XKCD: It's more than a comic

Okay fine. The artstyle bores me. I can't get past that to see whatever jokes there might be in there.

If somebody transplanted all the writing to something completely different, I could probably read it.

I find it so hard to believe that people care that deeply about the art. It's not that I think you're lying, it's just so far from my personal experience. Mileage varied.

What something looks like is always important to me. I think and remember things almost purely by visuals.

This is going to sound silly, but I like xkcd's art style. It's very simplistic, but the stick people are surprisingly expressive.

I like it too. It's just that there's something weird about Dinosaur Comics which I don't like.

I like Dinosaur Comics in small doses. Too much in one go and it starts to feel repetitive.

I think Dinosaur Comics as a concept is funny enough to justify their existence by itself. I'm not really a fan of the actual strips though, never quite clicked for me.

Being a recent convert to xkcd, I'm not entirely sure I get this ongoing negative trend people are talking about — it smacks of It's Popular, Now It Sucks!.

594 had me in stitches, and today's is pretty good too, considering it plays on Noodle Implements.

edited 12th Jun '09 6:18:33 AM by Fighteer

594 was pretty good, but with 3 dirty jokes in a row, I'm really starting to worry that the comic may go the way of VG Cats.

edited 12th Jun '09 8:28:45 AM by Eriksson

I think you're really overanalyzing here. It's a stick figure comic, you really should relax.

Also note that this was 500 comics ago.

Randall just keeps getting lazier.. and creepier..

I don't know. I thought the latest was pretty funny, if only because it's so familiar.

And the latest xkcd is a ripoff of SMBC.

http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=1547#comic

http://xkcd.com/598/

• Sigh*

edited 17th Jun '09 6:25:06 PM by Mr. Lostman

Doubtful. Who reads SMBC?

I love SMBC. Steps into Dude, Not Funny! for me sometimes, but it's fun for the most part.

Still, it's ridiculous to assume that just because a similar - not identical, but similar - joke appeared in another, more obscure webcomic, Munroe must have ripped it off.

It's seriously starting to annoy me the way every joke Munroe makes is declared to be a "rip-off" of another webcomic. You could do the same for any author of gag-a-day webcomics, or indeed, any author.

I read SMBC, but I don't think that's a ripoff. XKCD's joke was more technological.

I would have to agree.

Zach has claimed SMBC has at least 50,000 regular readers. And both comics appeared this very week with one just a few days before the other ...

How exactly is one more technological? They are the same joke.

edited 17th Jun '09 10:25:12 PM by Mr. Lostman

Yup not a rip-off to me either. XKCD is still funny to me. And for free entertainment, a dud now or then is excusable.

We're talking THREE DAYS here with the same joke. Ripoff!

Ah, but the true question is, does it matter?

It matters in the sense Randall has no fresh or original material, and could be considered a hack if this keeps up. Or right now.

'Cause webcomics are Serious Business?