Spider-Man PS4 Will Let You Dress As The Worst Version Of The Character

To the commenters who are upset by this - I get it. He evidently hates something you evidently like. But it's literally his job to give his opinion on these things. For all the complaining people do about articles on major games sites basically just sucking up to the money and/or being glorified advertisements - I for one welcome honest unfiltered opinions about media. Even if I don't agree with them.

To my point - when expressing your disagreement, please note that we do have a code of conduct and that attacks against staff are strictly enforced. So disagree away, but remember to do so respectfully.

Thanks

The butthurt in the comments section is palpable. Oh no, someone wrote an opinion I don’t care for so I demand he is fired for it!

The sheer entitlement of some of you is completely unreal.

J.K.Simmons as Jameson though....

Dude absolutely stole every scene he was in.

What editor approved this to be posted about dlc? And attacking those who like it vs attacking the thing itself, big difference. Very unprofessional.

This is (almost) a new all-time low for Gamespot. I´m surprised why i am on this site from time to time, but Jesus.. the dude that wrote this article should be laid off and sacked for making this unprofessional clickbait article. Using your position to unload your hate for a movie franchise is just a NO. You can use your own YouTube channel for that..

It´s the worst i have come across so far on this site, To the editor of this site, WAKE UP and do YOUR job..

@ezramallen: At least your advertisement is better than this article.

Tamoor, if you simply felt the urge to express your negative feelings towards Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man movies, wouldn’t it be smarter to just make an article dedicated to the topic, instead of using a news about a costume from the movie appearing in the recent Spider-Man game as the precedent to throw your off-beat remarks about those movies? It makes you sound vitriolic and unprofessional. Not that your “points” would sound any less vitriolic if they were actually explained in a post that’s related to your sentiments.

“But I can complain. And I will. Because, unfortunately, for many others out there this only serves to remind us of that sad six-year period where everyone was so desperate for a superhero movie that didn't make them embarrassed to be comic book fan that they doublethinked themselves into believing that trilogy was good.”

For one, if the suit is enough to trigger you and give you crippling depression about your horrible six years of life (which, believe me, were most likely horrible for reasons unrelated to Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man movies), can’t you just, you know, not add it to your game and not play the game wearing it? As simple as that. Second of all, how exactly liking that trilogy is any more embarrassing than liking any other superhero franchise of today? What is the delineation that sets its part so much for you that liking it equates to embarrassment? Why liking Spider-Man movies by Sam Raimi should be more embarrassing than liking Marvel Cinematic Universe movies? They’re kind of the same thing. Superhero movies that are fun and crowd-pleasing. The MCU simply has more bathos in its dialogue and scenes wheres Raimi’s Spider-Man movies always kept balance of drama and comedy and did not merge two together.

“It wasn't.”

Except, it was.

“For the most part though, those movies were awkward,”

Probably because the titular character is supposed to be an awkward guy with insecurities.

“cheesy,”

90% of superhero movies that have come out in the past seven or more years have been cheesy. The Avengers was cheesy. Guardians of the Galaxy were cheesy. Aquaman was cheesy. So?

“and completely failed to look beyond the surface of what makes Spidey interesting.”

What makes Spider-Man interesting is the idea of him being an insecure guy who lives a double life and he has to balance both sides of it and he doesn’t always, but he finds strength to keep going, because he is driven by an overbearing guilt that he can’t ignore. This is basically what all three movies were about.

Oh, and in case you want to talk about comic book accuracy of those movies, have a look at this (the title is ironic, btw):

https://comicvine.gamespot.com/forums/spider-man-167/proof-that-sam-raimi-is-a-hack-that-never-read-a-s-1878519/

Spider-Man 2 is one of the most quotable superhero movies of all time. When aunt May is having that talk with Peter while she's cleaning out her garage about the importance of the hero, you wondering if she secretly knows Peter's Spider-Man and is trying to convince him to keep going.

Maguire's not Mr. Charismatic, but the role was absolutely written in a way where it wasn't needed. This version of Peter was seriously vulnerable, which made his heroics more impressive, in that light.

Goodbye Gamespot

This is just downright unprofessional.

You thought TAS Spider-Man was better? Ok, you have no say in what’s good.

If it wasn’t for the Raimi trilogy. Comic Book movies would still be low budget schlock with a director’s tastes trumping staying true to the source material. Say what you want about the Raimi trilogy, especially the 3rd one, but he showed Hollywood that bright colors and spandex can WORK. This article comes off as snarky and smug as Jim Sterling crapping all on Breath of the Wild as a terrible game just because he didn’t like the durability factor and then trying to sell his singular opinion as a wholesale fact.

Perhaps you should put less op-Ed in your gaming news, because otherwise you’re going to quickly become the most hated journalist on GS...and that takes some doing.

While I share Tamoor's opinion on the Rami trilogy (I was horribly disappointed in them) I definitely don't agree with the condescending tone in which it was given. It's one thing to have an opinion. It's another thing to crap all over someone else's while you tell them why they have it and make it sound so belittling. But welcome to the internet I guess...

I just created a profile on this website to comment here and say this writer comes across as an obnoxious moron. The title of the article is obviously clickbait and the whole thing serves no purpose other than for the idiot to spew his hatred at a series of movies that are over a decade old. Sorry you have awful taste and dislike the Raimi movies, but there are plenty of people out there that do like them and you'd have done well to remember that before insulting them. I for one am glad the suit has been added and will be using it.

I'll be sure to never visit this site again, no matter how clickbaity the next article's title is.

Duh... what is a click-bait title?

The first two Raimi movies were superb. The third one...not so much.

Nope, he was the best. Not in Spiderman 3, but that was due to terrible writing. Just pretend 3 doesn't exist.

Tom Holland is a good Spiderman. I hate how they gave him a super suit though. Now a large portion of his abilities are in his suit which basically makes him iron man.

Andrew Garfield was by far the worst.

Worst? Spidey 1 and 2 were the BEST.

What a snarky a-hole this writer is. That's a huge putoff. Please never use this person again.

#deletethisnow

'The worst version of the character' What Homecoming?

Everyone in the comments thinks they're destroying Gamespot, but all you guys are doing is giving them traffic. They created a controversial headline to an article that 90% of you probably didn't read (because I guess reading is hard), and you took the bait. Keep on supporting Gamespot!

Can someone fire this guy?

To announce a new suit, then complain or rant with your opinion on those movies, was unnecessary man.

And BTW, they are not that bad at all, and for their time and RAIMI's style. So relax bro.