3779691

You're placing greater importance on official (i.e. copyrighted) offerings, which is why your reasoning is "If the character sucks in her official appearance, then she sucks full stop."

Except that's not my reasoning. I never once said she sucks full stop. I said her canon representation sucked, but it did demonstrate that there was some potential for the character to actually get some proper development. So my reasoning is actually, "Her canon representation sucks, so you, a fanfiction author, better do a real good job of developing a compelling character."

Beyond that, when it comes to liking a character for the character, all that matters is canon representation. At that point, all fanon and headcanon are irrelevant. So when it comes to judging Sunset Shimmer as a character as of EQG 1, then yes, she sucks. Full stop.

As soon as we move out of that context, though, sure, there's potential. And I'd be more than willing to read a story about a character that canon really dropped the ball on. It's just, as I said before, you better do a real good job of writing the character so it's actually compelling.

I think the issue that you're having is that you're failing to understand the context of various statements. When people have been saying Sunset Shimmer sucks as a character, full stop, they're referring to her canon representation as of EQG 1. Because again, when it comes to judging characters, you shouldn't be factoring in things like potential or headcanon. However, as soon as you enter the world of fanfiction, all bets are off. It's up to you, the author, to take the canon representation and make something of it. Unfortunately, though, you seem to skip the first part and go straight into fanfiction mode. That's a flawed way of trying to understand the character. To be able to develop a character beyond their canon representation, you have to first understand their canon representation.

IMO, the mindset that "a lot of obscure characters have potential if you just look" is important in a fanfic context.

See, if that was the first thing you said, there wouldn't be any problem. Instead, you said:

you have no imagination as a writer

That's very much different from what you just said, and frankly, your original statement was both incredibly insulting and flat-out wrong. This is why you properly explain what you mean rather than, how did you put it, abbreviating your thought process.

3780057
Oy

Internet arguments are super srs

3779950 And even as I said (twice in this thread, no less), I don't hate her enough to not read stories with her in it or write her out of any stories of mine (shit, she's a major villain in two of my stories), because in that regard, I can create a Sunset Shimmer that I could have only dreamed would appear in EqG.

Also, another good example of your basketball analogy would be, "I can play really good against the 2013 Miami Heat with the 2013 Charlotte Bobcats in NBA Live, so this must mean that the Bobcats are an amazing team in real life!"

3780098
That would be rude, though.

3779950

I never once said she sucks full stop. I said her canon representation sucked, but it did demonstrate that there was some potential for the character to actually get some proper development. So my reasoning is actually, "Her canon representation sucks, so you, a fanfiction author, better do a real good job of developing a compelling character."

I can agree with this clarification.

That's a flawed way of trying to understand the character. To be able to develop a character beyond their canon representation, you have to first understand their canon representation.

Understanding a character's canon representation is basic. It doesn't need to be said. One thing I hate is when characters act OOC, as intentionally written by the fanfic author. Because then why bother doing a fanfic?
What I was talking about in my first post is exactly your 2nd sentence: "To be able to develop a character beyond their canon representation." It's not enough to just go through proper character analysis and be able to understand a character's canon representation. You must then possess the imagination as a writer to develop a character beyond her canon representation (while avoiding OOC).
Which is what I said before in abbreviated form.

That's very much different from what you just said, and frankly, your original statement was both incredibly insulting and flat-out wrong. This is why you properly explain what you mean rather than, how did you put it, abbreviating your thought process.

It's not wrong. It's just you didn't understand what I was driving at because I kept things short. Unless you still wish to disagree with something I said above.
Why did I phrase it in an insulting manner, then? Because (1) I feel strongly about the evils of copyright and all things which tangentially remind me of it, and (2) because it's what I perceive to be true (see above).