What gets into some people

[Dunesen]

Let's say you wanted to make a comic strip. Webcomic or syndication, whatever. Let's say you think this would be a good idea. It'd be something fun you might be able to make a bit of money from or, God willing, a living. You can make fans with your wit and comedy. You'd make people laugh.

At the very least, before anything else comes to mind, there's one thing you'd have to consider. You'd have to think you were actually funny, right? You'd have to be convinced that your jokes are clever, and people will enjoy reading/hearing them. In other words, that what you offer will be worth someone's time.

There have been many comics strips I've read in print and online during my life that just sucked. There's no other word for it. They're unfunny to the point of pain sometimes, cliched and tired jokes based on stereotypes.

In many cases these are the heritage strips like Garfield and Blondie. They're non-threatening and familiar, so newspapers keep them around to take up space. And since their original creators have passed duties on to others, they'll never end, so it's a constant piece of "entertainment". I understand all that.

But what I want to talk about is the new strips, both online and in print.

Like I said, if you're going to take the time to write and/or draw a comic strip, you'd have to first believe that your work is of value to anyone other than yourself, preferably a large enough audience to justify your effort.

Yet why is it that so many times when I check out a new webcomic (since I rarely see a print comic from the beginning) I go to the start of the archives and I'm presented with at least a few weeks of terrible strips?

I'll give an example: Ctl+Alt+Del (or however it's spelled). I discovered that strip earlier today and was reading through the first few months, and I don't think any strip was funny. And this strip started out in 2002. If it had started in 1997 or 98 I could at least cut them some slack for going into an untested field. But by 2002 there were enough webcomics around that the cliches were established, and people should have known to avoid them.

And going to my main thesis, if you're going to try to put out a webcomic among the hundreds/thousands/who-knows already out there, you must think you have something to give people. Something new and daring that goes against convention? Something hilariously true-to-life that people can relate to? Something so absurd, yet following some kind of internal logic, that it makes sense in its own way?

Instead, what does CAD start with? A wacky guy that loves his video games and his straight-man roommate who is apathetic to his colleague's mental issues. Please, someone try to tell me with a straight face that that was not driven into the ground by 2002. I could use the chuckle (because CAD sure wasn't giving me any). Laugh!...as Wacky Guy puts his computer ahead of his girlfriend. Weep!...as Wacky Guy's heart is broken when his girlfriend leaves him. Thrill!...at the penguin that is there for no reason.

Like I said, this is a few months worth of strips. This guy was writing, drawing, and uploading comics this long, using hokey archetypes, asinine randomness and unfunny punchlines. Was he building to something? Was he finding his voice, getting used to the format and updating schedule before he brought out his 'A' material? Did he have a cache of killer material he was saving for the right moment?

I don't know, I didn't keep reading. Maybe a year or two into the archives he hit upon a slight change to the formula, some magic character-type that suddenly made the strip worth reading. I'm not wading through a year of feces to find out, though.

I can only ask: if he had great stuff from the start, why not GO WITH THAT? Why did he say to himself "I'm going to make a webcomic" if the best he could come up with was Wacky Guy blowing off his girlfriend to watch Escaflowne?

***

There actually is a print comic I got to read from the beginning (and witness its merciful end): The Big Picture. Anyone ever hear of this? It was awful, right from the start. The very first strip ran in our paper:

Panel 1: Protag (wearing pajamas, so you know it's the morning) pours cup of coffee.
Panel 2: Protag sits there, staring blankly ahead.
Panel 3: Protag drinks straight from the pot of coffee.

Do you see my sides? They are literally quaking with mirth!

Someone thought this was funny enough to draw. Someone thought it was funny enough to turn it into a regular strip. Someone thought it was funny enough to syndicate and publish in newspapers.

If someone wants to have recurring characters, why not introduce the characters from the start with some jokes coming from their personality? Get them established for the readers instead of just making them mouthpieces for the set-ups and punchlines, and then down the road say "Oh yeah, this guy has had a girlfriend for a year and she's pressuring him to propose. Here's a two month story about him picking out an engagement ring, only to find out she's been cheating on him."

Start out strong, for pete's sake. If you think you can swim, dive straight in. Don't wade in the kiddie pool.

***

And as a preemptory response to anyone that would say "If you think you know how it's done, why don't you do it?":

I am doing it, kind of. I can't draw, but I can write, and right now I'm developing characters and a storyline for a dramatic webcomic. The drama part makes it a bit easier to start out with something defined, but even if this was comedy I wouldn't just go with Wacky Guy and Straight Man.

I've got the first several strips written out, starting with what I hope is an interesting and grabbing first page, leading into an establishing scene that introduces the main characters, and then leads into another scene that gives enough exposition and background for the initial story arc.

In other words, I'm planning. I'm trying to make something intelligent and interesting by putting thought and effort into it. Nobody owes me their pageviews, I have to earn them.

Earn them I shall.

[Trazoi]

Most webcomics start off shakily because their creators are still learning. Many, many webcomic creators think a prime motivation for their work is as a learning exercise, and they expect to be making a few mistakes along their comic's run. All the webcomics I'd list as personal favourites had some kinks in them when they began (although they generally were still enjoyable even then). I generally don't mind this as a reader, as long as a) the webcomic is still fun most of the time and b) the creator actually puts effort into improvement.

I've pledged to start a webcomic sometime myself in 2008, but I don't hold any pretenses that my first few months won't be plagued with problems. I don't particularly mind, as my main personal objective is to have a vehicle for practicing my art and writing on a regular basis. I've brainstormed through a number of story ideas, but I'm putting some of the more ambitious ones on the shelf for a few years until my skills are good enough to do them justice. Of course, what I'm probably end up going with might seem a little naff, but it's a point to build off.

There's also a danger if you go too far in the planning, as you have to begin sometime. I've spent far too long on the brainstorming stages myself (couldn't be helped in my case; can't start yet due to external study issues) and my ideas tend to get more grandiose and complicated the longer you work on them - which is bad if you're looking for something simple you can handle. Personally I think it's best to plan a little bit; some idea of where you want to go is good, and at the least get a couple of weeks worth of strips done before you begin if you can, that way you'll have a buffer and some breathing time; but you can go overboard.

Best of luck with your budding webcomic.

[LurkerInPlayground]

Editors.
Webcomics don't have them.

[stm177]

Being funny is harder than being dramatic.

[Lord Fullbladder, Master of Goblins]

And in case you haven't noticed, all newspaper comics are like that.

[Turcano]

Like I said, this is a few months worth of strips. This guy was writing, drawing, and uploading comics this long, using hokey archetypes, asinine randomness and unfunny punchlines. Was he building to something? Was he finding his voice, getting used to the format and updating schedule before he brought out his 'A' material? Did he have a cache of killer material he was saving for the right moment?

I don't know, I didn't keep reading. Maybe a year or two into the archives he hit upon a slight change to the formula, some magic character-type that suddenly made the strip worth reading. I'm not wading through a year of feces to find out, though.

To answer your question in this particular case: no, he wasn't. In fact, all he really added from that point is tacked-on drama, which is like adding Marmite to ice cream.

However, any cartoonist of talent, which is true of just about every creative art really, will usually have a "golden age," which spans the period of time between when the strip is broken in and when the writer completely runs out of ideas. To give two examples, PVP's golden age was around 2000 to 2005, and The Simpsons' was from Season 2 to Season 7. (I know the last one wasn't a comic strip. Sue me.) This is true even for heritage strips like Blondie -- although that strip's heyday was back in the 30's -- that's why they attracted a large audience in the first place. Case in point: my dad has some compilation books from the early days of B.C., and they're freaking hilarious. It's true of practically every major syndicated comic, with the possible exception of Cathy. Some cartoonists, like the 90's comic triumvirate Watterson, Breathed, and Larson, quit while they were ahead, but that's the exception to the rule, which is enforced either explicitly through the contract with the syndicate or sheer complacency. And that's the trick: to know when to fold 'em, and then end it. Go out on a high note.

[nooblade]

I think Dilbert has been quite long-lived. It was funny when I was close to ten, it's been funny for the last ten years, and I wouldn't doubt it if I find new Dilbert comics to be really funny ten more years from now and then some. It's like XKCD geared to a less-hyper audience. Or, another comparison, it's like Happiness and Cyanide except grounded in reality.

(Maybe this is just a personal feeling about comics, but my point here doesn't depend on that being true or not.)

So this leads me to think that one key to setting up a successful webcomic (or anything) is to make it so you can't fail. Dilbert wasn't amazing, but people in businesses like that needed the comic relief more than many others that comics try to appeal to. Every comic has a target audience. Most of them seem to be made for video-game players or fantasy enthusiasts.


I guess that's not entirely related to the post topic, just some advice for comic creators in general and analysis of one oddly successful comic.


I think "gamer" comics are popular because, to put it bluntly, being a gamer means you're a bit of a loser. Most gaming is like work, in fact a little more repetitive than some work (it could be automated if game developers didn't mind so much), except without the satisfaction of being paid for it. Part of the reason for doing it is to experience the same things that other gamers enjoyed, which is why they enjoy hearing about that kind of thing in webcomics.

[Trazoi]

To answer your question in this particular case: no, he wasn't. In fact, all he really added from that point is tacked-on drama, which is like adding Marmite to ice cream.
Yes, Ctrl+Alt+Del isn't a webcomic that I'd list as an example as one that's imrpoved over time. Tim Buckley found a comfortable groove early on and has never seemed to attempt to push himself out of that rut.

For comparison: here's a link to the last comic of each year for CAD: 2002 (http://ctrlaltdel-online.com/comic.php?d=20021231), 2003 (http://ctrlaltdel-online.com/comic.php?d=20031231), 2004 (http://ctrlaltdel-online.com/comic.php?d=20041231), 2005 (http://ctrlaltdel-online.com/comic.php?d=20051231), 2006 (http://ctrlaltdel-online.com/comic.php?d=20061230), 2007 (http://ctrlaltdel-online.com/comic.php?d=20071231).

There's some improvement in the art the first couple of years, but by 2004 it's pretty close to how it is now. And the writing seem pretty similar throughout.

If you compare that to another big gaming comic, like Penny Arcade (1998 (http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/1998/12/23/), 1999 (http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/1999/12/29/), 2000 (http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2000/12/29/), 2001 (http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2001/12/31/), 2002 (http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2002/12/20/), 2003 (http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2003/12/31/), 2004 (http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/12/31/), 2005 (http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2005/12/30/), 2006 (http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2006/12/29/), 2007 (http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2007/12/31/)), then you can still see improvement in the art throughout ever year. (I'm not so sure about the writing; the jokes in the early years were pretty good, and the "joke" in 2005 was atrocious, but I'm focusing more on the art here).


However, any cartoonist of talent, which is true of just about every creative art really, will usually have a "golden age," which spans the period of time between when the strip is broken in and when the writer completely runs out of ideas.
...
And that's the trick: to know when to fold 'em, and then end it. Go out on a high note.
I completely agree with this. Many of the comics I respect had or have an ending planned, and those typically go out strong.

Oh, and thanks for the tips about PvP. I'm working my way through a bunch of webcomics to see what's gone before and haven't started on PvP yet, so I'll keep an eye on what happens in 2000 and 2005.

[Trazoi]

I think Dilbert has been quite long-lived. It was funny when I was close to ten, it's been funny for the last ten years, and I wouldn't doubt it if I find new Dilbert comics to be really funny ten more years from now and then some.
This might be a personal thing, but I found Dilbert to be hilarious satire up to about 2000, then it slowly started to fade in quality as it started to have to recycle old ground. I stopped following it a few years back. Of course, I did move from more office related jobs to postgraduate study around then, so I'm a step removed from the context.

[Aquillion]

As others have noted, no, CAD never improves.

But beyond that... I think you have to realize, when many webcomic artists start their comics, it's just a small thing. It really doesn't take much at all to put something online, and if you're an aspiring artist/writer/humorist who's sketched a few strips, it's not that hard to say "hey, why not put them online and see what people think?" (As I recall, OOTS itself started that way, with no certainty that there would ever be more than a few dozen strips to entertain the relatively small number of people who happened to frequent this site for other things.) Often the first few strips of a webcomic are, at heart, not written for an audience -- sure, they're put online in the hopes that someone will see them and like them, but without any real certainty that this is going to be a big regular webcomic. Few webcomics actually start big enough to worry about what their audience thinks.

In other words, many webcomics (particularly the ones with poor starts) don't have a clear dividing line of "Hey, I'm going to start a webcomic now, and try to become the biggest most popular webcomic ever!" They start with someone doodling some comics, then saying "Hey, why not put these in a corner of my webpage somewhere, since I took the time to make them? And maybe if I commit to doodling out another one every week or so, it'll help me get better as an artist."

A few people do go back and fix up their early strips. But that takes extra effort and time and, honestly, when a strip takes off unexpectedly you're sort of busy enough keeping up and improving the quality of the new strips.

[Turcano]

Oh, and thanks for the tips about PvP. I'm working my way through a bunch of webcomics to see what's gone before and haven't started on PvP yet, so I'll keep an eye on what happens in 2000 and 2005.

I should add that those dates might be off by a year or so, as my memory is rather hazy and the site's redesign apparently neglected to include a link to the archive page. Also, I would say that Penny Arcade didn't really kick it into gear until mid-2003, and is still going fairly strong (reading it isn't a chore like the comics I've given up on) -- the sample you linked to for 2005 was pretty much a fluke (to see what I mean, click two strips over).

[Trazoi]

Also, I would say that Penny Arcade didn't really kick it into gear until mid-2003, and is still going fairly strong (reading it isn't a chore like the comics I've given up on) -- the sample you linked to for 2005 was pretty much a fluke (to see what I mean, click two strips over).
Penny Arcade's humour writing has always been very hit and miss with me, and I'm not sure why; it might just not be my style. I usually find their setups to be pretty good, but the punch lines just dont hit my funny bone the way they seem to hit other peoples. I'd still rank it the best video gaming comic I know of (because lets face it, most are either dreadful imitators of Penny Arcade or dreadful imitators of imitators of Penny Arcade), and I think Gabe's art style has developed into something fantastic.

[Dunesen]

Haven't been able to go online at all today, so I get to respond to several posts all at once here.

Maybe I was a bit ambiguous in my first post, or maybe the thread just naturally veered off in other ways (an organic occurence on any thread), but I just want to reiterate my main point:

If you're going to start a comic, as in, start writing and drawing strips for each day or every other day or week or whatever, you're not exactly just doing something for the fun of it, like a casual pasttime. You're starting a regular habit.

I can fully understand that anyone who hasn't done something like this before would have a shaky period. Getting used to the pacing of jokes, how to handle characters and develop them, finding the right set-up for your series. But I really can't understand/accept that as an excuse for going with a pathetic joke (or series of pathetic jokes). The reason I used CAD and the Big Picture as examples is because their very first strips are so generic. Neither really improved, either.

OotS didn't start out with an epic story and intricate character interaction, I think we can all agree. But comparing the first strips there to the first strips for CAD, it's obvious that the Giant was putting more thought into what was at the time nothing more than filler material for a gaming site. "Bluff the ogre"? That's one of the earliest strips, and yet you already have something worth remembering five years later.

My main point is that if you're going to post something online, you have to at least think it's worthwhile to some extent. Regurgitating a "Look at him, he's WACKY!" joke? Why not just do a few strips to find your groove, keep them to yourself, and when you think you're ready start posting your good ones online?

***

I didn't mention the heritage strips to complain about once-funny ones getting stale. That's completely irrelevent to my point, I'm talking about strips that are terrible right from the start.

***

Trazoi: I well know how easy it is to get lost in trying to plan and brainstorm ideas and never actually use them. I have comic book and movie ideas in my head from years ago that I haven't started working with. But with my webcomic I've already got several strips written, and I'm trying to write one script a day. Some of it's planned, some of it I'm letting the story take me as I figure out exactly who the characters are.

I'm just saying that if someone wanted to do a comic strip, they should at least have some planning done beyond Wacky-Guy-Likes-Coffee/Video games/Women.

Lurker: I literally laughed out loud at that, it is so freaking true.

Stm: Dying is easy, comedy is hard. But something being hard doesn't excuse putting no effort in at all.

Lord Fullbladder: Foxtrot was hilarious. Pooch Cafe is hilarious, and that's one I've actually read from the beginning. I've always enjoyed that one. Non Sequitor is funny a lot of the time, though I wish he'd drop the recurring characters and their storylines.

Turcano: Season 8 is definitely part of the golden age. Two words: Hank Scorpio. Two more: Mr. Sparkle. Two more: Frank Grimes. One more: Poochie. Two more: Sherry Bobbins.

But like I said, I'm not talking about strips that started out strong and then got lazy or complacent (or in the Simpsons case, too familiar).

Nooblade: I certainly understand the appeal of going for a target audience (after all, would anyone say OotS is broad humor strip, switching between diverse topics like TV, movies, celebrities, politics, current events every day?). But wouldn't that give more cause to work harder? If I was going to make a strip about role-playing games, I'd be less likely to have characters living in a universe that follows the rules of D&D, or have real people playing D&D and LARP all the time. Why? Because that's already been done. Or if I was going to have characters in a D&D universe, I wouldn't start out with a party inside a dungeon, and make one psychotic, one an idiot, etc. I'd try to find some new angle.

Trazoi (again): Yeah, that's pretty pathetic. Five years later, the Wacky guy still has to choose between breasts and video games. (Course, everyone knows breasts will eventually sag, but the games will still be waiting for you until that happens :))

Penny Arcade just isn't my thing. But I will give credit for their first strip having something original to it. After that, though, it gets pretty bland.

But as far as art goes, I really don't care. XKCD is freaking stick figures, but the writing is good. Use clip art, or just put two dots there, and if the jokes are funny and intelligent, then I'll read it (and there are examples of each of those, I just don't read them right now). Nice art is nifty, but it's never a selling point for me.

Aquillion: Like I've said, people who start a comic seem to be saying to themselves "This is funny. This is worth sharing." Which makes it kind of sad when they do something really lame, and outright pathetic if they keep doing something lame.

That's the whole point behind this thread's title. Are they really telling themselves the lame jokes and same-old, same-old will be interesting to people? Or are they just shrewd, thinking "This will appeal to enough people that I'll get enough hits and my popularity will take off from there."? The latter is rather evil, so I usually chalk it up to the former, the stupid option.

Every comic will rack up misses in their run, and I'm very forgiving if it's early on. But there's a difference between a miss (ie. using a punchline that's similar to one somebody else has already done) and A MISS (ie., doing an entire strip or ten that somebody else has already done).

The really early OotS strips like the team being split up and Roy hesitating to pick Roy, that's a miss. All the CAD comics I read were A MISS, and given the later ones I read, and the responses on this board, it never rose above that.

[stm177]

I like Penny Arcade, but I usually wait a month then catch up on the comics all at once.

Sometimes the two rely on the "setup then obsessive rant" a bit too much. That gets pretty obvious when I digest a months worth of comics at a time.

[Dunesen]

Penny Arcade's humour writing has always been very hit and miss with me, and I'm not sure why; it might just not be my style. I usually find their setups to be pretty good, but the punch lines just dont hit my funny bone the way they seem to hit other peoples. I'd still rank it the best video gaming comic I know of (because lets face it, most are either dreadful imitators of Penny Arcade or dreadful imitators of imitators of Penny Arcade), and I think Gabe's art style has developed into something fantastic.

I've always thought of Penny Arcade as being too much "Level 1" humor. It's like you have a set-up of some kind, and you start thinking of jokes about it. At first there will be really obvious (and usually really stupid) punchlines, but if you think about it a bit, try to look at it from a skewed angle or try to introduce something completely off-the-wall, you can make a joke that's better.

An example I really hate (in any form) is when an actor famous for one character or movie is cast in a movie that's completely different from what they're famous for. So the joke will be "What if he played the same character as before, but in a different situation?" I've seen jokes about Heath Ledger as a Brokeback Joker and Simon Pegg as a Shaun of the Dead Scottie (neither from Penny Arcade). Both comics sucked.

Imagine Bruce Campbell gets cast in a Victorian-age melodrama (just work with me here). The obvious punchline is he plays Ash, but everything else fits the scenario like it should. So you'd have him shooting up a high-society tea party of regular Victorian people.

That's what I'd expect most people would do, and the people that would actually get my respect (and laughs, those sweet, sweet laughs) would be the ones to go beyond the obvious. It just doesn't seem like Penny Arcade does that too often, and given that they only do three strips a week, what the hell?

That's pretty much my gripe with Penny Arcade, and with a lot of other comics as well.

[DigoDragon]

What if a comic was written as a continous story line, like a comic book and you update one page at a time? Would every page need to have a funny moment or would it be alright to have a few serious pages go by and then the punchline shows up at it's appropriate time? :smallsmile:

[averagejoe]

I, unfortunately, have no answer for you. Indeed, this is something that often confounds me when I see that kind of crap that makes its way to the internet.

However, I think you're making one mistake that I see a lot of people make, which is mixing up quality and originality. Penny Arcade, for example, might make a few obvious jokes, but always does so in a quality way, and that's what makes it funny. Humor doesn't always, or even often, come from suprise and originality, and most "original" things these days really aren't. And originality isn't, in and of itself, a desirable quality anyways. It can be nice to run into, but if you require originality to be entertained then yours must be a very sad and empty life.

[Dunesen]

What if a comic was written as a continous story line, like a comic book and you update one page at a time? Would every page need to have a funny moment or would it be alright to have a few serious pages go by and then the punchline shows up at it's appropriate time? :smallsmile:

Hmm...now we're getting into scruples questions.

Well, as self-appointed Lord of the Thread (since I started it), I am passing down a verdict:

If the strip is supposed to be a comedy with an ongoing storyline (OotS, 8-bit Theater), it is permissible to have occasional weak jokes AS LONG AS it is established that there is a storyline going on. The story will help make it worthwhile to continue reading.

If the strip is a comedy with no over-all storyline but just occasional arcs(Penny Arcade, pVp), then each joke must be funny. Failure to follow this will incur penalties. Following a limited storyline does not excuse a drop in comedic quality.

If the strip is a drama, then jokes are not important.

[BRC]

Hmm...now we're getting into scruples questions.

Well, as self-appointed Lord of the Thread (since I started it), I am passing down a verdict:

If the strip is supposed to be a comedy with an ongoing storyline (OotS, 8-bit Theater), it is permissible to have occasional weak jokes AS LONG AS it is established that there is a storyline going on. The story will help make it worthwhile to continue reading.

If the strip is a comedy with no over-all storyline but just occasional arcs(Penny Arcade, pVp), then each joke must be funny. Failure to follow this will incur penalties. Following a limited storyline does not excuse a drop in comedic quality.

If the strip is a drama, then jokes are not important.
Starting a thread dosn't make you lord of it. You are not Lord of the Thread until an independant third party states that you have, in fact, "Won" the thread.

[Lord Seth]

Personally I think Ctrl+Alt+Del can be pretty funny sometimes.

It's kind of annoying that Order of the Stick's first comic was so weak, definitely not a good way to start off the strip. It really could've been cut out; I think the second strip would've been a much better start. (the original first strip could've been plugged in somewhere early on)

Peanuts was a major achievement not only for lasting so long, but staying good the whole way through.

Speaking of newspaper comic strips, Pearls Before Swine has made fun of a lot of the things listed in this thread.

[stm177]

I, unfortunately, have no answer for you. Indeed, this is something that often confounds me when I see that kind of crap that makes its way to the internet.

However, I think you're making one mistake that I see a lot of people make, which is mixing up quality and originality. Penny Arcade, for example, might make a few obvious jokes, but always does so in a quality way, and that's what makes it funny. Humor doesn't always, or even often, come from suprise and originality, and most "original" things these days really aren't. And originality isn't, in and of itself, a desirable quality anyways. It can be nice to run into, but if you require originality to be entertained then yours must be a very sad and empty life.

I can't argue with success, and Penny Arcade does have a definite niche. Maybe that is why their jokes are a bit repetitive. They don't want to alienate their fanbase.

[Flickerdart]

I've been toying with the idea of doing a webcomic, but this is exactly the reason I haven't. I can draw, sure, but if people wanted to look at art they'd go to dA. I'm not very good at jokes. Since most webcomics these days are, if not all about the funny, then at least stick a punchline here and there (LFG is a good example).

I'm just not willing to shove another piece of crap out into the internet. Granted, bad comic "authors" (or "causes", as aptly put by another) usually suck at both the writing and the art (not another sprite comic with the grammar of a 3rd grader, please!) but I want both of the elements to be good. Two of my friends are doing a weekly webcomic, and the art is splendid, but the writing's just not there. Plus they don't have any advertising, or even a domain, but that's not the point.

The whole point of a comic is to fuse two mediums into one, and if the comic is lacking in one area, then you should either stick to writing, or just drawing, where you won't ruining the good part with the bad.

I consider Cyanide and Happiness (it's a style and it works for what they do, they don't pretend to be great artists) and XKCD (the art isn't made out to be anything more than just a vehicle for the joke) exemptions. OotS doesn't even count as being exempted because the art is actually art, and Rich has proven he can draw anyways. Everybody else has no excuse.

[PhantomFox]

It's simple: Some people think they have talent when they don't, and can't (or refuse) to recognize that fact.

Then you have the people who really REALLY want to make a strip because they love the genre, that they are determined to give it a go and be like their heroes despite having no talent.

Both of these might overlap with those who are egoists and think that every word or drawing that drips from their mind is pure gold, despite the evidence (and critics) that says otherwise.

I'm planning a comic myself, but I have the sense to run it by a focus group (i.e. y'all) before putting it online. Need to brush up my art though. I'm a good storyteller (I think) but only an okay artist.

[Golby]

What if a comic was written as a continous story line, like a comic book and you update one page at a time? Would every page need to have a funny moment or would it be alright to have a few serious pages go by and then the punchline shows up at it's appropriate time? :smallsmile:

I've pondered this as well. It's tricky, really. Because of how webcomics are perceived and how they function, they tend to favor strips or gag-a-day comics, though this is not to say that an overarching story, something closer to a graphic novel can't be successfully pulled off.

Firstly, there are time constraints. No matter what level of art you achieve, the difference in the complexity of drawing a full page vs. a strip of three to five panels is immense. It's standard to assume that to finish a comic page for a graphic novel takes two days if you draw and work furiously, add more hours and time depending on how detailed your work is and even more if you are also doing the writing. Keeping this in mind, you have to work steadily for a few months in order to build up a buffer in your archive and upload daily. Otherwise you're limited to updating either once or twice weekly. Of course, if you go for a very simplistic approach, such as Rich's with OotS, you will be cutting down time, and there are people that manage to work faster, but I'm assuming we're putting a 'normal' emphasis on the artwork here.

Secondly, I'm willing to ascertain that the majority of webcomic readers mostly check their favorite strips during quick breaks at the office or when they have a bit of free time. It's in some ways similar to grabbing the newspaper and checking the funnies. These habits make it more difficult to fully appreciate the writing and flow in an extensive narrative, with plot twists and drama and that don't rely on a joke at the end of each page. These kind of stories require more concentration and time to properly read them.

Thirdly, and perhaps the most easily solved problem, is the format. Pages are obviously larger than strips, not always you can make them fit on screen, and scrolling is annoying - specially if you have to scroll both horizontally and vertically, don't do that. It can deter many people from enjoying the art and the writing (though, yes, I think we're all becoming more used to reading comics off our monitors, but it's still not as comfortable as having the paper version in our hands). Evidently, webcomic authors of this kind have to take a bit of time to ponder what kind of format and website design they'll use in order to better catch their audience and keep them interested for dozens of pages. Scott McCloud has some interesting ideas in his website about this, as an annexed chapter to one of his books.

[Trazoi]

Both of these might overlap with those who are egoists and think that every word or drawing that drips from their mind is pure gold, despite the evidence (and critics) that says otherwise.
An overdeveloped ego is the worst thing a budding webcomicker can develop, as it signals the death of any improvement in your work. Most of the webcomickers I admire seem to be the harshest critics of their own work; show them a strip of theirs from a few years back that most people would regard as good, and they tend to beat themselves up about how they were such a hack.

As for writing a webcomic as a continuous story line, there's a danger in that. Webcomics aren't read the same as printed comics. In a printed comic you can read an entire story arc in one sitting, but if you are following a webcomic you're only getting a page every couple of days or every week (full page webcomics tend to update slowly). It's fine to do an epic battle over a dozen pages in a printed comic, but in a webcomic updating every week that will take three months to complete. If you don't give the reader a pay-off on each and every page, they'll start to lose any reason for following your comic.

[Turcano]

Season 8 is definitely part of the golden age. Two words: Hank Scorpio. Two more: Mr. Sparkle. Two more: Frank Grimes. One more: Poochie. Two more: Sherry Bobbins.

There were some good episodes in Season 8 (and even a couple in Season 9), but that season was the turning point, in my opinion. It's also when the writers started to lampshade the declining quality (i.e., "The Itchy & Scratchy & Poochie Show" and "The Simpsons Spin-Off Showcase").


Thirdly, and perhaps the most easily solved problem, is the format. Pages are obviously larger than strips, not always you can make them fit on screen, and scrolling is annoying - specially if you have to scroll both horizontally and vertically, don't do that.

Yeah. Although Scott McCloud championed the infinite canvas due to its heightened artistic flexibility, he failed to appreciate that it suffers from a practical standpoint in that the audience absolutely hates it.

[Guyinthestreet]

Ever seen Hokuto No Ken (Fist of the North Star)?

I've always thought that it was relatively crappy. Full of plot holes (I'll strike the Deux Ex Machina pressure point to make him explode!) and undeveloped characters. Mostly the guys walk around and kill people, be it Raoh (well, he rides around), Kenshin or those guys who die 200 pages into the manga.

And there was one time where the story made me go WTF. It was when a blind guy faced multiple opponents who neutralized his hearing so that he didn't know where they were and when they would strike.

Guess how the author resolved it.

The blind guy took all his enemies out and said, oh....I can see you with my heart's eye (literal translation from chinese to english).

That sort of weaseling out of traps makes me want to puke.

The art wasn't Dragonball standard either. Toriyama and his assistants had talent in drawing, no matter what anyone says.

But it was serialized in Jump, the holy grail of manga and was held as the originator of all action comics. And people still talk about how fantastic FOTNS was.

So maybe people have different standards or something. Some have less rigorous standards on what constitutes "good". And if there's enough people, that'll be enough to propel a fanbase.

I think.

Oh, and people don't start out strong at the start. My drawings are quite amateurish. But I had to practise continually for more than two years before they turned out to be even that. Anything before that was really, really, crap.

You get better with practice, and that's the only thing that helps.

[Dunesen]

Starting a thread dosn't make you lord of it. You are not Lord of the Thread until an independant third party states that you have, in fact, "Won" the thread.

If there is actually a real title of "Lord of the Thread" and there are rules for attaining said title, then some people here officially have too much time.

[Dunesen]

Couldn't post last night to averagejoe, but I can do a big response now. It might be excessive, but I started this thread because this topic interests me and I really am enjoying the conversation so far.

Averagejoe: I politely disagree about Penny Arcade's overall quality. The strip as a whole isn't terrible or crappy, it's just not my thing. I stand by my statement about PA going with the obvious jokes a lot of the time, but yes, I will give them credit for doing more than simply having an A-B-A conversation that has a set-up and punchline. They have come up with some outlandish situations. And I give points for making Tycho as weird in his ways as Gabe, so at least it makes sense that they'd be hanging out together. (That's something I hate about the Wacky! Guy and Straight Man dynamic)

Bottom line, most of their strips use a joke that will feel tired even if it's presented in a way different than other jokes. An old woman in a new dress is still an old woman.

But just because a joke is old doesn't mean it's worthless. OotS has fallen back on many tested types of humor, and if the other factors of the strip weren't there, they would fail as well. Every time Roy has said something sarcastic or condescending to Elan, it's all going back to the old Sarcastic-Straight-Man and Wacky! Guy bit. But those jokes (usually) work here because of the characters of Roy and Elan. That's a major item in the discussion, and something I wish every comic writer understood. Who is presenting the joke matters just as much as what the joke is, if only because we'll care to some extent about the people involved.

Compare the regular SSM that has no reason to care about the W!G. Roy at least considers Elan a teammate (especially after the Forest Bandit arc), and push comes to shove he'll stand by him (ie, the gender-switch part).

From your post it seems you're arguing that Penny Arcade does present old jokes in new ways, but like I said, the way they do it just doesn't work for me. Maybe it's just because the originality they do bring to the situations doesn't override the cliche of the joke. Maybe I just see both Gabe and Tycho as veering too much in the Wacky! area and don't care for either.

Flickerdart: I can't draw at all, so I'm going to have to find an artist to work with. While I have certain expectations, I don't consider the art side to be that important (as I've said before on this forum, if not this thread).

PhantomFox: There's a strong argument for what you say, but I think laziness or apathy accounts for a lot of it as well.

Golby: The format of webcomics does radically differ from traditional comic books or a complete novel/film, but it's not entirely new. **** Tracy and other dramatic daily strips go back to the 30's and earlier. But if you're trying to incorporate humor, it does make the game a bit different. I would still say that you can have a story move at a steady pace (or with an occasional pause for a really good joke) and just go with simple jokes a lot of the time until you have the story and characters established well enough to start getting humor from them more than anything else. Much like what OotS has done. I would just say you should avoid really obvious punchlines or jokes (081 (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0081.html) is a good example of an telegraphed joke).

Trazoi (for the win): I've already had to consider how to get a serious scene moving over the course of several pages. Just with the seven I already have, I think that any natural pauses in a conversation or moments where the mood changes are the most effective. An action scene, however, would be harder to work out, and I haven't encountered that yet. But I think it can be done, and definitely helps if you've developed an audience used to your updating schedule.

Turcano: Poochie does stand out as significant, not just because it's where the Simpsons became the longest running primetime animated series, but also because the show starts to really acknowledge its own longevity. Lisa herself mentions that when you've seen the same characters for so long, it's impossible for them to have the same impact, which is what today is the biggest threat to the series, IMO. It's not that they're cliched so much as just so familiar. Thus the contempt is born.

Guyinthestreet: Just my personal theory, but I think art can improve a lot more noticeably over time than writing. Or at least, that's what people are more interested in improving, judging by so many of the webcomics I've read through. But I don't care about the art, I care about the writing.

There are some comics I read today that started out weak in the story and joke department at the start, and they got better. But I don't think it's too difficult to have your writing be even a little unique at the start, and I don't think it's asking too much for it.

[Solo]

Starting a thread dosn't make you lord of it. You are not Lord of the Thread until an independant third party states that you have, in fact, "Won" the thread.
Good times. Good times.

[Solo]

If there is actually a real title of "Lord of the Thread" and there are rules for attaining said title, then some people here officially have too much time.

Three Threads for the Char-op kings in Gaming d20,
Seven for the Winners in their posts of awesome,
Nine for Flamers doomed to be banned,
One for the Giant Lord on His dark throne,
In the land of Playground where the gamers lie.
One Thread to rule them all, One Thread to find them,
One Thread to bring them all, and in the forums bind them,
In the land of Playground where the gamers lie.

[BRC]

Three Threads for the Char-op kings in Gaming d20,
Seven for the Winners in their posts of awesome,
Nine for Flamers doomed to be banned,
One for the Giant Lord on His dark throne,
In the land of Playground where the gamers lie.
One Thread to rule them all, One Thread to find them,
One Thread to bring them all, and in the forums bind them,
In the land of Playground where the gamers lie.

Thread Won. We can all go home now.

[MeklorIlavator]

Three Threads for the Char-op kings in Gaming d20,
Seven for the Winners in their posts of awesome,
Nine for Flamers doomed to be banned,
One for the Giant Lord on His dark throne,
In the land of Playground where the gamers lie.
One Thread to rule them all, One Thread to find them,
One Thread to bring them all, and in the forums bind them,
In the land of Playground where the gamers lie.

Wow. Just wow. I need to sig this. May I Please?

[Solo]

Wow. Just wow. I need to sig this. May I Please?

Just conjugate the verbs that I missed and we're good to go.


Edit: Here, you might want a slightly better version.

Three Threads for the Char-op kings in Gaming d20,
Seven for the Winners for their posts of Awesome,
Nine for Flamers doomed to be banned,
One for the Giant Lord on His comfy chair,
In the land of Playground where the gamers lie.
One Thread to rule them all, One Thread to find them,
One Thread to bring them all, and in the forums bind them,
In the land of Playground where the gamers lie.

[Dunesen]

There have probably been far grander ways in which a thread has gone off course, but since I'm new to the forums this is the first memorable example of it. For the foreseeable future this will be the standard for getting lost.

Solo, Odysseus is lucky he didn't have you as a navigator. :smalltongue:

[Solo]

And don't you forget it.

[Dunesen]

And don't you forget it.

Don't worry. My brain puts people into one of three categories: Lust, Hate, and Dubious Navigational Skills.

[Aquillion]

Solo, Odysseus is lucky he didn't have you as a navigator. :smalltongue:

Odysseus: All right, now that we've blinded the cyclops, I sneak out under one of his sheep.

DM: As you leave, the cyclops bellows "Brothers, avenge me! Nobody has hurt me!"

Odysseus: Heh, heh, heh. That was really clever, Solo... but you still shouldn't have blinded him, even if you told him it was Nobody. How are you going to keep him from tracking you down eventually?

Solo: All right, time for the next stage of my plan. I cast a Major Image next to Odysseus, have it mimic his voice, and say "Haha, it was not Nobody who hurt you, but I, Odysseus!"

Odysseus: You utter bastard.

Solo: Also, when Oddy tries to run back to the ship, I cast Slow on him. And Black Tentacles. And if he actually looks like he might make it, I start spamming Power Word: Stun. Oh, and by the way? Gust of Wind was a second-level spell all along. Sucks to be you.

[Solo]

Solo: I then Polymorph myself into a dead ringer for Odyssius, kill off the crew so no one can tell, then Teleport back home and take his wife in a manly fashion whilst residing on his kingly throne.

Odysseus: Curse your sudden yet inevitable betrayal!

Solo: Muhuhahaha! Mine is an evil laugh! Now die!

[Dunesen]

Solo: I then Polymorph myself into a dead ringer for Odyssius, kill off the crew so no one can tell, then Teleport back home and take his wife in a manly fashion whilst residing on his kingly throne.

Odysseus: Curse your sudden yet inevitable betrayal!

Solo: Muhuhahaha! Mine is an evil laugh! Now die!

So now who comes after you in the sequel, his son or his best friend that you thought had been killed by the Cyclops?

[Flickerdart]

Poseidon drops the entire ocean on Solo. It's not a very long sequel.

[Dunesen]

Poseidon drops the entire ocean on Solo. It's not a very long sequel.

Oh...a bit anticlimatic.

...

*cough*