battlewraith

Sure, maybe. But I'm trying to make sense of your contribution here. The claim was that people didn't watch the show. According to Disney, they did. Now, unless someone actually wants to argue that Disney is not to be trusted on this--that's it. The claim is wrong. As far as I can tell, nobody here is claiming that Ironheart did gangbusters compared to other popular shows, just that it did well. So the lists that were provided are irrelevant to the point, other than to indicate what numbers Disney is giving which you can just google. I'm not taking issue with your background or perspective on numbers. I'm taking issue with this: Okay, so......... What am I supposed to do with this? Is it just a generic PSA that can be applied to any figures coming out of the entertainment industry (or any other industry for that matter)?

It was not directed at you, on purpose, to avoid this exposition. I don't disagree with anything you said about the numbers. I question the rhetorical goal of what you're saying. There is a cultural trend to be skeptical of data sources: scientific research, medical data, government statistics, etc. Skepticism is generally good. We shouldn't just take everything on faith. However, this current trend generally amounts to a vague dismissal of information based on insinuation. Someone said that people didn't tune in for this show. The list indicates that a substantial amount did tune in. That's a pretty simple claim. It doesn't matter to me that some, all , or none, of the figures on that list may have been exaggerated. The only case that would be relevant is if Disney decided to fabricate an audience for a show they left on the shelf for 3 years and did little to promote. You cared enough to write all of that based on someone referencing the list.

They wouldn't, unless some executive at Disney had a deep emotional commitment in a Disney+ show pulling ahead of Trainwreck: Poop Cruise. This is 2025. When people are confronted with a specific data point they don't like, they will often launch a vague, generalized attack on the source of the data. "I'm not saying this company lied (because then I'd have to show evidence), but companies do lie about these sorts of things."

Again, no clue what you're on about. Yes, and my observation is that, despite being shelved and having minimal promotion, people watched the show. Given this data point, a more reasonable conclusion is that they should have released the series earlier, in closer proximity to the Black Panther movies, and it would've performed better. You still would've hated it, but maybe it would've garnered a second season.

The reason I watched this show is because my wife wanted to watch Andor season 2, so we subbed Disney+ (which we now no longer have). Saw some ads, so I thought I'd give Ironheart a shot. So this "my precious Disney" stuff--I have no clue what you're going on about. I watched Loki, Agatha, and Ironheart. That's it. And I thought the point of this thread was Ironheart. I strongly suspect that you've consumed more Disney product than I have. I labelled it bitching because it is. This show didn't appeal to you so you think maybe it should've been scrapped and started over. I don't think you were really the intended audience for this show. Eventually, I think you will get over it. God speed.

If it was the most streamed thing on Disney plus, then obviously people were tuning in. And this was, by your account, with no build up or promotion until about 1 week before. Did it make your top ten list? No. Did any other superhero series? Lol no. I thought people were done bitching about this show weeks ago. With all this enduring hatred, they must've done something right.

And yet it was the most streamed thing on Disney+ the week it debuted. Letting it sit on a shelf until there was substantial superhero fatigue was most likely the real mistake.

The last big discussion on this topic revealed that, not only did maybe 1% of suggestions see any action, the ones that did took years for that to happen. The first example that Googly found for me took 5 years to be implemented. And this is assuming that the change that happened was actually related to the suggestion made years earlier and didn't have some parallel development. Regardless of what the devs can do or should do--the defense of the status quo here is exactly like a cult mentality. The god on the hill doesn't communicate with us directly. But he lets us know that he hears our prayers. Our roles as the chosen ones is to weed out heretics (ie people with bad ideas, people that don't do research, people that just need to be told to fuck off, etc.). We--the miniscule subset of forumgoers that camp the suggestions forum (mostly Rudra)--are the weathervane. We hold ourselves to represent what everyone wants. Our piety is rewarded when, some day, a change happens that vaguely resembles something we asked for and we feel that warm glow of affirmation that comes from assuming that we were the reason for it.

So, episode 4.... The cutest depiction of a chestburster ever?

A failed boomer mentality referenced in a 40+ year old ad used to justify why we can't change the rules for a TF in an old video game. It just doesn't get any worse/better than that.

https://soranews24.com/2025/08/22/japanese-household-cleaner-maker-releases-survival-horror-scrubbing-game-on-steam/

The third episode ended on a gruesome note.

Every class that has some sort of intelligent pet summons should have that sort of control. The idea of excluding doms from this as some sort of balance tactic is ridiculous. Do something more to help controllers if necessary, but don't consign doms to having stupid pets as if this is somehow helping. It's especially irritating in light of everyone having powerful incarnate pets available that have this control scheme, but doms still can't direct imps or whatever.

It seems to me that anti-knockback bias goes back to the days when teams would be relying on toggle powers with anchors, like radiation infection. You'd be fighting a tough group and then someone would knock your anchor away from it--sometimes sending it into another group. Maybe it's not as big a deal anymore since those anchor powers aren't as popular?

This is actually the most horrific aspect of the show for me. The conceit is that the hybrid synths have been mind swapped--as if the mind were something akin to a soul that could be moved from one housing to another. The kids were sacrificed in order to create synthetic replica minds with immortal bodies. This suggests a scenario where the deluded, vulnerable, or talented, if not the whole human race, could be enticed to commit suicide in favor of the creation of synthetic dopplegangers.