Comic Battle >> View Post
Post By

In Reply To

Subj: Re: Unless there is more to this than meets the eye, this is the biggest strength feat in all of comics, I think.
Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2008 at 12:58:27 am EDT (Viewed 161 times)
Reply Subj: Re: Unless there is more to this than meets the eye, this is the biggest strength feat in all of comics, I think.
Posted: Sat Sep 20, 2008 at 01:24:18 pm EDT

> That's only because so much emphasis by DC fans is placed on feats. Feats are practically the sole basis behind why some claim Superman to be hundreds, thousands or millions times stronger that Marvel's strongest characters (and that is based on maybe mainly on two, feats of shared planetary moving). People thus point out that he should likewise be that much stronger than his peers and opponents who have not performed such feats, yet DC fans often argue that they are tiered up due to having successfully gone toe to toe with Superman at some point, which brings me to the next point.

I don't think they are tiered up at all. The balance of continuity, which includes all showings, is what tiers up or down characters, not merely the results of one-on-one fights, in my opinion. I'm not about to tier up Superman to universe-benching level by way of his fight with Thor and Thor's match-ups with Hercules. The universe feat is Hercules' only; neither Superman nor Thor nor anyone else can claim it, in my opinion. Had Superman or Thor or whoever appeared in Hercules' issue and matched him in strength, then, in that single story, they proved as strong as a man who lifted the universe. Short of that, they cannot claim to have ever been depicted as strong as Hercules is depicted in the Atlas issue, as far as I'm concerned.

> > But this is not the case with Hercules here, which bemuses me. Also, per the tiering up logic (to which I do not subscribe), Superman and his peers should be tiered up, given the Marvel/DC crossovers; but no one here has said that, which I find odd, seeing as how frequently and ardently crossovers are invoked on this board.

> Yes, but crossovers have often been discarded by DC fans as "political", saying that DC characters are tiered down for such crossovers.

That's pointless to me, whether it's "politics" or not, and I could care less either way. I say just accept the crossover and add them to the "averages" of the characters involved; go from there.

> Thus we have a convenient way of allowing other DC characters to be tiered up by Superman, yet not allowing the same for Marvel characters to be tiered up by him.

If one employs the tiering up method for one side, it should be done so for the other, I believe. Fair is fair.

> It should be understandable when Marvel fans, after a Marvel character does some outrageous feat, to question why we should NOW allow crossovers to tier up characters when that has been resisted by DC fans in the past.

That's just silly and shameful for the DC (or whoever) fans, then. It has to be equitable if you apply the transitive approach, in my opinion.

> Marvel fans have generally not declared such extreme superiority over DC characters as DC fans have over Marvel characters.

I've seen it both ways, personally. But Ed J, my non-posting friends, and I are pretty much the only people I know of who put Superman on such a higher pedestal above the general Marvel characters.

> Marvel fans tend to accept the two companies as basically comparable, as shown by the crossovers.

Yes, I have noted that, on both sides, most fans stick to the crossovers and consider very little outside of that -- unless an outcome displeases them, then they will invoke other areas of continuity to argue that Character X should not have lost to Character Y. This bothers me -- adhering to the crossovers, rather than larger continuity, but then invoking continuity to worm away from the crossovers is disingenuous, I believe. Personally, as you know, I say be consistent, and to consider as much of each characters' continuities as possible -- otherwise, there is no way to take issue with the outcome of any crossover fight. There would be no basis to agree or disagree with anything in it.

> Emphasis on outrageous Marvel feats tends to be for the purpose of countering the emphasis on big DC feats and the resulting extreme belief by many DC fans of DC's overwhelming physical superiority.

Personally, I think nothing should be emphasized save for whatever "average" each fan derives for himself from as much of a character's continuity as possible. High, mid, low fight and non-fight depictions (they're all "feats" to me) of a character should be treated equally; as should the typical depiction of the character (my "20 pound bags of flour" approach), in my opinion.

> Even the most rabid Hulk fanboy would probably not place Hulk more than double Superman's strength, whereas there are those who express the opinion that Superman is hundreds, thousands or millions times stronger than Hulk

Personally, I don't think Hulk is typically portrayed in Superman's ballpark, as I have expressed to the board many times before, and I do think that Superman is "millions of times" (or whatever) stronger than Hulk, but only on the basis of the balance of continuity, not on crossovers or cherry picked depictions (high, mid, or low) alone. But that's the topic of another conversation.

> (something that is totally contradicted in crossovers).

No doubt, the crossovers do not support that notion. What's your take on Hercules' feat here, by the way? Did he lift the entire universe despite Earth remaining intact, and there being no mitigating factor in the comic that fortified the Earth?


Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 7 on Windows Vista
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2022 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2022 by Comicboards/TVShowboards. Software Copyright © 2003-2022 Powermad Software