This is discussion archived from a time before the current discussion method was installed.
re Spikeification/Badass Decay launched as Badass Decay: From YKTTW
Working Title: rename:spikeification: From YKTTW
Austin: I have to question Satan's inclusion here. From what I know of the bible, he was always a punk ass. He encouraged people to sin, but never did anything himself.
Austin: And aside from Sonic 2006, when has the character of Sonic gotten any development in the games? He's always portrayed as the same cocky, fun loving guy who lives for adventure that he always was. He never shows a vulnerable side nor does he angst about tough situations.
Lord Seth: In regards to Satan, agreed, so I deleted it. It's really more of a Villain Decay than a Badass Decay.
Charred Knight: Deleted Davy Jones as that was
Character Development. He was still the main threat in the movie he was just being controlled by Beckett who had his heart.
That Other 1 Dude: I don't think that
Gunnerkrigg Court example shouldn't be listed as an exception. It's seems to like a straight example where it's generally seen as an improvement on his character.
Being a straight example of this isn't automatically bad, and it'd be nice if there was at least
one thing that supported that. Also, there's a bunch of things listed under "exceptions", which sounds more like straight examples.
Grumman: Moved the Ozzy Ozbourne example from exceptions to straight examples. While I'm at it, the
Dungeons And Dragons example with the Drow looks like a straight example, too. I also removed the "Ahem" comment in the
James Bond example - it is clearly
They Changed It, Now It Sucks!, not
Complaining About Shows You Dont Like.
Janitor: This is not an example of badass decay. It might go in
Badass as an example.
- Noah "HRG" Bennet manages to retain much of his badass status. Sure, he may have turned on his evil employers and has lots of meaningful conversations with his wife and daughter, but he also travels the world, murders former mentors and captures villains, all without superpowers. The issue of badassery settled when HRG beat the crap out of (then-depowered) Sylar and then proceeded to slit his throat with a craft knife.
Fly: Cloud? Really? Cutting:
- Probably Cloud from Final Fantasy VII falls into this trope. Starts off as an aloof loner, always ready with a BFS and an uncaring attitude, and by the end of the game he's trite enough to use the words "Let's mosey!" with a straight face. Slightly inverted in that his backstory (as shown in FF7 and FF7 Crisis Core) shows that he was definitely no badass when he was younger. Interestingly, his character reverts back to badass for the anime sequel, Advent Children.
- To be fair, Cloud does everything with a straight face in the game. The graphics were pretty limited.
Cloud was never badass. He was just faking the Jerkass because he was slightly mentally ill. The kind of people who thought that behaviour was badass are the kind of people the game is making fun of.
Charred Knight: Fighting Sephiroth? Escaping Shinra on a motorcycle? That's not badass. Cloud's jerkass behavior wasn't supposed to be cool, but it wasn't deconstructing anything, it was just showing Cloud getting out of the shell he's been in since Childhood and discovering the power of friendship. It's pretty common actually.
Trouser Wearing Barbarian: The more I think about, the more I fail to realise any good reason for this page to even exist. The original
Spikeification trope served no other purpose besides complaining about Spike from
Buffy The Vampire Slayer not being as
Bad Ass as he used to be, with the other examples (
which weren't even examples) being tacked on to justify its existance. Over time it's become one of the most thematically sloppy "tropes" on this website, varying between about five different definitions.
Currently, this page (the write-up at least) seems to have gone with the "He developed a personality beyond being a killing machine! He's not cool anymore!" definition. This is still overwhelmingly negative in tone, as if having any Character Development besides "becomes more badass" is automatically a bad thing.
While I was the one to remove the "if this happens to a guy, it is Badass Decay" line from the Chickification (ugh) page, at heart, they're more or less identical - both were made based on one character (Spike and Tula), both of them are sloppily defined, and both of them are used primarily for whining whenever a character shows any signs of vulnerability or otherwise does something that some troper didn't like.
If this were made now, it'd be Cut Listed in a heartbeat. It only persists as a legacy page from when this site was more accepting of subjective Complaining pages. Adding a subjective tag and changing the write-up is still a futile attempt to polish a turd. At heart, this "trope" still boils down to "Complaining About Character Development You Don't Like."
Fast Eddie: We're not going to cut this.
That Other 1 Dude: Can you think of any reason other than "it's old"?
Rebochan: It seems to me that there might be a way to salvage this so long as we don't just let people complain about character development they don't like and simply objectively note characters that started out as particularly evil or Jerkass or whatever making a particularly dramatic shift towards the opposite. For example, the Godzilla example on this page is a good one - he starts out as a chaotic evil force and is these days depicted as a hero of humanity with a taste for collateral damage. We just need to really nail down a stricter definition and enforce it.
Charred Knight: I would remove anything that is "Character Development that changes one note badasses", an example is Scar for Fullmetal Alchemist who never stops being a badass, he just returns to the good man he was before the Amestris Goverment ruined his life by killing his family, destroying Ishval, and turning his people into refugees.
natter:
- Kenshin from Rurouni Kenshin suffers from this. This is an example of how you can only go down when you're already at the top. Kenshin initially has no problems defeating the beginning enemies, but... as the series went on, slowly by surely he started struggling when fighting every single enemy he met. It becomes rather unbelievable when Kenshin, who is 28 years old and has been known as a legendary assassin since he was very young, struggles in the fight against Seta Soujiro, who is only 18 years old and not even as well known.
- Are you joking? Kenshin's opponents later on consist of men as Aoshi-who was always capable of legitimately fighting Kenshin, Shishio-a legendary Hitokiri as well and Enishi-who had a style that was a perfect counter to Kenshin's own and had trained for ten years to fight him. And the idea that Kenshin won't struggle against Soujiro over the prospect Soujiro 'isn't well known' is absurd-For what reason would Shishio want to announce his secret weapon to the world? And add that to Soujiro's skill being nothing short of incredible....and being the prodigy of Shishio. And being able to move so fast he's literally invisible and throwing off Kenshin's sixth sense. Yeah.
- Yeah, exactly my point. Kenshin starts out able to defeat bad guys easily, and later starts struggling with everyone he meets. The writer inserts reasons, just like you listed, but that doesn't prevent badass decay from happening. There can be all the reasons in the world, but the overall story goes from -> Kenshin = badass able to defeat everyone —-> Kenshin = overwhelmed by almost every other fighter he meets. And about Soujiro: It doesn't matter that the story tries to justify him being a child prodigy that can go invisible. It really doesn't make sense to be that way, AND it makes Kenshin look a lot less badass. You could have Soujiro be a five year old underling and try to justify that he's the spawn of heaven or something, but it won't make Kenshin look any cooler when he's struggling against him.
- This is absurd. Kenshin defeats numerous bad guys, generally because they are street thugs who do not occupy the tier he does. He has an incredibly hard fought battle against Aoshi for one. Later on, guess what happens? Kenshin's fights become less frequent and he tends to only fight people who can give him a legitimate challenge. He doesn't have issues with, say, Cho or Kujiranami, but Aoshi, Shishio, Soujiro, Enishi, people who are on a far higher tier? This isn't badass decay in the slightly. He's a match for Saito, defeats Aoshi, defeats Shishio, ends up defeating Enishi...It goes to Kenshin fighting people on his level and frankly listing Soujiro's FAME as some sort of qualification is asinine. And it 'doesn't make sense' for Soujiro to be that way? Do explain. He was trained by Makoto Shishio to utilize a very dangerous inborn talent, which lends itself to superhuman speed-which KENSHIN HIMSELF piked up in a very short time going by the flashbacks. Not only that, Sojiro lacks emotions, which throws Kenshin's established sixth sense off. Not an example of this trope whatsoever.
Charred Knight: I just want to point out that this is the most ludicrous example I have ever heard, the OP is seriously comparing street thugs to Seta, one of the best fighters in the series.
KJMackley:I took out Tai Lung from
Kung Fu Panda because you can't suffer badass decay after appearing in only one story. It's the course of multiple stories that it happens. I also took out Bob Kelso from
Scrubs because it failed to mention that the guy retired. Yes his character has been softened slightly over the years (he is still about as huggable as a cactus) but his mean spiritedness could never have the same impact because he now has no influence on anyone.
Ronnie: Just curious, why was the meta-example removed? IMHO, it fits perfectly, and is the kind of humor that we often see in this wiki.
Meta
- This very trope and Rape The Dog underwent Spikification into their current states.
Shale: Am I the only one who doesn't see Spike as an example of this? He spent maybe five episodes as a badass, and then
characterization marched on to the lovelorn
Harmless Villain-slash-
Anti-Hero who makes friends with Buffy's mom over coffee and sob stories.
Arsenal Tengu: I don't know that the picture of the plush Spike represents the trope very well. That thing is fucking scary.
Crazyrabbits: Cut this:
- Ellen Ripley in between the second and third Alien movies. Just for comparison's sake:
Aliens: becomes a
Mama Bear, torches an entire nest of xenomorphs and engages in an epic fistfight with the Alien Queen before throwing her out the airlock.
Alien 3: crashes on prison planet, shaves head, has to be saved from gang-rape, doesn't get any weapons.
The author has little understanding of the films. Ripley's "badassness" in the second film, aside from the rescue of the Marines from the hive using the APC, only comes once she gets the pulse rifle. Her entire Roaring Rampage of Revenge is based on the fact that she has a metric shitload of weaponry and is going on a suicidal mission (she goes into the heart of the hive). She is still "badass" in the third film, but only to the extent that she has no weaponry to back her up. I don't understand she's supposed to do something heroic when she's assaulted by three men wielding knives in an isolated part of the prison. Hell, she even confronts the xenomorph and dares it to kill her during the third film. Keep this out.
Is it just me, or is the bit about Mannimarco little more than: "Bawww he Dunt l00k scarwy Anymure!11!1"
Reaction to rename
Fast Eddie: Name change done. The old entry for
Spikeification is left around as redirect, to service the 750 or so off-site references.
Clendy82: Why the name change? While the new name may technically be more grammatically correct. The term Spikeification just seems so much more . . . descriptive, if that makes any sense.
Meta Four: Because "Spikeification" only makes sense if you're familiar with the character arc of Spike from Buffy The Vampire Slayer. Strange but true: there are people who read this wiki who aren't familiar with Buffy. For them, Spikeification sounds like something that gets more spikes over time, which would make it more dangerous; in other words, exactly the opposite of the trope's meaning.
Redkun: If only there was something on the page to explain the reference. If only...
OotS Fan: This is stupid. I'm changing this article back to Spikification. Not everyone (including me) watches the Simpsons, so know do we have to change Flanderization too?
Screw that!
Fast Eddie: The discussion in this and the YKTTW discussion show many reasons for the name change.
Cassius335: @Eddie: I can't help but notice that Badass Decay got a grand total of three votes, two of them from you. This seems to be a case of descriptive-but-boring usurping creative. I'm also on the switch-it back side.
@Meta Four: If you ever try to make that a trope, you could always call that More Pointy or somesuch.
Meta Four: I'm not worried about the title being confused with some other trope, I'm pointing out that, to the uninitiated, the name "Spikification" implies something becoming more dangerous, but the trope is about people becoming less dangerous. I'm all for creative titles, as long as they make sense to those outside the fandom they reference.
So, yeah, renaming Flanderization might be a good idea too. But "Flanderization" at least has the advantage that it's a meaningless term outside this wiki, and as such it doesn't imply exactly the opposite of the subject it refers to.
Redkun: But the first paragraph of the entry explains what the term means. You're "initiated" the second you actually click on the link and read what it says, which is what any person actually interested in the term would do.
Meta Four: Explanatory paragraphs do not justify completely counter-intuitive titles, especially when a much clearer alternative exists.
That Other 1 Dude: I'm glad that the article had it's name changed, but "Badass Decay" actually sounds kind of worse. This isn't really about being Bad Ass and getting weaker, it's about being completely evil and then becoming sympathetic.
Kerrah: Worst. Name change. Ever.
Inyssius: I have never watched Buffy. I am not complaining, and in fact I love "spikeification". Please, please let's change it back.
Inyssius again: By my tally, the current situation is nine against Badass Decay (counting myself) and eight for it. And one against both Badass Decay and Spikeification, but I guess it sucks to be that dude because THIS EDIT WAR ONLY HAS TWO SIDES, PAL!
Situation may change as further votes come in or as previous voters voice their hatred for one side or the other now that I've polarized the debate.
Now what?
(No delays! Strike while the iron is hot! It's revert time!)
Charred Knight:That Other 1 Dude, this is actually about an attempt to make the badass look sympathetic but instead just made him look pathetic. An example, imagine if they gave a badass a background involving him being raped, and then the badass starts crying constantly about the rape. His no longer shooting vampires, his now just crying.
The Ninth Doctor: A huge amount of tropes have to have their description read to be understood (did you understand Anvilicious or Cut His Heart out with a spoon or Doomy Doom of Doom etc when you saw the title?) Of course, for a few you might get some vague apreciation of what it might touch upon, but you don't get it until you click the link. And there's an insane number of tropes named after characters. All this change does is take away some interesting.
Grimace: Throwing my hat in the ring here - as with the above, "Spikification" was/is far more interesting and unique a title than "Badass Decay", which is (forgive me) just really really bland. Part of the fun of TVTropes is the quaint little naming system we've got going on here! And after someone has visited this page, and been directed to it a few times, they quickly (like I did) get conditioned to "Spikificaiton = Making cool characters crap." Another vote to change it back, in summary.
Fast Eddie: When the change was proposed and executed, Spikeification had 750 off-site (inbound) referrals. The article now has 1270. That's operating links, not hits per link. 1270 sites now refer to the article, or anyway, that many unique URLS. The more accessible a title is to people who have not adopted our private jargon, the more successful the article is, which means the title has a better chance of being adopted as the jargon of the Web.
We are in pretty constant danger of descending wholly into a private language around here, which would be kinda sad because we have things to say that deserve a wider audience than just the people who post here.
Also, you can still use Spikeification as a term. Absolutely nothing has been lost, and there are gains to show for it.
Charred Knight: I am with Fast Eddie on this one, its kind of hard to get people to come over here when I am using some obscure reference to a Joss Wedon Tv series. Its Pandering to the Base, and for the growth of this site which is growing a lot since I got here, we need to make sure we can make it easy to understand what a trope title is. An example is Audience Sucker Punch seems to me like a reference to a big fight that never happens, but instead its a reference to bad fight scenes which are common is Shonen series.
The Ninth Doctor: So are the dozen or so Xanatos tropes going to be renamed as well? One of the reasons this site is popular and grows ever more popular is because of how interesting the tropes are, and intentional Trope Name Decay does not help this.
Grimace: I completely understand your argument Fast Eddie, but to me the "Private Language" argument doesn't gel. When I first came here I had absolutely no idea what a Xanatos Gambit was, and thought Flanderization was giving someone a mustache and green turtleneck. But I adapted rather quickly, as others (I presume) have/will do. And I quickly grew to like the quirky naming. So, unless we're thinking of renaming all the tropes titled after a character/event (and thus turning making this site really bland, in a way), I'm still (politely) voting we change it back. For what its worth.
Etrangere: I'm with Fast Eddie on this one. Not everyone spends enough time in this wiki to learn the language. Names should be clear enough, that doesn't mean they can't be amusing as well, but still approachable for people who have already spent days reading articles and getting acquainted with the lingo.
Fast Eddie: I treasure the quirky titles, too. They are a significant part of the wiki's charm. If you step back from it for a sec, Bad Ass Decay is not a stodgy title. I think it is bold and irreverent, but still very direct to the meaning of the trope.
A general renaming push isn't really called for. Someone (I forget who) came up with the idea of providing redirects for things like the Xanatos tropes from titles that are not as dependent on knowing who Xanatos is. That's not a bad idea. Like with BTVS, the day will come when a reference to a particular show will not be as automatically recognized as it once was. I think it is important that we never get to the point where we seem to be stuck in the past. For me, anyway, the wiki is about the things that endure in stortelling. The pop-hotness of a given show comes and goes. The tropes endure.
Rebochan: Another vote against the title change because it makes no sense from the standpoint of what this wiki is about. We're not The Other Wiki. We do not need to appeal to complete strangers when the whole point of the articles are to give quirky names to a trope that best exemplifies the trope and then provide an explanation. Seriously, almost none of the tropes in this wiki have a clear meaning - I had no idea who the hell Xanatos is, for example. And what the hell does Cue Cullen mean to someone outside the Transformers fandom? We are rapidly sliding down a slippery slope if we're pulling this on every trope just because newcomers might not get it, especially because this means we are assuming they won't actually read the page to get the reference.
That Other 1 Dude: Am I the only one that think this should have a different name, but not necessarily the old one? There's also the issue of this article seeming to being split in two different direction: An straight-up evil character becoming sympathetic, and when a formidable character ends up being pathetic (which to entirely honest is already covered by Villain Decay, and a lot of the time just leads to whining that a Draco in Leather Pants "isn't cool anymore")
Charred Knight: That's because it's supposed to be a Villain Decay caused by an attempt to make him sympathetic.
That Other 1 Dude: Now about a third of the examples weren't even bad guys to begin with (Cloud?)! Kevin from Ben 10 is a great counter-example to assuming being sympathetic made him "less badass". When he was evil he wasn't even remotely cool: he was pretty much a Ax-Crazy brat who tried to steal thing using the cheapest tactics possible, and then he was a loser that threw a psychotic tantrum when he couldn't control any of the powers his stole from Ben. After his Heel–Face Turn he actually has control over his powers and makes good use of them.
Nerem: Against 'Badass Decay', as most of the characters involved AREN'T BADASSES. They're simply 'cool people' or cool villains who lost most of what made them cool. And how is it an irreverant title. Sounds like you're just throwing words around to justify making Trope Titles as bland as possible.
Peanut: I'm with who ever said we could change the name but it doesn't have to go back to the old one. Spikeification grew on me after I learned what it meant. I didn't watch Buffy that much so I didn't really get it at first. Bad Ass decay is easier to understand but it's kind of bland and the characters aren't always that bad ass. Like Logan from Veronica Mars he was more of a Jerkass and A Jerk with a Heart of Gold occasionally and then they made him all wangsty. So I don't think either name is that great because they aren't accurate descriptions. And I do get tired of all the trope named for shows I don't watch, sure after seeing it a while I'll understand it but it kind of loses it's humor. Xanatos I put up with because it's a cool name I've never actually watch Gargoyles.
Lovecraft In Arkham: I was a Buffy fan and I understood Spikeification instantly. I don't mind all the tropes named after things I don't understand - part of the fun of the Wiki is learning new pop culture stuff
Rebochan: Maybe "Attitude Decay?" Or a much gruffer "Wussification"? Though I'm not sure either of those are all that creative.
Citizen: This is a good rename. Don't try to make it worse.
That Other 1 Dude: How about "Evil/Malevolence Decay". Something that indicates it's about how moral/nice the character was and not how "cool" they were.
Badass Decay rename? redux redux launched as Badass Decay: From YKTTW
Known Unknown: As noted by the above reaction to the rename, the trope doesn't really mean what it meant before what with the renaming and a rewrite to the description, which I guess means someone's going to have to YKTTW a replacement to the original. Hooray for overly specific rewrites...
Dausuul: I propose "Spike Wussification Syndrome." For anyone who's watched Buffy, the name says it all, and anyone who hasn't can still get the gist.
