What I am upset with is certain trends found in serialized media. I haven't given any exact descriptions with regards to future DCU-based games.
being here in the batman: arkham city video game discussion thread, you can see my confusion.
"...Just general predictions."
Originally Posted By: Rob
that's not a point i've made. i adore comic books as well as video games. does this really need to be said on a forum bearing my name with sections like: comic books and video games?
"Esteem" was a poor choice of words; I wanted to say "literary esteem," but that wouldn't have made sense. I'm not trying to say you dislike one more than the other. What I'm pointing out is that you're trying to draw a distinction between the contents of the two mediums using solely the differences in presentation and the fact that video games simply haven't had as much coverage as comicbooks yet. But that does not address the serial nature that video games have in common with comicbooks.
Batman is clearly developing its own larger serial niche as a video game. There has been an undeniable interest in this development (see also: Warner Bros. buying Rocksteady)--especially with its continuum being based on the current era of books. This tells the powers that be that the game reaches out to the same demographic. The potential promotional uses for the game with regards to the DCU and its characters is evident without "Parallaxian fear."
There can very clearly be seen a correspondence between the two mediums after all. If you haven't noticed the "Arkham City" campaign in the DCU already, just pick up the latest issue of Wonder Woman. It has a mini written by Paul Dini at the end depicting Joker and Harley and their thoughts at the end of "Arkham Asylum" and their foreshadowing for the sequel. This kind of marketing is easily reciprocated.
Originally Posted By: Rob
that bear no semblance to arkham city/asylum or the DCU comic books, let alone each other.
Wait. Are you saying Asylum/City don't bare a resemblance to the current DCU?
Originally Posted By: Rob
there need not be a correlation, attributes of one need not cross into the other, and every bit of established "proof" screams that.
I do not recall using the word "need."
Originally Posted By: Rob
and this bears stating: ongoing serials are an inherent strain on serials. in other words, a solo batman book can get old and bad just as quickly as a batfamily book.
Nine times out of ten it probably won't be "just as quickly." Which is the point.
Writing is not a strain unto itself. It's the weight of the device that strains the writing. Thus, there are certain things that are more difficult than others to write.
Originally Posted By: Rob
the evidence, again, is in a number of failed titles and arcs. thus, the arguments cancel out, and everything reverts back to a perspective of story quality, not character quantity.
That all depends on your practical examples. Not the principle of writing in and of itself. From story to story, certain tropes have a tendency to manifest what's generally considered to be bad writing. Not sure why it's so incomprehensible that writing tends to be bad for a particular reason.
Originally Posted By: Rob
if your job is to write, you're under the expectation to write well. that doesn't mean the situations wont occasionally overpower the role. however, that also doesn't mean it's a guarantee the role will succeed in a "regular" scenario. a good writer is a good writer and bad stories are bad stories. that description holds true for firefighters, nurses, groundskeepers, janitors and every other role.
Sounds like me Pre-Crisis when I was preaching to Mxy about writers not having an excuse not to know every square inch of the DCU and its trappings at any given time.
Everyone is expected to do a job. But most employers can acknowledge when certain circumstances are impractical. Or in this case, fanboys.
I'm not gonna call someone a bad fireman/nurse/cop because they're unable to save everyone or anyone in a set of particularly heinous circumstances. Likewise, I'm not gonna call someone a bad writer if they can't juggle "families" of characters and extraneous crossovers while they're writing a serial in which they're ideally charged with only a main protagonist and a scant amount of support characters. Even in JLU, the writers only focused on a few characters at a time per episode.
Originally Posted By: Rob
honestly, that'd probably be hysterical. it'd be a fun ride. i don't need every batman tale to be this epic journey through the darkness, with rooftop joker battles to the (near)death. personal preference? sure, i lean towards the dark knight as he was meant to be. but why would anyone shut themselves out of a good story and/or a fun adventure because things weren't what "they were supposed to be"?
Fair enough, but again, the lack of convention really defeats the purpose of actually calling it "Batman."
