"Infestation 2"

[BWprowl]

Prowl usually gives good reviews for that as do Anderson and Scourge. Dom... not so much. He comments on the behind the scenes stuff more than the comic itself. Although, I'm right there with you, I'd prefer to know what happens in the comic rather than the editorial stuff.

My reviews do that? It always feels like I'm just vomiting out tl;dr paragraphs of 'Here's a bunch of stuff I didn't like, but it's okay because here's some stuff I did like'. It's interesting to hear because I honestly try not to write reviews that are summaries, since that's not what I actually want out of a review. I prefer one for a comic book I'm interested in to tell me as little about what happens in the book as possible, just tell me if it's good or not so I can get it and read it with minimal spoilers. Likewise, a review shouldn't have to go over the basic points of a book for people that didn't/won't read it, could just check wikipedia summaries or something for that. A review should just tell you if a book sucks or not.

I do make a point of staying away from letter grades though.

[Dominic]

But I must admit I'm curious about how IDW are still keeping up the "-ation" schtick. How far can it go and still be part of the same story?

This is only verbally an "-ation" book. It actually has less to do with the main TF books than last year's cross-over.

I *really* dislike point by point reviews. "Stuff what happens" tends to be tedious to read, and even more so to write. Unless it is something epically bad and sporadic (like "Sabertooth: Death Hunt" and some parts of "Countdown") that I can have real fun with, I am generally not going to bother.

Short summary: The monsters from the first book-end issue were sent across dimendions/the multiverse. The TF issue shows them landing in a TF timeline and mergine with some Decepticons. To be....continued! Seriously, Dixon plots are so predictable that you can probably work out what happens by looking at the genre, in this case a crossover.

He comments on the behind the scenes stuff more than the comic itself. Although, I'm right there with you, I'd prefer to know what happens in the comic rather than the editorial stuff.

What behind the scenes stuff are you seeing in my reviews? "Dixon has gotten lazy and predictable over the last 10-15 years" is commonly known.

I enjoy Dom's reviews, since they often consist of a pithy ad hominem against the creative team and a single letter grade. He's like a cartoon teacher. =p

Because I never give good reviews or praise the guys who make the comics apparently....

Infestation 2 doesn't have anything to do with the first one. Cthulu-related Eldritch abominations show up in the Hearts of Steel spinoff universe. Stuff happens.

And, it also crosses over with at least one, possibly 2, in-house IDW properties. This thing is the definition of "half-assed money-grab".

A good place to start'd be.. oh, I dunno.. more than one word?

Long titles and sub-titles on comics are not a good idea. They make it harder for people to subscribe to and order books. When there are too many books with similar sounding titles (especially the beginnings of the titles), it leads to confusion among distributors, retailers and customers.

"Infestation: ___________" is probaby the best way to go.

, a review shouldn't have to go over the basic points of a book for people that didn't/won't read it, could just check wikipedia summaries or something for that. A review should just tell you if a book sucks or not.

Exactly, plenty of other places have spoilers and/or "I read it so you do not have to" reviews.

I use letter grades for people who just want a quick and easy metric to go by.


Dom
-which is why I occassionally explain the grades.

[Gomess]

A good place to start'd be.. oh, I dunno.. more than one word?

Long titles and sub-titles on comics are not a good idea.

More than one word = Long title and sub-title? That's some conclusion-jumpin' there, fella. I'd be happy with a two-word title. With no colon! You know, an actual statement that perhaps has more than one meaning. Or at least an actual meaning, rather than a vague descriptor of what happens in the book.

I just find these one-word titles cliché and pretentious (which is an incredible feat, if you think about it). And two-word titles with colons just blow me away. Right out of the shop with my wallet shut tight.

But of course, having a bunch of comics ending with "-ation" is just fine. =p

"A Night to Remember" could've so easily been called "Titanic"... O wait

[Dominic]

More than one word = Long title and sub-title? That's some conclusion-jumpin' there, fella. I'd be happy with a two-word title.

Keep in mind the tiny type and still limited space on many order forms. I forget the character-limit. But, if you have more than one book with the first word, ("Transformers", "Infestation", "Desperation", "Cancellation", and then those having sub-titles or additional words, ("More than Meets the Eye", "Robots in Disguise", "poop from your rectal eye"), skipping the colon will not help.

This is a systemic problem. I prefer non-coloned (heee heeee heeee, "colon") titles myself. If nothing else, I like to space book titles away from the reviews using colons (hahahahahaahahah, butt hole). And, long awkward titles are tedious to type and often add to confusion at the counter, especially when I am not ordering all of the books with the same root-title. (Seriously, it took Newbury about 3 months to realized that i was *just* reading the "GI Joe: Cobra" book, not "just 'GI Joe'" or "more than one Joe book" or "no Joe books" or.... You get the idea.

Part of me was afraid that I would end up reading "Ifestation" just because I am reading the other TF books. (If I put it back on the shelf, what confusion might that start?)



Dom
-gotta love the realities of comics...

[Gomess]

Well, I could accept "Transformers: Beast Wars" back in the day. I'm sure that's not too big for the average order form.

Now, I'm not in the business of doing people's work for them, but "Transformers: Old Ones" or "Transformers: Those Beneath" would catch my attention a heckuva lot better than "Transformers: Infestation".

But hey, IDW haven't missed my custom thus far.

[Dominic]

"Infestation" is IDW's in-house cross-over brand. The idea is that some generalized or public domain threat (zombies, Lovecraftian monsters, or whatever they use next year) launches some kind of interdimensional attack starting from one of IDW' in-house properties and out in to the licensed books, "infesting" them with monsters and stupid.

As we have discussed before, IDW is not above going the low road.

Dark Horse comics had a similar business model back in the 80s and 90s. They would get moribund, but recognized, licenses and use those to draw people in at the same time they developed in-house and creator owned properties. But, aside from a few logical cross-overs, ("Aliens v/s Predator" which was hinted at by the movies), Dark Horse generally avoided this sort of thing. And, even then, it was nowhere near this intrusive.

Dark Horse was not above using their licenses to entice readers to pick up their in-house books. But, they were classy about it. Every so often, Dark Horse would publish an anthology or something similar that just happened to include a broad sampling of their product offerings.

Last year's was so bad that I am not going to bother with this year's "Infestation". Yeah, there might be a suprisingly good stand-out, like last year's "Star Trek". But, even that was good more for being "competent damage control" than for being a good comic.


Dom
-notes that "Transformers" was arguably last year's worst, despite having the least excuse....

[BWprowl]

Long titles and sub-titles on comics are not a good idea. They make it harder for people to subscribe to and order books. When there are too many books with similar sounding titles (especially the beginnings of the titles), it leads to confusion among distributors, retailers and customers.

I was thinking about this, along with the thing you were talking about with IDW's G1 comics and the similar titles... It's not like it stops Marvel and DC from putting out all those similarly-named 'Batman' and 'Spider-Man' books, and I don't know that comic shops ever have trouble keeping those straight.

I mean really, they coulda called them 'The Amazing Transformers' and 'The Spectacular Transformers' and you would have lost all ability to complain about title confusion.

[Onslaught Six]

Eh. Stores order things but if you want specific things, it can get muddy. I specifically subscribed to both RID and MTMTE so I wouldn't miss a specific issue of the comic I actually wanted. (Which I'm still not sure the title of? Goddamn it IDW!)

[Dominic]

Adjectives, especially adjectives with different spellings and such, are very helpful.

The IDW "Transformers" situation is an example of this sort of thing being done wrong. The titles are similar in terms of being old slogans for the property. Hell, they even have similar meter. (That is one of the reasons I want to keep those threads on-topic, to make it easier for somebody to just open any page and figure it out.)

Multiple titles with the same character are fine. It allows for multiple stories of different tone/direction/quality, similar to what DC is doing with "Superman" and "Action Comics" right now. But, those are two books with long histories.

And, as stated above, "Infestation" is branding as much as a title.


Dom
-assumes that it might just be easier at some point to buy comics I do not want to get the ones that I do....

[Shockwave]

Prowl usually gives good reviews for that as do Anderson and Scourge. Dom... not so much. He comments on the behind the scenes stuff more than the comic itself. Although, I'm right there with you, I'd prefer to know what happens in the comic rather than the editorial stuff.

My reviews do that? It always feels like I'm just vomiting out tl;dr paragraphs of 'Here's a bunch of stuff I didn't like, but it's okay because here's some stuff I did like'. It's interesting to hear because I honestly try not to write reviews that are summaries, since that's not what I actually want out of a review. I prefer one for a comic book I'm interested in to tell me as little about what happens in the book as possible, just tell me if it's good or not so I can get it and read it with minimal spoilers. Likewise, a review shouldn't have to go over the basic points of a book for people that didn't/won't read it, could just check wikipedia summaries or something for that. A review should just tell you if a book sucks or not.

I do make a point of staying away from letter grades though.

Yes but you comment about what you did/did not like about the STORY. Whereas Dom comments on the behind the scenes stuff almost exclusively. If I want a commentary on the quality of a particular story I read your reviews. If I want a commentary on the state of editorial mandate in comics today, I read Dom's.