Originally Posted by
Revolutionary_Jack
As you said it was "One of the things" and not the main essential thing. The Superior Spider-Man as a concept ran all over the place and tonally the moral argument was hollow and insincere when they got around to spelling the obvious.
And again even this issue tries to argue that Otto is somehow a moral person with that wretched sexist line of dialogue about that "other Spider-Man dating Black Cats and supermodels" which is again a rephrase of Slott trying to demean MJ and other love interests as being "anti-Marvel". The attempt is that on some level Otto has some kind of moral claim over Peter or something which is totally bizarre, sexist, mean-spirited, grounded entirely in a kind of underground man resentment.
The truth is that Superior Spider-Man as an ongoing ran on the engine of a bad boy vicarious fantasy. That's what the majority of fans ran on...and Slott and others never once corrected the record. When Alan Moore wrote Watchmen and people said they were fans of Rorscharch, Moore always raised an eyebrow and told him that Kovacs was an asshole. Alan Moore never once tried to have things both ways. In the case of Slott...anytime someone comes and says they are fans of Otto and Superior's approach to crimefighting, he never stops to correct it. Sure if someone says they found it disturbing, he said that was intended but that doesn't mean much when you don't hold the first group to task. IN other words having things both ways, which also shows a lack of conviction in any moral imperative of the series, animated rather by a sense of gimmick and shallow cleverness. Anytime you see Superior Spider-Man fan threads, it's in praise of Ock in a lot of cases, with people saying Otto was an effective crime fighter and so on.
There was any moral conviction in Superior Spider-Man and that is the paramount reason why it's a failure as a story and concept.