Things that have gone wrong with comics

The price of comics is not a good value - Back when I started collecting comics with cover dates of April 1979, comics were 35 cents a piece. At the time, comics had been going through a lot of price changes already. I can remember looking at my friends comics and comics that were not that old had cover prices of 20, 25 and 30 cents quite regularly. This covered about 5 years the jump from 20 to 35 cents. But even still, at 35 cents a pop, comics seemed like a great value to me.

In 1978 I was 11 and I mowed a lot of lawns and raked many a yard. When I was 12, I had my own paper route. To be honest, in those days of not having a real job and real responsibilities, I was probably living a rich life. I didnt have bills and the money I had was mine to spend. It was nothing for me to have $20 - $100 at all times. Let me say, as an 11 year old kid, having that much money in the 1970s, I could do a lot. And I did. I had a blast. I went to the arcade a lot and spent hours playing the latest pinball machines and ancient video games (yes, they were crude, but they did exist). But lets just take a modest time and say I had $10 - $20. I could literally spend a couple of bucks and come home with a hearty stack of comics and hours of reading material. And still have money left over. Comics were a relative bargain back then. When I think of other things there were to do and how much it cost, nothing really compared to the value of comics.

Flash forward to 2012 and yes, the cost of everything has skyrocketed from that day 34 years ago. Comics has went up nearly constantly ever since then. Gone are the days of comics being a cheap bargain. Comics start out almost entirely at no lower than $4 a shot. And its not too uncommon I see them going for as much as $7 and $8 for a brand new comic. Now the thing that gets me, is comics in relation to other forms of print media.

A comic today is literally around 32 pages of glossy pages complete with about 10 pages of advertisements. The thing that gets me is I can buy some of my favorite Magazines with premium stock paper and glossy photos sporting well over 300 pages in an issue and pay $7 and sometimes less for that amount of print media. If I can get 300+ pages of Magazine quality Magazines that are not only bigger in size, maybe even more entertaining, then why does it cost me a minimum of $4 to get just 32 pages of smaller comics? Where is the value here?

Where as at one point in my life, comics barely made a dent into my budget, comics now have the potential to wreck havoc on my lifestyle if I decide to purchase more than a few comics. And if I purchase the way I did as a youngster who couldnt get enough comics, Im spending what amounts to as some kind of monthly bill that I could be applying towards my well being in my home. Quite literally, comics have just gotten too expensive and its put a lid on kids and adults wanting much to do with them.

In my mind, considering inflation and whats in relation to other forms of print media out there. I think comics should realistically be in the $1.75 to $2.50. To me, this would keep the relationship of how it felt to me buying comics as a youngster and seeing it as a bargain. I think if I could get 4 or more new comics at $10 or less, I would feel much better about it than paying the current price of $15 - $20 on average for the same amount of comics.

Comics need to retain that inexpensive feeling. Its what made them so desirable in the 1st place to me. It was a cheap thrill and the cost of buying one didnt make me feel like I lost something getting it. It felt like good entertainment and a good entertainment at a low price is a great value. Today comics are neither good entertainment (in my mind) nor at a good price, so therefore they are a poor value. So either the quality of the comics must significantly increase to justify its pricetag, or they need to cost less and be affordable to the point of being seen like it was when I was a kid and thinking "wow! I just got all these comics for this little tiny price!"

That is not old school thinking it's GREAT idea thinking. I'm sick of "legacy" numbering. I will be the first to admit that the reasoning behind Marvel's canceling and restarting (#1 are easier to sell than #364) of all their Silver Age titles was and still is EXTREMELY STUPID!

But what was done was done.

But it's not just Marvel.

DCE, before the "New 52" was launched, did the same thing on Wonder Woman and Adventure Comics and I think it's a safe bet if Action Comics vol. 2 lasts when it gets to the issue that would be #1,000 you can expect a return to original numbering (if not sooner).

IDW tried to do that crap with The Transformers adding all the IDW G1 Mini-series, Maxi-series, one-shots, and their then ongoing series to get a #125 when it was announced that they were going to end the ongoing series at #125 and relaunch with 2 new series, #125 was renamed The Transformers: The Death of Optimus Prime one-shot with a tag line above the logo saying something to the effect of "Celebrating 125 issues of Transformers!"

Another thing that gets on nerves is picking up the numbering of a series that was canceled by another publisher 20+ years ago.
G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero which had 2 different continuations one at DDP which lasted for about 45 (or there about) issues and one at that is currently going on at IDW the only difference is that one by IDW has the original series writer Larry Hamma writing HIS version of the book, the same with The Transformers (also published by IDW) and both series are picking up where they left off they picked up about 21 years later. Both titles are so continuity heavy I would have to read close to 20 TPBs combined to understand what the fuck is going on.

There are certainly plenty of things wrong with comics nowadays.

Variant Covers: It all comes down to a choice, to be sure... want a different cover? Buy the different cover... Easy! I worry about more of the logistical hazards they bring to the hobby. Collecting back issues is rendered incredibly difficult. If we're to believe there's such a thing as a "new reader", why are all avenues (sans digital) of collecting so damned complicated? Say you're a "new reader"... now, flip through the back issue bin. It used to be as easy as looking at the cover. Nowadays, you need to check, and double check the issue number... check the date (if it's listed)... check the price. If *I* am having a rough time of it after over two decades of trawling the bins, I can't fathom how a "new reader" would feel. Forget about flipping through the Overstreet Guide to price your books... you need scuba gear to go deep enough to find the "regular" cover... Oh, spoiler alert... it's worth $3.

Renumbering: In the past year or so, we've had TWO Wolverine and Fantastic Four relaunches! There was a Fantastic Four #1 last January, and there's going to be another one this April... Same with Wolverine... the Hulk's getting a new #1 soon too. So, now, Mr. or Ms. New Reader, has to crack the code as to whether they're reading the Marvel NOW! Wolverine or the All-New Marvel NOW! Wolverine... which will likely have the same trade dress, same price... hell, SAME CREATIVE TEAM... what's the point of this??? I try not to follow the "business" of comics anymore... but do these #1's REALLY sell THAT much better?

Like others here, I never found a high-numbered title as "intimidating" or "overwhelming", it made me feel as though I was... as silly as it sounds, PART of something. I remember checking out the Marvel Sons of Origins book from the library... I was able to read (Uncanny) X-Men #1, an issue of a series that I was STILL collecting. Later, through the Essentials Collections, I was able to follow the ENTIRE run of Uncanny X-Men. Now... while grabbing old Uncannys found in the wild is still fun... it feels as though I'm collecting for a "dead" series. Same with the Avengers... Same with Amazing Spider-Man.

"Star" Creators: I'll spare the Byrne-ism when it comes to talent... but these books really need to be about the characters again. These characters really can "come to life" when handled effectively. Now, we get to read RICK REMENDER's uncanny avengers, and JONATHAN HICKMAN's avengers, and DAN SLOTT's superior spider-man. It's sad... reading back issues from the 1980's... house ads were all about the characters, sometimes omitting the creative teams names completely.

The Internet: I don't want to know which way writers and artists vote. I don't want to know their favorite foods. I don't want to know their girlfriends name. Just tell a good story!

edit, just remembered...

Over-saturation I: I was catching up on a few months worth of backlog, and read two books that had the character Rogue in them. In one of them, she died. The other, she's on an adventure with the female X-Men team. These characters are stretched so damn thin, to the point where even if/when big events happen to them, it's not even mentioned in the other book(s) they're starring in. It goes a long way toward making all stories meaningless... if other writers don't care, why should I?

Over-saturation II: There are, at present (April Previews Catalog) FIVE books with X-Men in the title (not counting X-Force, X-Factor and the solos). SIX books with Avengers in the title (not counting solos, and all ages titles). DC's just as bad with FIVE books with Justice League in the title. I don't even want to check on how many have Batman in the title... there has to be a better way... with the rich history of both universes, there are SO many other characters we can be reading about.

I can't stand the lack of consistency. Marvel has their IT department trying to sort out how the universe of titles is interconnected and they had to create new database software to do it.

df1