Basement Cat said:
Their Big Three have no real flaws.
Batman has a couple of obvious ones that are only relatively rarely exploited: his need for prep time and some major psychological issues. Some of the best Batman titles are the ones that delve into his mental state, or even exploit it in some way. The Court of Owls stuff had some silly elements, but screwing with Bruce's mind worked for me.
The prep time issue is a sensible one: given time, his massive resources, and his brilliance, Bruce can come p with solutions. He doesn't always have those solutions at hand agains an unknown quantity, though. He's got plans for the Justice League, but even the Joker's randomness can throw him.
This is essentially why Death Battle gave wins to both Spider-Man and Black Panther over the Bat. Given time, atmancould likely overcome their advantages, but likely not on the fly.
These are not used nearly often enough in comics, though, because they conflict with Batman's greatest power: his popularity. And some people complain that this is hating on the Bat; I disagree. I don't have a problem with him being popular. I don't even have a problem with the notion that a popular hero wins a lot because he's popular. Batman writers are often so far up his Bat-butt, however, that they don't bother to write interesting or clever solutions. In a dubiously canon crossover, Batman defeated Carnage by...punching him. Batman beats the symbiote off Carnage.
I can think of better (arguable on "good" but better) ways to beat him, and I'm betting you can, too. Because almost literally anything is a better idea than "Batman punches Carnage".
For most of DC v marvel though, DC's going to win. Quicksilver is faster than sound. Flashes are faster than
time. Nova has limits, even with the Xanadarian Wolrdmind in his suit. Hal Jordan's weakness is is his very will to fight. Most of DC's characters are gods, when the point of Marvel is that they're normal people like us with extraordinary abilities.
Though I think DC's biggest flaw is more laziness than anything else. The characters are unrelatable not because they're gods, but because they're written in boring ways. Superman used to be a guy whose limits were measured in locomotives and tall buildings, but they wrote him bigger and grander to solve more exciting problems, until he had basically every power in the book. And then, because they hadn't invested in the character that much, there was nothing to do with him. They've even reduced his powers multiple times, but they always creep back to absurd levels. Isn't current Supes a threat the the reality-altering Doctor Manhatten or something?
The best Superman stories
do explore him as a person. Same with Wonder Woman and Flash. Though one of the interesting things with Flash is unlike Superman, they have no problem slowing him down to push a story along. Which makes sense: his powers are a win button against almost every threat he faces.
I mean, to go to film and TV, I assume that the Avengers are going to win, but the thing that interests me isn't the drama that they might lose, it's the character interactions that sell it for me. Similarly, the first three seasons of the Flash basically had most episodes end with the same solution: Barry has to go faster. Boring. What kept me invested was Barry, Caitlin, Cisco, and Wells. Neither franchise is perfect, but they give the characters character, and that's what makes them relatable. Or what's missing when they fail.
It honestly seems like they're so protective of the big three they're afraid to give them real, defining character traits. But that's when they're the most interesting. You can be a god and still be something humans can look to.
On the other hand....
Still, I figured Darkseid would win this one if only because one of Thanos' key character traits was a pervasive subconcious inclination to sabotage himself after winning.
Yeah, pretty much this. The comics had him undo his godhood just so the heroes had a fighting chance, and that was only the first of several times he sabotaged himself.
