"Injustice" question:

[superduperman]

If someone else has already asked about this, feel free to respond. In Convergence #1, we saw the Injustice universe essentially destroyed. Does this mean the characters in the comic are just going to get killed? I have been collecting the hardcovers as they come out but if they are just going to kill them off in Convergence, then does that mean the whole series is a waste of time?

[Xoxx]

Comic is prequel to video game. Injustice Gotham that was destroyed in Convergence #1 is set after video game, when Superman is taken down. So, timeline-wise, Injustice comics happen, Injustice video game happens, then they're all killed in Convergence.

[PRgirl94]

According to Brian Buccellato on his Twitter, the Injustice universe isn't going to be affected. It's outside the New 52 multiverse.

[Lee Stone]

According to Brian Buccellato on his Twitter, the Injustice universe isn't going to be affected. It's outside the New 52 multiverse.

Then why even do it?
Obviously, they used those characters to provoke a shock.
But if it wasn't really them, it makes it pretty moot.

It also sets up the possibility that all the characters in Convergence aren't the real ones.
Therefore, it won't really matter if they die or not.

[Cata]

Maybe he meant that the story he's telling is still in the past. The game is year 5 and year 4 is coming.

[Cipher]

Then why even do it?
Obviously, they used those characters to provoke a shock.
But if it wasn't really them, it makes it pretty moot.

It also sets up the possibility that all the characters in Convergence aren't the real ones.
Therefore, it won't really matter if they die or not.

This is why DC's obsession, going all the way back to the original Crisis, with destroying their multiversal worlds or current timelines for reboots in terrible ways has always baffled me. It's an unsatisfying narrative either way; either the stories you've read canonically end with the characters all being killed off (so much for whimsical superheroics?) or the versions we see are some multiversal echoes of the ones whose stories we've read, which both feels like a cop-out and is no less a bummer.

And there's absolutely no need for it. Accommodating all these different versions, their stories continuing off-page, is one of the reasons the concept of a multiverse entered the comics in the first place.

[Sutekh]

This is why DC's obsession, going all the way back to the original Crisis, with destroying their multiversal worlds or current timelines for reboots in terrible ways has always baffled me.

But look how successful it's been for them! They've got like 20% of the sales numbers they had before Crisis on Infinite Earths, so *clearly* it's saved them from all that dirty filthy money they'd be making otherwise!

Quick, let's destroy another huge swath of our intellectual property and see if we can hemorrhage faster!

[Slaughter]

I didn't get why they just killed Injustice like that. Not to mention their Superman sounds like a huge dick. I don't think Injustice Superman is a uncaring dick who shrugs at a massacre, even if he's a dictator.

[Cipher]

But look how successful it's been for them! They've got like 20% of the sales numbers they had before Crisis on Infinite Earths, so *clearly* it's saved them from all that dirty filthy money they'd be making otherwise!

I don't think it's affected their bottom line either way. But you can have reboots and multiversal events without handing out bummer endings to timelines at the same time. Just start the line afresh either without a catastrophic send-off (non-catastrophic send-offs are appreciated, though) either explicitly on another Earth or multiverse, or just don't go out of your way to acknowledge it. Man of Steel doesn't begin by eradicating the universe of the Dark Knight movies; it'd be crazy if it did.

We'll have to wait to see how Convergence ends, but -- at least as it stands now, with the whole bottled cities bit, not to mention the fates Golden Age Superman and other characters have met in previous Crises -- not one, or very, very few DC universes currently have canonical endings steeped in anything other than senseless destruction and tragedy.

These are your whimsical superhero stories, folks. Men and women in tights manage to save the world for a few years, then villains and cosmic entropy win.

This kind of move with Injustice strikes me as being particularly baffling, as they're still publishing a comic in that universe -- to which this ending definitely doesn't act as a nice thematic cap.

I had hopes that with Convergence, we'd actually see DC move away from this previous model, with the bottled cities all having their timelines restored. That could still be the case, and I'll be ecstatic if it is, though I'm suspecting more and more that it won't be the case.

[NeonZ]

I didn't get why they just killed Injustice like that. Not to mention their Superman sounds like a huge dick. I don't think Injustice Superman is a uncaring dick who shrugs at a massacre, even if he's a dictator.

It's out of character for comic Injustice Superman, but it's in line with his characterization by the end of the game, where he kills Captain Marvel just for being questioned once.

[Patrick_C]

I don't think it's affected their bottom line either way. But you can have reboots and multiversal events without handing out bummer endings to timelines at the same time. Just start the line afresh either without a catastrophic send-off (non-catastrophic send-offs are appreciated, though) either explicitly on another Earth or multiverse, or just don't go out of your way to acknowledge it. Man of Steel doesn't begin by eradicating the universe of the Dark Knight movies; it'd be crazy if it did.

We'll have to wait to see how Convergence ends, but -- at least as it stands now, with the whole bottled cities bit, not to mention the fates Golden Age Superman and other characters have met in previous Crises -- not one, or very, very few DC universes currently have canonical endings not steeped in anything other than senseless destruction and tragedy.

These are your whimsical superhero stories, folks. Men and women in tights manage to save the world for a few years, then villains and cosmic entropy win.

This kind of move with Injustice strikes me as being particularly baffling, as they're still publishing a comic in that universe -- to which this ending definitely doesn't act as a nice thematic cap.

I had hopes that with Convergence, we'd actually see DC move away from this previous model, with the bottled cities all having their timelines restored. That could still be the case, and I'll be ecstatic if it is, though I'm suspecting more and more that it won't be the case.

Completely agree.

And if things are this bad now, imagine what would have happened if Moore'd managed to publish his "Twilight" crap.

[superduperman]

Then why even do it?
Obviously, they used those characters to provoke a shock.
But if it wasn't really them, it makes it pretty moot.

It also sets up the possibility that all the characters in Convergence aren't the real ones.
Therefore, it won't really matter if they die or not.

This was my thinking. It basically is admitting that all these different versions aren't the "real" versions from the previous timelines and are all expendable. They could pull the same stunt they did with Kingdom Come in the pre-52 multiverse where there is an analogous universe to the original book but it isn't the same exact universe. But, again, what's the point?