u

Originally posted by -Pr-
I don't think we're talking about the same thing, tbh. Unless you've changed the subject.

Well, the comment that sparked our exchange was this:

Originally posted by Digi
I find it odd that people still hate on OMD, bad as it was. DC just did that to their entire company. And pointing to good stories in the DCnU isn't a pass either, because Spider-Man's been pretty awesome once they got past the BND arc.

Then my most recent comment was in reference to this:

Originally posted by -Pr-
Changing one small detail about a character through a retcon really isn't the same thing as OMD, tbh. We're talking about a substantial life change for Spidey, not altering one event in his past that won't count when the next arc rolls around.

But that's where you're wrong; several characters are almost identical to what they were beforehand; any changes are superficial at best, like Batman or the Lanterns, whose pre-Flashpoint stuff has remained largely if not completely intact.

...I feel like we've stayed on point, no? What am I missing?

Originally posted by Digi
Well, the comment that sparked our exchange was this:

Then my most recent comment was in reference to this:

...I feel like we've stayed on point, no? What am I missing?

I just don't see how DC doing what it did equals what Marvel did with Spidey, I guess...

The Robin system is pretty much as it was Pre-Flashpoint that I've seen, and anything written by Johns on GL and Morrison on Batman is still canon.

Aquaman is basically the same; they've just added to his history. If you picked up an Aquaman, or GL, or Batman comic pre and post Flashpoint, you're not going to feel like you missed out on anything because the characters are largely, if not exactly the same in terms of portrayal and situation.

DC might have rebooted it's universe, but the status quo has remained largely the same for a lot of characters. Spidey not so much.

In general though, I think people are more pissed off at OMD just being a really bad story than the actual changes that came about. Dan Slott is pure gold on almost any book he writes.

Originally posted by -Pr-
I just don't see how DC doing what it did equals what Marvel did with Spidey, I guess...

The Robin system is pretty much as it was Pre-Flashpoint that I've seen, and anything written by Johns on GL and Morrison on Batman is still canon.

Aquaman is basically the same; they've just added to his history. If you picked up an Aquaman, or GL, or Batman comic pre and post Flashpoint, you're not going to feel like you missed out on anything because the characters are largely, if not exactly the same in terms of portrayal and situation.

DC might have rebooted it's universe, but the status quo has remained largely the same for a lot of characters. Spidey not so much.

In general though, I think people are more pissed off at OMD just being a really bad story than the actual changes that came about. Dan Slott is pure gold on almost any book he writes.

Have you been reading Spider-Man? This seems disconnected from the reality of the situation.

The scope of DC's changes compared to Spidey's are laughably lopsided. As stated, I could name dozens of characters who have undergone more significant - and permanent - changes.

Let's take GL, which you mentioned. So, you're Hal Jordan...your age is regressed, your memories wiped out, and your status and power usage rebooted to where they were decades ago. You barely know the team you're on, one that you've had hundreds of adventures with. The universe around you has new people, new villains or reimagined villains, new team configurations, and often brand new characters. Origins are different - not in all but most cases - as well as the general world and their reaction to heroes and those with powers.

What you're saying is that he's still green, kinda cocky and brash, and wields a power ring for the Oan Corps. Therefore the changes are small.

In my mind, every single thing I just named is bigger than the Spidey change. Because Peter is still, literally, the exact same person in the exact same universe. His powers, feats, emotional history with every other character, all intact. None of that can be said for Hal. And Hal is one character in an entire universe of characters, and by your own admission is one of the least changed characters. Take any other character than the 2-3 you keep mentioning, and the gap is even further.

I'm not sure if you're more ok with it because you like the new DC direction, or if you actually believe the difference is the same. OMD was a **** story that ultimately did nothing to ruin or significantly change Peter. And, again, DC rebooted a whole damn universe, and merged it with another. The comparison between the two is like MJJ fighting the Penguin.

Originally posted by -Pr-
I just don't see how DC doing what it did equals what Marvel did with Spidey, I guess...

The Robin system is pretty much as it was Pre-Flashpoint that I've seen, and anything written by Johns on GL and Morrison on Batman is still canon.

Aquaman is basically the same; they've just added to his history. If you picked up an Aquaman, or GL, or Batman comic pre and post Flashpoint, you're not going to feel like you missed out on anything because the characters are largely, if not exactly the same in terms of portrayal and situation.

DC might have rebooted it's universe, but the status quo has remained largely the same for a lot of characters. Spidey not so much.

In general though, I think people are more pissed off at OMD just being a really bad story than the actual changes that came about. Dan Slott is pure gold on almost any book he writes.

I'm pretty ticked that DC has completely benched Wally West, though.

Originally posted by Digi
Have you been reading Spider-Man? This seems disconnected from the reality of the situation.

The scope of DC's changes compared to Spidey's are laughably lopsided. As stated, I could name dozens of characters who have undergone more significant - and permanent - changes.

Let's take GL, which you mentioned. So, you're Hal Jordan...your age is regressed, your memories wiped out, and your status and power usage rebooted to where they were decades ago. You barely know the team you're on, one that you've had hundreds of adventures with. The universe around you has new people, new villains or reimagined villains, new team configurations, and often brand new characters. Origins are different - not in all but most cases - as well as the general world and their reaction to heroes and those with powers.

What you're saying is that he's still green, kinda cocky and brash, and wields a power ring for the Oan Corps. Therefore the changes are small.

In my mind, every single thing I just named is bigger than the Spidey change. Because Peter is still, literally, the exact same person in the exact same universe. His powers, feats, emotional history with every other character, all intact. None of that can be said for Hal. And Hal is one character in an entire universe of characters, and by your own admission is one of the least changed characters. Take any other character than the 2-3 you keep mentioning, and the gap is even further.

I'm not sure if you're more ok with it because you like the new DC direction, or if you actually believe the difference is the same. OMD was a **** story that ultimately did nothing to ruin or significantly change Peter. And, again, DC rebooted a whole damn universe, and merged it with another. The comparison between the two is like MJJ fighting the Penguin.

Daaaaamn, Digi just got all up in that *****.

Originally posted by Digi
Have you been reading Spider-Man? This seems disconnected from the reality of the situation.

The scope of DC's changes compared to Spidey's are laughably lopsided. As stated, I could name dozens of characters who have undergone more significant - and permanent - changes.

Let's take GL, which you mentioned. So, you're Hal Jordan...your age is regressed, your memories wiped out, and your status and power usage rebooted to where they were decades ago. You barely know the team you're on, one that you've had hundreds of adventures with. The universe around you has new people, new villains or reimagined villains, new team configurations, and often brand new characters. Origins are different - not in all but most cases - as well as the general world and their reaction to heroes and those with powers.

What you're saying is that he's still green, kinda cocky and brash, and wields a power ring for the Oan Corps. Therefore the changes are small.

In my mind, every single thing I just named is bigger than the Spidey change. Because Peter is still, literally, the exact same person in the exact same universe. His powers, feats, emotional history with every other character, all intact. None of that can be said for Hal. And Hal is one character in an entire universe of characters, and by your own admission is one of the least changed characters. Take any other character than the 2-3 you keep mentioning, and the gap is even further.

I'm not sure if you're more ok with it because you like the new DC direction, or if you actually believe the difference is the same. OMD was a **** story that ultimately did nothing to ruin or significantly change Peter. And, again, DC rebooted a whole damn universe, and merged it with another. The comparison between the two is like MJJ fighting the Penguin.

I haven't been reading it lately, no. I had read some of Slott's OMD work, though.

My point was never that there were no changes; there were; just that it wasn't their "whole universe". Some characters are damn-near identical. More identical than Spider-Man was post OMD.

And no, Hal is only that way in JLA (which was the first arc set in the past). He's identical to his pre-FP self in his actual solo book.

And really? No mention of the fact that regardless, OMD was just badly executed in the first place, no matter how positive the outcome? Which honestly seems to be what people are most annoyed about in the first place?

Originally posted by roughrider
I'm pretty ticked that DC has completely benched Wally West, though.

You and me both.

Originally posted by -Pr-
I haven't been reading it lately, no. I had read some of Slott's OMD work, though.

My point was never that there were no changes; there were; just that it wasn't their "whole universe". Some characters are damn-near identical. More identical than Spider-Man was post OMD.

And no, Hal is only that way in JLA (which was the first arc set in the past). He's identical to his pre-FP self in his actual solo book.

And really? No mention of the fact that regardless, OMD was just badly executed in the first place, no matter how positive the outcome? Which honestly seems to be what people are most annoyed about in the first place?

But, like, OMD was, what, 2 years ago now? It's not even a thing anymore. Hating on Spider-Man for OMD, who is functionally identical to before, is like saying the character is ruined because you didn't like the Clone Saga. OMD was sh*t, no argument. But I don't even think about it now in ASM, and know I'm still reading the same Peter Parker who, for example, failed to save Gwen Stacy decades ago.

Whereas, in contrast, each issue, Hal wakes up in a new universe. Try telling me you can fool yourself into thinking you're reading the same Hal Jordan that you were a year ago.

Also, I don't consider a character to have undergone no or few changes if they remain the same character-wise. So many things changed, and so many histories were wiped out, that you might as well be telling me an alternate universe character is the same guy. Because that's essentially what it is. Being "like" Batman or Hal or whoever doesn't make them that, it just makes them a new version of the same character. And the point is exacerbated by every other character around them; I'm just using your "least-changed" characters as examples to make my point. But the old universe is dead and gone, rebooted to the new by DC's own words.

I'm not trying to hate on the change - it's obviously been good for business - I just can't see any justification for comparing the two in terms of scope or lasting change.

Originally posted by Digi
But, like, OMD was, what, 2 years ago now? It's not even a thing anymore. Hating on Spider-Man for OMD, who is functionally identical to before, is like saying the character is ruined because you didn't like the Clone Saga. OMD was sh*t, no argument. But I don't even think about it now in ASM, and know I'm still reading the same Peter Parker who, for example, failed to save Gwen Stacy decades ago.

Whereas, in contrast, each issue, Hal wakes up in a new universe. Try telling me you can fool yourself into thinking you're reading the same Hal Jordan that you were a year ago.

Also, I don't consider a character to have undergone no or few changes if they remain the same character-wise. So many things changed, and so many histories were wiped out, that you might as well be telling me an alternate universe character is the same guy. Because that's essentially what it is. Being "like" Batman or Hal or whoever doesn't make them that, it just makes them a new version of the same character. And the point is exacerbated by every other character around them; I'm just using your "least-changed" characters as examples to make my point. But the old universe is dead and gone, rebooted to the new by DC's own words.

I'm not trying to hate on the change - it's obviously been good for business - I just can't see any justification for comparing the two in terms of scope or lasting change.

and that's fine. The orignal point was that OMD was shit, wasn't it?

Yes, he wakes up in a new universe. A universe where everything that's happened to him under Johns is still canon. His book picked up where it left off pre flashpoint, so for all intents and purposes it's the same guy to a large extent. Even in the VS forum we take it as being that way.

So you're saying they aren't the same now?

Has DC had trouble making up it's mind on Wonder Woman's final design? Shorts, pants, shorts, pants, shorts...

Originally posted by roughrider
Has DC had trouble making up it's mind on Wonder Woman's final design? Shorts, pants, shorts, pants, shorts...

DC never makes up it's mind about Diana, tbh.

.

We can't forget to mention Frank Miller's return to Batman the past decade, can we? DK2 was well below standard, and deep in the shadow of TDKR. Plus it crapped on it's own continuity...
But All Star Batman & Robin was an offense in the eyes of God and Man.
Miller has his head stuck in Sin City and can't get it out.

Thankfully, DC finally had enough and told him to piss off elsewhere with his 'Holy Terror, Batman!' graphic novel proposal.

Originally posted by Mr Death Dealer
.

Nice attempt to stir **** (not really, but I'm being nice), but Pr and I don't really fight. We respect each other too much. The fact that he's wrong in this particular instance has no bearing on our friendship.

Right pr?

fdog

Didn't get to read it, so no idea. My guess is no, though.

So are they the same, or aren't they?

Originally posted by roughrider
We can't forget to mention Frank Miller's return to Batman the past decade, can we? DK2 was well below standard, and deep in the shadow of TDKR. Plus it crapped on it's own continuity...
But All Star Batman & Robin was an offense in the eyes of God and Man.
Miller has his head stuck in Sin City and can't get it out.

Thankfully, DC finally had enough and told him to piss off elsewhere with his 'Holy Terror, Batman!' graphic novel proposal.

Originally posted by roughrider
We can't forget to mention Frank Miller's return to Batman the past decade, can we? DK2 was well below standard, and deep in the shadow of TDKR. Plus it crapped on it's own continuity...
But All Star Batman & Robin was an offense in the eyes of God and Man.
Miller has his head stuck in Sin City and can't get it out.

Thankfully, DC finally had enough and told him to piss off elsewhere with his 'Holy Terror, Batman!' graphic novel proposal.

All Star Batman was pure gold, imo, just for how OTT it was.

Originally posted by Digi
But, like, OMD was, what, 2 years ago now? It's not even a thing anymore. Hating on Spider-Man for OMD, who is functionally identical to before, is like saying the character is ruined because you didn't like the Clone Saga. OMD was sh*t, no argument. But I don't even think about it now in ASM, and know I'm still reading the same Peter Parker who, for example, failed to save Gwen Stacy decades ago.

Whereas, in contrast, each issue, Hal wakes up in a new universe. Try telling me you can fool yourself into thinking you're reading the same Hal Jordan that you were a year ago.

Also, I don't consider a character to have undergone no or few changes if they remain the same character-wise. So many things changed, and so many histories were wiped out, that you might as well be telling me an alternate universe character is the same guy. Because that's essentially what it is. Being "like" Batman or Hal or whoever doesn't make them that, it just makes them a new version of the same character. And the point is exacerbated by every other character around them; I'm just using your "least-changed" characters as examples to make my point. But the old universe is dead and gone, rebooted to the new by DC's own words.

I'm not trying to hate on the change - it's obviously been good for business - I just can't see any justification for comparing the two in terms of scope or lasting change.

Superman:At earth's end. Just look at the design and believe me the story is even more stupid.

They should have retconned Gwen's children while they were at it, but they didn't. A sucky reboot if you ask me.

Sorry Pr, been busy, haven't forgotten about you.

Originally posted by HueyFreeman
Thats actually something I have a question about. I am retroactively going through spiderman at the moment and my question is "How much of his history is alterred besides the mary jane thing"? Maybe Im wrong but I assumed the story for the whole change was that Mephisto manipulated the timeline to lead to the conclusion that we see now. In Mephistos tweaked history Harry didnt die, Norman doesnt know who Peter is, but Peter still unmasked and instead of meeting mephisto he went to Dr strange who removed the unmasking from the entire world but left Peter and MJ with their memories intact. What I dont understand is that in the new timeline peter didnt make it to his wedding with mj, so Im assuming they were not married at the time aunt may was shot(or they still got to that point for whatever reason) and Spiderman visited strange or does he still have the memories from the pre mephisto timeline? Also with Harry alive and Norman not aware of who peter is, wouldnt that strike out altercations like the marvel knights battle and the most of the clone saga in general (not that thats a bad thing). If what I wrote is true, doesnt that indeed butterfly effect a lot of his history? (very similiar to Batman in the new 52)

Most of that stuff happened independent of OMD. The only things it changed were the marriage (never happened, they're still friends and MJ knows his identity) and Aunt May got better.

Anything involving the unmasking, Harry and Norman, etc. happened separately from the Mephisto nonsense.