document_title: Separation of powers

question_text: who developed the system of checks and balances

question_tokens: who developed the system of checks and balances

text: Separation of powers

text: History[edit]

text:
Part of the Politics series onRepublicanism
Central concepts[show]
Anti-monarchism
Liberty as non-domination
Popular sovereignty
Republic
Res publica
Social contract

Schools[show]
Classical republicanism
Neo-republicanism

Important thinkers[show]
Hannah Arendt
Cicero
James Harrington
Thomas Jefferson
John Locke
James Madison
Montesquieu
Philip Pettit
Polybius
Jean Jacques Rousseau
Michael J. Sandel
Algernon Sidney
Quentin Skinner
Cass Sunstein
Mary Wollstonecraft

History[show]
Roman Republic
Gaṇa sangha
Classical Athens
Republic of Venice
Republic of Genoa
Republic of Florence
Dutch Republic
American Revolution
French Revolution
Spanish American wars of independence
Trienio Liberal
French Revolution of 1848
5 October 1910 revolution
Xinhai Revolution
Russian Revolution
German Revolution of 1918–19
Turkish War of Independence
Mongolian Revolution of 1921
11 September 1922 Revolution
1935 Greek coup d'état attempt
Spanish Civil War
Birth of the Italian Republic
Egyptian Revolution of 1952
14 July Revolution
North Yemen Civil War
Zanzibar Revolution
1969 Libyan coup d'état
Cambodian coup of 1970
Third Hellenic Republic
Iranian Revolution
1987 Fijian coups d'état
Nepalese Civil War

By country[show]
Australia
Barbados
Canada
Ireland
Jamaica
Morocco
Netherlands
New Zealand
Spain
Sweden
Turkey
United Kingdom
United States

Related topics[show]
Communitarianism
Liberalism
Monarchism

Politics portalvte

text: Antiquity[edit]

text: Aristotle first mentioned the idea of a "mixed government" or hybrid government in his work Politics where he drew upon many of the constitutional forms in the city-states of Ancient Greece. In the Roman Republic, the Roman Senate, Consuls and the Assemblies showed an example of a mixed government according to Polybius (Histories, Book 6, 11–13).

text: Early modern biparty systems[edit]

text: John Calvin (1509–1564) favoured a system of government that divided political power between democracy and aristocracy (mixed government). Calvin appreciated the advantages of democracy, stating: "It is an invaluable gift if God allows a people to elect its own government and magistrates."[1] In order to reduce the danger of misuse of political power, Calvin suggested setting up several political institutions which should complement and control each other in a system of checks and balances.[2]

text: In this way, Calvin and his followers resisted political absolutism and furthered the growth of democracy. Calvin aimed to protect the rights and the well-being of ordinary people.[3][need quotation to verify] In 1620, a group of English separatist Congregationalists and Anglicans (later known as the Pilgrim Fathers) founded Plymouth Colony in North America. Enjoying self-rule, they established a bipartite democratic system of government. The "freemen" elected the General Court, which functioned as legislature and judiciary and which in turn elected a governor, who together with his seven "assistants" served in the functional role of providing executive power.[4] Massachusetts Bay Colony (founded 1628), Rhode Island (1636), Connecticut (1636), New Jersey, and Pennsylvania had similar constitutions – they all separated political powers. (Except for Plymouth Colony and Massachusetts Bay Colony, these English outposts added religious freedom to their democratic systems, an important step towards the development of human rights.[5][6]) Books like William Bradford's History of Plymoth Plantation (written between 1630 and 1651) were widely read in England.[citation needed] So the form of government in the colonies was well known in the mother country, including to the philosopher John Locke (1632–1704). He deduced from a study of the English constitutional system the advantages of dividing political power into the legislative (which should be distributed among several bodies, for example, the House of Lords and the House of Commons), on the one hand, and the executive and federative power, responsible for the protection of the country and prerogative of the monarch, on the other hand. (The Kingdom of England had no written constitution.)[7][need quotation to verify]

text: Montesquieu's separation of powers system[edit]

text: The term "tripartite system" is commonly ascribed to French Enlightenment political philosopher Baron de Montesquieu, although he did not use such a term. In reality he referred to "distribution" of powers. In The Spirit of the Laws (1748), Montesquieu described the various forms of distribution of political power among a legislature, an executive, and a judiciary. Montesquieu's approach was to present and defend a form of government which was not excessively centralized in all its powers to a single monarch or similar ruler, form of government known then as "aristocracy". He based this model on the Constitution of the Roman Republic and the British constitutional system. Montesquieu took the view that the Roman Republic had powers separated so that no one could usurp complete power.[8][9][10] In the British constitutional system, Montesquieu discerned a separation of powers among the monarch, Parliament, and the courts of law.

text: In every government there are three sorts of power: the legislative; the executive in respect to things dependent on the law of nations; and the executive in regard to matters that depend on the civil law.

text: By virtue of the first, the prince or magistrate enacts temporary or perpetual laws, and amends or abrogates those that have been already enacted. By the second, he makes peace or war, sends or receives embassies, establishes the public security, and provides against invasions. By the third, he punishes criminals, or determines the disputes that arise between individuals. The latter we shall call the judiciary power, and the other, simply, the executive power of the state.

text: Montesquieu argues that each Power should only exercise its own functions, it was quite explicit here:

text: When the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person, or in the same body of magistrates, there can be no liberty; because apprehensions may arise, lest the same monarch or senate should enact tyrannical laws, to execute them in a tyrannical manner.

text: Again, there is no liberty if the judiciary power be not separated from the legislative and executive. Were it joined with the legislative, the life and liberty of the subject would be exposed to arbitrary control; for the judge would be then the legislator. Were it joined to the executive power, the judge might behave with violence and oppression.

text: There would be an end of every thing, were the same man, or the same body, whether of the nobles or of the people, to exercise those three powers, that of enacting laws, that of executing the public resolutions, and of trying the causes of individuals.

text: Separation of powers requires a different source of legitimization, or a different act of legitimization from the same source, for each of the separate powers. If the legislative branch appoints the executive and judicial powers, as Montesquieu indicated, there will be no separation or division of its powers, since the power to appoint carries with it the power to revoke.

text: The executive power ought to be in the hands of a monarch, because this branch of government, having need of dispatch, is better administered by one than by many: on the other hand, whatever depends on the legislative power, is oftentimes better regulated by many than by a single person.

text: But, if there were no monarch, and the executive power should be committed to a certain number of persons, selected from the legislative body, there would be an end of liberty, by reason the two powers would be united; as the same persons would sometimes possess, and would be always able to possess, a share in both.

text: Montesquieu did actually specify that the independence of the judiciary has to be real, and not merely apparent.[13] The judiciary was generally seen as the most important of the three powers, independent and unchecked,[14] while also likely to claim to be the least dangerous one.[13]

text: Checks and balances[edit]

text: The examples and perspective in this article deal primarily with the United States and do not represent a worldwide view of the subject. You may improve this article, discuss the issue on the talk page, or create a new article, as appropriate. (May 2018) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text: Checks and balances is the principle that each of the Branches has the power to limit or check the other two and this creates a balance between the three separate powers of the state, this principle induces that the ambitions of one branch prevent that one of the other branches become supreme, and thus be eternally confronting each other and in that process leaving the people free from government abuses. Checks and Balances are designed to maintain the system of separation of powers keeping each branch in its place. This is based on the idea that it is not enough to separate the powers and guarantee their independence but to give the various branches the constitutional means to defend their own legitimate powers from the encroachments of the other branches.[15] They guarantee that the powers of the state have the same weight (co-equal), that is, to be balanced, so that they can limit each other, avoiding the abuse of state power. The origin of checks and balances, like separation of powers itself, is specifically credited to Montesquieu in the Enlightenment (in The Spirit of the Laws, 1748), under this influence was implemented in 1787 in the Constitution of the United States.

text: The following example of the separation of powers and their mutual checks and balances for the experience of the United States Constitution is presented as illustrative of the general principles applied in similar forms of government as well.

text: «But the great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department, consists in giving to those who administer each department the necessary constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachments of the others. The provision for defense must in this, as in all other cases, be made commensurate to the danger of attack. Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. The interest of the man must be connected with the constitutional rights of the place. It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government. But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.»

text: «A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions. This policy of supplying, by opposite and rival interests, the defect of better motives, might be traced through the whole system of human affairs, private as well as public. We see it particularly displayed in all the subordinate distributions of power, where the constant aim is to divide and arrange the several offices in such a manner as that each may be a check on the other that the private interest of every individual may be a sentinel over the public rights. These inventions of prudence cannot be less requisite in the distribution of the supreme powers of the State.»

text:
Legislative (Congress)

Executive (President)

Judicial (Supreme Court)

Passes bills; has broad taxing and spending power; regulates inter-state commerce; controls the federal budget; has power to borrow money on the credit of the United States (may be vetoed by President, but vetoes may be overridden with a two-thirds vote of both houses)
Has sole power to declare war, as well as to raise, support, and regulate the military.
Oversees, investigates, and makes the rules for the government and its officers.
Defines by law the jurisdiction of the federal judiciary in cases not specified by the Constitution.
Ratification of treaties signed by the President and gives advice and consent to presidential appointments to the federal judiciary, federal executive departments, and other posts (Senate only).[17]
Has sole power of impeachment (House of Representatives) and trial of impeachments (Senate); can remove federal executive and judicial officers from office for high crimes and misdemeanors

Is the commander-in-chief of the armed forces
Executes the instructions of Congress.
May veto bills passed by Congress (but the veto may be overridden by a two-thirds majority of both houses)
Executes the spending authorized by Congress.
Declares states of emergency and publishes regulations and executive orders.
Makes executive agreements (does not require ratification) and signs treaties (ratification requiring approval by two-thirds of the Senate)
Makes appointments to the federal judiciary, federal executive departments, and other posts with the advice and consent of the Senate. Has power to make temporary appointment during the recess of the Senate
Has the power to grant "reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment."

Determines which laws Congress intended to apply to any given case
Exercises judicial review, reviewing the constitutionality of laws
Determines how Congress meant the law to apply to disputes
Determines how a law acts to determine the disposition of prisoners
Determines how a law acts to compel testimony and the production of evidence
Determines how laws should be interpreted to assure uniform policies in a top-down fashion via the appeals process, but gives discretion in individual cases to low-level judges. The amount of discretion depends upon the standard of review, determined by the type of case in question.

text: Comparison between tripartite and bipartite national systems[edit]

text: Constitutions with a high degree of separation of powers are found worldwide. The UK system is distinguished by a particular entwining of powers.[18] A number of Latin American countries have electoral branches of government.

text: Countries with little separation of power include New Zealand and Canada. Canada makes limited use of separation of powers in practice, although in theory it distinguishes between branches of government.

text: New Zealand's constitution is based on the principle of separation of powers through a series of constitutional safeguards, many of which are tacit. The Executive's ability to carry out decisions often depends on the Legislature, which is elected under the mixed member proportional system. This means the government is rarely a single party but a coalition of parties. The Judiciary is also free of government interference. If a series of judicial decisions result in an interpretation of the law which the Executive considers does not reflect the intention of the policy, the Executive can initiate changes to the legislation in question through the Legislature. The Executive cannot direct or request a judicial officer to revise or reconsider a decision; decisions are final. Should there be a dispute between the Executive and Judiciary, the Executive has no authority to direct the Judiciary, or its individual members and vice versa.

text: Complete separation of powers systems are almost always presidential, although theoretically this need not be the case. There are a few historical exceptions, such as the Directoire system of revolutionary France. Switzerland offers an example of non-Presidential separation of powers today: It is run by a seven-member executive branch, the Federal Council. However, some might argue[weasel words] that Switzerland does not have a strong separation of powers system, as the Federal Council is appointed by parliament (but not dependent on parliament) and although the judiciary has no power of review, the judiciary is still separate from the other branches.

text: Typical branches[edit]

text:
executive
legislative
judicial

text: Additional branches[edit]

text:
auditory
electoral – in which election commissions, tribunals or courts are maintained separately from other branches
prosecutory
civil service commission

text: Three branches[edit]

text: Australia[edit]

text: Australia does not maintain a strict separation between the legislative and executive branches of government—indeed, government ministers are required to be members of parliament—but the federal judiciary strictly guards its independence from the other two branches. However, under influence from the American constitution, the Australian constitution does define the three branches of government separately, and this has been interpreted by the judiciary to induce an implicit separation of powers.[19] State governments have a similar level of separation of power, but this is generally on the basis of convention, rather than constitution.

text: Austria[edit]

text: The Constitution of Austria was originally written by Hans Kelsen, the prominent constitutional scholar in Europe at that time. Kelsen was to serve as a part of the judicial court of review for Austria as part of its tripartite government.

text: Czech Republic[edit]

text:
The Constitution of the Czech Republic, adopted in 1992 immediately before the dissolution of Czechoslovakia, establishes the traditional tripartite division of powers[20] and continues the tradition of its predecessor constitutions.
The Czechoslovak Constitution of 1920, which replaced the provisional constitution adopted by the newly independent state in 1918, was modeled after the constitutions of established democracies such as those of the United Kingdom, United States and France, and maintained this division,[21] as have subsequent changes to the constitution that followed in 1948 with the Ninth-of-May Constitution, the 1960 Constitution of Czechoslovakia as well as the Constitutional Act on the Czechoslovak Federation of 1968.

text: Denmark[edit]

text:
Parliament – legislature
Prime Minister, Cabinet, Government Departments and Civil Service – executive
High Courts and lower courts – judiciary

text: France[edit]

text: According to the Constitution of the Fifth Republic, the government of France[22] is divided up into three branches:

text:
Executive. This includes the popularly elected president as well as the prime minister and cabinet. The French Prime minister is nominated by the president, but the government is responsible to the lower house of the legislature, the National Assembly.
Legislature. A bicameral legislature that includes the Senate (upper house) and the National Assembly (lower house). The relationship between the two houses is asymmetric, meaning that in case of dispute, the National Assembly has the final word according to Article 45[23]  of the Constitution.
Judiciary. This includes the judicial and administrative orders. It also includes a constitutional court.

text: Hong Kong[edit]

text: Hong Kong is a Special Administrative Region established in 1997 pursuant to the Sino-British Joint Declaration, an international treaty made between Britain and China in 1984, registered with the United Nations. Currently, Hong Kong has three branches of government as codified in the Basic Law, its constitution, which largely preserved political structures of the British colonial era, under the doctrine of one country, two systems:

text:
Legislative Council – legislature
Government – executive
Judiciary (Court of Final Appeal and other courts and tribunals) – judiciary

text: The Chief Executive, elected by a 1200-member Election Committee which historically was dominated by pro-Beijing establishment members, is both head of the region and head of government, and chairs the Executive Council which is composed of "unofficial" members and government secretaries.

text: The legislature consists of 70 members, 35 of whom are elected by "functional" constituencies represented by members within various industries rather than the public at large.[24] Separation of power between executive and legislature is, therefore, questionable.[25]

text: The courts frequently exercise a power of judicial review of administrative actions and also decide matters of constitutionality of legislation, though this power is circumscribed under the power of the People's Republic of China's National People's Congress to make final determinations as to interpretation.[26] Hence, the separation of powers is again structurally weak.

text: It is worth noting that the branches' separation of power may not be intended within the Hong Kong Basic Law as leaders of the PRC have publicly called for the three branches to cooperate and be led by the Chief Executive.[27]

text: Further, Deng Xiaoping was quoted to have categorically dismissed Hong Kong having a "Trias Politica" system.[28]

text: India[edit]

text: India follows constitutional democracy which offers a clear separation of powers. The judiciary branch is fairly independent of the other two branches with the power to interpret the constitution. Parliament has the legislative powers. Executive powers are vested with the President who is advised by the Union Council of Ministers headed by the Prime Minister. The constitution of India vested the duty of protecting, preserving and defending the constitution with the President as common head of the executive, parliament, armed forces, etc. not only for the union government but also the various state governments in a federal structure. All three branches have "checks and balances" over each other to maintain the balance of power and not to exceed the constitutional limits.[29]

text:
President can set aside a law passed by the legislative or an advise given by the Union Council of Ministers when it is inconsistent with the constitution of India.
Even if the president accepts a law passed duly by the legislative, it can be repealed by the Supreme Court after a fair trial if it is against the Basic structure of the constitution. Any citizen of India can approach the Supreme Court directly to repeal the unconstitutional laws made by the legislative or executive.
President can be impeached after conducting a fair trial by the parliament for his unconstitutional orders/decisions.
President can be asked to step down by the judiciary for his unconstitutional orders/decisions on the grounds of losing eligibility criteria of the president.
Parliament can impeach judges of Supreme Court and High Courts of states for their incompetence and mala fides. Higher bench of judges can set aside the incorrect judgements of smaller bench of judges to uphold the constitution.

text: Iran[edit]

text:
Government – Executive
The legislature of Islamic Republic of Iran – Legislative
Judicial system – Judicial

text: Italy[edit]

text: In Italy the powers are separated, even though the Council of Ministers needs a vote of confidence from both chambers of Parliament, that represents a large number of members (almost 1,000).[30]

text: Like every parliamentary form of government, there is no real separation between Legislature and Executive, rather a continuum between them due to the confidence link. By the way, the balance is protected by Constitution also between these two branches.[31] and, obviously, between them and the judiciary branch, which is really independent.

text: Malaysia[edit]

text:
Parliament – legislature
Prime Minister, Cabinet, Government Departments and Civil Service – executive
Federal Courts and lower courts – judiciary

text: Nepal[edit]

text:
Legislative Parliament – Legislature
Prime Minister, Cabinet of Minister and Government Departments – Executive
Supreme Court – Judiciary

text: Norway[edit]

text:
Parliament – legislature
Prime Minister, Cabinet of Norway, Government Departments and Civil Service – executive
High Courts and lower courts – judiciary

text: A note on the status of separation of power, checks and balances, and balance of power in Norway today.[32]

text: In the original constitution of 1814 the Montesquieu concept was enshrined, and the people at the time had the same skepticism about political parties as the American founding fathers and the revolutionaries in France. Nor did people really want to get rid of the king and the Council of State (privy council). King and council was a known concept that people had lived with for a long time and was for the most part comfortable with. The 1814 constitution came about as a reaction to external events, most notable the Treaty of Kiel see 1814 in Norway. There was no revolution against the current powers that had been be the case in the US and France.

text: As there was no election of the executive, the king reigned supremely independent in selecting the members of the Council of State, no formal political parties formed util the 1880s. A conflict between the executive and legislature started developing in the 1870s and climaxed with the legislature impeaching the entire Council of State in 1884. (See Statsrådssaken (Norwegian Wikipedia page))

text: With this came a switch to a parliamentary system of government and while the full process takes decades, it has led to a system of parliamentary sovereignty where the Montesquieu idea of separation of powers is technically dead even though the three branches remain important institutions.

text: This does not mean that there are no checks and balances. With the introduction of a parliamentary system, political parties started to form quickly and this led to a call for electoral reform that saw the introduction of a Party-list proportional representation in 1918. The peculiarities of the Norwegian election system generate 6–8 parties and make it extremely difficult for a single party to gain an absolute majority. It has only occurred for a brief period in the aftermath of World War II where the Labour Party had an absolute majority.

text: A multi-party system parliament that must either form a minority executive or a coalition executive function as a perfectly good system of checks and balances even if it was never a stated goal for the introduction of multiparty system. The multiparty system came about in response to a public outcry of having too few parties and a general feeling of a lack of representation. For this reason you'll find very little on the topic of separation of powers or checks and balances in the works of Norwegian political sciences today.

text: Pakistan[edit]

text:
Parliament – Legislative
Prime Minister and his Cabinet – Executive
Supreme Court and lower courts – Judicial

text: United Kingdom[edit]

text:
Parliament – legislature
Prime Minister, Cabinet, Government Departments and Civil Service – executive
Courts – judiciary

text: The development of the British constitution, which is not a codified document, is based on this fusion in the person of the Monarch, who has a formal role to play in the legislature (Parliament, which is where legal and political sovereignty lies, is the Crown-in-Parliament, and is summoned and dissolved by the Sovereign who must give his or her Royal Assent to all Bills so that they become Acts), the executive (the Sovereign appoints all ministers of His/Her Majesty's Government, who govern in the name of the Crown) and the judiciary (the Sovereign, as the fount of justice, appoints all senior judges, and all public prosecutions are brought in his or her name).

text: Although the doctrine of separation of power plays a role in the United Kingdom's constitutional doctrine, the UK constitution is often described as having "a weak separation of powers" A. V. Dicey, despite its constitution being the one to which Montesquieu originally referred. For example, in the United Kingdom, the executive forms a subset of the legislature, as did—to a lesser extent—the judiciary until the establishment of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom. The Prime Minister, the Chief Executive, sits as a member of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, either as a peer in the House of Lords or as an elected member of the House of Commons (by convention, and as a result of the supremacy of the Lower House, the Prime Minister now sits in the House of Commons) and can effectively be removed from office by a simple majority vote. Furthermore, while the courts in the United Kingdom are amongst the most independent in the world,[citation needed] the Law Lords, who were the final arbiters of judicial disputes in the UK sat simultaneously in the House of Lords, the upper house of the legislature, although this arrangement ceased in 2009 when the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom came into existence. Furthermore, because of the existence of Parliamentary sovereignty, while the theory of separation of powers may be studied there, a system such as that of the UK is more accurately described as a "fusion of powers".[citation needed]

text: Until 2005, the Lord Chancellor fused the Legislature, Executive and Judiciary, as he was the ex officio Speaker of the House of Lords, a Government Minister who sat in Cabinet and was head of the Lord Chancellor's Department which administered the courts, the justice system and appointed judges, and was the head of the Judiciary in England and Wales and sat as a judge on the Judicial Committee of the House of Lords, the highest domestic court in the entire United Kingdom, and the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, the senior tribunal court for parts of the Commonwealth. The Lord Chancellor also had certain other judicial positions, including being a judge in the Court of Appeal and President of the Chancery Division. The Lord Chancellor combines other aspects of the constitution, including having certain ecclesiastical functions of the established state church, making certain church appointments, nominations and sitting as one of the thirty-three Church Commissioners. These functions remain intact and unaffected by the Constitutional Reform Act. In 2005, the Constitutional Reform Act separated the powers with Legislative functions going to an elected Lord Speaker and the Judicial functions going to the Lord Chief Justice. The Lord Chancellor's Department was replaced with a Ministry of Justice and the Lord Chancellor currently serves in the position of Secretary of State for Justice.

text: The judiciary has no power to strike down primary legislation, and can only rule on secondary legislation that it is invalid with regard to the primary legislation if necessary.

text: Under the concept of parliamentary sovereignty, Parliament can enact any primary legislation it chooses. However, the concept immediately becomes problematic when the question is asked; "If parliament can do anything, can it bind its successors?". It is generally held that parliament can do no such thing.

text: Equally, while statute takes precedence over precedent-derived common law and the judiciary has no power to strike down primary legislation, there are certain cases where the supreme judicature has effected an injunction against the application of an act or reliance on its authority by the civil service. The seminal example of this is the Factortame case, where the House of Lords granted such an injunction preventing the operation of the Merchant Shipping Act 1988 until litigation in the European Court of Justice had been resolved.

text: The House of Lords ruling in Factortame (No. 1), approving the European Court of Justice formulation that "a national court which, in a case before it concerning Community law, considers that the sole obstacle which precludes it from granting interim relief is a rule of national law, must disapply that rule", has created an implicit tiering of legislative reviewability; the only way for parliament to prevent the supreme judicature from injunctively striking out a law on the basis of incompatibility with Community law is to pass an act specifically removing that power from the court, or by repealing the European Communities Act 1972.

text: The British legal systems are based on common law traditions, which require:

text:
Police or regulators cannot initiate complaints under criminal law but can only investigate (prosecution is mostly reserved for the Crown Prosecution Service), which prevents selective enforcement—e.g., the "fishing expedition" which is often specifically forbidden.
Prosecutors cannot withhold evidence from counsel for the defendant; to do so results in mistrial or dismissal. Accordingly, their relation to police is no advantage.
Defendants convicted can appeal, but only fresh and compelling evidence not available at trial can be introduced, restricting the power of the court of appeal to the process of law applied.

text: United States[edit]

text: Separation of powers was first established in the United States Constitution, the founding fathers included features of many new concepts, including hard-learned historical lessons about the checks and balances of power. Similar concepts were also prominent in the state governments of the United States. As colonies of Great Britain, the founding fathers considered that the American states had suffered an abuse of the broad power of parliamentarism and monarchy. As a remedy, the US Constitution limits the powers of the federal government through various means, in particular, the three branches of the federal government are divided by exercising different functions, and the executive and legislative powers are separated in origin by separate elections and the judiciary is kept independent, each branch controls the actions of others and balances its powers in some way.

text: In the United States Constitution, Article 1 Section I gives Congress only those "legislative powers herein granted" and proceeds to list those permissible actions in Article I Section 8, while Section 9 lists actions that are prohibited for Congress. The vesting clause in Article II places no limits on the Executive branch, simply stating that, "The Executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America."[33] The Supreme Court holds "The judicial Power" according to Article III, and it established the implication of Judicial review in Marbury v. Madison under the Marshall court.[34]

text: The presidential system adopted by the Constitution of the United States obeys the balance of powers sought, and not found, by the constitutional monarchy. The people appoint their representatives to meet periodically in a legislative body, and, since they do not have a king, the people themselves elect a preeminent citizen to perform, also periodically, the executive functions of the State. The direct election of the head of state or of the executive power is an inevitable consequence of the political freedom of the people, understood as the capacity to appoint and depose their leaders. Only this separate election of the person who has to fulfill the functions that the Constitution attributes to the president of the government, so different by its nature, and by its function, from the election of representatives of the electors, allows the executive power to be controlled by the legislative and submitted to the demands of political responsibility.[35]

text: Judicial independence is maintained by appointments for life that makes disappear very soon any sense of dependence on the Executive, with voluntary retirement and a high threshold of dismissal by the Legislature, in addition to a salary that can not be diminished during their service.

text: The federal government refers to the branches as "branches of government", while some systems use "government" to describe the executive. The Executive branch has attempted[36] to claim power arguing for separation of powers to include being the Commander in Chief of a standing army since the American Civil War, executive orders, emergency powers and security classifications since World War II, national security, signing statements, and the scope of the unitary executive.

text: «In order to lay a due foundation for that separate and distinct exercise of the different powers of government, which to a certain extent is admitted on all hands to be essential to the preservation of liberty, it is evident that each department should have a will of its own; and consequently should be so constituted that the members of each should have as little agency as possible in the appointment of the members of the others. Were this principle rigorously adhered to, it would require that all the appointments for the supreme executive, legislative, and judiciary magistracies should be drawn from the same fountain of authority, the people, through channels having no communication whatever with one another. Perhaps such a plan of constructing the several departments would be less difficult in practice than it may in contemplation appear. Some difficulties, however, and some additional expense would attend the execution of it. Some deviations, therefore, from the principle must be admitted. In the constitution of the judiciary department in particular, it might be inexpedient to insist rigorously on the principle: first, because peculiar qualifications being essential in the members, the primary consideration ought to be to select that mode of choice which best secures these qualifications; secondly, because the permanent tenure by which the appointments are held in that department, must soon destroy all sense of dependence on the authority conferring them.»

text: «It is equally evident, that the members of each department should be as little dependent as possible on those of the others, for the emoluments annexed to their offices. Were the executive magistrate, or the judges, not independent of the legislature in this particular, their independence in every other would be merely nominal.»

text: Other systems[edit]

text: Republic of China[edit]

text: According to Sun Yat-sen's idea of "separation of the five powers", the government of the Republic of China has five branches:

text:
Executive Yuan – led by the premier but in actuality it is the president who sets policy – executive
Legislative Yuan – unicameral – legislature
Judicial Yuan – its Constitutional Court (highest) and Supreme Court have different jurisdictions – judiciary
Control Yuan – audit branch
Examination Yuan – civil service personnel management and human resources

text: The president and vice president as well as the defunct National Assembly are constitutionally not part of the above five branches. Before being abolished in 2005, the National Assembly was a standing constituent assembly and electoral college for the president and vice president. Its constitutional amending powers were passed to the legislative yuan and its electoral powers were passed to the electorate.

text: The relationship between the executive and legislative branches are poorly defined. An example of the problems this causes is the near complete political paralysis that results when the president, who has neither the power to veto nor the ability to dissolve the legislature and call new elections, cannot negotiate with the legislature when his party is in the minority.[37] The examination and control yuans are marginal branches; their leaders as well as the leaders of the executive and judicial yuans are appointed by the president and confirmed by the legislative yuan. The legislature is the only branch that chooses its own leadership. The vice president has practically no responsibilities.

text: Belgium[edit]

text: Belgium is currently a federated state that has imposed the trias politica on different governmental levels. The constitution of 1831, considered one of the most liberal of its time for limiting the powers of its monarch and imposing a rigorous system of separation of powers, is based on three principles (represented in the Schematic overview of Belgian institutions):

text: Trias Politica (horizontal separation of powers):

text:
The legislative power is attributed to an elected parliamentary body elected with a representative general election system (one person one vote).
The executive power is attributed to the Council of Ministers. Ministers are formally appointed by the King, though in practice the prime minister decides the composition of his cabinet. The ministers are usually from the elected members of parliament (non-elected people can also be nominated). However, they must first resign from their elected seat.
The judicial power is in the hands of the courts. Magistrates are nominated by the minister (on proposal from a Council of the Magistrates).
Magistrates can be nominated to become a judge (sitting magistrates) or instructing judge (investigating judge) of Procureur (public prosecutor) (the standing magistrates).
The executive branch of the government is responsible to provide the physical means to execute its role (infrastructure, staff, financial means).
Judges and some other people cannot run for elected office while they are nominated to certain positions (military, police-officers, clergy, notaries, bailiffs).

text: Subsidiarity (vertical separation of powers):

text:
Supranational directives (EU legislation) and international treaties are subjected to approval of the federal level (the federal level being Belgium the nation state)
The federal level is composed of the following:
A bicameral parliament (House of Representative and Senate) (in 2014 this will be a directly elected house and an indirectly appointed Senate of the regions)
A federal government (led by the Prime Minister and the ministers and secretaries of state)
Tasked with overseeing justice, defense, foreign affairs, and social security, public health
High Court, Constitutional Court, Cassation Court and Council of State
The regional level is composed of the following:
A monocameral parliament
A regional government led by the minister-president (ministers and secretaries of state) is tasked with regional matters.
Provinces also have similar structures:
A monocameral provincial council
A nominated provincial governor assisted by deputies is tasked with provincial matters.
Appellate Court, Assisses Court
An intermediate level of Arrondissements subdivides the provinces
it has only an executive level with an arrondissemental commissars
City and communal entities:
A city or communal council
A mayor, assisted by aldermen, is tasked with local matters.
Magistrates Court, Correctional Court (three judges).
Justice of the peace and Police Court judges (single judge courts)

text: Secularism (separation of state and religion):

text:
The king, the head of state, holds no political authority and requires executive approval by a minister for every action and statement; he nominates the ministers but he does not choose them (his executive powers); he signs and decrees the laws voted in parliament (his legislative powers);
The head of state is commander in chief of the military (in title only), politically the military depends of the Minister of Defense and the chiefs of staff are responsible towards parliament and take their orders from the Minister of Defense and the government;
Certain functions are deemed incompatible and people must resign from their function if they want to assume responsibilities in another function (military commanders have never been government ministers, even during a war)

text: Costa Rica[edit]

text: In the aftermath of the 43-day civil war in 1948 (after former President and incumbent candidate Rafael Álgel Calderón Guardia tried to take power through fraud, by not recognising the results of the presidential election that he had lost), the question of which transformational model the Costa Rican State would follow was the main issue that confronted the victors. A Constituent Assembly was elected by popular vote to draw up a new constitution, enacted in 1949, and remains in force. This document was an edit of the constitution of 1871, as the constituent assembly rejected more radical corporatist ideas proposed by the ruling Junta Fundadora de la Segunda República (which, although having come to power by military force, abolished the armed forces). Nonetheless, the new constitution increased centralization of power at the expense of municipalities and eliminated provincial government altogether, at the time it increased the powers of congress and the judiciary.

text: It established the three supreme powers as the legislature, executive, and judicial branches, but also created two other autonomous state organs that have equivalent power, but not equivalent rank. The first is the Tribunal Supremo de Elecciones de Costa Rica (electoral branch) which controls elections and makes unique, unappealable decisions on their outcomes.

text: The second is the office of the Comptroller General (audit branch), an autonomous and independent organ nominally subordinate to the unicameral legislative assembly. All budgets of ministries and municipalities must pass through this agency, including the execution of budget items such as contracting for routine operations. The Comptroller also provides financial vigilance over government offices and office holders, and routinely brings actions to remove mayors for malfeasance, firmly establishing this organization as the fifth branch of the Republic.

text: European Union[edit]

text:
The European Union is a supranational polity, and is neither a country nor a federation; but as the EU wields political power it complies with the principle of separation of powers. There are seven institutions of the European Union. In intergovernmental matters, most power is concentrated in the Council of the European Union—giving it the characteristics of a normal international organization. Here, all power at the EU level is in one branch. In the latter there are four main actors. The European Commission acts as an independent executive which is appointed by the Council in conjunction with the European Parliament; but the Commission also has a legislative role as the sole initiator of EU legislation.[38][39]
[40] An early maxim was: "The Commission proposes and the Council disposes"; and although the EU's lawmaking procedure is now much more complicated, this simple maxim still holds some truth. As well as both executive and legislative functions, the Commission arguably exercises a third, quasi-judicial, function under Articles 101 & 102 TFEU (competition law ); although the ECJ remains the final arbiter. The European Parliament is one half of the legislative branch and is directly elected. The Council itself acts both as the second half of the legislative branch and also holds some executive functions (some of which are exercised by the related European Council in practice). The European Court of Justice acts as the independent judicial branch, interpreting EU law and treaties. The remaining institution, the European Court of Auditors, is an independent audit authority (due to the sensitive nature of fraud in the EU).

text:
Council of the European Union – executive and legislative
European Commission – executive, legislative and quasi-judicial
European Council – executive
European Court of Auditors – audit
Court of Justice of the European Union and the General Court – judicial
European Parliament – legislative

text: Germany[edit]

text: The three branches in German government are further divided into six main bodies enshrined in the Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany:

text:
Federal President (Bundespräsident) – formally executive, but mainly representative in daily politics
Federal Cabinet (Bundesregierung) – executive
Federal Diet (Bundestag) & Federal Council (Bundesrat) – bicameral legislative
Federal Assembly (Bundesversammlung) – presidential electoral college (consisting of the members of the Bundestag and electors from the constituent states)
Federal Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht) – judiciary

text: Besides the constitutional court the judicial branch at the federal level is made up of five supreme courts—one for civil and criminal cases (Bundesgerichtshof), and one each for administrative, tax, labour, and social security issues. There are also state (Länder / Bundesländer) based courts beneath them, and a rarely used senate of the supreme courts.

text: Hungary[edit]

text: This article's factual accuracy may be compromised due to out-of-date information. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. (August 2014)

text: The four independent branches of power in Hungary (the parliament, the government, the court system, and the office of the public accuser) are divided into six bodies:

text:
Parliament (Magyar Országgyűlés): elected every 4 years by the people in a highly complex, one-round voting system
Government (Magyar Kormány): installed and removed by 50%+1 basic majority vote of the parliament, 4-year terms
Supreme Court (Legfelsőbb Bíróság): Chief justice elected by qualified (2/3) majority of the parliament, no government oversight
Constitutional court (Alkotmánybíróság): members elected by qualified majority of the parliament for 8 years, this body nullifies laws and has no government oversight.
Chief public accuser (Legfőbb ügyész): elected by qualified majority of the parliament, 6-year terms, office budget fixed, no government oversight.
The President of the Republic (Köztársasági Elnök) is elected by qualified majority of the Hungarian parliament for 5-year terms (cannot be reelected more than once). The President's task is to oversee the functioning of the democracy. Most of his/her powers are ceremonial only: like signing laws into power and commanding the military in time of peace. But before signing, once he/she can also return accepted bills with advices to the Parliament for reconsideration, he/she can also request nullification in advance from the Constitutional Court. He can negotiate with civil/professional unions regarding the bills. Without the President's permission, the country can neither declare war nor deploy the armed forces.

text: The independent pillar status of the Hungarian public accuser's office is a unique construction, loosely modeled on the system Portugal introduced after the 1974 victory of the Carnation Revolution. The public accuser (attorney general) body has become the fourth column of Hungarian democracy only in recent times: after communism fell in 1989, the office was made independent by a new clausule XI. of the Constitution. The change was meant to prevent abuse of state power, especially with regards to the use of false accusations against opposition politicians, who may be excluded from elections if locked in protracted or excessively severe court cases.

text: To prevent the Hungarian accuser's office from neglecting its duties, natural human private persons can submit investigation requests, called "pótmagánvád" directly to the courts, if the accusers' office refuses to do its job. Courts will decide if the allegations have merit and order police to act in lieu of the accuser's office if warranted. In its decision No. 42/2005 the Hungarian constitutional court declared that the government does not enjoy such privilege and the state is powerless to further pursue cases if the public accuser refuses to do so.

text: Quadripartite systems[edit]

text: The Empire of Brazil had, in addition to the three traditional powers, the moderating power, which was exercised solely by the Emperor,[41] and which function was resolving conflicts between the other powers.


question_text: who played the joker in the tv series batman

root

text: Batman, a fictional superhero appearing in publications by DC Comics, has appeared in numerous filmed works, with a variety of casts. The list below presents the casts of the television series in which Batman was the eponymous starring character.

tag: p

text: Television series[edit]

text:
Character
Series (all except Batman (1966-1968) are animated)

Batman
(1966-1968)
The Adventures of Batman and Robin the Boy Wonder
(1968-1969)
The New Adventures of Batman
(1977-1978)
Batman: The Animated Series
(1992-1995)
The New Batman Adventures
(1997-1999)
Batman Beyond
(1999-2001)
The Batman
(2004-2008)
Batman: The Brave and the Bold
(2008-2011)
Beware the Batman
(2013-2014)

CAST

Bruce Wayne
Batman
Adam West
Olan Soule
Adam West
Kevin Conroy
Rino Romano
Diedrich Bader

Zachary Gordon (young)

Mikey Kelley (pre-teen)

Dee Bradley Baker (infant)
Anthony Ruivivar

Terry McGinnis
Batman

Will Friedle

Alfred Pennyworth
Alan Napier
Olan Soule

Clive Revill

Efrem Zimbalist, Jr.

Alastair Duncan
James Garrett
J.B. Blanc

Commissioner James Gordon
Neil Hamilton
Ted Knight
Lennie Weinrib
Bob Hastings

Mitch Pileggi

Kurtwood Smith

Dick Grayson
Robin
Burt Ward
Casey Kasem
Burt Ward
Loren Lester
Brianne Siddall

Evan Sabara
Jeremy Shada
Crawford Wilson
Grey DeLisle
Jason Marsden

Nightwing

Loren Lester

Jerry O'Connell
Crawford Wilson

Tim Drake
Robin

Mathew Valencia

Carry Kelly
Robin

Anndi McAfee

Barbara Gordon
Batgirl
Yvonne Craig
Jane Webb
Melendy Britt
Melissa Gilbert
Tara Strong
Stockard Channing
Danielle Judovits
Mae Whitman
Tara Strong

Katana

Vyvan Pham
Kim Mai Guest
Sumalee Montano

The Joker
Cesar Romero
Larry Storch
Lennie Weinrib
Mark Hamill
Michael McKean

Kevin Michael Richardson
Jeff Bennett
Corey Burton

The Penguin
Burgess Meredith
Ted Knight
Lennie Weinrib
Paul Williams

Tom Kenny
Stephen Root
Jeff Bennett

The Riddler
Frank Gorshin
John Astin
Ted Knight

John Glover

Robert Englund
John Michael Higgins

Two-Face

Richard Moll

James Remar
Richard Moll

Catwoman
Julie Newmar
Eartha Kitt
Jane Webb
Melendy Britt
Adrienne Barbeau

Gina Gershon
Nika Futterman

Mr. Freeze
George Sanders
Otto Preminger
Eli Wallach

Lennie Weinrib
Michael Ansara
Clancy Brown
John Di Maggio

Ra's al Ghul

David Warner

Peter Woodward
Lance Reddick

Clock King
Walter Slezak

Alan Rachins

Dee Bradley Baker

Scarecrow

Henry Polic II

Dee Bradley Baker

Mad Hatter
David Wayne

Roddy McDowall

False Face
Malachi Throne

Townsend Coleman

Corey Burton

Harley Quinn

Arleen Sorkin

Hynden Walch
Meghan Strange

Man-Bat

Marc Singer

Peter MacNicol

Killer Moth

Jeff Bennett
Corey Burton

Killer Croc

Aron Kincaid

Ron Perlman
Stephen Root

Poison Ivy

Diane Pershing

Piera Coppola
Jennifer Hale

Scarface / The Ventriloquist

George Dzundza

Dan Castellaneta

Bane

Henry Silva

Joaquim de Almeida
Ron Perlman
Clancy Brown
Michael Dorn

Firefly

Mark Rolston

Jason Marsden

Dr. Hugo Strange

Ray Buktenica

Frank Gorshin
Richard Green

Rupert Thorne

John Vernon

Victor Brandt

Tony Zucco

Thomas F. Wilson

Mark Hamill

Fox

Bill Mumy

David Faustino
Phil Morris

Shark

Peter Scolari

Googy Gress

Vulture

David Jolliffe

Grey DeLisle
Edoardo Ballerini

Count Vertigo

Michael York

Greg Ellis

Spellbinder

Jon Cypher
Michael Massee

Blockbuster

Kevin Michael Richardson
Gary Anthony Williams

Black Mask

James Remar
John Di Maggio

Thomas Wayne

Kevin Conroy

Corey Burton
Greg Ellis
Adam West

Martha Wayne

Adrienne Barbeau

Pat Musick
Julie Newmar

Chief O'Hara
Stafford Repp

Harvey Bullock

Robert Costanzo

Renee Montoya

Ingrid Oliu
Liane Schirmer

Aunt Harriet Cooper
Madge Blake

Lucius Fox

Brock Peters
Mel Winkler

Louis Gossett, Jr.

Green Arrow

Chris Hardwick
James Arnold Taylor

Hal Jordan
Green Lantern

Dermot Mulroney
Loren Lester

Zatanna

Julie Brown

Jennifer Hale

Hawkman

Robert Patrick
William Katt

Rex Mason
Metamorpho

Scott Menville
Adam Baldwin

Sinestro

Miguel Ferrer
Xander Berkeley

Solomon Grundy

Kevin Grevioux
Diedrich Bader

Jason Blood
Etrigan

Billy Zane

Dee Bradley Baker

Jonah Hex

Bill McKinney

Phil Morris

Summer Gleeson

Mari Devon

Mayor Hamilton Hill

Lloyd Bochner

Dr. Leslie Thompkins

Diana Muldaur

Bat-Mite

Lou Scheimer

Paul Reubens

Ace the Bat-Hound

Frank Welker

Dee Bradley Baker

Dana Tan

Lauren Tom

Mrs. Mary McGinnis

Teri Garr

Delia & Deidre Dennis

Melissa Joan Hart

tag: table

text:
[hide]

v
t
e

1966–1968 Batman television series

Characters adapted
for the series

Alfred
Batgirl / Barbara Gordon
Batman / Bruce Wayne
Catwoman
Clock King
Commissioner James Gordon
Green Hornet
The Joker
Kato
The Mad Hatter
Mr. Freeze
The Penguin
The Riddler
Robin / Richard "Dick" Grayson

Characters created
for the series

Egghead

Vehicles & gadgetry

Batmobile
Batboat
Batcopter
Batcycle
Batsuit
Bat phone
Batcomputer
Batbelt

In-story locations

Gotham City
Batcave
Wayne Manor
Londinium

Related topics

Shows

Legends of the Superheroes
The New Adventures of Batman
Return to the Batcave: The Misadventures of Adam and Burt
The Green Hornet
The Man from U.N.C.L.E.

Films

Batman
Batman: Return of the Caped Crusaders
Batman vs. Two-Face

Music

"Batman Theme"

Lists

List of Batman television episodes
List of Batman television series cast members
Holy...

Other

Batman '66
Batman XXX: A Porn Parody
Bat Pussy
Batusi

text: Batman listsBatman television seriesLists of actors by crime television seriesLists of actors by science fiction television seriesLists of DC Comics television charactersLists of DC Comics animated television characters

tag: ul


document_title: Grand Army of the Republic

question_text: when was the grand army of the republic formed

text: Grand Army of the Republic

text: History[edit]

text: This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (April 2018) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text: After the end of American Civil War, various state and local organizations were formed for veterans to network and maintain connections with each other. Many of the veterans used their shared experiences as a basis for fellowship. Groups of men began joining together, first for camaraderie and later for political power. Emerging as most influential among the various organizations during the first post-war years was the Grand Army of the Republic, founded on April 6, 1866, on the principles of "Fraternity, Charity and Loyalty," in Decatur, Illinois, by Dr. Benjamin F. Stephenson.

text: The GAR initially grew and prospered as a de facto political arm of the Republican Party during the heated political contests of the Reconstruction Era. The commemoration of Union Army and Navy veterans, black and white, immediately became entwined with partisan politics. The GAR promoted voting rights for Negro veterans, as many white veterans recognized their demonstrated patriotism and sacrifices, providing one of the first racially integrated social/fraternal organizations in America. Black veterans, who enthusiastically embraced the message of equality, shunned black veterans' organizations in preference for racially inclusive and integrated groups. But when the Republican Party's commitment to reform in the South gradually decreased, the GAR's mission became ill-defined and the organization floundered. The GAR almost disappeared in the early 1870s, and many state-centered divisions, named "departments", and local posts ceased to exist.[1]

text: In his General Order No. 11, dated May 5, 1868, first GAR Commander-in-Chief, General John A. Logan declared May 30 to be Memorial Day (also referred to for many years as "Decoration Day"), calling upon the GAR membership to make the May 30 observance an annual occurrence. Although not the first time war graves had been decorated, Logan's order effectively established "Memorial Day" as the day upon which Americans now pay tribute to all their war casualties, missing-in-action, and deceased veterans. As decades passed, similarly inspired commemorations also spread across the South as "Confederate Memorial Day" or "Confederate Decoration Day", usually in April, led by organizations of Southern soldiers in the parallel United Confederate Veterans.[2]

text: In the 1880s, the Union veterans' organization revived under new leadership that provided a platform for renewed growth, by advocating Federal pensions for veterans. As the organization revived, black veterans joined in significant numbers and organized local posts. The national organization, however, failed to press the case for similar pensions for black soldiers. Most black troops never received any pension or remuneration for wounds incurred during their Civil War service.[3]

text: The GAR was organized into "Departments" at the state level and "Posts" at the community level, and military-style uniforms were worn by its members. There were posts in every state in the U.S., and several posts overseas.[3]

text: The pattern of establishing departments and local posts was later used by other American military veterans' organizations, such as the Veterans of Foreign Wars (organized originally for veterans of the Spanish–American War and the Philippine Insurrection) and the later American Legion (for the First World War and later expanded to include subsequent World War II, Korean, Vietnam and Middle Eastern wars).

text: The G.A.R.'s political power grew during the latter part of the 19th century, and it helped elect several United States presidents, beginning with the 18th, Ulysses S. Grant, and ending with the 25th, William McKinley. Five Civil War veterans and members (Grant, Rutherford B. Hayes, James A. Garfield, Benjamin Harrison, and McKinley) were elected President of the United States; all were Republicans. (The sole post-war Democratic president was Grover Cleveland, the 22nd and 24th chief executive.) For a time, candidates could not get Republican presidential or congressional nominations without the endorsement of the GAR veterans voting bloc.

text: With membership strictly limited to "veterans of the late unpleasantness," the GAR encouraged the formation of Allied Orders to aid them in various works. Numerous male organizations jousted for the backing of the GAR, and the political battles became quite severe until the GAR finally endorsed the Sons of Union Veterans of the Civil War as its heir.

text: Women members[edit]

text: Although an overwhelmingly male organization, the GAR is known to have had at least two women who were members.

text: The first female known to be admitted to the GAR was Kady Brownell, who served in the Union Army with her husband Robert, a private in the 1st Rhode Island Infantry at the First Battle of Bull Run in Virginia and with the 5th Rhode Island Infantry at the Battle of New Berne in North Carolina.  Kady was admitted as a member in 1870 to Elias Howe Jr. Post #3, in Bridgeport, Connecticut.  The GAR insignia is engraved on her gravestone in the North Burial Ground in Providence, Rhode Island.[4]

text: In 1897 the GAR admitted Sarah Emma Edmonds, who served in the 2nd Michigan Infantry as a disguised man named Franklin Thompson from May 1861 until April 1863. In 1882, she collected affidavits from former comrades in an effort to petition for a veteran's pension which she received in July 1884. Edmonds was only a member for a brief period as she died September 5, 1898; however she was given a funeral with military honors when she was reburied in Houston in 1901.[5]

text: It is possible that other women were members of the GAR as well.

text:
Kady Brownwell

Sarah Emma Edmonds

text: Later years[edit]

text: The GAR reached its largest enrollment in 1890, with 490,000 members. It held an annual "National Encampment" every year from 1866 to 1949. At that final encampment in Indianapolis, Indiana, the few surviving members voted to retain the existing officers in place until the organization's dissolution; Theodore Penland of Oregon, the GAR's Commander at the time, was therefore its last. In 1956, after the death of the last member, Albert Woolson, the GAR was formally dissolved.[1]

text: Memorials, honors and commemorations[edit]

text: There are physical memorials to the Grand Army of the Republic in numerous communities throughout the United States.

text: U.S. Route 6 is known as the Grand Army of the Republic Highway for its entire length.[6]

text: The Commemoration of the American Civil War on postage stamps began during the conflict by both sides. In 1948, the Grand Army of the Republic was commemorated on a stamp.[7] In 1951, the U.S. Postal Service printed a virtually identical stamp for the final reunion of the United Confederate Veterans.[8]

text: State posts[edit]

text: Every state (even those of the former Confederacy) fell within a GAR "Department," and within these Departments were the "Posts" (forerunners of modern American Legion Halls or VFW Halls). The posts were made up of local veterans, many of whom participated in local civic events. As the posts were formed, they were assign to the home Department of the National Commander-in-chief of the year that they were chartered. There was no GAR post in London, but there was a Civil War Veterans Association Group that had many GAR members belonging to it.

text:
As Civil War veterans died or were no longer able to participate in GAR activities, posts consolidated or were disbanded.[9] Posts were assigned a sequential number based on their admission into the state's GAR organization, and most posts held informal names which honored comrades, battles, or commanders; it was not uncommon to have more than one post in a state honoring the same individual (such as Abraham Lincoln) and posts often changed their informal designation by vote of the local membership.
See:

text:
List of Grand Army of the Republic Posts in Kansas
List of Grand Army of the Republic Posts in Kentucky

text: In popular culture[edit]

text: John Steinbeck's East of Eden features several references to the Grand Army of the Republic. Despite having very little actual battle experience during his brief military career, cut short by the loss of his leg, Adam Trask's father Cyrus joins the GAR and assumes the stature of "a great man" through his involvement with the organization. At the height of the GAR's influence in Washington, he brags to his son:

text: I wonder if you know how much influence I really have. I can throw the Grand Army at any candidate like a sock. Even the President likes to know what I think about public matters. I can get senators defeated and I can pick appointments like apples. I can make men and I can destroy men. Do you know that?

text: Later in the book, references are made to the graves of GAR members in California in order to emphasize the passage of time.[10]

text: Sinclair Lewis also refers to the GAR in his acclaimed novel Main Street[11] and in his novel It Can't Happen Here,[12] as does Charles Portis's classic novel, True Grit,[13] the GAR is briefly mentioned in William Faulkner's novel, The Sound and the Fury.[14] and Willa Cather's short story The Sculptor's Funeral briefly references the GAR.[15]

text: The GAR is mentioned in the seldom-sung second verse of the patriotic song You're a Grand Old Flag.[16]

text: The GAR is referenced in John McCrae's poem He Is There! which was set to music in 1917 by Charles Ives as part of his cycle Three Songs of the War.[17]

text: In Ward Moore's 1953 alternate history novel Bring the Jubilee, the Confederates won the Civil War and became a major world power while the rump United States was reduced to an impoverished dependence. The Grand Army of the Republic is the name of a nationalistic organization working to restore the United States to its former glory through acts of sabotage and terrorism.[18]

text: Notable commanders-in-chief[edit]

text:
Benjamin F. Stephenson, 1866

John Alexander Logan, 1868

Ambrose Burnside, 1871

John Frederick Hartranft, 1877

Paul Vandervoort, 1882

John S. Kountz, 1884

John Peter Shindel Gobin, 1897

Wilmon W. Blackmar, 1904


document_title: Marvel vs. Capcom: Infinite

question_text: when does sigma come out marvel vs capcom

text: Marvel vs. Capcom: Infinite

text: Gameplay[edit]

text: Like its predecessors, Marvel vs. Capcom: Infinite is a 2D fighting game in which players compete against each other in tag team combat using characters from both the Marvel Comics and Capcom universes.[1] Players must knock out the opposing team by repeatedly attacking the opponent and draining their health bar.[2] Infinite features two-on-two partner battles, similar to Marvel vs. Capcom: Clash of Super Heroes and earlier installments in the franchise.[3][4] Unlike past entries, the game does not allow players to use traditional call-in assist attacks from off-screen characters; instead, Infinite utilizes a "free-form" tag system, known as "Active Switch", which shares similarities with Marvel vs. Capcom 3's "Team Aerial Combo" system and Street Fighter X Tekken's "Switch Cancel" system.[4][5][6] Players can immediately switch between their team members at any point, even while mid-air or during attack animations.[4][5][7] This provides players with the abilities to create their own offensive or defensive assists through the tag system and form continuous combos between their two characters.[6][8] Alternatively, players can sacrifice meter from their Hyper Combo Gauge to perform the newly introduced "Counter Switch" mechanic, which tags in their partner character while the opponent is attacking them, providing the opportunity to counterattack and free the character trapped in the enemy's combo.[1][9] The game also features several playable stages that combine notable locations from Marvel and Capcom franchises, such as Valkanda, a fusion of Val Habar and Wakanda, and XGard, a fusion of Abel City and Asgard.[10]

text: Infinite moves away from the button layout previously used in Marvel vs. Capcom 3, and instead employs a control scheme more similar to Marvel vs. Capcom 2, which includes four attack buttons, consisting of two pairs of light and heavy punches and kicks, and two additional buttons used for swapping characters and activating Infinity Stone powers.[11] To improve accessibility, the game includes an "auto-combo" system which allows players to repeatedly press the light punch button to automatically perform both ground and air combos.[9] In addition, certain Hyper Combos can now be activated by simply pressing the two heavy attack buttons, as opposed to the specific joystick and button combinations required in previous titles.[12]

text: Infinite also implements the Infinity Stones as a gameplay mechanic, similar to Marvel Super Heroes, where each stone grants unique abilities.[4] Before the match begins, each player selects one of the six Infinity Stones – Power, Space, Time, Reality, Mind, and Soul – which bestows one ability that can be activated at any time, known as the "Infinity Surge".[5][9] For example, the Power Stone produces a knockback effect when used, while the Space Stone pulls an opponent closer to the player character.[1] A second, stronger ability called the "Infinity Storm" can be activated after a player fills their Infinity meter at least halfway, giving them a significant boost for a limited time, similar to the X-Factor system from Marvel vs. Capcom 3.[1] The boost is determined by the chosen Infinity Stone; for example, the Power Stone increases the user's damage output and combo ability, while the Space Stone traps an opponent within a confined area that severely limits their movement.[1][5]

text: The game offers various offline and online single-player and multiplayer game modes.[13] The offline features include Story Mode, a two-hour cinematic story campaign; Arcade Mode, a classic arcade game experience where players fight against several AI-controlled opponents before confronting the final boss characters Ultron Sigma and Ultron Omega; Mission Mode, where players can complete tutorial missions and character-specific challenges; Training Mode, where players can practice their fighting abilities and adjust various training field parameters; Versus Player 2, where two players can battle against each other locally; Versus CPU, where players can battle solo against an AI-controlled opponent; and Collection Mode, where extras unlocked through gameplay are stored, including story cutscenes, character and stage information, concept artwork, and audio tracks.[13][14] Online multiplayer includes ranked and casual matches, global leaderboards, replays, and eight-player lobbies with spectating.[3][13] The online mode also introduces the Beginners League, a special league designated for low-ranking players to compete for graduation into higher ranks.[13][15]

text: Playable characters[edit]

text: Marvel vs. Capcom: Infinite features a base roster of 30 playable characters, consisting of both new and returning heroes and villains in the Marvel vs. Capcom series.[16][17] Additional characters will also be released post-launch as downloadable content (DLC).[18] According to Producer Mike Evans and Associate Producer Peter Rosas, the development team examined the strengths and weaknesses of each returning character and adjusted them by providing new moves and abilities, hoping to make every fighter viable.[11][19] In terms of roster selection, characters were chosen based on two aspects: their potential interactions within the story and their gameplay style.[19] The developers sought to include a variety of different character archetypes, from small, nimble characters, such as Strider Hiryu, to large, brawler-type characters, such as the Hulk.[19] The Marvel characters' designs were proposed by Capcom's research and development team in Japan, who took inspiration from both the characters' comic book and film appearances.[20] Marvel staff members worked closely with the team, providing feedback to maintain the authenticity of their characters' portrayals.[19] While speaking at E3 2017, Evans explained how they picked the roster based on which characters Marvel was currently pushing or planning to push in the future.[21][22]

text: New characters to the franchise are listed below in bold.

text:
Marvel characters[23]
Capcom characters[23]

Black Panther§
Black Widow§
Captain America
Captain Marvel
Doctor Strange
Dormammu
Gamora
Ghost Rider
Hawkeye
Hulk

Iron Man
Nova
Rocket Raccoon
Spider-Man
Thanos
Thor
Ultron
Venom§
Winter Soldier§

Arthur
Chris Redfield
Chun-Li
Dante
Firebrand
Frank West
Jedah Dohma
Mike Haggar
Morrigan Aensland

Monster Hunter§
Nemesis
Nathan Spencer
Ryu
Sigma§
Strider Hiryu
X
Zero

text: ^§ : Available as downloadable content.

text: Story[edit]

text: Death is visited by Jedah Dohma, who proposes an alliance to achieve equilibrium between life and death on both their worlds. Needing the six Infinity Stones to do so, Death deceives Thanos and Ultron into aiding her, granting Thanos the Space Stone and sending Ultron to retrieve the Reality Stone from Abel City. Sigma intercepts Ultron, and the two forge an alliance. They betray the others and use the Space and Reality Stones to merge the two dimensions and fuse themselves into a single being named "Ultron Sigma". To wipe out biological life, they begin unleashing an evolved form of the Sigma Virus that turns organic creatures to synthetic beings under their control. An alliance of heroes from both worlds is formed, and they rescue Thanos from imprisonment. They secure him in a containment field at Avengers Tower, but Thor becomes infected and escapes. To gain their trust, Thanos reveals the locations of the remaining four Infinity Stones, and teams of heroes are dispatched to find them.

text: In Valkanda, Ryu and Hulk are captured by Black Panther and Monster Hunter, but are interrupted by Captain America and Chun-Li's arrival. Panther refuses to surrender the Time Stone, but Ultron Sigma's drones arrive and spread the virus, infecting a Dah'ren Mohran. Ryu and Hulk defeat the creature, and Panther agrees to give them the Stone. Dante, Arthur and Doctor Strange travel to the Dark Kingdom, where Ghost Rider and Morrigan Aensland are pursuing a soul-stealing thief. Morrigan leads them to Jedah, who is using the Soul Stone to feed souls to a Symbiote creature, hoping to use it against Ultron Sigma. The heroes battle Dormammu and Firebrand, but Jedah escapes with the Stone.

text: Chris Redfield and Spider-Man infiltrate an A.I.M.brella facility. They run into Frank West, who is performing his own investigation, and discover M.O.D.O.K. turning people into bio-organic weapons at Jedah's demand. The heroes free Mike Haggar from containment and defeat M.O.D.O.K.'s enforcer, Nemesis. They take the Mind Stone, but are attacked by Jedah and his Symbiote. On Knowmoon, Captain Marvel, Rocket Raccoon, Gamora, Nova, Strider Hiryu and X defeat Grandmaster Meio and rescue Zero from his control. Upon taking the Power Stone, the station ejects its core, which falls towards New Metro City carrying a massive Sigma Virus payload.

text: While Doctor Light, Iron Man, Spencer and Hawkeye build a weapon to harness the Infinity Stones, Ultron Sigma attacks Avengers Tower. In the carnage, Thanos is released and attacks Ultron Sigma, cracking the Reality Stone and forcing him to retreat. As Chris’s team is pursued by the Symbiote, the heroes return to repel it. They use their Stones to destroy the Symbiote and the falling core, but are infected in the process. With hours left until they are turned, the heroes head for Xgard. While one group distracts Ultron Sigma, the rest infiltrate Sigma’s laboratory to finish their weapon, the Infinity Buster. When Thanos learns of Death and Jedah’s partnership, he becomes enraged and betrays the heroes, creating a mechanized gauntlet that absorbs Ryu’s Satsui no Hadō before departing. Dante returns to the Dark Kingdom and reclaims the Soul Stone from Jedah. He arrives in Xgard and pretends to surrender the Stone, but because they have no souls, Ultron Sigma is overwhelmed by the Stone and transformed into Ultron Omega. The Soul Stone purges the Sigma Virus within Thor, returning him to normal. The others appear and install the Infinity Buster into X, who uses it to destroy Ultron Omega.

text: In the aftermath, the virus is neutralized, but since the Reality Stone was cracked, the universes cannot be separated again. The heroes agree to protect the new world and split the Infinity Stones between them to keep them safe. In a post-credits scene, Jedah tells Death that he has another plan, but Thanos arrives seeking vengeance against them. Believing the Satsui no Hadō is capable of killing Death, he attacks them with a Hadouken.

text: Development[edit]

text: Following the release of Ultimate Marvel vs. Capcom 3 for the PlayStation Vita in 2012, Marvel's new parent company, The Walt Disney Company, which acquired Marvel in 2009, chose not to renew their licensing deal with Capcom, instead opting to move its viable properties towards their self-published game titles, such as the Disney Infinity series; this resulted in Ultimate Marvel vs. Capcom 3, Marvel vs. Capcom 2: New Age of Heroes and Marvel vs. Capcom Origins being removed from the Xbox Live Arcade and PlayStation Network in 2013.[24][25] However, in May 2016, Disney announced its decision to discontinue self-publishing efforts and switch over to a licensing-only model, allowing third-party game developers, including Capcom, to negotiate licenses with Marvel once again.[26][27] On December 3, 2016, Marvel vs. Capcom: Infinite was officially unveiled during Sony's PlayStation Experience event; its first gameplay footage debuted on the same day following the conclusion of Capcom Cup 2016.[28][29] Norio Hirose, a programmer who had previously worked on X-Men vs. Street Fighter, Marvel Super Heroes vs. Street Fighter, and Marvel vs. Capcom: Clash of Super Heroes, as well as other Capcom fighting games, such as Project Justice and Capcom vs. SNK: Millennium Fight 2000, serves as Infinite's director.[30][31]

text: Game development involved Capcom Japan, Capcom USA, and Marvel Games.[32] According to Mike Jones, Executive Producer at Marvel Games, Infinite was designed to be a "more elegant and simplified" game which remained as "complex and hardcore" as past Marvel vs. Capcom installments.[33][34] While the developers sought to keep the core elements of the series intact, such as air combos, they also wanted Infinite to push away from its predecessors, resulting in several changes to the series' traditional formula.[9] The decision to change the three-on-three battle system used in Marvel vs. Capcom 2 and 3 was considered for a long time before ultimately settling on two-on-two fights for the sake of accessibility.[5] Producer Evans hoped that introducing a more manageable two-character system would give casual Marvel vs. Capcom fans the ability to play the game without becoming overwhelmed.[9][5] To offset the streamlined character select system and removal of call-in assist attacks, the six Infinity Stones were implemented to provide teams with additional customization options and increase gameplay depth.[5][33] Marvel and Capcom compared the Infinity Stones to the "Groove System" used in Capcom vs. SNK 2.[5] The primary goal with the Infinity Stones was to create a level playing field by acting as a comeback enabler, and allowing players to compensate for their characters' deficiencies and enhance their strong points.[5] According to developers, the inclusion of the Infinity Stones and the theme of "infinite [gameplay] possibilities" influenced their decision to use Marvel vs. Capcom: Infinite as the game's title, rather than Marvel vs. Capcom 4.[35] To further differentiate Infinite, the developers opted to use the Unreal Engine 4 to develop more cinematic and modern visuals, as opposed to the stylized art direction used in Marvel vs. Capcom 3.[9]

text: Beyond appealing to genre and series fans, Capcom sought to target a diverse audience with Infinite and bring in casual players who were fans of Marvel's movies, comic books, and television shows.[36] To this end, the developers wanted to introduce a more robust, cinematic story compared to previous Marvel vs. Capcom titles.[36] Bill Rosemann, Creative Director at Marvel Games, stated that Infinite's increased emphasis on storytelling was influenced by Marvel's story and character-centric approach to their recent projects in games, film, and television; Rosemann and Jones cited Insomniac Games' Spider-Man video game, Telltale Games' Guardians of the Galaxy title, and Marvel's successful Netflix series as examples.[5][34] While speaking at the 2017 D.I.C.E. Summit, Rosemann also explained that Marvel Games would not force its development partners to tie their games into existing storylines throughout Marvel's universes, giving them more freedom to craft their own original stories and create new visions for their characters.[37] Infinite's story mode script was penned by writer Paul Gardner, with oversight from Rosemann and Marvel's gaming division.[21] Gardner first became involved with the project beginning in 2015 and finished writing the script in 2016.[38] Marvel provided feedback to Capcom on the revisions, animations, music, and presentation of the overall story mode experience.[39] Frank Tieri, the lead writer for Marvel vs. Capcom 3, has also confirmed his involvement with Infinite.[4]

text: According to developers, Capcom's struggle with the launch of Street Fighter V influenced several decisions during Infinite's development.[19] The heavy criticism towards Street Fighter V's lack of content prompted Capcom to promise a larger variety of single-player and multiplayer content for Infinite upon release.[33][36] As a result of Street Fighter V's initial online multiplayer server issues, the developers plan to forgo their own servers in favor of dedicated servers by Sony and Microsoft, aiming to provide more stable online play for Infinite.[1] The game does not feature cross-platform play, with Evans citing Capcom's trouble with implementing the Capcom Fighters Network cross-platform structure into Street Fighter V.[19][40] Infinite also does not include any currency systems similar to Street Fighter V's "Fight Money".[19]

text: Release[edit]

text: Marvel vs. Capcom: Infinite was released for the PlayStation 4, Xbox One and Microsoft Windows, on September 19, 2017, in North America and Europe, and September 21, 2017, in Japan.[41][42][43] The game was available in three editions: a standard edition, a Deluxe Edition, and a Collector's Edition.[44] Pre-orders for the standard edition include the Evil Ryu and Warrior Thor alternate in-game costumes.[44] Pre-orders for the Deluxe Edition include the Evil Ryu, Warrior Thor, Gladiator Hulk and Command Mission X alternate costumes, in addition to the "2017 Character Pass".[44] The Collector's Edition, which includes the Deluxe Edition and its pre-order incentives, features four character dioramas of Iron Man, Captain Marvel, Mega Man X and Chun-Li by TriForce, and a case filled with six LED-powered Infinity Stone replicas.[44] The Major Carol Danvers alternate costume was also packaged exclusively with the PlayStation 4 version.[45] A story mode demo was released on June 12, 2017, following Sony's press conference at the Electronic Entertainment Expo.[46]

text: To coincide with the game's release, Capcom announced their first global tournament series for Infinite called Battle for the Stones.[47] In addition to extending special invitations to the Evolution Championship Series' seven Marvel vs. Capcom 3 champions, Capcom selected six community events to act as "Infinity Stone Tournaments".[47] The winner of each event, in addition to qualifying for the Battle for the Stones finals, will receive an Infinity Stone that can be used to gain a unique advantage during the competition.[48] For example, the Space Stone allows its bearer to swap their position within the tournament bracket to face a different opponent.[49] Fellow competitors can steal Infinity Stones by successfully defeating their current owners.[47] Capcom will also hold three regional online tournaments to fill out the remaining bracket spots.[47] The finals will be held in Anaheim, California on December 9–10, 2017, and includes a US$30,000 prize pool.[47][48]

text: Downloadable content[edit]

text: The "2017 Character Pass" includes six DLC fighters: Black Panther, Black Widow, Monster Hunter, Sigma, Venom, and Winter Soldier.[50][51] Black Panther, Monster Hunter, and Sigma were released on October 17, 2017, while the rest will come before the end of 2017.[51][52] Players can also obtain the Superior Spider-Man alternate costume by pre-ordering Spider-Man: Homecoming through the PlayStation 4 and Xbox One online stores before October 24, 2017.[53] On October 17, 2017, Capcom released three themed costume packs, each containing six outfits: the Avenging Army Pack (Iron Man, Hawkeye, Thor, Dante, Spencer, Arthur), the World Warriors Pack (Captain America, Captain Marvel, Hulk, Chris, Ryu, Chun-Li), and the Mystic Masters Pack (Doctor Strange, Dormammu, Ghost Rider, Morrigan, Firebrand, Nemesis).[54] The premium costumes can also be purchased individually or altogether with the "Premium Costume Pass".[54] In addition, the Premium Costume Pass will give players access to alternate costumes for the remainder of the cast, which will be released before the end of 2017.[54]

text: Related media[edit]

text: In February 2017, Hasbro announced a Marvel vs. Capcom: Infinite toy line during their presentation at the American International Toy Fair.[55] In May 2017, Marvel announced a series of Marvel vs. Capcom-themed comic book variant covers, which became available in comic stores throughout August.[56] In September 2017, Marvel revealed a new wave of Funko Pop! collectibles, featuring the playable cast from Infinite in their premium alternate costumes.[57] The collectibles will be released in November 2017.[57]

text: Reception[edit]

text: Pre-release[edit]

text: In pre-release coverage, Infinite's departure from some of the series' long-standing gameplay mechanics, namely three-on-three battles and character assist moves, for the sake of accessibility was met with mixed reception. Suriel Vazquez of Game Informer and Wesley Yin-Poole of Eurogamer stated that Infinite could end up being a divisive game, especially to the hardcore audience, since both mechanics had defined the Marvel vs. Capcom series for nearly two decades.[5][9] The issue was mirrored by IGN's Daniel Krupa, who mentioned that the shifts in the series' formula could lead to a feeling among fans that their game was being "diluted" for newer players.[34] Vazquez and Krupa, however, appreciated the changes, with Vazquez saying that he preferred the series "go for broke", rather than play it safe.[5][34] GamesRadar's David Houghton and Kotaku's Ian Walker gave positive remarks in their impressions of the press preview build, with both praising the development team's attempt to create an accessible environment for newcomers while also pleasing the competitive community.[1][58]

text: Early criticism was directed at Infinite's less stylized art direction. Alex Donaldson of VG247 stated that "the art style just feels off — or at worst, unfinished...as it stands right now the art style is a mistake when compared to Marvel vs. Capcom 3."[40] Sergio Figueroa of Gamereactor and Nick Valdez of Destructoid also expressed disappointment with the visuals, particularly the in-game character models and the HUD.[12][59] Figueroa wrote that "the developers have chosen a simplistic and, in our opinion, insufficiently detailed character design that we think diminishes the fighters' personalities."[12] The release of the story mode demo was also criticized. Polygon's David Cabrera felt the demo was a "squandered opportunity" by Capcom that "actively [hid] the good points of the game and [highlighted] its failings," such as unpolished character models and awkward voice acting, while Game Informer's Ben Reeves thought the demo lacked entertaining moments and failed to showcase Marvel and Capcom's "dream matchups" in any meaningful or creative way.[60][61] Following complaints about the quality of certain character models, particularly on the Capcom side of the roster, the developers announced plans for a day-one patch that would focus on artistic improvements.[62][63]

text: Post-release[edit]

text:
Reception

Aggregate score

Aggregator
Score

Metacritic
77/100 (XONE)[64]
72/100 (PS4)[65]
70/100 (PC)[66]

Review scores

Publication
Score

Destructoid
7.5/10[67]

EGM
7.5/10[68]

Game Informer
8.25/10[70]

GameSpot
8/10[10]

GamesRadar
[71]

Giant Bomb
[69]

IGN
7.7/10[72]

PC Gamer (UK)
74%[73]

Polygon
7.7/10[74]

VideoGamer.com
7/10[75]

VentureBeat
75/100[76]

Metro
8/10[77]

Entertainment Weekly
B+[78]

The Guardian
[79]

text: Marvel vs. Capcom: Infinite was released to reviews ranging from average to generally favorable, according to Metacritic, which provided aggregated scores of 77, 72, and 70 for the Xbox One, PlayStation 4, and Microsoft Windows versions, respectively.[65][64][66]

text: The game received praise for its gameplay, including its changes to the series' traditional tag team system and the addition of the Infinity Stones. GameSpot's Tamoor Hussain complimented the developers for simplifying tagging without sacrificing gameplay depth.[10] He appreciated the game's more open-ended fighting systems, comparing Infinite to "a blank canvas" and its mechanics "as the brushes for painting your unique superhero squad."[10] Polygon's Chelsea Stark and Jeff Ramos also praised the revised core mechanics, saying that the new tag system opened more options for clever combo creation.[74] Similarly, IGN's Darry Huskey was impressed by the game's willingness to "completely [upend] traditions fans have known since X-Men vs. Street Fighter in 1996" by overhauling time-honored game mechanics, such as the assist system.[72] Additionally, Huskey described the decision to replace each team's third character with an Infinity Stone as the "crown jewel" of Infinite's design, claiming that it "works so well, it makes the very idea of a three-character team now seem like old news."[72] Game Informer's Ben Reeves wrote that the streamlined fighting system and the inclusions of automatic combos and simplified super attacks would allow newcomers "to feel right at home."[70] Conversely, The Guardian's Graeme Virtue felt "like something has been lost along the way in the push for slimmed-down accessibility."[79] PC Gamer's Michael Johnson questioned the game's balance, particularly during online play.[73] VideoGamer.com's Alice Bell concluded that "Marvel vs. Capcom: Infinite is, like football, a game of two halves. The actual fighting half, which is arguably the more critical 50% anyway, is fun and exciting. The other half is a bit confusing."[75]

text: Reviewers frequently criticized the game for its presentation. Huskey labeled the character design as "distractingly bad and stiff", and found the orchestral soundtrack to be "forgettable and easily ignored."[10] Stark and Ramos proclaimed that the aesthetics were "the stalest the franchise has ever seen", and compared the user interface to "placeholder graphics that were never changed for the final product."[74] Destructoid's Chris Carter also loathed the visuals, describing the art style as "a crime against humanity."[67] GamesRadar's Sam Prell felt that Infinite's presentation, in comparison to "the flashy cel-shaded art direction and over-the-top tone of Marvel vs. Capcom 3" and "the silky smooth sprites and technical precision of Marvel vs. Capcom 2," made the game fall "hopelessly short...in the shadow of its own pedigree."[71] Entertainment Weekly's Aaron Morales called the realistic art direction "a surprising step in the wrong direction", while GameCentral for Metro faulted the game for its "bland visuals", "drab menus", and "uniformly dull backdrops."[77][78] EGM's Mollie Patterson said "Marvel vs. Capcom: Infinite looks ugly, feels kind of cheap at times, and suffers from a disappointing initial roster."[68]

text: Infinite was also criticized for its playable roster at launch, which was smaller than the previous installment, Ultimate Marvel vs. Capcom 3, and recycled many of its characters. VentureBeat's Mike Minotti expressed his disappointment with the game's smaller selection of fighters, especially compared to its predecessors, and the meager amount of newcomers.[76] Giant Bomb's Ben Pack felt the game's base roster was lacking and found Capcom's choices for characters to be uninspired.[69] GameCentral stated that the roster "smacks of laziness and/or a lack of budget" and suspected that most of the final roster decisions were made by lawyers and marketing people.[77] The omission of characters from the X-Men and Fantastic Four franchises was also chastised by critics, who speculated that the ongoing legal dispute between The Walt Disney Company, Marvel Studios, and 20th Century Fox over their film rights was the main motive behind their exclusion.[72][76][78][80] Prell and Morales both lamented the lack of X-Men characters, given the franchise's significance in establishing the Marvel vs. Capcom series with X-Men vs. Street Fighter.[71][78]

text: Sales[edit]

text: According to their sales plans for the fiscal year ending on March 31, 2018, Capcom expects Marvel vs. Capcom: Infinite to sell two million units worldwide.[81] The game saw poor first-week sales in the United Kingdom, debuting at #12 on the all-formats chart.[82] The PlayStation 4 version peaked at #16 in the individual formats chart, while the Xbox One version failed to reach the Top 40.[83] In Japan, the PlayStation 4 version ranked #8 on the Media Create sales chart after its first week, selling 8,273 copies; the Xbox One version did not make it into the Top 20.[84] This marked a significant drop from the 80,966 units Marvel vs. Capcom 3: Fate of Two Worlds had sold in a similar time period.[84] The game reached #6 in Australia and #7 in New Zealand.[85] It ranked #19 in the United States' PlayStation Store download charts.[86]

text: Notes[edit]

text: Jump up ^ Māberu VS. Kapukon: Infinitto (Japanese: マーベル VS. カプコン：インフィニット)

tag: ol