Quote: It's not change if it already happened before.
I welcome change, I love change... when it's justified, makes sense and it's honest change, not when it's middle aged so-called writers trying to bring back their lost childhood either because middle-aged so-called readers demand them to do it or because the choose to do it.
Show me change, real change in comics, and I bet I was for it when it happened, it was justified and it was real, not the return of an outdated status quo.
For readers like you turning the Wasp back into a human after Heroes Reborn is "change" while having made her a butterfly in the first place was wrong, while for me the opposite is true.
Are you reading this? Do you read what you post? 1) "Middle aged so-called readers"? You mean guys that don't care about how good a story is if it defies their precious continuity? That's what you mean, right? And they cling to their childhood comics... Like Man of Steel, right? 2) "Justified change". You explained to me in another thread what you thought was "justified change". If it's got a Crisis to back it up, then it's justified. It doesn't matter if the comics NEED the revamp or not, if it's got the Crisis you think it's justified. That's what you said. You said you'd support Birthright (a comic you hate) if it had a Crisis to back it up. Your words. But that's not a good reason for change. A Crisis is just another comic, it has no real impact. Maybe in your "continuity above all else" world it does, but not here where everyone else lives. A good reason for change is the fact that the comics suck and nobody knows what to do with the characters as they are anymore. That's why the DCU was revamped in 1985, not because the Anti-Monitor forced the Editors to do it.
