I really can't help but feel there has been a huge missed opportunity ever since Joss Whedon left Astonishing X-Men for Scott to get some real growth to his character. None of this silly "darker and edgier" thing we've been seeing for the last decade or so, which really doesn't gel at all with the character both as he was conceived and as he was subsequently evolved. He finally grew into the leader role that Xavier always envisaged for him, gained control of his powers and got the confidence he needed. Then, after Whedon was done they picked up all his toys and put them back in the box, just like they did after Grant Morrison's run. It's obvious that they want the character to change but whenever they get the chance they wipe the slate and go back to this stupid idea of Scott ordering executions and whatnot. Really? Scott Summers? And Logan is the sensible one? And please stop using Emma as a crutch for weak writing because all the bad things he does seem to stem from her influence and writers are quick to forget that this is not the Dark Phoenix Saga days, Emma has evolved as well. Whedon is the only one who ever made me feel like Cyclops was cool, I wish someone could continue in that direction.
nick7913's forum posts
... and everybody else who keeps arguing that people who don't like the events should stop buying them to show Marvel that they don't like the direction they've taken: People have stopped buying them. This has already happened. Then when their favourite titles kept getting bogged down in event after event they dropped those, making for even lower sales and cancellations for many otherwise outstanding books. I've been faithfully keeping up with New Mutants but have been having storylines interrupted all the time and will probably drop it too. I used to buy 10-15 Marvel titles every month. I believe I'm now down to 5 or so. Readers are jumping ship and Marvel hasn't gotten the message.
Events might outsell regular titles but have been declining in sales since Civil War and the only reason they do sell is because you honestly can't follow any story without having the status quo "changed" and then you have to buy tie-ins just to keep up. If Marvel would commit to a better policy they would have me back in a flash. Regrowing the non-fanatical readership will be harder and slower than losing it but it's worth it. It's probably time for Marvel to stop digging itself into a hole and start trying to climb out of it. If they still can.
Oh, boy, lots of hate for the old Starcraft Universe, eh? The original game actually had some pretty good lore, even though they seem to be trying to run it into the ground now. At least the gameplay still kicks ass!
I don't think that reverting back to the old numbering invalidates the achievement of being the oldest superhero book still being published today. I have no issue with number changes since I am mainly a Marvel guy (although I've been switching to indies more and more) and they have done this quite a bit to the point that it's no big deal anymore. Plus, renumbering doesn't mean that there haven't been 999 issues before issue #1000. It just makes collectors' lives a little bit harder. Still, I shouldn't think it's very hard to go into the comicvine wiki and get it sorted out really easily since most titles have only gone through renumbering once or twice. It's much worse with titles that get cancelled every few years and then start up again at #1 (Inhumans, New Gods etc.) because when you try to talk with someone else about them there's always a bit of confusion since that always leads to conversations like the following:
-No, I mean the one that came out in... what was it? 2005... No 2006!
-The one with art by Jae Lee?
-No, that was 1998-99. The one with story by McKeever.
-That came out in 2003.
- Oh, right. Yeah, that's the one.
P.S. No matter what Dan Didio says, it will be almost a decade before the big #1000 is due. By then Didio might be history or the board of directors might send down different orders. There is no way in hell that a company like DC will not jump at such an opportunity to boost their sales.
To everyone ragging about how Ultimate Spider-Man isn't the real Spider-Man: Neither is the one in the main universe (I really don't want to say 616...) They're both interpretations of a character created by Lee and Ditko by modern writers. There is no "real" Spider-Man. That's all in your head. Some people enjoyed the way Bendis portrayed him in this series and some people didn't. The one thing no one can deny is that with 160 consecutive issues under his belt, Bendis's vision has been one of the most consistent. If you didn't enjoy it, I'm really sorry. Move along, there's nothing for you to see here. But for those of us who have loved and stuck with the character through more than a decade, let us mourn the passing of an icon. I believe that if anyone resurrects him, it probably won't be Bendis. And if it isn't BMB writing him, it's not Ultimate Spidey...
P.S. And to preempt any smart-ass comments: Yes, the arc is called Death of Spider-man but at least there was some nice ambiguity about whether it would be the end of just Peter Parker's career or his life. In any case, spoiler tag!