*Membership spots not really limited!
*Membership spots not really limited!
doombug wrote:You really are the george carlin of the outhouse. that's fucking hilarious.
doombug wrote:and yeah, Yoni called it.
guitarsmashley wrote:Great, another #1 with the same creative team more or less continuing a story. Marvel doesn't need to out DC right now DC is doing a good enough a job at screwing themselves 11 months of the year.
Chessack wrote:Man, these guys reboot series more often than a Windows 3.1 computer. (Who is old enough to get that joke?)
This is like the Kelly Sue/Captain Marvel thing. I mean, what is the need to end a series and re-start it when the SAME creative team is staying on it and, presumably, the overall continuity is not being re-started or changed in a major way? "Oh we're going to send Captain Marvel into space now," is a good reason to start a new story arc, but not a new SERIES. I mean come on. They are just milking the #1s now.
At what point are the customers going to wake up, realize this is a scam, and stop rewarding it? Or has that ship sailed long ago? Have Marvel and DC already weeded out the 80% of former comic collectors who detest this kind of gimmick, causing most of them to stop buying comics or move on to indies? Are the only collectors left the people who fall for this shit?
Chris wrote:Could not care less about a number on the cover. Just keep writing good shit.
Arion wrote:The obsession for a new #1 has always been there. DC and Marvel are capitalizing on it.
Actually, it hasn't.
In the pre-Crisis era, very few comics got rebooted, and getting to high numbers of continuous print comics was a badge of honor. There was a sense that Marvel would always be screwed in that department because they started so much later than DC did that they could never catch up. The closest they had was Journey into Mystery, because Thor started on #82 of that series, and they never renumbered it because it was their highest-numbered comic.
Back in the day, the milestones used to be important. Companies would frequently double-size issue 25, 50, 75, 100, 150, 200, 250, etc. Most of the time (though not all), these milestone issues wrapped up major stories. Rom 25 wrapped up the Galador storyline, for example. Thor 350 was originally slated to wrap up the Surtur saga but it got so big that although Simonson double-sized it, he still needed 3 more issues to finish the story. The list goes on and on.
With the reboot mentality, comics rarely reach 50 or 75 anymore, and almost never 100. So are we really sure that just putting another #1 out there on what would have been DareDevil 37, is really going to sell better than if they did a "double sized anniversary 50th issue" a few months later?
The numbers used to mean something. Comics were the only periodical that had sequential numbers like this. Every other periodical goes by volume and issue number, e.g. vol 1, issues 1-12, then the next year is vol. 2, issues 1-12, and so on. The way they are doing things now, they may as well just number them like a regular magazine. That would give them their #1 issue every single year.
But it also means that the numbers mean nothing. Remember, nobody knows "what issue" Discover magazine is on. It's been published for 33 years, 10 issues per year. So this month's Discover is (roughly) #330. But they don't call it that. They call it "the October issue of Discover."
So if comics are going to make numbering irrelevant (which is what all this rebooting is doing) then they may as well go all the way and do it like that.
What they don't realize, and what collectors don't realize, is that what made #1s valuable back in the day was their rarity. When Captain America has 5 #1 issues in a 10-year period, then the #1 issue loses its value. As can be seen from the fact that back-issue prices for these things rarely go up anymore.
Victorian Squid wrote:Marvel does this because they get a ton of publicity and a bunch of people who jump on to try a book out from that hype. If it works, they keep doing it. And it's worked well for them lately.
Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 70 guests