I think it has to do with the kinds of stories these characters are used to tell. Batman is a tortured billionaire who tries to use his vast resources to solve the problem of crime single-handedly, and he keeps people at arm's length because he's afraid that personal ties will endanger the mission he's given himself (or something like that, Batman scholars feel free to chime in if I got it wrong.). Spiderman is a story about a broke kid trying to make a difference in the world with the limited resources he has. Similar goals for both characters, but different preconditions make the stories meaningfully different.

I think these flaws are what endear fans to a particular character because they struggle with the same problems (overly self-reliant, broke as hell) and if you have a character grow past them, you're now telling a meaningfully different story. Might still be an interesting story, but I get why people who love these characters would consider some changes to be dealbreakers.

This is kind of a foundational feature of serialized character stories: if you want to keep telling stories about the same characters over and over again, they can't fundamentally learn or grow or change meaningfully, not permanently anyway, because then the appeal of the character fundamentally changes, so you get characters like Batman who are stuck in this sitcom-y eternal purgatory of constantly slamming their heads against their own limitations, and still failing to grasp the root issue. And really I think, it's not for them to figure out. Their stories are there so that we can see our own flaws in them, and learn from them. And once we have, Batman will still be out there, being a lonely nerd for other lonely nerds to identify with.

For the billionaire friends of Parker you kind of have to ignore it. For the same reason you have to ignore that all these superheroes exist in the same universe. It's like when people ask how come Spider-Man's dealing with this threat to the World by himself when all these other superheroes live in the same city. Well the comic isn't about them it's about Spider-Man. So you just kind of have to ignore the existence of the other sometimes. It's one of the plot problems in having a comic universe. It's unavoidable so we all just kind of ignore it.

For Batman specifically I think it starts as a way to clean up Gotham. He'll quit just as soon as Gotham is cleaned up. But of course it's a neverending task. Plus even if he cleaned up Gotham, how can he stop there? How can he stop when there is so much left to do.

But! That's why I like Batman working with the Justice League and Superman specifically. He can never go back to being Bruce Wayne, he'll always be Batman, but at least with Superman he gets his moments of comfort, however brief they may be.

Batman is cursed to be Batman and not Bruce Wayne. That's his character.

I'm not against changing some aspects of his character. And as you noted other characters strike a balance. But those are other characters. If we're changing too much of a character, maybe we just tell that different character's story instead.

As for Spider-Man, that is a character who, depending on the story and timeline of that story, does try to strike a balance. In terms of being poor I think it's a matter of being independent. Whenever he works for someone, they tend to want to do things their way. Even if he agrees or he's doing what he wanted to do, there is still that layer of dependence.

Bruce having friends sets a dangerous precedent to children that being a millionaire is likable

I mean, I don't really enjoy characters I like changing overtime. They are nor "people" they are just stories, I don't necessarily want the best for them. I just want them to keep providing the same interesting stories that hooked me on them to begin with.

If they change is hit or miss, and they may loose the thing I like about them.

I dont want to see them grow either tbh. The Simpsons have been the same age for like 30 years.

The writing matures sometimes, and the issues they face remain relevant to the modern world, but the characters persist.

You first and last issue was posting to reddit

isnt peter parker mostly financed by iron mans company in the MCU now.

One thing to remember is that Batman is crazy. He doesn’t consider himself Bruce Wayne, he considers Bruce a mask he wears. He is Batman. Superman calls him Bruce to try to keep him grounded, but he’s already lost it. For Bruce to develop and have friends and a personal life, he has to first get past his need to be Batman. His psychosis keeps him from moving forward.

Spiderman totally deserves a break though. That kid puts himself through hell out of guilt. But for him to stop torturing himself he has to forgive his mistakes and guilt over Ben. He can still be Spiderman after that, so I’m all for it.

We've had storylines that fleshed out Bruce, two faces origin being one of the more popular ones, but I think the popular story is that Bruce is just an exaggerated character batman plays. Bruce doesn't really exist anymore. Even the stories where we see batman costume free, the connections that seem real feel like they're connecting to batman just with his mask off.

I'm also with you on your last point even if I think you were being sarcastic, personally not sure how the story of batman makes sense if he has a mutual loving support structure in his life. It would be interesting to see batman happy, but it just feels kind of like a story ender.

I'd still give your idea a read if it was made, but I'm definitely coming into it feeling kinda wary.

It's the editors who keep resetting things to the status quo.

https://gamerboss101.itch.io/touch-grass-simulator