Reviews Webcomic / Homestuck

I've read from act 1 to the first intermission.

Which means you quit before things started getting interesting. Though this also means that you quit before some of the problems mentioned here got really bad

almost no dialogue

What? Were you even reading the chatlogs? There are pages upon pages of dialogue.

I've read from act 1 to the first intermission. I think that's more than enough to write a review about.

There are six acts and three intermissions that each get longer with the telling. Of course, it's a webcomic, and should be judged at least partly by whether it draws you in early (any webcomic should do so if it hopes to survive), but I feel that proclaiming you've read more than enough to inform anyone whether they should invest time in this thing is jumping the gun. Things resolve, characters develop, old devices return. If nothing else, Hussie cares. Homestuck is more than a job for him - if it was a job, he'd probably be getting paid better.

Similarly, how much of the music have you heard to describe it all, without exception, as forgettable? There are many musicians at work, each of them with a distinct style, and dozens of musical genres combined, recut and remixed. It boggles the mind that none of it - not one composition, not one piece, not one bar - could be considered be memorable. It's like pointing at a wall covered in dozens of paintings, each one using different styles, colours, subjects, tones and mediums, by different artists with different levels of skill from brand new to old masters, and proclaiming that none are worth looking at.

Finally, there is no way you could or should be putting down cash to access Homestuck itself. The vast majority of the text, art and music assets are available on the web for free. What is that warning for?

I'm glad you liked my review! I will come back and check frequently for new comments, we all have many opinions of this work so I'll expect some heavy feedback!

I know there are alot of holes in this argument, but I'm not sure hating something without going through it all is valid criticism. And I'm not even a fan of Homestuck.

Sorry if this sounds offensive. Just my two cents, and it was beside a half-eaten rat corpse.

"I'm glad you liked my review! I will come back and check frequently for new comments, we all have many opinions of this work so I'll expect some heavy feedback!"

...Are you trolling us or something? Pretty much none of the feedback you've gotten so far has been positive.

@comment #16144 Endless Sea

No, not at all. I think the comments are very constructive, I've just haven't had the time to answer them yet.

@comment #16129 Twiddler

If you think chat logs counts as dialogue, then yes. There are a lot of badly written wall-of-text dialogue.

@comment #16130 Nano Moose

Any work should be at least bearable to watch in its entirety. I have read 3 Acts, and I still don't think it's good. If I didn't like Harry Potter 1-3, why should I like the rest? It's true that the quality could be a lot better later in the work, but as far as I know the same fundamental principles and format of the story doesn't change.

@ comment #16142 eternalNoob

I don't hate Homestuck!

I do not like your review. As a review, it fails by being factually incorrect. You can have any opinion you want about Homestuck and I don't mind, but you should have an informed one if you're going to write reviews about it.

I have read 3 Acts, and I still don't think it's good. If I didn't like Harry Potter 1-3, why should I like the rest? Well, because Homestuck is a slow burner. It sets up things early, builds on them, connects them with other things, then adjusts the scope so that suddenly all the "irrelevant" nonsense snaps into focus and triggers a cavalcade of emotional response and story progression. Complaints about flat characters and concepts that never return become pretty laughable around Act 5. You don't have to read it all, but you didn't read enough.

You didn't address my other points. If you do not dislike Homestuck, why are you telling us all - in no uncertain times - that it isn't worth a single picosecond of our time? The way you phrased the review is very confrontational, exclaiming Hussie doesn't care at all and nothing about it is even a little worthwhile. That should only be the case if it's somehow actively offensive or degrading. It's not. As I said, it's almost all available for free, and it has a very large and active fan community who are willing to spend money on it anyway. Either they're all complete idiots, or you're missing something (or, possibly, trolling).

@comment #16147 Nano Moose

I didn't get any enjoyment out of these three first acts, and that's what my review is about. I don't know the author and I don't care how much time he spent making this webcomic, it's still not good. This review is my opinion and not the fans. Reviews don't have to follow a relativistic template that's obviously very popular on sites like these. I'm not trolling, I'm serious.

ITT: People respond poorly to a negative review.

You didn't enjoy it! Okay! That's what you say, along with why. Don't tell us all with the certainty of a great webcomic authority that we should completely and utterly avoid it because it's objectively horrible, because that's just not true in any sense. I could argue all day about the relative merits of its writing, art and music, but I really don't want to do that.

You didn't give specific examples of anything, either, except two things that slow the pace. How are the characters flat? You also said there's "almost no dialogue", which is just...incorrect. When corrected, you hastily exclaimed you "meant" a lot of badly written dialogue - you moved the goalposts. The comment about money is also still really confusing. It's a free webcomic. The impression, overall, is that you're trolling by saying negative things without a whole lot of support about something popular in order to provoke a reaction.

@comment #16160 Nano Moose

No, I don't count the chat logs as dialogue. Here is a quote:

"TG: is it there TG: plz say yes TG: maybe you can play with TT shes been pestering me all day about it TG: shes mackin on me so hard all the time i start to feel embarrassed for her TG: i mean not that i can blame her or anything EB: yes, it is understandable because you are really attractive. i am attracted to you. TG: thank you EB: jk haha. "

This was the first page I could find when I searched for "pester". I don't want to read through this, I don't think this is funny, it's not clever and this is not good writing. I could edit my review to reflect that if you want? "There are almost no good dialogue"

You have an option to spend money on the merc, that's what i meant by spending money on this comic.

I think the points I made in my review are more than enough. You have to accept that some people have different opinions of a work.

They are, by definition, dialogue - two or more characters communicating in a story. And of course it's not clever. It's two adolescents chatting over the internet. One of whom is John Egbert, who is characterised as a little but stupid. They're kids making a joke which isn't supposed to be funny. It does, however, characterise them both - John's transparent, vaguely annoying "pranking" and Dave's try-hard cool, slangy façade, and their friendship based on mutual insults. I'll grab another example that I think is both clever and funny. Let's see.

TG: you dont seem to harbor any sympathy for the fact that ive burrowed fuck deep into lively, fluffy muppet buttock TG: im whirling in the terrible cyclone at the epicenter of my own personal holocaust of twitching foam noses TG: its like a fucking apocalypse of perky proboscis here TG: like TG: the proboscalypse i guess TT: Are you going to start rapping about this? TG: what no TG: no listen TT: Prong of flesh bereft of home TT: Found solace 'twixt a cleft of foam. TG: no oh jesus

An absurdly lengthy and verbose description of Dave's personal hell buried in smutty puppets, offset by Rose's teasing "rap"; if nothing else, the vocabulary exhibited here is pretty spectacular, and the distinct voices of the two kids come off clearly.

You have to accept that some people have different opinions of a work. I do. Most people I know can't get into it. That's fine; it's a slow-burner and a demanding story. I don't accept it when someone marches into the review area on a work's page (which is maintained mostly by fans) and inform everyone present that they're wrong to enjoy the work, including all of its art, music, writing, animation, characters, plot and merch, with only the flimsiest reasons why, and proclaiming to have read "more than enough" to make a judgement that said work is absolutely without worth even though "more than enough" is apparently less than half of a complex story. In doing so, you're announcing to us all that we should not love it. Reason: because you didn't. I genuinely don't care if you disliked Homestuck, but when you're reviewing it, a more considered approach is necessary, or you will come off as hating it simply because it's popular, or a troll.

I'm sorry, but if a work can barely hook in new readers with the first act, basically relying on "It Gets Better", then it makes it a bad work to me. I'll admit to not reading far into it, but the "humor" I saw was just... brain-numbing. I simply couldn't continue after a centain amount of strips, I could feel my IQ being sapped from my skull.

If you've had the luck of going through the story and enjoying it, good for you. If you, like several, just can't get into it, that's good too. If you're going to judge a work over a single review, stop reading reviews; people like you attract flame-wars.

Seriously, it's 1 bad review. a simple "Hey, the characterisation gets better blahblahblah" would have been better, instead of going apeshit and saying "he thinks people are wrong to enjoy it" to justify an endless argument. Where is that stated in the review? He never outright attacks the fans, he gives HIS opinion on the work [[Darth Wiki/Wallbanger which is the point of reviewing in the first place.]] Not to mention, some of the points are fairly valid. The art is meh at best (though that might be a part of the appeal, being on a site named "MS Paint Adventures after all) and the plot moves SO SLOW. the first 5 "panels" get NOWHERE, showing a blatantly unfunny naming gag and sending the main character to find some arms so he can continue the adventure. What the hell is that?!

Seriously though, I'll wrap this up. I don't hate fans, if you've had the patience to go as far as you have then that's your decision, and I gain nothing from insulting you. I don't exactly like haters, because occasionally there'll be that one asshole who's never tried it in their life and attacks fans for kicks. But I do hate people who go completely overboard at one negative review. The guy played through a full act, and then a little more, and felt nothing. He feels the comic/game/whatever is of poor quality. THAT'S HIS VERDICT. You can't change that, and you can't go flagging a review because he called the comic trash.

The arms thing is a gag from Hussie's previous works and the command "quickly retrieve arms from chest". The whole thing is a send-up of old-school RP Gs, text-based adventures, and internet culture. The panels are slow-paced because the comic updates fast; five "pages" probably constitute half a single, average update, and they often pop up daily unless, as currently, Hussie's busy with backstage things. The naming gag came from the forums as a joke on the old reader-command system that's now obsolete.

I didn't flag the review because he thought the comic was trash. I thought he was a troll, after he seemed to react happily to negative feedback and expected more "attention", under the assumption it looks and quacks like a duck. I'm not "apeshit", I'm just wordy; I'm not quoting what I think your reasoning is and potholing it to "wallbanger"; and a review is an informed, critical opinion, not a series of negatives with little explanation that fervently warns everyone reading the review away from the work as if it's freaking malware. I wanted specific examples of why Homestuck is bad because I didn't feel like the review gave enough to justify its entirely negative conclusion. "Some of the points are fairly valid" (emphasis mine) is damning with faint praise. I know Homestuck is slow, hard to get into, bizarre, occasionally full of itself, and tonally a mess - I've read it from start to finish - but I also know that the characters develop, the plot progresses into something enormous and insane, threads seemed abandoned resurface, "gags" become plot points, it's multi-threaded with loads of references and a grasp of character voice that is, to me, pretty amazing and feel, personally, that it's worth the grind and parsing the weird format is part of its fun. "I read a little way in and gave up because the pace was too slow for my liking and the format convoluted for its own sake; there may be something worthwhile after that point, but I personally doubt it will be worth the time," is a review. "I read less than a quarter of this work and obviously from that it is all so bad with its mediocre music and boring art and boring characters with no development and it is stupid and not funny and nobody should read it ever or contribute money ever," is inflammatory.

I am not asking him to change his verdict. I don't care if he doesn't like it. I'm asking him to elaborate beyond "it is bad". I just...use a lot of words to do that. You notice I didn't comment on the other negative reviews here?

@ Blodqvist

Sorry, mate. Just got the impression.

I'm genuinely sorry I flagged it assuming you were a troll, Blodqvist. I jumped to conclusions. Unfortunately, I can't unflag it, as far as I'm aware.

Sorry, I wasn't 100% targeting you. I'm sorry if it seems that way, but I really did have to comment on the "he insults fans for being fans" things. That part really pissed me off.

I jumped into vehement Hatedom mode there, and for that I apologize.

@comment #16171 Nano Moose

No problems at all. I think we both got our points across, so there is no need to continue this discussion. I have no problems with the fans, I just don't like homestuck.

Well, I read Homestuck. I caught up from the third act to the third intermission of act 6, a month ago. It's time-consuming, yes, but I didn't think that it wasn't worth it (obviously). Would this review have dissuaded me from beginning to read Homestuck? Not at all.

It's not really saying much. It complains abuot things, but doesn't say anything really specific (but I guess the idiotic word count limit of TVT reviews isn't helping). But worst of all, it's condescending. It begins with the title and is at it's worst in the last paragraph (which says little more than "don't read Homestuck" multiple times). Since it doesn't go into it's criticism, the main part of the review only underscores the condescending undertone. It's like it's saying "you don't need to why, just do what I say".

I'm sure that wasn't actually intended (that would surprise me, at least), but it feels like the review treats it's readers like a little child.

I don't see the condesention honestly, this feel like a direct argument aiming to hit the roots. It assumes intelligence on the part of the readers if anything, since it complains that you aren't going to find the full characters that you see elsewhere or any sort of resolution. The last sentance maybe comes off as it but to me it reads as an honest appeal.

Personally, I was going to write a Homestuck review but honestly this covers most of it for me. Years after the initial plot, who can really describe what motivates the original four beyond general stereotypes? It seems like when Hussie gets bored rather than delve deeper into characters, he adds 8 more and starts over with the same plot we've already read. I rage quit after the Alpha/Beta Universe switch.

The humour also gets really stale. I have a similar sense of humour in a lot of ways, I love seeing something strange and random ascend into a universes canon, but it needs to be an exception and stops being amusing once it has. For Hussie this is everything in Homestuck. It feels like Con Air gets more character development than the actual characters and we're supposed to be still amused by it even once it has been worked in because it's still absurd.

It's been several years and three rehashes of the same plot and I'm honestly yet to see any more substance to the strip. Just more running gags turned semiserious while refusing to fall into the backdrop and call backs strained to the point of just feeling sad.

"There are very few resolutions to the plot, it feels like you are always hanging and the story never moves forward. You never have a sense of continuity, the author makes up new rules and ideas as he go and throw them away when he gets tired of them."

"I've read from act 1 to the first intermission. I think that's more than enough to write a review about."

...these two bits. These two, right here. I just want you to take a cold, hard look at them.

...and you didn't read through the chatlogs? Really? Over three acts?! That's like complaining about a movie when you watched the whole thing on mute! How... just how do you have even the slightest notion that you're in a position to write a review?

...and you didn't read through the chatlogs? Really? Over three acts?! That's like complaining about a movie when you watched the whole thing on mute! How... just how do you have even the slightest notion that you're in a position to write a review?

This would be valid except the Troll arc is soon looming at that point and if there's nothing to invest you in the original kids, why would you want to read the same plot twice?

@ Twin Bird From what I understood, this is a webcomic written in a very serialised format, like "Dragon Ball", "Twin Peaks" or "The Days of Our Lives". You don't have to watch all 11 000+ episodes of "The Days of Our Lives" to give it a fair review, it should be enough just completing one big story arc.

I know that Homestuck is not done yet and I can accept that the overall heavy loose ends cannot be resolved in a hand wave. But loose ends are supposed to be resolved in a steady pace, Homestuck does not do that. The story drags for too long without getting to the point. And before it does, it introduces new characters, new rules and new settings. We're back at square one, again.

I did read through the chatlogs, did you read through the comments?

To say you don't like it, sure. But to say that it leaves too much unresolved, not so much.

"This was the first page I could find when I searched for "pester". I don't want to read through this, I don't think this is funny, it's not clever and this is not good writing."

This definitely sounds like you weren't following along in the chatlogs.

You can have that opinion. You don't have to like my review.

By that quote I meant that I read it, but it's not the kind of writing I want to read, because it hurts my eyes. By my standards, this is not what I count as good-written dialogue.

I wanted to show an example, I opened up the comic, searched with cmd+f for "pester", because that's what the IM-messaging used in the story is called. (pesterchum) I skipped to the last example (at the beginning of the comic) and found that chatlog. I hope that explains it?

@Twin Bird: I'm not sure if it's not following along so much as not reading too much into it. Pesterlogs aren't like most literature- just line upon line upon line of chatroom dialogue, with no descriptive prose whatsoever. It's easy to just look at them and think, "Oh, it's just some random guys talking in broken sentences and tons of swears and butchering the English language with random numbers and misspellings everywhere," without reading into them as deeply as possible, looking for in-jokes and hidden meanings and foreshadowing and characterization, which often pop up in spades.

@Blodqvist: I'll try and explain it through an analogy- the Redwall books. Each one is divided into three subsections (themselves called books) with one mini-arc per subsection, and all of this is further divided into chapters. At the end of each section-book, an arc reaches a reasonable conclusion, but the overarching story remains unresolved until the novel ends. It's kind of the same way with Homestuck- each act has its own plot arc that adds to the story, but leaves the true resolution for the end of the final act (and, if Hussie writes it, an epilogue or sequel). If the first few acts seemed a bit slow anyways, well, keep in mind that the first three-and-a-half acts were partially dictated by reader input, so a lot of time was spent dicking around according to the fanbase. The first act in particular had readers with no idea what was going to happen, so when they saw John's captchalogue, they probably decided they might as well milk it as much as possible.

Here, I'll break it down for you as best I can without too many spoilers:

Act I: Prologue/Introduction. Introduces John and Rose, their settings, and S Burb. Shows that S Burb is not a normal game, and has incredibly high stakes.

Act II: Fully introduces Dave. The true nature of S Burb begins to peek through, and the fate of the world after S Burb's beginning is revealed.

Act III: Fully introduces Jade; trolls make themselves known. Shows that S Burb's influence and scale extend far beyond John's house and the present day. Reveals some incredibly plot-important game mechanics and external characters.

Intermission 1: Peers into the minds of the Midnight Crew, an alternate-universe team with connections to the main timeline.

Act IV: Reveals most of S Burb's most important aspects, such as how it's supposed to be beaten and how it relates to the four kids. Introduces a primary villain, marking the point where the game goes off the rails. (Note: the viewer suggestion box is axed halfway through this act's run.)

Act IV Epilogue: An extended conclusion to Act IV (well, duh!), seeing as the actual End of Act didn't serve as a very good resolution on its own.

...That's as far as I'm gonna go for now. Still, I think I'll add that acts one through five are themselves fairly self-contained as a story arc themselves, discounting Act V Part I, which is itself standalone and tends to be considered another intermission. I hope this helped!

Dangit, I got ninja'd by one of the guys I was talking to. :P

Um, when you say it hurts your eyes, do you mean the color choices or the sheer volume of text without spacing? While I can understand why those could bother someone, that's more related to thematic choice than the writing itself, and at any rate, the fact that it hurts one person's eyes (I'm using your words, here, so sorry if you meant something different) shouldn't be harmful to EVERYONE's reading experience to the point that it factors into telling people not to read.

@ Endless Sea It's both the stylistic choice and the writing itself that bothers me.

If I think this is an awful webcomic with awful writing with awful thematic/stylistic choices, then no, I can't recommend it to anyone else just because another person think it's the Citizen Kane or Ulysses of Webcomics.

@Blodqvist: First of all, what about the writing is the problem?

Second, not being able to recommend it isn't the same as actively telling people they shouldn't read it, the latter being the message your review carries.

For that matter- and I'm trying not to let my anger seep into this, let's see how well that works- nowhere in your review do you act like the material you are presenting is your opinion- hell, the only time you even refer to yourself is when you mention that you didn't even read the entire comic before finalizing your opinion. Except for that single two-sentence paragraph, everything you say comes off to me as being treated as pure, unbiased fact, like the very notion that people could like Homestuck and think it is quality work is, well, inconceivable (and I'm using the dictionary definition here!). Sure, the term "overhyped" implies that there are fans that speak highly of the comic, but from my perspective your overall word choice and tone sound like anyone who could possibly think that is either delusional, lying, both, or some other thing to the same effect. You have to keep in mind that reviews are opinions, and if you don't write them as such, nobody's going to like what you have to say, even if the majority agrees, and ESPECIALLY if it doesn't.

Your reply to me, on the other hand, went the distance of saying "I think" before pulling out the criticism, and that gets you a smiley face of approval. :)

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand I'm done ranting now. Just to reiterate- presentation matters just as much as content!

@ Endless Sea I'm sorry the tone of my review wasn't in your taste. You could be right about the difference between not recommending something and telling people directly not to take part of something. Let me rephrase what I was trying to say: If I think that Homestuck is a bad webcomic, like I described above, then yes, I would tell people not to read it, because if they are bothered by the points I described in my review, then I think that they probably wouldn't like it, however I don't have to write out that they "probably" wouldn't like it because I think that it's implicitly understood, since this is a review. I think that readers are intelligent enough to understand that, both the people that agree and the ones that disagree. Also, all works of art are subjektive in their worth, that's also understood by the ones that are into this. I'm not supposed to lecture people that they can have an opinion of their own that's different from mine and that they can ignore my review, that's up to themselves to find out.

Sorry again, that you didn't like the tone of my review.

@Endless Sea: "...everything you say comes off to me as being treated as pure, unbiased fact, like the very notion that people could like Homestuck and think it is quality work is, well, inconceivable (and I'm using the dictionary definition here!)."

That could pretty much describe the problem with every poorly written review ever typed. Thanks for articulating it.

I liked this review. I'm glad that you didn't jump on the bandwagon, and I'm glad you were able to say what you didn't like about it. I agree that the dialogue is poor, and I agree that the art is bad, but I like a specific few characters, so I'm a fan of homestuck.

It's overhyped, but it's still a good webcomic.

Have you tried Girl Genius?

"if they are bothered by the points I described in my review..."

I would be bothered by horrible pacing, flat characters that don't develop, and no resolutions to the plot. Yet in spite of these, I have read Homestuck ever since it began and love the story. Funny, huh?

Well okay, the pacing can get pretty bad sometimes. But honestly, I can give that one to the author: he is pretty much just winging it, after all, not ever thinking ahead and making the whole shit up as he goes along. That considered, I think he's doing a pretty excellent job.

The characters being flat and there being no character development, though? That's just objectively wrong. Even at the parts you reviewed.

spoilers!!!!!! sorry guys

uh, just like to point out, i didn't read the pester logs for three acts to, but i stuck with it. plus alot of people say that you have to read up to act 2 or 3 to see if you are into it. also, there is plenty of character development. Dave starts to freak out and hate puppets when john points out how scary they are. also rose goes grim dark, and do you now why? because she bottled her emotions. after that? she stopped... i think, at least. i have to reread the comic. a lot of times i think back about how i started homestuck, and why i like it. maybe its becaus of the plot, or because of the characters. the thing is, you have to read all of whats going on. the repeating jokes? those are jokes as well, at least to some people. i know that i smiled when i saw some of them. also andrew does stop them (kind of, at least) and he does make the characters deep. plus all the foreshadowing. all in all, homestuck is rather well written, very deep, confusing, and full of possibilities for the fandom to grow. i know that i am a completely different person than when i started. also, alot of the people in the fandom are really nice. i got to know all my friends through homestuck, and they are the best friends i have had. so please, reread and reconsider homestuck.

oh no more spoilers!!!

also tavros has character development so your rather lame excuse of no character development is invalid. please dont hate me. i just like homestuck a lot.

He read into Homestuck, he disliked what he saw. Every comment in this thread, along with the review itself, should tell whatever a potential reader wants to know about Homestuck.

Basically, it takes ages to get going, you have to devote a quarter of your brain space to memorize in-jokes and brick jokes and that the fans are crazy defensive.

But seriously, this back-and-forth between fans and non-fans on this review is ridiculous. He didn't like it not because he doesn't pay enough attention, but because he doesn't have the time nor the patience to read/play something which is physically and mentally demanding. And why should he? If you can follow the comic, don't go after people who can't.

This review has been corrected somewhat by the comments. If review comments could be locked, here'd be where I'd call for one.

If he didn't have the time and patience, why did he bother to write the review? You make it sound like he chose not to read more into it, but his review and comments suggest otherwise, in tone if nothing else.

Also, on the note of your "crazy defensive" comment- I'm not even trying to defend the comic here. My entire point throughout this entire comments section has that I don't like how the reviewer's stating his opinions as facts. Granted, the fact that I'm a fan (to an extent) is naturally causing a bit of bias to slip in, but I don't think that should get in the way of my message.

Now, if you would please NOT dig up arguments from a month ago? I was hoping we'd settled this by now.

The review was already dug up when I got here. You're right though, I shouldn't have written anything.

\"The characters are bland, they are flat and doesn\'t evolve through the series\" How can you know if you have not reached the intermission. In fact,they do evolve. Their evolution is in fact related to their title. \"The Comic is given fake length through unnecessary running gags that have no effect on the overall plot. \" Well,running gag rarely make the plot advance.I confirm,if you don\'t like gag dont read Homestuck. \"There are almost no dialogue, most of the time you are reading second-person narration.\" AHEM.\"30 Aug 2012 (Homestuck, Day 1236): 18903 words in 1 page of HSA 6 I 3,\" You clearly haven\'t seen the HUGE moutain of text during memo for exemple.In fact,this is for me one of the negatives point of Homestuck. \"The pacing is horrible\" I do not agree.The final objective and situation change constantly.[spoiler]Escape a metorite,enter the game,finish the game,find a way to escape bec noir,scratch the session,escape the session,de-mind control a powerfull ally,beat the new ennemies,beat the Big Villain...With constant change of POV ,i would say there are to much stimulation outside dialogues. \"There are very few resolutions to the plot\" Well:escape the meteorite.Resolution:enter the game.How win the game?Travel all the gates.What is the reward?New world to rule over.Bec Noir is overpowered?Scratch the session.Why LE is so powerfull?Break the clock,destroy the sun,use secret weapon,use secret weakness. \"The art is overall not pretty to look at, a few detailed pictures and flash scenes don\'t make up for the overall ugliness displayed in the ms-paint gifs. The music is very forgetable and highlight rather unintresting scenes. \" Personally,i do not finf them bad.These are clean,good drawed gifs,and i find the mix of gif,photoshop,3D,and drawing cool. Wont contemplate them for hour,but this is more comic and more cute.And the contrast beetween the different arts is well-used. \"He switches between perspectives too fast.\"Yes.But it\'s on purpose and exploited. \" the author appearently doesn\'t care either way and introduces new characters and plot lines whenever he gets bored\" All have been written in advance,so he doesn\'t just made new character like that. And personnaly when these new point I would get bored.i don\'t see the trouble.If you do\'nt like new heroes/characters don\'t read Homestuck. \"You never have a sense of continuity, the author makes up new rules and ideas as he go and throw them away when he gets tired of them. \" Yes,this is wanted. he play with this,he make new rules,confuse us with a non-linear story.he is not bored withthem,he varies them to increase the pace you don\'t seem to find,and surprise the viewer,and mark the great change in the story.

I found this critic inexact,false and useless. If I wanted to describe the problems of Homestuck,I would say that the stories is unpredictable,hard to understand,that important point are hidden beetween less important fact,and that dialogues are too long ,without obvious relevant information hidden in. And good point are the omnipresent humour,the exellent use of bathos(never the author seem to tragic,too dramatic, or too serious,and excel to create mixed,intense feelings ),the complexity of the story itself ,the constant changement of circunstance and goals,the personnality of the characters,the constant foreshadowing and the long run view of the author who make thousand of prediction and thing that were planned all along. Without forgets whal lines,pages and picture all the times.

I agree, I hate it too.

Personally I think review made by one that hasn\'t seen all or most of the story should be taken with a grain of salt at best. As other have said this story has a lot of things that aren\'t resolved or given context until very long after they are introduced. Even then somethings are prosperously left unresolved or ambiguously so.