Obviously wrong in the character or the approach? If the former, I don't feel a critique has to be purely negative. If one likes something, no reason one can't go into details as to why to help them figure out what people are responding to and enjoy seeing.
If just in the approach, I'd say reason why I feel it's wrong is because I don't see how it's helpful. It feels hollow. Moreover, it makes me wonder if the only reason a person said even says as much as they do in the critiques is just to get to their character. Which, obviously, is absolutely self-absorbed. I'll show you what I mean.
Version 1: Your character is good. Nice!
Version 2: Alright, starting with the back story, I actually do like the whole being an average person for the most part aside from their love of comics. Maybe it's just me, but I get small vibe they'd be the top more focused on fantasy & escapism in general. If so, I'm curious as to why for them? Given how mundane everything was, I'd personally make it a case of I Just Want to Be Special
. Up to you, of course, but just a thought throwing out there. Unless it's already there and just subtext.
Also, I really like them as a Hero Antagonist
. A part of me does feel that nowadays that the Silver Age Superman expy types get tossed into that role more often than some of the others, but I'm not at burnt out point of it yet. Some might be, who knows? I am curious how much spotlight does his character have for a Hero Antagonist
in it, least in relation to others too. Curious to ask how long the phase regarding his change to darker character lasts. I'm exactly sure how I feel on that side, though I would have to see the execution to ultimately decide. I can see potential since it shakes up the status quo and redefines the threat they offer. Plus the whole change to 90's style anti-hero could be pretty cool, though only reason I'd have concern is with regards to audience reaction. I can easily imagining some people wanting the old variant of character back and, even though you outright said they do comeback, just a factor to toss out there. Actually, yeah, more I think on it and potential threat they could offer, plus how it could effect them once they get back to their normal, I'd say it's worth it.
Besides that I think they could make for pretty good comedy moments and threats. Really, with them, balance I feel is the key. Really, if played right, could easily see that character being a fave due to their humorous personality and depth beneath it. Can you give any examples of type of comedy you'd pull? Directly showing or giving an example as to how he'd do things is fine by me.
Also, I really like the way you balanced our his weaknesses in particular. Personal favorite is one with him actually just forgetting his powers at times. Really, given whole element of New Powers as the Plot Demands
and so forth, he makes for someone who works well to make the other heroes look strong facing alongside me makes them look well when dealing with him. Such as attacking the environment with their magic. I'll admit when I first read their powerset, I was worried about them seeming too strong, but overall, I think you've compensated pretty well. I will say one thing I could see becoming old is if defeated by sense of smell too many times. Hell, if I was the heroes, I'd just bring a stink bomb or something along to neutralize him swiftly and efficiently after the first time learned about that. That or if I was him, take that into account to stop it from happening... which just gave me hilarious image of someone with those type of powers coming into battle with nose plugs or nose pinched close.
Then they get knocked off during the fight to finally exploit the weakness or something. Such as someone uses magic on them alone once in the situation since they aren't immune or anything. Or something, not sure. Only reason I bring it up on that weakness is because it makes me reflect back on Venom and his weakness to sound. I don't mind it being used at all, but I love it when other options are pulled out too. Or we all know how tired people got with Superman and Krypotine, which is a shame since Superman is vulnerable to magic and there are other things which can effect him.
But yeah, as a whole, I think they can make for a pretty good character and those are the reasons why I say it.
So yeah, if people honestly feel Version 1 of these critiques are what's for the best for everybody, I just want to understand why. I just don't see how it's all that helpful. Even in version 2 when one feels things are positive, saying why one feels it is positive and what they respond to can be helpful when writing. Or at least that's how I feel. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I know from my experience, I know which is more helpful and which I'm indifferent to.
Now, I know they can't all be lengthy. Sometimes one just doesn't have that much to work with. But still, I feel one can at least put a bit of effort into it. I feel that's the true spirit of this. Really, it's very basic "Do unto others" type deal. It's just cooperation as fellow artists and being a support group for one another.
Do you like receiving the Version 2 edition more in return for all that hard work you put typing it out? If yes, then why not pay that same respect to someone else, who would feel the exact same way? If no, if it doesn't make any difference to you whether it's version 1 or 2, I'm curious to ask why not? And why put all that effort into trying to share something when there is barely any payoff in doing so? Or is there some form of payoff here that I'm missing? I just fail to understand and asking questions is the only way for me to learn a different perspective.
Also, kudos for answering that. Actually hadn't thought about that at all with Lelouch aspect. I think I'll take that into account for a little bit of analysis, contemplation, and so forth.
edited 16th Apr '13 5:50:21 AM by Prime_of_Perfection