I hate retcons. Universe altering retcons are even worse. Minor ones can be ignored.
There is nothing wrong with streamlining and disposing of old content. Traditionally, DC has done a better job of that than Marvel. But, in the last decade or so (particularly at the direction of Johns), DC has have more complicating fixes than simplifying fixes.
As it stands, it looks like Marvel is heading towards a "Crisis" story. The incursions (and other events) in the Avengers books are implying a multiversal disaster. And, time was specifically broken in "Age of Ultron".
It depends on the writer or general editorial policy. There have been times when events from thirty years before were referenced, and sometimes even spawned a new story. But I think we're well past the point where the integrity of their fictional history matters to DC. How can they hype things and sell a few more books this week? That's all that matters to them now.
Current DC editorial makes 90s Marvel look good.
Part of the problem is that most of DC's readers are new/younger. Those guys do not know the tricks of the industry, so DC's antics are working on them. I had a conversation with one of them last Friday at the comic shop. The manager and I were talking about recent trends, and the kid was impressed with how much we knew and could call. But, all we really did was look back at the history of the industry.
DC is coming up on its third reboot in less than a decade. Up to the "Crisis Trilogy", this sort of thing meant something at DC. They had decisive stories that over-wrote old stories and then the company moved on. But, the changes were planned, if not always followed through on. "Flashpoint" was a last minute change with no planning.
Were people really that saddle-sore about the deaths of supporting characters from a What-If book last seen four years ago? Comics fans are weird. People really need to get their priorities strai-
Wait, in last issue, Slott killed off Spider-Man and his Amazing Friends! The nerve of that monster! I'm going to boycott every Spider-Book, write an angry letter to Marvel editorial, and go throw a tantrum in my local shop, screaming until Slott personally comes over and un-kills those characters! It's only what a true fan would do.
Dude, have you been reading CBR? There are people trying to argue that
MJ and love interst guy
maybe survived
the big explosion and fire, what with all the screaming and all.
People are looking for holes in the line about
May and Ben being the only avatars left
, because they do not want to deal with
the implication that it means that MC2 Kaine and the other spiders are dead
, even though "Edge of Spider-Verse" is a house-cleaning and that
MC2 is
a derelict line that is actually counter to Marvel's current directives.
I can almost see being more angry about the Amazing Friends, because that was purely for the sake of trolling fans. (If nothing else, why is Slott wasting page space for it?) But, the complaints basically come down to fantards who cannot let go of a cartoon from 30 years. ago. But,
wiping out the MC2 spiders
is part of an overall direction that Marvel is going in,
(specifically getting rid of all signs of Peter and MJ )
, and thus more justified.
Why is that weird? It's not just comic book fans that form attachments to characters and get upset to see them killed off you know.
But, comic fans are the ones who typically get *really* attached to characters, even when the character has not been used for years.
've heard the Spider-Man from the 90's cartoon was killed off as well.
A cartoon Spider-Man was killed. But, I think it was the late 90s cartoon. (The early 90s cartoon might be off limits for licensing reasons or something. Dunno. Need to find more information.)
The point is, this was a blatant cash grab by Marvel. There was no extra added value for that extra dollar. It was just more of the same, literally. Could I afford that extra dollar? Sure. Was I going to reward Marvel for this stunt? Absolutely not. Not that they know or care. If the book continues to sell the same amount of copies, Marvel's now making 25% more than they were before, and I guarantee THEY notice the difference. An extra $30,000 or $40,000 every month isn't chump change.
The problem is that the increases can be off-set by lower sales volume. And, the more money that readers are spending for individual books, the more that publishers stand to lose if/when those readers drop a book.
One extra dollar a month doesn't qualify as 'hefty' in any scope. As for the reason: Prices on pretty much everything, particularly consumables like comics, go up over time. That's how the economy works. The fact that comics have a perpetually shrinking user-base probably doesn't help either.
It depends how you are monetizing for "increase". In absolute terms, a buck is not much. But, by percentages, it is expensive (both as a percentage of the original or the new price).
Still, I cannot see dropping a good book because the price went up. As stated above, I am likely to drop the cheapest book on my pull-list because it is also the worst book on my pull-file.
"Earth 2" is one of the few times I have regretted my pull-file. After I drop the book, I am going to be stuck with two weekly books until the "drop" gets processed. Damn, I need to get caught up on that book so I can be justified in dropping in (rather than dropping it without giving it a chance). Even if I drop the book this week (and I am unlikely to get to the comic shop), I would be stuck with it until sometime in November.
