Did Peter Parker Need To Die In Order to Relaunch the Ultimate Universe?

[Darman456]

Or could another big event have sufficed?

Now, I would like this to remain objective. I know that some people like Miles better, some Peter and some just enjoy both. I don't want anyone saying he needed to die because they like Miles better or anyone saying that Peter didn't need to die because they like him better. Now, bias aside, I think it could've been done without killing Peter, if done creativly enough. We could've moved Reed Richards' return to UU sooner.

So, Reed Richards comes and attacks. Europe is mostly destroyed. This is a huge event, causing mutants to band together to form the X-Men again. The Ultimates, X-Men and, yes, Spider-Man go to stop Reed. They do, but now the entire world is not only frightened of mutants but super humans altogether. With Peter's already ruined reputation (at the hands of the Chameleon twins), the Daily Bugle is no longer enough to stop the whole world from attacking him. So, Peter is forced to go on the run with the X-Men. With Spider-Man no longer able to protect New York City, Miles becomes a new vigilante and starts to fight crime.

1) This would provide us with the "on-the-run" book of X-Men.
2) This would be a status quo change for Spider-Man, sending him on the road with the X-Men, replacing his old title with Miles's.
3) This would relaunch the UU, so as to have three ongoing titles.
4) This would make both Miles and Peter fan boys (I think) very happy.

If you think Peter needed to die, vote above or just say he did. If you don't think he needed to, vote above or say no and provide a way it could've played out differently.

[NapoleonBlownapart]

Obviously they could have avoided killing Peter and still brought in The Children, The People, Stryker, etc, but that wasn't the point. The Ultimate Universe isn't about being a more modern version of the Marvel Unvierse anymore, it's about being a comic book universe that isn't predictable where death has a real meaning, and the best way to demonstrate that is by killing off a major character like Spider-Man. It's the same sort of thing they tried with Ultimatum, except this time they were more careful and did a much better job of establishing the new status quo.

[wyokid]

Again with this? Yes, he needed to die. Captain America, Kitty, Johnny, and Bobby wouldn't be where they are without it and Spider-Men #4 would be pointless.

[CrazyOldHermit]

No, of course not. He was needed to relaunch it the exact same way it was relaunched but the Avengers vs Ultimates arc was much more important to the scope of things than Peter's death and it still could have been relaunched with him alive.

[Kurolegacy]

Honestly, I don't find that it was necessary to kill Peter off in order for the relaunch to have happened. While about half of Fallout was because of it, events like Miles gaining powers, Reed and the Children, Stryker and the Purifiers and the People would have happened regardless of if he lived or died. As was, even if Peter hadn't died, Johnny and Bobby would have had to leave Peter's house after DoSM since they had blown their cover by fighting the Sinister Six on Peter's lawn and would have had to go underground anyway since I doubt Johnny would want to go back to his sister. Also Miles may have gained a mentor in the form of Peter to help him with what he was dealing with with his new powers and showing him the true meaning of with great power comes great responsibility acting as an Uncle Ben figure for him. As for the other events, aside from Steve quitting as Captain America, DoSM had no bearing on them. So I still don't find that it was necessary to kill off Peter for the relaunch to happen, it was merely for another change in the status quo involving death (something I feel that they need to stop doing so much if they're going for dead is dead).

[wyokid]

They've done it twice...

[Trallis]

The question isn't phrased fairly. I don't think Peter needed to die, but I think it was a very wise choice. No character NEEDS to die. Gwen Stacy in 616 did not NEED to die, but it was a great story so it was done. Great story doesn't mean happy story.

As I've said before, the Ultimate Universe is unique. Peter Parker's early years were coming to an end.. and soon Peter would be 17. Age 15-17 was the part of the Peter Parker story that was kinda rushed in the classic comics, and it was also much more old fashioned and very different from the comics that are around nowadays. Ultimate Spider-Man retold those years. Unlike a lot of Ultimate characteres, Ultimate Pete was a lot like his 616 self, so the main thing that made USM unique was that it was a teen drama and the early villains from his life were reimagined and had their stories told with utter greatness. Had he lived, it wouldn't have been a BAD thing, but it wouldn't be very much different than Spider-Man comics that have already existed, as well as the ones coming out now. If there was to still be an Ultimate Spider-Man, why not have it be something new and special again. See how another person would handle Spider Powers. Every fan dreams of what it would be like to get those powers, so reading about someone else getting them is awesome. In exchange, we get to see Peter make the Ultimate sacrifice and end all doubt that he was a hero through and through, until his dying breath.

If Pete had lived, the great art, great story telling, and great teen drama would continue for a while.. he'd probably become an avenger when he turned 18, and he'd go to college, etc. It's good stuff, and Bendis is perfect for the job, but it's not new. I'd much rather have a book that the writer is passionate about, and I'm sure Bendis' passion for writing Spider-Man had sunk at all, it's been rejuvenated now that he's writing a character he invented.

Just think, Peter Parker hasn't died and someone asks you
-"what's the point of reading Ultimate Spider-Man? What's the difference?"
your answer is: "well, this time he got bit on the LEFT hand and it wasn't radioactive, it was genetically modified, and there's a different writer"
-"so really the only difference is the writer?.. but writers change all the time on Amazing Spider-Man, why not just have this guy write Amazing Spider-Man if he's so good?"
: "well because he writes Ultimate Spider-Man, which is different"
-"how is it different?"

[wyokid]

The question isn't phrased fairly. I don't think Peter needed to die, but I think it was a very wise choice. No character NEEDS to die. Gwen Stacy in 616 did not NEED to die, but it was a great story so it was done. Great story doesn't mean happy story.

As I've said before, the Ultimate Universe is unique. Peter Parker's early years were coming to an end.. and soon Peter would be 17. Age 15-17 was the part of the Peter Parker story that was kinda rushed in the classic comics, and it was also much more old fashioned and very different from the comics that are around nowadays. Ultimate Spider-Man retold those years. Unlike a lot of Ultimate characteres, Ultimate Pete was a lot like his 616 self, so the main thing that made USM unique was that it was a teen drama and the early villains from his life were reimagined and had their stories told with utter greatness. Had he lived, it wouldn't have been a BAD thing, but it wouldn't be very much different than Spider-Man comics that have already existed, as well as the ones coming out now. If there was to still be an Ultimate Spider-Man, why not have it be something new and special again. See how another person would handle Spider Powers. Every fan dreams of what it would be like to get those powers, so reading about someone else getting them is awesome. In exchange, we get to see Peter make the Ultimate sacrifice and end all doubt that he was a hero through and through, until his dying breath.

If Pete had lived, the great art, great story telling, and great teen drama would continue for a while.. he'd probably become an avenger when he turned 18, and he'd go to college, etc. It's good stuff, and Bendis is perfect for the job, but it's not new. I'd much rather have a book that the writer is passionate about, and I'm sure Bendis' passion for writing Spider-Man had sunk at all, it's been rejuvenated now that he's writing a character he invented.

Just think, Peter Parker hasn't died and someone asks you
-"what's the point of reading Ultimate Spider-Man? What's the difference?"
your answer is: "well, this time he got bit on the LEFT hand and it wasn't radioactive, it was genetically modified, and there's a different writer"
-"so really the only difference is the writer?.. but writers change all the time on Amazing Spider-Man, why not just have this guy write Amazing Spider-Man if he's so good?"
: "well because he writes Ultimate Spider-Man, which is different"
-"how is it different?"

Dude, you should have been here when Peter died. We had a new thread every week most made by Darman.

[OrpheusTelos]

Obviously they could have avoided killing Peter and still brought in The Children, The People, Stryker, etc, but that wasn't the point. The Ultimate Universe isn't about being a more modern version of the Marvel Unvierse anymore, it's about being a comic book universe that isn't predictable where death has a real meaning, and the best way to demonstrate that is by killing off a major character like Spider-Man. It's the same sort of thing they tried with Ultimatum, except this time they were more careful and did a much better job of establishing the new status quo.

This. And that is a very loaded question OP.

[Zak213]

The question isn't phrased fairly. I don't think Peter needed to die, but I think it was a very wise choice. No character NEEDS to die. Gwen Stacy in 616 did not NEED to die, but it was a great story so it was done. Great story doesn't mean happy story.

As I've said before, the Ultimate Universe is unique. Peter Parker's early years were coming to an end.. and soon Peter would be 17. Age 15-17 was the part of the Peter Parker story that was kinda rushed in the classic comics, and it was also much more old fashioned and very different from the comics that are around nowadays. Ultimate Spider-Man retold those years. Unlike a lot of Ultimate characteres, Ultimate Pete was a lot like his 616 self, so the main thing that made USM unique was that it was a teen drama and the early villains from his life were reimagined and had their stories told with utter greatness. Had he lived, it wouldn't have been a BAD thing, but it wouldn't be very much different than Spider-Man comics that have already existed, as well as the ones coming out now. If there was to still be an Ultimate Spider-Man, why not have it be something new and special again. See how another person would handle Spider Powers. Every fan dreams of what it would be like to get those powers, so reading about someone else getting them is awesome. In exchange, we get to see Peter make the Ultimate sacrifice and end all doubt that he was a hero through and through, until his dying breath.

If Pete had lived, the great art, great story telling, and great teen drama would continue for a while.. he'd probably become an avenger when he turned 18, and he'd go to college, etc. It's good stuff, and Bendis is perfect for the job, but it's not new. I'd much rather have a book that the writer is passionate about, and I'm sure Bendis' passion for writing Spider-Man had sunk at all, it's been rejuvenated now that he's writing a character he invented.

Just think, Peter Parker hasn't died and someone asks you
-"what's the point of reading Ultimate Spider-Man? What's the difference?"
your answer is: "well, this time he got bit on the LEFT hand and it wasn't radioactive, it was genetically modified, and there's a different writer"
-"so really the only difference is the writer?.. but writers change all the time on Amazing Spider-Man, why not just have this guy write Amazing Spider-Man if he's so good?"
: "well because he writes Ultimate Spider-Man, which is different"
-"how is it different?"

This sum's it up pretty well as the UU needed to show that it was going to be a completely different beast than the 616 and they put their money where their mouth is.

[Darman456]

The question isn't phrased fairly. I don't think Peter needed to die, but I think it was a very wise choice. No character NEEDS to die. Gwen Stacy in 616 did not NEED to die, but it was a great story so it was done. Great story doesn't mean happy story.

As I've said before, the Ultimate Universe is unique. Peter Parker's early years were coming to an end.. and soon Peter would be 17. Age 15-17 was the part of the Peter Parker story that was kinda rushed in the classic comics, and it was also much more old fashioned and very different from the comics that are around nowadays. Ultimate Spider-Man retold those years. Unlike a lot of Ultimate characteres, Ultimate Pete was a lot like his 616 self, so the main thing that made USM unique was that it was a teen drama and the early villains from his life were reimagined and had their stories told with utter greatness. Had he lived, it wouldn't have been a BAD thing, but it wouldn't be very much different than Spider-Man comics that have already existed, as well as the ones coming out now. If there was to still be an Ultimate Spider-Man, why not have it be something new and special again. See how another person would handle Spider Powers. Every fan dreams of what it would be like to get those powers, so reading about someone else getting them is awesome. In exchange, we get to see Peter make the Ultimate sacrifice and end all doubt that he was a hero through and through, until his dying breath.

If Pete had lived, the great art, great story telling, and great teen drama would continue for a while.. he'd probably become an avenger when he turned 18, and he'd go to college, etc. It's good stuff, and Bendis is perfect for the job, but it's not new. I'd much rather have a book that the writer is passionate about, and I'm sure Bendis' passion for writing Spider-Man had sunk at all, it's been rejuvenated now that he's writing a character he invented.

Just think, Peter Parker hasn't died and someone asks you
-"what's the point of reading Ultimate Spider-Man? What's the difference?"
your answer is: "well, this time he got bit on the LEFT hand and it wasn't radioactive, it was genetically modified, and there's a different writer"
-"so really the only difference is the writer?.. but writers change all the time on Amazing Spider-Man, why not just have this guy write Amazing Spider-Man if he's so good?"
: "well because he writes Ultimate Spider-Man, which is different"
-"how is it different?"

I think you could've changed the status quo, made Miles Spider-Man and kept Peter alive. The whole point of the Death of Spider-Man was to reintroduce the Ultimate Universe to the world. But, after the event, it went back to its normal numbers in terms of issue sales. So, the whole point of the Death of Spider-Man was to earn cash for that one specific event. And, if you had an event, you could relaunch it and pute Peter in a new place so MARVEL can introduce a new Spider-Man in Miles.

[Time_to_Zap]

I think it was necessary b/c Peter was such a tie to the old Ultimate Universe. He's been around as a constant ever since the UU began, and while his supporting cast has changed, he himself, and his purpose, never really became anything else. Which was not a bad thing, just a steady one.

UC:XM has its cast in a situation they've never been in: on the run, fighting an actual war to help mutants, which never had come to fruition before. Kitty's its leader, in a different role than she's ever been. Meanwhile, the Ultimates are trying to save the world from multitudes of threats, initially without Cap, who had always been there for them.

These two series were drastically different, but for Kitty to change into this leader and Cap to leave, you needed Peter gone. We needed Peter to die to force Kitty and Cap into their new roles. Without Peter dead, two of the UU's current Big Three would be in their former status quos.

[Plawsky]

No, he didn't need to die. The only way you can say he needed to die is to get these EXACT stories. But they could have gotten to a very similar status quo - or a whole different relaunch entirely - without killing Peter. If it was only to get away from the "old Ultimate Universe," they could have killed Iron Man, Cap, or Nick Fury, who have also been around, essentially, since the beginning.

[Bat_Fan2232]

As someone who is new to the ultimate universe.. Never been a big marvel fan until recently(due to my discovery of ultimate universe), I enjoy miles and think it's nice peter is gone. I feel like if I want a peter parker story i could pick up one of the other spider-man titles. But thats off topic I guess I never saw anything before death of spider man so I really enjoyed the Death of Spider-man arc. Did he need to die probably not.. But I'm sure glad he did :)

[Blanks]

Honestly, I would have liked it if Peter had died during Ultimatium and gotten Miles earlier.