TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

A Proposal For Constant Reboots

Go To

God_of_Awesome Since: Jan, 2001
#1: Sep 21st 2012 at 8:53:00 PM

Meant to possibly solve problems such as Continuity Lock-Out.

  • Have a simultaneous running continuities, at least two and no more than four. Each comic has a clear numerical label on the cover denoting which continuity it belongs to and an explanation on the back of the cover explaining this.
  • Give each continuity about the lifespan of ten years, possibly less, possibly more. They have a time to end just the same.
  • Start a new continuity every five years, more or less.
  • Within every continuity, have a consistent team of writers from its infancy to its death.
  • Changes to the Status Quo don't matter, feel free to reassert them in a different continuity but let those who died stay dead.
  • Characters age. They get a deaging reboot in a new continuity, out in not too long while the character development of this one continues on until its climactic crossover conclusion.
  • Were some writers very successful and popular? They may be able to drag out the life span of their continuity longer. They may be reused for a new continuity booted up as soon as theirs ends.
  • Don't like something in this continuity? Don't repeat in the next one but let this one run its course.

Tiamatty X-Men X-Pert from Now on Twitter Since: Jan, 2010 Relationship Status: Brony
#3: Sep 22nd 2012 at 6:35:52 AM

That's a terrible idea. The result would be the characters never really get to grow, because every few years, they'd be returned the status quo. It would also mean getting the same stories told and re-told and re-re-told all the time. Because, let's be honest, every time we got a new X-Men continuity, we'd get a version of the Dark Phoenix Saga.

So, no. Marvel's got the right idea. One main continuity, that's been going on since 1939, and occasional new continuities running alongside it.

X-Men X-Pert, my blog where I talk about X-Men comics.
Distortion00 Since: Nov, 2011
#4: Sep 22nd 2012 at 8:12:18 AM

You're forgetting that continuity is something people tend to like once they become established fans.

What you're looking for is more easily achieved by having high quality graphic novels produced every couple of years. The Killing Joke, Kingdom Come and things like the Ultimate Universe have produced more new readers than reboots have.

edited 22nd Sep '12 8:12:45 AM by Distortion00

NapoleonDeCheese Since: Oct, 2010
#5: Sep 22nd 2012 at 10:10:03 AM

I'd be okay with a reboot per universe every 25 years or so, but retiring each iteration quietly and without destroying everything and everyone in a Crisis just to return them to scratch in-universe.

Cider The Final ECW Champion from Not New York Since: May, 2009 Relationship Status: They can't hide forever. We've got satellites.
The Final ECW Champion
#6: Sep 22nd 2012 at 11:30:05 AM

How about not running everything in the same continuity and making crossovers non canon or at least in their own canon. It is not so bad with DC. Since they've rebooted their universe three times it is actually a well contructed one. Marvel, on the other hand is anything but.

Modified Ura-nage, Torture Rack
God_of_Awesome Since: Jan, 2001
#7: Sep 22nd 2012 at 12:36:06 PM

[up][up]: Well, yes, that was the day, retiring not destroying, drawing everything to a satisfying conclusion. Maybe longer then 10 years to end and longer the 5 years to get start another one but isn't the Ultimate verse based on the concept of starting anew so to get readers who don't have to keep up with everything (Despite it's failures, or so I heard)?

Allow new ideas, allow people to die and stay dead, for the Status Quo to be shaken up and have your cake and eat it too.

Tiamatty X-Men X-Pert from Now on Twitter Since: Jan, 2010 Relationship Status: Brony
#8: Sep 22nd 2012 at 1:13:51 PM

[up][up] But the shared universe is part of the fun with superhero comics. It always has been. The possibility of Spider-Man teaming up with the Fantastic Four, or the Avengers battling Magneto, or the X-Men crossing over with the Hulk - it's part of why a lot of people read superhero comics. I love that Quicksilver can start off as a foe of the X-Men, join the Avengers, leave them to hook up with X-Factor, and then go back to the Avengers. I love that Spider-Man can team up with practically everyone. I love that any hero, at any time, can fight any villain.

X-Men X-Pert, my blog where I talk about X-Men comics.
VampireBuddha Calendar enthusiast from Ireland (Wise, aged troper) Relationship Status: Complex: I'm real, they are imaginary
Calendar enthusiast
#9: Sep 22nd 2012 at 1:14:56 PM

The ultimate universe didn't do away with the original one, though. That's still there, and still going strong.

I'm against reboots. I like continuity, and with the appearance of colossal trade paperbacks in the last decade, it's increasingly easy to start reading a comic from the very beginning, as I hope to do with Spider-Man if I ever manage to get a steady income. A reboot chucks all that in the bin, saying "Those events, stories, and characters you got invested in? Not relevant any more!"

And the reason I like continuity is that I like seeing characters change and develop over time. You keep rebooting, all that character development is done away with, and they become a blank slate. Character development means that a character's actions in the present are affected by what has happened to them before. After a reboot, none of what has gone before has happened, and so the character can react in a way that would be completely against their nature pre-reboot, but now is acceptable. And that's just unsastisfying.

Ukrainian Red Cross
God_of_Awesome Since: Jan, 2001
#10: Sep 22nd 2012 at 9:26:34 PM

Yeah, Reboot is the wrong word actually if it means one continuity has to end for another to begin. My idea was another continuity starts while the others carry on but the others are also allowed to end and put to a satisfying conclusion.

RavenWilder Since: Apr, 2009
#11: Sep 22nd 2012 at 9:51:53 PM

I don't see what's so bad with this idea. The basic idea has worked pretty well for the Gundam franchise.

C0mraid from Here and there Since: Aug, 2010
#12: Sep 22nd 2012 at 10:11:05 PM

What's going to hook me into a new continuity? Storylines I've seen played out five times before? Writers that I probably haven't heard of, as they all get locked in every ten years? The fact that the classic stories I like are no longer available in tpb because they are now totally irrelevant?

The Ultimate universe hasn't brought many new readers to Marvel. Most of the readership read them for a few years and move on from comics.

Am I a good man or a bad man?
DrFurball Since: Jan, 2001
#13: Sep 22nd 2012 at 10:16:45 PM

[up] The fact that the Ultimate universe ended up with its own huge continuity probably didn't help, either.

Sparkysharps Since: Jan, 2001
#14: Sep 22nd 2012 at 10:40:37 PM

I don't see what's so bad with this idea. The basic idea has worked pretty well for the Gundam franchise.

The Gundam franchise doesn't have four actively running and constantly resetting 'universes' (each being spread across about forty or fifty different ongoing books) starring the same characters with the same/very similar backstory and the same Stations Of The Canon.

edited 22nd Sep '12 10:42:39 PM by Sparkysharps

VampireBuddha Calendar enthusiast from Ireland (Wise, aged troper) Relationship Status: Complex: I'm real, they are imaginary
Calendar enthusiast
#15: Sep 23rd 2012 at 1:35:45 PM

Gundam works very differently to Marvel and DC. First of all, each Gundam franchise runs for a time and tells a defined story with a clear beginning, middle, and end, rather than being an environment for stories to happen in.

Secondly, each new Gundam franchise isn't really a reboot. The new series don't bring in the characters from the previous; rather, they have a new cast of characters in a story with similar themes and settings to their predecessors.

Ukrainian Red Cross
SlendidSuit Freelance Worrywart from Probably a Pub Since: Oct, 2011
Freelance Worrywart
#16: Sep 24th 2012 at 3:18:57 AM

Hmm. Again, I don't think there is a continuity problem as such. Things get messy at times sure, and it's confusing to new readers but it always will be. Doesn't stop people tuning into new TV shows or webcomics or what-have-you.

And as a medium we easily have the most painstakingly recorded databases if things get confusing.

Gimme yer lunch money, dweeb.
KingZeal Since: Oct, 2009
#17: Sep 24th 2012 at 9:05:45 AM

Vampire Buddha has it right. With trade paperbacks, there's no reason for this. I swear, I grit my teeth and die a little inside when people mention the words "Continuity Lock-Out" to me. It's really not that hard to understand what's going on in a given story, if the story is any good. And if the story isn't any good, why would you want to read it? Well, for Snark, I guess, but . . .

All Star Superman is written assuming you know the story of Superman, who Lex Luthor is, who Lois Lane is, what Bizarro is, and along with lots of other pieces of Continuity Porn from the Superman mythos. But it's considered one of the greatest Superman stories of all time. Of course, mileage varies, but that isn't taking away the fact that people I know who hate Superman loved that comic/cartoon.

Same with Planet Hulk. Greg Pak is currently one of my favorite comic book writers strictly because he can balance Continuity Porn and As You Know so well. I had never read the Microverse Hulk storylines where he and Jarella were Star-Crossed Lovers or where Betty Ross died from radiation poisoning. But the story did a good job of explaining that.

He's the Hulk. He was once in love with a couple of women—one of whom was an alien and the other his One True Love. He has the Cartwright Curse. His life sucks.

Bam. How hard was that? If I find those hints interesting, I can read the back issues, or I can petition Marvel to retell the Microverse stories. Greg Pak, as a writer, is full of details like that. What makes his Hulk stories compelling is that it acknowledges that he's been through all this before. Sometimes, a story is interesting if it picks up In Medias Res. That's part of the appeal of characters like Indiana Jones and James Bond—the appeal that they're not just on an adventure, but that they've done this many many times before.

edited 24th Sep '12 9:10:08 AM by KingZeal

NapoleonDeCheese Since: Oct, 2010
#18: Sep 24th 2012 at 10:25:20 AM

All-Star Superman is written assuming you know the story of Superman, who Lex Luthor is, who Lois Lane is, what Bizarro is, and along with lots of other pieces of Continuity Porn from the Superman mythos. But it's considered one of the greatest Superman stories of all time. Of course, mileage varies, but that isn't taking away the fact that people I know who hate Superman loved that comic/cartoon.

But that series follows its own continuity. It isn't exactly the best argument against the need for retellings and reboots, since it's something that disregards regular DC continuity, both Pre and Post Crisis, and goes off to do its own thing.

RavenWilder Since: Apr, 2009
#19: Sep 24th 2012 at 11:07:07 AM

I'd argue that Continuity Lock-Out in comics comes, not because series last for several decades, but because of how extensively their Shared Universe is used. It's frustrating as hell to read a series and really enjoy it, only for the plot to take a sudden turn because of events that happened in a different series. While a good writer might give enough background info that you can understand what's going on, that's not the same thing as appreciating what's going on.

KingZeal Since: Oct, 2009
#20: Sep 24th 2012 at 1:02:32 PM

[up][up] But it's still not mutually exclusive to most of what those stories do. The entire story ends with Lex Luthor making an ambiguous Hazy-Feel Turn and Superman becoming the King in the Mountain. Very little of it contradicts continuity and very little of it can't be picked up by continuity.

[up]That's a different problem. Continuity Lock-Out from outside the series is bad because it gyps a reader out of significant changes, not because those changes are hard to understand. If you're reading X-Men and your favorite character dies in The Defenders #10, the problem isn't that you don't understand it. It's that your investment was invalidated.

supergod Walking the Earth from the big city Since: Jun, 2012
Walking the Earth
#21: Sep 25th 2012 at 2:30:21 PM

Yeah. I never understood the Continuity Lock-Out thing either. I mean, not every comic book fan has read everything Marvel and DC put out, and yet they still manage to enjoy the good stuff. One of my first comics was a Crisis Crossover in fact. W Hile a good number of books do require some prior knowledge to appreciate it fully, it shouldn't really affect enjoyment. The past references (at least in theory) is only a bonus for long time readers.

edited 25th Sep '12 4:19:20 PM by supergod

For we shall slay evil with logic...
NapoleonDeCheese Since: Oct, 2010
#22: Sep 25th 2012 at 3:31:31 PM

I mean, very comic book fans have read everything Marvel and DC put out, and yet they still manage to enjoy the good stuff.

That's because the comics readers that remain by now are the hardcore audience, those who stick with the medium regardless of almost anything that happens.

supergod Walking the Earth from the big city Since: Jun, 2012
Walking the Earth
#23: Sep 25th 2012 at 4:16:13 PM

Sorry, that should have said "not every comic book fan has read everything Marvel and DC put out". It orginally said something else and I only half-edited it by mistake. What I was trying to say is that, once upon a time, we "hardcore fans" were beginners as well, so I don't see why it's different for new fans. There was loads of continuity back when I was getting into comics as well (around 2006).

edited 25th Sep '12 4:26:46 PM by supergod

For we shall slay evil with logic...
NapoleonDeCheese Since: Oct, 2010
#24: Sep 25th 2012 at 6:59:39 PM

Well, nowadays, comics have much more of an 'uncool' social stigma between youngsters than they had when we were younger ourselves. And other, flashier types of entertainment media (often with a better prize-value ratio to boot) have stolen a lot of their original target audience as well.

Edit: Ah, you started in 2006. Well, the public perception hasn't changed that much since then, but since my day, well...

edited 25th Sep '12 7:01:02 PM by NapoleonDeCheese

C0mraid from Here and there Since: Aug, 2010
#25: Sep 25th 2012 at 7:03:45 PM

[up][up][up]While readership certainly is too low I feel that is a dangerous attitude to have. The problem is declining sales, that means they need to attract new readers and keep the current ones. If Marvel or DC tried something this stupid I'd walk away.

Complicating matters by having a dozen simultaneous continuities isn't going to help new readers. That's more complicated than what we have now.

Removing the baggage of continuity might, but it isn't going to help create long standing readers. And it'll piss off a lot of old ones. The 50 year old history is a big draw for Marvel readers, who tend to have more loyalty when trying new things.   

Continuity baggage is held up as the one big thing that is killing the industry. I'd argue that things like decompression, pricing and the way comics are sold are bigger problems.

Personally I think the Ultimate line had the right idea but was poorly executed from the start. It tried to be too "modern", dark and edgy. Ultimate Spider-Man is often is often held up as an exception, but that was ridiculously easy to get hold of. I remember walking into a book shop several years ago and finding their entire graphic novel selection consisted of 2 copies of Watchmen, V for Vendetta, several volumes of Sandman and Ultimate X-Men alongside multiple copies of the entire set of Ultimate Spider-Man. You could argue that's what sold but in a bookshop decisions are often made on what they want to sell.

edited 25th Sep '12 7:04:33 PM by C0mraid

Am I a good man or a bad man?

Total posts: 165
Top