Excraft

I don't believe I've ever used the word "hate" to describe the show. I think you love the show much it's warped your thinking and your blinded by devotion and can't admit the obvious. See? That can work both ways. It didn't get a second season. That's a patently obvious fact as to the show not doing well. Well no, what I'm saying is that Disney knew they had a turd on their hands and that no amount of hype or release proximity was going to save it. BP: WF performed markedly worse than the first Black Panther film ($1.34 billion vs. $859 million). The property was already declining. If Riri's solo story was that good, it would have garnered higher viewer numbers and received another season regardless of when it was released. Apparently they do. Did they greenlight a second season? It's possible those were factors. Regardless of the reasons, the show didn't get a second season, which means not enough viewers. The how and the why don't matter at this point.

Yeah no. I'm being honest here, it reads to me that you misread what was posted and zeroed in on a single comment out of context from someone who said they didn't like the series. You decided to go on the offensive and accuse them of something they didn't say because they didn't like the show. Also, how are you defining "did well"? Did well in comparison to what? It made the top 10 for the week on Disney? Ok, but what other new content was released that week? How does Ironheart viewership rank among other MCU streaming shows? I disagree. It's just as plausible that Disney shelved the series because they knew they had a huge steaming turd on their hands, and instead of wasting money on advertising, they shelved it while deciding whether to write it off or release it. Ultimately they decided to release the series, but decided not to spend on advertising because they knew it wasn't going to do well. If Disney were really confident they had a hit on their hands, they'd have hyped it up and released it years ago after Wakanda Forever to continue Riri's story. You can play the "what if" scenarios as to why the show failed and/or how it could have done better endlessly. The series didn't perform well enough for a second season. That's a fact. That's what's most important. I agree and I personally think it's part of the reason Marvel/Disney knew there wasn't much of a story here. I agree. I'd like to see a better script and totally agree Riri needs to do a lot of maturing first.

Don't know that I'd say the set is broken, but this part would be a welcome change.

I disagree, I think they are relevant. They're providing further context. The charts show people did watch the show, and that it may have done okay, but not well enough. The viewership hours weren't sufficient to warrant Disney renewing the series. I don't know about you, but I did find the info rather interesting and did a little research myself. I had thought most went just by straight viewership hours. I found some info about this Luminate company and how they collect their data. Some of it makes me want to read user agreements again for my streaming devices lol. Anyway, from what I found, they are able to track D+ stuff even though they don't get viewership numbers directly. They had reported on how the viewership for the MCU is declining back in November of 2024. Take that article for what you will. A lot of people (IIRC including some of those nasty YouTubers you hate so much) hopped all over that first article @Ghost linked to with the one chart as proof Ironheart sucked because it didn't make the top 10 viewership. I'd have thought given your ardent defense of anything Ironheart, you'd have been thankful that someone took the time to explain why that chart in particular wasn't accurate. I know I'm thankful. It added clarity to the discussion. I could be wrong here, but I think you're reading way too much into it. Seems very simple to understand. There's differences in numbers posted by various sources due to different collection methods and there's a degree of inaccuracy. If I'm being honest, you're trying really hard to accuse @ShardWarrior of saying Disney inflated their viewership numbers for Ironheart. @ShardWarrior repeatedly said that Disney he isn't saying Disney inflated anything, just that there can be some degree of inaccuracy in the data, especially considering that they all use different methods of data collection. That's all. Bottom line is, people did tune in for Ironheart, but not enough to warrant further seasons.

I understand that the Beta server is subject to frequent data wipes. Again, I don't disagree with you. All I said was recreating a character on the Beta server isn't going to take the "hundreds of hours" alluded to.

I can second that this does happen. It's not common, but I do see the occasional request in LFG for people running Aeon or ITFs that are requiring people to have "multiple IO sets" in order to join. There are a couple of really bad SGs that require people to have completely ridiculous builds created by one of the officers in order to run content with them. Any deviation from the build is allowed.

Well, yeah. I don't disagree. That's what I was getting at. All I was saying is that it's not a huge chore to recreate a character on the Beta server. You don't need to spend "hundreds of hours" playing it again and again to get back to whatever level progress you were at. You can recreate any character at any level within a couple of minutes. No need to even transfer it from a live server.

You can just re-copy the character to BETA or re-roll it with all the bells and whistles in a few minutes. It's not like you'd need to level up the character running all the content from scratch again. I think it's more people don't play on BETA because of the low population and most do want some feeling of progression.

A couple of things ... No disrespect was intended. It is true the HC team produces more content than some real development shop. See Cryptic Studios. STO barely gets a trickle of content. Pointing this out doesn't mean other real development shops suck. That's you making an assumption. All my post means is that some of them produce content at a slower pace than HC. That's all. You're injecting a personal hangup into my post that isn't there. If you want the cadence to improve, as others have suggested, volunteer for the development team.

No disrespect meant, but so what? This is just my 2 inf, but there's already so much content in this game. I really don't think we need more story content or power sets. I think we should be happy we have the game back and that the group of volunteers running it are still running it and not burned out. Is everything HC does great? Hell no. Some of it has been great, some of it has been a steaming pile. Overall, they've done a good job with what they have and accomplish more than other real development teams working on real games have produced. That's not something to complain about.

What's not getting done fast enough for you? How much are you expecting from volunteers doing this in their spare time? I think they've done a great job with the amount of content they've produced in the time they have, and that should be commended. I may not like everything HC does, but I'm thankful they are doing it.

Aw man, I just watched the final Black Sabbath show with Ozzy and Metallica. So sad to hear about this. RIP Ozzy.

Which in of itself is a pain, especially in cave maps and narrow hallways, and that isn't including KB knocking stuff into the map geometry where it gets stuck. Hence, the reason people avoided playing sets with heavy KB. There still are those people.

You just have issues with people not liking things. Nobody is confused. Nobody needs you to explain this to them. Nobody needs you to explain what an opinion is or what the term "subjective to the person" means. Just because I didn't care for a particular comic in no way means others won't enjoy it. I didn't care for Supergirl: Woman of Tomorrow. I do encourage everyone to read it and make their own judgment about the story. Your point doesn't make sense though. People can dislike something and that doesn't make it bad for everyone. If I can be honest, it seems to me like you post here just to start arguments. I have to agree with what @ZacKing said earlier - you have the opportunity here to discuss the film and have yet to do so.

Actually, it's you who is very uninformed. I've read the Supergirl: Woman of Tomorrow comic. I didn't care for it. You seem to have serious issues with people disliking something. What are you on about? I said exactly both. Please learn to read. I can use an even larger font to quote what I posted again for you if you need it.

Since you seem to have missed this in my post -

All of which is meaningless for me. Winning an award doesn't automatically mean I can and should like the story. I think its great this writer got recognized for their work and I'm happy there's people out there who enjoyed it. It's not the depiction of Supergirl I'd prefer. The JL/JLU animated series along with the Superman and Batman animated series. There were some great storylines in those that I think would adapt very well to the big screen.

So I've read. Well, not every comic depiction is a winner. I wouldn't have gone with that, but congrats to those who will enjoy it. I really liked Milly Alcock on House of the Dragon, I wish Supergirl was getting something better.

I liked the Justice Gang's costumes, Hawkgirl especially. Initially, I thought they looked a bit weird, but they'd grown on me and having now seen them in action, I agree they look good. I also like the brighter coloring. Man of Steel was much too dark and muted, although Superman's costume did improve in BvS and the Snyder Justice League. I still think Superman looked a little goofy in this with the obvious muscle suit underneath. My only real complaint is the S. It looks more like a diagonal line than an "S" shape to me. I do like the much brighter coloring on it and that its made to look like something other than a generic spandex bodysuit.

I saw it over the weekend. Overall I enjoyed it. There were some good parts, some parts I didn't like, but overall it was a good movie. I do like the brighter, more hopeful/inspiring version of Superman than the Snyder films. Casting was well done. The Jor-El message thing was a bit of a head scratcher and I don't know if I liked how Supergirl was depicted. It was an entertaining film and that's good enough for me. David Corenswet does a great job as Superman and Rachel Brosnahan I think had the most character makes a great Lois Lane. They had good chemistry together. That was me. I still think the suit looks goofy. I'm not sold on the S symbol.

I always thought she'd fit right in with an Armor Wars project and pairing her up with Rhodey. Maybe that's the obvious thing to do so Marvel tried for something different. Shame that the whole Rhodey revelation was done in Secret Invasion. I agree with you that overall the show isn't horrible. I think Secret Invasion was a lot worse. I do like Dominque Thorne in the role.

I don't "scorn" the writers or the show. You'll note I've said the show wasn't all that bad and there's just one or two parts I find badly written. I just don't find the writers work on parts of this series well done and fleshed out. Is that ok with you? That's not me. That's the dialogue from Wakanda Forever and Ironheart. I'm not offended, nor do I dislike that she's making poor choices. Most superheroes do at one point or another. That's part of her journey. I'm offering my opinion on an aspect of the story that I don't find particularly well conceived that makes the character unrelatable for me. Again, is this ok with you? You'll note Pym, Stark, Gates and Tesla didn't need to turn to a life of crime to achieve what they did. But ok, let's set those few examples aside. Here are a few more from the real world. Mozart wrote his first concerto at 17. Blaise Pascal wrote a treatise on vibrating bodies at age 9. Enrico Fermi published his first scientific papers at age 19 and earned his doctorate at 21. Isaac Newton wrote his paper on the Binomial Theorem at age 22. Albert Einstein published his Annus Mirabilis at age 26. Alan Turing became a fellow at Cambridge at 24 and published his "On Computable Numbers" paper at age 24. Surely Riri Williams - super genius - is at least on par with some of them? I can list many more if you like. By the way, none of those examples needed to turn to crime either. Also, I'm not "miffed" she hasn't already made millions. I find it poorly written that someone of her talents and intellect decides to waste her opportunities, of which there would be many open to her... many that wouldn't be available to anyone else. Yes, I don't like to see people waste their potential and blow their opportunities. So what? How did his money help him when he created his first armor? Stark built the miniature arc reactor and that armor in cave from literal scraps. His money had nothing to do with it and was of no help to him there. It was the answer that was dumb and evasive. I already know the answer - you don't like other people offering criticisms of things that you like, and it's very clear that no amount of criticism, no matter how minor, is acceptable for you.

I completely disagree. You can't get much worse than what these "writers" came up with for that part of her story. All of which is irrelevant to the story of Ironheart. Riri is supposed to be a super genius who's smarter than Stark, Pym, Gates and Tesla. People less smart than her could come up with technologies they could sell for big money to fund their personal projects, but Riri can't? I guess you're just going to continue to evade the question. No problem.

Come on, this isn't rocket science. Riri invented a Vibranium detector. She can't sell it or the patent to it to some company for big money? What do you think something like that would be worth? She created an all new AI system on the show. She can't sell that for money to an AI firm? She can't develop other technologies or devices that she can turn around and sell to large corporations for huge sums of money and use those funds to finance her personal armor project? What's the difficulty in understanding that? Tesla sold all kinds of inventions to make money. Riri Williams super genius can't? I understand that these aren't your forums. It's not what I asked you.

That's not always universally true. She also could, you know, negotiate like intelligent people do. "Sorry, you can't have my armor, but I'll build you this instead which would be just as profitable for you"... like the Vibranium detector. You didn't answer the question. Is there anything that people are allowed to question or criticize or dislike with this stuff? I'm not asking Mods.