you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 8 hours ago (7 children)

You've misunderstood their comment.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 5 hours ago (6 children)

    Did I? The OP is obviously discussing the market share, or culture share. HP obviously is similar to SW. If they meant the number of other pieces of media then sure, SW is bigger, but not for the same point in time. HP is much larger for how old it is.

    If I'm still misunderstanding, would you care to explain, rather than just saying it's misunderstanding it?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 hours ago (1 child)

    You did, yes. They weren't comparing Harry Potter to Starwars at all, they were just pointing out what the OP meant by using the example of Starwars/Marvel.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 2 hours ago

    I don't think you're right. The OP is about something new within our lifetimes. HP is for most of us. The person contradicting originally said the issue was that it wasn't new. Relative to what? It's within our lifetimes, like the post says.

    Ok, so next they talk about scope and scale. This is the part that could be misunderstood. Yeah, they aren't as big as SW yet, but SW had decades. Both of these are probably similarly large to SW for the same length of time after release. If anything, HP is larger, in market share, culture share, main entries, theme parks, and just about everything else. If they meant something else then yeah, I misunderstood and, and I can't see anything else it could have meant to contradict that they don't fit what the OP was discussing.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 4 hours ago (2 children)

    What people are trying to explain to you here is this. You read the original post wrong. You read it as nothing new has been made since Star Wars. So you came up with examples of new things since Star Wars. Which was never the argument.

    The original post was saying that in the future, meaning after the date it was posted which was like a month ago, something completely new of a huge cultural significance and a massive scale will be created that has nothing to do with anything right now. It's a post about human Innovation and creativity and about how new things are always on the horizon.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 hours ago* (1 child)

    The point of the comment was that this is the most boring statement ever though. It happens all the time. "Tomorrow, the sun is probably going to rise!" That's not insightful. The point of the comment was that you don't need to wait for "the next big thing." Yeah, IPs rule everything, but new big things are still constantly being made.

    Edit: Also, the OP says "in our lifetimes." That doesn't mean after that post. It means since "we" were born. Most people on this platform are at least as old as HP.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 45 minutes ago

    I'm not saying it's an insightful or original post I'm just saying you interpreted it wrong.

    Also Star Wars and Marvel has been in my lifetime too. So that's an irrelevant point. By new they clearly meant something not already existing. Originality was clearly the entire point. They could have used Harry Potter as their example. It would not have changed their point. You're focusing too much on the example which wasn't the point.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 4 hours ago

    Another very popular franchise of questionable quality is The Big Bang Theory, which now has three spinoff series. Good quality? Debatable. Very popular, profitable, and likely to continue expanding? Yes.

  • source
  • parent