>>114256180>Are you a fan of the shared universe? Not really. It creates far too many problems.
>What characters do you think would be better off if they were in their own self-contained universe?Most of them. Or at least existing in self-contained "Hubs". For example, the X-Men should've been separate from the rest of the MU. Not because of the Avengers or whatnot, but because it limits the narrative. Apocalypse can't be the final boss when they can call Doctor Strange to throw him into some random dimension and call it a day. There is also no progression if there are other supers in their U. If there weren't, the public would see that yeah, muties are dangerous but the X-Men risk their lives for them. Eventually the public would warm up to them, and the X-Men would get off their self-righteous horse and realize how dangerous they are on principle. An understanding would be reached and the books would progress.
Following the bove logic, I'd break down most things into their sub-hubs. Ghost Rider can't exist in the same Universe as Iron Man, who cannot exist in the same Universe as the F4. If people have alien invasions every other week, and the heroes have direct contact with alien civilizations, then why aren't they making /any/ changes to Earth through scientific and technological means, whatever they may be ? If Stark exists in the same Universe as Spider-Man, Cap and SHIELD, it works. If he exists in the same as Thanos, things get muddled. Ghost Rider, a literla demon/Heaven's servant, can't exist in the same exact universe as tech-based characters, because then all the rules are broken. Same way Batman should be self-contained.
I know, I know, it can be made to work. But to me you just end up with clashing tones. Something metaphysical and abstract like Doctor Strange can work with sci-fi, but something explicitly supernatural like Etrigan cannot work with it. IMHO always, as I prefer "neat little boxes".
