What makes a good comic?

[Sammy_black]

I was wandering the other day : What makes a good comic book?

For myself, I must like the sensibility of the drawing and the story. I must be able to relate to at least one of the characters. The character, from my point of view are very important. I must like them or else I will not like the story.

I will pass for my " what makes a good comic?", and I want the opinion of other comic book lovers.

[Terotrous]

I think a major part of what makes a for a good comic is for the creator to know their strengths. Some people can tell a good story, others are very good at writing jokes, some people are extremely competent artists, others would do better to keep things simple, etc.

I think almost anyone can produce a good comic if they can identify their strengths and make use of them.

[Sammy_black]

I Like that very much

[VeryCuddlyCornpone]

Well, we kinda have a topic like this already, and I put mostly everything I could think of there

[McDuffies]

To me, what makes a great comic is when art and writing work together to make a sum that is larger than it's part.
I prefere comics that have some sort of subtext, where there's a sence of what the comic is trying to say and that the thing it's trying to say isn't superficial. I like comics that present a certain understanding of the world.

[Sammy_black]

I have pretty much the same idea. When there is non message I feel like there is no story. I like alot when the words and the image fit perfectly to make one and tell a message by just being.

[Mo]

If I'm still interested after reading three strips, the comic isn't shit. If I'm still interested after twenty strips, it's good.

A great comic has to be consistently good. This includes both the quality of art and writing. Only one of the two is not enough. The art may be what will first catch my eye, but it is the writing and characters that keep me reading.

Funny strips have to be original or at least well executed to keep me interested. Clichés are boring. I read zero webcomics that are about guys playing videogames. And I like games.

I tend not to read many "serious" story-driven comics where there is little to no humor, no punchlines etc, mainly because the ones that have decent artwork update so slowly that it makes it difficult for me to get into the story - I'd prefer to read such stories in a printed version when it's all finished, much like a regular novel.

My regular webcomic reading list used to consist of over 30 webcomics, now it's less than 10 - partly because some of my favourite comics ended, or went on infinite hiatus, but also because some comics just weren't worth my time any more.

[McDuffies]

If I'm still interested after reading three strips, the comic isn't shit. If I'm still interested after twenty strips, it's good.

I've read so many webcomics that only got good after months or years, so nowadays I have to read everything I start in entirity. It's a neurosis.

Have you notices, when you check a random comic in a longer storyline, it always gives impression that the comic is more interesting than it really is.

[VeryCuddlyCornpone]

Have you notices, when you check a random comic in a longer storyline, it always gives impression that the comic is more interesting than it really is.

Haha yes. Sometimes if I'm reading a comic that I'm not particularly enjoying I go to the archive and find a random future date so that I can console myself as to whether the comic is going to get better anytime soon.

Granted, I have read relatively few webcomics in their entirety. Probably less than 20, which includes a lot of the ones that I read to review.

[McDuffies]

Have you notices, when you check a random comic in a longer storyline, it always gives impression that the comic is more interesting than it really is.

Haha yes. Sometimes if I'm reading a comic that I'm not particularly enjoying I go to the archive and find a random future date so that I can console myself as to whether the comic is going to get better anytime soon. [/quote]
I read a lot of comics that way... I see the last page and it looks interesting and mysterious, then when I read everything, the event in question turns out to be banal and inconsequential...

Granted, I have read relatively few webcomics in their entirety. Probably less than 20, which includes a lot of the ones that I read to review.

That's because when you started reading comics they were all ten years old or so. When I started, the oldest ones were five years old.

[VeryCuddlyCornpone]

This is true. I get a bit intimidated by a huge archive, so unless I know it's something I'm going to enjoy for sure, I usually say "Ahhh, so and so has enough readers."

[Mo]

If I'm still interested after reading three strips, the comic isn't shit. If I'm still interested after twenty strips, it's good.

I've read so many webcomics that only got good after months or years, so nowadays I have to read everything I start in entirity. It's a neurosis.

When I find a new comic (which happens rarely as I don't really look for them any more) I tend to read new pages from the latest updates, rather than start at the beginning, to see if I like it. If I'm then still interested after going back so and so many pages, I might do an archive trawl.

Surely you don't keep reading EVERY comic in its entirety if it is badly written or completely uninteresting?

[McDuffies]

Surely you don't keep reading EVERY comic in its entirety if it is badly written or completely uninteresting?

Well I am a closet neurotic. I usually do read the comic through, but if I decided I hate it, I gradually start skipping, glazing over and noticing only main events.
There are a few comics where I couldn't get to the end. Like, I never read entire Dominic Deegan, after a while it just became too painful, like looking at a guy embarrasing himself in public.

[Sammy_black]

If the comic book does not get any better in time I stop reading it. What i like about comic books is that you can see the growth of the and of the creator. That is a wonderfull ting to folow.

[Terotrous]

When reading a new comic, I typically read the current page, then the first 5 comics or so from the archives. If none of those are funny or interesting, that's pretty much it.

Of course, this means that the earliest strips in your comic's archive are very important, even though they're usually the ones that are drawn the worst and probably weren't thought out all that well. I'm not really sure what the best way to address that would be.

[Mo]

When reading a new comic, I typically read the current page, then the first 5 comics or so from the archives. If none of those are funny or interesting, that's pretty much it.

Of course, this means that the earliest strips in your comic's archive are very important, even though they're usually the ones that are drawn the worst and probably weren't thought out all that well. I'm not really sure what the best way to address that would be.

Once you're at 100-200 strips you could always touch up on the first 5 pages, just to trick new readers.

[McDuffies]

Of course, this means that the earliest strips in your comic's archive are very important, even though they're usually the ones that are drawn the worst and probably weren't thought out all that well. I'm not really sure what the best way to address that would be.

Well, there is something in immediacy and improvisational character of those first 5 comics.