The Broken Base cleanup thread discusses about examples in Broken Base, but this talks about examples in YMMV pages of works containing Base-Breaking Character, (despite being an Example Sectionectomy, this can still be seen in the YMMV pages of works) where the details on what is suitable is also vague.
Here is the criteria for Base-Breaking Character:
- A long-term, sustained conflict: Characters that were simply hated and loved, then had their interest evaporated away (both positive and negative) after a few months doesn't count. Characters in upcoming works also don't count.
- A vicious conflict: Factions that have little problem co-existing and doesn't mind about what the other faction likes or dislikes about the character doesn't count. If it's not particularly vicious and heated, then it would be cut or be listed as a Downplayed Trope.
- Two (or more) vocal, almost equally sized factions: A tiny Vocal Minority that doesn't shut up their pet peeve, whilst being outnumbered by more reasonable fans don't count. Nor does a Silent Majority who doesn't make a big deal with the other side count. If one of the hating factions is significantly bigger than the other, it would be classified as The Scrappy or an Ensemble Dark Horse.
- Little to no Middle ground: Scenarios where most of the fandom doesn't care about the character, don't count.
Base-Breaking Character is when half of the fandom likes a character, yet another equally sized half dislikes it. Now that happens, but the problem is, some entries aren't really contentious (thus not resulting in flame wars when someone says they "liked that character"). Also, several entries are one-sided towards the negative or the positive side describing that only side in detail, but then wrapping up with a single line saying "But the other half likes that character". A correct way would be describing it like "a split in the Fandom on who likes it or not", with details on both sides why they're liked and disliked.
Here's an example from YMMV.Undertale:
- Alphys. A lot of players find her character gimmick of constant messages and attempts to help more annoying than funny, especially on repeat playthroughs. And even though she has sympathetic reasons, the reveal that she's been experimenting on sick monsters to create the Amalgamates and manipulating the player to feel better about herself doesn't help, especially since she never directly apologizes for the latter.
While it may have annoyed players due to these reasons above, there has been a considerable amount of fanarts and comics or her, and not only that, the like-dislike situation hasn't been so contentious (compared to Sans, whom he's popular, now he sucks.)
edited 21st Feb '18 1:46:31 PM by AppleGates
I'm not even sure those characters have enough detractors to not be the Vocal Minority. I've mentioned it before, but just because an Internet community is very vocal about their hatred toward a character doesn't actually mean they make up a huge portion of the fanbase, especially if the work in question has millions of fans.
I mean, I'm well aware that Sasuke Uchiha is not liked by many on this site. However, TV Tropes is hardly representative of the Naruto fanbase as a whole, so I wouldn't take the sizeable amount of haters here as proof that the entire fandom (Western and Eastern combined) is split on the character with little to no middle ground.
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
(I apologize in advance if this comes across as confrontational. That is not my intention. I'm just trying to clear up what the criteria for Base-Breaking Character is or isn't.)
I don't understand why a character ranking high on a popularity poll is evidence against someone having a large amount of detractors. Base-Breaking Character is by definition a character with many fans, along with detractors.
From what I understand you seem to be asking for some sort of "objective proof" that characters have a large hatedom among the fanbase in order to qualify as Base Breaking Characters and that certain negative opinions are not just from a Vocal Minority. But the thing is, it's nearly impossible to find that sort of thing. Series creators almost never run any "unpopularity" polls. And if can't trust internet communities to represent a fanbase, than who can we trust?
Let's take Sasuke from Naruto for example (since you brought him up). I have been in and out of the Naruto fandom for over a decade, and every time in every community and every forum that I have been to he has had a very large and vocal amount detractors, while still having many fans, and he is the source of many heated arguments. He is absolutely, unquestionably, a Base-Breaking Character (heck, he was even pictured on the trope's main page at one point). And I'm sure that anyone else who has had any experience with the Naruto will agree. But how can I possibly back that up with hard evidence?
You say that Tvtropes does not represent the Naruto fanbase as a whole, and that's true, but large internet communities rarely vary in opinion that heavily (unless they have some sort of bias for/against the subject matter, or revolve around accentuating the negative, or vice versa). If many people on the site don't like him, odds are many people off the site don't like him either. I think the same sentiment can be said about other characters. I understand the need for skepticism, but we can't just brush off negative opinions with "Maybe it's just a Vocal Minority "
—-
@The Fire Emblem thing.
I think Tharja still qualifies as a Base-Breaking Character . She might get less hate than Camilla, but she still has plenty of people who hate her for similar reasons (along with her relationship with her daughter). At the same time, she's an extremely popular character with many fans.
edited 11th Apr '18 6:45:56 PM by mrbits
Honestly, I wouldn't trust any Internet community to accurately represent any fanbase.
Apologies for people who have heard this before, but let me use Fire Emblem again as an example. The most well-known Western community, Serenes Forest, currently has 31,422 members as of this writing. Now, let's assume that Fire Emblem has at least 2,100,000 fans (using the total number of physical units sold for Fire Emblem: Awakening, based on this site
). This means that Serenes Forest only makes up less than 1.5% of the entire fanbase. Hardly enough to fit the definition of "half of the fanbase is split on this character."
Also, saying that you have found every community and every forum you've visited to hate a character is still just anecdotal evidence. And it doesn't prove something crucial for a Base-Breaking Character: the lack of very few or no middle ground.
Popularity polls don't tell us how many people hate or don't have particularly strong feelings toward a character. However, a character that consistently scores high on popularity polls is more likely than not to not be a Base-Breaking Character. That's why more concrete evidence is needed; to make sure that it really is a case of "the fanbase is split on this character with little to no middle ground" and not "someone is using this audience reaction to stealth-whine about a character they don't like."
If we can't trust internet communities, then what do we trust?
If we're just going to write off the collective opinions of Tvtropes, Youtube, Tumblr, Reddit, and specialized websites like Serenes Forest (by the way, they aren't the largest community. r/fireemblem has 77,091 subscribers) because everyone who never uses those sites might not care, then what's the point?
I didn't say that every community I went to hated Sasuke. I said that every community had people that hated him, along with people who loved him. And that they would frequently argue about his overall quality. You are right that I didn't prove that there was a lack of middle ground, but that's my entire issue. How do you provide concrete evidence towards a lack of middle ground? You can't do that in most cases, because under normal circumstances nobody is ever going to ask things like "Who is completely indifferent and neutral about Sasuke and why?"
The best you can do is just measure the frequency and intensity of both sides and their arguments.
I'm curious. Who would you consider consider a clear-cut example of a Base-Breaking Character, and how can you be sure that there is no middle ground regarding them?
edited 11th Apr '18 9:25:16 PM by mrbits
The number of things I would trust internet communities with is very, very little.
Also, taking that number of subscribers to the Fire Emblem reddit, that would make them...less than 3.6% of the entire fanbase (even without taking into account any overlaps with other communities).
Frequency and intensity doesn't tell you if a character is a Base-Breaking Character; all it tells you is how loud a certain part of a fanbase is. Again, a few thousand really whiny people doesn't really matter much when the fandom consists of millions.
For your question on who I consider a clear-cut example, I have my doubts that there actually are any clear-cut examples. I've certainly never seen one. There's a reason why I don't add examples of Base-Breaking Character, precisely because it's very difficult to actually tell who is one, what with things to consider such as Silent Majority and Vocal Minority.
I'll be honest with you; I feel like for audience reactions like Base-Breaking Character and The Scrappy, any informative benefits they might've had have been completely lost due to tropers using them as a way to whine about characters they don't like. I'd rather they not be allowed on any YMMV page since they're basically complaint magnets, but I doubt it'll ever become that way. Best thing we can do is make sure that the bad examples get taken down, especially if it's clear that people are using them as a way to wonk and get around the "no whining on the wiki" rule, but honestly I don't see any value in them whatsoever other than just serving as a definition page with no examples.
Though I will admit, Base-Breaking Character is kind of funny sometimes when someone adds a "there's a third party that doesn't care" and completely invalidates the example.
edited 11th Apr '18 10:07:21 PM by dragonfire5000
The sad thing is that Base-Breaking Character by definition isn't a negative audience reaction. It's just used so damn often for stealth complaining.
Unbeugsame Klinge
Just found this one on Persona 2.
- Base-Breaking Character: Lisa's fixation on Tatsuya makes her far and away the most disliked principle cast member to come out of the Persona 2 duology. She dogs him right up to the end of Innocent Sin despite how obviously uncomfortable her behavior makes him, displaying little regard for his personal boundaries (calling him pet names, physically following him around) or his actual feelings (she refuses to let go of her crush even after the party defeats her Shadow, and Tatsuya confesses to another party member). That's bad enough on its own, but it gets even worse when it's made apparent how little her infatuation has to do with him as a person—she sees him as an accessory to her popularity that she's entitled to have just because she wants him. Those less critical of her will point out that she does improve somewhat over the course of her character arc, but her shallowness and lack of respect for Tatsuya still leave a bad taste in plenty a player's mouth.
Cut it. Not only does it seem like something written for The Scrappy, but it's also complaining.
This Sui-Feng entry was added to the YMMV.Bleach page without coming through this thread.
Does it apply?
- Base-Breaking Character: She is either a total badass ninja who is understandably irritated by Omaeda's cowardly demeanor, or an obnoxious bitch who needlessly bullies him and holds a petty grudge against Urahara and the Visoreds for motivating Yoruichi to leave her.
Note: A Sui-Feng entry was previously removed (see the previous page), but the content was completely different. In my view this is a brand new entry, not an attempt to readd something that was removed.
Found this on The Rise of Darth Vulcan:
- Base-Breaking Character: The title character is polarizing to say the least. Some love him and find him a threatening, competent, and sometimes funny villain and like how he tears the show's flaws apart, others loathe him for being too competent for what amounts to an edgy teenaged bully thrown into a world he barely knows to the point it feels like the narrative is bending over backwards to allow it and find said tearing apart of the show's flaws too meanspirited and frequent to be enjoyable. A third camp likes him too much to the point even the writer was disturbed. Another group believes the problem is less with Ted and more with the fact he's in a deconstructed version of Equestria, which heavily undermines the fact he's intended to be an Unreliable Narrator, and the character might have worked in a Truer to the Text version where his POV is more clearly warped and flawed.
I'm Sad Frogerson.
That entry seems to be split into four opinions, a side that loves him, a side that hates him, a Misaimed Fandom, and those who think They Wasted a Perfectly Good Character. You could probably keep the first two groups and move the others to their own subsections and not miss much. Then again, I have no experience with MLP or their fanfics.
I also didn't get much feedback from when I brought up the entries for the SCP Foundation a while ago. I though I'd get some hard numbers and tallied up the score for each SCP to see how their articles were received on the site. Users can vote an article up or down and the difference between these determines an entry's final score. I found that the only real Base Breaking SCP was SCP-579, which had a 58%-42% upvote-downvote range.
I didn't post include the entries themselves the last time I brought them up, so I figured I might as well do it now so you can all judge for yourselves.
- SCP-579 Some believe it's a perfect demonstration of exactly what makes most SCPs scary, while others believe it lacks a "hook" to draw the reader in and is simply a product of lazy writing.
- SCP-076, "Able": People either hate Able as an overpowered reminder of the site's early days or think it's a well-written article demonstrating the hubris of the Foundation.
- SCP-682, "Hard-To-Destroy Reptile": While most readers enjoy the actual article, the creature's Memetic Badass status is either annoying or hilarious. Many readers also dislike how it's referenced in other articles so much.
- SCP-085, "Cassy": Moeblob who has her every wish tended to by the Foundation or a good-natured entity stuck in a horrifyingly lonely and alienating existence?
- Are We Cool Yet?: People tend to either despise them as jerkish hipster warlocks who plaster their inane catchphrase on everything or love them as a new and fresh Group of Interest with a disorganized, guerrilla art mentality that allows for plenty of possibility. The tendency of some authors to needlessly shoehorn in an AWCY reference into random articles hasn't helped.
- SCP-789-J, the butt ghost!!: A joke article considered either very hilarious, or embarrassingly immature. It was written by an 11-year-old, after all.
- SCP-105, "Iris": Once beloved by contributors, now is considered a badly-written Mary Sue and the article was even under threat of deletion due to low ratings. Remained popular enough to evade that fate though instead getting a rewrite to downplay her "ability".
- Everything stated about SCP-105 applies to SCP-239. However, she also has one tale that's really well-received.
- SCP-231 is considered by some to be a well-written tragic article about just how cruel the Foundation in the name of the greater good can be and by others to be a poorly written sob-story that uses implied rape for shock value and explains too little for it to even be effective.
- The SCP Foundation Heritage Collection, a "Hall of Fame" for older articles considered important to the site's history and culture. Some think it's a good way to preserve the "classics" and recognize their impact on the site, while others think it shows favoritism or will encourage people to emulate the old writing style. It doesn't help that some of the divisive SCP's listed above are in that collection. The truth here is a bit more complicated; essentially, the Foundation staff were planning on migrating to a new site with a more stable server, a new design, and better coding (Wikidot, the hosting site, has a very... finicky formatting, at times). As a result, all of the SCP articles would start at a rating of 0, and several crucial ones could be downvoted to oblivion and lost forever, hence the creation of the Heritage List. However, plans for a new site fell through, and as a result, the entire thing looked sketchy.
- The Resurrection canon. Some feel, due to the number of site mods and older writers involved, that this is drifting away from what the site is in terms of storytelling. Not helping matters is the fact that one of the most respected authors on the site seemed to Rage Quit as a direct result of the canon's existence, going so far as to delete his account. (He did come back, however.)
- SCP-2718. Some praise its ambition, gradual build-up and terrifying, detailed reveal. Others feel the article is bloated, dislike the Purple Prose in the last section, and bring up the fact that it's not clear what the designation SCP-2718 actually designates.
- SCP-173. While loved by the website's userbase for being the original idea that started the whole series, it has gotten flack mainly due to SCP – Containment Breach. Along with SCP-106, it is virtually difficult to avoid and comes off as annoying whenever you're killed by it (although there's less annoyance with 106). There's also the critique that it's way over-powered for some, especially to that of SCP-682.
- SCP-2212 is praised for an intriguing gimmick that each supplement is a puzzle, but the SCP itself is found underwhelming and without a clear reason for the Interface Screw. The fact the author didn't implement the final feature yet, nearly two years later, doesn't help stop dissers.
- Gamers Against Weed, the newest Group of Interest as of the end of 2016, is controversial for several reasons. Some people this is what Are We Cool Yet? should have been, while another camp thinks that they're lukewarm ripoffs of AWCY?. Another camp is concerned that this can be used as an avenue to have forced memes pushed onto the site, and another still is wondering why GAW qualifies for GOI status while the likes of the Shark Punching Center do not. Finally, there are people who just ignore it because they think it's too silly.
- SCP 3999 Is it an excellent analysis on the loss of sanity and a perfect breakdown about the foundation of SCPs themselves or is it an overwritten, incomprehensible and undeserving of being on the site?
- SCP 3000 winner of the SCP 3000 contest. Is it a great thriller that builds up and delivers on good horror or a terribly long and silly article that's incredibly silly.
edited 7th May '18 9:12:34 PM by chasemaddigan
Honestly, I have trouble believing most of those were even added by someone who thought they were widespread disputes - as opposed to simply their own gripes disguised.
"silly article that's incredibly silly." Wow
No, the other one.
The SCP stuff is a matter of differing opinions, not widespread base-breaking wars. Then again, thinking minor things are important and significant seems to be a running theme for that site.
Check out my fanfiction!
From YMMV.Sister Claire
- Base-Breaking Character:
- As detailed below and above, Oscar. Who is either a kickass, empowering breath of fresh air, or a fairly bland character who has all but supplanted Claire as protagonist due to Author Appeal.
- A close second is Hanabi. Opinion on her falls into two usual camps. One side sees her as a flawed, but well-meaning Witch just looking out for the others. The other see her as a self-rationalizing, unrepentant kidnapper and attempted murderer.
BaseBreakingCharacter.Steven Universe could use a rework and a major update:
- Pearl is probably the biggest one; some fans find her quirks (she's a clean freak, and is extremely protective towards Steven) to be annoying, others find them funny or endearing. And while she sincerely means well, she commits several Kick the Dog moments in Season 2 which have made her very divisive.
- Pearl's feelings for Rose Quartz have divided the fanbase further. Initially regarded as sweet, as more light has been shed on the nature of their relationship, fans are debated as to whether it makes Pearl even more of The Woobie or whether it makes her an unsympathetic Jerkass Crazy Jealous Girl, or a mix of both. It doesn't help that she seems to be completely unable to think about anything or anyone else once she goes into "Rose mode." In "Rose's Scabbard", she's so distraught that when Steven misses his last jump and nearly falls to his death she doesn't even try to help him climb back up. Then in "Sworn to the Sword", she convinces Connie that her life is worth nothing when it comes to protecting Steven, seeming to forget that she's human and will not simply retreat into her gem if her body is injured. Over all it seems that Pearl has some very serious issues to work through, but doesn't truly mean any harm. The events of "Cry for Help" have done her even more damage. She repairs the Communication Hub, lies that Peridot did it, and uses it so that she and Garnet will continue fusing into Sardonyx. Some Pearl-haters now despise her even more, because she used a serious situation for a selfish purpose and used Garnet while doing so, and her attempts to make up for it afterwards caused even more problems. Others defend her, acknowledging that what she did was wrong, yes, but that doesn't make her a bad person. "Back to the Barn" might just smooth over a lot of her detractors given we learn that in the Gem hierarchy, Pearls are made-to-order servants and designed to be obedient, several of Pearl's problems stemming from that. It puts several of her conversations and actions in a different context.
- Amethyst's carefree attitude. She's always had her fair share of fans who enjoyed seeing her let loose and have fun with her powers. Others found her misuse of her powers grating and obnoxious, making her the least popular of the Crystal Gems, particularly in the first half of season 1. This largely died down after her hidden insecurities and self-worth issues were explored in "Tiger Millionaire", and especially after "On the Run". Focus episodes after the revelation of her being created in Kindergarten during the war made her much more sympathetic even to those that disliked her.
- Steven himself is also a pretty big one. One half of the fanbase absolutely adores him thanks to being an All-Loving Hero who initially tries to bring peace rather than hate and war. The other half finds him deeply annoying and thinks his All-Loving Hero status is a tad too excessive on accounts that he usually just tries to talk his enemies down rather than fighting them, or not fighting them at all. However, as the series goes on, later episodes have shown him learning that sometimes Violence is the Only Option, so his reluctance to fight is an important plot point towards him learning when it is or isn't right, and part of his Character Development. On the other hand, some fans think his gradual increase in willingness to use violence is making him too out of character.
- Another common complaint about Steven is that he receives far too much screen-time, even for the protagonist. Even in episodes that focus on other characters, Steven retains a background presence when he contributes nothing to the conflict, and even detracts from it on occasion.
- Lars. He often acts like a selfish Jerkass, and any time an episode ends with him learning humility, it completely gets forgotten by the next episode. However, he still has his fair share of fans and has been involved with some of the show's Heartwarming Moments. This clip sums Lars up perfectly. He has his Jerkass moments, but deep down inside, he does actually care, as evidenced by when he gives Sadie his shirt at the end for her to keep warm. "Island Adventure" accentuates this, with a lot of people either hating on Lars and glorifying Sadie (for Lars coming across as even more of a jerk than usual for a lot of the episode) or vice versa (for Sadie taking matters into her own hands to "help" Lars without asking him, which may have just ended up hurting him and their relationship).
- Jasper. Depending on who you ask, she's either an unrepentant sadist for her lust for fighting, complicated and abusive treatment of Lapis, and her single-minded determination for revenge that still has Hidden Depths to her personality, or a Blood Knight that could still be persuaded to fight for the Crystal Gems as a Noble Demon that isn't really bad/should be befriended given the show's usual tendencies. There's very little neutral ground.
- As of "Crack The Whip", more people are turning their backs on Jasper, due to what she did to Amethyst. Although, "Earthlings" allowed her to regain some sympathy by showing her Hidden Depths and her Freudian Excuse.
- Ronaldo, full stop. Some people hate him because of his callous disregard for the safety of others, and his very disturbed mind makes him more of a villain than he appears. Others see him as a well-intentioned idiot, others like him because of his jerkassery, and others say he works better only in very small doses.
- Bismuth, another Crystal Gem who Rose bubbled due to her becoming He Who Fights Monsters and designing a weapon that could permanently kill any Gem. Many fans disagreed with the show presenting her in the wrong and accused it of victim-blaming after she'd been a slave on Homeworld, and pointed out Rose lying to the others about the fight as if she knew she'd been wrong (and which is clearly presented as the wrong thing to do), while others claim that Bismuth desired genocide rather than just using lethal force, and it's strongly implied she started the fight that led to her being bubbled, and instantly turns on Steven and tries to kill him when he says that nobody should use the Breaking Point.
- Andy DeMayo is either a well-rounded character with a very moving Heel Realization, or an unsympathetic bigot who needed way more of a comeuppance for his hateful statements. It really didn't help that he was introduced just one week after the 2016 US presidential election, meaning many fans were in no kind of mood to give any slack to a guy ranting about hippies and immigrants destroying society. Others still have used the election to point out that Some Anvils Need to Be Dropped, as if more people had tried to reach out and build bridges with people like Andy rather than leave them feeling alone and forgotten, the result of the election might have been different.
No, the other one.
It should never say "as detailed above", since all examples, no exceptions, should be self-contained.
The self-contained rule is also why no examples should be spread over several bullets.
Anyway, I'm not familiar with either series, but I'll see if I can look through those later on.
Check out my fanfiction!
No, the other one.
So, anyway, some opinions. I'll reiterate that it's only based on what's written; I have no prior knowledge of the characters. I have heard some things about the fandom, though.
Those are sparse in context, but what's there seems correct, assuming it's somewhat representative of the fandom. Those details about Oscar need to be written into that example.
- Pearl: I don't like how the example claims it's about "some" fans. That makes it seem like there's a whole lot of fans who has neither opinion. There's also a whole lot about what she does wrong, with a very minor, "but she means well" attached to it, which makes it seem like complaining.
- Also needs to be one bullet.
- Amethyst: If it died down, then it didn't break the base. It was just a temporary argument.
- Steven: My gut feeling says, "No". While I don't know much, he's the main character, and pretty much by default there are going to be people will all sorts of opinions about him. I've heard a bunch of those. They're not in two camps. They're all over the place.
- Lars: No idea. Seems like it could fit, and doesn't contradict anything I've heard.
- Jasper: Could fit. Again, not sure.
- Needs to be one bullet.
- Ronaldo: Doesn't need the full stop. Also too many groups. Doesn't seem like an example.
- Bismuth: Needs to have an example you can read without spoilers. Seems oddly specific. Not sure.
- Andy: Not sure.
edited 10th May '18 12:21:00 AM by AnotherDuck
Check out my fanfiction!
I'm Sad Frogerson.
I trimmed most of the SCP examples, namely cutting those that were considered some of the highest rated SCPs on the website. I left a link to the thread in my edit reason in case anyone else wanted to dispute my removals.
edited 9th May '18 9:09:00 PM by chasemaddigan
Regarding the Oscar example, I should mention 1) at least one of the other examples it refers to (Creator's Pet) I had to pull for misuse 2) the "supplanting the protagonist" part is untrue for the comic itself. (The story is told through a comic [present day] and prose [past]) Oscar does get tons of focus in the prose, but the prose largely takes place before Claire was born, so she wouldn't have been protagonist for it anyway.
edited 9th May '18 9:10:10 PM by Twiddler
I'm just going to point out that every single main character in is listed under BaseBreakingCharacter.My Little Pony Friendship Is Magic.
Planeswalker
I will say Pearl is divisive, but after a recent episode I think we're going to need to wait and see what the fandom's consensus becomes on her. This episode also effects the Rose Quartz entry so I think we'll need to come back to both of those within a few months and see if the fandom stabilizes around one opinion or stays broken.
Oissu!
No, the other one.
Considering that fanbase, I'm not surprised in the least. I don't think any of the main ones qualify from what I've heard. Opinions are far too spread out.
- To a much lesser extent, the Chain-Chomp in Aces, primarily due to the fact that it lacks any appendages and wasn't exactly who most people were expecting to see in the roster, seeing as it's a generic Mook that has never been playable previously (outside of being a capturable enemy in Super Mario Odyssey). Once again, the fact that it made it into the game before more reasonable candidates like Diddy Kong and Birdo only complicates matters.
The Chain Chomp is also under Ensemble Dark Horse.
As for the SU examples, I might delete Pearl because her entry is a giant Wall of Text. I'm definitely deleting Amethyst's, Steven's, Ronaldo's, and Bismuth's entries, and condensing Jasper's entry into a single bullet. I'm probably gonna leave Lars' and Andy's entries alone, though I'm not entirely sure about it, as (to my knowledge) Lars' reception has become a lot more positive following "Wanted" and "Lars of the Stars", and Andy's entry seems a bit too politically based, though that's just me.
edited 15th May '18 5:17:43 AM by Crossover-Enthusiast
Jawbreakers on sale for 99¢
I'm not sure if that should completely disqualify someone. Sasuke Uchiha from Naruto and Bakugou Katsuki from My Hero Academia are both characters who are consistently popular but also have enough detractors that I don't think it can be brushed off as a Vocal Minority.
Tharja isn't a hill I want to die on though.