Does Marvel Publish Too Many Event Books?

Posted by No_Name_ (16193 posts) - - Show Bio

Few things in comics are more evident than the love hate relationship that comic fans have with comic books and publishing companies. For those of us that love Superman, Supergirl and the rest of DC's roster, you may have spent the last few months feeling slightly distraught and apprehensive about the impending changes to the DCU.

New 52 Supergirl re-design

And as much as DC's publicity has tried to quell your fears, the fact that there has been no mention of what will happen to characters like Stephanie Brown (Batgirl) and Wally West (the former Flash) can be a bit disheartening when these are some of your favorite characters. I know how you feel. Recently I wrote an article on Cassandra Cain and why I felt she deserved better treatment in the new DC Universe, instead of being stuck in limbo for the foreseeable future (which, as far as I can tell based on solicits for upcoming comics, is exactly what will happen to our poor Cass). But DC isn't the only company getting flack from it's fans about the state of mainstream comics. Marvel has been getting an earful as well -- and while the argument is different, Marvel fans have been equally as vocal.

== TEASER ==
X-Men teasers

Year after year, month after month, Marvel has released big events that encompass their entire gallery of characters into some sort of life-altering, crazy event. Within the last few weeks, the publisher revealed they were once again gearing up for big Marvel events this fall -- however it would not be just one. Last week we saw the release of the teasers for Marvel's latest X-Men event -- first there was Schism, and after 'schism' was revealed to be caused by a split within the X-Men (Cyclops and Wolverine) and that Schism would break into an array of new books. Not to be outdone by DC's "new 52 number one's," Marvel will be launching an all new X-Men book, Wolverine and the X-Men #1' this October. The publisher will also be relaunching Uncanny X-Men as a #1 issue, and will make vast changes to the rosters of their X-Men books. We posted all the teaser images here which you can see for yourself. But the new X-Men era isn't the only big event Marvel has cooking.

'Shattered Heroes' event teaser

Last week Marvel released teaser images for their all new upcoming event Shattered Heroes which implied that many of the Avengers would be 'broken' following the Fear Itself event, which is due to conclude this fall. When we put the preview images for those teasers up on Comic Vine, I, like many of you, let out a little groan. Yet another event from Marvel comics.We shouldn't be surprised since big events are just the way the Marvel Universe works, but have we had enough already?

The truth is, Marvel has been revolving many of their biggest and most impactful stories around major story arcs since the 1960's. So we should probably be used to reading them by now, right? Not exactly. Since the beginning of 2001, Marvel started publishing at least twice the number of events per year. Prior to that, Marvel was only doing an event per year. Now, events are intertwined and cross over into a plethora of books and tie-ins -- the repercussions of previous events stumble into new events. For example, Fear Itself will result in Shattered Heroes, and if I have to guess, whatever happens in Shattered Heroes will cause Marvel's next big event which will be introduced probably sometime in January.

The Amazing Spider-Man #657

The game changer was probably Marvel's release of House of M and Decimation in 2005, which not only changed everything in the X-Men Universe, but the repercussions of that event can still be seen today (and are still referenced) in books like Avengers Children's Crusade. In 2005, Marvel released three events, House of M, Decimation, and Spider-Man: The Other. Secret War which had begun in 2004 flooded into 2005. In 2007 we saw six events, two of which (Civil War and Annihilation) started at the end of 2006 and went into 2007. In 2010 fans witnessed fifteen major Marvel events, five of which started in 2009 and ended in 2010. Its no wonder fans are complaining about the number of events and event crossovers that we are seeing today -- and personally, I think they have a reason to be complaining. Everything feels like a massive comic book event. No longer do Marvel books read like character driven stories that aren't prompted by some massive life-altering catastrophe. We are seeing more and more of "Is this the end of ______?" and less of the stories that focused on the development and nourishment of individual characters. Sure, sometimes the events that take place can change a character and force them to reflect. Take for example the death of Johnny Storm (Fantastic Four #588) which could be considered a crossover (it crossed into Amazing Spider-Man). In Amazing Spider-Man #657 Peter got to reflect on the life and death of Johnny, one of his closest friends. And as beautiful and poignant as it was, does someone always have to die for characters to appreciate them?

I don't blame the publishers for their decision to make these big events the center of their stories given the proof in numbers which books have the most sales. Books that featured the death of Johnny Storm and Spider-Man in Ultimate Comics: Spider-Man #153 revolved around big events. People want to read the issues where the heroes die this crazy death, but not enough people want to read the stories that are told in-between and focus on the development, evolution and growth of these characters.

Even though the events and event cross-overs draw the biggest numbers, Marvel hasn't yet given up on character driven stories. In fact, I would venture to say that most of my favorite Marvel books out right now are disconnected from big crossover events -- and should probably stay that way. Daredevil, for example, which has been relaunched by Mark Waid is turning out to be an absolutely fantastic title. The book, so far, seems to be self contained, focusing on the return of Matt Murdock to New York City and to his former role as Daredevil. Not only is the story accessible because (so far) the focus has remained solely on Matt's character, but it's fun to read. It's interesting to explore the facets of Matt's character that make him so appealing in the first place.

Daredevil #4

Writer Marjorie Liu has been continuing to deliver a highly entertaining series with the release of X-23. X-23 focuses solely on the character development of X-23 -- even with all of the crazy shake-ups happening in the X-Men universe right now (Schism) X-23 has remained unscathed and has (so far) survived the wrath of the cross-over. It continues to be a book that revolves almost entirely on the different aspects of Laura's character, and how she deals with coming to terms with who and what she is.

As far as team books go, Uncanny X-Force has been almost entirely disconnected from any other cross-over event at Marvel, save for a Fear Itself mini-series which had absolutely nothing to do with the Uncanny X-Force ongoing title by Rick Remender. The story there, while confusing at times for new readers, continues to be totally enthralling. This X-Men team book is god because it has nothing to do with the big events in the Marvel Universe. Only time will tell if the title will remain under the radar and continue to remain separate from the rest of the goings on of the Marvel Universe.

If you have felt like there have been more events and cross-over events at Marvel in the last few years, it's because there have been. But as of right now, it's still good to know that there are still mainstream Marvel books that have not been influenced by these big events, and continue to be books you can go to in order to read a solid character driven story. What do you think of the number of Marvel's big events? Are you more inclined to purchase big event books, or character driven stories?

#1 Posted by TheAvenger802 (297 posts) - - Show Bio

EH sometimes it can feel that way. Dc is kinda up there sometimes to

#2 Posted by CombatSpoon86 (960 posts) - - Show Bio

Marvel has been over doing it with so many events. Personally I'm burned out right now with stuff that change the whole universe. However, I wouldn't mind those self containing events in their own respective book if I was picking it up. Marvel has been overdoing for some time now. But it is true, the sales don't lie and that's how they make the money.

#3 Posted by Enzeru--defunct (2969 posts) - - Show Bio

Yes, there are far too many events in the Marvel universe going on since years and the sad thing is, that they're not getting better.
It's hard to concentrate on your favorite heroes and their fights against villains from their rogue-gallerys, because nowdays everyone is the part of a bigger plan and it simply sucks.
I thought that Chaos War was bad, but Fear Itself is even worse.

#4 Posted by gavinification (83 posts) - - Show Bio

I like the events.

#5 Posted by sethysquare (3965 posts) - - Show Bio
@TheAvenger802: Uhm, DC has Blackest Night in 2009, Brightest Day in 2010 and Flashpoint in 2011, how is that too many? Compared to the current number of events in marvel now which is already 4. Fear Itself, Point one, Spider Island and Schism
#6 Posted by toodiesel (1 posts) - - Show Bio

Marvel's bigger problem is grimdark , and the editors who listen to the sales dept. telling them that's what sells.  Thank Christ Fantastic Four (FF) and Uncanny X-Force are self-contained, otherwise I'd probably not bother reading anything marvel puts out.  I cancelled my Avengers/New Avengers subs because I could care less about Fear Itself and didn't want the tie-in books.  

#7 Posted by TDK_1997 (15975 posts) - - Show Bio


#8 Posted by insheepsclothes (193 posts) - - Show Bio

too many company wide events? sure. but would i mind if these events were contained in select titles affecting a smaller pool of characters? nope, i would quite enjoy that i think. i wonder tho if ppl are really having event-fatigue at marvel or if there just sick of seeing the same main characters everywhere; playing intricate parts in other books that a fan might like and not want touched. also, there are a ton of tie-in books w/ every marvel event and i know thats hard on ppl's pocketbooks/wallets so theres that as well.

#9 Posted by Gambit1024 (10217 posts) - - Show Bio


#10 Posted by waruikumo (364 posts) - - Show Bio

Why sound precede the title of the article. 
Marvel's real problem is it refuses to allow it's characters to grow.  They have all basically been 12 months from the status quo of 1992 since 92. 

#11 Edited by Burnstar1230 (217 posts) - - Show Bio

I don't think it's so much with events as there are titles. I way I see it, making different team books that contain characters that come from a bigger team not only allows some characters to shine, but to bring in new characters that the bigger books don't have the time for. Then with big events like House of M or Infinite Crisis, it's a way to either alter the character or kill a character to either have some kind of impact or basically 'clean out the moth-eaten clothes from the closet to make room for new clothes'. Not everyone can be the Batman, Wolverine, Spider-Man, or Superman of the comic verse.
Are there too many events in the Marvel verse right now? It all depends on what's going to happen, so can't really say yet.

#12 Posted by difficlus (10659 posts) - - Show Bio

Marvel is about event books. Its there good then i don't mind. otherwise its very annoying. 

#13 Posted by Avenging-X-Bolt (14770 posts) - - Show Bio

not just Marvel
#14 Posted by CombatSpoon86 (960 posts) - - Show Bio
@insheepsclothes: Definitely agree with you there. Self contained events in their own titles are fine ( Spider-Island) but event's that have to involve more than 2-3 ongoing titles is just too much for me. 
#15 Posted by joshmightbe (26381 posts) - - Show Bio

I think Marvel should space them out more because this one right after another crap makes them feel less important

#16 Edited by Fantasgasmic (1092 posts) - - Show Bio

Wow, I tried to talk about this just over a week ago in my blog post "On "Events" in Comics, and the State of Comics" which , admittedly, was kinda rambling (as posts made 2am fueled by insomnia and nyquil tend to be). I don't think Marvel is alone in it, but I've skewed more towards DC as I've gotten older, (the characters are more archetypal and less complex sometimes but that's what I look for in escapist fantasy). So for my opinion, I'm gonna try and parse out the clearest most relevant points from my post rather than try and rewrite it.

The big 2 have been doing "Event Comics" and massive crossover storylines about as long as I've been alive (to date myself slightly). In 1984 DC had its first major universe rewriting event comic, Crisis on Infinite Earths, and Marvel had its first massive crossover team up story, Secret Wars. According to Wikipedia's rather lackluster list of Modern Age comic events, DC has only had a year without a major event 9 times, and Marvel only 6. And for the past 27ish years, they've only extended the length and scope of these events, (unnecessary) tie-ins, and frankly, filler.  
I think back to the first major multi-year "events" I read Death of Superman, World Without a Superman/Funeral for a FriendReign of the Supermen, and Return of Superman. It was a huge story compiled in multiple trade paperbacks but it only really focused on the Superman family and only took place within those books. I compare that to Sinestro Corps War, Rage of the Red LanternsAgent Orange, and Blackest Night. Those were primarily a Green Lantern story but by Blackest Night there were sooooo many tie-ins and most of them went nowhere. The next bad sign was that I found it hard to try and determine when the modern event ends. With the earlier Superman story, there is a clear beginning middle and end, not only to each separate arc, but to the whole story; it starts with the arrival of Doomsday, and it ends with the (apparent) destruction of Hank Henshaw. The destruction of Coast City led toEmerald Twilight which led to Zero Hour, but by limiting the tie-ins it seems more like real life events stemming other events, and less like a giant never ending epic. If I recall correctly there was one tie-in with the Justice League when they fought Doomsday, and one Green Lantern tie in when Mongul destroyed Coast City, but the rest took place in Superman, Adventures of Superman, Action Comics, and Superman: Man of Steel. Contrast that to the modern evet. GL's story doesn't really have an end; it keeps going into Brightest Day, and then War of the Green Lanterns, and only really ended a few weeks back when the Guardians kicked out Hal Jordan again. In all that time it primarily took place in Green Lantern, Green Lantern Corps, and Green Lantern: Emerald Warriors, but there were a billion tie-ins in Blackest Night and Brightest Day (just about every major hero had one AND they made Blackest Night and Brightest Day their own event books!). And that is a major problem

So not only do we have pointless filler, and massive events that spill into dozens of books, but we have a constant stream of events. All of which claim to "totally change everything" and be a "game changer" and all that bullsh*t. And, how else does the industry try and drive up sales? Murder. From Cap's death in Civil War, to Johnny Storm's death in the non-event 3 (which was really just a vehicle to launch FF) the idea is that shocking the audience, or  promising  to shock the audience will drive up sales. But there's a problem, it doesn't work (I don't actually  know  if it affects the sales, but i do know it doesn't actually surprise anyone). The reason it doesn't work is because it happens  all the time . They oversaturated the market, and made that their audience jaded. Promising to change everything and threatening to kill off my favorite characters won't make me read your books because I don't believe either of those will actually matter in the long run. In that sense, comics are like sitcoms, eventually everything goes back to the way it was.

[I'd like to see] more one shot stories between events. Current events go from point A to point B in event 1 and from point B to point C in event 2. But the real world doesn't always have such a clear line between cause and effect. Sometimes the repercussions of an event won't be fully felt until years later. I think that this is an idea that some comics writers really know how to do, and can also be seen in anime of all places. The anime example I would use is Cowboy Bebop, there is an overarching story to the series, but it's only told in 5 out of the 26 episodes. The rest of the show develops characters, shows their relationships, has fun wacky adventures, but don't feel like filler. The comics example would be Sandman. There are stand alone stories that play with the characters and there a stories that advance the plot, but none of it feels like filler, and sometimes things that seemed like minor points to a single issue or short term storyline get tied back in later in the arc as a whole.
#17 Posted by ReVamp (23014 posts) - - Show Bio

Marvel publishes too many events. Period. DC publishes less and many times they aren't "events" but instead "crossovers".
#18 Posted by sesquipedalophobe (4963 posts) - - Show Bio

I don't think they have enough event books. I want Hulk to kill Spider-Man while Captain America gives up his shield to the Power Pack, meanwhile Reed Richards cures Doctor Doom of his metal armor because it's haunted by Howard the Duck for some reason. Also, Sentry and Void would be the shared personalities of Franklin Richards, who doesn't actually exist.

#19 Posted by SeanNOLA (75 posts) - - Show Bio

Venom has been pretty good and detached for the first 5 issues as well, but now it's crossing into Spider-Island, so we'll see how long Daredevil can keep his nose clean. 
I just hate how much they try to change my buying habits. I mean, I know that's the idea, but I don't feel like I'm buying more, I think I'm just buying different things that I don't want rather than focusing on the second-tier books that I enjoy. For example: the other week, I walk into my comic book store and pick up Herc #6, Venom #6 and a couple of my other regulars. I started to grab Hawkeye and Mockingbird, which I enjoy  independent of any event, but my friendly neighborhood comic clerk warned me that Herc and Venom aren't going to make much sense without reading Spider-Girl or Spider-Man 667.  I don't want those comics, I don't read those comics, but if I want to understand the comics I do read, I have to follow characters I don't particularly care about.  
I shelved Hawkeye, (because as much as I like Hawkeye, I like keeping up with Herc more) and picked up Spider-Girl. What can I say, I'm on a budget.

#20 Posted by Ulviar (29 posts) - - Show Bio

I totally like most of the Marvel events, but maybe we really need a break. When the writers all the time think about another epic change after which "nothing will ever be the same", they just run out of good ideas. Take Fear Itself, for example. They could make a perfect story of how the heroes meet their worst fears, but instead we get a bunch of guys with hammers. I mean, FI is not bad, but it could be better. That's what I feel most of the time when I read the recent events. Not bad, but could be way better. And if we talk about some ordinary arcs, they're just fine. So maybe Marvel should really concentrate of them for a couple of years before creating "the story even cooler, then Civil War".

#21 Edited by antiterra (175 posts) - - Show Bio

As far as I'm concerned, my favourite books from both DC and Marvel are always the ones disconnected from Big Events. I care very little for Geoff Johns' bombastic, soulless writing or Marvel's latest "things will never be the same again" yawnfest. This is always when company-mandated imperatives ruin every chance of character development.
More and more often, I tend to skip tie-in issues altogether, so I can probably rejoice: I'll be saving a lot of money if Marvel continue their stupid trend of a new Event every other month. I've lost all interest in half of Marvel's books because that fugly Fear Itself is on so many covers these days, so if that's their new business model, yay, more money for other stuff!

DC handled Flashpoint perfectly, IMO: for company-wide events, mini-series should always be the way to go. The readers who are interested in the latest mega-crossover can just buy the minis, while those who are not interested aren't deprived of their regular, beloved series for two or three months in a row. This should really be the rule - but hey, the market has spoken, people love events, so I'm not holding my breath...

#22 Posted by gethere (165 posts) - - Show Bio

I  also think they are over doing and they need to stop. Marvel needs to think about maybe reducing to one comic event per year again because trying to keep up with all these events are in my opinion stupid and annoying. Plus in all honestly they are losing money people are tried of all these events and are not willing to keep paying for all those comics.

#23 Posted by CombatSpoon86 (960 posts) - - Show Bio
@SeanNOLA: Definitely know what your going through there. Luckily I am picking up Spider-Island so now down turn there and reading Cloak and Dagger and Venom. I fell into the Fear Itself trap where I was picking up all my books I decided what the heck. 5 Months ltr, I regret picking up that Fear Itself ugh.
#24 Posted by BKole (563 posts) - - Show Bio

Are these things Events or just Banners to put characters into the whole timeline? 
Us Nerds are desperate to put things into Chronological order and make sense of events in a cohesive Universe. Why is Namor in Avengers when he should be in Hell? How come Strange has his Cloak of Levitation here, but in Fantastic Four hes in a Brown Coat? Why is Wiccans Cape Brown in this issue and Red in the other? 
Honestly, the majority of responses should be "Who gives a toss?" but we do this because we care. Comics are unique in this element, and indeed, these level of fanaticism about bloody timelines. Anyway, Point has migrated. Shattered and Fearless and all these other "Events". Are they simply not banners for individual titles and characters to work under, the way Dark Reign was never an "Event" because it was never Civil War, or Fear Itself. 
Perhaps Shattered, and everything spinning out of Fear Itself is simply PART of Fear Itself, a continuation of that storyline and that arc? Perhaps it is simply a banner to cover the history and workings of these characters, or perhaps it is another Event. Does it matter too much? Isn't every Comic actually an event? We get issues of the New Avengers battling Agamotto, or we get the Hulk fighting Fin Fang Foom? Isn't that as much an event as Civil War or Fear Itself just on a smaller scale? 
Honestly, I don't mind. I don't care. I will buy my comics and I will enjoy them, regardless of what branding or banner or whatever they carry. because they're Comics. Long form story telling without an end. Why bother worrying about it, really?

#25 Posted by DrewVsShark (25 posts) - - Show Bio

I think they may be overdoing it a bit on the events and crossovers. But to be honest, I think they do a decent job keeping the stories on point and splitting the work between so many books and talents definitely allows for a wider scope of storytelling. Fear Itself went a little overboard with all of the extra tie-ins, one-shots and miniseries, but I've thoroughly enjoyed the first few issues of the main steries. I do wish the Iron Man title would get a break from all of the event madness soon because I was really loving the book while it was self-contained last year. Overall, though, I think Marvel does a good job making their event books quality reads. And for me, that's what comics are about. I want to read an exciting story that keeps me entertained. I'm not going to waste my time complaining because the bottom line is, crossovers don't make money. If you want crossovers to be fewer and further between, then buy more comics on a monthly basis.

#26 Posted by Thunderscream (1944 posts) - - Show Bio

I wouldn't mind if there was maybe ONE major event each year.....but it's just one after another after another and I can't freaking afford to keep up. I think the X-Universe should get chopped down to 4 titles instead of 8. Uncanny X-Men, X-Men, X-Factor & X-Factor. It's silly to keep the New Mutants on a team still called the New Mutants. They've grown. Even some of the Gen X'ers have become full fledged X-Men for heaven's sake.
I think it makes sense to have a plan set out for all the titles like Marvel has done......but going so far into the future restricts creative freedom of some of the writers and gives very little room for self contained stories (which are my favorite).

#27 Posted by GBrutality (201 posts) - - Show Bio

goddamn it, thank you. marvel reeeeeally went off the rails in the 2000's (sounds ridiculous to say) with all of these events. some wouldn't even be considered events, just sagas or chronicles or something of that nature but they built them up to be such huge deals that never really amounted to anything. honestly, the lasting ramifications of spider-man: the other has barely been felt ever. events were cooler some time ago, because that's what they were. events that took place very sparingly. if something happens so much in one year, it isn't an event, just a really long monster-of-the-week formula where someone dies (never for long), someone betrays or defects from the team (never for good), a bad guy comes in and gets over-used afterward to the point of nausea, every little thing is meant for shock and awe but it never has that affect, and it just encompasses everything. so much so to the point that if the event is good, then you'll have some obvious clunkers for tie-ins, but it will really strengthen the meat of the tale. however, if the sucks and feels like it's going in circles (anyone else devastatingly bored by fear itself?) then it's just a really awful experience.

#28 Posted by Xenozoic Shaman (422 posts) - - Show Bio

I don't mind events, just not CROSSOVER events.  I despise those.

#29 Posted by Overlander (615 posts) - - Show Bio

I love Marvel, but it seems as though they just do event after event after event because recurring stories aren't dramatic enough. Is that really what comic readers want: Manufactured drama?

#30 Edited by _Zombie_ (10551 posts) - - Show Bio

Yes, there are too many.  While some of them are enjoyable, there are just way too many at once.  And what makes it worse is the insane amount of tie-ins nowadays.  It's gotten to the point where there are so many that are average or below average quality that if I see an event comic, I'm immediately going to forgo it for a limited series like Incarnate or Deadpool Pulp.  If the quality picks up, I'll start buying them again.
#31 Posted by Jonny_Anonymous (41137 posts) - - Show Bio

I hate all these events, I honestly don't see what the attraction is at all and that is why Marvel gets no more of my money.

#32 Posted by RedheadedAtrocitus (6958 posts) - - Show Bio

Character driven stories all the way.  Marvel really just has been doing far too many events in the last ten years. Its ENOUGH ALREADY!  Not only do big events deplete our wallets but they become so intertwined in each other and continuous in the narrative that its almost impossible to find just where the jumping on points can be.  DC is guilty of it too unfortunately.  We need to start focusing on character driven storylines again on a month to month basis.  Maybe have a larger story arc come out every 3 months maybe.  And if they absolutely HAVE to have them, then have Marvel and DC put in big events once every year, but not every few months.  That way we can actually be EXCITED for them when such stories come around, instead of feeling the silly mediocrity every time a new big event comes every 3-4 months.  

#33 Posted by The Devil Tiger (1278 posts) - - Show Bio

My theory ? 
Back in the earlys 2000's, someone in Marvel Officje thinked sales were bad, almost plummeting. So they turned in a new sales strategy : BIG EVENT !  
It force the "few "remaining followers of one series to buy ALL of the book, instead of only sticking to one serie. Turning them into magic cash cow. 
It seems  to work for us. For now. 
But I've already given up Marvel, though I was a fan of X-Men. (Thanks Fraction !! ).  
I'm somewhat suspicious about how long they will keep doing that. Maybe the new generation of reader will get used to it and will compensate for the old guard who will get upset by the lack of focus Marvel series will get : think about it : two big or main event per year. It's meaning that the reader will be busy to stick to the event for most of the year : as big event tends to go for at least between three and six month.
That's pretty much make almost the whole year by now... 
#34 Posted by GrandSymbiote94 (12077 posts) - - Show Bio

F*** it I'm just going to stick to Spider-Island it's the only one I'm interested in right now.

#35 Posted by Elpizo (14 posts) - - Show Bio

I do like some of the big events (I love Dark Reign) but II do think sometimes they should focus on developing characters
#36 Posted by venomoushatred1001 (12360 posts) - - Show Bio

Yeah, this whole "event after event" thing has gone stall.

#37 Posted by Outside_85 (12171 posts) - - Show Bio

Both DC and Marvel are guilty of this, but yes, Marvel is drowning in it more than DC is. (However they were picking up the trend as there had been no interludes between Blackest Night, Brightest Day or Flashpoint. So atleast the reboot's broken the chain.) And Dan did mention one of the reasons were him getting cornered by a host of writers claiming event fatigue amongst other things.
That still sell regardless how sick people say they are of them.

#38 Posted by Vortex13 (12138 posts) - - Show Bio

Very simple answer. Yes, yes they do.

#39 Posted by RedheadedAtrocitus (6958 posts) - - Show Bio
@Outside_85 said:
Both DC and Marvel are guilty of this, but yes, Marvel is drowning in it more than DC is. (However they were picking up the trend as there had been no interludes between Blackest Night, Brightest Day or Flashpoint. So atleast the reboot's broken the chain.) And Dan did mention one of the reasons were him getting cornered by a host of writers claiming event fatigue amongst other things.   That still sell regardless how sick people say they are of them.
Precisely.  They sell.  The answer is if we want them to stop...STOP BUYING THEM. LOL Don't know how much more clear that can be said.
#40 Posted by MyraMyraMyra (300 posts) - - Show Bio

I agree that Marvel publishes Big Events too frequently. Moving seamlessly from one breathtaking, world-shattering, nothing-will-ever-be-the-same-again event to another is bound to exhaust and bore even the most action-hungry reader.  
I'm mostly into X-Men, and I agree that the titles mentioned here - X-23 and Uncanny X-Force - are currently the best books in the franchise for various reasons, one of them being the fact that they include interesting, self-contained storylines and a strong focus on the main character(s). As a casual reader with very little interest in other Marvel characters besides the X-Men, I'd really just rather see more X-Men stories that aren't tied into big crossover events. I dislike crossovers.   

#41 Posted by atomicrobo5 (104 posts) - - Show Bio

Way to many.  It feels like they only want out money (which they do because this is a business) and at times I feel that quality is sacrificed for quantity.  Honestly they if we are lucky give readers a hand full of issues of a series before dragging it back into an event.  It gets to the point where I would rather buy trades than single issues.  That way I get the story all at once.  I would love for them to make a pledge to do a year or more with out huge events.  Or even better if they want to do an event then stop having all the tie in stories.  Another idea would be going back to telling event stories in the Annuals instead of the main books.  You want to tell a giant X-Men event?? Then do it in the Annuals for those books and get it all out at once and then move on.  Same with Avengers and the like.  

#42 Posted by MastaKilla (26 posts) - - Show Bio

 In the early 90's the same atmosphere of too many titles and too many crossovers led to the eventual bankruptcy of the company. You would think this would have taught them a lesson....

#43 Posted by Emperor Gonzo Noir (19148 posts) - - Show Bio

It's more the problem of them doing events so close together.

#44 Posted by Wattup (682 posts) - - Show Bio

Every time I visit, it feels like an event. A happy event. 8 )

#45 Posted by Timandm (3393 posts) - - Show Bio
@MastaKilla said:
 In the early 90's the same atmosphere of too many titles and too many crossovers led to the eventual bankruptcy of the company. You would think this would have taught them a lesson....
I wasn't aware of that.  What happened, exactly?  Was it a case that they were printing too many of these events and not selling enough to cover the cost... or did they simply  lose readers?
#46 Posted by djotaku (935 posts) - - Show Bio

A resounding YES!  This is ridiculous.  15 in one year?!?  We need a return to one or two per year so that we can really focus on them and have time for the characters to relax between events.  I have almost entirely skipped fear itself (except where it's intruded into my books) and the reason is that I'm also following Spider-Island and Schism.  And I don't have infinite money - nor do most others.  So even if FI ends up being like House of M where people are still talking about it in five years, I'll be completely lost because I only have the money for one or two events.  At the very LEAST there should not be more than one major Marvel-wide event per quarter.  
Oh well, until people start voting with their wallets we'll be stuck in this situation because everyone knows that people will say one thing on the internet and do another in real life so companies have learned not to pay any attention to articles like this and the comments within them.

#47 Edited by FalcomAdol (121 posts) - - Show Bio
@waruikumo said:
Marvel's real problem is it refuses to allow it's characters to grow.  They have all basically been 12 months from the status quo of 1992 since 92. 

Agreed. The problem at Marvel these days is that with so many crossovers and events, no one owns the major characters that they are expected to write.
No single person can "own" Spiderman. No single person can "own" Wolverine. Therefore no impactful events can happen in their lives unless they are part of the massive crossovers that the top editors keep lining up. Essentially, unless your book is completely cut-off, or unless your book is being crossed over into by an event, it might as well be out of continuity. The universe continuity is ruining the ability of the individual books to have continuity. How ironic is that?
#48 Posted by primepower53 (6064 posts) - - Show Bio

Usually I'll get one event a year. If I get tired, I stick the the character-driven stories. Moon Knight, Daredevil, Punisher, X Force, X-23, and Dark Wolverine to name a few of my favorites.

#49 Posted by rouder (57 posts) - - Show Bio

Nobody is forcing you to read everything.  If you are a fan of Hulk, why wuold you read Spider-Island or Schizm or Three and so on?
How many series have a tie in arc to ALL events? none? probably

#50 Posted by BransonHuggins (101 posts) - - Show Bio

Simple answer to this question is yes.  Seriously, how many times do we have to hear, "things will never be the same"

This edit will also create new pages on Comic Vine for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Comic Vine users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.