I've been thinking about this one for a while, especially after DC did their New52, Hellboy turning into an ongoing and Marvel going all over the place with renumbering.
What is your stance on the subject and hat numbering system do you prefer?
>Reboot with a new creative team (or just the writer)
>Reboot with each new storyline
>Dual numberings (like pic related)
>Without rebooting of any kind
http://strawpoll.me/6214934
Here's a portion of a CBR intreview with Mcfarlane during SDCC14 on why "Spawn" has maintained its original numbering and there are some interesting points:
>If you look at some of the things I've done in my, I guess 30 years now, I try to evolve and go with where the flow's at. The numbering piece of it is really a very interesting conversation that you and I and probably ten other people at a panel could probably have a two-hour conversation about. I get input from a lot of people that I trust in the industry and they all say, almost to a person, "Just do it," [regarding rebooting with a new #1]. But I think part of it is it's easy to do it, and really, Jonah, there's no historical data that says -- actually, quite the contrary -- if you do it that you actually then will get better sales and you'll keep going. What usually has been out there -- as a matter of fact, I could show you hundreds that say the opposite -- that you get your bounce and then you actually come down to a little bit -- eventually, in 5, 8, 10 issues -- below where you were before you started renumbering it, and it seems like a shame that you threw all those numbers away.
>>78029903
I remember back when objections about the New 52 renumbering came up, people dismissed concerns about the numbering as "just a number" or something like that.
I think what Marvel proved with their constant renumberings is that doing it too many times and with barely much reason for doing it just causes more problems.
>>78029982
>Number two, just from a quasi-ego comic book, sort of old school [perspective], if Marvel and DC want to renumber all their books, and God bless them for doing it, that means I get to now walk into places and say, even if it's just at a cocktail party, "My book is the biggest-numbered comic book in the country." That's not an insignificant thing to say. And then to add another piece to it -- maybe I'm being too much of a dad now -- Image comic books have been around for 20+ years, we've got this entire group of the youth coming up. If I renumber my book, I just sort of fall into that same category as them. Image will continue to have a bunch of low-numbered books forever because it's just the nature of the business -- people want to do miniseries and whatever. I think that we have a couple of books like "Walking Dead's" gonna get there, and "Invincible" and "Witchblade" and "Savage Dragon" -- and "Spawn" -- they can go, "Look, there's some of the anchors. Those are the guys who helped build this." Even if it's just for that foundation of how the corporation got going, and that you, if you wanted to, could get there some day, I think that's okay. I think there's a value, at least for me, there's a mental value to say, "No no no, I'm gonna keep grinding it."
source:
>http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=54740
>>78029903
The word you're looking for is relaunch, not reboot. Off to a horrible start here, anon.
>>78029999
>just causes more problems
For collectors maybe, but it's been consistently helping to artificially inflate sales numbers.
>>78030020
reboot the numbering, not the story
>>78030043
Not all readers usually read in trade format.
>big 3 digits numbers is too intimidating for casuals to jump in
>3 to 4 #1s in 5 years isn't
>>78030149
Bonus if those Vol 2 #1 follows up story from Vol 1.
I think they shouldn't renumber unless there's a new creative team coming aboard with a massive shift in tone. They should never be relaunching books that aren't even double digits (like what Marvel's been doing lately)
I prefer it when they put text that says "Something War: Part 2 of 5" somewhere in the credits or cover
>>78030149
>"I really want to read Ant-Man because of the new movie!"
>Goes to store
>Ant-Man #1
>Ant-Man Annual #1
>Ant-Man: Last Days #1
>Astonishing Ant-Man #1
>All published in 2015
JUST
>>78030288
Then you just ask the person behind the counter for clarification. Being able to explain this shit is half of a LCS employee's job.
>>78030188
This really fucking upsets me. The numbering of the trades is all kinds of fucked up.
Like, you have
>Dude X Vol. 1 Shit gets Ruined
>Dude X Vol. 2 Shit gets Broken
Then the series relaunches, and again you have
>Dude X Vol. 1 Fly Again
Where the fuck is some asshole coming in fresh supposed to start reading?!
Dual numbering just makes more sense to me, it's like, "This is ASM #13 written by Slott" but it's also the 620th issue of AMS to ever be printed.
>>78030383
Marvel's whole idea is that you don't have to do that because if you have to ask the guy for assistance, any big number would be a good entry point.
>>78030383
>Being able to explain this shit is half of a LCS employee's job
You fucking kidding me? Most of those fat slobs fucking hate comics and only read graphic novels.
