Official : Bendis gets both books

[Sacred Knight]

Outside of major anniversaries, I've never cared about numbering. Action could go back to #1 after #1000 for all I care.

[JasonTodd428]

I think there's a case to be made for excessive relaunching hurting the comic industry, but I guess I'm not surprised to see DC relaunching Superman (and just Superman) for Bendis' run.

That seems a little unnecessary to me though. Readers will come because of Bendis not because there is a number one on the cover of the book. Then again I've hated the excessive use of #1s that have been happening lately so it's soured me on the concept. Personally, I feel books should only have a #1 issue in the case of them being absolutely brand new or if they have been cancelled for a while and the company is giving them another go. I also think so long as you put the title of the story arc on the cover of the book there is already a "clear cut jumping on point" for new readers. I'm probably the only one that feels that way though.

However I do understand the desire to distance this from the previous runs of the book and to offer fans a firm beginning to what Bendis is working on.

That sort of makes it sound like what was happening with the book before this point was crap though and that's not the case here. Also I don't really see the need in doing so when Bendis coming onto the title already pretty much screams new story arc and new direction anyway. Like I said its a bit excessive in my opinion and it even makes it seem like Bendis wants to be able to say he worked on a Superman #1 comic for the accolades or something.

[JasonTodd428]

To be totally honest with you, I wouldn't at all mind it if they made it so every significant run has its own #1. Leave the real number somewhere on the cover (smaller than the number one for obvious reasons) for the old heads and posterity sake.

We could then stop thinking of it as relaunching.

What would be considered a significant run though? Would it be any time there is a creative team change? Also after the mess Marvel caused with their excessive use of #1s I'd rather comic companies stayed away from that idea for a while. Again that's probably just me.

[Superlad93]

What would be considered a significant run though? Would it be any time there is a creative team change? Also after the mess Marvel caused with their excessive use of #1s I'd rather comic companies stayed away from that idea for a while. Again that's probably just me.

Idk.

That'd probably be up to DC. Maybe like a 40 or 50 issue run or something. Nothing too short, but it doesn't have to be crazy long. This would mean that creators would have to commit to runs in a pretty real way, and they could always break the upper limit and go over if it's popular and they're down. But yeah, if they wanted to do something like this I'd be down, and it'd be simpler for people to come on and find their way back to where the run started.

[Flash Gordon]

To be totally honest with you, I wouldn't at all mind it if they made it so every significant run has its own #1. Leave the real number somewhere on the cover (smaller than the number one for obvious reasons) for the old heads and posterity sake.

We could then stop thinking of it as relaunching.

That's one thing that has been really rad about AQUAMAN. You have the NEW 52 Geoff Johns/Jeff Parker respective runs, which very much compliment each other, then you have AQUAMAN REBIRTH which is Dan Abnett's epic (sure he started in the final few issues of the previous series but ah well). It has made collecting easier. If Abnett leaves anytime soon (which I hope he does not, the book has been so dope) I'd like the next AQUAMAN to be a new #1.

So, yeah, long story short- I'm vibing with you man.

[Soubhagya]

To be totally honest with you, I wouldn't at all mind it if they made it so every significant run has its own #1. Leave the real number somewhere on the cover (smaller than the number one for obvious reasons) for the old heads and posterity sake.

We could then stop thinking of it as relaunching.

Not a bad idea on paper. As long as the original number is mentioned getting a number 1 should be fine. I don't know why it has not been experimented with. I can't think of a problem for this.

[MajorHoy]

Not a bad idea on paper. As long as the original number is mentioned getting a number 1 should be fine. I don't know why it has not been experimented with. I can't think of a problem for this.

Umm, you must be relatively new to comic books.

It has occasionally been done before.

[stephens2177]

Well nowadays the writer is now important than the character(not to me),we should just consider every time a new writer gets to write a character as a new volume.

The thing is though that these series are more continuous than series you find at Image or other independent companies.they have a team working on a book,with one set idea of story to deliver,then when they are done,they are done.next team gets the character down the road and goes in a totally different direction.

I say do it with 2 sets of numbering on the cover.the continuous # and the "teams" volume #.

[stephens2177]

Umm, you must be relatively new to comic books.

It has occasionally been done before.

Perfect example right there from good ol majorhoy,and with my favorite kon-el

[MajorHoy]

. . . The thing is though that these series are more continuous than series you find at Image or other independent companies.they have a team working on a book,with one set idea of story to deliver,then when they are done,they are done.next team gets the character down the road and goes in a totally different direction.

Uh, doesn't your example leave out the fact that, in general, DC (the corporation) owns the properties that get worked on, but independent companies like Image often don't own the characters; the creators often do?

[Soubhagya]

Umm, you must be relatively new to comic books.

It has occasionally been done before.

You got that right. A reader since Rebirth.

Do you know why they don't do this? From what i have been reading on the internet frequent relauches aren't showing proper results. Over a period of time they are showing a downward trend. Temporarily they do get a boost. #1 look easy to jump in.

Both numbers can be a good step.

[Daniel22]

What would be considered a significant run though? Would it be any time there is a creative team change? Also after the mess Marvel caused with their excessive use of #1s I'd rather comic companies stayed away from that idea for a while. Again that's probably just me.

I'd like them to go full on seasonal model like TV does. Each season can be twelve issues, or eighteen or longer if necessary. It would help with accessibility and would make selling trades a lot easier for me. It would mean each season would have a specific "hook" I could sell people on. I would stagger the new seasons so it isn't overwhelming when a customer walks in and sees 52 new number ones to choose from, but instead has the option to jump into any of a handful of books that just launched. Or they can easily know where to go back to in order to get caught up. Plot threads can continue from season to season, just like TV, but you would also have the traditional "big" season story have its full arc.

[StrikeJP]

I'd like them to go full on seasonal model like TV does. Each season can be twelve issues, or eighteen or longer if necessary. It would help with accessibility and would make selling trades a lot easier for me. It would mean each season would have a specific "hook" I could sell people on. I would stagger the new seasons so it isn't overwhelming when a customer walks in and sees 52 new number ones to choose from, but instead has the option to jump into any of a handful of books that just launched. Or they can easily know where to go back to in order to get caught up. Plot threads can continue from season to season, just like TV, but you would also have the traditional "big" season story have its full arc.

This. Completely agree. Always thought this for the longest time. It's mind-boggling comics haven't tried it yet.

[Daniel22]

This. Completely agree. Always thought this for the longest time. It's mind-boggling comics haven't tried it yet.

I think it's time to rethink the entire retail model. This would be a good first step. I'd also like it if they did more weekly series. Trying to sell a 12 year old potential customer (who knows nothing but binge watching full seasons upon release and total access to everything ever made, on their phone) on the idea that they get part one of a story now and the finale in six months to a year is nearly impossible. The attention span isn't there. But I digress.

[stephens2177]

Uh, doesn't your example leave out the fact that, in general, DC (the corporation) owns the properties that get worked on, but independent companies like Image often don't own the characters; the creators often do?

Yeah my point was that they can do that stuff more easily at independent.

Still doesn't mean DC shouldn't try it,hell they should try many different models,many on this page would be good.