XKCD: It's more than a comic

In retrospect I'm surprised it took five posts (aka a third of a page) to come up with that joke.

edit: Any normal forum that'd be a third of a page. Here it's a fifth of a page, to help facilitate an even higher unrelated tangent density.

edited 23rd Jul '09 11:15:06 PM by Brickman

Your funny quote here! (Maybe)

This one almost makes up for the bad threesome strip.

Barret guy is my favourite character. I think he's supposed to be the embodiment of some philosophy.

the statement above is false

I think it was absurdism or something!

Existentialism.

I thought this comic was cute.

Welcome To TV Tropes | How To Write An Example | Text-Formatting Rules | List Of Shows That Need Summary | TV Tropes Forum | Know The Staff

Huh, I gotta say I'm a little surprised at all the positive reactions to Woodpecker. It is pretty cute I guess, but my strongest and most initial reaction was a big WTF.

I suppose my mileage varied.

Exits, pursued by a bear.

It's clearly a ripoff of the classic WoodyWoodpecker cartoon, "Happy Birthday Woody." I can't believe Randell's ripping off my childhood now!

Sex, Drugs, and Rationality

Beret. :/

That was hilarious, and cute too. Subtle but effective use of the Infinite Canvas, too, you have to scroll down to see the present Beret Guy gave the woodpecker. That increases the punch.

After thinking about it, I realized why I didn't like this one: the setup. Frankly, I think this comic would be much better if it consisted solely of the last panel.

The first panel is fine; but the second is all kinds of contrived. How does she know that it hatched about that time last year? I'm no ornithologist but a quick google tells me that woodpeckers have a lifespan of at least a few years, and I've always been under the impression that most if not all birds are fully mature well before one year of age, leaving no way for her to visually distinguish a year-old woodpecker from, say, a three-year-old one. Much more importantly, even if we willingly suspend disbelief and accept that she can somehow know the woodpecker's age for sure, the dialogue of her response is a jarring and cringe-worthy non sequitur. Who hears "A woodpecker!" and feels compelled to reply with an estimation of when it hatched? It's awfully stilted, clumsy, and expository, almost the webcomic version of an Infodump, obviously and inelegantly shoehorned in to justify the upcoming birthday present—speaking of which...

Mr. Beret's leap from "The bird hatched about a year ago" to "I should get it a present!" is also somewhat of a non-sequitur. Normally, it wouldn't bother me, because hey, Rule of Cute! However, because it comes on the heels of a much more egregious one, I am already so turned off by these characters' random leaps in dialogue and thought that even Rule of Cute can't assuage my distaste for them.

I would prefer it if Randall had just started out with Mr. Beret standing below the tree, present in hands, saying "Happy birthday, woodpecker" or something. I would much rather suspend disbelief enough to accept the assumption that he knows it is the Woodpecker's birthday and would buy it a present than sit through a disjointed explanation for why he knows it is the Woodpecker's birthday and would buy it a present, if that makes any sense.

Actually, the best setup would be the image of a Home Depot with smashed windows and disarrayed shelves... and then a whole flock of woodpeckers carrying drills! But somehow I doubt that is the mood Randall was going for, which is fine.

Anyway, I really wasn't intending to ruin the funny with all the analysis, so sorry if I had that effect on anyone... sloppy explosition is just a pet peeve of mine, even in a stick figure comic.

edited 24th Jul '09 11:23:48 PM by Lyanna

Exits, pursued by a bear.

She was present when it happened?

Maybe there weren't woodpeckers in that tree two years ago?

Your funny quote here! (Maybe)

Points taken. Much more importantly, even if we willingly suspend disbelief and accept that she can somehow know the woodpecker's age for sure, the dialogue of her response...

edited 25th Jul '09 2:13:12 AM by Lyanna

Exits, pursued by a bear.

Owwww. He Panned It Now It Sucks (we should have this one). No, actually not, I still like it - probably because Willing Suspension of Disbelief is a subjective thing.

edited 25th Jul '09 5:55:59 AM by Ana

Really, it never struck me as odd.

• "hey, nice car", "yeah, got it last month"
• "what nice flowers", "thanks, planted them last spring"
• "love your outfit!", "this old thing? bought it ages ago"

This sort of response is quite normal in casual conversation where I'm from.

But w/e, sometimes a joke just falls flat for someone

edited 25th Jul '09 10:43:31 AM by GreatLich

Since he would essentially have to rewrite history for you to start enjoying the comic again, why do you keep readng it?

I mean, this isn't just a simple case of Don't Like, Don't Read, you've more or less admitted that you can't go back to liking the comic at all. So aside from venting and spoiling the experience for people who still do like it, what's the point in following it?

...eventually, we will reach a maximum entropy state where nobody has their own socks or underwear, or knows who to ask to get them back.

edit: Wait. Nevermind. I'm a little slow today... I was going to say we have this as He Panned It, Now He Sucks!, but...

edited 25th Jul '09 5:37:47 PM by Eriksson

I think I liked the bird one. The avoidance one not so much. Or at all.

@Meta Four: I don't really have passion. I was vaguely lying. (Anything worth doing is worth doing well, however.) Though there's this new guy though on the Polk Out forums who really has it out for the thing.

Regarding opinions: Please read through this[1]. (6, 7, and 14 if you want the relevant sections about OMG OPINIONS.) The theft of SMBC material thing was rather blatant.(Just 3 days later! And it's not like it was something that was featured in the news! !!!11!1)

Too late! I will be more punctual from now on! More exclamations all around!

@Madrugada: No! It's like the difference between 'Classic' Coke and New Coke and I'm the only one who can tell, save for a few people in that what webcomics have you stopped reading thread. If that metaphor doesn't work, how about another one? You have a water bottling plant, maybe even flavored or sparkling or whatever (actually that's all the better). This is xkcd back when. The comics since 2009 (& some of those that capped off 2008) are the equivilant of Randy dumping heaps of dirt, sand, what-have-you in there and ruining an otherwise good product. The decline in quality (writing, although there are some glaring art mistakes staring back at me through my monitor on another tab) is noticeable to someone who can taste high fructose corn syrup. I think that's a pretty 1 to 1 analogy that came back full circle to Coke again. Well, no, the metaphors weren't that different in retrospect. Too late, already typed up and ready to be ignored with "lol".

Other dude, I will get a thesaurus; I don't agree with what else you said but that's a non-issue because I don't care anymore. Other people: bolding and quoting functions noted.

The promises of children are worth less than the children themselves.

You'e the only one who can tell? That won't win you any arguments.

What's the frequency Kenneth?|In case of war.

I'm here to explain why I like or dislike the current xkcd, as I have done before. It's not like I said "It's bad because it's bad!!!11" (or vice versa) Reasoning goes into it, which is then generally ignored with "OPINIONS!1" Which was the point of that metaphor.

edited 26th Jul '09 9:29:27 PM by Mr. Lostman

The promises of children are worth less than the children themselves.

It sounds massively arrogant and ticks people off.

What's the frequency Kenneth?|In case of war.

I noted people in that other thread noticed it.

And I could care less about elitist accusations.

The promises of children are worth less than the children themselves.

People. It's a webcomic. It's not that important. Nobody cares. Okay? Just a webcomic. Not the downfall of western civilization or the greatest thing since sliced bread, a webcomic. That's it. So please don't have an angry argument about it...

[1] This facsimile operated in part by synAC.

615 is pretty funny, but then again, I'm someone who generally enjoys xkcd.

Heapers’ Hangout

So you are either a troll or someone on a holy mission to make sure people will at some day finally see the utter badness that is xkcd - on a forum with people you openly admit you don't give a shit about what they think.

The other, more pathetic options are the classic "Stop Having Fun" Guys guy or attention seeking behavior. But be careful. The fascination of a caged monkey flinging his own excrements gets old sooner or later.

Oh, nice link btw. Shows how easily you can void your somehow correct statements by being a total asshat.

Calm down. Nobody's being an asshat. Mr. Lostman is not a troll. He's entitled to his opinion, and he's being pretty gracious about it.

[1] This facsimile operated in part by synAC.