Discussion ComicBook / AvengersArena

You really, really didn't look through the threads at all. Since this is an OLD topic, I pointed out further problems way down the line.

The point it manifold:

• 1) Nothing that Hopeless has done matches or enhances what came before in terms of the Darkness in Nico Minoru. Is it dark to kill in revenge, yes. However, it does not go against or further her prior characterization (mentioned below in three instances both with BKV and Joss). Her spells are not dark enough, and I can provide myriad examples from both runs of spells that are darker than anything she pulled under Hopeless. Want them?
• 2) Because of this, the claim that she is now changed and darker due to her connection does not hold out.
• 3) Ergo: we are not shown in any capacity that Nico is now darker, we are only told.

Please don't try to dress up Deathlocket as an innocent in Nico's eyes. She is an unknown factor and she is pragmatic (and cruel to her foes) even before her supposed change. For all Nico knows, Deathlocket is willingly working with Apex. She loves her family, but Spider-Man can attest to her reactionary violence against even the hint of a threat.

Nothing she does fits the idea that she is more evil now than she was before and I am more than willing to provide a list of examples as needed.

And as I stated before, you are merely comparing Hopeless's work to others and it still does not fit the trope as you described. Hopeless did indeed show a dark side of Nico as she went against Apex. You may feel that he came short, but it is indeed shown throughout issue #12 with her fight against Apex with her actions and spells.

We can take this to Ask The Tropers to get an outside opinion.

Stories do not exist in a Vacuum. These characters existed before Arena and what other people wrote about them does matter. The claim that it does not is beyond frustrating. It's active denial. It does not address the point at all, it is an plain and open attempt to dismiss them that I find highly insulting. This is an issue of continuity. This is not comparing the works of two different authors on different characters. It's two different authors on the same character int he same universe.

And, hell, why we can't compare how a story is told between other stories for this discussion is frankly baffling, but that's not what I am doing here anyway. Your argument is a straw one. And thus, even more inapplicable and useless.

It is a sad thing that many comic book readers do deny past stories to some degree, and that writers sometimes re-write or retcon things just to suit their needs. It can work for good, but here it is for ill. Neither changes the fact that the old stories existed.

Worse, you are claiming a retcon is occurring when there is no active indicator of that retcon. The only one stems from ignorance and would NOT negate the BKV examples I can cite of darker spells from Nico Minoru. She was dark before this, and this 'new darkness' doesn't beat her old stuff. Even if there was one, it would not matter.

You have no ground to stand on, Mega J. You defense is literally nothing.

Edit: Sorry, your defense is so frustratingly dismissive and frankly fallacious that I am at near bafflement at how to answer it calmly and respectively. I feel like I've been insulted with this idea being put out, or existing at all. Every bone in my English major body is offended by the idea of throwing out continuity at every juncture between writers.

Dude, the trope. Show, Don't Tell. Means characters' actions are stated through dialogue as opposed to action. Issue #12. I described the actions Nico took against her fight against Apex. I know these characters are part of a shared universe and get passed along to all sort of different creators. I even acknowledged that Joss Whedon did do it better. But what you're arguing doesn't even match up with the entry that you want to place on the main page. It's as simple as that. There's the Reviews tab, write a review if you want to compare and contrast this series with the older ones. Show, Don't Tell is not the trope to do it in.

And the Actions are not DARK ENOUGH to justify the dialogue where she tells us about how she is more-or-less herself or Arcade's ramblings.

And the trope entry will have to be altered to reflect the full nature of it (as I've had to move and re-write it multiple times — Things get lost in repetition when a copy-paste will not serve). It has now been edited to better reflect reality.

Arcade and Nico say things, but they do not match the actions. Nico Is, quite simply, not darker than she was before.

QED.

Oh, so it's not dark ENOUGH. I see.

Don't move it just yet, I'm going to Ask The Tropers.

Shall I provide the list of spells cast from each era — because I am more than willing to. With full citation.

Go right on ahead.

Given that I'm only now realizing it's 1 a.m. over why I am, I am going to have to postpone the full list, but

• "Deconstruct" from vol. 2 #1 was so spooky, Karolina thought Wrecker was killed.
• "You Suck" from Vol. 2 #3 (IIRC), nearly killed Turbo, and she did it casually. And showed no remorse afterward.

Those are the big, nasty ones that show her callousness in single spell form. Beyond that, there is the attack on Spider-Man in the "East Coast/West Coast" arc. And on a full re-read tomorrow, I can recall more instances. Nico is not always a nice person ("Rip X's damn heart out" twice, with earnestness). Edit to add: Also, there is the part of cloak tracking a great darkness amongst the kids in the "New York" arc again. It's pretty clear by this point he was referring to Nico.

And then there's the witchbreaker staff. Vol. 2 #30:

• "Vegan" on Maneater. Given the nauseous look on his face, it is likely a lot more than just a temporary thing.
• "The Show must go on" for the Yorkes. They will never stop screaming.

Sadly, I cannot be as full in Vol. 3.

Of all the spells that Nico cast in Avengers Arena, only "Dirt Nap" comes close to the things she has already done. Everything else is generic short term attack spells (most of which got me to scream: C'mon! Target the leader! Just say "FLAY" and be done with it!). There's a reason I didn't include spells like Rockstars, Hellfire and "Shut Up, Chase!" on the list. There's no cruelty in pulling a trigger unless you aim somewhere nasty.

Edit to add: Because there are spells from both before and after Whedon's change, and the only possible evidence for a retcon limits itself to Whedon's run, the idea that the continuity does not matter has no evidence to back it up within the text and is only being done by you as a reader for convenience.

"If someone sees it in the work, that's a valid interpretation and it should go where it is normally slated to go."

And that's the issue right there. It's not an issue of interpretation when it comes to the non-YMMV tropes. Examples Are Not Arugable, no one should have to debate whether or not I don't know, Red Shirt or Darker and Edgier. The tropes in question are really heavily sided on slamming the book, which all belongs in YMMV/Reviews. You made it clear you have an issue with the series. Quite frankly, I do really like Avengers Arena and I make sure none of edits praise the book at all. I'm not sure why there's an issue with you adding these tropes.

Examples Are Not Arguable is more about weasel words, this is a difference of interpretation of the evidence. I hold the view that all interpretations are, to some degree, valid. Separating how much is in the text and how much is between the reader's ears is the problematic element.

I know there's like a long list of them, but just for clarity, let's compile the contested tropes you disagree with. I know we have:

• Flanderization
• Not as You Know Them
• Totally Radical from the YMMV page.

I know there's others, but let's just get them out in the open.

Just to update this: Flanderization and Not as You Know Them have basically been replaced with Out of Character on the YMMV page. Kept details to a minimum to avoid an aggressive tone. Should specifics be mentioned?

Here is the motive to the status of the words in question in the description of the page: " in this case it weakens the foundation of the example by making it subjective. It is true that there may be disagreement between two or more tropers over whether or not a work uses a certain trope. That's fine. Misunderstandings happen. However, disputes about trope examples should be restricted to edit reasons and the discussion page, not clutter up the main article."

Update: Show, Don't Tell was covered in PM. If anyone has anything that can be used regarding Totally Radical, though that's still open for discussion.

With the revelations of Nico Minoru's repeated arc, we have yet another example of Show Don't Tell, and as far as I'm concerned, the evidence is irrifutable. We have two different writers doing the exact same arc, and not only is the degree of darkness greater in the work of Joss Whedon, it's shown to us rather than told as the trope dictates. It is done through the characters actions by choice without provocation.

That is true darkness. Attempted murder in revenge for actual murder is, frankly, bog standard reactions for fiction. I mean, I can recall a few thrillers based on "You though you killed me, and now I get revenge".

It does not compare to slow, mental torture, done over years simply because it was the cruelest option available to solve the problem.

It simply does not compare. It is both a matter of degrees and a matter of indicators. Getting revenge on the person who killed you? Yeah, that's about a light overcast. It's no greater darkness than her threatening to murder Chase if he ever betrays them again back in Runaways #24 (which is a callback to the end of the second volume's first arc, where she threatens to do the same to Victor Mancha if he goes evil). This played up a event in #1 where Karolina thinks Nico outright killed one of the Wrecking Crew with a word. Nico didn't even flinch at the accusation, just brushed it off.

The method, by the way? "Rip his damn heart out." (an idea started by chase in #1, but followed up by Nico at the end of that arc)

Doing an internationally condemned act that she never before considered or mentioned before vs. something she has already threatened to do twice over by now?

It's simply not new darkness in Avengers Arena. It's old hat, in more ways than one.

Edit: to simplify 1) The Darkness from before was far, far greater. 2) The only indicator we have for the darkness is dialogue as the spells used are not dark in an of themselves, holding no greater meaning or nastiness beyond the moment of their creation. They are shallow.

Like Arena itself, really.

Further, getting revenge itself is not an act of greater darkness within a character. She was pretty damn vengeful before. I can provide further examples if you want.

Fridge Logic can easily be explained with Darkhawk having started out as a teen hero and the picks were done at random anyway. By the time they were all transported there, it was probably too late to do anything. Even then, he's not that much older than the others and it probably doesn't matter to Arcade.

As for Though Act to Follow, that is simply not how the trope is used.

Flanderazation: Mettle and Hazmat are acting like they've always acted. Also, what Mettle suggested was taking Arcade seriously, because he noticed that a full frontal assault would simply not work. Hazmat has never been the nicest person either and she was always quick to snark at the others

To Fridge Logic: That explanation assumes he began working on this project at least three years ago Marvel Time or had a database built on assumptions. It doesn't fly. The man buys beer. The explanation for why this happens pretty much amounts to Arcade being a complete idiot.

Which I actually fully believe for a lot of reasons, but it's not what the author intends. I think. He's certainly intent on hyping Arcade, when I think he's just made him twice as incompetent.

I feel Tough Act to Follow is pertinent simply as a byproduct of the backlash and explanation of it. It's part of the controversy and helps explain it. I'd need more people to speak out against it. But if others argue for its removal, there's not much I can do about it.

Flanderization — Yeah, No. Just no. You need a stronger argument than that. This is not how they 'always' acted. Hazmat's anger is derived from experience not nature (Academy #3 established this, Arena #1 contradicted it) and she had matured greatly over the course of the series. It's that contradiction that is the primary problem. Saying "She's always been like that" doesn't account for the change, or really, anything. For Mettle, find me something that he does in Arena #1 that doesn't boil down to "Loves Hazmat" or "Exposition Dump."

There was no "frontal assault", it amounted to a few of them attacking (about half or less IIRC) making separate attacks, Mook Chivalry in full effect. Then they do nothing when Hazmat brings Arcade to his knees just screams of Idiot Ball. Given Mettle's overall character and history, it really doesn't work. See Avengers Academy #19 for a better example of what he'd do in a hopeless situation.

Being quick to snark is different from how she's portrayed here. Here, she's angry and belligerent. The scene I'm referring to is the destruction of Nico's fruit tree in #4. It's bad. Really bad. After being rested and fed, it should have reset at least part of her rational mind. Instead, the 'stress' (that occurs off screen mind you) is in full effect. That's not how those things even work! Furthermore, before, her barbs were, well, witty and pointed. So even if being snarky is part of her character, Arena's is a shallow variation of it. In other words, Flanderization.

Also, Juston was recently added to the list. Do you have any problem with that?

Since you did not mention any of the others, I will assume that you have no further qualms with them.

Fridge Logic: But Darkhawk was chosen specifically because he started out as a teen hero.Besides the oldest he can be is 21 and that is only 2 years older than Chase anyway. There is really no fridge logic there. That one of the books he read to get the idea for this scheme(Battle Royale) had at least two characters that were older than the others. Besides, once he was transported there, it was probably unwise to send him away and Arcade is probably happy with the results of Darkhawk being included. Arcade is an idiot, that we both can agree.

I think Contested Sequel would work better than Though act to follow.

Flanderization: As much as she has matured, she is still mean to others before getting to know them. It took awhile for her to war up to the newer Academy kids. It really is not that different from how she is acting in Arena and it takes longer for her to warm up to the other characters since she is not even sure if she can trust them.

And Mettle has always cared for Hazmat, that certainly isn't new and he ends up being the one that made a selfless sacrifice. It was certainly more than just "Loves Hazmat".

Hazmat did not bring Arcade to his knees, he easily blocked her attacked and would have killed her had Mettle not sacrificed himself.

And yes i have a minor complaint with adding Juston to that list, since that piece of Flanderization happened in Academy. It was in Avengers Academy where he said that the Sentinel was his best friend and that he was not talking with his father. So that example would go on the Avengers Academy page since it is an example of Flanderization from that series.

Your Fridge Logic point is hollow. The point remains, even if he WAS a teen hero, he's not anymore. Hasn't been for a few years. the BR comparison falls flat as those two were intended 'ringers' and that only goes through the film version. Kiriyama in the book/manga is not older than the others, just the 'spy', who had to fake credentials to get in IIRC.

But the point remains: he's not a teenager. Why is he there? Appealing to the incompetence of the villain doesn't make it better. It makes it worse.

Contested Sequel may be a good fit regardless of how we go with it. I'd like to hear from others before making a move.

To Flanderization:

That does not address Hazmat in the slightest. It's goal post moving at best. I mean, look at her interaction with Nico in #4 of Arena as compared to #26-27 of Academy. In one, they were becoming fast friends. In the other, she was nearly homicidal. Even when the stress factors of food and hydration and sleep are removed, it remains on Homicidal. That doesn't even make logical sense. I feel like simplifying the first part of Critical Research Failure to "Have either the writer or the artists ever been outside for extended periods? Or read up on survival situations? Or have outdoors experience that amounts to more than "having watched Survivor?"

To Mettle: yes, that does boil down to "Love's Hazmat" as it is all done for that love. Selfless or no, it's for her. It's for love. It's "Loves Hazmat".

But you're right, I remembered the scene wrong. She didn't bring him to his knees. She staggered him and got him to say "Ouch". That is my point: She hurt him in front of everyone, shattering the "God" image. That they didn't rush him right then and there is pure Idiot Ball.

Page 19. Panel 2 if you want to be specific. Just following "You're the worst villain ever!"

The Academy addition of Juston's Flanderization was actually not added in Academy, as his focus issues in Av X have him talking with his dad and addressing how the revelation of the Sentinel did some bad stuff. Arena takes that to 11, as though he has no one besides the Sentinel. #33, Page 1 no less covers it.

"Dad, you know I can't [go back]! People at home freaked out over my sentinel. the only way I could keep him was to come to Avengers Academy"

The change is explained and given his abandonment issues were addressed in his old series and the minimal characterization given to him in Arena ("Love my sentinel!" is pretty much it), it still fits.

But we could also put it on the Academy page. Think I'll add that and Contested Sequel soon.

If I could ask, if you could, please respond sooner. A week between posts is a bit much, especially with the brevity of the posts. Not to pressure or anything, I mean, you could have a Life! Something I can only dream of. Still, prompter response would be appreciated.

Yeah, but ultimately Arcade doesn't care that Darkhawk is not a teenager anymore and the fact that he started out as such is why he was picked, even if he is not one anymore. There really is no Fridge logic there and some of the others are in their late teens.

On Mettle: It would have been weird if he wasn't worried for Hazmat or would have sacrificed himself to save her, but it does not reduce him to just "Loves Hazmat". As for the Hazmat's fight with Arcade, the instant she hit him he put up his shield. Another Rush attack would not have worked and they already tried it.

On Juston. I'm ok with it if it's on both the Academy and Arena pages. Sorry for the delayed replies, i've been somewhat busy.

So, you want to go with "Arcade is a Slothful idiot"? We got a trope for that?

Honestly, on Mettle and Hazmat, that is insufficient. The kids here, a lot of them, have faced "Thor Level" things before and Hurt them. That he was vulnerable, that external things were being used, well, it strains Suspension of Disbelief far to much. Mettle really didn't do much, and it generally fits the two points of "Exposition" and "Love's Hazmat". If the issue was told from his perspective, then perhaps things could have been different. But it wasn't. And that's all we get.

The Juston Point is now on the Character Page of Avengers Academy.

And no worries, man. You have a life. Be proud of it :)

Nah, you're right to try and reign me in, as I reign in your gushing. It's a balance. Arena is a highly flawed book, but it's not the worst thing ever. Perhaps if I do a review basically outlining the major problems and major successes it would 'clear the air' a bit.

Anyway, as to the reason I put that there: it was more than Juston's line. #7 and various other incidents related to Arcade (IE: how only Bloodstone has said anything bad about Arcade without narrative retribution, which is counterbalanced by his later fearful cowering) all lead me to that conclusion. I was tempted to post it after #7, but shilling the character was basically the point of the issue, so it didn't quite fit as it was done on a meta level. Juston's line and X-23's reinforcement of it at the end, for me, pushed it over the edge and confirmed the trope.

That, and Arcade's 'grand master plan' is extremely flawed, falling into mistakes and problems that the narrative source material for his game took explicit steps to avoid ("8 day time skip" followed by "You kids are boring, I'm changing things!"). It wants us to believe that he's a grand threat, but the evidence presented is frankly a false facade and I don't think the writer even realizes it.

But that's just my take on it. What are your thoughts?

Edit to add:

I could be misreading the trope, since a lot of it is rather meta. The aggrandizement of Arcade is one of the stated goals and it only partly lines up with what's being shown. Does it fit? Honestly? It's a close call. Thought it was a slam dunk before, but now I question it. The constant praise is there, but would this just fall under the standard Villain Sue problem? Dunno.

But, to the bigger problem: If I may make a suggestion: why not add rather than cut. Find a bunch of positive/neutral tropes to add to the main page/YMMV to counterbalance the problematic elements being focused on. Sometimes, cruising the site, I'll stumble on tropes I've never heard of before and realize they apply elsewhere. That may help find some.

Character Shilling is an character shilling an another character.

It's a struggle to me to edit pages of shows I really like, mainly because I tend to be defensive of them. However it seemed like every trope in the main page seemed to be some sort of slam against the book instead of just describing what tropes the series contains.

I really like Arena, and I was one of the people who didn't really have a complaint about the possibility of character death, even though I loved Avengers Academy. I'm aware of that and there were times where I had to pry my hands away from the keyboard and say "HOLD IT! Think about that trope!" when posting.

Re: Character Shilling. I'm still enh on the validity of that. Is it praise that Arcade is getting? Even in his character issue, he was completely disrespected by the other villains. Ms. Coriander helped him with Murderworld, but she doesn't seem too impressed by him. When the kids refer to him, it isn't in a "OMG, THIS GUY IS SO POWERFUL, WE'RE COMPLETELY FUCKED" but just seemingly to acknowledge that he's the guy with all the chess pieces and their stuck on the board.

Just my two cents.

I wish my impulse control was that good, Mega J. Help avoid things like this, eh?

The problem, I think is that based on what's been shown, Arcade's actually a very incompetent game-master compared to his antecedents in the genre. The ones they're explicitly drawing from. Compared to the Gamemakers of Panem or to Kitano in the movie version of Battle Royale, he really falls flat through the way he's described.

The surrogate for all hat villain hate was severely injured (no one speaks bad about him without either contrition or punishment), Ms. Coriander had several lines towards the end of #7 where she praises him for the game idea, calling it a "Gutshot" for the supers (frankly, Striker had a better key on what'll happen in Avengers Academy #13: They're gonna get statues next to Jack of Hearts and be forgotten).

Perhaps it's more Informed Ability than Character Shilling, or a combination of the two. I dunno. I just can't buy into the praise they're hyping on him. It rings false.

Sorry so late, this stupid thing called a job.

But yeah, I think instead of pointing out the flaws of the series or gushing over it, the main page at least needs to be informative. As in, someone who never heard of the series and is looking at this page in order to gain some sort of knowledge before hand. Right now, it's pretty schizophrenic.

Life before hobbies. No worries.

But, I gotta say, that's kind of wrongheaded. Mostly because there are some legitimately bad stories out there (Mystery Science Theater 3000 Fan, I've seen some crap!) and the tropes regarding certain bad things are, frankly, rather objective (Mountains Of Illinois being one of my favorites). If someone wants to look up The Giant Spider Invasion, they're gonna see rather quickly that it's a shitty movie.

Arena isn't that bad, thank god (it's more of an offensive Earth vs. the Spider level bad or perhaps a more neutral The Deadly Mantis sort of deal), but we can't ignore the problems it has for the sake of some imagined neutrality. If it is truly neutral, all must be laid bare before the public. If you want to balance it out, find some "positive" or neutral tropes to dilute the amount of negative ones. Rephrasings may be needed, but it won't change the facts. It can't change a Slurpasaur into a Stop Motion dinosaur or even a CG one. We must address them somehow.

I love Godzilla, but he's a Man in a Rubber Suit at the end of the day. What? He was CGI Once for an entire movie? I have no idea what you're talking about.

But here's the thing: I don't think the series has many problems at all, and if it does, it doesn't really bother me. I mean, at the end of the day I don't really care that Old Lace isn't there, for example. Your opinion that the series has it's problems and flaws is just that, an opinion just like mine. That's why I'm concerned over the main page.

Admittedly, some of them are nit picks. I mean, in the most recent issue, the use of EMP and it having no real effect on Arcade's nanites bugs the crap out of me, but I recognize that it's a minor complaint.

The repetitious nature of the deaths, however, are not. I mean, seriously: 3 neck injuries in a row? All sudden instant-deaths? All done primarily to evoke shock and surprise? 3 of the 4 all with the Red Background/Silhouette mode? 3 of the 4 have health bars up? It's almost a rout formula at this point, sapping it of the majority of its potential drama.

The nature of fictional analysis often leads to people seeing things that you do not. But we must expand our understandings to see what they are seeing.

In this specific case, I see a villain being over hyped both in universe and out that does not actually match up with what is shown. The game is so incompetently set up to the point where it ruins his credibility (his interference fights against most of the possible reasons and goals he could go for), the cast was fearful of Arcade even before the game started (and were called "Smart" for doing so even though the art indicates that if they did all rush him, they would have actually succeeded: Hazmat's second blast took him to his knees and no one acted on it in the followup), characters who do not toe the line or suck up to him are beaten by the Narrative (Hazmat, for example, compared to the more contrite Cullen Bloodstone), and his focus issue? Yeah, that really pushed it over the edge with the backtracking of Constrictor and using him as a strawman bully of all Arcade's detractors. It's like Hopeless is actively working to undo all the character development Christos Gage had done since Avengers: The Initiative.

That's what I see it. You disagree. And that's okay.

I disagree with some tropes that appear on the page too: "Took a Level in Badass" for instance. But then again, I define Bad Ass differently from most (Badass not equated to raw power). But I can see why people see that trope in there. So I leave it alone.

Can you see why I see what I see?

I can see why, but like I said I just disagree. Some of this is Willing Suspension of Disbelief, some of it is me not being as attached to the characters like many are, some of it is "I don't care, I'm really enjoying this ride."

I'll give you the character deaths, sorta. All four characters killed were used mainly as plot devices for others or the narrative. I was wondering why Juston was brought in and not say, Striker but then I remembered it was mainly for Apex so she can have use of the Sentinel.

For the example discussed, Willing Suspension of Disbelief doesn't really apply, it's simple logical thought. But don't fret, what you're experiencing is frankly the common reaction Arena proponents have (and have similar backgrounds too). People who knew the characters before hand, tend towards the opposite camp.

But, the big question and real focus should be, does that mean you are okay with that trope entry from the start? Character Shilling. Does Arcade have it? Well, I see it there, or something very similar. Will you stand against it still?

Yeah I still stand against it. I do not see it remotely as Character Shilling.

And I'm not so hooked up on it to keep pushing it. Further developments, of course, can always change that. If anyone has a vote one way or another, do speak up.

Mostly, because I'm not sure it quite applies, but something like it is happening.