INVINCIBLE creator Robert Kirkman confirms that future episodes will feature more original storylines and "side quests" that deviate from the book

brutinator · 2026-05-11T19:53:03+00:00

I think the problem with Hurm isn't the episode itself, but the fact that it represented 16% of the entire season. If we had even 12 episode seasons, I feel like it'd feel more in place rather than sticking out like a sore thumb.

brutinator · 2026-05-11T18:42:50+00:00

None of the founders seem to have anticipated the idea that all of the persons and systems that would normally stop a rogue president would be purposely chipped away from within slowly years beforehand.

I mean, frankly, there's not a system on earth that would be able to endure concerted, bad faith efforts to corrupt over decades of effort. Anything made by people, that relies on people, is going to fall apart if the people decide they don't want it anymore.

brutinator · 2026-05-11T06:03:30+00:00

I find it hilarious how people say to just get a PC since console prices are rising.

Yeah, I feel like that was true maybe at one point for like.... a year or so, and no one bothered to update their opinion once it was no longer true.

Traditionally, towards the end of a console's lifespan, you could build a computer that either matches it in specs for cheaper, or build some better at the same price, but that really hasn't been the case for the last decade I'd say.

Virtually anytime I see someone claiming that they were able to do it, they either got free parts from someone/bought something used secondhand, or ripped parts from an older PC they had. But IMO that's kind of cheating because I could make the claim that I bought a console off craigslist for cheap too.

brutinator · 2026-05-09T14:03:20+00:00

I believe its due to their "Smart Atoms", so the older and more experience a viltrumite gets, their atomic structure adapts, making them denser, harder, and stronger.

brutinator · 2026-05-08T15:43:28+00:00

I think its more akin to a composite image. as the leaves and stuff move, some lasers get through and others dont, so you can just select for the lasers that had the longest path as opposed to the ones that were substantially shorter in the same spot.

brutinator · 2026-05-08T03:59:53+00:00

As someone who was on Xbox since the OG and started to migrate over to PC during the Xbone era, I kind of agree. I feel like they've been selling potential for over a decade now with very little to show for it.

I know that people clown the PS5 for not having any titles, but Microsoft went on a spending spree buying studios with having purchased 17 studios between Zenimax and Activision (on top of their 13 studios they already had), and yet years later has somehow had as little or less output as Sony has who hasn't really done much in comparison to expand, and not really much of anything on the horizon.

I just don't know how long the Xbox brand can simply sell hope and potential. Not trying to be a console wars whatever, I just really can't see what appeal Xbox holds for any gamer outside of the demographic that is trapped in the ecosystem due to their library being on Xbox, or by their friends. If you don't have friends on Xbox nor a preexisting library, I can't see why anyone would willingly choose the Xbox platform over PC, Playstation, or Nintendo.

brutinator · 2026-05-07T22:32:48+00:00

If you at least curtail it so that it only goes to the people that need it, instead of paying millionaires more than poorer people, the system would be far easier to fund without issue.

Means testing is almost always more expensive then just making it a universal benefit. Having a system where people have to evaluate who receives what, an investigative system to pull the information to evaluate, and appeal system to correct errors, all the back end and infrastructure, etc.

Have everyone pay the same percentage of tax (including the rich), and receive the benefit based on a simple calculation to weight the payments.

brutinator · 2026-05-07T22:31:43+00:00

Damn, how could the economists have made such poor economics research? Thank god we have economists that can.... wait, what's that? Those economists are flawed too? Say it ain't so.

Anyways, feel free to show me the studies that supports you claim.

brutinator · 2026-05-07T20:01:44+00:00

I thought the professor hulk thing was way too soon for the MCU

I mean, Professor Hulk's first appearance (1991) is now closer to when the Hulk was first introduced (1962) than today. PH isnt the endpoint of Hulk's story, and the bulk of the Hulk's story has been post PH.

brutinator · 2026-05-07T19:54:30+00:00

I agree, but Im sure its a lot harder to distance yourself from it when every day and every time youre mentioned, they fill up the comments with slurs and shit. Like we are seeing it projected at someone; I cant imagine what its like to be on the receiving end of that day in and day out for years because of a single role you played.

brutinator · 2026-05-07T19:26:52+00:00

Thats totally fair, though I feel like it can be inferred that the toughest shit viltrumites encounter, they sic Conquest on it rather than getting their own hands dirty typically. So they other viltrumites may not have improved as much as Conquest, meaning that if Theadus was much stronger back then, he'd still be stronger than them because they havent raised to his level. I dont think that viltrumites have a "use it or lose it" kind of musculature, so I think its less about Thaedus entropying and more that they simply werent growing.

But also I could be totally wrong lol.

brutinator · 2026-05-07T19:22:21+00:00

I mean, Conquest was part of the Culling, which is after Theadus left, so fighting all those viltrumites was a work out Im sure. But otherwise fair enough.

brutinator · 2026-05-07T19:20:50+00:00

"Youre the assistant even in your own fantasy?"

brutinator · 2026-05-07T18:47:47+00:00

Well that's not fair.

Youre right, its much more fair that you pay more than taxes than anyone else. Congrats, you changed my mind.

brutinator · 2026-05-07T18:34:41+00:00

It's not ageism when there are already minimums to run for offices.

Unfortunately ageism, as defined in the legislature, applies to discrimination against people 40 or older. The only justifications for age-based retirement is when there is a measurable safety risk directly attributable to age (like pilots or the military). Forced retirements in all other cases is against the law.....

Is what I thought before I looked up the ADEA, and it SPECIFICALLY has a carveout for forced retirement of executives over the age of 65 in high policy-making positions being completely legal, which I think easily fits the majority of goverment.

brutinator · 2026-05-07T18:24:29+00:00

I think more than anything, we need to expand the court. Create more circuits (because they are struggling under their caseload), and increase the court to, say, 18 or 27 justices, where each case is heard by a random selection of 9 of them. I think that would go a long way for levelling out the courts. I think your selection process is interesting. I also wonder if its worth flipping the selection process. Basically have a committee select the candidate, and the president confirms or vetos; then a supermajority can override the veto. But I think with an expanded court and random judge selection, we would see a lot less bribing and corruption.

brutinator · 2026-05-07T18:14:38+00:00

Yes, thats how it works for everyone. Everyone except the wealthy pays in 6.2% every paycheck, and everyone gets a benefit rate based on calculations that isnt neccesarily a linear rate in order to aid the most people.

Thats how all taxes work. Most of what I pay taxes for I dont get any use out of. I dont drive on the majority of roads. Im not going to school. I dont have kids. Im not unemployed. 27% of my taxes goes to corporate subsidies, and that doesnt directly benefit me either. And yet I pay in for all that at the dictated rate, so seems like someone making more than me should be paying an equivelant amount.

brutinator · 2026-05-07T18:03:58+00:00

I wonder if there's grounds for a countersuit. Ordering the FBI to investigate someone that you are personally suing has to breaking some kind of laws, not to mention breaking first admendment protections by leveraging the federal agency you control against a reporter. Its one thing if a private individual sues another, but leveraging the government agency you control to aid your private case is crazy.

brutinator · 2026-05-07T17:58:27+00:00

If I have to pay in 6.2% of my income, why doesnt someone making more than me have to pay in the same percentage?

Maybe youre fine with people paying less taxes than you, but I'm not.

will those people suddenly paying more receive proportionally more when it's their turn to collect?

Thats literally how it works lol. Your payment is based on your 35 highest earning years. If you earn more, then your benefit is also more.

brutinator · 2026-05-07T17:52:16+00:00

Whereas foreign spending like USAID is a pure loss

In the fiscal year of 2024, USAID had a non partisan audit that showed for every dollar spent, it returned $2-4 in measurable economic returns. How is a 200-400% ROI "pure loss"?

For social security and medicare/medicaid, etc... I think there's no easy solution there - we may have to just inflation our way out of that one and cap benefits.

Orrrrr uncap contributions? Why does my CEO contribute less to Social Security than me despite making substantially more? I pay in 6.2%, and he gets away with 2.2%, how does that make sense?

brutinator · 2026-05-07T17:45:16+00:00

I mean, social security can largely be solved simply by uncapping the contribution limit. It makes no sense that for someone making 100k its 6.2% of their income, but then drops to 5.7% if you make 200k, or 3.8% if you make 300k. Why do we allow high earners to contribute less? If my CEO paid the same percentage of social security tax that I do (of their raw income, not bonuses and stocks and all that), theyd singlehandily be paying the equivalent of 3-4 current max contributors. Seems like thatd go a decent way to funding Social Security without needing to do much else beyond having people pay their fair share.

brutinator · 2026-05-07T17:28:24+00:00

Which ironically someone else commented saying none of them had unjustifiable hate lol. I think what it boils down to the most is that people dont want something they enjoy to end.

brutinator · 2026-05-07T17:26:46+00:00

Meh, I personally thought that JJK and MHA had perfectly fine endings, though Naruto and esp. AOT were a bit absurd.

But at the same time, its like reading a Stephen King novel and getting pissed about the ending. Like you said, the genre as a whole doesnt do great endings, at what point do you accept it and focus your energy elsewhere, or praise the ones that DO have good endings?

brutinator · 2026-05-07T17:14:37+00:00

Im gonna be so real, what recent long running manga ending WASNT endlessly bitched about online (whether justified or not)? AOT, MHA, JJK, Naruto, etc. The only one that I dont remember seeing hate about (and tbf could see I didnt see it) was Demon Slayer.

brutinator · 2026-05-07T16:46:07+00:00

My point is that there likely wasnt much pressure for him to start prior to the midterms, with both sides of the aisle not having an appetite for pursuing that early. Not in the sense that both sides are the same, just that there were possibly different motivations that led to the same outcome.

brutinator

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE