|
Post by cyberstrike on May 1, 2010 11:16:55 GMT -5
DC has stated that Wonder Woman #600 will be followed by #601, and so forth. It'll only be a matter of time for every other major DC series gets a "legacy renumbering" so chances are when titles like Justice League of America, Green Lantern, The Flash, Aquaman, Green Arrow, The Legion of Super-Heroes, The Teen Titans, and others reach a major milestone (#500, #600, etc) they will be renumbered. I think it's stupid. Yeah, I agree with you strongly on that. Doing things like that just dilutes all the volumes involved if you ask me. I can't remember exactly where the original series of Wonder Woman ended, but I know the 2nd series was around 228 or someplace close to that number. I don't remember the exact issue number, but I know it was close to something like that. And then you start over with another #1 and now we have yet another volume. So basically you have canceled 2 series already. And now your 3rd volume is probably somewhere around issue 40 or so and it suddenly jumps to 600 and will be followed with 601 and so forth. Furthermore, none of the previous volumes had an issue #599. So if you're tying it in to the previous count, you now have volumes jumping from like 228 to 600. It doesn't make sense. It dilutes all the volumes. I still think in a situation like this, whatever issue Wonder Woman was on at the 599th comic that should have upped the number by one and then have on the cover something like "Special 600th issue of Wonder Woman in comics!" and make it double sized or something special like that and then the next issue, just continue with the numbering. In other words, the is NO issue 600. Just an issue that says this would have been issue 600. I know previous to this, I said I was happy they returned books like Fantastic Four to original numbering and I am. But in my mind, there should have never been a stoppage of the original numbering in the 1st place. And speaking as someone who has probably more Fantastic Four's than any other title I own, I haven't never really bought hardly any issues of FF since they restarted at #1 like 14 years ago. I did get those first few issues, but once I stopped, I never picked back up and the numbering is a major reason I stopped. I simply made it a stopping point and only concerned myself with collecting the original volume. What came in other volumes failed to concern me. IIRC Wonder Woman vol. 1 ended at #300, Wonder Woman vol. 2 ended around #250, and vol. 3 went up to #49 with what would have been vol. 3 #50 being renumbered #600. I agree with you that the "#1 is easy to sell than #421" reason which is mainly why Marvel canceled and restarted several series was and still is very fucking STUPID. But my attitude is that once a volume of any series a canceled regardless of reasons (bad, stupid, or good) that volume of that series is over. Marvel made a commit to restart titles like The Fantastic Four, Iron Man, Captain America, The Avengers, The Amazing Spider-Man, Daredevil, The Incredible Hulk, and X-Factor and they should stick with the current volume numbers and not do all this "legacy numbering" bullshit. If they want to celebrate the original volume with a special anniversary issue like Iron Man vol. 3 #55 (I think it was #55) as "The 400th appearance of an Iron Man series" fine I don't have have a any problem with that. But IMHO this legacy numbering bullshit is just plain stupid because it devalues the importance all the previous volumes of a series and looks like the people who run companies can't count. And in some cases like with a series like X-Factor and as much as I love the current the series, it's a second or even a third string book giving it the legacy numbering treatment is REALLY stupid especially after a double-sized 50 issue (which probably cost about $5) followed by a double-sized 200 (which probably cost about $5 as well) issue is just Marvel milking it's customers.
|
|
|
Post by cyberstrike on May 1, 2010 11:23:34 GMT -5
For the record: If IDW did a simlar deal with Transformers like with what they're doing with G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero, by starting a new Transformers series at #93 (this would include both the orginal series that lasted 80 issues and Transformers: Generation 2 which lasted 12 issues) I would be against it.
|
|
|
Post by G on May 1, 2010 16:47:22 GMT -5
For the record: If IDW did a simlar deal with Transformers like with what they're doing with G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero, by starting a new Transformers series at #93 (this would include both the orginal series that lasted 80 issues and Transformers: Generation 2 which lasted 12 issues) I would be against it. If the same company did it and it only had one original volume and it picked up with the next issue after the last volume ended, I wouldn't have too much of a problem with that. In fact, I'm quite sure there are more than a couple titles out there with quite a few numbers between issues. (One famous one is All-Star comics between issues 57 and 58). I'm cool with them extending a number as long as they never restarted it at number one before. Once they end one series and then relaunch with a new #1. Then yes, the original is dead. Don't get me 50 - 60 issues into a new series and then pick up where the original series left off. Even if it is an anniversary issue. I'll agree on once it's canceled and another new series takes it's place, they should live with what they've done and move on from it. I mean Flash had two very long successful runs and even a third. And now a forth??? The 1st two...okay...But now its getting out of hand. If they suddenly came out with a Flash #700 it would be blasphemy.
|
|
|
Post by defiant1 on May 1, 2010 20:16:43 GMT -5
For the record: If IDW did a simlar deal with Transformers like with what they're doing with G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero, by starting a new Transformers series at #93 (this would include both the orginal series that lasted 80 issues and Transformers: Generation 2 which lasted 12 issues) I would be against it. If the same company did it and it only had one original volume and it picked up with the next issue after the last volume ended, I wouldn't have too much of a problem with that. In fact, I'm quite sure there are more than a couple titles out there with quite a few numbers between issues. (One famous one is All-Star comics between issues 57 and 58). I'm cool with them extending a number as long as they never restarted it at number one before. Once they end one series and then relaunch with a new #1. Then yes, the original is dead. Don't get me 50 - 60 issues into a new series and then pick up where the original series left off. Even if it is an anniversary issue. I'll agree on once it's canceled and another new series takes it's place, they should live with what they've done and move on from it. I mean Flash had two very long successful runs and even a third. And now a forth??? The 1st two...okay...But now its getting out of hand. If they suddenly came out with a Flash #700 it would be blasphemy. Incorporating mini-series and crap like that is stupid. I'm surprised by your comment "if the same company did it". You being a Charlton fan, you should know they were notorious for buying up a dying publisher and continuing their defunct series. Some tiles they published kept the same numbering between three publishers. df1
|
|
|
Post by G on May 1, 2010 22:00:12 GMT -5
Incorporating mini-series and crap like that is stupid. I'm surprised by your comment "if the same company did it". You being a Charlton fan, you should know they were notorious for buying up a dying publisher and continuing their defunct series. Some tiles they published kept the same numbering between three publishers. You are correct, I admit that is a contradiction. I guess I'm thinking in modern terms. Back in the day it wasn't unusual at all for a company like Charlton to buy a title from say Dell and just stick with the same numbering and being in one volume. I guess I'm not so opposed to that idea because the G.I. Joe I picked up today was kinda cool. But are they going to continue with the numbering from there or revert to a new number one? If they leave it as just a one issue deal, then I think they paid homage to what Marvel did. If they continue on, I guess that is okay too as long as you can view it as one volume. But if they already have other volumes existing (Im not sure, I'm not much on G.I. Joe history) and then all of a sudden they pick up from here the numbering from here on out, then it feels like they've diluted their other volumes. (If there is any). Charlton just stepped in and upped the number by one. Fine. I don't know what IDW has done with G.I. Joe. If there is no other volumes that they've been putting out. I guess it's fine. Mini-Series to me don't even go into the quotation for me. It's almost like King-Sized Annuals. Totally existing in a realm of their own.
|
|
|
Post by defiant1 on May 1, 2010 22:30:25 GMT -5
Incorporating mini-series and crap like that is stupid. I'm surprised by your comment "if the same company did it". You being a Charlton fan, you should know they were notorious for buying up a dying publisher and continuing their defunct series. Some tiles they published kept the same numbering between three publishers. You are correct, I admit that is a contradiction. I guess I'm thinking in modern terms. Back in the day it wasn't unusual at all for a company like Charlton to buy a title from say Dell and just stick with the same numbering and being in one volume. I guess I'm not so opposed to that idea because the G.I. Joe I picked up today was kinda cool. But are they going to continue with the numbering from there or revert to a new number one? If they leave it as just a one issue deal, then I think they paid homage to what Marvel did. If they continue on, I guess that is okay too as long as you can view it as one volume. But if they already have other volumes existing (Im not sure, I'm not much on G.I. Joe history) and then all of a sudden they pick up from here the numbering from here on out, then it feels like they've diluted their other volumes. (If there is any). Charlton just stepped in and upped the number by one. Fine. I don't know what IDW has done with G.I. Joe. If there is no other volumes that they've been putting out. I guess it's fine. Mini-Series to me don't even go into the quotation for me. It's almost like King-Sized Annuals. Totally existing in a realm of their own. Agreed. The numbering needs to make sense and you shouldn't need some online chart to figure out what number they want to call a comic. If it doesn't say 321 in the indicia, it's NOT a 321. df1
|
|
|
Post by cyberstrike on Sept 16, 2010 13:40:47 GMT -5
Incorporating mini-series and crap like that is stupid. I'm surprised by your comment "if the same company did it". You being a Charlton fan, you should know they were notorious for buying up a dying publisher and continuing their defunct series. Some tiles they published kept the same numbering between three publishers. You are correct, I admit that is a contradiction. I guess I'm thinking in modern terms. Back in the day it wasn't unusual at all for a company like Charlton to buy a title from say Dell and just stick with the same numbering and being in one volume. I guess I'm not so opposed to that idea because the G.I. Joe I picked up today was kinda cool. But are they going to continue with the numbering from there or revert to a new number one? If they leave it as just a one issue deal, then I think they paid homage to what Marvel did. If they continue on, I guess that is okay too as long as you can view it as one volume. But if they already have other volumes existing (Im not sure, I'm not much on G.I. Joe history) and then all of a sudden they pick up from here the numbering from here on out, then it feels like they've diluted their other volumes. (If there is any). Charlton just stepped in and upped the number by one. Fine. I don't know what IDW has done with G.I. Joe. If there is no other volumes that they've been putting out. I guess it's fine. Mini-Series to me don't even go into the quotation for me. It's almost like King-Sized Annuals. Totally existing in a realm of their own. G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero ran 155 issues at Marvel, that is volume 1. G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero ran about 50 issues at Devil's Due Publishing and was a pretty much a direct continuation of vol. 1 with The Transformers: Generation 2 link removed and severed. that would be vol. 2 G.I. Joe: America's Elite which lasted about 35 issues that would be vol. 3 The current G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero series published by IDW would be vol. 4, the only difference is that from I what I read vols 2 and 3 don't count. The only other title that IDW is publishing with an even screwier numbering system and history is Famous Monsters of Filmland and it's no where near as confusing even though it numbering problems date back to 60s and 70s! Marvel's Annuals are also getting renumbered like the recent The Amazing Spider-Man annual which is I think #35, which considering how messed up the numbering on the annuals were before the all the serieses cancellation and restarts, that maybe the best way to go with them.
|
|
|
Post by G on Sept 16, 2010 23:52:19 GMT -5
Annuals seemed to have gotten too choppy. It's like they are skipping years and putting them out whenever they want. Or do they? I haven't been seeing solicitations for Annuals. I kinda think Annuals are cool ideas as long as they stay true to their numbering as well. I think it would be cool if they had one issue a year with correct numbering. You could probably see a real progression with it. But it seems to me like most of them died out and if there are any now, I would imagine it doesn't respect what was done beforehand with Annuals.
|
|