One Year Later> The Best and the Worst of DC's New 52

[Reginleif]

its more than just, "I wish X character was used" is more about the lost of such character who was entirely erased

I dont see character X, therefore it is erased. Does anyone honestly believe they will never bring back Wally West? It might take a few years, but oh well.

you cant possibly deny points 1 and 2
the creative fights on things like Voodoo, Batwoman, Static and others are just bad and in some cases proff that they really didnt know what they wanted or what they were doing with such properties

I can deny a lot actually

and point one, is simply the lost of legacy in the universe

Its a reboot, what do they expect?

Civ V is nothing like Beyond The Sword, the entire battle gameplay is completely different from any other Civilization game

I know, but this did not stop all the people from CivFanatics from complaining, "Oh, no religion! Oh no espionage! Lets just keep comparing a new game to one that had 2 expansions!" The only exception is that people were not saying "Oh no, Civ IV had 32 civs, but Civ V only has 18 (19 if you include Babylon, at launch of course" which is what many people here are saying.

[ArnoldoAAD]

I dont see character X, therefore it is erased. Does anyone honestly believe they will never bring back Wally West? It might take a few years, but oh well.

It happen on the case of Oracle

but #10 is BS to be honest, we have a book about Dial H for Hero now , there is enough diversity in DC

Its a reboot, what do they expect?

it doesnt mean that the complain doesnt have value

I know, but this did not stop all the people from CivFanatics from complaining, "Oh, no religion! Oh no espionage! Lets just keep comparing a new game to one that had 2 expansions!" The only exception is that people were not saying "Oh no, Civ IV had 32 civs, but Civ V only has 18 (19 if you include Babylon, at launch of course" which is what many people here are saying.

yeah why is there no religion in Civ 5, that just sucks!
not to mention the Corporations which were one of the best feature in BTS

[ropeburn39]

Makes me wonder something though. Did any super heroes exist 5 years ago at all? Or are meta humans only popping up now?

which is crazy if hundreds of meta-teens are popping up now.

[Hulk_Is]

I agree with their comment about alot of the new costumes having to many pointless details. it's been pretty much proven that the simplest costumes are the ones that stand the test of time, and the costumes with excessive details are the ones that are usually looked back on as being kind of ugly and or dated.

Alot of those high detail designs only look good when the original designer draws them and don't really cross over to other artist well. This is a problem in mainstream comics where character are passed from artist to artist. In the old days comic creators understood this, that's why older characters like Batman and Superman have simple designs that are nearly impossible to draw badly. In short the more details a design has the more oppertunities their are to get it wrong.

I agree. I'd have a fit drawing all those details to the costumes. And, these designs will probably get ragged on years from now.

[shark]

I more or less agree with the Worst List. Disagree with most of the Best List one.

Their number 1 worst thing I completely disagree with. One of the top draws to me about this relaunch is the lack of superhero history, and that this is, for all intents and purposes, the beginning. I love that we're not convoluted with past superheroics that go as far back as WWII. I appreciate that era's significance as it birthed American comics...but that era's long gone. I like a DCU where that history, up to now, has been "normal" and by the numbers with real history.

This isn't a clean reboot, there are parts of the history that are still there. We just don't know what. Which means current DCnU is trying to make a puzzle with half its pieces, which makes it even more confusing than before.

[Ebon]

I agree with:

Worst #9 - Many of the costuming and character development decisions are almost like Jim Lee saying 'Shut down Wildstorm? Well here it all is again, in all it's 90's glory'. This dovetails into...

Worst #4 - Most of the costuming decisions are either bad ones, or seem poorly thought-out. I can live with Red Robin's wings, but the reasoning behind them seems like what a 12-year-old would complain about. I do not like the 'trunks are for sissies' mandate. Some costuming decisions are good - Aquaman's return to an updated classic is a good example - but there's still too much 90's stink on most of the uniforms for me to like them. I'm not at all adverse to change, but the change I'm seeing here hasn't been very good.

Worst #2 is the most disturbing to me, both as a fan and a consumer. It sends the following message: We have no idea what we're doing. When you have this many 'creative differences' pop up in such a short period of time, it certainly gives the impression to me of a poorly-thought-out match between artist, writer and editor, or that your choices for those people were poor to begin with.

The Best of's
I'm not sure I totally agree with any of the 'best of' entries. They seem a little... padded.

Artists as writers can work well, but it's usually a recipie for disaster. Again, we saw that happen all over the 90's books, with terrible, terrible results.

I haven't seen the universe 'open up' that much. A lot of it feels very much the same to me. I don't feel that 'fresh start with endless possibilities that (perhaps wrongly?) I should be feeling. A lot of it simply feels like the same stuff done the same way, only with a few new dance partners that happen to change more often.
The only thing I've really enjoyed is having a Nightwing and Blue Beetle title again.

[Paladin King]

I agree with most of the best list except for #10. The failure rate on artists turned writers has been pretty high thus far. Van Sciver, Daniel, and Perez all failed miserably. Even Williams seems to have kind of fallen apart after the first arc of Batwoman. Out of all the artists turned writers, only Manapul/Buccellato are still going strong (which, honestly, I'd never have predicted).

Also, on #8: Grant Morrison on Action isn't bad, but it hasn't lived up to expectations at all and wouldn't even be in my top 5 of the new 52. I never imagined that would be the case. Also, #6 seems to act as though the bat-books weren't already stellar before the relaunch. Things aren't much different there.

On the "worst" list, I agree with #9 (the whole 90s thing and the general return of old, forgotten creators) and #2 (creative differences) and #6 (the fill-ins). That said, fill-ins are an inevitable part of having consistently on-time books, so it's part of the trade-off. The rest of the "worst" list really just seems like quibbling, particularly #10. Either that, or it's stuff I honestly don't care that much about (Wildstorm and Oracle). #8 (What About Us) is also a bit silly. In 52 books, not every one of your favourite characters is going to get his or her own solo book.

[CBikle]

Their worst is just feces and fanboy rage, most of their points were all the same; why isnt character X in here?

No, the worst list is surprisingly accurate for Newsarama and offers a window into the many flaws and weak spots of the Nu52.

Also, the points weren't so much about displaced characters as they were about ill-thought out and rushed art, writing, editing and overall execution that led to so many of the books being absolute crap.

It seems like the titles that are least affected by editorial (Lemire, Manapul & Snyder), seem to be the strongest.