On 8/2/2019 at 8:34 PM, urloony said:

If you can't see it, I can't help you.

Ok. I'll help you a little. Honestly answer this question. Why is She-Hulk included instead of Hulk?

Exactly the same reason Hulk isn't included in the core set for the Marvel minis game announced at GenCon.

Money.

Hulk will sell booster packs.

On 8/3/2019 at 4:37 PM, urloony said:

Sure, but The Hulk is an original Avenger. First issue mind you! Instead, we have She-Hulk because she's been here five minutes?

(if you don't want to go into the political/economical/comics rabbit hole just skip to under the ---------)

I agree Marvel currently is a woke disaster. No wonder sales are plummeting.
While their epic diverse characters are more and more pushed to the wayside.
I'd love to see more Blade. (but he seems to be seen by the company as too 'radical') ...hence i'm weary of the PG13 movie.
Storm is awesome but in recent years she like all X-Men suffered through horribly storytelling.
War Machine is underused. Night Trasher... everyone forgot about etc.
I'd be fine with it if they'd stop reskinning beloved characters and just changing their look/sex/orientation.
And also be a bit subtler at the minimum with their preaching. I'm a righty and I appreciate Judge Dredd despite it being very anti conservative in intent. But the parody/satire tended to usually be well written.
Marvel nowadays just seems to lack good writers and the twitter war artists are mostly there due to the low wage strategy meets 'flood the market' strategy of Marvel.

And that is the biggest problem. The market strategy and overall approach of Marvel Comics. The bizarre forced virtue signalling is just a result of an abusive relationship with their own workforce, the customer base and a lack of realisation that comics need to keep up with the times and become a more quality niche product. They no longer dominate due to alternate entertainment out there.

It's all i'll say about it political/economical marvel side because apparently demanding quality makes me instantly a homophobe/racist/sexists/...
Guess my colleagues unknowingly work with satan because i dislike modern comics...
Weirdass internet...

My annoyed rant asside. And it's the only one i'll make on the topic I promise!

About the choices though see under here...

------------------------

In this case i suspect it has more to do with profit. Nothing more 'nefarious' than that.
I fear a lot of their sets will slam together big popular names with some lesser known ones.
Hence you might end up with a set that has fan favourite Daredevil with one my favourites the niche Moon Knight or Night Trasher.

It forces you to pick up the big sets AND the little ones down the road.
I do think the first core set should've gone with some staples though.
Despite being no fan of modern Captain Marvel. I can see why she's in there. She had a movie.
But She-Hulk? I like her more than Hulk. Well oldschool '4th wall breaking She Hulk' but they should have gone with Cap or another big name Movie Avenger for the core set.
This would more easily draw in people. And then future sets a mixup.

Still I hope that for the future the big sets tend to be stories/scenarios. So i just pick up little hero boxes of the ones I like.
I don't feel like collecting 300 different heroes of which I only like 15.

But we'll see how it turns out.

On 8/3/2019 at 7:04 PM, iJiminy said:

Yeah, it really makes sense that groups like F4 and X-Men come in their own big box expansions.

That would work very well actually. As long as they don't slip in too many 'must-haves' so the sets are quite standalone.
That way you just pick up what factions/groups/themes you're interested in.

8 hours ago, CitizenKeen said:

I can absolutely see Daredevil keeping up with Captain Marvel, the Silver Surfer, and Doctor Strange in this game.

Yes in this kind of game 'abilities' would make minor chars shine and still make sense.

Kinda makes me wish they had the DC universe now that I think about it. The Justice League would make for an awesome core set.

Marvel not in base set? I thought base was Iron Man, She-Hulk, T'Challa, and Spider-Man?

5 minutes ago, CEOWolf said:

Marvel not in base set? I thought base was Iron Man, She-Hulk, T'Challa, and Spider-Man?

If I understood it correctly the core set has:

"Iron Man, Captain Marvel, Spider-Man, Black Panther, or She-Hulk"

10 hours ago, KBlumhardt said:

Or. since the movie rights likely weren't squared away by the time this game started development, the X-Men and FF may have been off-limits for this first release.

There's also the fact that those characters aren't really mainstream popular currently.

There is really numerous reasons not to include them. I do find it strange that there isn't like a token mutant character though.

8 hours ago, Darthvegeta8000 said:

That would work very well actually. As long as they don't slip in too many 'must-haves' so the sets are quite standalone.
That way you just pick up what factions/groups/themes you're interested in.

The dream of all LCG players. 😄

8 hours ago, Darthvegeta8000 said:

I do think the first core set should've gone with some staples though.
Despite being no fan of modern Captain Marvel. I can see why she's in there. She had a movie.
But She-Hulk? I like her more than Hulk. Well oldschool '4th wall breaking She Hulk' but they should have gone with Cap or another big name Movie Avenger for the core set.

In your rush to unnecessarily get on a soapbox did you not stop to look what characters are included in the box.

Are you really trying to say that they didn't include staples in their core set when 4 of the 5 characters have had 1 or more billion dollar solo movies; two of which are Iron Man and Spiderman.

The core set is all staple characters, except for 1. So honestly what are you even talking about in that regard?

56 minutes ago, ScottieATF said:

In your rush to unnecessarily get on a soapbox did you not stop to look what characters are included in the box.

Are you really trying to say that they didn't include staples in their core set when 4 of the 5 characters have had 1 or more billion dollar solo movies; two of which are Iron Man and Spiderman.

The core set is all staple characters, except for 1. So honestly what are you even talking about in that regard?

This.

Funny how when Marvel started plastering the GotG everywhere after that movie surprised everyone and made $750 million, no one thought it was strange... but when they started including Captain Marvel into just about everything they release after her movie made 1.2 billion a good portion of the internet acts like it's due to tokenism or something.

It's money. EVERYTHING is about money. Period.

Disney is a crazy successful business for a reason. They know a heck of a lot more about making money than a bunch of angry fanboys who haven't read a comic in two decades but insist they're somehow worse now than they were back in the 90s (the absolute darkest hour that comics have seen since the 60s).

54 minutes ago, KBlumhardt said:

This.

Funny how when Marvel started plastering the GotG everywhere after that movie surprised everyone and made $750 million, no one thought it was strange... but when they started including Captain Marvel into just about everything they release after her movie made 1.2 billion a good portion of the internet acts like it's due to tokenism or something.

It's money. EVERYTHING is about money. Period.

Disney is a crazy successful business for a reason. They know a heck of a lot more about making money than a bunch of angry fanboys who haven't read a comic in two decades but insist they're somehow worse now than they were back in the 90s (the absolute darkest hour that comics have seen since the 60s).

Personally, I think it's more to do with that the Captain Marvel movie wasn't very good by MCU comparisons. GotG was not only successful, but the majority of people that saw it loved it. There's more to jumping on a property than just how much money it made. Sometimes Disney doesn't know that, which is the troubling thing. Take The Last Jedi and Solo for instance. TLJ was trash, but made a billion dollars. Should Disney be marketing Admiral Holdo or Han Solo?

And, sometimes Disney is really bad at tackling the diversity issue. I've no problem with female protaganists like Captain Marvel and Black Widow. They're heroes, they're female, they're just as cool as the boys when the story is told right. I do have a problem with the shove it down your throat parts like the cheesy scene in End Game where all the female heroes gather. That didn't drive the story. It drove something that existed outside the story, which breaks the story and makes me roll my eyes. Just give me a bad***** female lead, like Leia Organa and have her be a bad*****. You don't need to shout, "Hey, look a woman!".

As for comics, Marvel is pretty much trash right now. Since jumping on the multiverse, world reset bandwagon, they haven't had many compelling runs on any book that would rival their product up to 1992. Sure, the rest of the 90s was awful, but the entirety of the 2000s hasn't been any better. I give anything Waid does a read and usually end up staying on those (His Ant-Man and Wasp and Dr Strange stuff has been pretty cool, and his Daredevil from five years ago had a great run). Slott's doing OK with Fantastic Four and his Surfer stuff was top notch. But, the bulk is real bad. Nothing compares to the character based plots of Claremont's X-Men or Bob Layton's Iron Man classics. All the best writers, Fraction, Hickman, Rucka, Remender, they've all moved over to independent books with the exception of when they need to cash a Marvel paycheck (see Hickman's current X-Men relaunch as an example). Bendis and Jason Aaron have ruined most of Marvel's comic appeal for me.

But, all that said, I love the character choice from the core. She-Hulk is fun and plays into the Alter-Ego mechanic really well. Her lawyer side is one of the better Alter-Egos of any Marvel property. Same, really with Parker and Stark. I think that theme was more why they included who they did. They wanted compelling and different alter-egos. My only gripe is that I like thematic focus, so I would have preferred an all Avengers/X-Men/FF lineup, but I get why they didn't do it.

I love how sensitive Internet Men get when a woman shows up in a comic book movie.

20 movies of hunky dude dope fan service, Cap switching to a bicep curl to pull down a moving helicopter, Stark summoning 100 suits to fly around him, etc and everyone loves it. 1 fan service scene for women and they immediately get all in their feelings about it.

And calling Hickman ditching LosH to do his dream X-Men project a cash grab 😂

1 hour ago, CitizenKeen said:

Sorry for the DP, thought I'd be able to edit this into my previous post but this is beautiful.

Making products for women & poc that make a billion dollars = pandering, forced diversity

Making products for white dudes that make a billion dollars = art

1 hour ago, gokubb said:

As for comics, Marvel is pretty much trash right now. Since jumping on the multiverse, world reset bandwagon, they haven't had many compelling runs on any book that would rival their product up to 1992. Sure, the rest of the 90s was awful, but the entirety of the 2000s hasn't been any better. I give anything Waid does a read and usually end up staying on those (His Ant-Man and Wasp and Dr Strange stuff has been pretty cool, and his Daredevil from five years ago had a great run). Slott's doing OK with Fantastic Four and his Surfer stuff was top notch. But, the bulk is real bad. Nothing compares to the character based plots of Claremont's X-Men or Bob Layton's Iron Man classics. All the best writers, Fraction, Hickman, Rucka, Remender, they've all moved over to independent books with the exception of when they need to cash a Marvel paycheck (see Hickman's current X-Men relaunch as an example). Bendis and Jason Aaron have ruined most of Marvel's comic appeal for me. 

I'd argue there are actually some excellent titles being published at Marvel right now (and this is coming from someone who has continuously read Marvel Comics since 1984). The current Amazing Spider-Man run is very good, for instance (much improved since Dan Slott left) and the Immortal Hulk is not only the best Hulk title ever (yes, including Peter David's run) or the best Marvel title right now, it's one of the best titles on the stand, period. It's no fluke that it's consistently outselling Batman for pretty much the first time ever.

That said... it doesn't matter. The comics just don't matter anymore. I love them (and buy way too many each week), but it's a dying industry (and no, we can't conveniently place all the blame for that at Marvel's feet, it's much more complicated than that) along with the rest of print media. Marvel's comics specifically have become little more than a testing ground for the MCU at this point. It's a place they can try out ideas, storylines, and characters and see the reactions to them before pushing them out into other media.

2 hours ago, gokubb said:

Personally, I think it's more to do with that the Captain Marvel movie wasn't very good by MCU comparisons. GotG was not only successful, but the majority of people that saw it loved it. There's more to jumping on a property than just how much money it made. Sometimes Disney doesn't know that, which is the troubling thing. Take The Last Jedi and Solo for instance. TLJ was trash, but made a billion dollars. Should Disney be marketing Admiral Holdo or Han Solo?

According to whom?

Critics whose opinions people only care about when it helps them make a point?

How "good" a movie is is subjective... the amount of money it makes is not. Lots of people bought tickets to go see TLJ, BP, Captain Marvel, the Transformers films, and Endgame alike (many of whom did so multiple times). That signals to the studios that people want more of those characters and films, regardless of the critical reception of those films or the opinions of noisy people like us on the internet.

Can we please stop with the political theme of "Woke vs Reactionary" please?

Let's judge the characters based on how well they perform in the game, and not on whither, or not, their inclusion is pandering.

There is no good reasons to get hung up over the inclusion of She Hulk and Captain Marvel. Only petty reasons. This is the reason why I gave up on CG

What's CG?

1 minute ago, CitizenKeen said:

What's CG?

*cringes* Comicsgate. Now I feel dirty. It's pretty much half of a pointless culture war over comic books. Half of the battle (the far left, or the current creators) decided that the medium needs to be diverse, and so they decided to be lazy and reskin some superheroes. This is where you got Jane Foster as Thor, Sam Wilson as Captain America, Kamila Kahn as Ms Marvel, Black Superman etc.

The other half just moaned and complained (comicsgate), and eventually decided to make comics in the similar style of 90's comic creations. Many of their complaints today seemed to be short sighted and equally cringe inducing. For example, Jane Foster, at the time was fighting cancer, and transforming into Thor undid the treatment she was receiving. Female Thor was always going to die. Black Superman was from the Earth 2 series after that Clark Kent became evil. Sam Wilson became Captain America to fill in for Steve Rogers who had the super soldier serum removed from his body, thus aging him (I refuse to bring up Hydra Cap because he was generally panned from both sides).

46 minutes ago, KBlumhardt said:

According to whom?

Critics whose opinions people only care about when it helps them make a point?

How "good" a movie is is subjective... the amount of money it makes is not. Lots of people bought tickets to go see TLJ, BP, Captain Marvel, the Transformers films, and Endgame alike (many of whom did so multiple times). That signals to the studios that people want more of those characters and films, regardless of the critical reception of those films or the opinions of noisy people like us on the internet.

I don't read what critics say. I watched the movies. I have a ton of friends that have watched the movies. Some people love Captain Marvel. Most of my community found it fell flat. It was a fine movie, but to the people I know, it lacked compared to other Marvel titles. It wasn't because of having a woman lead. That's got nothing to do with it. It was the directing. There's the scene where Captain Marvel realizes the lies that she's been told and how the Kree used those to keep her down. When she fought through that and came out the other side, it was kinda cool, but really for something that should have been so emotional, it was flat. Compare that to a similar moment in V for Vendetta when Evey realizes the lies she's lived and is fed up with it. That was an amazing moment that is one of the most inspirational in all of film history. That's how Captain Marvel should have made me feel at that moment and it didn't.

It is all subjective, and individually, love what you love. But, there is a thing such as the collective reaction (i.e. IMDB/Rotten Tomato audience scores). CM is at the lower end of those for the MCU. TLJ is at the lower end of that for any blockbuster movie to ever be released.

58 minutes ago, KBlumhardt said:

I'd argue there are actually some excellent titles being published at Marvel right now (and this is coming from someone who has continuously read Marvel Comics since 1984). The current Amazing Spider-Man run is very good, for instance (much improved since Dan Slott left) and the Immortal Hulk is not only the best Hulk title ever (yes, including Peter David's run) or the best Marvel title right now, it's one of the best titles on the stand, period. It's no fluke that it's consistently outselling Batman for pretty much the first time ever.

I'll have to give that Hulk a try. I've not been too much a fan of AMS, but I think that is due to the dramatic changes everyone has done to him. He's just not my Peter Parker anymore. Marvel does splash in some decent titles, but they are hard to find. This is also subjective, of course. My lense is through a longtime Marvel fan. I have about 85% of all Marvel comics from FF #1 to Infinity Crusade, so my version of Marvel that I love is all pre-Image split.

To bring it back to the original post, these conversations really highlight how difficult it is to select who to create. Marvel comics to me isn't about Deadpool, Spider-Gwen and the new Ms Marvel. I live in the classics. But, I have absolutely no problem with producing the new characters as well. I may learn about one that I didn't have exposure to and end up liking them. As long as they bounce around as they did in the core set and as it looks like they will with the first couple hero packs, they can give everyone a little bit of what they want.

1 hour ago, CitizenKeen said:

What's CG?

Similar to gamergate - racist undersexed white boys who are upset that women and brown people started creating and buying comics/video games/etc

4 hours ago, KBlumhardt said:

According to whom?

Critics whose opinions people only care about when it helps them make a point?

How "good" a movie is is subjective... the amount of money it makes is not. Lots of people bought tickets to go see TLJ, BP, Captain Marvel, the Transformers films, and Endgame alike (many of whom did so multiple times). That signals to the studios that people want more of those characters and films, regardless of the critical reception of those films or the opinions of noisy people like us on the internet.

Marvel and TLJ both had A CinemaScore scores, same as GotG 1&2, so clearly audiences loved, and all 4 are rated fresh by the RT aggregate of +/- scores, so critics liked them as well.

That makes their comparison just confusing.

Also, for the record, Solo was a “bad” movie because of script failures, not because it was aesthetically unpleasant, or failings of the cast/crew. Some viewers would forgive the narrative lapses, and time may prove kind to it, but for my money, a Han who runs off leaving Chewie to his own fate (a total reversal of the character as known prior to the movie being made) reads as a failure of the writer.

Tangent: Kind of on the same level as making a movie with a Batman someone willing use guns and to casually murder just about anyone...

20 hours ago, Darthvegeta8000 said:

(...blar blar blar, I don't care about your politics...)

Storm is awesome but in recent years she like all X-Men suffered through horribly storytelling.
War Machine is underused. 

(...still not caring...)

All other things aside, good gravy yes. The X-Men have been butchered (mostly) since X1 & 2, and I NEVER get enough War Machine on-screen.

Tony is great, but THIS makes me bounce in my theater seat like a little kid.

8 hours ago, coolcalmjon said:

20 movies of hunky dude dope fan service, Cap switching to a bicep curl to pull down a moving helicopter, Stark summoning 100 suits to fly around him, etc and everyone loves it. 1 fan service scene for women and they immediately get all in their feelings about it.

Personally, my problem with it was not the scene itself, but the fact that they wasted that scene on a relatively meaningless moment. I mean, compare it to the other female character fan service scene (AKA Wanda going up against Thanos). No one complains about that one because everyone wanted it to happen.

So, yes, give me plenty more A-Force all female fight teams scenes. Just make it matter.

9 minutes ago, slope123 said:

Personally, my problem with it was not the scene itself, but the fact that they wasted that scene on a relatively meaningless moment. I mean, compare it to the other female character fan service scene (AKA Wanda going up against Thanos). No one complains about that one because everyone wanted it to happen.

So, yes, give me plenty more A-Force all female fight teams scenes. Just make it matter.

How are you defining fan service? I'm not sure that Wanda's moment would really fit that term.