50 Comments
Edited by AllStarSuperman

first! yeah!

I have mixed feeling on 1st issues. yes, even I will admit it is easier mentally to jump on, but lets say New Nightwing just changed to issue 1 when he when to Chicago, that would be stupid. I would have been good with Jeff Lemires Green Arrow starting at number 1, so yeah mixed feeling.

Edited by HushoftheWind

@allstarsuperman: And why is that important again? Can we please act above an elementary level of intellect and actually give some personal thought or opinion on what the video or topic is about.

As far as the number 1 re issuing goes, I personally think its more of a greed factor and as well as getting new readers. Im guessing comic companies are trying to stray away from high comic book numbers ie Amazing Spider-Man 656 b/c readers feel too discouraged to jump in the middle. I just feel bad, i remember the days of having a number 1 issue meant something but now it seems like Marvel and DC crap out another number 1 issue books every season. If its getting new readers then more power too them, i just hope it doesnt mess up character and story content in each universe of characters continuity.

Posted by spinningbirdcake

If I'm already reading it I want it to continue in numbering. If I'm not reading it I like it when it's relaunched, but I don't necessarily need it to be in order to jump in.

Edited by RulerOfThisUniverse

My thoughts: If you're going to continue the plot or make it so that you have to have previous knowledge on the character anyway, there's really no point in renumbering. If it's a relaunch, go ahead. But seriously, marvel keeps randomly renumbering a lot of their books for what seems like no reason (other than easy cash).

Posted by AllStarSuperman

@allstarsuperman: And why is that important again? Can we please act above an elementary level of intellect and actually give some personal thought or opinion on what the video or topic is about.

As far as the number 1 re issuing goes, I personally think its more of a greed factor and as well as getting new readers. Im guessing comic companies are trying to stray away from high comic book numbers ie Amazing Spider-Man 656 b/c readers feel too discouraged to jump in the middle. I just feel bad, i remember the days of having a number 1 issue meant something but now it seems like Marvel and DC crap out another number 1 issue books every season. If its getting new readers then more power too them, i just hope it doesnt mess up character and story content in each universe of characters continuity.

I crossed out your rude parts, because they were pointless.

I actually did, okay?

Edited by Kelevra216

Single issues have got to continue their numberings. DC, I'm okay with because of the universe/timeline reset. So, of course they gotta start from #1 and with every new title will start with #1 but what happens if/when they bring back a cancelled title?

For Marvel, I guess I'm still a little confused about Marvel NOW! because it still continues the story Pre-NOW! I got into Superior Spider-Man and I was like "Wha? Otto? When did this happen? Spider Island 2?" New titles obviously need to start from #1.

But I also think it's the mentality of continuity and the overwhelming history that gets to new readers and it scares them away. We should just advise them: here's the next story arc starting, jump in and just catch up with trades. Jumping on points are very important IMO. We just need to get new readers out of the mentality of "I must read everything before the current issue to understand."

Then there's the other issue of trades. Pre-New 52 and Marvel as well, I was confused and overwhelmed with the amount of trades and where which trade/arc went where. Now, they simplified it: Pick a title/hero, start from vol. 1. Simple.

Edited by ArturoCalaKayVee

I hate that series keep getting relaunched now. I'm one of those die hards who want the numbers to go from single digits to double digits and to triple digits. If they're concerned with getting new readers then should do continue doing those .1 issues or at the start of a new arc have "GREAT JUMPING ON POINT HERE!" in big huge bolded letters so readers will take that into consideration.

Casual readers probably don't read solicitations, so having something on the cover could be a selling point for people.

Just my thoughts. And Btw, G-Man, that was very entertaining to watch, thank you for that.

Edited by TheMantisShrimp

I'm totally fine with relaunching but wish they would clearly label they volumes on the cover. Thanks for your thoughts G-Man, they were hilarious and informative.

@hushofthewind, you angry bro?

Posted by Dabee

@allstarsuperman: Are you going for the first comment on all of these 2 Minute Time-Outs? If I recall, you got the first one too?

Posted by AllStarSuperman

@dabee said:

@allstarsuperman: Are you going for the first comment on all of these 2 Minute Time-Outs? If I recall, you got the first one too?

that's my plan, or at least see how long I can keep it up

Posted by TheManInTheShoe

I just don't see the point in renumbering. I think it's kind of boring to have a number 1 if it's still the same concept as before. For example, what's the point of having Marvel NOW! If they are just going to launch All-New Marvel NOW! a year later?

I love to see these high numberings so that people can actually see how long this has been able to keep going. And if something has been going on for long it usually means that it's good.

Posted by iaconpoint
Edited by timelord

I am having a hard time buying any new titles from the big 2. They ether get canceled or relaunched unless it's a Batman or Justice League book or an Avengers or XMen title as a result I just stick with my current books because I know they will always be around.

Posted by darthfury78

I just don't see the point in renumbering. I think it's kind of boring to have a number 1 if it's still the same concept as before. For example, what's the point of having Marvel NOW! If they are just going to launch All-New Marvel NOW! a year later?

I love to see these high numberings so that people can actually see how long this has been able to keep going. And if something has been going on for long it usually means that it's good.

And the idea of Marvel doing another Captain Marvel #1 with the same writer is quite dumb. Why couldn't they let Kelly Sue take a break and let another writer take over for a story arc. It's very rare to see a series that did not do very well to get another chance. Especially after 17 issues. If Marvel wants new readers, they should simply allow them to by the back issues or the reprints to those series as the constant relaunch is getting old.

Posted by Jonny_Anonymous

I lol'd when g-man started dancing

Online
Posted by Battle_Forum_Junkie

Thus concludes another episode of G-Man's dance minute.

I just don't see the point in renumbering. I think it's kind of boring to have a number 1 if it's still the same concept as before. For example, what's the point of having Marvel NOW! If they are just going to launch All-New Marvel NOW! a year later?

I love to see these high numberings so that people can actually see how long this has been able to keep going. And if something has been going on for long it usually means that it's good.

Like G-Man said, It makes the new reader feel more comfortable picking it up. The concept stays the same so it doesn't completely alienate long-time readers either. It's the perfect move from a business standpoint. Although a high numbering does show that it's survived cancellation it doesn't always mean it's good. :P

Edited by antvent85

I am totally fine with the renumbering. To me, it is like a season of a TV show and I would be interested if they actually planned arcs that way. For example doing 12 issues and taking a brief break. For me this would be great because it would allow me more time to read other series while I am waiting for the next arc to come.

Posted by TheManInTheShoe

@battle_forum_junkie: Well, at the same time (in this case) Marvel says it's the All-New Marvel NOW!, when it's not. It's just the same comic book with the same creative team but with new covers and a renumbering. I can think of a better way for people to feel more comfortable to start to read a comic book, they should create more jumping on points.

Posted by kennybaese

I'm with G-Man, I think that comics should use magazine style number with volume numbers for the year and issue numbers for the month. That way every January (or whatever cycle they want to get on) there can be a new number one, but there's still an extended number scheme for long time readers.

Posted by kilomac29

My only problem with renumbering is that there always seem to involve long delays. For example, Captain Marvel is being renumbered after #17. It came out on 11/6/13, but the new #1 won't be out until February. I'm all for renumbering to lure new readers but why the three month delay? Boo!

Posted by Ashr

Relaunching and rebooting are two completely different and mutually exclusive concepts. The first does little for new readers not already well versed in previous canon, causes no noticeable schedule interruption from the previous volume, and changes little other than the creative team with a fresh coat of renumbering paint. A reboot on the other hand takes a previously established character/team that does not rely on previous storylines and history while still renumbering. Usually reboots are reserved for a shelved character that has been out of circulation for awhile (i.e. Moon Knight, Silver Surfer, Ghost Rider).

Do you consider Superior Spider-Man to be a relaunch of Amazing Spiderman? Reboot? Would a new reader be able to grab Superior Spider-Man #1 and be able to hit the ground running without previous knowledge of Amazing Spiderman storyline that ended with Issue 700? To me it's false advertising to say relaunches are "great jumping-on points" for new readers. They are not, from my perspective.

Posted by kriminal

I do not like the renumbering, but love number ones. I am reluctant to jump into a series in the middle of It. I like when a cross over happens to get me into another series, like omega effect got me reading daredevil and punisher.

but good point about needing new readers to help the comic industry.

Edited by CaptainHoopla

I think it's purely a greed move. I can think of several easy ways to denote good jumping on points on the cover. Number ones sell, they are trying to make money for them and retailers as well. I get that, but does it ultimately work? Readers have budgets, are they dropping some other Marvel book in order to afford the new Marvel book?

Posted by Hawkguy

People have problems catching up to a series 13 issues in? The problem nowadays is that people get scared by the silly number. When I was starting comics, I'd pick up issues hundreds of numbers in and I'd be curious to see what happened before! I'd hunt them down or find collected omnibuses!

This isn't a DC problem, it's a Marvel problem. Look at Wolverine, it just restarted this year and next year... It's restarting again! But guess what! You won't get the full effect without reading the previous killable arc... So wtf? What was the point?

This is a very touchy subject because user friendliness means nothing when anything X-Men or Avengers involves so much history anyway. The Jean Grey school for learning, but Jean Grey is dead, and as most casual fans know (or think they know), Prof X is headmaster and not Wolverine, so they'd be confused anyway!

Action Comics will get the the 900s again, as will Detective Comics, Batman and many other DC series... but Marvel? Yeah not so much.

Posted by Mucklefluga

My thoughts are: I love the dance endings so much.

Edited by Wilbertus

I personally don't like the renumbering. I can still understand the New 52 with the universe being reset and all, but it would be stupid to restart it again in a couple of years. If you are actually interested in a series you will go back and read those trades and not be scared by the fact that they had 13 previous issues ...

I hate that series keep getting relaunched now. I'm one of those die hards who want the numbers to go from single digits to double digits and to triple digits. If they're concerned with getting new readers then should do continue doing those .1 issues or at the start of a new arc have "GREAT JUMPING ON POINT HERE!" in big huge bolded letters so readers will take that into consideration.

My thoughts exactly.

Posted by Extremis

yes I guess it does definitely help new readers out. I think of myself, as I started around the beginning of Marvel NOW! and the New 52. It was a fun time getting started because EVERYTHING was getting started just like me (feels that way to a new reader anyway).

Downside is, for current readers, is that though it provides easy jumping on points, it provides an easy jumping OFF point for books that maybe you would normally see through if you were 20 issues in, but to start over your issue numbers aren't accumulating as it's a new volume.

I don't know. That's my take anyway. Good and bad.

Posted by mattwing87

I was planning to ask this in the podcast but you answered. I too would like to see high numbers but if #1's bring in new readers then I am all for it! I wonder if Peter Parker comes back will they start at Amazing Spider-Man #701 or relaunch it with a new #1 to bring in new Spider-Man readers.

Posted by Ashr

@mattwing87:

I wonder the same thing myself but if they restart Amazing Spiderman at #701 then there's a huge hole in continuity that can only be answered by the current run of Superior Spider-Man. It also makes a convenient reason for Marvel to "relaunch" Amazing Spiderman even though Superior Spider-man is for all intents and purposes just a continuation from issue #700.

Posted by oldnightcrawler

@ashr said:

@mattwing87:

I wonder the same thing myself but if they restart Amazing Spiderman at #701 then there's a huge hole in continuity that can only be answered by the current run of Superior Spider-Man. It also makes a convenient reason for Marvel to "relaunch" Amazing Spiderman even though Superior Spider-man is for all intents and purposes just a continuation from issue #700.

sure, but The Amazing Spider-Man is, for all intents and purposes, just a continuation of Amazing Fantasy #15, yeah?

Edited by dcd747
@hawkguy said:

People have problems catching up to a series 13 issues in? The problem nowadays is that people get scared by the silly number. When I was starting comics, I'd pick up issues hundreds of numbers in and I'd be curious to see what happened before! I'd hunt them down or find collected omnibuses!

Totally agree. When I bought my first issue of Detective Comics (#566), I loved the fact that there was so much history behind the series. I felt like if something had been running that long, it had to be awesome.

Seriously, with university-level courses about comic books around now, why isn't there someone who is doing academic-level research about whether or not the renumbering actually does attract people, instead of just assuming it does?

Posted by sagejonathan

I want comics to reach high number just because its cool, but I am guilty of being attracted to #1 issues. Not to say that I won't read a book unless it's at number 1, but it makes it much more attractive.

Edited by dreamfall31

I came for the thought provoking discussion and stayed for the G-man's funky dancing!

To be honest though, #1's played a part in my reintroduction to comics. I got back into them during DC's #0 issue month and as saw it as a good jumping on point. I have been reading Hawkeye and FF since #1, also Daredevil was easier to jump into as I already liked the character. But a few months later I really realized I didn't need to worry about numbering, mostly just about arcs. I've definately gone back and got the two or so volumes of the DC series I currently get on my pull list. It is cool to get issues to high numbers, but with as bad as the industry has been doing in the past decade I say it's a fine way to get new readers. It will probably help those who are only into the movies transition better into comics if they eventually become curious about this side of the medium.

If anything I think they should make the numbering smaller and not a focal point of the cover, but rather put "Part # of #" along with the arc title. That way people know if its the first part of an arc so they can jump on the story that will last a few issues.

Edited by Ashr

@oldnightcrawler:

I've never read the golden age Amazing Fantasy series but I didn't think it was solely focused on Amazing Spiderman, was it? If it was, then you're 100% correct. If not, Marvel's decision to make a stand-alone title dedicated to Peter Parker made a lot more sense.

Edited by oldnightcrawler

@ashr said:

@oldnightcrawler:

I've never read the golden age Amazing Fantasy series but I didn't think it was solely focused on Amazing Spiderman, was it? If it was, then you're 100% correct. If not, Marvel's decision to make a stand-alone title dedicated to Peter Parker made a lot more sense.

yeah, I'm just saying it's the same thing as giving Dr.Spiderpus his own book instead of giving him Peter's, once he had become the star character.

Posted by clayscarface

I'm more about the creative teams. I like when people get into a book with a clear intention of where they want the story to go. Rick Remender on X-Force, the original team on Batwoman, anyone whose ever done a third party limited comic run. These all turn out to be really good stories that are self contained and not intimidating. When you force people to be on a book and force a book to keep running, it can suffer. I guess I suppord #1 issues if they're allowing for better stories to be told, but if not, there's no point.

Edited by etragedy

It's not about casual readers.

Those of us who jumped on series in the 70s, almost every major comic was in the 100s, and we didn't have any trouble jumping in there.

Then the collector's boom happened, and publishers learned that there was an uptick in sales every time a #1 issue hit the stands based on speculators. It's pretty much the entire reason X-Men #1 was created in the early 90s - to boost sales right before Marvel's IPO happened.

Posted by metakevin

Its not just about new readers jumping on for new stories, its old readers wanting to catch up or branch out and being unable to afford to do so. Its a lot easier to justify starting a subscription at $4 every month than it is $100-200 at a time to catch up with TPBs and such. Not to mention affording the time to catch up, I can only read so many comics in a day!

Edited by Grey56

Hmmm. I have to say I am incredibly happy to see so many people with the same reaction I have had to publishers (particularly Marvel) frequently putting out a new volume (issue 1). In particular - I'd like to say that I heavily agree with points outlined by: @hawkguy, @arturocalakayvee, @mattwing87 ,@dcd747 and even business principles outlined by @clayscarface.

Most of these gentlemen have already made that point in one fashion or another. However it's worth being said that I'm also sure nearly everyone on this particular forum also agrees that the publishers have to make enough money to continue to....well...publish.

I can only imagine the painstaking process which is involved in long-term planning of these character/team properties and all the while keeping the front offices happy with sales (not just books but all periphery media). That said - it's not called work for nothing.

I can see that there are many of you on here whom are like myself in that we are not only readers - but collectors. @etragedy makes an EXCELLENT point about how the industry was completely reshaped by the collecting element/comic boom of the 80's. Bottom line is : these industries can't afford to undercut either the hard core collectors or the young adolescent spending their allowance on their first comic.

Whereas I (and my wife in particular whom catalogs our collection) find it very cumbersome in dealing with a new volume every 3 years - I understand the business need to generate revenue. I gotta be very honest though; DC pulling the plug before Action or Detective reached 1000 nearly rocked me out of my gourd.

I appreciated the nod Detective got with the '900' and the Man-Bat story - but it still doesn't beat the nostalgia of that milestone. But even beyond nostalgia - there's a hearty business module in being able to say 'We've been in business for 100 years'. Warranties pack a consumer wallop. Don't believe me? Check Toyota's sales since introducing their bumper to bumper 20 years ago. What I'm saying is; for DC to be able to make it to issue 1000 of Action would be a wondrous slap in the face of the Marvel's front offices.

Continuity doesn't discourage readers within this industry unto itself. If that were the case, the model would have failed decades ago when there was no such thing as social media or the dozens of hero movies now dazzling a new generation. New volumes aren't in them of themselves a bad thing but where @clayscarface makes a lot of hay is in the point that it is about the creative teams at critical junctures for some books. Batman, Superman, X-Men - people will buy these books no matter the number or color of the cover. Daredevil was a solo book already 100 issues into its publication but suffering in sales when they introduced a guy by the name of Miller. Marvel didn't 'reboot' or 'renumber' Daredevil - they simply gave a new creative team a try. The same was true with titles taken on by Byrne & Cockrum, O'Neil and so on.

As comic consumers whom are dyed in the wool for the hobby; we aren't going anywhere. Marketing tricks of yesteryear didn't necessitate a constant renumbering. As many have mentioned, a lot of the time if simply involved some bold, color letters saying "Great Jumping On Point". Ultimately though, publishers have to make quotas and I certainly understand that. Like most of us on this thread though - I merely wish that the beginning of new volumes was only conducted under very unique and well defined scenarios and not simply during a quarterly sales slump or as a knee jerk reaction to the other publisher doing the same.

I suppose we'll see. In the interim, I'll go back to writing the Marvel front offices nasty-grams about how they've done business over the last 8 years.

Posted by rincewind86

well what i hate the most reagrding this question is that they always erase some of the history which was introduced before. i mean wth "new 52" my ass....oliver queen is a totally new charakter, most of the things going on in the years before just gets ereased or are not of interest anymore....

i really dont like it. yeah ok new reader will be picking up an issue or two but..well i really dont like it.

Posted by Rebecca815

▇ ▅ ▄ ▂ ▇ ▅ ▄ ▂I must give my thanks to Ashley, who posted here last week comment about system she uses to earn online... I've got my FIRST check total of $2550, pretty cool. I am so exicted, this is the first time I actually earned something. I am going to work even harder new and I can't wait for next week payment. You can try it for yourself>>>>>>>>>>>> <b>WWW.BLUE48.COm</b> ▇ ▅ ▄ ▂ ▇ ▅ ▄ ▂