Your DC-Only controversial opinions (part II)...

[Agent Z]

I might have liked the Perpetua saga if it weren't yet another DC story in which DC talks about how much darker and more cynical they'd gotten. That this is the fourth or fifth story of that sort that they've done shows you how hollow it all is.

The Injustice games and the Justice Lords story arcs aren't cynical because they show Superman as being as corruptible as anyone else. They're cynical because they imply that if Superman went bad, the majority of DC's heroes would follow him instead of stopping him

[SiegePerilous02]

The Injustice games and the Justice Lords story arcs aren't cynical because they show Superman as being as corruptible as anyone else. They're cynical because they imply that if Superman went bad, the majority of DC's heroes would follow him instead of stopping him

They can be cynical for both of those reasons.

[PCN24454]

They can be cynical for both of those reasons.

What really makes Injustice jarring is that they made the Regime side almost exclusively Superhumans with Resistance "normal".

Because having superpowers naturally makes you evil and not having them makes you good, apparently./s

[SiegePerilous02]

What really makes Injustice jarring is that they made the Regime side almost exclusively Superhumans with Resistance "normal".

Because having superpowers naturally makes you evil and not having them makes you good, apparently./s

It's really all about kissing Batman's ass in the end

[Gaius]

What really makes Injustice jarring is that they made the Regime side almost exclusively Superhumans with Resistance "normal".

Because having superpowers naturally makes you evil and not having them makes you good, apparently./s

Honestly, I know it's alternate universe, but the complete lopsided favoritism towards Batman + friends and how just about everyone on the Regime side gets thrown under the bus did more to put me off Batman, the Bat family members, and other street level heroes (GA, Black Canary) than any of the stuff they get in the main books or poor writing elsewhere.

Harley's always been a terrible character so no change there though.

[achilles]

These opinions aren’t nearly as controversial as you think. I’m gonna give you a real controversial opinion: I actually loved the “Perpetua” Saga. It’s been making me choose DC over Marvel recently.

As for names, I honestly don’t see why “Perpetua” is a bad name.

It's like...Imperiex, the guy with the super-embarrassing look of a broom on top of his head----a guy who is supposed to be scary. It's just hard to take someone seriously if they're called "Perpetua". First off, it's either the name of a new Swiss watch, or the name a five year old might give the character. Not seven, by that age, they've learned shame. Might have worked when the average age of readers was 5, but that isn't the case anymore.

[Agent Z]

They can be cynical for both of those reasons.

Not really. Showing that one hero is as corruptible as anyone else can be sad for fans of the character but the idea that the world's heroes would also become corrupt and authoritarian just because said hero went down that path is also cynical and makes them look like a cult of personality.

[SiegePerilous02]

Not really. Showing that one hero is as corruptible as anyone else can be sad for fans of the character but the idea that the world's heroes would also become corrupt and authoritarian just because said hero went down that path is also cynical and makes them look like a cult of personality.

But since he's the one who consistently gets corrupted or brainwashed in these things or is at the least the most at the forefront as the most visible (Injustice, Justice Lords, the planned DCEU arc, the marketing of the Suicide Squad game thus far) it actually makes it seem like he's the most corruptible, not the same as anyone else.

Everyone else following his lead doesn't make the Superman situation suck any less. it just means it sucks in multiple ways for multiple fanbases. Except Batman's, apparently.

[Gaius]

It's like...Imperiex, the guy with the super-embarrassing look of a broom on top of his head----a guy who is supposed to be scary. It's just hard to take someone seriously if they're called "Perpetua". First off, it's either the name of a new Swiss watch, or the name a five year old might give the character. Not seven, by that age, they've learned shame. Might have worked when the average age of readers was 5, but that isn't the case anymore.

I don't care for Perpetua but it's not any dumber a name in a genre with names like "Sinestro", "Darkseid", "Galactus","Dr. Doom", or "Atrocitus".

Not really. Showing that one hero is as corruptible as anyone else can be sad for fans of the character but the idea that the world's heroes would also become corrupt and authoritarian just because said hero went down that path is also cynical and makes them look like a cult of personality.

Yeah, grading on a curve , Superman's one of the better done by characters in Injustice as the series at least least tries to justify how he got where he did and the game writers/Taylor try to pin his fall/actions on other characters like Wonder Woman.

[Stanlos]

It just occurred to me that an unexpected and unexplored idea could be to have Joker partially succeed. Maybe he catches Bruce off guard during the holidays and this time it he who is shot and his spine destroyed. And he becomes the New Oracle!

[manwhohaseverything]

Not really. Showing that one hero is as corruptible as anyone else can be sad for fans of the character but the idea that the world's heroes would also become corrupt and authoritarian just because said hero went down that path is also cynical and makes them look like a cult of personality.

But, they didn't though. There were factions for both pro superman and pro batman. That would happen naturally. Clark is a leader figure.

Yeah, grading on a curve , Superman's one of the better done by characters in Injustice as the series at least least tries to justify how he got where he did and the game writers/Taylor try to pin his fall/actions on other characters like Wonder Woman.

only the books provide some breather for superman . The games don't. The games are specifically for making superman into a jobber villain,not even a great villain.

[Agent Z]

But, they didn't though. There were factions for both pro superman and pro batman. That would happen naturally. Clark is a leader figure.

Which doesn't mean virtually every hero has to take leave of their senses and follow him. Especially since some of them like Aquaman, Wonder Woman and Green Lantern are leaders in their own rights.

only the books provide some breather for superman . The games don't. The games are specifically for making superman into a jobber villain,not even a great villain.

What definition of jobber are you using? In the first game, the only person who is able to defeat evil Superman is a Superman from another universe. In the second one, Batman's faction has to team up with him to stop Brainiac.

[SiegePerilous02]

So for those who played the game or read the comics for this dumpster fire, did the good Superman who showed up in the first game help reinforce that Injustice Superman is an outlier?
Or did they play it as he was lucky not to have faced a similar tragedy, and he could easily go over the edge if the same thing happened to him?

I'm cynically thinking it was the latter, and I know the other heroes like Wonder Woman weren't even afforded that much, which is even worse.

[Gaius]

only the books provide some breather for superman . The games don't. The games are specifically for making superman into a jobber villain,not even a great villain.

The entire first game revolves entirely around only Superman can beat Superman and the second game is given one of the two endings in which he is victorious.

Between the games and comics; Shazam gets heat-visioned to death, The GLC gets decimated pretty much single handily by Superman, Wonder Woman gets turned into arm candy for a disinterested Superman and also a Lady MacBeth to try absolve him of his more worse actions while also getting jobbed out to Batman twice in the second game.

I'm probably forgetting some but yeah, Superman got a raw deal because NRS love Batman and Harley, they and Taylor just gave Superman the rest of the DC universe to punk out as a consolation prize.

[Agent Z]

So for those who played the game or read the comics for this dumpster fire, did the good Superman who showed up in the first game help reinforce that Injustice Superman is an outlier?
Or did they play it as he was lucky not to have faced a similar tragedy, and he could easily go over the edge if the same thing happened to him?

I'm cynically thinking it was the latter, and I know the other heroes like Wonder Woman weren't even afforded that much, which is even worse.

In the comics, there is some mention of how even as a kid Regime Superman had some troubling aspects to him so the implications seem to be that this version of Superman was just destined to be evil unlike his normally good counterparts.

As for Wonder Woman, they eventually did give her a Freudian excuse for her actions. In Injustice 2 #1, we find out that the Steve Trevor of this universe was a Nazi who tried to take advantage of Diana's trust in order to steal the Lasso so the Axis could win the war. Diana killed him and this was what started her down the dark path.

The execution of these is... questionable.