Poll: Superior Character: Batman or Superman

[Denamic]

Batman.
It's painfully obvious.
He has a storied and interesting past that makes him into a character you can relate to.
And he has a personality to speak of.
Superman is an indestructible demi-god that's also a paragon of all things virtuous.
And he's an american 'patriot' that wears his underwear on top of his tights.
He's a walking/flying cliché.
In fact, pretty much all of the american superheroes are pretty retarded.
Batman and Ironman are the only two superheroes that I actually like.
And they don't even have superpowers.

 

[UrieHusky]

Who would win in a fight? Superman.

Who's a better character though? Batman. He's just far more fleshed out and a bit more relatable than an alien with super strength, since he's just a guy (albeit a very rich guy) in a suit trying to do the right thing.

So yeah, put simply to answer your question I think Batman is the superior character

 

[Joseph Alexander]

Batman.
It's painfully obvious.
He has a storied and interesting past that makes him into a character you can relate to.
And he has a personality to speak of.
Superman is an indestructible demi-god that's also a paragon of all things virtuous.
And he's an american 'patriot' that wears his underwear on top of his tights.
He's a walking/flying cliché.
In fact, pretty much all of the american superheroes are pretty retarded.
Batman and Ironman are the only two superheroes that I actually like.
And they don't even have superpowers.

then you might want to read marvel's civil war arc and DC's tower of babel.
oh and last i checked the cap was still awesome, and he has no powers.

 

[Gizmo]

I'm going to have to go with Batman on this one, in terms of how he is as a character compared to Superman I feel he is superior.

 

[sumanoskae]

Batman is just a more complex character. Superman is good because he just is. Batman holds a strict moral code because he's afraid of becoming what he hates. Batman's struggle is a human one, and it's against himself. Thus his victories and his defeats hold more meaning because they have real world relevance.

 

[deadish]

The scenario we're talking about is full out, cut loose, no-holds-barred fight from both opponents. Two men using everything they have and are capable of to kill the other with no regard to outside influence. No other heroes or villains. No other people or factors. No interfering ideals, creeds, or beliefs. No deus ex machina from a biased writer.

In which, I must say, I don't see any possibility. It's generally what I think of when discussing a "what if" fight, which I believe everyone else was thinking as well. We aren't considering future storylines from writers since it has no place for speculation, you know?

Everything in the case of Batman includes his entire armory, which as I mentioned can be made as strong as the writer wants without breaking lore as it's contents never was well defined in the first place - who know what Bats have in there.

Deus Ex Machina is subjective. Personally, I define it as, as long as it doesn't break plot consistency then it isn't Deus Ex Machina.

"Batman can play at that too. Just sniper Sups in the back with a kryptonite tip arrow/bullet"
let me get this straight, you think you can hit a man.. with a bullet... who can move faster then said bullet and hear the gun fire even if its on the other side of the planet.

In the context of a surprise attack, Sups wouldn't know it was tip with kryptonite and would just have eaten it.

listen theres only a handful of super heroes who can legibly stop superman, the flashes, captain atom(red sun radiation or any of the myriad of kryptonites),and captain marvel are the only ones who could really do it.

if its just batman vs. superman, supes can just roast him from space.
theres a reason optic blasts are some of the most powerful attacks in comics, they're self aiming sniper rifles, add in telescopic and microscopic vision and its the ultimate weapon.
the second supes looks at bats, no more bats, just a smoking corpse.

In a hand to hand fight yes, only a few can stop him. But Bats doesn't necessarily has to fight fair, he rarely does that against a strong foe that he can't physically beat.

Hide in a armored bunker - his bat caves practically are those. That's the thing, Bats doesn't really need to be present for the fight to be honest. Hide somewhere and nail Sups with missiles load with kryptonite or fire kryptonite lasers at Sups - don't tell me Sups is so powerful that he can dodge those too; he gets smacked around by those pretty often to my knowledge.

Writers, writers, it depends on the writers.

and don't give me none of that miller bullshit about being prepared for everything bats rarely is, he has plans for everything yes but thats not the same as having it in his belt of wonders.
batmans shtick isn't that hes "prepared for everything" its that he can "deal with anything" its not that he has a way, its that he FINDS one.

I disagree. He prepares for almost everything, that is his modus op. Nothing to do with his belt really, that's just one of his many tools.

Whether the said plans are effective or not is another matter.

"Deal with anything" doesn't make sense, as he can only deal with tougher foes if he is prepared unlike Sups.

 

[sumanoskae]

Batman.
It's painfully obvious.
He has a storied and interesting past that makes him into a character you can relate to.
And he has a personality to speak of.
Superman is an indestructible demi-god that's also a paragon of all things virtuous.
And he's an american 'patriot' that wears his underwear on top of his tights.
He's a walking/flying cliché.
In fact, pretty much all of the american superheroes are pretty retarded.
Batman and Ironman are the only two superheroes that I actually like.
And they don't even have superpowers.

then you might want to read marvel's civil war arc and DC's tower of babel.
oh and last i checked the cap was still awesome, and he has no powers.

Captain America?, yeah, he has powers. He just wasn't born with them.

 

[Radoh]

Neither.
Superman is kind of an idiot, being that his whole story seems like a "Brawn Beats Brain" thing since Lex is a genius and aforementioned idiocy seems to win anyways.
Batman throws money at a problem until it goes away. Also his whole "My parents are dead" schtick is old and tired. So what? Superman's entire species is dead, Spider-man's parents and uncle are dead (as well as aunt May in some cases), Captain America's everything is dead, Iron Man's parents are dead and the only person to act like a parent tried to kill him. What makes you so special?

 

[Prismatic Baron]

Captain Marvel, aka Billy Batson is the superior character, because he is actually likable.

 

[CardinalPiggles]

Superman is a boring character

Batman is less boring.

This, pretty much. Both have one thing going for them, they never lose. And they are always bloody good. Villains are much more interesting.

 

[Joseph Alexander]

Batman.
It's painfully obvious.
He has a storied and interesting past that makes him into a character you can relate to.
And he has a personality to speak of.
Superman is an indestructible demi-god that's also a paragon of all things virtuous.
And he's an american 'patriot' that wears his underwear on top of his tights.
He's a walking/flying cliché.
In fact, pretty much all of the american superheroes are pretty retarded.
Batman and Ironman are the only two superheroes that I actually like.
And they don't even have superpowers.

then you might want to read marvel's civil war arc and DC's tower of babel.
oh and last i checked the cap was still awesome, and he has no powers.

Captain America?, yeah, he has powers. He just wasn't born with them.

no he doesn't, all he has is capable with intense training.
in fact there are a few characters that prove that, batman is one of them.

 

[deadish]

Batman is just a more complex character. Superman is good because he just is. Batman holds a strict moral code because he's afraid of becoming what he hates. Batman's struggle is a human one, and it's against himself. Thus his victories and his defeats hold more meaning because they have real world relevance.

Actually Superman is not completely without depth. He just appears that way. He is actually greatly afraid of his own power and how he might hurt people due to the way he wields it. And because of that, he "doesn't think", he lets others decide what is right and wrong. He a law biding superhero. The boy scout.

Batman isn't a law biding superhero, he effectively works outside the law, and makes his own valued judgments about things. It's a good thing he is crazy smart and rarely ever wrong, else he would be a very scary person to have around.

 

[TheDrunkNinja]

The scenario we're talking about is full out, cut loose, no-holds-barred fight from both opponents. Two men using everything they have and are capable of to kill the other with no regard to outside influence. No other heroes or villains. No other people or factors. No interfering ideals, creeds, or beliefs. No deus ex machina from a biased writer.

In which, I must say, I don't see any possibility. It's generally what I think of when discussing a "what if" fight, which I believe everyone else was thinking as well. We aren't considering future storylines from writers since it has no place for speculation, you know?

Everything in the case of Batman includes his entire armory, which as I mentioned can be made as strong as the writer wants without breaking lore as it's contents never was well defined in the first place - who know what Bats have in there.

Deus Ex Machina is subjective. Personally, I define it as, as long as it doesn't break plot consistency then it isn't Deus Ex Machina.

"Batman can play at that too. Just sniper Sups in the back with a kryptonite tip arrow/bullet"
let me get this straight, you think you can hit a man.. with a bullet... who can move faster then said bullet and hear the gun fire even if its on the other side of the planet.

In the context of a surprise attack, Sups wouldn't know it was tip with kryptonite and would just have eaten it.

listen theres only a handful of super heroes who can legibly stop superman, the flashes, captain atom(red sun radiation or any of the myriad of kryptonites),and captain marvel are the only ones who could really do it.

if its just batman vs. superman, supes can just roast him from space.
theres a reason optic blasts are some of the most powerful attacks in comics, they're self aiming sniper rifles, add in telescopic and microscopic vision and its the ultimate weapon.
the second supes looks at bats, no more bats, just a smoking corpse.

In a hand to hand fight yes, only a few can stop him. But Bats doesn't necessarily has to fight fair, he rarely does that against a strong foe that he can't physically beat.

Hide in a armored bunker - his bat caves practically are those. That's the thing, Bats doesn't really need to be present for the fight to be honest. Hide somewhere and nail Sups with missiles load with kryptonite or fire kryptonite lasers at Sups - don't tell me Sups is so powerful that he can dodge those too; he gets smacked around by those pretty often to my knowledge.

Writers, writers, it depends on the writers.

and don't give me none of that miller bullshit about being prepared for everything bats rarely is, he has plans for everything yes but thats not the same as having it in his belt of wonders.
batmans shtick isn't that hes "prepared for everything" its that he can "deal with anything" its not that he has a way, its that he FINDS one.

I disagree. He prepares for almost everything, that is his modus op. Nothing to do with his belt really, that's just one of his many tools.

Whether the said plans are effective or not is another matter.

"Deal with anything" doesn't make sense, as he can only deal with tougher foes if he is prepared unlike Sups.

Fuck it. I'm done. See ya.

 

[deadish]

When a Superhero fights way of his league AND wins than it is out of character. It vastly overestimates the power of the hero and underestimates the villian. A good example is the Cry for Justice series where Green Lantern and Green Arrow defeat a bunch of top-notch villians in one big group fight. This one fight included Bizzaro, Black Manta, Scarecrow, Dr. Polaris, Killer Freeze (and about 10 more). That those two guys can defeat this lineup is ridicolous and shows only one thing: Bad writing. There are other examples but I like that one. It shows that the writer just wanted ah "fuck yeah" moment, he never wanted to come up with a way those two could've defeated a load of supervillians and a guy who is literally Superman.

Making Batman literally unbeatable is one of those things that happens a lot (from Millers side especially). It is lazy and just fandom. Batman is good but he is still just a human. Defeating a Superman who is really out on defeating him is impossible.

But yeah, after all those years of plotarmor, the anti shark spray and Millers work to make Batman the only competent member of the JLA seem to have done the work.

For me, as long as it isn't inconsistent or self-contridictory. I'm fine with it.

I don't really like the concept of absolute "power levels". Where A must beat B. IMO it depends on situation, it always depends on the situation.

I want an interesting story, not a dick measurement contest about who is more "powerful" - where "powerful" is poor defined and impossible to meaningfully measure.

 

[deadish]

Fuck it. I'm done. See ya.

LOL. Bye. Have a good evening.

I need to stop posting too and get back to doing something actually productive. >.>

 

[RedDeadFred]

Batman for sure and I would even argue that he would be intelligent enough to figure out Superman's alter ego and develope a kyrtonite weapon to defeat him.

 

[Spectrre]

Lux Luthor always has a collection of Kryptonite and other weapons, doesn't he?

And isn't Bruce Wayne more wealthy than Lex Luthor?
He probably has more Kryptonite than Lex does. And some Anti-Superman Spray on his belt.

Superman once gave Batman a kryptonite ring, in case Superman needed to be killed(I don't remember why). Superman believed that Batman was the only person capable of stopping him, ergo Superman believes Batman is the better man. Batman wins by Superman's own admission.

I'm sorry but I cannot resist: Isn't Superman the better man for being humble? And Superman GAVE him the weapon he would need to destroy him with. Superman doesn't need anything but himself to kill Batman if he so desired.

I don't know who I really find the better character tho. They're both incredibly interesting and capable characters and as someone has already said, we'd be worse off without them. (or the illusion of them)

 

[deadish]

The problem is just that Superman seems boring beeing a boyscout and "the good guy". As one of the oldest heroes in existance he has a character as interesting and fleshed out as Batman. But his character is not such a big part of popculture as Batmans.

Their popularity goes up and down.

Superman was popular in the 80s with the Christopher Reeves movies, no?

Batman came into the spotlight in the 90s with Tim Burton, then die with some no talent director. But now is in the spotlight again because Chris Nolen is making Batman movies.