• 50 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Posted by Blackdog2009 (1821 posts) - - Show Bio

Ok to make a fair comparison I'll go ahead with DC. DC is very good at supporting their solo characters. They are not afraid to try out things. It's not all about just spotlighting what's popular in their movie verse . Examples: Katana, Constantine, Vibe, Phantom Stranger, Swamp Thing, Amethyst, Grifter, Pandora (notice they are also very good about pushing female characters), Booster Gold, Blue Beetle and many others. Yet Marvel is very bad in this department. Yeah they do have solo books (Hawkeye, Gambit). But man you know how awesome it would be to see ongoings for the likes of: Doctor Strange, The Vision, Namor, Storm, Spider Woman (and keep Bendis away from her!!!), maybe a western title, a mideaval time period title with The Black Knight, a Paladin ongoing.

Just build, diversify more and think outside the box. Their MAX line is a wasted ground where it should be more like Vertigo. What are your thoughts guys?

#2 Edited by Squares (6614 posts) - - Show Bio

@blackdog2009: I'm sorry...you're saying Marvel isn't diverse because characters you like don't have their own ongoing solo comics? That's just stupid.

#3 Posted by Blackdog2009 (1821 posts) - - Show Bio

@squares: I think Marvel has the potential to make many other characters shine.

#4 Posted by Squares (6614 posts) - - Show Bio
#5 Edited by JediXMan (30630 posts) - - Show Bio
@squares said:

@blackdog2009: I'm sorry...you're saying Marvel isn't diverse because characters you like don't have their own ongoing solo comics? That's just stupid.

This.

Moderator
#6 Posted by LCazT1996 (532 posts) - - Show Bio

@squares said:

@blackdog2009: That doesn't mean the MU has less diversity.

I think he means they don't have a diverse pallet of characters with their own series. They have like 20 Avengers books, 15 X-Men books, and only the main Avengers and X-Men have their own solo books.

#7 Edited by BattheMan008 (309 posts) - - Show Bio

Indestructible Hulk just went medieval...sorta. Also, Marvel is releasing All New Invaders (with Namor.) And who knows? Have you seen all the teasers for upcoming books? Finally, what about She Hulk, Scarlet Spider, Daredevil, Superior Foes, Venom, and X-Force? I would say those are lesser known characters. I can't really understand why you're complaining when Marvel, DC, Vertigo, Image, IDW, Dark Horse, and even BOOM are putting out really great books. If there IS anything to complain about is should be DC make poor editorial decisions.

#8 Posted by Squares (6614 posts) - - Show Bio
#9 Posted by dagmar_merrill (8638 posts) - - Show Bio
#10 Edited by LCazT1996 (532 posts) - - Show Bio

@squares said:

@lcazt1996: So team books means less diversity?

Well when it's Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, Wolverine, and Spider-Man in almost every single one of those books...yes, basically, it means less diversity.

I'm not saying that he's right necessarily, but I would like to see more characters have solo books.

#11 Posted by MisterAnderson (514 posts) - - Show Bio

Are you talking about a lack of genre diversity, like westerns, or racial/ national diversity? I think perhaps you need to research deeper. You'll find that Marvel has a rich history of exploring multiple genres, and while some of those aren't being published as frequently right now, it's because of industry trends not a company thing. Also, Marvel's racial, biracial, and homosexual characters are a lot less disconcerting than they used to be; in the 70s and 80s, African Americans, Asians, and Latinos catered to ridiculous stereotypes, while homosexual characters were just unheard of.

#12 Posted by Squares (6614 posts) - - Show Bio

@squares said:

@lcazt1996: So team books means less diversity?

Well when it's Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, Wolverine, and Spider-Man in almost every single one of those books...yes, basically, it means less diversity.

I'm not saying that he's right necessarily, but I would like to see more characters have solo books.

Characters get solo books fairly frequently, but they often don't sell well. DC (to my knowledge) tends to release roughly the same amount of solo titles, but doesn't state how many issues of those titles will be released- the benefit of limited-run titles is that you know exactly how many you can expect, whereas unlimited runs can be cancelled at any time, practically without warning.

#13 Posted by Squares (6614 posts) - - Show Bio

@lcazt1996: Deadpool has a solo book..

Deadpool is one of the most lucrative characters in the MU right now, of course he has a solo book. At one point he had two or three.

#14 Posted by Wolverine08 (42355 posts) - - Show Bio

LOL.

#15 Posted by SC (13119 posts) - - Show Bio

When talking about comic companies such as DC and Marvel we are talking about hundreds of writers and artists, thousands if are including companies histories, thousands of characters, dozens and dozens of ongoing books, that cover different teams and solo characters and genres and a bunch of other variables I can't care to go in to. We also have to factor in money. That and how we create a criteria, define it and measure it comparatively as far as entities and the like go.

DC and Marvel don't really micromanage to the extent and context I think you assert. If Marvel and DC are doing something its got nothing to do with what they fear or are willing to risk creatively, or about one pandering by taking advantage of its cross medium successes, or one being more experimental, its all really about how they can most effectively make money both short term and long term whilst ensuring the means to grow as a company/not lose ground which in very simple terms means making the most of their creative talents and creative and intellectual properties (characters and so on) and they have different ideas on how to do that. Giving a character a solo book is not a good way to use a character if they might be better off in a team book. Both companies have won various awards for how they use minorities. Both seem to have periods where some numbers seem to hint at something (like how a few months ago Marvel had way more female creators) but most of that is superficial stuff that gets used in silly Marvel vs DC arguments. Bluewater comics uses a ton of females in their books, should they be praised for that? Basically to draw any genuinely well made points about how female characters for example are used one has to establish a rigid and objective criteria, and thats hard as far as fictional and subjective elements.

Emma Frost at various points has been at the forefront of X-Men comics, but for many her characterization was so poor to many this was more of a negative. Earth 2 for a while had Powergirl and Huntress in it, but was received as negatively. So it should never be simply about what characters have solos or appear a lot, its far more nuanced than that and we have to be careful how we judge companies that main goal is to make money about what they are good and bad at. Especially forgetting that fellow fans play a part here as well, many amazing and excellent solo and team books by both companies, but fans didn't support them so they were cancelled. X-23 had a great series for example, but didn't sell as well as hoped so was cancelled. Book was quality, some fans supported it but not enough, and thats how that essentially works. Marvel putting out a solo book for a character means using up a writer and an artist and other creative talent that could be working somewhere else. So they have to think wisely before committing talent there for a book that might only last 8 issues. Should Marvel and DC do that just so they can brag about having more temporary solo titles with female, black Asian bisexuals?! This would not only hurt those characters that get the series but other characters and books and their creative talent and us the fans and customers. Bad bad business and creative practices.

Personally I'd love all the books mentioned in OP and the nature of the comics industry is that at some point we may get them and more, but I don't want these books to come about for bragging rights nor as attempts to superficially insert diversity into comics at the expense of hurting characters, creative talents and us the fans. I have nothing against team books either which generally tend to be a great place where diversity excels because it combines a lot of characters that appeal to a lot of different fans strengthening sales. Team books also help build characters to a point where solo series may be a more likely prospect but even with that there are other factors that need to be taken into consideration. Nice thread, nice questions.

Moderator
#16 Posted by LCazT1996 (532 posts) - - Show Bio

@squares said:
@lcazt1996 said:

@squares said:

@lcazt1996: So team books means less diversity?

Well when it's Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, Wolverine, and Spider-Man in almost every single one of those books...yes, basically, it means less diversity.

I'm not saying that he's right necessarily, but I would like to see more characters have solo books.

Characters get solo books fairly frequently, but they often don't sell well. DC (to my knowledge) tends to release roughly the same amount of solo titles, but doesn't state how many issues of those titles will be released- the benefit of limited-run titles is that you know exactly how many you can expect, whereas unlimited runs can be cancelled at any time, practically without warning.

I would disagree. But Marvel has more "big time" team books than DC does. Who would you consider a big time team at DC? the Justice League. Maybe the Teen Titans and JSA. So of those three teams, there are five total books. There are currently 9 Avengers titles...10 if you count the Ultimates. 7 or 8 X-Men books, without counting Deadpool and the two Wolverine ongoings (if you want to count those). So besides those two teams, let's see what books they're publishing: 24. And quite a few of those are team books (Fearless Defenders, Thunderbolts, etc.)

DC has: Justice League, Justice League of America, and Justice League Dark. Three books for their big team. Every other team book has one book each. Granted, Batman probably has five solo books. So that's unfair. But even so, it's much less than Marvel when it comes to how many books an individual character has.

43-non Justice League books at DC, 24 non-Avengers/X-Men books at Marvel. That's the difference I see. That's all. I'm not saying it's right or wrong. I'm just saying what I have noticed.

#17 Posted by Blackdog2009 (1821 posts) - - Show Bio

@misteranderson: genre diversity. And I know that Marvel used to be good in this regard many many years ago. can you imagine a Doctor Strange ongoing? It would open the door for us to see the 'magic' aspect of the Marvel universe. No mutants, no Avengers, but something NEW, magical bad guys, places, different supporting characters, different threats, situations and basically just another side of the Marvel universe we don't get to see. This is how new characters branch out. To be fair it looks like they're going to try soon. I heard a new She Hulk ongoing is coming. That's a good thing.

#18 Posted by PeppeyHare (4310 posts) - - Show Bio

Looooooool

#19 Posted by Supreme_Maj (291 posts) - - Show Bio

@sc: said

When talking about comic companies such as DC and Marvel we are talking about hundreds of writers and artists, thousands if are including companies histories, thousands of characters, dozens and dozens of ongoing books, that cover different teams and solo characters and genres and a bunch of other variables I can't care to go in to. We also have to factor in money. That and how we create a criteria, define it and measure it comparatively as far as entities and the like go.

DC and Marvel don't really micromanage to the extent and context I think you assert. If Marvel and DC are doing something its got nothing to do with what they fear or are willing to risk creatively, or about one pandering by taking advantage of its cross medium successes, or one being more experimental, its all really about how they can most effectively make money both short term and long term whilst ensuring the means to grow as a company/not lose ground which in very simple terms means making the most of their creative talents and creative and intellectual properties (characters and so on) and they have different ideas on how to do that. Giving a character a solo book is not a good way to use a character if they might be better off in a team book. Both companies have won various awards for how they use minorities. Both seem to have periods where some numbers seem to hint at something (like how a few months ago Marvel had way more female creators) but most of that is superficial stuff that gets used in silly Marvel vs DC arguments. Bluewater comics uses a ton of females in their books, should they be praised for that? Basically to draw any genuinely well made points about how female characters for example are used one has to establish a rigid and objective criteria, and thats hard as far as fictional and subjective elements.

Emma Frost at various points has been at the forefront of X-Men comics, but for many her characterization was so poor to many this was more of a negative. Earth 2 for a while had Powergirl and Huntress in it, but was received as negatively. So it should never be simply about what characters have solos or appear a lot, its far more nuanced than that and we have to be careful how we judge companies that main goal is to make money about what they are good and bad at. Especially forgetting that fellow fans play a part here as well, many amazing and excellent solo and team books by both companies, but fans didn't support them so they were cancelled. X-23 had a great series for example, but didn't sell as well as hoped so was cancelled. Book was quality, some fans supported it but not enough, and thats how that essentially works. Marvel putting out a solo book for a character means using up a writer and an artist and other creative talent that could be working somewhere else. So they have to think wisely before committing talent there for a book that might only last 8 issues. Should Marvel and DC do that just so they can brag about having more temporary solo titles with female, black Asian bisexuals?! This would not only hurt those characters that get the series but other characters and books and their creative talent and us the fans and customers. Bad bad business and creative practices.

Personally I'd love all the books mentioned in OP and the nature of the comics industry is that at some point we may get them and more, but I don't want these books to come about for bragging rights nor as attempts to superficially insert diversity into comics at the expense of hurting characters, creative talents and us the fans. I have nothing against team books either which generally tend to be a great place where diversity excels because it combines a lot of characters that appeal to a lot of different fans strengthening sales. Team books also help build characters to a point where solo series may be a more likely prospect but even with that there are other factors that need to be taken into consideration. Nice thread, nice questions.

very good explanation

#20 Edited by cameron83 (7338 posts) - - Show Bio

@sc: As usual,very well said!

@squares said:
@lcazt1996 said:

@squares said:

@lcazt1996: So team books means less diversity?

Well when it's Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, Wolverine, and Spider-Man in almost every single one of those books...yes, basically, it means less diversity.

I'm not saying that he's right necessarily, but I would like to see more characters have solo books.

Characters get solo books fairly frequently, but they often don't sell well. DC (to my knowledge) tends to release roughly the same amount of solo titles, but doesn't state how many issues of those titles will be released- the benefit of limited-run titles is that you know exactly how many you can expect, whereas unlimited runs can be cancelled at any time, practically without warning.

Isn't DC releasing another Justice League book?

I mean,they cancel many other books just to release another Superman or Justice League one.

And for God's sakes,Wonder Woman only has 1 book. And How many does Green Lantern have?

And besides,every time DC or Marvel releases a non-Avengers book or something,it gets cancelled because no one supports it.

And besides,in the next wave,characters like Silver Surfer,Black Widow,Namor (and the other original Marvel characters),She Hulk,etc.....and there were like 20 other teasers in the past week.

So I wouldn't say that it's not really diverse.

Also,well said,squares.

@squares said:

@blackdog2009: I'm sorry...you're saying Marvel isn't diverse because characters you like don't have their own ongoing solo comics? That's just stupid.

lol calm down....although you may be right.

#21 Edited by LCazT1996 (532 posts) - - Show Bio

@sc: As usual,very well said!

@squares said:
@lcazt1996 said:

@squares said:

@lcazt1996: So team books means less diversity?

Well when it's Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, Wolverine, and Spider-Man in almost every single one of those books...yes, basically, it means less diversity.

I'm not saying that he's right necessarily, but I would like to see more characters have solo books.

Characters get solo books fairly frequently, but they often don't sell well. DC (to my knowledge) tends to release roughly the same amount of solo titles, but doesn't state how many issues of those titles will be released- the benefit of limited-run titles is that you know exactly how many you can expect, whereas unlimited runs can be cancelled at any time, practically without warning.

Isn't DC releasing another Justice League book?

I mean,they cancel many other books just to release another Superman or Justice League one.

And for God's sakes,Wonder Woman only has 1 book. And How many does Green Lantern have?

And besides,every time DC or Marvel releases a non-Avengers book or something,it gets cancelled because no one supports it.

And besides,in the next wave,characters like Silver Surfer,Black Widow,Namor (and the other original Marvel characters),She Hulk,etc.....and there were like 20 other teasers in the past week.

So I wouldn't say that it's not really diverse.

Also,well said,squares.

@squares said:

@blackdog2009: I'm sorry...you're saying Marvel isn't diverse because characters you like don't have their own ongoing solo comics? That's just stupid.

lol calm down....although you may be right.

Nope. DC is changing the name of JLA to Justice League of Canada.

Wonder Woman has one book, Hal Jordan has one book, John Stewart and most of the Corps has one book, Kyle has one book, and Guy and the Red Lanterns have one book. It's not just Hal Jordan starring in four books.

And that's not true. Currently Suicide Squad, Stormwatch, Teen Titans, etc. are all books that have nothing to do with Justice League (the first time that any of the non-JL books are tying in with JL book stuff besides Pandora, Phantom Stranger, and Constantine is Suicide Squad, Teen Titans, and I believe Constantine are all tying in with Forever Evil, after almost 25 issues...)

#22 Posted by Squares (6614 posts) - - Show Bio

And that's not true. Currently Suicide Squad, Stormwatch, Teen Titans, etc. are all books that have nothing to do with Justice League (the first time that any of the non-JL books are tying in with JL book stuff besides Pandora, Phantom Stranger, and Constantine is Suicide Squad, Teen Titans, and I believe Constantine are all tying in with Forever Evil, after almost 25 issues...)

Saying the Teen Titans have nothing to do with the Justice League is like saying that the New Mutants have nothing to do with the X-men.

#23 Edited by LCazT1996 (532 posts) - - Show Bio

I'm saying it in the sense that the stories being told in their books don't tie at all to the Justice League stories. Obviously the Titans have to do with the League.

#24 Posted by _Maven_ (58 posts) - - Show Bio

Lol just another thread to bitch about Marvel

#25 Posted by MisterAnderson (514 posts) - - Show Bio

I agree, @_maven_. I think both mainstream Marvel and DC are experiencing a drought of genre diversity. If one wants a comic book story outside of horror or science fiction, they need to look to imprints like Vertigo. To encourage the companies to write the stories you want, create demand. Talk writers and editors up (politely) at conventions and start Fb pages to get western or sci-fi or magic/horror characters the push you want. Bring back "because you demanded it."

#26 Posted by turoksonofstone (13199 posts) - - Show Bio

Marvel has been conscious of diversity and addressed it as far back as the 60s DC first in the 80s and still playing catchup.

#27 Edited by Dernman (15105 posts) - - Show Bio

@turoksonofstone said:

Marvel has been conscious of diversity and addressed it as far back as the 60s DC first in the 80s and still playing catchup.

You do know that the OP isn't talking about racial or gender diversity?

Now not directing this at you when I say this but for whomevers sake when you ask a question about one of the big two stop trying to point the finger at the other like that some how means anything.

#28 Posted by Squares (6614 posts) - - Show Bio

@dernman said:

Now not directing this at you when I say this but for whomevers sake when you ask a question about one of the big two stop trying to point the finger at the other like that some how means anything.

This is a Marvel and DC comparison thread, where else are we supposed to point?

#29 Posted by Dernman (15105 posts) - - Show Bio

@squares said:

@dernman said:

Now not directing this at you when I say this but for whomevers sake when you ask a question about one of the big two stop trying to point the finger at the other like that some how means anything.

This is a Marvel and DC comparison thread, where else are we supposed to point?

Yes you're right. I jumped the gun because I've seen it done every time someone brings up something in one company. Still you could carry on at least some of the sentiment of what I was trying to say in some of the replies. Like a sidestepping of the diversity question to take a swipe at DC's editorial decisions. Though that might be something else.

#30 Posted by PowerHerc (84031 posts) - - Show Bio

Diversity doesn't always mean race, gender, creed, etc.

#31 Edited by Blackdog2009 (1821 posts) - - Show Bio
#32 Posted by HumanRocket (8174 posts) - - Show Bio

Scarlet Spider Man and Venom was marvel trying new things so no marvel isn't afraid to try new things even though they got canceled they did go for something new.

#33 Posted by CheeseSticks (2479 posts) - - Show Bio

@squares said:

Saying the Teen Titans have nothing to do with the Justice League is like saying that the New Mutants have nothing to do with the X-men.

I don't agree with that, every New Mutants are also X-Men because the X-Men are a family. The Teen Titans are not Justice League member, they are in a different team.

#34 Posted by Squares (6614 posts) - - Show Bio

@squares said:

Saying the Teen Titans have nothing to do with the Justice League is like saying that the New Mutants have nothing to do with the X-men.

I don't agree with that, every New Mutants are also X-Men because the X-Men are a family. The Teen Titans are not Justice League member, they are in a different team.

The X-men are not a family, they're a loose association of similar teams. And the New Mutants are not part of the main X-men team, so by your logic they're not X-men.

#35 Edited by CheeseSticks (2479 posts) - - Show Bio

@squares said:

The X-men are not a family, they're a loose association of similar teams. And the New Mutants are not part of the main X-men team, so by your logic they're not X-men.

Yes they are a family. They are all related via being Mutant and that is making them a family. The New Mutants are a part of the X-Men family. Why do you think that they are called the X-Family?

#36 Posted by Squares (6614 posts) - - Show Bio

@squares said:

The X-men are not a family, they're a loose association of similar teams. And the New Mutants are not part of the main X-men team, so by your logic they're not X-men.

Yes they are a family. They are all related via being Mutant and that is making them a family. The New Mutants are a part of the X-Men family. Why do you think that they are called the X-Family?

'Related via being Mutant'? Wow, playing the race card. Most people in the 'X-family' don't even know of one another, the relationships between individuals often don't extend very far outside of specific teams.

They're called the X-family erroneously, and because it's simpler than saying something stupid like X-character.

#37 Edited by CheeseSticks (2479 posts) - - Show Bio

@squares said:

'Related via being Mutant'? Wow, playing the race card. Most people in the 'X-family' don't even know of one another, the relationships between individuals often don't extend very far outside of specific teams.

They're called the X-family erroneously, and because it's simpler than saying something stupid like X-character.

What? Just stop please, they're called the X-Family because they are acting like a family. They're protecting their kind like brother and sister and they mostly live in the same mansion. Thanks to Schism, this is no longer the case tho.

- Playing the race card? Emmm do you even know the principle of the X-Men? They are X-Men because they have the X gene. The whole concept is to reunite the Mutants...

- ... Another false sentence, here's a picture of a lot of X-Men related to each other:

Is this enough for you to considered them a family like it's supposed to?

#38 Edited by Squares (6614 posts) - - Show Bio

@squares said:

'Related via being Mutant'? Wow, playing the race card. Most people in the 'X-family' don't even know of one another, the relationships between individuals often don't extend very far outside of specific teams.

They're called the X-family erroneously, and because it's simpler than saying something stupid like X-character.

What? Just stop please, they're calle the X-Family because they are acting like a family. They're protecting their kind like brother and sister and they mostly live in the same mansion. Thanks to Schism, this is no longer the case tho.

- Playing the race card? Emmm do you even know the principle of the X-Men? They are X-Men because they have the X gene. The whole concept is to reunite the Mutants...

- ... Another false sentence, here's a picture of a lot of X-Men related to each other:

Is this enough for you to considered them a family like it's supposed to?

You'll notice not all the characters in that picture are from X-men titles, does that make them X-men too?

And yes, I happen to know the principle of the X-men. I've read decades worth of X-stories, it's kind of something you pick up on after a while.

#39 Posted by CheeseSticks (2479 posts) - - Show Bio

@squares said:

You'll notice not all the characters in that picture are from X-men titles, does that make them X-men too?

And yes, I happen to know the principle of the X-men. I've read decades worth of X-stories, it's kind of something you pick up on after a while.

- I didn't make the picture. Stop trying to find something to say, just look at those who have the X-Gene.

- Well, those decades definitely didn't make you understand the concept of this family.

#41 Edited by CheeseSticks (2479 posts) - - Show Bio

@squares said:

I know you didn't make the picture. And I know you don't understand the concept of the X-men.

So being genetically related doesn't make you a family (X-Gene)? Well, if genetics doesn't determine family, i wonder what does.

I'm just gonna stop responding to you.

#42 Edited by Squares (6614 posts) - - Show Bio

@squares said:

I know you didn't make the picture. And I know you don't understand the concept of the X-men.

So being genetically related doesn't make you a family (X-Gene)? Well, if genetics doesn't determine family, i wonder what does.

I'm just gonna stop responding to you.

Wait, my original argument was that the New Mutants are affiliated to the X-men.

Um...okay. Sorry about that.

#43 Posted by CheeseSticks (2479 posts) - - Show Bio

@squares said:

Wait, my original argument was that the New Mutants are affiliated to the X-men.

Um...okay. Sorry about that.

Your argument was that they are affiliated and not part of the actual X-Men

My argument was that they are more than affiliate and they are part of the X-Men family via their genetics. Also, that they are X-Men because of that.

I don't see how repeating your argument make a difference.

I needed to clarify that because it didn't look like you understand it.

#44 Posted by cameron83 (7338 posts) - - Show Bio

@cameron83 said:

@sc: As usual,very well said!

@squares said:
@lcazt1996 said:

@squares said:

@lcazt1996: So team books means less diversity?

Well when it's Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, Wolverine, and Spider-Man in almost every single one of those books...yes, basically, it means less diversity.

I'm not saying that he's right necessarily, but I would like to see more characters have solo books.

Characters get solo books fairly frequently, but they often don't sell well. DC (to my knowledge) tends to release roughly the same amount of solo titles, but doesn't state how many issues of those titles will be released- the benefit of limited-run titles is that you know exactly how many you can expect, whereas unlimited runs can be cancelled at any time, practically without warning.

Isn't DC releasing another Justice League book?

I mean,they cancel many other books just to release another Superman or Justice League one.

And for God's sakes,Wonder Woman only has 1 book. And How many does Green Lantern have?

And besides,every time DC or Marvel releases a non-Avengers book or something,it gets cancelled because no one supports it.

And besides,in the next wave,characters like Silver Surfer,Black Widow,Namor (and the other original Marvel characters),She Hulk,etc.....and there were like 20 other teasers in the past week.

So I wouldn't say that it's not really diverse.

Also,well said,squares.

@squares said:

@blackdog2009: I'm sorry...you're saying Marvel isn't diverse because characters you like don't have their own ongoing solo comics? That's just stupid.

lol calm down....although you may be right.

Nope. DC is changing the name of JLA to Justice League of Canada.

Wonder Woman has one book, Hal Jordan has one book, John Stewart and most of the Corps has one book, Kyle has one book, and Guy and the Red Lanterns have one book. It's not just Hal Jordan starring in four books.

And that's not true. Currently Suicide Squad, Stormwatch, Teen Titans, etc. are all books that have nothing to do with Justice League (the first time that any of the non-JL books are tying in with JL book stuff besides Pandora, Phantom Stranger, and Constantine is Suicide Squad, Teen Titans, and I believe Constantine are all tying in with Forever Evil, after almost 25 issues...)

That's not my point regarding the lanterns thing. My point regarding that was that there are so many GL books,not Hal Jordan. I didn't say anything about Hal.

LOL JLC

And yes. Wonder Woman has 1 book (sadly). In her other appearance she is part of a team book and shares another with Superman.

#45 Posted by GraniteSoldier (7848 posts) - - Show Bio

People want more "lesser" characters to have solo titles. Well Venom does, getting cancelled, Scarlet Spider does, getting cancelled, Red She-Hulk did, got cancelled, Captain Marvel does, suffers from bad sales and probably at risk of getting cancelled.

My point is, Marvel listens and gives plenty of lesser characters books and they don't sell well. All the titles I listed were great titles as well, I didn't mention worse ones like Mobius (no offense if you like Mobius). I'm honestly surprised Deadpool and Hawkeye are doing so well, but those are two examples of lesser knowns succeeding.

#46 Posted by evilvegeta74 (4530 posts) - - Show Bio

Ok to make a fair comparison I'll go ahead with DC. DC is very good at supporting their solo characters. They are not afraid to try out things. It's not all about just spotlighting what's popular in their movie verse . Examples: Katana, Constantine, Vibe, Phantom Stranger, Swamp Thing, Amethyst, Grifter, Pandora (notice they are also very good about pushing female characters), Booster Gold, Blue Beetle and many others. Yet Marvel is very bad in this department. Yeah they do have solo books (Hawkeye, Gambit). But man you know how awesome it would be to see ongoings for the likes of: Doctor Strange, The Vision, Namor, Storm, Spider Woman (and keep Bendis away from her!!!), maybe a western title, a mideaval time period title with The Black Knight, a Paladin ongoing.

Just build, diversify more and think outside the box. Their MAX line is a wasted ground where it should be more like Vertigo. What are your thoughts guys?

They have pushed most of the very characters you named in the past. They will eventually be back in their own series sooner or later. It's a cycle!

#47 Posted by MisterAnderson (514 posts) - - Show Bio

@blackdog2009 did specify genre diversity, indicating that he is frustrated with Marvel's lack of storytelling outside of spandex stories, science fiction, and their new take on horror, as opposed to the fantasy stories of bygone days (Dr. Strange). I agree that those stories aren't there, but they are pretty few and far between in DC, as well. Now that you have identified a need, take action to get someone to satisfy it.

#48 Edited by LCazT1996 (532 posts) - - Show Bio

@lcazt1996 said:

@cameron83 said:

@sc: As usual,very well said!

@squares said:
@lcazt1996 said:

@squares said:

@lcazt1996: So team books means less diversity?

Well when it's Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, Wolverine, and Spider-Man in almost every single one of those books...yes, basically, it means less diversity.

I'm not saying that he's right necessarily, but I would like to see more characters have solo books.

Characters get solo books fairly frequently, but they often don't sell well. DC (to my knowledge) tends to release roughly the same amount of solo titles, but doesn't state how many issues of those titles will be released- the benefit of limited-run titles is that you know exactly how many you can expect, whereas unlimited runs can be cancelled at any time, practically without warning.

Isn't DC releasing another Justice League book?

I mean,they cancel many other books just to release another Superman or Justice League one.

And for God's sakes,Wonder Woman only has 1 book. And How many does Green Lantern have?

And besides,every time DC or Marvel releases a non-Avengers book or something,it gets cancelled because no one supports it.

And besides,in the next wave,characters like Silver Surfer,Black Widow,Namor (and the other original Marvel characters),She Hulk,etc.....and there were like 20 other teasers in the past week.

So I wouldn't say that it's not really diverse.

Also,well said,squares.

@squares said:

@blackdog2009: I'm sorry...you're saying Marvel isn't diverse because characters you like don't have their own ongoing solo comics? That's just stupid.

lol calm down....although you may be right.

Nope. DC is changing the name of JLA to Justice League of Canada.

Wonder Woman has one book, Hal Jordan has one book, John Stewart and most of the Corps has one book, Kyle has one book, and Guy and the Red Lanterns have one book. It's not just Hal Jordan starring in four books.

And that's not true. Currently Suicide Squad, Stormwatch, Teen Titans, etc. are all books that have nothing to do with Justice League (the first time that any of the non-JL books are tying in with JL book stuff besides Pandora, Phantom Stranger, and Constantine is Suicide Squad, Teen Titans, and I believe Constantine are all tying in with Forever Evil, after almost 25 issues...)

That's not my point regarding the lanterns thing. My point regarding that was that there are so many GL books,not Hal Jordan. I didn't say anything about Hal.

LOL JLC

And yes. Wonder Woman has 1 book (sadly). In her other appearance she is part of a team book and shares another with Superman.

Right but how many GL's are there overall? 7,202? How many Wonder Women are there? 2 (if you include Wonder Girl). And which is currently more popular and selling better? Green Lantern. (compared to Wonder Woman's solo book)

I love Wonder Woman's solo book and I'm not saying she doesn't deserve to have more than one book (or to at least have a Wonder Girl book or something else that is also related to her). But

#49 Posted by Herokiller12344 (999 posts) - - Show Bio

@jedixman: Stupid. Yes. Legitimate complaint among Comic Book nerds? Also yes.

#50 Edited by cameron83 (7338 posts) - - Show Bio

@cameron83 said:

@lcazt1996 said:

@cameron83 said:

@sc: As usual,very well said!

@squares said:
@lcazt1996 said:

@squares said:

@lcazt1996: So team books means less diversity?

Well when it's Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, Wolverine, and Spider-Man in almost every single one of those books...yes, basically, it means less diversity.

I'm not saying that he's right necessarily, but I would like to see more characters have solo books.

Characters get solo books fairly frequently, but they often don't sell well. DC (to my knowledge) tends to release roughly the same amount of solo titles, but doesn't state how many issues of those titles will be released- the benefit of limited-run titles is that you know exactly how many you can expect, whereas unlimited runs can be cancelled at any time, practically without warning.

Isn't DC releasing another Justice League book?

I mean,they cancel many other books just to release another Superman or Justice League one.

And for God's sakes,Wonder Woman only has 1 book. And How many does Green Lantern have?

And besides,every time DC or Marvel releases a non-Avengers book or something,it gets cancelled because no one supports it.

And besides,in the next wave,characters like Silver Surfer,Black Widow,Namor (and the other original Marvel characters),She Hulk,etc.....and there were like 20 other teasers in the past week.

So I wouldn't say that it's not really diverse.

Also,well said,squares.

@squares said:

@blackdog2009: I'm sorry...you're saying Marvel isn't diverse because characters you like don't have their own ongoing solo comics? That's just stupid.

lol calm down....although you may be right.

Nope. DC is changing the name of JLA to Justice League of Canada.

Wonder Woman has one book, Hal Jordan has one book, John Stewart and most of the Corps has one book, Kyle has one book, and Guy and the Red Lanterns have one book. It's not just Hal Jordan starring in four books.

And that's not true. Currently Suicide Squad, Stormwatch, Teen Titans, etc. are all books that have nothing to do with Justice League (the first time that any of the non-JL books are tying in with JL book stuff besides Pandora, Phantom Stranger, and Constantine is Suicide Squad, Teen Titans, and I believe Constantine are all tying in with Forever Evil, after almost 25 issues...)

That's not my point regarding the lanterns thing. My point regarding that was that there are so many GL books,not Hal Jordan. I didn't say anything about Hal.

LOL JLC

And yes. Wonder Woman has 1 book (sadly). In her other appearance she is part of a team book and shares another with Superman.

Right but how many GL's are there overall? 7,202? How many Wonder Women are there? 2 (if you include Wonder Girl). And which is currently more popular and selling better? Green Lantern. (compared to Wonder Woman's solo book)

I love Wonder Woman's solo book and I'm not saying she doesn't deserve to have more than one book (or to at least have a Wonder Girl book or something else that is also related to her). But

True. As said,Marvel and DC can't just throw out titles just for the sake of having bragging rights of diversity. Especially because it may not sell well. But the fact still remains. There are so many GL titles and Batman and Superman titles,but not very many Wonder Woman titles (especially since the OP made it seem as if DC was super diverse and Marvel isn't diverse as well). And that seems to be something a lot of the fans want (then again,let's hope they would actually support it).