The problem is the unclear description. The laconic and every line in the description after the first paragraph seem to imply "Expy living in the shadow of the original," but nothing ever comes out and says it. Everyone seems to have a different definition of this in mind. It seems to be misused mostly just for expy.
Which means the description conflicts with itself internally. It describes the Audience Reaction as two different things at the same time.
We'll also have to deal with its use in relation to Expy, but how about we decide on the reaction's actual definition for now.
Please help out our The History Of Video Games page.
Apparently it used to be called Why Does Everyone Think Im Deadpool but was renamed in a since-deleted TRS thread; ironically, despite the Trope Namer Syndrome, the old title better gets across what the trope actually is.
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
It does, yet it doesn't simultaneously. It might need a newer title that gets the definition across, but we need to decide what the trope's definition is.
^^ I don't think that's quite accurate. Rather, this page came to exist because of that one from what I recall. This page was originally designed to note when people see two characters and assume that one must be based off of the other. For example, in 2006 there was the Haruhi Suzumiya anime and then only a season or so later an anime for Kanon. Both had snarky, deadpan protagonists so people assumed that the guy from Kanon was an expy of the Haruhi guy when in truth not only is this a common character trait, but Kanon is the older work.
I've no idea what has happened to the page since then, but that's my rough memory of the original thread's consensus.
I'm just going off what's on the discussion page(s).
I do not think that the first issue is an actual issue: The usage stats don't support it and as history shows, "anything could be used as this..." in practice happens rarely.
The bigger issue I see is that the definition of this contains two different things: "Character compared to an older, similar character" and "Similar character".
I would not mind splitting off the second thing as Expy Assumption. That would be what Arha assumes was the definition of this.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Again, we need to decide on what the actual definition on Counterpart Comparison is before going through with anything.
Please help out our The History Of Video Games page.
Well, considering what the page was originally supposed to be, I suggest we tune up the description and turn it back into that.
They definition you put forth seems to be Older Than They Think rather than something that deserves its own page. Does this mean we should cut Counterpart Comparison outright?
Yeah, it seems like Older Than They Think with characters!
I personally think the newer definition is much better and has more potential, especially with the potential it has to clean up the Expy trope which has its own issues. I really want to keep the definition of "two characters" are similar.
On the other hand, I think we can do away with the section that has to do with Legacy Characters. There's this one example with Batman's sidekicks in the comics section that I feel doesn't really go there, since the similarity and differences between them is explored in-universe.
Please help out our The History Of Video Games page.
Cleaning up problems with expy is why this page exists in the first place. It didn't work and I doubt a new definition will help either.
I don't really have a strong opinion for what we should do here, but if you approach the issue from that angle you'll likely be disappointed. Or more likely you'll just forget this discussion ever occurred and that such a page even exists, but that's not as dramatic.
Was that really the purpose of the page? It looks like it was just introduced as a new Audience Reaction with only a mention of Expy. Especially since the description implies Character Y is in the shadow of Character X.
Please help out our The History Of Video Games page.
Internet Archive versions:
The lone 2009 un-ptitled version of WDETID.
Earliest ptitled version of WDETID.
Last ptitled version of WDETID.
Earliest version as Counterpart Comparison.
First 20 posts of the previous TRS thread.
edited 10th Aug '13 11:55:03 PM by MorganWick
Well, at least it's thriving slightly more than how much it was back then.
"People think characters are very similar, to the point that they think one is based off the other" is Older Than They Think? Is that the claim being made here?
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Yep. Specifically it's because of the part that states "if the character being compared is older than character that is being compared to."
Older Than They Think is "fan thinks a trope, plot, or line was invented by a show he or she watches, when in truth its origins lie farther back in history. ". I have absolutely no idea how "fan thinks this character is based off that other one" could be related to that.
Or, to put it practically: OTTT is when they think it's younger; the thing we are talking about is when they think it's older.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Well, if you take out the part about one character thought to be based on another when the first is actually the older character, yeah, it's not Older Than They Think.
I'm trying to say is that the definition Arha puts forth implies that it's just Older Than They Think but more specific.
Please help out our The History Of Video Games page.
Well, OK, Arha's def is definitively The Same But More Specific.
That said, I see this definition as "People assume character X is based off character Y and compare X to Y". I would support splitting off the bit before the "and" there, maybe.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
^ That's basically right. It's an assumption that one character is based off the other.
At least that definition is less broad than the current definition.
*bump*
Please help out our The History Of Video Games page.
Counterpart Comparison has two issues:
First, it's that its definition is way too broad. It just means "there are similarities between two characters". Anyone can construe similarities with any two characters, by virtue of Alternate Character Interpretation or something else.
Second, and directly related to the above, is that it's not thriving in the way it should. The problem is that we use Expy they way it should be, and it's not classified as a subjective trope either. It doesn't help that Expy has seen a lot of change from its original definition of "creator reusing his/her own character archetype" to "any two similar characters".
We could limit Counterpart Comparison to be less broad, or we can do the same for Expy, but the latter isn't viable due to its widespread definition change. If there are other ways to fix this, let's go for it.
Please help out our The History Of Video Games page.