Originally Posted by
Sutekh
And yes to this. I remember Lord of the Rings fans annoyed at how 'weak' Gandalf was compared to a D&D wizard chucking fireballs and lightning bolts around (or even compared to Tim the Enchanter, from Monty Python and the Holy Grail), or how 'weak' Luke Skywalker's force powers were compared to the sort of 'psychic' displays we saw in movies like Scanners, Carrie and Firestarter way back in the 70s and 80s, so it's something that goes around all sorts of fandoms, and feels kind of toxic, as if 'more power' is somehow tied to 'better character,' when that's explicitly not the case, and if it was, characters like the Sentry or Sersi or Blue Marvel with *amazing* power levels would sell tons of books, and 'weaker' characters like Daredevil and Punisher and Captain America would never get a movie or TV series, let alone a solo book.
Similarly, mutants like Wolverine, who is barely a spark compared to the raging mutant bonfire of someone like Exodus or Vulcan, is vastly more successful, because 'more powerful' rarely if ever means 'more interesting.' (Indeed, a more powerful character has a *smaller* range of stories and challenges and foes they can face, or has to be written pretty badly to be 'challenged' by something that is an appropriate challenge for their allies, and ends up looking like a moron for not resolving the challenge of the day with a Flex, something that happens to Storm pretty much constantly, being chumped out so that the rest of the people around her get to do something.)
I like that Sunspot, and the various other New Mutants, were introduced with limitations, and weren't 'Omegas' out of the box, and would be absolutely fine with them never reaching that status.