I wonder if he knows about US....

[MyriVerse]

23 hours ago, Techwright said:

We're now seeing with MCU phase 4 and 5 such a problem.  Whether it is due to bad design/handling or just audience fatigue, there's a chink in the armor, and that's going to likely keep game houses hesitant at development.

I'm not sure why people are so surprised, tbh. The phase 4 and 5 characters have never been the money-makers.

[Bill Z Bubba]

On 3/29/2023 at 2:10 PM, Scarlet Shocker said:

Ship of Heroes is about to launch on Steam so it's probably the most viable of those.

 

They're actually opening that vaporware up? Wow.

[Scarlet Shocker]

5 hours ago, Crysis said:

 

So if the capabilities are all there to do it, but nobody does it, has to be some product marketing guru running around killing superhero games with tons of market demographics stating that the genre just won’t make money.  It’s the only obvious reason.

 

 

This is clearly incorrect since there have been many Superhero games - Some have made serious money. The reason they don't is because accountants are not interested in making stuff people want.

[Bill Z Bubba]

6 hours ago, Mr. Vee said:

I guess i'm the only one who doesn't want them ruining squirrel girl with an mcu version.

 

I'm perfectly happy with this happening.

 

[Scarlet Shocker]

Perhaps we should all wait with baited breath for:

 

Flaming Carrot: The Movie

 

That will put the doubters to rights

 

[Luminara]

2 minutes ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

They're actually opening that vaporware up? Wow.

 

Don't get excited.  The system requirements are steep.

 

 

8 MB RAM and 25 MB storage.

 

SO MANY MEGABYTES, I CAN'T EVEN!  OR ODD!

[Sir Myshkin]

12 hours ago, Crysis said:

Just conjecture…..but many of the players were the same between COH and CO yes?

No. CO actually struggled to contend with CoH after its first six months of activity, and it could easily be argued that the loss in traffic was players investigating the game before returning back to other haunts.

 

Even after CoH terminated, CO didn’t really pick up much overflow, and it didn’t stay for long. And when I say “not much” we’re talking a few hundred users a month at best. All this information used to be public. They even went so far as to get integrated with Steam to try and capitalize on its infrastructure, but I digress we’re not talking about CO’s failures.

 

😏

[SomeGuy]

16 hours ago, SteelRat70 said:

Up to a point that's true.  It's far more gratuitous since Disneys take over than before it and Disney do it at every opportunity regardless of whether it has any relevance to the story or not.

 

*gestures broadly at JUST the X-Men*

 

Even as a kid who was barely aware of what existed past my favorite crayon color, comics were always laying it on thick with political messaging I recognized THEN.

 

FAR more gratuitous? *cough*

 

ok

[SteelRat70]

 

2 hours ago, SomeGuy said:

 

*gestures broadly at JUST the X-Men*

 

Even as a kid who was barely aware of what existed past my favorite crayon color, comics were always laying it on thick with political messaging I recognized THEN.

 

FAR more gratuitous? *cough*

 

ok

In the last couple of years, there has been a definite shift in narrative in terms of roles and message.  It is no longer deemed acceptable to have a white, male, straight protagonist, unless that character is portrayed as a bit of a failure / joke / doofus or is someway helped out / propped up / corrected / made mostly obsolete by someone female, ethnically or sexually diverse.  Better still the white male character would likely be the villain (see Eternals as one of many examples).

Whilst in terms of the cinematic representations of Marvel heroes, X-Men have been unsullied by this approach, largely because most of those films were made more than 5 years ago, but even Logan has a tinge of that self same approach as well.

There have even been statements by Disney that what they're doing is entirely intentional, and yet what amazes me is that you can't see this and see it as a "yeah it's fine, it's always been like that".  No.  It.  Hasn't.

Honestly that level of  blindness is not going to be cured by any number of yellow insps.

Edited March 31, 2023 by SteelRat70

[Xiddo]

I'm a white, straight, male and I've found the newest load of comics/shows about, and often written by, people who aren't like me to be much more interesting than the old guard. I'm a Marvel man more than DC so my examples are from there:
Miles Morales, imo, is a better Spider-Man atm - he's more for the little guy, its just that the little guy now isn't "white nerd". Jane's run with the hammer was a great message that being a hero doesn't mean you have to be a god. Captain Carter I haven't read, but everyone's picked up the shield at some point. It would make sense that the X-Men would introduce conversations around sexuality and gender identities into their story, they've always been about equal rights. Luke Cage has always been about race relations, the Netflix show - sadly - was able to reference things happening in recent memory. I was always sad Disney didn't make Iron Man an alcoholic in the films, reading the comic where he deals with it was so interesting and probably the first time I'd ever seen alcoholism portrayed and discussed. I will admit I knew very little about Islam, and found Ms Marvel (both the show and comics) to be a really joyful way into understanding some of the practices. I was 10 when 9/11 happened, I live in the UK and I couldn't understand the gravity of it, but there was a beautiful piece done where hero and villains came together to help the city, it was about grief and shock, I got the political message in that. I could go on with lots of other examples.

 

There are still straight, white, male protagonists. Captain America. Iron Man. Daredevil. The Punisher. Peter Parker. They've changed over time, some have gained more depth, some have tried to become allegories for things happening in the real world - to help people think about things in a different way. If you have issues with the messages being brought up, it might say more about you.

Edited March 31, 2023 by Xiddo

[Ruin Mage]

Hey what's going on in h-

 

3 hours ago, SteelRat70 said:

It is no longer deemed acceptable to have a white, male, straight protagonist, unless that character is portrayed as a bit of a failure / joke / doofus or is someway helped out / propped up / corrected / made mostly obsolete by someone female, ethnically or sexually diverse.  Better still the white male character would likely be the villain (see Eternals as one of many examples).

Oh okay. You're one of those types.

Don't worry, white male straight characters still exist in DC and Marvel as popular characters. We crackers aren't being erased or less focused on. There's a multitude of factors. Fatigue, comics not being the big booming industry it once was, and more.

Though if we're going solely off movies? Well that has more factors than just "straight white man." - such as the movies just not being great. I mean DC Cinematic Universe has had it rough as hell. Marvel's' Phase 4 & 5 is off to a rocky start not because of a lack of us white bois, but because some stories just haven't been that great. The TV shows are doing alright (in my opinion), but the movies have been...hit or miss.

Also hey, newsflash, most of the comic heroes we love today have had messages/themes tied to them before the 2000s. Even the whitey-white heroes have had themes that you probably despise because it's not just a Straight White Man Being Epic and Cool. Also hey, guess what? There's more than Straight White People in the world. Something which you seem to see as an issue.

 

 

Edited March 31, 2023 by Shadeknight

[Luminara]

You guys are going to get the thread locked.

[Xiddo]

[Shred Monkey]

Here's my HOT TAKE in response to the article.  The reason none of the Superhero MMO's succeeded is because with the exception of CoX, they've all been hot garbage.  CoX didn't actually fail, the studio decided to shut it for non-disclosed reasons that don't seem to have a direct connection to the revenue potential of this property.

 

Also, I think in general, big studios look at the gaming industry and think "we want some of that money!"   But after they hop in, they discover that they're only able to get 1/1000th of the revenue generated by that industry.  Those dollars just aren't enough for them to keep investing.  On the other hand, an independent studio is happy to get that much from their game and they'll keep it alive until they get bored or bought off.

 

 

[Xiddo]

It’s always a bit sad that often the most successful comic/hero games are mobile apps. But I guess the “collect them all!” Nature of multiple characters is always going to attract monetisation. I played the PS4 Spider-Man games (PP&MM) and while I love them… I haven’t played much more since.

I think this game filled the niche of the market of wanting to be super, without being SupermanTM. Most companies think we want to be him, which is then hard to get the cash flowing in.

[Ruin Mage]

31 minutes ago, Luminara said:

You guys are going to get the thread locked.

That's the plan.

[honoroit]

[ZemX]

4 hours ago, SteelRat70 said:

Whilst in terms of the cinematic representations of Marvel heroes, X-Men have been unsullied by this approach, largely because most of those films were made more than 5 years ago, but even Logan has a tinge of that self same approach as well.

 

The X-Men were invented in the early 60s and drew inspiration from the Civil Rights movement.  The Black Panther was introduced in 1966 precisely BECAUSE there was so little representation at the time.  Going even farther back, Cap punched Hitler on the cover of a comic book a year before America even entered WW2.   It seems uncontroversial now, but it would be more like Cap punching Vladimir Putin on the cover of a comic today.  They got death threats, from American comic book fans, for publishing that cover back then because Hitler had his supporters then in America, many more than now, and Putin has his fans here today.

 

Comics have not only always been political, they've always been OBVIOUS about it.  What's different is WHICH politics.   And that's what you're noticing.  There's a natural tendency for people to think something is normal and apolitical merely because it agrees with the status quo or with their own political views.   But the people who want to keep things the same are just as "political" as the ones who want to change things.  That's the truth.

[InvaderStych]

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 31, 2023 by InvaderStych

[GM Crumpet]

It can be argued comic sales are almost on the floor and the current MCU is the only thing keeping them going. I'm certainly over them after the fiasco of the X-Men Krakoa stuff and the way they have done almost every legacy character dirty. Captain Marvel has become one of the most dreary heroes in existence and Carol Danvers was always a personal favourite.

 

As for Phase 4 and 5 I think they were a bit stuck. The existing characters were done, the actors too expensive, and the story ended. They started strong with WandaVision. Loki and Moon Knight, but Ms. Marvel (while done well) as a comic character isn't that interesting and the show changed too much about her powers for the actual fans to embrace her.

 

Eternals was fun, but should have been a limited series. Expecting to introduce a dozen characters, a threat and a resolution was too much for it.  Even the original comic had Ikaris wake up, then slowly bring together the core Eternals together over a year. It suffered from JLA syndrome without the pull of a couple of characters you actually knew, so audiences walked outr none the wiser as to who these people were.

 

She Hulk was a shambles. Even for someone who loved the John Byrne era it was still shocking. I did find it entertaining, but it was all over the place and was just hot garbage.

 

I could go on, but basically it seems that dragging Feige off to try to save Star Wars  was a massive mistake as his attention was split. I'd have gone the route of Loki forming a new Avengers team to combat the threat of Kang after the events of his show. Similar to the Nick Fury cameos in the early shows. Resulting in a quick Avengers movie handing the baton to the new team.

[Xiddo]

1 hour ago, GM Crumpet said:

<snip>

#GetCrumpetAtDisney

Yeah Captain Marvel has lost her way a bit I think... "Which space nonsense can she fly into now". Civil War 2 was a bit of a wet fart too. I've been enjoying the most recent Daredevil stuff. Every time I try and get into Krakoa I feel a bit like I fell asleep during a film and am trying to piece together what I've missed enough so I can nod along.
Dan Slott's She Hulk is quite fun - NGL I haven't watched the show because I got worried about the reviews.

Edited March 31, 2023 by Xiddo

[Techwright]

22 hours ago, MyriVerse said:

I'm not sure why people are so surprised, tbh. The phase 4 and 5 characters have never been the money-makers.

The same could, and has been said about The Guardians of the Galaxy.  And yet, they came from seemingly nowhere (pun intended) to rise to extreme popularity.  Before the MCU, many didn't know who Iron Man was.  Captain America was more well-known, probably due to his WWII ties, Thor was well-known but due to the Scandanavian stories more than anything within Marvel works.  Hulk was probably the best known of the bunch, due to the pre-MCU Ang Lee movie and the success of the 1980s TV show.  (I'm focused on the first Avengers movie.  Obviously Spider-Man tops them all in recognition.)

 

Also, Loki, Spider-Man, and Black Panther aren't money makers? They're all Phase 4.  I will agree that Phase 4 had an overall weaker lineup, and Phase 5 is even riskier, though it has the the next chapter of Loki, plus the trilogy finale of GotG in the mix as well as the reboots of Blade and Daredevil, both of which appear to be highly anticipated.  Incidentally, Blade is considered Marvel's first movie success, though modestly so by today's standards. (International gross, scaled for 2023: a bit more than  US$ 242 million.)

 

[Captain Fabulous]

9 hours ago, SteelRat70 said:

 

In the last couple of years, there has been a definite shift in narrative in terms of roles and message.  It is no longer deemed acceptable to have a white, male, straight protagonist, unless that character is portrayed as a bit of a failure / joke / doofus or is someway helped out / propped up / corrected / made mostly obsolete by someone female, ethnically or sexually diverse.  Better still the white male character would likely be the villain (see Eternals as one of many examples).

Whilst in terms of the cinematic representations of Marvel heroes, X-Men have been unsullied by this approach, largely because most of those films were made more than 5 years ago, but even Logan has a tinge of that self same approach as well.

There have even been statements by Disney that what they're doing is entirely intentional, and yet what amazes me is that you can't see this and see it as a "yeah it's fine, it's always been like that".  No.  It.  Hasn't.

Honestly that level of  blindness is not going to be cured by any number of yellow insps.

This is pure nonsense.

 

21 hours ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

 

They're actually opening that vaporware up? Wow.

It looks awful TBH.
 

On 3/30/2023 at 12:06 PM, Crysis said:

 

There was a time when I believed that state of the art really prevented superhero movies from being a “thing” since all the sfx would look campy.  MCU and others have proven we have the ability now to pretty much put anything on the screen we would like to see.  So that’s no longer a limitation in film or in games.  

 

So if the capabilities are all there to do it, but nobody does it, has to be some product marketing guru running around killing superhero games with tons of market demographics stating that the genre just won’t make money.  It’s the only obvious reason.

 

For me, I’ve come to the realization that MMO’s in general have “moved on” from PC gaming to consoles and, perhaps even moreso, to mobile gaming devices.  Free-to-play was a reaction to micro-transactions and those were all pushed by explosive growth in mobile gaming.  So, we are re-living “the good old days” simply because there are no other options.

From what I've read and been told by developer friends one of the reasons we don't see more Marvel games is that the licensing agreement is STEEP. A huge yearly payment plus a large percentage of the profits in the first 1-2 years. Makes sense why most Marvel games are garbage P2W mobile games, because they make a ton of money.

[Crysis]

3 hours ago, Captain Fabulous said:

From what I've read and been told by developer friends one of the reasons we don't see more Marvel games is that the licensing agreement is STEEP. A huge yearly payment plus a large percentage of the profits in the first 1-2 years. Makes sense why most Marvel games are garbage P2W mobile games, because they make a ton of money.

 

I read an article recently (I'll like it if I can find it) that showed that the average, as in NOT top-10 mobile game STILL brings in anywhere from 15-20X the revenue of the top selling console games AND almost all of the top 10 PC games -COMBINED-.

 

I don't enjoy most mobile games.  I don't play most mobile games.  But they sure do seem to dominate the gaming industry now.

[MyriVerse]

3 hours ago, Techwright said:

The same could, and has been said about The Guardians of the Galaxy.  And yet, they came from seemingly nowhere (pun intended) to rise to extreme popularity.  Before the MCU, many didn't know who Iron Man was.  Captain America was more well-known, probably due to his WWII ties, Thor was well-known but due to the Scandanavian stories more than anything within Marvel works.  Hulk was probably the best known of the bunch, due to the pre-MCU Ang Lee movie and the success of the 1980s TV show.  (I'm focused on the first Avengers movie.  Obviously Spider-Man tops them all in recognition.)

 

Also, Loki, Spider-Man, and Black Panther aren't money makers? They're all Phase 4.  I will agree that Phase 4 had an overall weaker lineup, and Phase 5 is even riskier, though it has the the next chapter of Loki, plus the trilogy finale of GotG in the mix as well as the reboots of Blade and Daredevil, both of which appear to be highly anticipated.  Incidentally, Blade is considered Marvel's first movie success, though modestly so by today's standards. (International gross, scaled for 2023: a bit more than  US$ 242 million.)

 

I'm speaking about historically, not really about movies, and yes, in general. Spidey, Thor, and Panther are the exceptions.

 

Black Widow, Shang-Chi, Eternals, Doctor Strange are Marvel's D-list characters. Loki might be a C-lister, as are Falcon, Captain/Ms. Marvel, Winter Soldier, Moon Knight, Wanda, Vizh, Hawkeye, and Shulkie.

 

Phase 5 seems a lot worse.