Mycroftian

Love all the comments that say "I don't care about these characters." Of course you don't, they're new characters (or possibly little-known comics characters disguised with different names, I suppose) and all we know of them are these little blurbs. Nobody ever spontaneously liked a character without reading or watching something with that character in it. Really, this information doesn't change anything; we knew we were getting a SHIELD series with new characters, and given Whedon's history and the show's context, these are just about exactly the archetypes you would expect to see in the lead roles.

@hyenascar said:

Be brave Marvel. Do something fresh and new. Even if everyone on here is afraid of change, it would be nice to have a true departure from the normality of this character. There are plenty of characters and plenty of opportunities for new stories. Heck, maybe you should kill spider-man. Maybe he kills someone, because accidents do happen.

This. So much this. I'd love to see a big change and a new direction that stuck for a while. Not crazy about the "Ock tentacles" idea that's been thrown around (even though it does sound plausible), but whatever happens, I'm on board if we get to see a little bit different take on Spidey and good stories come out of it.

Ah well, this is what I get for replying to this sort of thing. But because I have poor self-control, I would like to point out before leaving this thread that

a)I referred to MvC as a series because it is in fact more than one game. CotA, MSH, XvSF, MSHvSF, MvC, MvC2, and (U)MvC3 are all separate games. Similarly, Legends and MUA both have sequels. Every game I mentioned (bar maybe MUA2 and Injustice, since it hasn't been released yet) was critically well-received. MvC is a series that has withstood the test of time, which many would argue trumps just one well-received game. Maybe you feel differently. That's great. What you are experiencing is called an opinion. It differs from a fact in several key ways you already know about but ignore for your personal amusement.

b)I never agreed that Marvel's animation is mediocre. For my money, I'd rather watch Spectacular Spider-Man or Earth's Mightiest Heroes than Young Justice or Batman: TAS. And yet, amazingly, I do not expect other people to conform to this opinion, nor do I antagonize people who disagree with me. I do not get off on other people replying to rudely phrased opinions. I highly recommend this course of action; it's your first step on the path to a mentally healthy you.

I just awarded Spectacular Spider-Man twenty-nine Golden Mycrofts, and bestowed upon it the coveted rank of fifteen out of sixteen Dumbledores.

Big-name awards aren't quite that arbitrary maybe, but don't take them too seriously. Not really sure what the purpose of this thread is other than trolling, but on the off-chance that you're actually trying to prove some kind of point. . . yes, DC has historically had several really good shows and Marvel has only had a couple (Spectacular Spider-Man and Earth's Mightiest Heroes are great; quite a few people like them and dismissing them out of hand just makes you come across as incredibly biased) . But in terms of games? Neither has a great library, really. As far as good games go, there's MvC and the X-Men Legends/MUA series on the Marvel side, and the Arkham games and MKvDC/possibly Injustice on the DC side. Neither company has too much to boast about.

I am not quite so opposed to the idea of Ghost Rider being an Avenger. Maybe that's just because my taste in comics is for some reason perpetually stuck in the 90s, but right now Ghost Rider doesn't seem to be doing much of anything, (correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe he's currently featured in a single monthly title) and I'd like to see him start making regular appearances. He did get an UMvC3 appearance, and I'm pretty sure that game's roster was 90% marketing, so maybe Marvel has something in mind for him

Spider-Man has been an Avenger for quite some time now, yes. Hadn't heard about Ghost Rider, though

@Trodorne

• You will replace the high glossy pages you currently put in your books with recycled newsprint paper. yes a comic may degrade faster if not taken care of but that is the point.
• Increase the number of pages in comics to 32 pages and those are pages are pnes that do not have ads.
• You will also stop abusing your current audience with ill conceived "Major events" just to try to sell to an average market.
• Stop using Death as a gimmick to try to boost sales when you are planning to bring them back only a few months later, have some class.
• Drop the printing of variant covers unless its an anniversary issue like Issue 800 or 1000...etc
• Kill off your character or retire him if you are truly out of story ideas, do not make them younger.
• If a writer is coming on to a series make sure they at least understand the basic premise of how the character works.

1. This seems. . . really nitpicky. I get that you want things to be cheaper, but not sure what the rest of your point is.

3. Major events sell comic books. Could the big events be better thought out and perhaps restructured a bit? Absolutely. But Marvel is a corporation, and you can't blame them for doing what makes a profit. That is their purpose: to make a profit.

4. Not like DC doesn't also have that problem.

6. Kill off every character that they're not immediately sure what to do with? That would end very, very poorly.

7. Fair enough.

Also, you seem to think that there is no such thing as a reader who gets drawn in by movies. This is completely wrong. I was into Batman when I was little because of the Adam West show, and ended up reading The Dark Knight Returns when I was around 8. I got out of comics for a while, but I was drawn back in by the Spider-Man movies, and then the Dark Knight Trilogy and the Marvel Phase One movies. Believe it or not, people do actually take notice when millions of dollars are spent to put characters and properties at the forefront of national attention, and some of those people are of the sort willing to buy comics.

I feel like the answer to this question is situational. Really, it depends on the nature of the death and how that was meant to influence the story. Let's look at Batman. After death, Jason Todd stayed dead for a long, long time. That was good; it gave time for a lot of interesting situations and plotlines to develop from the impact Jason's death had on Batman's psyche. When Darkseid dispatched Batman, however, he came back in no time at all (what was it, a year?) and DC never put much effort into pretending he wouldn't be alive and well. That was perfectly all right; we all knew he wouldn't stay dead anyway, and it gave DC some time to explore the fallout of Batman's death.

Comic book deaths can be hard to take seriously, sure. But I think people need to stop getting so hung up on that and start valuing death based on where it sends the story, rather than its permanency. The recent deaths of Xavier and Fantomex, for example, will probably not prove to be long-lasting (especially not the former), but both deaths push the stories surrounding them in very interesting directions.

Not really crazy about this idea. So far as I can tell, this is an ongoing, not a miniseries. How long can this possibly last? Are we just going to get a Gilligan's Island situation where the characters comically botch all their attempts to escape, or are we going to constantly see new contestants? There can't be too much murder if this series is meant to go on for any amount of time. (if it is a mini and I just missed that little tidbit, then I forgive it that complaint) Also, all characters in this series can't be anywhere else, logically, so I guess X-23 is kinda out of the spotlight for a while, since she'll be sharing the lead role with fifteen other characters.

@venomoushatred1001 Yeah, realize that now. Just had some temporary confusion.