Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 90
  1. #61
    T.S.O.T.I. Hulk_Is's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Waiting 4 comix...
    Posts
    8,826

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BrotherUnitNo_4 View Post
    This actually could be an interesting approach considering as you say readers would continue to ask for the old universe anyway. The problem is that DC editors believe the multiverse is confusing. Some how Marvel's managed to maintain two successfully ongoing universes just fine. DC execs should give their customers more credit.
    DC's usage of the multiverse is confusing. That's why I clicked on this thread. I figured that today was the day that all would be revealed to me about the DCMV, but i read two sentences of the OP and I was like, "Wut???"

    I can't even tell if Marvel even has a multiverse and i've been reading Marvel for 30 years. I support DC trying to make the multiverse easier to understand if they're going to use it.
    Marvel, STOP writing for the Trade so I can go back to collecting Monthlies again. Thanks.

  2. #62
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,680

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bruce Twain View Post
    Because an ending is one, if not the, most important aspects of any piece of fiction and that's not an insane thing to expect? Especially if they're going to be rebooting anyway. And it's something you can't do if every time you reboot, you need to have the whole of continuity erased or condensed into a new version.
    Which is why we had CoIE and FC.
    Both of those were endings.
    I don't understand why those weren't sufficient for you.
    I guess I just have to accept different strokes.

    It's one of the things that puts potential readers in a "why bother" mindset. Why bother if it's never going to develop or end? And pragmatically, for current readers and collectors, I'm also sure there's a pile of money to be made on "finale" issues.
    Another thing that puts people off is abandoning previous continuity to focus on a new one.
    There's no way to please everyone.

    I guess I should say I'd also be okay with them not explicitly designating each reboot a spot in the multiverse, or using the multiverse as a meta-fictional organizer, but I think that's sort of inherent to the concept. It was what DC originally (though badly) used its for, DC has acknowledged a multiverse for quite some time, and it's basically the natural conclusion that comes out of having different versions of a character without one erasing or amalgamating the other. "Oh, new Batman series? New universe? Okay, multiverse."
    Well, again, that's not what DC used its multiverse for. Ever.
    The multiverse was used to allow characters to crossover in order to team up with the characters of the primary universe.
    One of the ways to indicate that the main universe is the primary universe is to give it a designation of 1 or 0.
    Making Earth 33 the main universe and then switching to Earth-39 doesn't carry the same weight.

    Again, for DC, just being different versions isn't enough to warrant being given a designation in the multiverse.
    The Earth has to be different enough that it warrants a crossover. The editors have to be interested in having the possibility of a crossover.
    If they want a crossover to be impossible, they go with a reboot/retcon.
    That some people don't like reboots/relaunches is kind of a different discussion.

    I still suggest it'd be much clearer, and much better for potential readers for a number of reasons, to use it as such.
    Sure, but suggesting it doesn't make it true.

    Anyway, I'm probably ending the night with this post as well, but I think it's been a good discussion so far.
    Have a great night!!!
    I had a great time reading your posts, even if we don't quite agree on the resolution.
    Sharing different perspectives is what forums are all about.
    Last edited by Bdiggs; 03-30-2013 at 08:41 PM.

  3. #63
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,680

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hulk_Is View Post
    DC's usage of the multiverse is confusing. That's why I clicked on this thread. I figured that today was the day that all would be revealed to me about the DCMV, but i read two sentences of the OP and I was like, "Wut???"

    I can't even tell if Marvel even has a multiverse and i've been reading Marvel for 30 years. I support DC trying to make the multiverse easier to understand if they're going to use it.
    I would think the reboots/retcons are the confusing part.
    What's confusing about the DC multiverse?

  4. #64
    Veteran Member glennsim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Madison, MS
    Posts
    6,391

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bruce Twain View Post
    Because an ending is one, if not the, most important aspects of any piece of fiction and that's not an insane thing to expect? Especially if they're going to be rebooting anyway. And it's something you can't do if every time you reboot, you need to have the whole of continuity erased or condensed into a new version.

    It's one of the things that puts potential readers in a "why bother" mindset. Why bother if it's never going to develop or end? And pragmatically, for current readers and collectors, I'm also sure there's a pile of money to be made on "finale" issues.

    I guess I should say I'd also be okay with them not explicitly designating each reboot a spot in the multiverse, or using the multiverse as a meta-fictional organizer, but I think that's sort of inherent to the concept. It was what DC originally (though badly) used its for, DC has acknowledged a multiverse for quite some time, and it's basically the natural conclusion that comes out of having different versions of a character without one erasing or amalgamating the other. "Oh, new Batman series? New universe? Okay, multiverse."

    I still suggest it'd be much clearer, and much better for potential readers for a number of reasons, to use it as such.

    Anyway, I'm probably ending the night with this post as well, but I think it's been a good discussion so far.
    It's not necessarily an insane thing to expect, but when you consider that Superman has been published for about 75 years, it's an unrealistic thing to expect. This is serial fiction - it continues on and on and on. Endings are not unheard of and are an interesting side-project (like Marvel's "The End" series) but they aren't taken seriously because everybody knows they aren't really going anywhere.

    I'm not sure I understand the "why bother" mindset issue - you suspect that they go 20 years with the ongoing adventures and not necessarily end the series in a satisfying way, so you're not going to bother reading for those 20 years? Despite the fact they've never had a satisfying ending in the previous 75 years, and yet people have enjoyed reading the ongoing adventures of the characters? Sounds like maybe you're not really in to corporately owned super-heroes like DC and Marvel if that's the problem.

    I can see why moving on to the next universe might seem attractive, but in addition to the crossover element inherent in the notion, there are a couple of other things to consider. At DC, whenever there has been a multiverse, whatever the main storytelling universe was was always rather the "center" or "beginning" of that multiverse. It goes back to the notion that even though the JSA's universe has super-heroes first, it was the JLA's world that was called "Earth 1" and the JSA's had to be "Earth 2" - Earth 2 being literally secondary. And that has continued through all of the other iterations of a DC multiverse. So saying that we're not going to read about Earth 0 any more and are going to move over to Earth 42 (because Earths 1-41 have probably all been defined already), then there's nothing exciting about knowing you're reading about Earth 42, and it again leads to the assumption that at some point you're going to get back to reading about Earth 0.

    Another note of previous DC multiverses. While there may be exceptions, new universes tended to be implemented on a very limited basis as actual locations for storytelling. Earth 2, Earth 3, Earth S, Earth X etc. were created as parts of specific stories and were often revisited. On the flip side, the notion that the DC animated world and the Batman-as-vampire world were only ever defined as worlds in the multiverse retroactively, almost like as an Easter Egg. Other than a couple of brief series that featured the multiverse (and still jumping around between them) as the central situation (and all of that around the Countdown series), the fact that the Justice League Unlimited world is a world in the multiverse was pretty much ignored, because it was never intended to be anything other than geek chow.

    All of this is to say that for DC, the notion of moving on to a new universe as the main storytelling focus is nowhere near a natural step as you might think, because nothing like that has ever been done in their history.
    The DC relaunch was successful and was executed in what was most likely the best way it could given restrictions we wouldn't know about. No, your idea wouldn't have worked. Now move on.

  5. #65
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,680

    Default

    Exactly.

    Also, it's not like it's typical for individual series to wrap up story lines when they're cancelled. That is really a fairly uncommon luxury. Although, the New 52 is structured tightly enough that, unless the book is an abysmal failure, the creative teams have enough notice that they can provide a fairly decent wrap-up.

    With CoIE and FP, we have more than decent wrap-ups to the shared universe/multiverse, as a whole.
    Life, in general, doesn't come with neat little bows. People's stories often end unexpectedly. And that is often the case, as well, with serial fiction.

    As I touched on in an earlier post, one of the challenges for DC is figuring out how to do a full reboot of the shared universe without shooting themselves in the feet for popular books, like New Teen Titans. You can't just start Superman, Wonder Woman and JLA from scratch and hope that the fans of NTT will wait a year or two until it makes sense to have a reboot introducing their sidekicks' team. And you can't expect the reboot TT to have equal success when a major part of the appeal is that the NTT had enough experience under their belts to move into adulthood and be respected on their own merits - almost equal to their mentors.
    DC management will be reluctant to try to "fix" the books that aren't broken. Which leaves us with some books with minimal changes to their history rather than a reboot. instead, we're given retcons to patch over the rough spots in the shared history.
    CoIE had tons of rough spots since it was the first attempt at a company-wide reboot of the entire "universe" at once.

    Flashpoint and the New 52 had the same challenges regarding DC's most popular titles.
    The events in the Green Lantern series were way too popular to reboot all the way Hal's origin. Too much of a risk to have to wait to introduce John, Guy and Kyle as replacements for Hal and have all of them acquire a decent enough amount of experience to be senior members of the GLC.
    The Batman books were also selling too well to simply jettison that history with a full reboot. Nightwing's title was too popular to have to wait months or years for Dick to move from Robin to Nightwing. Tim and Damian were too popular to abandon as well.
    Same for Batman Incorporated.
    There's no way DC management is ever going to allow a full reboot of the shared universe. The histories of the most popular books will always remain mostly untouched at the time of the reboot because it's too risky to lose that magic if the fanbase doesn't respond well to the change.
    And it's either going to be a reboot/retcon type of relaunch, or an MU/UU piecemeal type of launch of a new universe, for the same reason.
    Wrapping up all the stories of one universe and then shifting over to a new universe that is a clean break is never going to happen.

    Again, that's the inherent problem of having a shared universe with 30+ titles - some of which are successful, many of which are not. It's a problem that a shared universe with 3- titles doesn't face. Nor an isolated TV show.

  6. #66

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BrotherUnitNo_4 View Post
    This actually could be an interesting approach considering as you say readers would continue to ask for the old universe anyway. The problem is that DC editors believe the multiverse is confusing. Some how Marvel's managed to maintain two successfully ongoing universes just fine. DC execs should give their customers more credit.
    DC maintained 2 universes in the 70's and even had the Earth-2 Justice Society in their own comic. In addition, there was the "Haney-verse" that existed in the Batman team-up book, Brave and the Bold.

    The truth is, throughout the Silver Age, DC didn't have a set continuity, and until Crisis on Infinite Earths in the early 80's, there was no attempt at a definite timeline. Now, continuity is so strict that it constricts the kinds of stories that writers can tell, so DC has lost that wonderful sense of whimsy and high adventure that used to define them. They're not as bad as Marvel, but they're getting there.

    But, yeah, DC used to run two universes and do it successfully. I don't see why the "multi-verse" couldn't be used in place of the "crisis" to change and update their timeline.

  7. #67
    Veteran Member glennsim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Madison, MS
    Posts
    6,391

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Heroid View Post
    I don't see why the "multi-verse" couldn't be used in place of the "crisis" to change and update their timeline.
    The answer would be all of the reasons I've already given in this thread.
    The DC relaunch was successful and was executed in what was most likely the best way it could given restrictions we wouldn't know about. No, your idea wouldn't have worked. Now move on.

  8. #68
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,680

    Default

    DC has books published in two universes now.

    Silver Age had quite a substantial amount of set continuity.
    LSH, JLA, Teen Titans, Flash, GL - all of the Earth-Two books.
    Increasingly so as they move through the 70s.
    There wasn't as much strict continuity.

    During the Silver Age, you knew a story was canon if it continued to be referenced via editor's note.
    If a story was never referenced again, it could just be a one-off.
    Post-CoIE, we were told all pre-CoIE stories remain canon until specifically retconned.
    But, that paradigm caused too many blatant discrepancies, which fostered a culture of fans becoming irate at even minor discrepancies.
    Post-IC, continuity became quite bit more loose.
    New 52 is set up to allow enough space that discrepancies with pre-FP continuity aren't an issue - that's loose. Post-FP continuity is tightly interwoven across titles and seems to be internally strict. I'm not aware of any blatant contradictions.

    True that post-CoIE established the 10 years ago timeline.
    I'm not sure I agree that the timeline limited creativity.

  9. #69
    New Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    65

    Default

    Them not rebooting Batman and Green Lantern ruined the new 52 in my eyes. This whole picking and choosing what history in those two titles that still matters only makes the rest of the universe confusing to new readers, I'd imagine. They should have cleaned the slate with everything since they wanted a reboot so bad.
    You can buy my comics at Indy Planet! I draw horror!

  10. #70
    Veteran Member glennsim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Madison, MS
    Posts
    6,391

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blanks View Post
    Them not rebooting Batman and Green Lantern ruined the new 52 in my eyes. This whole picking and choosing what history in those two titles that still matters only makes the rest of the universe confusing to new readers, I'd imagine. They should have cleaned the slate with everything since they wanted a reboot so bad.
    Why would they screw up their two most popular franchises. That's throwing out the good along with the bad.

    It's not that complicated - the basic stuff, and the stuff written by Johns and Morrison over the last few years, all were basically still in place. That's it.
    The DC relaunch was successful and was executed in what was most likely the best way it could given restrictions we wouldn't know about. No, your idea wouldn't have worked. Now move on.

  11. #71

    Default

    So far they have several different multiverses occurring. Listed below. I have to admit I am a fan of the Elseworlds and Multiverse titles, as they present different spins on characters.

    Earth Prime - Where all the main DC titles take place.

    Earth 2 - Justice Society

    Ame Comi (Earth Unnumbered) - A world where all the heroes and villains are female.

    Injustice Earth - A world where the point of divergence is the tragic death of Lois Lane, instigated by the Joker.

  12. #72
    Lazer Faced Goggindowner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Little Elm, Texas
    Posts
    2,919

    Default

    I didn't read every post, so I don't know if this point has been touched on. Forgive me if it has.

    One MAJOR flaw with the idea of jumping from reality to reality every decade or so is fan expectations.

    What do I mean? Well, fans expect Dick Grayson to be the first Robin, they expect Hal Jordan to be involved with Carrol Ferris, and for the Trinity to found the Justice League, and whatever else you want to add to the laundry list. And at the end of the day, DC is going to deliver that. Now imagine that every ten years, DC had to deliver the same set of stories to set up a new universe. It would get redundant. As redundant, or more so, that what DC is already doing.

    Want proof? Look at Marvels Ultimate line of comics. It was fresh and updated approach to the classic characters, but it still, for a long long time, followed along with established Marvel stories, just with new twists. Jean Grey developed a form of Phoenix powers, Peter Parker was dating Mary Jane, and so on. It was new, but it was familiar. And it sold like gangbusters. Then, as time went on, the Ultimate line started to deviate farther and farther from the original stories and concepts of the Marvel 616, and sales started to tank. Then they went for shock factor 10 and killed off half of the characters, and sales tanked even farther. To the point now, that, I can hardly believe the line hasn't been cancelled yet.

    My point is, doing this just gives DC the reigns to retell the same stories with updated settings and twists every ten years or so, and we never see most of the characters do much of anything beyond what we have seen before, because most fans will huff and puff and throw a fit when you try and deviate a character too far from what they are familiar with, and DC is out to make money.
    Writers before artists.
    Artists before concepts.
    Concepts before characters.

  13. #73

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by glennsim View Post
    Why would they screw up their two most popular franchises. That's throwing out the good along with the bad.

    It's not that complicated - the basic stuff, and the stuff written by Johns and Morrison over the last few years, all were basically still in place. That's it.
    But that's not it. You can't fit all of Batman's previous history in with the new continuity. The four Robins is just stupid. They should have gone for broke. Let Morrison finish his Batman story in a separate title and rebooted Batman with the rest. They're trying to have their cake and eat it but what's happened is that they got a bubble in readership, but now it's headed back to the old numbers, which were steadily declining (as they have been for comics in general for years).

    I think the answer is to ditch continuity in favor of consistency. Let each title have it's own internal continuity for the duration of a storyline or creative team and then just let the next team come in and tell their story and if they want to ignore some things that came before, do so. And if they want to ignore "events," do so. They just need to keep the core cast and main characters of the title consistent and recognizable. After all, it's not like you can pick up a comic book from either publisher from twenty years ago and relate it to the characters as they are portrayed today, although fanboys will insist you can. There's plenty of continuity, but no consistency of character.

    Either way, if they don't do something, then no matter how many reboots and number ones they come out with, readership is going to continue to decline.

  14. #74
    Best In The World Legato's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    84,628

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GoddessOtome View Post
    So far they have several different multiverses occurring. Listed below. I have to admit I am a fan of the Elseworlds and Multiverse titles, as they present different spins on characters.

    Earth Prime - Where all the main DC titles take place.

    Earth 2 - Justice Society

    Ame Comi (Earth Unnumbered) - A world where all the heroes and villains are female.

    Injustice Earth - A world where the point of divergence is the tragic death of Lois Lane, instigated by the Joker.
    You also have the universe that Young Justice is based in
    "It isn't jumping the shark if you never come back down." Chuck

  15. #75
    Lazer Faced Goggindowner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Little Elm, Texas
    Posts
    2,919

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Heroid View Post
    Either way, if they don't do something, then no matter how many reboots and number ones they come out with, readership is going to continue to decline.
    This is really the bottom line. It will eventually get to the point were Disney and Warner won't find enough benefit to even bother publishing these things anymore. Nothing DC or Marvel have done in the past 15 years (or even long before that) have done anything to curb that trend. A change in publishing philosophy is required if DC and Marvel are going to continue publishing anything at all.
    Writers before artists.
    Artists before concepts.
    Concepts before characters.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •