Yeah don't disagree, the game had it's problems, but Ms Marvel wasn't one of them.
Just pointing out that people were not expecting her to be the main character, which lead to disappointment.
Kamala is quite a successful character in the comics, and her TV show was well received. Agreed that she was the best part of the Marvels as well.
The only negative reception she's had so far was that she was the central character of the Avengers VG, when people were expecting Thor, Cap & IM to be the central characters, and felt the promotional material essentially did not show that.
That's a bit far-fetched, everyone can see that Rogers has flaws, especially when he refuses to back down and be pragmatic over the Bucky situation, and instead fight over it, and his naivety around SHIELD. And more importantly, the scripts actively have him challenged on his flaws.
Just because he's overly virtuous, doesn't mean he's flawless.
He's the biggest villain they had the rights to. If they had any plan for Avengers sequels, then it included him.
Let's not also forget that the first major Thanos plotline in the comics involved the cosmic cube, not the infinity gems.
Honestly, what made the Thunderbolts a popular name was the original reveal that they were secretly villains. A twist like that would work wonders with the general audience, it would be a fresh take on the MCU.
Instead we got a team of crybabies.
I just remembered that initially The Marvels was supposed to be released in July, against Barbie and Oppenheimer.
That would have been a whole new level of bloodbath.
I keep wondering this too. Maybe inserting an established character from an established tv show could work, but Marvel rushed a lot of it in order to fill up D+ with content.