primenova
Fusilateral Quintro Combiner
Posts: 6,001
|
Post by primenova on Sept 15, 2011 14:18:37 GMT
What are people views on rebooting a series to #1 instead of jump on issue?
We are getting it in Transformers in Jan 2012 [after the reboot few years ago with new #1 ongoing series]
Then the whole Titan comic 3 #1.
Also Panini moved all comics back to #1 [Aston SM know on v3.]
DC comics [that I don't follow] all on #1 this month?
Uncanny X-men v2#1 out soon instead of #555.
Fantastic Four got back to #1 then it's #600 again.
Should they stick with new numbers or build up to higher numbers? I hope Titan go back to Transformers v1 numbers soon. [so that the next issue is #51 [v3#5]
|
|
|
|
Post by The Doctor on Sept 15, 2011 17:51:04 GMT
Though I personally prefer titles to keep their original numbering, in the digital age I think renumbering or changing to a TV 'season' type numbering system may make more sense, especially if an iTunes for comics appears. We old hands understand the numbering conventions, but if such a site appears and devices like the iPad drop in price and really take off, which makes comics cheap and accessable for civilians again, the traditional comics numbering system will be hellishly confusing for new readers.
-Ralph
|
|
|
|
Post by Andy Turnbull on Sept 23, 2011 11:45:45 GMT
The sense of heritage from the original numbering is a plus point sometimes. Like Ralph though, I do think we will see a move to a Season x or Volume X as the digital market becomes more important.
Andy
|
|
|
|
Post by verity on Sept 25, 2011 12:53:18 GMT
Transformers isn't really a reboot and starting the two issues at #1 makes sense as it seems they both spin out of the current series but will take it in a completely different direction. Trying to do it in another way like, say... continuing one with the regular number and starting the other at, ohh, #126 or something would be hopefully confusing. Or calling it Transformers and Transformers Alpha or something (and again, what would you do with the numbering?). The only thing I'm not sure about is the titles, as More Than Meets the Eye was already used for the profile books and Robots in Disguise is a cartoon of a completely different continuity. I'd rather they'd thought up something completely new.
|
|
primenova
Fusilateral Quintro Combiner
Posts: 6,001
|
Post by primenova on Sept 25, 2011 15:50:52 GMT
IDW comics is more starting out - jumping on point. Uncanny X-men starting at #1 seems to be story related for it to tie in with new title starting from #1. But if a new story is started should it go back to #1, or just conitnue with old numbering?
|
|
|
|
Post by verity on Sept 25, 2011 17:26:46 GMT
You know, when I read the title, I was hoping it'd be an #1 for a Reboot comic series. Boy was I disappointed...
|
|
|
|
Post by blueshift on Sept 25, 2011 17:44:00 GMT
#1 reboots seem to be the rule rather than the exception nowadays, which misses the point since the allure of a #1 reboot was that it was very rare!
Not a fan myself unless there is a good and compelling reason.
|
|
|
|
Post by legios on Sept 25, 2011 19:49:26 GMT
I am in two minds about this. On the one hand there is something nice about consecutive numbering, it creates a sense of history to a title and reinforces the sense of an ongoing story.
On the other hand, with the modern western comics structure of having very defined story-arcs with a clear beginning, middle and end (rather than the old models of single or two issue stories, or the rolling soap-opera of old-fashioned Spiderman or X-men) I do see some logic in treating each one as a separate "block", with sub-plots and sequel hooks for subsequent series. That would easily justify a switch to short volumes with issue 1's every six months, year or whatever.
On the more general question of whether restarts from issue 1 bother me - I'm a long-time Legion of Superheroes fan. The Legion was getting issue 1 reboots/restarts long before it was fashionable! So it doesn't bother me that much.
Karl
|
|
primenova
Fusilateral Quintro Combiner
Posts: 6,001
|
Post by primenova on Sept 26, 2011 7:24:48 GMT
What if - back in the 80's. Matrix Quest was released as a 5 issue mini instead of being #62-66?
Also should #1's be event lead or events be in normal titles.
ie Onslaught 1996 had bookend issues while the story itself where contained in the ongoing series of each issue. But AOA 1995 was all in new series [put the events in those last few X-men comics only effected the Marvel Universe on the X-men side - no crystal wave was seen in Spiderman/Avengers etc books]. Then you have the Civil war etc - which have only miniseries & are in the ongoing's too.
|
|
Dave
Empty
Posts: 1,811
|
Post by Dave on Sept 26, 2011 14:57:26 GMT
Well I like having ongoing numbering but I'm not that bothered about it. I can see how that would be off-putting to new readers and a new #1 can be perceived as a good jumping on point. I think the TV-style season numbering would be a good idea. It's not a problem if you're following a title but if you jump in after a few years you find yourself looking at 8 #1's and wondering quite how it all fits together. You know, when I read the title, I was hoping it'd be an #1 for a Reboot comic series. Boy was I disappointed... I didn't watch much Reboot but that was my thought too. |
|
