Broken Base Cleanup

Alright, about a week or so ago, I asked if this was a valid entry to add to The Mighty Thor YMMV:

---

Should Gorr be added to Base-Breaker characters? I've seen that people are split down the middle about him. He's either liked for being a badass with a dark and tragic backstory, making him seen as a Jerkass Woobie among his fans, but he's also got a lot of detractors who consider him to just be an "edgy" oc and in some cases they consider him a Creator's Pet for Jason Aaron. He's either seen as one of the best parts of Modern Thor comics, or the amalgamation of everything wrong with Jason Aaron's run.

---

Now, troper Alley Oop responded that it could be added, but no one else did and I'd need more than one person saying it's a proper entry to the YMMV page just to make sure, especially since my experience with YMMV tropes is admittedly more limited compared to more objective tropes such as main pages and character pages. So would this be a good entry? Should it be re-worded? Or should it be nixed altogether?

Edited by ssjSega on Nov 5th 2019 at 2:42:43 AM

Normally I'd be willing to chime in on a superhero-related subject, but TBH I've neither read nor know much about the fan response to most modern Thor comics, so I honestly wouldn't know whether he counts or not.

From YMMV.Clannad.

Broken Base:

• Nagisa/Tomoya VS Kyou/Tomoya VS Tomoyo/Tomoya VS Kotomi/Tomoya VS Fuko/Tomoya VS Sunohara/Tomoya… you get the message.
• The ending to ~After Story~: a nice, touching way to send the series out on a high note, or just a Writer Cop Out?
• The latter half of ~After Story~ is either a high point of what was already a very emotionally impacting series or a succession of contrived melodramas that nobody signed up for.
• The English dub, in stark contrast to the dubs of Air and Kanon from the same dubbing studio, which are highly praised (especially Kanon). Complaints boil down to two areas: Mispronunciation or mis-stressing of names, and Kyou's voice actress sounds too old. Oddly enough, very few complained about the quality of the acting itself.
  • The fact that Clannad's dub was handled by Steven Foster (who is absolutely despised by a vocal minority of the fandom) as opposed to Kyle Jones (who directed Air and Kanon) undoubtedly played a huge role in why criticisms of this dub tend to stick. However, the earlier dubs also mispronounced some names and had the occasional questionable casting choice, yet they're justifiably well-regarded.
  • There's no doubt that this dub (due to Sentai having No Budget) was not given the level of care the earlier ADV dubs got, but it still compares reasonably well to its predecessors, largely due to being made up almost entirely of veteran voice actors – as opposed to Sentai's later efforts, which use mainly new talent (since most of the longtime Houston actors have decamped for greener pastures).
• The English release on Steam has the anglophone fanbase split over the pricing. Those who are just happy to finally have an official English version of the VN don't mind the $50 price tag and point to the massive amount of text to translate in the VN as justifying the price. Others point to the 2D graphics and the fact that the original VN is over a decade old as reasons why it's too expensive. However, this is mitigated by the VN going on sale at a fairly frequent rate (typically 50% off).
• Fuko's arc. Some feel that it was melodramatic to the point of Narm, attempted to take the focus away from more interesting characters like Nagisa and her family, the Fujibayashis, and Kotomi, tried to force the dreaded loli upon the fanbase, and pushed the Main Plot of trying to re-establish the theater club into the background. Additionally, many are not fans of how Tomoya's characterization is depicted in that arc as he initiates contact with Fuko without ever being given a reason why he wanted to help her (in contrast to Nagisa, Kotomi, and Tomoyo, who sought him out first, and the Fujibayashis, whom he already knows). The ending of the arc, where all the characters end up forgetting about her, did not please the fanbase either as it ended up rendering the last six or so episodes completely pointless.
• It doesn't help that the arc that follows it, Kotomi's arc, is widely considered the best of the first season due to fixing most gripes the fans had about Fuko's.
• Also, the basketball game arc in between Kotomi's and Tomoyo's arcs has a tendency to feel like Filler due to some heavy grabbing of the Idiot Ball and Jerkass Ball, as well as being utterly pointless as well. Do you think they could have just figured out they could share the advisor at the beginning of the arc?

The entire sections are either very short with no info or a onesided argument to the negative.

• The Powerpuff Girls (2016):
  • The art style and new voices, with part of the fandom saying that it doesn't detract from the show all that much and helps to make the show feel more up-to-date, and the other part saying that it ruins the feel of the show and doesn't hold up to the original. On a completely different side of the argument, quite a number of fans wish the series used the Dance Pansted art style instead while in contrast others hated that style.
  • "Horn, Sweet Horn", the episode with the pony who wanted to be a unicorn - while some have praised it for discussing gender identity in a way that wasn't too anvilicious, others have thrashed it because of the botched moral - the pony underwent a dangerous transformation procedure, not because he wanted to, but because Bubbles wanted it and told him he needed it. Upon returning to normal, he discovers that he was a unicorn all along since his horn was tucked away under his mane the whole time. The episode's writer later came out and said that the episode was not intended to be about gender identity, meaning the supposed commentary was merely something the producers spun up to make the show sound progressive.
  • Some praise the show for promoting girl power and feel that it's in step with the previous series. Others feel that it comes off as forced and (in light of dropping Ms. Bellum and reducing Ms. Keane's bust) disingenuous, hypocritical and laced with "Real Women Don't Wear Dresses"-like Unfortunate Implications.
  • A lot of the first few episodes are Buttercup focused. It's unknown if the series will focus on the others more as time goes on, but this has left some fans mad. Other fans enjoy Buttercup enough not to mind, think she's more interesting than her sisters in the reboot, or believe future episodes will be more diverse.
  • The girls' personalities also came under fire. While some like the fact that they're a tad more mature than their original incarnations and bicker more like any siblings would, others feel they have flanderized some of their more negative aspects such as Buttercup's thirst for action, Bubbles' girlishness, and Blossom's need for order to the point where it seems like she has Super OCD.
  • Some of the villains' portrayals as well, with Mojo Jojo (the girl's main arch-enemy in the original series) getting the most criticism for being almost completely ineffectual and having NONE of the original Mojo's vocal tics. Some find it fitting for the sake of humor, others think it completely misses the point of the character.
  • If the show is better than (or at least as good as) the original. One side shows support and says to keep an open mind, others think it makes a mockery of the original series and will put it down every chance they get, and those that are in between, who think it's neither overly bad or good and just enjoy it for what it is.
  • The Merchandise-Driven aspect of the show is a piece of contention. Some have noted that merchandise was being advertised even months before release. With a good chunk of the fandom this makes the series seem like a cash-grab or if the cartoon is based off the toys (instead of the other way around like the original), while others think they were either prepared because the original was a runaway success or they don't mind.
  • The series is a sort of Soft Reboot Stealth Sequel. It obviously intends for fans to have seen the original series, despite the fact that the show hasn't had frequent reruns on Cartoon Network in a decade (thus the target audience might not know of it like older fans do). Fans are split on this. Some are glad for the references and feel they are a saving grace for the series, while others think they tie the series down too much and make everything confusing (for example, how old are the girls now?)
  • Probably the glaring one is that if fans are simply overreacting to the show not meeting expectations since its inception. Yes, the argument over the animation errors is valid, since it's a sign of sloppiness on the animators' part that both the show's defenders and detractors mutually agree on. However, when it comes to meme references, the defenders argue they aren't that overused, citing that they pop up every few episodes and are quick gags at best, and don't overstay their welcome regardless if they're dated or not (they even point to a previous CN cartoon, MAD, for comparison, as that show used memes much more frequently and blatantly, yet no one argued when they did it) while detractors argue internet memes shouldn't even be used in the first place. Defenders say the show does try to stay true to its roots, and argued that the show is on its first season with a new set of writers who're trying to bring their own spin to the series so both old and new fans can enjoy it, and accuse older fans of being too rooted to the original series without even trying to give it a chance, with most just hating it cause it's not like the original series. At the very least, the series is called a better comedy-oriented reboot than Teen Titans Go!, as the PPG reboot at least stays faithful to the comedy style of the original series, while TTG is full of sadist humor, Black Comedy, and personal attacks against the hatedom. While detractors, most of whom are fans of the original series, argue that some of the newer viewers of the show have never seen the original series to understand what made it so special, and that the writers are being too desperate to appeal to its current audience and trends that are the standard of Cartoon Network now (the fact that the show looks like it's trying to be too much like Clarence or Steven Universe, but without their depth, doesn't help). Needless to say, there's no middle ground to be had.

In order:

• Art style and voices - Fits better under They Changed It, Now It Sucks!.
• Unicorn episode - There's a point in there and I know the episode is divisive but it needs severe rewriting.
• Girl power - Has a valid point in itself but is written to sound like one-sided complaining.
• Buttercup focus - Speculative troping. Cut.
• Character and villain personalities - I don't know enough about to tell if it's really divisive or a mild divide.
• Better than original - Fits better under Contested Sequel, but is too wishywashy as is.
• Merchandising - One-sided (complaints vs. don't care). Cut.
• Last one - While I believe there's a valid point in there, it needs severe trimming and rewriting, and made up of several points which could each be worth their own bullet. A good chunk of it also focuses more on the hatedom than the fan divide. The division between fans and haters means it might make for good Contested Sequel material since the above equivalent is lacking.

For Cuphead:

• The decision to have the game remain exclusive to Xbox One and PC until further notice. Is it a smart idea that lets Microsoft have another game license of its own, or should it also be released on other platforms so that their followers can get a chance to play it? Of particular contention was the original intent to release on other platforms, then Microsoft essentially bought the whole thing out from under everyone else. While the additional cash did allow for the immense content expansion into the final game, many were still disappointed.
  • Mitigated by the fact that the PC Windows version isn't exclusive to Windows Store (in fact, it's also available on Steam and GOG), allowing Windows 7, Windows 8, Windows 8.1, and non-Store using Windows 10 users to buy and play the game. Even more when the game was later released for Mac and Nintendo Switch.

Seems to me the second bullet outdates the first. Do we still keep it?

From YMMV.Deltarune:

• Broken Base: Debates about whether Kris breaks free of the player's influence or they get possessed by Chara or another character in Chapter 1's ending tend to become Flame Wars very often, due to the fact that Chara is one of Undertale's most Base Breaking Characters. These debates tend to open old wounds about how good or evil Chara is and how much if any control they have over Frisk in Undertale's genocide run.

The game isn't released yet, although there is a one-chapter demo which was deemed sufficient for a Complete Monster entry to be approved. But this conflict doesn't sound like it'll be a lasting one, since once the full game releases we'll have an answer to the question.

I vaguely recall hearing that there's some question as to whether a full game will ever be released, actually.

Really? I've never heard of this, and can't find anything about it.

From what I last remembered he said a continuation is in the making though he doesn't know how long it will take since it requires more work than Undertale. Chapter 1 is its own contained thing for now so I say it's worth troping.

But the problem with the example I mentioned is that it's not going to be a sustained conflict, since it will almost certainly get resolved once the full version comes out. I was under the impression that "sustained" didn't just mean "longer than six months", it meant a conflict that could potentially last for as long as the fandom does. It's basically speculation about the full version, not just about the demo.

In this case it should be about how heated and divided the debate gets, because sometimes the fandom can be quite split on something outsiders will view as irrelevant or speculative, but nevertheless the effects can be truly base-shattering.

These under Yooka-Laylee:

• Broken Base:
  • The orchestral soundtrack stretch goal has received mixed opinions. Many enjoy the MIDI music used in the original Banjo games and want that trend to continue here, though Grant Kirkhope specified on Twitter that Banjo-Kazooie did indeed use real instruments, simply downsampled in audio quality, though technically this applies to most SNES and N64 games as well. This was clearly written before the game was out and seems like a fringe issue. And it doesn't go into why there's two sides to the conflict.
  • Even the jabs at Nuts & Bolts found in promotional material have caused this; are they funny or groan-inducing? Some have even pointed out that the jokes may not hold up well as time goes on, while some others don't mind. Is this a vicious, sustained conflict, or just a "We need something to argue about before the game is released" issue? It's only tangentially related to the game itself.
  • The inclusion of Shovel Knight as a guest character. While many are happy to see the crossover, others feel that the character has been appearing in too many indie games and doesn't fit in with the world of Yooka-Laylee or its characters. Sounds like a fringe issue, doesn't detail both sides.
  • Reviews of the game have been very mixed. Some praise the game for essentially being a modern-day Nintendo 64 platformer while others criticize it for the exact same reason, citing that gaming has moved on from nearly twenty years ago.
  • The player base has unfortunately been much the same as the reviewers. You either love the game for being a true successor to Banjo-Kazooie and even considered it better in some aspects, or hate it for being a lackluster game that feels like a cheap version of Banjo-Kazooie with none of the charm. There is remarkably little to no middle ground. This only got worse when A Hat in Time got released to much more positive (and much less mixed) critical reception, causing the latter group of the player base to almost immediately flock over to its fandom practically out of pure spite, turning what could have been a nice example of Friendly Fandoms due to the various similarities between the two games (mainly the fact that they were both inspired by N64-era "collectathon" 3D platformers and were funded by Kickstarter) into a rather ugly example of Fandom Rivalry instead... Can be combined with the above bullet.
  • Was removing JonTron's cameo from the game shortly before its release because of the controversial political statements he made during the months leading up to it a good or bad decision on Playtonic's part? To say there have been many flame wars over this would be an understatement...

The fourth and fifth points are about general reception, not reception within the fanbase. The "Base" part of Broken Base stands for "fan base". If a game has a mixture of positive and negative reviews, those who rate it poorly aren't fans.

Only the last point seems like it could count.

The "it's the same so it sucks" and "it's the same so it's great" aspect is the largest and most unambiguous divide the game has for sure.

This was added to the Diamonds' entry in BrokenBase.Steven Universe:

I don't know if it actually deserves its own point.

Edited by Crossover-Enthusiast on Nov 20th 2019 at 12:19:39 PM

Jawbreakers on sale for 99¢

Yeah, in all the debates I've seen over the subject I've rarely seen that come up as a part of it, and when it does it's usually the impartial and curious types rather than the heated types.

I diagree that the complainers in mixed reviews are not part of the fanbase.

Yooka-laylee is in the weird position that by design it was inheriting Banjo-Kazooie's fanbase, since it postures itself as a legally distinct Banjo-Kazooie remake (using some of the same creative team even). And I know more than a few players that grew up with Banjo-Kazooie that were disappointed with Yooka-laylee.

The complainers and lovers are people who all started off in the same group of fans until playing long enough to decide they had opposing opinions regarding those aspects about it. When the trope definition brings up "people not part of the fanbase" they mean to exclude the people who were soured on it before giving it a chance, but the complainers were not.

Edited by AlleyOop on Nov 20th 2019 at 6:13:53 AM

It is not exactly fair to exclude complainers from the fanbase on face value, and it could be a slippery slope to determine who gets to be part of the fanbase and who doesn't.

I think the best assumption is to view anyone who watches the show regularly as a fan, and go from there.

Optimism is a duty.

To be clear, this is about the Yooka-Laylee example, not the Steven Universe one.

A person can complain about certain aspects of a work and still be considered a fan. But the examples in question say "Reviews of the game have been very mixed" and "You either love the game [...] or hate it" which is about how one feels about the work as a whole. If you give the game a bad review, you're not a fan of that game.

The part about the Banjo-Kazooie fanbase being split is possibly a valid one, but I'm not sure if a work breaking a base different from its own should be allowed.

---

About the SU example, I don't recall ever seeing anyone use this argument. I get the feeling that one person who does hold this view assumed that lots of others agree with them and added it based on that.

Edited by Zuxtron on Nov 20th 2019 at 5:24:59 AM

Does Yooka-Laylee have a fanbase distinct from the Banjo-Kazooie fanbase? Are there a significant number of dedicated YL fans who are not also part of the BK fanbase?

I think an argument can be made that there is often sufficient overlap in the fanbases of a Spiritual Successor with its predecessor that it makes sense to treat them as subsections of the same overarching fanbase, but I can't say whether that's the case in this specific instance.

Edited by HighCrate on Nov 20th 2019 at 3:21:57 AM

But if that reviewer has played the game and gave a negative review, that can still be seen as a criticism from a legitimate source, namely a player of the game.

Optimism is a duty.

I removed the SU thing.

Jawbreakers on sale for 99¢

YMMV.Mulan:

• The "Mulan is transgender" theory gets a lot of very different reactions. Trans fans like the movie for what they see as Mulan dealing with many of the issues that they go through; the song "Reflection" is often used as how trans people feel about body dysphoria (feeling like one gender but looking like another). On the other hand, Chinese and Chinese-American fans argue that this interpretation misses the point, as they say the movie is more about the oppressive Stay in the Kitchen attitude in imperialist China, and that the reason Mulan dressed as a man was because that was the only way she could take her father's place. Regardless of one's personal interpretation of this opinion, it's indisputably caused quite a rift among the movie's fans.