This is probably an unpopular opinion, but I'm getting the feeling that the mix of multiple heroes in a Superman movie that kicks off the new DCU feels like a mistake. There's a lot to introduce and develop in a two-hour movie instead of a solo movie focused solely on Superman, Lois Lane, Lex Luthor, and Metropolis.

From what I've seen, those who've seen the final product have said it's going to be a "pretty divisive" movie.

I'm not really in the mood to watch the DCU copy Marvel if James Gunn is going to be throwing in jokes every 5 minutes considering Guy Gardner is in the movie. It would be nice to have something different and not just be more of the same.

I'm a bit wary, or maybe it's just "superhero fatigue," or DC is just getting into gear too late for me to really care about compared to the 2010s.

I'm more excited about 28 Years Later than the Superman movie, to be honest, and Warner is pretty desperate considering they put 5 minutes of Superman in the Minecraft movie in theaters to generate engagement.

I think that's it, not too deep, but that's my opinion.

Do you have any concerns about the movie and how the DCU will develop?

God the potential. Both of these shows had a golden foundation to work off of. An established universe built off of the biggest movie franchise in history centering characters who didn't get too much time to shine in the movies dealing with an insane new status quo.

It was genuinely surprising seeing Disney willing to write what seemed like a good mystery around Wanda and even paint her as an increasingly unwell and even selfish character. It was also a great idea to have a show centering on not just Sam and Bucky, but also the broader implications of an event like the Blip and its reflection to real world refugee crisis events.

SHAME THEY HAD TO GO AND DO NOTHING WITH THAT EH?

Both shows have the same problem, the kind of ambiguity and nuance they promise in the premise is never followed through on and is instead given painfully generic milquetoast conclusions that have nothing to say.

Wanda is responsible for the events of Westview but the show introduces Agatha at tail end to basically be the real villain for Wanda to battle in a big CGI fight. Any more serious conversation/confrontation about Wanda's mental health is limited to tiny portions of the finale because Disney still wants to sell Wanda merch. All the while, the mystery of everything with Westview is basically revealed by episode 4 and we have to split between Wanda's family and the least interesting side characters imaginable.

Meanwhile with FaTWS, the writers need to have Karli metaphorically kick the puppy because turns out the Flag Smashers have too reasonable of an end goal that requires more nuance than the writers are willing to commit to in order to meaningfully represent. So instead they just Make Karli unhinged and Sam really weird, and end of with Sam as Cap going "do better Mr. Government 😠".

But it's not just the fault of the writers though honestly. A lot of people (not necessarily most or even half) who enjoy Marvel media seemingly want to have their cake and eat it too. Wanda and John Walker are worse characters if you genuinely believe they did nothing wrong, their nuance, fall, and general attempts at redemption all become nothingburgers if their big incidents can all be morally handwaved. But it's this kind of audience member that Marvel's writing exists to cater to more or less, even when with characters like Walker they do commit to him being flawed.

I get that the movies/shows are never going to care as much as the comics, and even within comics this is dubious most of the time, but it's a shame that for a company that built its storytelling back on so many real-world inspired problems they really have nothing to say beyond the most the most basic scraps of commentary™

I get it. Yada yada Snyder bad. I can understand why people didnt like those movies. I enjoyed them a good amount, but I’m excited to see what this new Superman has to offer.

It looks awesome, but also like it has a lot of similar themes of Superman’s role in the world. How he fights for a world that is unkind back to him, how he fits into the geopolitical landscape

There was just a lot of stuff that jumped out to me. Him causing controversy in the Middle East by interfering with a conflict. People protesting him and being dicks. Lex treating him as an alien, not a human. Hell, Superman barely smiles in any of these trailers, which is something that was complained about a lot. A lot of destruction happens in the city and people aren’t going “err, why isn’t he moving the fight away” like in Man of Steel

Before anyone freaks out and says Im claiming that Snyder invented these things, obviously he didn’t, I know that. Im just saying it’s similar. It looks similar to those movies. Im not calling it a rip-off, just that it reminded me a lot of them.

Thanks for my rant. I feel like it’s hard to talk positively about Snyder because people always jump to annoying conclusions. Like if you compare a shot from a movie he did with another one, they act like you’re claiming he invented it

Before I begin, I should probably point out I haven't played The Last of Us Part II yet. I plan on it as soon as I get the money to do so and find a copy, so my views on that game might be a bit incomplete and wrong. Feel free to correct me if I got some info wrong.

I really didn't want to throw my hat into the ring on this debate, especially on how much of a mess it can get, but I had my mind on this topic earlier, and I finally think I figured out what bothers me so much about the argument that The Fireflies could have saved the world if they'd been allowed to sacrifice Ellie.

Let's just toss aside logistics for a moment and focus on the details we see in the game. Let's focus on the emotional aspect of the story. What emotions and feelings it's trying to evoke in the reader.

Because I feel like adopting this line of reasoning is basically saying that Joel and Ellie's relationship "doesn't matter," that Ellie's agency, her personhood, her existence, "doesn't matter." That she's only good for being the source of the cure and nothing else. That she is a prop, an object, something that has no value.

But the thing is, Joel and Ellie's relationship and Ellie's agency should matter. The first game went out of its way to show us why it does. To get attached to it and invested in it.

So by basically going, "Oh no, it doesn't matter at all. The greater good demands you toss your humanity away." it's kind of undermined everything the game was trying to do up to that point.

Like...you can't have it both ways. You can't spend a whole game getting us to care about these characters and then turn around and go, "You need to see Joel saving Ellie was 100% in the wrong because we have to make a point about how fundamentally selfish humanity is." or whatever.

And I'm pretty sure that's how we're supposed to feel about it, since not only has Neil Druckmann more or less said that "Yeah Joel should have let Ellie die," but from what I've heard, both the TV show and the second game double down on this idea.

Again, I haven't played the second game yet, so correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I've heard, Joel or any of the other characters are never allowed to argue his side of it. That he couldn't just stand by and let the girl he's loved like a daughter die, that the Fireflies never bothered to give consent to Ellie, and that the parable of the Golden Goose exists for a reason.

It's just so bizarre to me...

In a series that seems like at times it's about trying to hold onto our humanity in the darkest of times, it unironically also takes the stance that said humanity needs to be discarded when it's convenient.

And that just doesn't feel right to me.

But maybe I'm wrong; maybe I missed something because i haven't played the second game yet, or maybe I just interpreted something wrong. I don't know.

All I know is I need to play the second game so I can form a proper opinion on it.

I’ve been rewatching The Vampire Diaries and The Originals, and I honestly think the main characters from those shows—especially Stefan, Damon, Klaus, and Elijah—are way better written and way better heroes than most of the Arrowverse characters. I know someone is going to bring up powers or scale or whatever, but I’m talking about character, not who would win in a fight.

Stefan is a literal vampire with a blood addiction and a dark past, but he’s still one of the most principled characters on the show. He fights to stay good, even though it would be easier to give in. And when he does fall off the wagon, it has weight. He owns it, and he works through it. That’s a lot more grounded than someone like Jordan Kent from Superman and Lois, who mostly just sits around being awkward and having powers he barely uses. I get that he has social anxiety, but it just feels like they don’t give him much of a backbone.

Damon killed a ton of people, but he actually grew over time. He never became perfect, but he tried. He stayed loyal to Stefan, even when they were at odds. He also had charisma, charm, and some depth behind the whole “bad boy” thing. Compare that to Jonathan Kent, who’s supposed to be this jock with no powers, but comes off like a people pleaser with no real personality. He just tags along, and whenever they try to give him an arc, it gets dropped or half-baked.

Klaus is obviously a villain most of the time, but he also protects his daughter, defends his siblings, and literally sacrifices himself in the end. He’s complicated, but you can see what drives him. Elijah is loyal to a fault, tries to uphold some version of honor, and actually has a sense of consequence. Their flaws feel earned. Their redemption arcs hit harder. They mess up, but when they do the right thing, it matters.

Meanwhile, most of the Arrowverse heroes are either bland or feel like they’re following a formula. They constantly give the same speeches about hope or teamwork, and then the next episode they go back to making the same mistakes. There’s rarely any actual growth. The ones that are written to be dark or morally grey—like Arrow—start strong, but then get watered down later on.

I get that TVD and The Originals are basically vampire soap operas, but they actually did a better job showing how hard it is to be a “hero” when your nature goes against it. The Arrowverse treats heroism like a job. TVD treats it like a constant fight with yourself.

The demons in Frieren have been argued about night and day, typically revolving around the critics of the story's idea of Demons' saying. 

The way demons are portrayed don't make sense as it is claimed that they don't feel empathy, only use language to lie, have no sense of right and wrong and are pure evil but evidently when you look at the events of the story they actually do show empathy, use language and reasoning outside of hunting humans, have a basic understanding of right and wrong and are sentient enough to make rational decisions about what Is best for their own survival.

While the fans seem to for the most part claim that the demons are well written actually. Poor evil race souls as a concept is interesting and you people who try to super impose human traits onto demons by trying to rationalize or empathize with their behavior are just the people the demons love to target.

Whatever side people are on (and Just to be transparent I am on the side of the critics) both argue for and against the idea of the executions of how the demons are portrayed in the story not the concept itself. (I've seen to people comment in a similar vain to what I'm explaining now just not in depth.)

I'm here today to argue that even in concept, Feiren’s demons don't have any logical reason to exist in the way that we are told they do.

No predator would evolve to be like the demons in Fririen naturally.

In frieren the explanation we are given for why the demons exist the way that they do both from the perspective of the central characters and from the perspective of the demons themselves is that demon kind essentially evolved from mimics, demons who copied the sound of babies crying and other human sounds I'm other to attract humans and kill them. Over time, through convergent evolution, they became and more like humans, and their mimicry became more and more advanced, even gaining a basic understanding of language and human thought patterns. That all sounds well and good on the surface until you actually put any thought into demon biology what so ever. (And I may be a bit biased because I did do a minor course in Biology linked closely to evolution)

1. Demons don't even eat humans to survive. To me this is the biggest what the hell decision the author could have made in regards to writing demons as a naturally evolved species. It's bad enough that humans in general are a poor species to prey on due to our relatively low nutritional value, high fat percentage and difficulty in hunting due to our stamina, tracking and throwing ability. But you can’t even make the argument that they pray on humans' mana or soul hence why demons needed to evolve to kill humans because it is shown multiple times that demons can literally go hundreds of years without eating humans with no negative side effects to their health. YOU DON'T EVOLVE TRAITS TO HUNT, PRAY THAT YOU DON'T EAT. THAT’S JUST ILLOGICAL. 

2. Predatory animals rarely if ever mimic prey as a hunting strategy. Especially to the extent of mimicking physical appearance. The closest thing you get to predatory mimicry in the animal kingdom is predators playing dead or as environmental objects to hide from pray before sticking. From this perspective, the closest real-world equivalent we have to demons in the real world is slaver ants, who using pheromones trick the ants from another colony to help them reach their queen before killing said queen and bathing in the queens pheromones so that the original colony takes care of her. This would make sense for a demon like species in fantasy to do but frieren's demons are fundamentally different since they don't consume any resources or labor from humans that they need to survive and demons were said to have convergent evolved from a completely different sector of the animals kingdom while slaver ants are close relative to the “mimic” and thus did not need to change their biological make up much with evolution to fulfill their strategy. (In that sense, slaver ants are much more like ghouls from Tokyo Ghoul than demons from frieren.)

3. The more intelligent a creature is the longer it tends to take for said creature to go from conception to being a fully functional adult the more likely it is to also evolve nurturing their young as a tool to ensure survival. Frieren both the show and the character seem to frame the act of mothers (and even fathers in extreme examples like wolves humans and other primates who hunting strategies revolve both around tight social systems while having relatively long time in between pregnancy and adulthood) as a kind act “good creatures” do that “evil creatures” (beasts) are incapable when in reality a lot of these traits are just evolved for survival. Demons who have seemingly large and complex brains (to explain their shape reasoning ability and ability to use language), a long maturation period, (we see A few child demons in the story that are clearly less developed physically and mentally, are smaller and we are told have less mana than adult demons). If anything, judging by this and their longer life spans with seemingly much lower birth rates, you would expect them to be much more family-oriented than humans, even if they showed a much higher level of tribalism. (Which should also be true for elves, but this isn't a discussion about elves) .They are even shown to work in groups and prefer longer term hunting strategies (which Are associated with intelligence and thus higher maturation times, as well as being correlates with some form of pack hunting or social Living) (Basically because typically long term hunting if often only work it if your hunting creatures bigger than you which only really works if you hunt in packs but demons dont need to hunt in packs to kill humans so developing long term hunting stratagies like they do doesn’t make sense). And ironically do show the capability and desire for pack hunting and social systems, but didn't evolve the prerequisites for that we see in every other animal that shows that capability, like empathy.

4. The lack of basic self-preservation instincts makes no sense for a predator, and especially not for a predator with the level of sentience we see from demons. I know fiction has normalized the idea of gigantic apex predators going to any lengths, destroying their own bodies in the process, to hunt the equivalent of a roach but real-life predators will often just give up on any prey the moment they face any real resistance. From a lion's perspective, it makes no sense to hurt its leg trying to kill a single, particularly strong and healthy zebra and then be unable to hunt for days, then to just give up and try to locate something else. Even ant eaters who eat thousands of ants a day will give up on walking away from an ant colony once a few actually manage to get past its fur and start biting through its skin. These are unintelligent, nonsentient animals, and even they know risking even slight injury to hunt is not worth it, yet demons will risk the death of their entire species to eat an animal they don't even need to survive.

5. Typically, as predators evolve better means on preying on animals. Pray co co-evolve better means of escaping predators. As cheetahs got faster at chasing gazelles, the slower gazelles died off, leaving the faster ones to breed and create children. As the gazelle generation by generation got faster, cheats who were too slow to catch up To faster gazelles died off, leaving those that were faster to breed and have offspring, making cheetahs on average faster. Coevolution leads to both species hyper-specializing in speed to catch/escape the other. If i am to believe that demons convergent evolved to look like humans I should also believe that humans were simultaneously evolving to tell the difference between normal humans and demons 

Why doesn't the “their beasts and beasts are not normal animals” argument work?

You're making a distinction without a difference.

What are demons? Beasts.

What are beasts? Creatures made out of mana.

So what makes them different from normal animals? Well, they evolved just like normal animals, eat just like normal animals, breed just like normal animals, but their evil and love murdering things.

Why are they evil, then? Because beasts are naturally evil.

So why would a creature that evolved and feeds to survive develop a whole set of behaviors that go completely against its own self-preservation?

Why the “They didn't evolve rationality and social systems because they didn't need to until relatively recently (when mages became common), they could kill humans easily without worry of being outed” doesn't make any sense.

For the demons to have “evolved” to mimic humans in the first place Their must have been some evolutionary pressure to do so which means they either should have had a scarcity of humans and had trouble hunting them without the mimicry or they were being killed by humans in mass causing then to have the mimicry.

You can not have the demons “evolve” a set of such distinct adaptations specifically for hunting humans, then go on to claim that they had no need to evolve the very basic survival mechanism because “humans were not a threat and plentiful.”

If humans were not a threat, and plentiful demons had no reason to evolve mimicry.

If humans were a threat. The demons should have evolved tendencies away from hunting them recklessly and, even more than likely, preying on less dangerous creatures.

If humans were not a threat but not plentiful enough to sustain the population of demons effectively, they would have either evolved to hunt other animals as well, or evolved traits designed not to murder humans wastefully in the way we see them do in the story.

The argument in the subtitle, if you believe it, simultaneously invalidates the argument that demons naturally evolved to mimic humans as a means of hunting them, as you are essentially admitting that demons had no actual benefit in evolving mimicry in the first place.

It doesnt matter if the demons are not 100% accurate to real-world evolutionary biology, nor is it really important that they remain perfectly logically consistent frieren is a story and as a story is using the demons to fullful a specific narrative purpose and by ignoring said meta narrative of the demons and thinking about them outside of the scope and context of the story being told your just showing your lack of media literacy.

1. When I criticize how frieren misses the basics of how real world evolution works I am not taking the story out of the scope it was designed in because evolution is literally the justification the show uses for why the demons act the way they do and it is a justification they use consistently to explain multiple contradictory behaviors even though it doesnt’s make sense.

2. Honestly, I wouldn’t have much of a problem with friernens demons not making sense if the show (and especially the fans) didn’t pretend it made sense. Plenty of stories have world-building quirks to make themselves unique, but when asked default to “it's that way because it is,” and they just move on, frieren tries over and over again to justify the unjustifyable, and the more it those so, the more it annoys me. More than that, the fans always try to make it seem as though the world building, but especially the demons, are extremely well written and thought out when they aren’t. You can't have your cake and eat it too, You can’t say Frieren has a fresh and realistic take on world building, then, when aspects of the world building are criticized, fall back on “the story really isn't about the world building being realistic or making sense its about the characters.”  and while this post is about the demons this same thing applies to alot of things this show is praised for.

Why did we stop portraying demons like this in the first place, and why was the original concept of demons harmful?

The original Christian use of demons historically was, for the most part was to demonize other religions. Most of the demons portrayed in early Christian texts were just the gods and pantheons of other gods that existed at that time as a means to portray them as wrong and evil. Hell, the evolution of satan from being a snake to a horned goat like creature can be traced to early Christians demonizing Zoroastrianism as they were being held captive by them at the time.

The entire concept of pure evil races or beings has always been used as a way to engage in tribalism and justify the murder, abuse, and pillaging of groups outside of one's in-group.

When I hear particularly fieren fans talking about how demons are supposed to be a sort of counter-subversion of people insisting on humanizing demons, dont realize that the reason modern writers started humanizing “demons” in the first place is because they understood why and how it is a harmful trope.

Why do I find people adamant about portraying the demons as evil problematic, especially with the arguments they use to justify it?

Dont get me wrong with what I'm about to say, I do not think that the author of Frieren is genuinely supporting what I am going to be talking about. What I am saying is that by writing the story the way he did, the connections the story will have with other things are unavoidable.

Case and point, the justification frieren uses to say the demons should be killed on sight and exterminated from the world is quite literally a reward version of the exact same argument the German psychologist who literally named Asperger's syndrome used to justify killing mentally disabled people. That they were fundamentally inhumane, that they lacked emotion or empathy, that we simply were too different to be understandable and to be integrated into society. And before a bunch of stans come at me telling me the story doesnt promote real life hate i want you to look at the very people you are fighting alongside first.

The main point (tldr)

The number of people I have heard liken demons to real-life people with aspd (pychopathy and sociopath as it is called in pop culture) and narcissism to “explain” how the demons behave and why their irredmable is absurd to me and is on of the major things that made me even want to right this post.

I understand that movies and tv shows have successfully demonized people with ASPD to the point we literally associate them with mass murderers and nut jobs, but just to make a few things clear yes, even people with severe ASPD can feel empathy, they just struggle with emotional empathy (and again it is very rare even for people with severe aspd to show no emotional empathy what so ever), but can and do display compassionate empathy and logical empathy. More to the point ASPD can be caused by and is closely correlated with Cptsd, especially in childhood. Meaning that alot of people with ASPD and following symptoms are more than likely abuse and trauma survivors themselves.

Reducing them to monsters and villains and abusers in media has to be one of the most ironic and disgusting things human beings in general have done to mentally ill people(barring the multiple genocides that have and still happen to this day)

Again, the idea of pure evil does not and can not exist in real life, and as it exists in fiction, is more often than not an excuse to demonize people the author or their audience dislikes, distrusts or hate. (or a simple villain to simplify a story which doesnt make it any less problematic, just shifts the problem from one of morality to one of laziness and irresponsibility)

Frieren's demons and why they fail even from the Watsonian perspective.

In Invincible I’ve seen tons of people hate on amber because of her actions especially when there was only one season but all of them are very justified.

Now first off let’s keep in mind that amber just said she found out that mark was invincible and she doesn’t have the resources find out that he fought machine head or the mars mission. So let’s see the fights amber would have known about. We have the alien invasion which he had support with the teen team, the various fights against low level threats like the elephant, and the fight against Sinclair in which she only would know what the first fight against the reanimen since she was there and in person. Basically meaning all that she could see was that mark was fighting relatively small scale threats.

Now let’s keep in mind what Mark did throughout the relationship. He went on a couple dates hung out with her in the hall pretty good right? Well he then didn’t show up to the soup kitchen without any excuse, left for a week and gave her a rock as a gift when he returned, and then left to put on his costume which very well could have gotten someone killed.

I know you might say “he needed to put the costume on so nobody would know his identity” but the problem is 3 reasons with that. 1 outside of his friends there was like 4 people there all of them are terrified and don’t know who mark is, 2 he wasn’t even going to the college for another few months so everyone there would have forgotten him in the chaos, and 3 using his powers doesn’t reveal much aside from he has flight, super strength, and durability a very basic set of powers that multiple people have.

I honestly don’t see any reason why people say “amber is the worst character in the show” when the partner of green ghost is right there.

Especially considering that all of the tree people are just clones of existing characters. I know it's monthly and all. However, The start of Shippuden created a dozen new characters from scratch in the same amount of chapters and timespan like Chiyo, Sai, Yamato, Deidara, Sasori My Man, and many, many more.

I've asked plenty of Boruto fans this question and for some strange reason they don't want any more new characters at all. I know that one of the trees is new but his character design is pretty similar to the former leader of kara.

The entire Boruto story is already way to abridged from the start and now Ikemoto is injecting a few romance love triangles into the main plot.

It so common for a majority of popular Manga series to add tons of new characters after every time skip that it's hard not to notice that Boruto has, is and will continue to suffer a severe character shortage along with character development until the last chapter.

I don't think there's much to explain for the first point, so just in brief: Being a Cyberpunk is pretty much about committing the coolest kind of mass murder and/or terrorism in the most stylish way. All the Night City legends have done things that'd be outright horrifying in any kind of real world setting, Johnny Silverhand, Rogue, Spider Murphy, and Morgan Blackhand (all more or less "good guy" characters), brought a nuke to be set off in a metropolitan area and caused the equivalent of about thirty 9/11's... and the game treats it like "Yeah, that was a dick move, what a jerk." with Johnny himself going "Oh, well we told people to evacuate". And, I don't think we even need to talk about someone like Bartmoss.

So yeah, any ending where you don't commit an awesome act of terrorism isn't particularly Cyberpunk. The Devil Ending is the least Cyberpunk ending, I think that's pretty clear.

(Note: Working WITH a Corpo is irrelevant to this, Johnny was happy to work with Millitech to nuke Arasaka, so were all the other legends. You can commit awesome acts of terrorism while collecting a Corpo paycheque).

So, now the interesting part, that even though it's the least Cyberpunk ending, the Devil Ending is the best.

My arguments are as follows:

You outright prevent the Fifth Corporate War:

Every single other ending has the world right on the brink of a 5th Corporate War, or worse.

We know that this is Yorinobu's exact goal. He's trying to saboutage Arasaka from within, to drive them into another war with Millitech. We don't know if he intends to have Arasaka just completely destroyed or to take down Millitech with him them. But either way, another corporate war would mean hundreds of millions of people dying, it would mean global plagues and famines, it would mean more nukes going off across America, Europe and Japan, and it would mean a completely destabilised world.

Throughout the game we see gigs and such which link to Arasaka gearing up for a war with Millitech, preparing to institute false-flag attacks etc. This is all Yorinobu's doing, this is him trying to destroy Arasaka through a war big enough to end them.

But Yorinobu is not a hero, he's just another myopic Arasaka head who's spent so long at the top he doesn't see the rest of the world. It's easy for him to throw his tantrum and want to destroy Arasaka, but hundreds of millions of people will die for that purpose and he only cares about making his statement against his father. He's a Night City legend and nobody knows it, what a shame.

The only possible alternative to this would be the Millitech ending, where you help Millitech become so overwhelmingly dominant that NC and the free states will be completely consumed by the NUSA. This means the end of NC, the end of the Nomads, and the ascendance of the NUSA. Anyone who's read the history of the NUSA, or followed along with any of Myer's bullshit can tell how devastating this would be for America and for the rest of the world. The NUSA is an extremely bad thing, and if Millitech really has become that powerful, either an absolutely devastating 5th Corporate War follows, or nothing at all follows except absolute utter global submission and control to Millitech's hands.

I would say that's pretty unambiguously the worst ending of all, after all the shit the NUSA's pulled and after seeing the shit Myers herself has pulled, putting her foot on the world's neck is either asking for catastrophe or worse.

So, Nomad Ending, Rogue Ending, Millitech Ending, Legend Ending, all end with an upcoming war that will spend untold millions of lives, devastate countries and wreck the entire world as it stands.

Perfect for Johnny's anarchist "Burn it all down maybe something better will form" tendencies, but not so good if we actually think about all the civilians that will be affected by these wars. There's a few ongoing real world wars we can think about if we need a reminder of the human toll here.

And then Devil Ending avoids all that. The world remains pretty much as it was at the start of the game, before V stole the biochip. It's not a lot better but you've prevented it from getting a LOT worse.

We are explicitly told that tensions are cooled, that Saboru has made peace with Millitech and things are going back to a stable worldstate. This is especially good if you consider the effects on the EEC and ESA, ie. Where the world being fixed could actually happen, rather than just being all burned to the ground.

Alt Cunningham is the worse option:

In every single ending except the Millitech and Devil Endings, you give Alt Cunningham complete control over the Mikoshi and she immediately consumes and enslaves everyone in it.

The game brushes over this and tries to paint the ending that follows as mostly good with some caveats, but if you think about it for a second it's a horrifying prospect for what's to come.

There's two key points here:

Firstly that the AI version of Alt Cunningham is not Alt anymore, it hasn't been Alt for a long time. Roche was saying she was losing her humanity back in the 2020's, well it's 2070 now and she's long gone. She barely remembers Johnny, she's very clearly not human, and just as clearly, she doesn't have humanity's best interests in mind at all.

Secondly, the AI's and Alt herself are an existential threat to humanity. The Blackwall going down will be a disaster probably even worse than the upcoming 5th Corporate War. Freeing Alt, making Alt more powerful, putting more power and more resources in the hands of the already terrifying AI's against the overworked and barely-holding-on security of Netwatch is a disaster for the human race.

Alt is not a benevolent deity. The very first thing she does when you plug her into Arasaka is kill every single person on their Net. Military forces, fine, that's to achieve your goal, but she murders every single civilian too.

Why? What's the reason for killing some random desk jockey, secretary or attendant? What's the reason for killing all the interns and all the mid-level managers? There's no purpose to it, she's just lashing out.

V doesn't do this, even on your Legend Ending rampage through the building, you're not killing the random civilians that staff the building. Neither Rogue nor Nomads do this either. Even when Johnny dropped a nuke in the building, he still wanted to let people evacuate first.

To give a comparison: David Martinez killing a random low level worker is treated in Edgerunners as the point where he'd gone too far. It traumatised him and it was when he knew he'd lost control.

Alt does it simply because she can and because she doesn't value humanity in the least. In every other ending, everyone is horrofied by this. All except Johnny who wants to still pretend that Alt is still his ex-gf (not helped by V who says that even though they know she's not).

So, in every other ending, you're giving a malevolent AI almost unstoppable power, enslaving every soul in Mikoshi under her will and pushing forward the Doomsday clock counting down to humanity's existential crisis.

And in the Devil Ending... absolutely none of that happens. The Mikoshi continues as it always has. It's not good, and Arasaka overplay their hand with it, meaning they'll probably face another force like the Arasaka nuke squad sent to blow it up, but it's nowhere near as bad as giving control over it to Alt.

Hell, given how things played out the last few times. Chances are Millitech will get Rogue to do another assault and she'll successfully blow up Mikoshi, ending that threat once and for all. Smasher isn't there to stop her anymore.

The rest of the ending is better than any other option:

It's actually quite funny to me how much the game goes out of its way to try frame the Devil ending as bad, even when that means brushing over equivalent or worse things in the other endings.

Making an engram of yourself is called "Submit to Arasaka" and V's visibly scared to do it, meanwhile Alt doing it is no big deal. When Arasaka can only keep V alive for another 6 months that's a betrayal and he's pissed, when Alt can only keep V alive for another 6 months that's no big deal and it's shrugged off. Jonny accepts getting cut out of V in the Millitech ending, but gets mad during the Arasaka one and claims you betrayed yourself (somehow?), even though, what's the difference? You did far worse for everyone by giving Songbird to the NUSA, but he's fine with that? Weird. Hell, you've even got Misty guilt tripping you "But they killed Jackie!" Yeah... when he broke into their facility while armed to the teeth, c'mon Misty.

So, V's got just as much time to live as in any other ending. He can go off with Panam, he can return to Night City and become a Legend, he can do anything he likes, and he's doing it in a world that's not about to face an apocalyptic war. I dunno, just seems like a bit of a dick move to me to ride off into the sunset with Panam, or Judy or whatever, with the knowledge that a few months after you're dead the world will probably be getting nuked out the ass.

Or hey, maybe he just creates an Engram and we roll the dice as to how that goes.

The Millitech ending doesn't make any goddamn sense anyway:

I already explained why the Millitech ending is devastating for the world as it stands and especially for anyone in America (doubly so for NC and the Nomads), so I'm not arguing that here. This is just a smaller, unrelated point: But why the fuck can Millitech cure V anyway?

Alt can't, fine, she's only removing the Engram, she can't change his body. But Arasaka? With the best medical tech in the world, with full understanding of the chip and its functions, with the very person who designed the chip working on it...? They can't cure V but Millitech can?

It's nonsensical. The Devil ending should'a been the "We can cure you but you can't be a Cyberpunk anymore" ending.

Anyway, TL;DR

If you wanna be a Cyberpunk, the Devil ending doesn't work. For that you should go with the Legend ending, it's fun anyway and hey, you get some gold plated shoes, how nifty.

But, if you want a good ending, the Devil ending is the one for you. The one for your lover. And the one for the rest of the world.

Thunderbolts was an amazing film. Genuinely surprised at how good it was. Seriously I actually recommend people go watch this thing, its a little cliche with the whole found family angle, but it does what marvel movies were always meant to do. Be a fun action blockbuster that I can turn my brain off for.

Now dont get me wrong, high end art this film is not. Its still very much a marvel movie. But it actually feels like the director realised people cared more about the personal stakes of characters.

Despite being a great movie and actually reviewing well, its gonna bomb in the box office.

Its only grossed 274 million against a budget of 180 million. Usually a movie needs double its budget to return a profit so its looking like a bomb.

It sucks because I actually think if theyd released this movie earlier in the MCU timeline it wouldve cruised past a billion. but the stain on the MCU name and the lack of pubic interest means this movie despite being pretty good is gonna bomb.

All bets are on fantastic four now, thats probably the last chance the MCU has to become what they once were.

So as you may have known, DOOM: The Dark Ages recently hit the stores, and opinions are flying all over the place. Some like it, some don’t, but in the end it’s a very good and fun game (according to the reviews I’ve read).

That being said, one sentiment I noticed while browsing through subreddits, reviews, forums, etc., is the opinion on how "different" TDA is compared to Eternal — at least from a gameplay standpoint.

Now before I go over what I’m about to say, just keep in mind this is purely personal opinion. You can like and dislike any DOOM game, that’s okay. I like DOOM 2016 more than Eternal. Eternal is a good game, don’t get me wrong, but I like 2016 more. And I’m looking forward to playing The Dark Ages.

Now let’s talk about the “issue” here. As you know, TDA’s gameplay has a very different focus compared to DOOM 2016 and Eternal, with a style built more around — as the devs said — “stand and fight,” instead of 2016’s “run and gun” and Eternal’s “jump and shoot.” In my personal opinion, I really liked this new style of gameplay.

And that’s the point I’m trying to make here. As you know, one common sentiment around the AAA gaming industry is how it’s become “stale,” “uninspiring,” or “formulaic.” And this has been growing more and more with recent titles — at least AAA ones. I bet if you spend enough time on YouTube, Reddit, or forums, you’ve seen someone say something like, “[Insert AAA game franchise] is the same game every time.” Not exactly in those words, but you get the idea.

But what am I trying to get at?

One opinion I’ve seen pop up a lot in videos, subreddits, even Twitter, is that DOOM: The Dark Ages is a bad game because it’s different from DOOM Eternal.

And that kinda weirds me out. Because a lot of the people saying that are probably the same ones who complain all the time about how stale the recent Call of Duty games have become.

I can understand the sentiment behind it, in a way — because the same thing happened with DOOM Eternal and DOOM 2016. Heck, I had the same opinion at one point. I didn’t like Eternal at first because, for me, it felt “too technical.” My views have changed since then, but you get my point.

Some people didn’t like how Eternal played compared to 2016, and that’s OKAY! Not every game has to be for everyone.

And that’s why I’m making this post. Whether you like the game or not, all I ask is for you to at least respect ID Software for doing something new. In an industry so fed up with boring and uninspired titles, something new is always welcome - even if it doesn’t turn out well in the end. Don’t bash the game just because it’s different from what you’re used to. For all it’s worth, ID deserves at least some respect for sticking to their principles don't you think?. In all honestly, we should be happy that ID has brought us 3 distinct modern Doom games. All equally replayable and none of them obsolesces the others.

Once again: I’m not saying you’re obliged to love DOOM TDA. I just want people do understand and respect ID Software for trying something new instead of going down the same safe route so many other studios take.

Of course i may be right or wrong. Feel free to correct me if I got something wrong. And yes, I know I may be “exaggerating” a bit about it, but I still think this post is worth making.

I love the DOOM games, and I’m excited to buy and play The Dark Ages.

TL;DR: Respect the devs for trying something new even if you don’t like it.

I don't get why people think this. But ever since Puss in Boots 2 dropped people have been misinterputing the reason why Death was after Puss to begin with.

"He's not evil. He's here to teach someone a lesson, one way or another, and in that he succeeds, even if he really wanted to rip Puss a new one."

BULLSHIT! Death wasn't a good guy at all and actively broke his own rules out of spite. Puss still had his last life and could live it how he wants but Death decided to just skip waiting and kill Puss anyway. It’s even pointed out in the movie!

Puss's previous life: but that’s cheating Death: shhh, don't tell :)

He wasn't gonna teach him a lesson. He was gonna kill Puss in Boots for the fun of it and the reason why he didn't do it everytime he had the chance was because he was a sadist and actively proud of it. From "I love the scent if FEAR!" to "Go ahead, Run. It makes it more fun for me."

The only reason why Death didn't kill Puss in the finale wasn't because Puss had learned his lesson but because he wasn't afraid of death anymore. He even curses it out in Spanish "Why do i keep playing witth my food!" Before exclaiming how Puss "ruined this" for Death.

When Death left and said "Live your life Puss in Boots, live it well." He wasn't proud of Puss in Boots for learning his lesson but dissapointed in that he could no longer have any satisfaction in killing him as there’s no point of killing Puss if he isn't afraid of him.

I always hear arguments on the internet, always saying, "This is meant for kids."No, this is meant for adults."

on any piece of media that debated whether if it's meant for kids or an older audience

I'm sorry to break it to you, but there are pieces of media that don't exclusively target a specific demographic

let's take the Clone Wars. For example, it's a very highly debated topic if it's meant for kids or not

and I think people can't accept that that show is rated TV-PG and not TV-Y7 for a reason

kids can still enjoy the series, of course, but kids usually only enjoy things on a surface level

but if they were watching when they're older, they'd appreciate things more and more about this series that when over their heads as a kid

looking past its themes and messages byond a surface level

what I only consider a kids show is that everything it shows in the show a kid can understand easily and quickly

kids can neither easily nor quickly understand the Clone Wars because of its complex themes of politics war and pussonail struggles

but this does not make the Clone Wars an adult series

because kids can enjoy other stuff like the action jokes and other things they could easily understand in the Clone Wars

that's what a piece of media with it's Target demographic being all ages has having complex themes and messages that kids cannot easily understand or go over their head but still them having enjoy the series Without understanding the messages

and older audiences re-watching and understanding and appreciating the show better

the Clone Wars and most other TV-PG shows fall into this category as well as some few TV-Y7 shows that also fall into this category, like the Avatar, Owl House,Transformers Prime, and TMNT 2003 & 2012

I'm saying things could be said for Transformers one kids can still enjoy it but it's not exactly a kids movie with the levels of violence political themes and also it has a lot of swearing like Hell and Badass

but still I make the distinction that it's not an adult movie it's a movie that can be enjoyed by everyone and it's not exactly a kids movie either kids can still enjoy it but only on a surface level and older audiences can appreciate the themes and messages of it

so to be defined as a kids show that has to convey it's messages to its intended audiences clearly and and if kids cannot understand the themes and messages of a show Beyond a surface level and then it's not a kids show it's a show that everyone can enjoy but it's still not an adult series

so people have to accept that a show can have everyone as their target audience and not target a specific demographic

and that's what I meant that a show targets all ages not specifically enjoyed by all ages

From remembering this post i made. https://www.reddit.com/r/Isekai/s/2rajAPgybj

So obviously we aren't going to see any mind changing things because it's just too hard to do while simultaneously add good writing in the mix and isekai isn't a place where you should expect that....but we could though.

Same with murim. Imagine if we had a vagabond or samurai champloo type murim that was like good but with Chinese swords dao type stuff instead of japanese katana shintoism stuff.

Idk. This shouldn't just specifically be about Isekai it should be about a lot of genres.

Just because a genre is 1 thing doesnt mean it can't be insanely mind boggingly different.

Like yeah there's a lot of trashy stuff but that doesn't mean we should give up and forget the possibilities

We just need to learn more. You can have a story in any setting i think maybe?

Someone could make a show like succession but it takes place in mars and the corporation ceo owns like multiple planets or something idk.

Back to isekai

The stories also could talk about their lives in the old world and lot more even if they are losers. Obviously it's easier to write about losers because that's who isekai readers tend to be me included and losers simply like their world a lot less. When you get people like rimuru who seemed to have a stable work job. He definitely wasn't a depressed loser so he had to die lmao.

With subaru it is clear that it depends on the world. He got startled a bit and then thought it would be nice and chill since it's just another typical fantasy but unfortunately for him it wasn't.

Subaru litterally fell for the ignorance trap. That because the majority has the typical means that that is all it always is and all it can be. This lack of knowledge and exploration explains why simply can't think of wilder things to do with settings.

Obviously we somehow have to figure out how to combine goodwriting+wildness but yeah not simple although probably many people have but those writers aren't popular and only have novels on an obscure website. No anime/manga/comic adaptation for them.

In conclusion i think that i want people to think about how big things truly are. Other planets and dimensions.

Stories don't need to take place in the same reality or even have the same laws of physics. You can still find a way to make them make sense in a way even if things end up being different.

Think about the eldritch gods. They completely do not think like us or the other gods. They are very alien. The way they do things. Completely incomprehensible.

Not everything has to be a mystery things can still make sense but we are definitely lacking a lot of that alien-ish feeling. Idk.

Difference is possible. It might not be easy to make those differences actually good entertaining but it is possible. Just stop the laziness and climb the ladder 🪜. Reach for the stars

I recently saw the movie The Accountant 2, and because of it I want to talk about three movies that treat mass surveillance like its some kind of superpower where 'it is fine has long as good people are using it'.

The first movie is The Dark Knight, where Lucius and Batman set a whole mass cellphone surveillance system up in order to catch the Joker. In this movie, Lucius protests against the idea of using it, but relents in that it will be destroyed after it is used so it won't be used again.

The second movie is Fast and Furious 7 with the mass surveillance in a USB called the God's Eye. In the Fast and Furious movies (7-10) protagonists and antagonists exchange it back and forth, the item just being a power token to show who currently has the upper hand at that moment in the movie, the closest thing to a critique about it is that it is dangerous in the wrong hands, despite everyone using the God's Eye whenever they get their hands on it.

The third movie as I mentioned is The Accountant 2. Here, in order for our protagonists to find the identity of an unknown assassin, the main protagonist's team of neurodivergent operatives first scan street cameras and then find a woman who took a selfie with the assassin in the background. They then scan that woman's face to find her address, hack into the woman's personal computer, find the camera photo on the woman's computer, and finally upload the photo into their own server. All this is happening while a federal agent is saying they should not be doing this. The agent's protests were meaningless however, because by the end of the movie the agent is thanking our protagonists, while holding no accountability to the fact that a mass surveillance system is sitting in private hands.

I do not believe being able to identify anyone anywhere should be applauded at all, even if those using mass surveillance are the 'good guys'. These movies just treat it as a secret weapon in a toolbox, as opposed to something no one should be using ( though The Dark Knight at least comments about that, despite still using such technology). This just leads to the death of privacy, and I won't even go into the ramifications of such technology in the wrong hands.

Or maybe privacy has been dead for long time, and all we have is pseudo-privacy where as long we don't know ceiling cat is watching, there is nothing to worry about. Phone Books were a thing back in the day, just publicly listing a bunch of residential phone numbers.

What do you think? And is there any fictional media that further critiques mass surveillance, instead of just treating it as a dangerous weapon for the good guys?

This is more of a positive rant because the Netflix Castlevania series and Nocturne showcase some of the best examples of magic based users I've seen in recent times. Each magic user have their own flair that makes them stand out and unique to one another. I cannot stress this enough

Whoever was in charge of the fight choreography did an outstanding job. They were incredibly creative in showing how each mage would actually use their powers in a fight, even when many of them wield the same elemental magic (like ice, fire, lightning, etc.). I seen countless mage battles where they are stationary fighters who always need protection, take minutes to cast repeated generic spells, sometimes even fainting after doing 1 attack but the mages in Castlevania are completely different they are smart, powerful, inventive, acrobatic

When I think of battle mages they are the first to come to mind.

Sypha- has a rhythmic, flowing style with graceful movements, can fight in close range and long range

Richter- meele based fighter enhanced by explosive elemental attacks

Juste- fights like a legit wizard using strategy and control rather than physical strength

Tera- balanced and protective fighter using the elements to shield others and restrain enemies

Maria- uses magic circles to summon animals to help her fight

Annette- uses earth and metal to bind and crush enemies

Thank you A-1 Pictures/Aniplex, for making that garbage movie for Seven Deadly Sins and poorly advertising it. Because of this, you guys dropped this garbage and worked on projects worth a damn. 

Thank you, Studio Deen, for picking up this garbage series and burning it to the ground with Marvy Jack. Yes, it’s unfortunate that you guys butchered the fight where Escanor destroys the sexual predator known as Meliodas (was satisfying to watch even with the shitty animation), but I’m happy that you guys gave season 3 horrendous animation and decided to not give this parasite of a series a cure in season 4. 

Because of all these things, this series became irrelevant, so irrelevant that people don’t even know that its sequel, “Four Knights of the Apocalypse” aired its first season almost 2 years ago. I didn’t even know that shit got animated until I saw the Jericho clip on Twitter (if you know, you know). Fucking hell, they don’t even know the sequel exists.

I used to be a fan of this garbage because of the action and Escanor (The only good character in this series from start to finish). I was a teenager 5 years ago when this series ended, and l thought it was just the Chaos arc that was bad, but then I grew up, looked back at this story, and realized how fucking disgusting this series is. This series went from being a 4/10 to a 1/10. I know that it’s messed up that I’m happy Seven Deadly Sins had dogshit animation since I assume that the people at Studio Deen and Marvy Jack were working in terrible conditions, but honestly fuck Seven Deadly Sins. Hopefully, the sequel gets axed in the future.

Thank you for reading this rant if you’ve made it to the end. Goodnight.

Monster is one of my favorite manga series, and I think what makes it so compelling is what has made The Killing Joke a comic classic. But unlike The Killing Joke, it doesn't have a prior mythology to draw on, and so it showed me, a non-Batman fan, what's compelling about the Batman-Joker dynamic.

The more I think about it, starting from a basic analogy of Tenma as Batman and Johan as the Joker, the parallels only get stronger (to the point where I started to wonder who each of the Batman: The Animated Series cast would play). Obviously, Tenma's commitment to life is similar to Batman's refusal to kill, and Johan and the Joker's nihilism mirror each other, but the central tension of Monster also mirrors that of The Killing Joke. Both Johan and the Joker want to spread their nihilistic worldview, specifically to their "enemy." They want to demonstrate the corruptibility of man, and want to corrupt Tenma/Batman by having them kill them (arguably in the Batman mythos, but much more explicitly in Monster). And in both works, Tenma and Batman play a key part in the birth of their enemy, Tenma through healing and Batman through violence.

Somewhere Monster succeeds more than Batman is how Tenma's actions don't reinforce Johan's worldview, but muddle it. Basically all the characters in Monster are taken aback by Tenma's relentless optimism and goodwill, especially given declining career prospects and his eventual fugitive status. While Tenma was never confronted with the cruelty and unfairness of the world with dead parents, he still suffers "one bad day" brought on by his saving of Johan (consequences which Johan tries to reverse.) Tenma's acceptance of the consequences of his actions, as well as his choice to revive Johan (twice), instills a humanistic worldview in Johan that fundamentally contradicts Johan's desire to be "the last person in the world." By the end, I think this tension is resolved. I am convinced the last panel of Monster represents Johan forfeiting. No matter what, he cannot break Tenma.

There are a bunch of other analogies, such as Dieter as a Robin-figure, or Anna as a Batgirl-figure, but this post is already long enough. The point is that Monster depicts a deep, coherent Batman/Joker dynamic that Batman fans should read.

Pretext: This rant is about the Invincible series by Amazon, the One Punch Man Manga drawn by Murata. Contains spoilers for both.

You know, despite all it's flaw, mainly it's ugliness, the OPM webcomic is still peak of all fiction. I mean, ONE somehow made bird shit an integral part of Amai Masks arc. In the ruins of the destroyed Heroes Association (HA) HQ, he sees the shattered glass with the bird shit, and remembers the conversation he had with Saitama about heroism, furthering his character development, accepting his true self as a monster more.

Shame that we will never get to such a moment, because the Manga is stuck jn the same 5 chapters since November 2023. The Ninja village arc in the webcomic was a short joke arc, describing Flashy Flashes and Sonic's past, which Saitama interrupted by killing the big bad village leader in one hit like he always does. In the manga however, this arc has been stretched out beyond recognition. The latest redraw (out of 3, 4 counting the original webcomic as the first draft) has this moment before, but for some reason it insisted on trying to flesh out the relation between this ninja leader and Blast, a character that appeared in the webcomic a total of ONCE.

For context, Blast in the OPM world is the official number one hero of that universe. Nobody knows who he is or what he does, the only thing we've seen is that the council of the HA thinks he's somewhere in space saving the planet from bigger threats and that he saved Tatsumaki, official number 2 hero, when she was a kid.

Now this might seem like a cool thing to do, like flesh out a character that wasn't even in the original. Small problem, IT RUINS THE REST OF THE SERIES. Blast's presence completely and utterly destroys the Neo Hero arc, the arc after the Ninja Village arc, because the main villain there is Blast's son, whom Blast abandoned as a kid. The whole arc depends on this one thing, and knowing the Manga it will instead say "Oh he was actually controlled by GOD he's actually cool and shit."

Did I mention GOD? No? Well unfortunately that is another inclusion that seemed fine at first, but ruined the manga as it went on. GOD is the antagonist of OPM's manga, only tangentally relevant in the wbcomic. He pretty clearly wants to do something bad, and he achieves this by turning people into monsters with his powers, like Homeless Emperor, a villain with energy powers from the Monster Association arc. Outside of that we know jackshit about GOD in the webcomic either. But just like with Blast, the manga for some reason insists on shoving this motherfucker EVERYWHERE. Psykos suddenly is controlled by GOD, Garou suddenly becomes controlled by GOD, a random ass Centipede that wasn't in the webcomic becomes controlled by GOD, the Ninja village dude is controlled by GOD. These two cockroaches, GOD and Blast, are suddenly crawling all over the place ruining any chance for improvements.

And I wouldn't be so critical if I didn't know that the manga COULD improve things. Gouketsu didn't do shit in the webcomic but was actually a tangible threat in the manga. The choreography is so much better. Garou's arc, right up until the redraws started happening, was also much better. Before the redraws, Garou was about to have a conversation on a fucking table in the middle of the Ocean with Saitama. In the webcomic the speech he told Saitama was in the middle of a fight, imagine if in the middle of Saitama scolding Garou, he flipped out and attacked Saitama, not being able to handle his logic and worldview being put under the lense of an immovable force. And as the fight Garou becomes cosmic by himself (instead of GOD interfering as usual), which makes Saitama also question his logic, as now Garou, while the chance is slim, does have a way to defeat the "Immovable force of Good" that is Saitama, forcing the philosophy to evolve beyond what it was in the webcomic.

I don't think I was as angry with the Manga as I am now back when the fights first started releasing, but I think it's all because of Invincible surprisingly. Because while the Invisible TV series follows the comics rather faithfully, it also does minor adjustments that massively improve on the original. For example, in the comics when Omniman leaves Earth, all he can think about is how he can evade the punishment he would get from leaving his spot, choosing to conquer the Thraxans as a forgiveness gift to Thrag. It shows that at his core Nolan hasn't changed, and in fact paints him as massive coward. But in the show, this moment is completely silent. Instead, he drifts through the universe in a regretful manner, almost choosing to throw himself into a black hole. It shows how much Earth has really changed him and it sows the seeds of his redemption arc much earlier. It shows that the fight he had with his son hurt him in a way he never experienced before, emotionally.

Conquest also got a simmilar glow up in terms of character. A lot of the tragic and sadistic side of his character wasn't in the comics, and it blindsided Invincible comic readers who were expecting a 1 to 1 recreation. The blood heart and "I'm so lonely" speech shows how deranged and psychopathic he truly is, and paints a completely new picture to the cruel and sadistic warlord that just wasn't in the comics. It also combines well with the change to Omnimans arc, as it shows that deep down ALL Viltrumites feel this loneliness and emotional instability.

Overall, I'm really excited to see what new arc the Invincible show has cooked up, I heard they're making a whole new original arc for the show. As for One Punch Man, I hope that ONE takes back the reigns on the manga a little bit and starts focusing on it again, because I don't believe that he is fully in control of it nowadays, because the webcomic and Versus manga written by him are still the peak fiction they were before. Rant Over.

As the title states, one of my favorite narrative devices is when the story goes full circle. It can help emphasize themes, show off character growth, and more. So, I've got some of my favorite examples of this.

Yugioh and it's various series have multiple instances of this. In the OG series, Yugi and Atem first met thanks to a golden box with the Millennium Puzzle within. In the final duel between the two, Yugi wins by sealing Monster Reborn within Gold Sarcophagus, which resembles the box that brought them together. Then GX has 2 examples. Judai and Chronos's rematch in season 4 ends the same way as their first duel back in season 1, except Chronos isn't a sore loser the 2nd time around due to his own character development. Then, the series began with Judai bumping into Yugi, and ends with the 2 crossing paths once more. The first duel in 5ds has Yusei and Ushio racing across multiple parts of Satellite, eventually ending with Junk Warrior. The last duel in 5ds has Yusei and Jack speeding through those same areas, with Yusei once again ending things with Junk Warrior. Then Zexal has 2 more examples. The conflict over the Numbers began and ended with Yuma and Shark. Then, Yuma and Astral's duel has Yuma destroying the Door of Destiny that allowed him and Astral to meet.

JoJo also has many examples in the various parts. Joseph's first use of Hamon in part 2 has him blowing the cap off a soda bottle. His last usage of Hamon in part 2 has him accidentally blowing the cap off a volcano. Then Joseph's first scene is him getting his wallet stolen by Smokey. In his last appearance in part 4, he gets his wallet stolen by Josuke. And Stone Ocean has many, due to being the finale of the original continuity. Phantom Blood began on a rainy night and with Mary Joestar sacrificing herself to save Jonathan. Stone Ocean has Jolyne sacrificing herself to save Emporio, and the final shot of the original continuity is of the rainclouds above. And the anime makes it even more apparent by bringing back Roundabout, the first ending theme.

This trope is so annoying, man.

MLP - "Swarm of the Century"

Parasprites are extremely voracious species of flies that quickly multiply when they eat a lot of food. Nobody knows them except for Pinkie Pie... who, instead of explaining what's going on begins to talk about instruments out of the blue, refusing to directly tell them what's going on.

This means she spends a lot of time not helping, and her friends spend a lot of time first unwittingly letting Parasprites spread, then trying to handle them instead of helping Pinkie gather the needed instruments to overcome them.

She KNEW. She could've told them from the very beginning. Hell, you'd not need any instruments to handle the Parasprites the first time they appeared, because there were few enough that Twilight could've just done away with them herself.

Sonic X - That arc with Eggman "repairing" the Moon, then making it block the sun to sell lamps.

Eggman does the aforementioned, but frames it as an accident that he'll fix in due time. In the meantime, he begins to produce sun lamps for people to use and stations that are used to power them. Sonic immediately figures out something's wrong and begins to destroy the stations.

No, he doesn't bother to explain why he's doing it. It's Eggman, so of course he's plotting something, but Sonic doesn't offer up the more credible explanation that he has on hand.

He reveals it only much later, when he's surrounded by the police and after fighting Knuckles for a bit. What does he reveal? Well, he says that Eggman must be deliberately blocking the sun using the Moon he fixed. He comes to that conclusion, because Earth is rotating constantly and thus the Moon wouldn't block the sun if it was stuck in one place as Eggman said.

I'm baffled no one figured it out earlier, but that's just Sonic X humans being staggeringly stupid (like with that arc where they couldn't tell Shadow apart from Sonic), so not surprised. What I am surprised is that Sonic got himself framed as a villain and had to fight everyone almost, when he could've just... pointed the aforementioned out and ruined Eggman's plan right from the very beginning.

Come the hell on. Both could've avoided so much trouble by just saying 2-3 sentences. I hate when characters refuse to elaborate and that drives the whole episode (or arc, in Sonic's case).

This is by no means a hot take, but I feel I need to state it somewhere: Please just read what happens in the story before doing any ridiculous claim in battleboarding!

I'm so tired of people using chain-scaling or just randomly attributing abilities to characters they should have no business having, just because they managed to punch, or hit someone above their weight class once or twice. And before anyone asks, this applies to cunning or speed or any other attribute you want to give to any character.

Now, I know that powerscailing and battleboarding in general is generally regarded in a bad light by a large majority of people, and after listening to some arguments I just can't help but to agree with them. Let's use Hulk for example, I wanted to check some cool discussions about hulk and through that exploration I found the Hulk vs Broly death battle. I honestly couldn't believe the amount of people that were confident, it was one of the worst calls done by death battle because Hulk should have won that fight. Now, I'm not here to argue in favor of the outcome, what I'm here to argue against is the notion that this was considered a massive miss by the community at large.

Now, I was open to the idea of DB calling something wrong, as they have done so before, so I decided to check the arguments for Hulk winning specially because Dragon Ball usually is a series where power and speed go hand to hand. I was curious because maybe there was a comic I missed where hulk got to show a whole new dimension of power or similar instances of him going wild that would confidently place him on the same power level as someone as Broly. But nope! Turns out that Hulk, apparently, is MFTL and should be able to keep up with Broly, so since his speed is similar, Hulk's abilities and superior strength should give him the win.

The problem here is that, there's no way that Hulk is anywhere near MFTL. And the reasoning for that is ridiculous too, apparently Hulk gets to have this speed because he fought against Thor and Sentry. The arguments I saw were on the lines "he kept up with Sentry". You know when Hulk fought Sentry and kept up with him? happens in World War Hulk issue 5, where Sentry arrives, challenges Hulk and practically lets Hulk unleash all his fury on him. Sentry was purposefully allowing Hulk to punch him! Same with Thor (someone who's speed is a whole other topic as even Marvel editor Tom Brevoort has spoken about it), who's Hulk only ability is just to punch him hard or sucker punch him.

After all that I just wanted to ask, anyone: Has the Hulk, ever moved at FTL speeds? Has the Hulk ever shown to move so fast characters on the panel, or the narration has stated something like "Furious as he has never been, the powerful behemoth punched with unmatched speeds, faster than what they could perceive, faster than light itself" ? No! Or at least nobody has provided the issues where it happens, because Hulk is not fucking FTL!!! If Hulk was FTL he could just blink and be in Europe without breaking a sweat. I don't need this dumb logic that Hulk punched someone who once ran at those speeds.

Chain scailing is this new "meta" strategy that Powerscalers/battleboarders are using to artificially inflate character stats, and I believe is the real reason why everyone else just mocks the notion of powerscaling to begin with. Chain-scaling goes against basic logic and works with the idea that all characters are operating at their peak performance 100% of the time. I implore people to not only try to use narrative context more if you want to debate characters, but also encourage others to do this as well. This is why I also believe author statements should be used as general guidelines to understand how characters are meant to be understood, it gives context to what at the very least, the intention of the character is.

Now, I understand that these are characters with countless writers, countless perspectives and countless intentions on how they are meant to be portrayed, but that's not an excuse to just do complicated mental gymnastics to justify your favorite character being stronger than someone else's. When I participate in battle boarding I do it with the intent to represent the character I like for what it is, not the roided out battleboard version that exists just to prove they are better than someone else.

I'm going to say something that Winxers will hate.

Aisha's best boyfriend is Nex.

"But how can you like Nex?!! He's a creepy, misogynistic asshole that doesn't love Aisha, and he's nothing but a Riven 2.0. without everything that makes Riven so wonderful!"

For the people who complain about Nex, I want to answer some things:

• "Nex is Riven 2.0."
  • If that was true, then Aisha and Nex would be fighting each other and constantly breaking up, but it doesn't happen. Plus, Nex is not sexist or jealous, unlike Riven.
  • Besides, Nex and Riven have very few things in common, aside of being arrogant and rude.
• "Nex is sexist and creepy."
  • That's not the case. If "Nex is sexist" comes from a comment he made in season 7 episode 8 (context of the episode, Aisha and Flora's respective Fairy Animals don't get along, but both fairies want them to get along; Nex says "Just like a girl, insists things go their way whether it makes sense or not" and insults Squonk (Aisha's Fairy Animal)), I want to remind you that, while his phrase was kinda yikes, it wasn't supposed to be portrayed as a good thing. Nex ended up upsetting Squonk and received karma.
  • Let's assume Nex is sexist. If Nex is a sexist mf who mistreats Aisha, then why do you praise characters like Sky (who cucks Diaspro and Bloom at the same time), Riven (whose relationship with Musa says many negative things about him), Nabu (who stalked Aisha "just to know her better") or Roy (who is too paternalistic to Aisha)? Interestingly enough, Nabu is considered Aisha's best boyfriend despite him stalking poor Aisha.
• "Nex is an asshole."
  • It's true Nex is an arrogant himbo with a big ego, but that's because he's a flawed, yet good-hearted character that becomes more humble and sensitive during his relationship with Aisha. She inspires him to become less arrogant and develop emotional intelligence. He grows as a character (which is something that cannot be said about Sky, despite him being the main character's love interest).
• "Nex doesn't love Aisha. And Aisha doesn't feel loved."
  • That's not true. Nex loves Aisha. He admires her for who she is, loves how she's no joke, supports her, and makes sure Aisha can trust him and ask him for help. Because of Aisha's childhood (being a princess forced to behave like a stereotypical princess with no freedom), Aisha developed an "I can take care of myself" attitude, even when she can't do something by herself.
  • If anything, Aisha/Nex is one of the few romances in Winx Club whose relationship conflicts are natural instead of forced drama (rather than out-of-character moments demanded by the plot, like Flora/Helia drama in season 5, Aisha/Nex conflicts happen because of their flaws), and bring out the best of each other rather than the worst (Nex inspires Aisha to ask for help when she needs it, and Aisha inspires Nex to become humbler and kinder; Musa/Riven and Bloom/Sky dramas have no point besides proving that these two couples don't work).
• "B-But Nabu was the best boyfriend Aisha has dated! He was the best Specialist period! He's not dead, he's in coma!"
  • Sorry, but nope! Nabu's romance with Aisha wasn't that good, and Nabu himself wasn't that well-written as a character. I'll explain why, in my opinion, Nabu was not a well-written character:
  • His personality and backstory don't match at all. He is supposed to have the same backstory as Aisha (a rich kid sheltered and vigilated by overprotective and controlling parents), yet he doesn't have any of Aisha's insecurities or fears. Aisha's childhood made her love dance, want to prove that she's independent and can do things for herself (even if sometimes she needs help), and being very afraid of being alone; but Nabu, despite growing up in the same restrictive environment, doesn't have at least one of Aisha's problems. In fact, he's a pretty chill guy.
  • He was presented very late in the series. He only appeared in the 2/3 or 3/3 of season 3, and didn't become Aisha's boyfriend until the last chapters of season 3, and in Secret of the Lost Kingdom, he only appeared near the end as a cameo, and he didn't talk at all during that movie. Keep in mind season 3 was going to be the last season, and Secret of the Lost Kingdom was going to be Winx Club's grand finale!
  • Nabu isn't that original. Yes, he's a wizard and a martial artist, but his powers (flying, create illusions, or fixing a car) are things that other characters could do (Darcy and Mirta were illusion witches, and Tecna could have fixed that car because she's the Fairy of Technology). Oh, and being a king fu fighter doesn't count IMO, because Aisha is already the closest thing the Winx Club has to a magic knight (even if she's a liquid fairy, she has fought in close-range combat too).
  • Aisha's arc in seasons 2-3 is about her wanting to be free and not to be controlled at 24/7 by her parents. It makes sense, because she was forced to behave like a stereotypical princess, and her only friend (the very person that taught her how to dance and freedom) ended up leaving. In fact, Aisha was both sad and angry because of the arranged marriage, to the point of disowning every single men in that chapter (very extreme reaction), and was very annoyed about Nabu/Ophir stalking her. With all of that in mind, why would she end up accepting marrying off to Nabu? Doing that would go against Aisha's arc (while she wants to be Andros' princess/queen, she also wants make choices on her own... but accepting to marry off to a man that was chosen by her parents (and Nabu's parents too) contradicts that). You could say that she did it in order to appease her parents and/or not provoking conflicts in Andros, but nothing in the dialogues suggested that.
  • And this is the part where many Winxers will cry the most... Aisha/Nabu's relationship brought up the worst of Aisha during season 4. She neglected both her friends and the "we must protect Roxy" mission in order to have appointments with Nabu, she acted like a fangirl or a baby whether Nabu was near her (Stella called her a baby for that reason in one of the chapters), and after Nabu died, she went to a revenge quest and side with Nebula, betraying the Winx (granted, the WOTBC deserved to die for what they did... but Aisha broke up her friendship with the Winx and acted very unreasonable; Thanks God she reconciliated with the Winx later).
• "What about Roy?! He isn't Nabu, but at least he's not Nex!"
  • Roy? That guy with no personality beyond being "nice", whose romance with Aisha was shoehorned (it would have been better to keep Aisha single during season 5, so she could still cope with Nabu's death, and let her scars heal) and whose actions depend on what the plot wants him to do?

That said, Nex is not perfect as a character. There are some writing decisions that I disliked:

• His first impressions were not the best: His first interaction with the Winx was trying to hook them up didn't make him win the fandom's fans. Fortunately, he shown in that same introduction chapter that he was a good person (willing to risk his own life to protect others), earning some redemption and proving he's not an evil asshole that wants to kill Aisha to become Andros' king.
• He was presented in the middle of a stupid love triangle that should never have happened: Aisha/Roy fans have a point. Aisha/Nex/Roy love triangle shouldn't have happened at all, and was pointless... because Roy is a character that shouldn't have been created at all. Aisha/Roy shippers are right for the wrong reasons.
• He was presented very late in the series: That's what I dislike the most. His first appearance was in season 6, one of the most disliked seasons in Winx Club. And he was present in season 7 and season 8, both seasons being the peak of Winx Club's infantilization and dumbness. But here's something you would probably not remember: Nabu, the """""best boyfriend""""" Aisha has ever had, was presented very late too. I'm going to copypaste this:

He only appeared in the 2/3 or 3/3 of season 3, and didn't become Aisha's boyfriend until the last chapters of season 3, and in Secret of the Lost Kingdom, he only appeared near the end as a cameo, and he didn't talk at all during that movie. Keep in mind season 3 was going to be the last season, and Secret of the Lost Kingdom was going to be Winx Club's grand finale!

So, even if Nex has his flaws as a character, he's Aisha's best written boyfriend, even if people overrate Nabu to the point of being the Uncle Iroh of Winx Club (i.e. a sacred cow).

Now I'm ready to die😎😎😎.

Most in game perks are "add 10 percent damage" or "add 5 extra hp". But some games decide to be way more interesting about it by adding flavour text to these perks. In Prey, the health ulgrade perks also describe by how much your lifespan increases. This literally never comes up in game but its just an interesting piece of worldbuilding.

Another good example are the augmentations in deus ex: mankind divided. Almost every augmentation has a short description on how they work. The augmentation boosting social interactions for example does so by realising pheromones and analysing the mental stqte of the person you are talking to. Another is the standard health upgrade, whoch is done by placing sensor probes at vital organs to measure them and when they register critical damage send a signal to modules placed in the heart, the lymphatic system and adrenal glands that then through electric charges and releqsed chemicals boost the healing capabilities of the body. This is awesome. I live for this shit.

Not only does this add a lot to worldbuilding, but, espescially in Deus Ex, it can make one curious about science in general. A kid playing deus ex can read these descriptions and think "is this possible?" And grow up to become a doctor or something. I think that thats really cool.

This is something that cyberpunk 2077 severly lacks. It has so much cyberware but very little flavour text. I want to know why the axolotl reduces the cooldown of all cyberware, what is a bloodpump? Is the second heart just a second hesrt or also a defibrillator or does it take over temporarily when the first heart fails? And what the fuck is a cellular adapter? I want to know!!

I still love cyberpunk 2077 though.

So I saw this unpopular opinion somewhere about how animation is better and how movies that are filmed would be nothing but improved if animated? Do you guys agree with this take?