Is this an example?

For a trope that explicitly references monsters, such as Monsters Favorite Petting Spot, what qualifies as a 'monster'? Obviously a dragon or a dinosaur does, but what about, say, a bondbird from the Heralds of Valdemar series - bigger and smarter than a normal bird, and also telepathic, but otherwise it's still a bird? What about an entirely mundane large animal such as a cheetah or a wild horse?

I don't quite understand, when you say "same universe", does that mean a different show in the same universe? That would be more of a spinoff than a bus.

I would say monster refers to any created or exaggerated creature. Though it has a tendency to be an evil or feral creature, I don't think that is ironclad.

Yes, I'm talking about Natalie from Big Mouth appearing in Human Resources (2022) to be specific. Someone listed her as The Bus Came Back but I don't think it fits.

Honestly does The Bus Came Back have its own cleanup? It's horribly misused and that could help until we get TRS.

Edited by mightymewtron on Mar 21st 2022 at 5:50:14 AM

I don't think that counts at all. When a character is Put on a Bus, that's an intentional move so that the writers have the option of bringing them back. If the character was never intended to come back, then it's not really an example, even if a spinoff show decides to recycle the character.

EDIT: You could create a Short Term Cleanup, though I've noticed those tend to just peter out after a few days ...

Edited by laserviking42 on Mar 21st 2022 at 5:55:06 AM

From YMMV.Arrowverse:

• Super Couple: Barry and Iris have become this for the entirety of the Arrowverse, for many reasons. Most importantly, the popularity they have with both the fandom and critics, supported in large part by the strong chemistry Grant and Candice share. Also unlike some other couples on tv, the writers take great pains to ensure that the two sidestep or hurdle over pitfalls that usually stagnate other couples having the two face, aside from supervillains and issues as part of a superhero team, very real life problems head on and overcoming them together, simply by relying on one another. It came to a front that their long teased and heavily built up wedding became the focal point and catalyst of Crisis on Earth-X. Not to mention the fact that the two had been best friends all their lives, the heavy elements of destiny in play when it comes to their relationship and in-universe recognition as one of the Arrowverse's greatest love stories. What else can be said of a romance that has spanned multiple earths, at least three timelines and withstood death itself, super couple indeed. This was taken Up To Eleven after Crisis on Infinite Earths, with Barry's status as the Paragon of Love and Iris serving as his lightning rod in the Speed Force, meaning their love is literally a universal force in the Arrowverse.

Isn't a Super Couple supposed to be like the couple that captures the attention of the public to the point of being at least known to those not part of their fandom. My thing is are they that well known. Like do people not aware of the show know of them like they would Ross and Rachel from Friends, Jim and Pam from the Office, Superman and Lois Lane from DC, or Batman an Catwoman also from DC. Over all this reads more like a One True Pairing entry to me. Am I wrong in my assumption of this trope?

Looking at the Super Couple page (and man is that riddled with ZCEs), it would appear you're right. This would be a couple who's pairing would drive the show and its ratings, and quite honestly, the Barry and Iris coupling has to be the most boring part of the show. The example seems to be describing a Fan-Preferred Couple.

Fan-Preferred Couple is a non-canon couple that is more popular than a rival canon couple.

I suppose parts of the writeup could fit a One True Pairing example, but most of it is describing in-universe stuff.

On Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of NIMH

Noodle Incident: Nicodemus mentions an incident in which he lost his eye. What exactly happened is never explained.

In this case we know what happened, just not how. Does it still count, or is there another trope for it?

Wouldn't a Noodle Incident have to referred to more than once to count?

No?

I don't think that counts as a Noodle Incident either.

The Arrowverse YMMV example is also (ironic, given how usually angry fans are with it) super-gushy, with lines like "What else can be said of a romance that has spanned multiple earths, at least three timelines and withstood death itself, super couple indeed" feeling especially bad.

There is also this gushy entry from Crisis on Earth-X:

• Supercouple: Barry and Iris, for the Arrowverse; just look at the event's format centered around their wedding and promo poster as proof. Even Felicity and Oliver admit, during their impromptu wedding that their vows and love got nothing on Barry and Iris.
  John: Vows?
  (Oliver and Felicity adamantly shake their heads no)
  Oliver: We can't do better than them.
  Felicity: Definitely not!

And this one from The Flash (2014) that mentions it still has hatedom and is still about In-Universe stuff.

• Supercouple: Barry and Iris, quite possibly for the Arrowverse in general. Case in point, the comic-style promo poster for the massive crossover event Crisis on Earth-X feature the two of them, dressed for their wedding, front and center. Though the ship (and Iris' character) has a sizeable Hatedom, compared to the big ships of the other shows, not to mention the other ships in this show, the Hatedom is pretty much a Vocal Minority.

Edited by Bullman on Mar 22nd 2022 at 10:29:24 AM

Still not an example, much like the earlier Super Couple one you posted. Also I find it rather humorous that whoever added it tried to justify it with the whole "it's not as bad as the other couples in the arrowverse".

All three are now cut.

Pokémon Legends: Arceus:

• Last-Second Ending Choice: Kind of. When you set out to complete the Lake Trio's tests, you have to choose whether Adaman or Irida will accompany you. Who you choose determines whether you catch Dialga or Palkia at Mt. Coronet, with the other becoming the Final Boss. Either way, you end up with both and the choice only changes in the long run who gets to stay in the Origin Ball.

If the resulting changes are ultimately minor (having played, I can confirm that Dialga and Palkia are interchangeable story-wise at this point), does it count as that trope?

I guess the real question is if it is a choice made near the end of the game, and does that choice affect the ending you get? Those seem to be the two qualifications for the trope to apply.

Also, starting an example with "Kind of." seems to violate Examples Are Not Arguable.

Gonna repost this as it got lost:

I'm curious to whether these examples on Magical Negro count:

• An interesting variation is when a black character gets advice from their mature, future self. They may literally be magical, as we never learn how the future self appears in the present.
  • In a milk commercial [1], a little girl meets a frowsy, tired woman who says "I'm you from the future". When the girl drinks milk, the woman suddenly becomes an award-winning athlete.
  • There's a car commercial where a young man gets a ride from his older self, showing him the type of car he could get. When he drops the younger man off, he says "By the way...your future wife is in there."
  • A 2022 commercial for Crypto.com [2] takes place in the bedroom of Le Bron James in 2003. The present-day Le Bron is telling him about the future, but declines to tell him whether he should turn pro.

Thoughts?

I don't think it counts because I think Magical Negro relies a lot on the Unfortunate Implications of a black person guiding a white (or at least nonblack) person through their quest. If it's another black person, especially their past self, it lacks the contrast.

I deleted this from Audience-Alienating Ending per ATT.

• The Last of Us Part II: The game was already fairly bleak starting on a Downer Beginning with Joel being brutally killed by Abby for the revenge of her father which already didn't sit well with the fanbase. But after going through all the trials tribulations of the leads. It ends with Ellie having nothing at the end of the game. She foregoes her revenge on Abby at the last minute and lets her live, but comes home to find Dina and the baby they raised together having left which Dina had threaten to do if she went through with going after Abby one more time. Two of her fingers bitten off in the final fight meaning she can no longer play guitar, the last remnant of Joel she had left and wandering off into an unknown future. One can argue that Abby lost all of her friends due to her revenge, but she at least had Lev and the hope of finding a firefly base by the end of her story. Sure no one was expecting a major happy ending given the game's setting, but the ending utterly soured what goodwill most players were willing to give the game, who felt like nothing was accomplished at the end of the day and topped off a pretty miserable story.

AAE is when the ending is so contentious that it's practically the only thing fans talk about the work and audiences avoid the work entirely because they hear about the ending. I removed this as the game is so contentious many of it moments, especially said Downer Beginning, received just as much discussion and backlash from fans so the ending complaints are not dominating/overshadowing the rest of the works merits (which include other complaints). It also failed to explain/prove how even non-fans would hear about the ending backlash so ATT said to cut for that.

I got PM'd by a troper who thinks it is an example and we agreed to take it here. Does AAE require it overshadow the other complaints or be avoided solely due to the ending?

So, not being at all familiar with this game, I went and did a bit of a google dive on the game and its reception, and wow ... alot of people have strong opinions here.

That said, the criticism of the game seems to be spread over various topics, few of which involve the ending. Again, with the caveat that I'm not really plugged in to the fandom, I do not see the discourse dominated by talk of the Downer Ending, which would be required for AAE to apply.

So in my humble opinion, not an example.

I asked this on the Aversion Clean-up thread and didn't get an answer, but Puberty Superpower isn't omnipresent enough to list aversions (superpowers manifesting before puberty), right? Some of them could probably be moved to tropes like Goo-Goo-Godlike and Super-Strong Child.

Edited by rjd1922 on Mar 22nd 2022 at 9:30:08 AM

Aversions are only for Omnipresent Tropes. Not sure if the list on that page is inclusive, but Puberty Superpower wouldn't be one of those IMO. That would mean near every superpower related story would have powers switching on at puberty, whereas we mostly have lab experiment gone wrong or being born with them.

I think the entry's correct in that the ending does sort of finish off what goodwill most people were willing to give the game - why play through an unpleasant story if there's no satisfying payoff? - but it certainly doesn't overshadow the rest of it. The thing is one big controversy magnet through and through. I agree with a cut.

The Secret of NIMH says under Meaningful Name:

• Jeremy means "the lord loosens or god will uplift."
• Nicodemus means "victory of the people."