Originally posted by cdtm
This is a good point, but even Johns isn't immune to editorial mandates.If DC execs say not to chump out Supes, he doesn't get to chump out Supes.
It's not like he has to answer to anyone outside of DiDio and Lee. And let's not kid ourselves, Geoff Johns probably has the most pull out of any single writer in DC right now in terms of "rank". Everyone just lets Morrison do whatever the hell he wants because they know it'll sell.
Originally posted by cdtm
Yeah, if he could have his way Sinestro would've saved the day in Blackest Night and War of the GL's.But that's one case I'd say even his influence falls short.
He may have had Hal get the "final word" in those events, but the fact he made Sinestro the first White Lantern and somehow, impossibly, get re-drafted to the Green Lantern Corps due to his badassery...er, I mean, willpower, says a lot.
I can't even remember the last time Hal cleanly beat Sinestro under his own power since Johns took over. Hell, he probably hasn't.
Anyway, I don't think Johns' was forced to make Superman beat Hal in such a fashion. I think DCnU is trying to give us a more, for lack of a better term, "badass" Superman, and as such, he showed Hal what was up. I just get this vibe that Superman is clearly going to be portrayed above his peers, at least more often, in this canon than in DCU canon.
Meh, comparing skill between street level fighters usually results in an exercise in futility. Unlike strength, speed, or any other factor that can be quantified and weighed against the environment in some fashion, skill is almost always determined by how you fair against anybody that's billed as being 'the best'.
Batman being 'pretty good at everything but not the best at anything (save forensics)' sounds like a nice in writing, but often isn't the case. Batman is often simply the best at whatever he commits himself to, often to the point of ridiculousness.
That being said, there's not a lot of strong arguments to back up the notion that the top streets at Marvel are for some reason or another more skilled than those at DC simply because there are more of them. If the analogy were drawn between the JLA and Avengers trinities, preboot Bats would mentally be the Tony and physically be the Cap, and that's pretty much how I've always seen him. I guess that may be because I see company portrayal as the most valuable tool for determining something intangible and unquantifiable such as skill level for a fictional martial artist.
I guess that's the nature of the beast though.
Originally posted by Existere
Meh, comparing skill between street level fighters usually results in an exercise in futility. Unlike strength, speed, or any other factor that can be quantified and weighed against the environment in some fashion, skill is almost always determined by how you fair against anybody that's billed as being 'the best'.Batman being 'pretty good at everything but not the best at anything (save forensics)' sounds like a nice in writing, but often isn't the case. Batman is often simply the best at whatever he commits himself to, often to the point of ridiculousness.
That being said, there's not a lot of strong arguments to back up the notion that the top streets at Marvel are for some reason or another more skilled than those at DC simply because there are more of them. If the analogy were drawn between the JLA and Avengers trinities, preboot Bats would mentally be the Tony and physically be the Cap, and that's pretty much how I've always seen him. I guess that may be because I see company portrayal as the most valuable tool for determining something intangible and unquantifiable such as skill level for a fictional martial artist.
I guess that's the nature of the beast though.
this view is also very accurate, and one i've echoed in the past. oddly though, i don't find it impossible to reconcile both this view AND srank's. i've used the iconic stature of a character as a reason for believing a character wins OFTEN in the past. many will simply refer to this 'company status' as a euphemistic form of PIS. not me, but many. and i can't even call the view unjustified. i just don't always agree with it. i think that's why i still say bats>danny or dd in terms of pure skill. the notion of who bats is and where he fits in the hierarchy of the company is powerful. srank will say look beyond that at specific feats alone. i think BOTH can be used to view the character in his/her entirety. in fact, i think both NEED to be viewed. 😬
Originally posted by leonidas
srank will say look beyond that at specific feats alone.
Sranks also a pretty big Cap and Wolverine booster, though, and they're at a similar place in Marvels hierarchy as Bats is in DC. If he really looked at feats alone, I don't see how he could downplay Danny Rand so much..
Originally posted by leonidasYeah, and I agree, I think you should take into account as much as you can basically. Determining how a comic would portray a fight isn't really the point of discussion, cause I know that in a comic Batman would last a lot longer against a fully powered Danny Rand than he has any right. But if a fight is set up as a pure contest of skill, there isn't a lot else to fall back on other than icon status.
this view is also very accurate, and one i've echoed in the past. oddly though, i don't find it impossible to reconcile both this view AND srank's. i've used the iconic stature of a character as a reason for believing a character wins OFTEN in the past. many will simply refer to this 'company status' as a euphemistic form of PIS. not me, but many. and i can't even call the view unjustified. i just don't always agree with it. i think that's why i still say bats>danny or dd in terms of pure skill. the notion of who bats is and where he fits in the hierarchy of the company is powerful. srank will say look beyond that at specific feats alone. i think BOTH can be used to view the character in his/her entirety. in fact, i think both NEED to be viewed. 😬
I guess I could argue that Danny without chi probably lacks the strength, speed and durability feats to compete with Bruce, but mostly I'd bet on Batman because I think he's just plain better, and largely that's because he's portrayed in a brighter light in these settings.
srug
Originally posted by cdtm
Sranks also a pretty big Cap and Wolverine booster, though, and they're at a similar place in Marvels hierarchy as Bats is in DC. If he really looked at feats alone, I don't see how he could downplay Danny Rand so much..
the former is debateable--especially logan. the latter? i...really don't know what you're saying there. srank isn't downplaying danny at all. he already said he thought danny>bats. :confusing:
Originally posted by Existere
I guess I could argue that Danny without chi probably lacks the strength, speed and durability feats to compete with Bruce, but mostly I'd bet on Batman because I think he's just plain better, and largely that's because he's portrayed in a brighter light in these settings.srug
and maybe that's unfair to danny, but...... yeah. 👆
Originally posted by Existere
Meh, comparing skill between street level fighters usually results in an exercise in futility. Unlike strength, speed, or any other factor that can be quantified and weighed against the environment in some fashion, skill is almost always determined by how you fair against anybody that's billed as being 'the best'.Batman being 'pretty good at everything but not the best at anything (save forensics)' sounds like a nice in writing, but often isn't the case. Batman is often simply the best at whatever he commits himself to, often to the point of ridiculousness.
That being said, there's not a lot of strong arguments to back up the notion that the top streets at Marvel are for some reason or another more skilled than those at DC simply because there are more of them. If the analogy were drawn between the JLA and Avengers trinities, preboot Bats would mentally be the Tony and physically be the Cap, and that's pretty much how I've always seen him. I guess that may be because I see company portrayal as the most valuable tool for determining something intangible and unquantifiable such as skill level for a fictional martial artist.
I guess that's the nature of the beast though.
Yeah... company portrayal (I'm assuming this means feats?) is virtually 100% what I'm going on. The idea that Batman is the best is %100 fabricated fan nonsense. He isn't the strongest. He isn't the fastest. He isn't the most skilled. When has DC ever portrayed Batman as being the most skilled fighter? Never. The fact is there are numerous accounts of narrative statements from his friends and peers where they have stated someone is more skilled then him and there are few pieces of anecdotal evidence? Where is the Captain America equivalent of Oracle saying Black Canary is more skilled than Bruce, or Nightwing saying Connor is more skilled than Bruce or Dragon saying Bruce is a "talent amateur, ect ect"? Examples like that doesn't exist. Where is the Batman equivalent of him beating Shang-Chi? Where is the Batman equivalent of Shang-Chi's rogue gallery admitting Captain America is more skilled than Shang? Where is the Batman equivalent of Captain America saying Mantis level skills isn't enough to beat him? Ect. With all his gear and equipment the best Batman has ever accomplished is stalemate a top tier martial artist... and most of those examples took place in pre-crisis. Iron Fist has fought Daredevil more times than all the times Batman has fought a top tier martial artist combined... and like I said most of those examples are PC.
Originally posted by leonidas
the former is debateable--especially logan. the latter? i...really don't know what you're saying there. srank isn't downplaying danny at all. he already said he thought danny>bats. :confusing:
He only downplays Danny when it comes to top tier Marvel, like Cap and Wolverine.
I don't see how it's debatable at all, both could be considered flagship characters in Marvel. Cap, especially, will put up a good fight against almost anyone regardless of their feats. Wolverine, he could suffer more from "Worf Effect", but the fact he's usually the "measuring stick" for guys like Deadpool to defeat is testament to his status..
Originally posted by cdtm
He only downplays Danny when it comes to top tier Marvel, like Cap and Wolverine.I don't see how it's debatable at all, both could be considered flagship characters in Marvel. Cap, especially, will put up a good fight against almost anyone regardless of their feats. Wolverine, he could suffer more from "Worf Effect", but the fact he's usually the "measuring stick" for guys like Deadpool to defeat is testament to his status..
What are you talking about? I don't down play Danny, I just know Cap and Wolverine are better than him... because they are.
"Guys like Deadpool" have only beaten Wolverine when he didn't have a healing factor, they had prep, or he took a fall.
Originally posted by srankmissingnin
Yeah... company portrayal (I'm assuming this means feats?) is virtually 100% what I'm going on. The idea that Batman is the best is %100 fabricated fan nonsense. He isn't the strongest. He isn't the fastest. He isn't the most skilled. When has DC ever portrayed Batman as being the most skilled fighter? Never. The fact is there are numerous accounts of narrative statements from his friends and peers where they have stated someone is more skilled then him and there are few pieces of anecdotal evidence? Where is the Captain America equivalent of Oracle saying Black Canary is more skilled than Bruce, or Nightwing saying Connor is more skilled than Bruce or Dragon saying Bruce is a "talent amateur, ect ect"? Examples like that doesn't exist. Where is the Batman equivalent of him beating Shang-Chi? Where is the Batman equivalent of Shang-Chi's rogue gallery admitting Captain America is more skilled than Shang? Where is the Batman equivalent of Captain America saying Mantis level skills isn't enough to beat him? Ect. With all his gear and equipment the best Batman has ever accomplished is stalemate a top tier martial artist... and most of those examples took place in pre-crisis. Iron Fist has fought Daredevil more times than all the times Batman has fought a top tier martial artist combined... and like I said most of those examples are PC.
Back on Alvaro's Battleboard, there was a guy named Cain Marco who used to go on about the "Cap Factor". Basically, anyone who fought Cap, or was on panel with him, would go on about how strong and fast and skilled he is, despite having fought characters of superior stats or skill in the past.
For example, Spider Man gets hit by Cap, and asks him "What are you packing, atom bombs?" Spidey's been hit by guys like Venom, Scorpian, Rhino, Hulk, but he's impressed by Caps hitting power? Or, another time he'll comment on Caps speed, even though he's fought superhumanly quick characters before. More recently, your boy Wolverine talked about how Cap gave him one of the worst beatings of his life, and he's been beaten by class 100's (And even though it was Wayverine, doesn't take away from the fact this is a pretty common occurrence with Cap.)
You're right that Cap gets a lot of praise and hype from other characters, but that doesn't make it proof that he's > anyone in and of itself..
Originally posted by cdtm
He only downplays Danny when it comes to top tier Marvel, like Cap and Wolverine.I don't see how it's debatable at all, both could be considered flagship characters in Marvel. Cap, especially, will put up a good fight against almost anyone regardless of their feats. Wolverine, he could suffer more from "Worf Effect", but the fact he's usually the "measuring stick" for guys like Deadpool to defeat is testament to his status..
in terms of company status, and the way the 'universe' views him, batman has it all over logan. i'm not speaking strictly of 'cash cow-ness'. cap is much closer, but even cap doesn't have the history of batman. bats has been integral to the dcu for what--80 years, give or take??? cap has come to mean approximately the same thing. logan? no way. that is no way is a comparison of the 2 and how they perform IN COMICS. but if we did a marvel trinity, no way logan makes the top 3. the dc trinity has been firm for a very long long time.
Originally posted by leonidas
in terms of company status, and the way the 'universe' views him, batman has it all over logan. i'm not speaking strictly of 'cash cow-ness'. cap is much closer, but even cap doesn't have the history of batman. bats has been integral to the dcu for what--80 years, give or take??? cap has come to mean approximately the same thing. logan? no way. that is no way is a comparison of the 2 and how they perform IN COMICS. but if we did a marvel trinity, no way logan makes the top 3. the dc trinity has been firm for a very long long time.
The Marvel Trinity in terms of in-universe importance is Cap, Thor, and Iron Man.
Originally posted by cdtm
Back on Alvaro's Battleboard, there was a guy named Cain Marco who used to go on about the "Cap Factor". Basically, anyone who fought Cap, or was on panel with him, would go on about how strong and fast and skilled he is, despite having fought characters of superior stats or skill in the past.For example, Spider Man gets hit by Cap, and asks him "What are you packing, atom bombs?" Spidey's been hit by guys like Venom, Scorpian, Rhino, Hulk, but he's impressed by Caps hitting power? Or, another time he'll comment on Caps speed, even though he's fought superhumanly quick characters before.
You're right that Cap gets a lot of praise and hype from other characters, but that doesn't make it proof that he's > anyone in and of itself..
Spider-man survives getting hit by those guys by nature of being fast enough that they only connect with glancing blows, which he mitigates further by rolling with the blow. Captain America has class 2 strength, superhuman combat speed, and flawless technique. It would need to impossible to quantify how hard the guy can hit. Imagine if Mike Tyson could punch as fast as Manny Pacquiao... then imagine if he was 5-10x faster and 5-10x stronger, and about 100 times more skilled and he targeted all his punches at vital areas and pressure points. Cap hits like a tank.
You can ignore all the praise Cap gets if you want, but your still left with the fact that he beats those people.
Originally posted by JakeTheBank
The Marvel Trinity in terms of in-universe importance is Cap, Thor, and Iron Man.
maybe. it would be a good debate. personally i think i would sub tony for spidey. leaving hulk out doesn't feel quite right either though.... 😬
i did a marvel mount rushmore thread in the comicbook section once. it was a fun thread. 🙂
Originally posted by leonidas
in terms of company status, and the way the 'universe' views him, batman has it all over logan. i'm not speaking strictly of 'cash cow-ness'. cap is much closer, but even cap doesn't have the history of batman. bats has been integral to the dcu for what--80 years, give or take??? cap has come to mean approximately the same thing. logan? no way. that is no way is a comparison of the 2 and how they perform IN COMICS. but if we did a marvel trinity, no way logan makes the top 3. the dc trinity has been firm for a very long long time.
Seriously. Marvel hasn't even put Wolverine in any of their major events since HoM. Batman showed up for an issue in Blackest Night... and he was "dead" at the time.
Originally posted by ExistereI guess I could argue that Danny without chi probably lacks the strength, speed and durability feats to compete with Bruce, but mostly I'd bet on Batman because I think he's just plain better, and largely that's because he's portrayed in a brighter light in these settings.
srug
Except that he does have all that. Danny has feats like any other peak human without his chi. There's nothing to suggest that he lacks the speed and strength to fight Batman. When Danny loses his chi he's either just like cap and them or so weakened he can barely stand. Since I'm assuming this fight is he has his chi but isn't using it, it'd be the former.
what from Danny makes you think he can't compete with batman?