makes Titanic look minuscule.

So, Titanic is a better movie than A New Hope? Titanic is a better movie than Empire Strikes Back?

Originally posted by fascistcrusader
As do I, actually when you get down to it nothing about comics is important, but its fun to discuss the pros and cons of Marvel and DC.

Meh, important is hard to define really. Quite subjective.

I can't but notice that you didn't produce any of those stats you were talking of, what's that all about?

Originally posted by Bardock42

So, Titanic is a better movie than A New Hope? Titanic is a better movie than Empire Strikes Back?

Originally posted by Almighty Bauer
It depends. Are you a middle-aged woman?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Nah, not me. Fascistcrusader might be though.

Originally posted by Almighty Bauer
I'm sure he/ she/ it will thank you for that... compliment...

Originally posted by Bardock42
Oh, I didn't mean it to be a compliment at all.

Originally posted by Almighty Bauer
Yeah, funnily enough, I worked that out all by myself!

With your mind?

Originally posted by Bardock42
With your mind?

Originally posted by Almighty Bauer
Nah. 'Course not.

You are pulling my leg.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
[B]Yes, from personal experience with dealing with fellas like you BH.

... wat?

Have you gone mad? is this a game?

This is the internet.

I'd take your opinion seriously if you made an ounce of sense.

I guess the feelings mutual, then.

Well that was a waste of a reply.

Ah, I see.

I gotta tell you, though. I was sort of skeptical about the whole Batman's moral code... until I saw TDK. That really answered some questions about it. So, although it sort've annoys me in cases, I can still accept his attitude towards not killing people.

But he is more brutal, dark, and overall questionable in comparison to most superheroes.

TDK made it worse, imo. he's not afraid to throw people off buildings and shit yet he can't "kill" someone.

Well, that's not new to me.
I mean, why not keep it a discussion and not an insult contest?

That wouldn't be a very *******'ish thing to do, would it?

rubber bullets?

Originally posted by NonSensi-Klown
[BTDK made it worse, imo. he's not afraid to throw people off buildings and shit yet he can't "kill" someone.
[/B]

I'm going to assume you're referring to Harvey Dent, in which case I will simply point out that I and others have had this argument a thousand times and actually Batman didn't have a lot of choice. Please expand on what "shit" means in this context.