DC hasn't rebooted roughly every 7 years though. You're averaging the number of events by 30 years, not the actual time between those events. 9 years, 11 years and 6 years between when each reboot event began. That's an average of about 9 years.
Over the course of ~30 years, DC has rebooted 4 times and..... Oh fuck it.
DC has never actually rebooted before, not in the strict sense of "starting over from scratch". Yes, they have events every so often that make retroactive changes to continuity, but in no way can it be said that they reboot every X years.
DC has done this several times. (And, no, I do not think that anybody cares about going in circles on the differences between a reboot and a reset and a retcon and just being retarded.)
"Crisis on Infinite Earths" was a massive rewrite of every single book in DC's line. McGuffins and history that had been a given part of the settings for years were swept away. And, guess what? Some people (generally the guys who had been reading comics for years) complained because their comics were gone. Barry Allen got killed off. All of that extra stuff from Superman was *gone*. If anybody liked Silver Age "Batman" comics, (which is hard to comprehend, but there probably a few), they were shit out of luck. "Oh noes, their childhood was raeped!!11!!" If somebody liked "All Star Squadron" or "Infinity Incorporated", they were likely unhappy with CoIE. Not only did their books change, but the stuff they liked in those books was over-written. In story, the characters went back to the dawn of time to rewrite history in order to save some kind of existence. In real life, DC tossed old context.
"Zero Hour" slid the time line around a bit and involved no small amount of back-writing. (Remember "Triumph" and "Damage"?) But, most of the back-writing was forgotten shortly after. "Zero Hour" was also the cleanest of the reboots.
The Crisis Trilogy (Identity, Infinite and Final) more or less undid CoIE. Some of yester-year's characters were killed off or otherwise written-out. Power Girl's history was re/de-written. (And, hey, I hope that nobody had an attachment to the idea of Superboy Prime and those other guys making a heroice sacrifice and living happily every after!) Even before the multiverse was established as having returned, Johns established that some elements of the characters' histories had changed. (Superman was active before going to Metropolis, albeit not as Superboy. "Batman Year 2" was back in context. Wonder Woman re-replaced Black Canary...and some other stuff was changed.)
"Flash Point", like CoIE, involved history being changed by time-travel. And, when history was set right, it was different from what it was before. And, the real reason is the same. DC wants to streamline and rebrand. Some characters are changed. Some are wiped out entirely. There is no in-story reason for why Earth 2 would have changed after "Flash Point". Barry Allen's time travel should not have effected that timeline. But, it did because DC wanted/needed it to. The whole point was that DC wanted to go in a different direction.
And, in 15 years or so, after another reboot or 2, there will be people who liked the New 52 complaining about their favourite books being ruined by change.
This is not just the latest reboot in a continual cycle of starting over every few years, not by any stretch of the imagination.
"Flash Point" changed more than "Zero Hour" and the Crisis Trilogy. And, you happen to find more of these particular changes offensive. But, there is objectively nothing unprecedented about this.
I happen to like Byrne's rewrite of Superman. But, I am not going to hand-wave it and say it was not a huge change when a fan of Curt Swan's Superman complains. Byrne's rewrite was huge and (at the time) unprecedented. Think of how much history that the Silver Age Superman had. Now, keep in mind how much of it came through CoIE. (Hey, who wants to talk about "Legion of Superheroes"? Anybody?)
Too bad. I hate to see this kind of slipshod, half-baked attempt at a reboot succeed.
Yeah, I would hate to see the business side of my hobby going well.
So Tim Drake was never Robin? That's another strike against the New 52 as far as I'm concerned.
edit: the pages in question:
http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/09/16/ ... -titans-1/
Further proof that DC are just making it up as they go along.
Heh, funny that the guy who owns that compilation was clearly trying to preserve the book's spine when he scanned it.
I am okay with DC changing Drake's history. Do we really need a retelling of his origin with minor changes? If nothing else, "Tim Drake as Red Robin" arguably makes Tim Drake a more unique character than "Tim Drake as a former Robin".
However, I do agree that DC is being haphazard. The bat-books have the problems that the "Superman" and "Hawkman" books had in the 80s and 90s. Changes were poorly planned and indecisively executed. DC did not want to make hard choices with the various Robin characters and the history that they require for other characters, not unlike how DC did not want to make hard choices regarding Power Girl and others in the 1980s. DC has changed its mind *after* they should have figured out what they were doing. resulting in post-hoc changes in the last year, not unlike DC needing to fix "Legion of Superheroes" with a fanfic grade "alternate timeline" story right after "Crisis on Infinite Earths" was supposed to rule out that sort of story.
The New 52 is not like that. It is the same DC universe fans have been reading about for years, only it was altered by the events in Flashpoint.
So, it is the same aside from all of those differences and changes?
I am not saying that there is anything wrong with changing things. But, for better or worse, New 52 DC is not pre-"Flash Point" DC. Paul Cornell's run on "Action Comics" is gone. Defining stories like "A Death in the Family" or "Blackest Night" could not have happened as originally presented. If somebody liked the Palmiotti and Grey "Uncle Sam and the Freedom Fighters" book, those characters are gone. (The new Phantom Lady and Doll Man are bastardizations of previous iterations of the characters.)
Yes, "Flash Point" set up for huge changes to DC in context and in terms of what comics they publish.
Are there pre-"Flash Point" elements that I liked? Yes. Visually, I prefer some of the old costumes, (particularly for characters that have that "Image" feel to them now). Is there pre-"Flash Point" history that I would have liked to have seen maintained? Yes. Hell, I would still like to see a comic featuring the Ted Kord Blue Beetle. (Fat chance of that.) And, there were things from before pre-CoIE that (as I discovered them after the fact) I kind of wish DC had kept.
But, complaining about DC moving on from old comics is like complaining that DC does not follow up on "Elseworlds" stories that I happened to like. "Superman: Red Son" is one of my favourite comics. I wish that I could consistently get comics of that quality on a regular basis. But, I am not going to complain that DC needs to put "Red Son" in continuity. (In fact, when DC clumsily attempted to do so during "Countdown", I was sorry to see they tried.)
I am not reading Robinson's "Earth 2" series because I liked the 90s "Justice Society of America" comic. (And, hey, that book likely would not have happened but for "Armageddon 2001", which involved some stuff changing in other books.) I liked that old Justice Society book. But, I am reading "Earth 2" because DC is publishing a more or less self-contained book where the big-events are likely to stick. I have always liked the concept of the Huntress as a character (and the general concept of the original "Infinity Incorporated"). But, I am not reading "Worlds' Finest" because Levitz is not really doing anything with that book.
I am not happy with the fact that the bat-books have so many sloppy edits that they are going to need a round or two of fixes before the next "Crisis Point" story. But, I am ecstatic about getting comics where we do not necessarily know what will happen next.
Dom
-gives DC credit for being decisive if nothing else.
