What was it like

[VeryCuddlyCornpone]

Is this foreshadowing good things to come to CG's near future?

It always seems that way but then always seems to fade back to the same way it's been.

[Terotrous]

Wow, it's like a nostalgia party and everyone's invited!

Let's party like it's 2005 and we all still draw comics! Woo!


*busts out poster pens*

[Toxic]

Is this is where TheSuberbanLetdown comes in, tells you he did and you tell him to go fuck himself?

Where is he? I enjoy our borderline-flirting.

"Borderline."

Isn't that AudioScience's middle name?

Aww crap, I forgot to send that kid a birthday card and $20 this year.

[Nanda]

Wow, it's like a nostalgia party and everyone's invited!

Let's party like it's 2005 and we all still draw comics! Woo!


*busts out poster pens*

What's a comic?

[McDuffies]

From what I rememember it's a that's a guy standing on a small stage, telling jokes.

[Faceless]

Hey everyone, it's been a while. Good to see some of the old lot are still around, as well as some new faces! What's this I hear about people not making comics any more?

[IVstudios]

Comics are passé. Now we all make Let's Plays and Vlogs.

[spoonyliger]

It's true... I even started a Vlog with a friend recently.

...but I still draw comics. It's all I can do to save my life! And even that's not working! What do! How do I shot webcomics?

[Humbug]

I'm still drawing comics... am I passé now?

[Terotrous]

Surprisingly, I also still draw mine. Since restarting it I've continued for two full years longer than anyone could have anticipated.

[McDuffies]

I don't have time to draw right now.

[spoonyliger]

I don't have time to draw right now.

This saddens me.

[peterabnny]

Anyone can make a comic. Only a special artist can make one that isn't torn to shreds by LibertyCabbage...

[McDuffies]

Yey, I'm special!

[LibertyCabbage]

Anyone can make a comic. Only a special artist can make one that isn't torn to shreds by LibertyCabbage...

Did you forget about the post you made in May?

I looked through your reviews from then until you reviewed Sly Eagle's Quest, taking the viewpoint "If I received this review, would I consider it Good (or Positive), Bad (or Negative) or Mixed. I found 11 were Good, four bad, and six mixed. Out of 21 reviews, 17 good or mixed and only FOUR bad! Needless to say I was damned-near shocked, considering your reputation! I guess seeing how things were before your review of my comic overly - and wrongly, I suppose - colored my view of your reviews since. So, yeah - "Your Honor, I'd like to withdraw my previous objection."

[peterabnny]

Anyone can make a comic. Only a special artist can make one that isn't torn to shreds by LibertyCabbage...

Did you forget about the post you made in May?

I looked through your reviews from then until you reviewed Sly Eagle's Quest, taking the viewpoint "If I received this review, would I consider it Good (or Positive), Bad (or Negative) or Mixed. I found 11 were Good, four bad, and six mixed. Out of 21 reviews, 17 good or mixed and only FOUR bad! Needless to say I was damned-near shocked, considering your reputation! I guess seeing how things were before your review of my comic overly - and wrongly, I suppose - colored my view of your reviews since. So, yeah - "Your Honor, I'd like to withdraw my previous objection."

Oh, I haven't forgotten. That's still as true then as it is now. To me, ANY artist who can pass muster with you is a special artist, even if they get mixed reviews. I'd like to think that I've since improved since then, but I rather doubt it.

Still, SOMEbody has to bring up the negative end of the spectrum, so I guess I'm that. No worries, tho. I'm come to terms with my own comic fail. The trick is to surrender giving a rat's fuzzy bottom about it.

Incidently, all this talk of stats had me curious so I went to my site host for the first time in months to see how I've been doing. Pretty much as bad as I expected, but what was interesting was the site's report of where people were coming from. 1.3% of my site traffic came from somewhere called the Webcomic Police. I forgot that that was your outfit until I saw your review. Ah, the memories...

[LibertyCabbage]

To me, ANY artist who can pass muster with you is a special artist, even if they get mixed reviews.

I guess. I just don't like the idea that the hordes of Joe Shmoes posting their comics online somehow make the creators who display some competence "special" by comparison. Just like a kid who gets a "C-" isn't "gifted" just because everyone else in the class got an "F." I guess the exception to this, though, would be the creators who can't write but have amazing artwork, which still end up seeming "special" even though their comics are kinda lackluster overall.

I'd like to think that I've since improved since then, but I rather doubt it.

A big problem I pointed out in my review's your lack of updates. 2011 had nine updates, while 2012 had eight. So, just judging by that, I'd objectively say it looks like the comic's actually gotten worse.

Still, SOMEbody has to bring up the negative end of the spectrum, so I guess I'm that.

I do review a lot of webcomics other people won't. For example, on Smack Jeeves, when people request reviews for blatantly sucky webcomics, they often get ignored for weeks or even months because no one wants to be "the bad guy." So, then I finally review them, and it's, like, "You're mean." Well, okay.

No worries, tho. I'm come to terms with my own comic fail. The trick is to surrender giving a rat's fuzzy bottom about it.

Except that you went from wanting to do the comic professionally to not caring about it because of a bad review you got. To me, that doesn't sound like a normal reaction. I'm optimistic and believe it's possible for anyone to be a successful cartoonist if they have the right attitude about it, so I feel like it ultimately comes down to you making a conscious decision as to how important being a successful cartoonist is to you. If you're just doing the webcomic as a hobby for your personal enjoyment, then you aren't failing at it if you're having fun doing it. "Failure" only means the inability to fulfill a goal.

Incidently, all this talk of stats had me curious so I went to my site host for the first time in months to see how I've been doing. Pretty much as bad as I expected, but what was interesting was the site's report of where people were coming from. 1.3% of my site traffic came from somewhere called the Webcomic Police. I forgot that that was your outfit until I saw your review. Ah, the memories...

Well, hey, I guess on the bright side, you got some free traffic out of the ordeal.

[peterabnny]

I guess. I just don't like the idea that the hordes of Joe Shmoes posting their comics online somehow make the creators who display some competence "special" by comparison. Just like a kid who gets a "C-" isn't "gifted" just because everyone else in the class got an "F."

You have to remember, tho, if you're the kid constantly getting "F"s and "D"s, that "C" starts looking pretty darned good to you after a while, and you start to admire the kids who can get it.

A big problem I pointed out in my review's your lack of updates. 2011 had nine updates, while 2012 had eight. So, just judging by that, I'd objectively say it looks like the comic's actually gotten worse.

You also said, "The home page is embarrassingly primitive. It looks like something from the '90s, and it's by far the worst website of the comics I've reviewed so far. Even the generic templates that Smack Jeeves and Drunk Duck spit out are superior...It's [the writing] the same kind of cute, bland, unfunny, and apolitical slice-of-life gag strips you'd expect to see in the comics section of a print newspaper...As far as describing the writing mechanically, which I feel obligated to devote at least a few words to, it's never funny or amusing in any way, and the characters are completely devoid of personality...Lastly, the furry world in the comic doesn't always play out very plausibly...The art's decent, but it gets boring pretty quickly because almost all the panels are just variations of the characters standing and talking or sitting and talking...If Critters ever actually updated once in a while I could maybe give it some credit for at least trying, but since it doesn't even do that I just don't really see the point of it..."

That's what I was actually thinking of when I wrote that part about trying to improve since last year. As long as I have a full life away from my drawing table (and one that seems to keep getting busier and busier all the time), and as long as I'm more focused on trying to improve the quality of my production rather than kill myself over quantity, I don't see that as taking quantum leaps forward any time soon. However, would it really matter, tho, given what you said before? Wouldn't pumping out more crap just make a bigger mess? Even if I had the wherewithall to boost production, I'd want to have a marketable product first as you wrote in your review.

I do review a lot of webcomics other people won't. For example, on Smack Jeeves, when people request reviews for blatantly sucky webcomics, they often get ignored for weeks or even months because no one wants to be "the bad guy." So, then I finally review them, and it's, like, "You're mean." Well, okay.

Heheheheh...

Although you did say that you wouldn't have bothered to review my comic unless I personally asked you...

Except that you went from wanting to do the comic professionally to not caring about it because of a bad review you got. To me, that doesn't sound like a normal reaction. I'm optimistic and believe it's possible for anyone to be a successful cartoonist if they have the right attitude about it, so I feel like it ultimately comes down to you making a conscious decision as to how important being a successful cartoonist is to you. If you're just doing the webcomic as a hobby for your personal enjoyment, then you aren't failing at it if you're having fun doing it. "Failure" only means the inability to fulfill a goal.

I guess, but IMO part of your enjoyment comes from sharing what you love and the being able to see others' enjoyment in return. But when they tell you you suck, it takes the fun and joy out of it. For me, it wasn't just one bad review (or, two, as it turned out). It was one bad review and little else. Had I gotten your review, but I already had such a massive following of rabid fans who would go after anyone who talked bad about their favorite cartoon, as well as other positive reviews from other outlets, your's likely wouldn't have meant crap to me. However, since I do in fact get so little feedback from people - least of all, reviews - your one bad review was uber amplified against the stark silence, which was made even worse since it was peer-to-peer. Additionally, in response to my doubt about improvement since that bad review, instead of saying something like, "Not at all! You've improved the comic's layout considerably since then, and I can see a marked improvement in your character's personalities," you hone in again on my lack of updates. On this side of the monitor, what WASN'T said was infinitely louder than what WAS said.

But as I said, I've built a pretty blue suspension bridge with stone piers to help me get over it. My reaction may not sound normal to you, but I assure you - it was a change long in coming. I finally and eventually realized long ago that I was never going to make a living from my comic; so, that part on the website about me holding out hope to do so was in fact bullshit. I mean, sure - if some outfit happened on my comic and wanted to sign me, of course I'd go along! But to be perfectly honest, by the time you got a hold of my comic, I already knew how that story was going to end. Okay, fine - I can't make a living from Critters. But I can at least make Critters popular! So, I figured I'd take the next best thing: an Internet presence with a burgeoing fanbase. But even that seemed elusive after a while. After a long while of second-guessing myself and my efforts, alternatingly hating myself and trying to figure out why I couldn't get decent numbers on anything, I finally came to the realization that I needed to just...let...go of trying to be the next big thing on the Internet and instead do what I wanted and not obsess about numbers and popularity. But actually doing so was proved to be sooooo freakin' difficult, too. Fans and popularity were the heroin that I just...couldn't...break free of. No matter how many times I thought I was finally clean and ready to move on and just do Critters as a private hobby, seeing what my artist friends had sent me off running for another fix.

Wellsir, I can honestly say you (and Scooby) helped clean my head once and for all. Whatever lingering ambitions I had before your review, I didn't have them afterwards. It was in that subsequent period of detox that I finally and at long last came to a clearer vision of what I wanted to do with my comic and how, deciding that I definitely wanted to keep it going, but focus on building a better comic rather than building a bigger fanbase. If I can stay true to my update schedule, so much the better. Let's make a game of it. But if not, what the hell difference does it make? It's not like I have to worry about losing scores of ass-kissing fanboys I never really had to begin with. And so, my dear LibbertyCabbage, it may sound like an abnormal change from wanting to do Critters professionally to not caring about it over a bad review, but I assure you, sir - there was way more going on on this side of the monitor than you think.

Well, hey, I guess on the bright side, you got some free traffic out of the ordeal.

Indeed, bad publicity is still publicity. At the very least, there weren't any haters leaving comments after your Webcomic Police review.

[Humbug]

For the most part negative reviews are actually pretty honest and can highlight problems in your comic. The difference is how much tact the reviewer has. Years back, I received my first ever scathing review (and I had a bit of a following at the time) and the reviewer didn't pull any punches. Boy, did I feel every single one of them. But I did agree that my old comic was, well, bad. Even my new writer commented that the old ToP was the "prettiest train wreck he had ever seen" so I don't think it was just one guy being mean. I hope the new ToP now will be better than ever.

Something interesting I noticed was that the review itself received 1 star from 4 people, so I wonder if it was old fans.

[peterabnny]

For the most part negative reviews are actually pretty honest and can highlight problems in your comic. The difference is how much tact the reviewer has. Years back, I received my first ever scathing review (and I had a bit of a following at the time) and the reviewer didn't pull any punches. Boy, did I feel every single one of them. But I did agree that my old comic was, well, bad. Even my new writer commented that the old ToP was the "prettiest train wreck he had ever seen" so I don't think it was just one guy being mean. I hope the new ToP now will be better than ever.

Something interesting I noticed was that the review itself received 1 star from 4 people, so I wonder if it was old fans.

It's one thing to have a negative review that tells you how to improve. It's another to have a negative review that doesn't. I should never have a problem being told I suck. But at least tell me why so I can fix it!