I covered this in the Missed Opportunities thread in the General Marvel forum, and it really got me thinking, how true is this, and what do you think of it?

Quote:

Quote Originally Posted by Hybrid View Post
This is a core difference between Spider-Man and Batman. The real world popularity of Spider-Man never influences the narrative of where Spidey stands in the world. He’s just another hero, not an icon of his own. Doctor Doom’s main beef is with the FF, and following that is his plot for world conquest that puts him at odds with other big teams and heroes. Whenever he meets Spider-Man, he views him as some D-lister not worth his time. In most events that aren’t Spider-based that he appears in, he’s a minor character. I think the most important was Civil War, where he was a supporting character but far from a main one.

Batman on the other hand has become “that guy” of DC, because his popularity means that he’ll be the center of the DC Universe. He’s often a driving force, even for stories that should be way above his weight class. Batman is DC to lot of people in real life, and in-universe as well.

It’s a mixed bag in my opinion. I would like to see Spider-Man be more important especially since elements of his lore have been important before. I think the Parker Industries arc, if handled by a better writer could have been a much longer lasting shift and well earned, but it wasn’t handled well and thus was reverted fast. It would be cool to see a big event or Spiderman saves the world. But we’re unlikely to see that Because Spider-Man is defined as a “street level” hero even if that tag is a bit of a spotty title.
This came after I said a missed opportunity was in Dark Reign, where Norman Osborn's rise from being Spider-Man's villain to the big bad of the General MU did not have a reverse effect on Peter in a similar way. Osborn grew out of the corner and menaced everyone, while Spider-Man remained in that corner the whole time. The end of Dark Reign was the traditional "Avengers suit up and defeat the bad guy" story of many events, whereas Spider-Man was there but was just another character despite Osborn being his eternal nemesis. We did get a bit of fanservice with Spidey shutting Osborn up with a punch to the face, but that was after he had already lost. Spidey could've elevated in a reverse level similar to Osborn, where he became a big good like figure to counter him. That... didn't happen.

I even said that the Parker Industries arc could've had potential if it was handled better than how Slott did it, because that was a chance for Spidey to really branch out and become something new. But it was done badly, and illusion of change set in.

So that brings me to the main point. Spider-Man in-universe may occupy his own corner that's massive to us, but not to the others. He's just another hero, rather than some big A-lister. It's interesting because, as mentioned in the quote, it directly contrasts how DC let the real world popularity of Batman influence his standing in the universe to the point where he's "that guy" of DC. Spider-Man just isn't quite "that guy" of Marvel even with a comparable popularity to Bats. I don't think there's ever been a big crossover event where Spider-Man was absolutely essential to saving the world and was a major character.

On one hand, I do like it because it allows the universe to feel complete without anyone being "that guy" like Batman, and the different areas of Marvel feel distinct as they should be. Plus, I like Spidey as a humble, small steps hero who might be the strongest street leveler there is. On the other, I would like Peter to finally catch a break and be something greater because the "Parker Luck" of constantly seeing him down can make you feel bad. Hence, it's a mixed bag.

What are your overall thoughts? Do you think this is better, or should Spider-Man's status elevate? Is it a mixed bag to anyone else? Discuss.