Marvel's Numbering System

[dam60]

Okay, does anyone else here think that Marvel's numbering system flat out stinks? I was reading in CBG that Wolverine is about to be redone leaving only Uncanny X-Men with numbering that is pre 1990. Can you imagine? Here are my thoughts against this move:

 

1 - Lack of Interest for Back Issues

Even though I am a DC fan, Marvel has produced some really phenomenal stuff. Without the old numbers in place I don't feel that there is enough interest in the back issues amongst new readers. Why buy a Wolverine Limited Series or Regular (ie 88) series when as far as a new reader knows it started in 2003?

 

2 - Lack of "Respect" for Creators/Previous Artists

Also, without the old numbering I feel that there isn't enough credit given to the old time creators / storytellers.

 

Take Action comics for instance. With #800 out this month there is definitely much more of a sense of history and nostalgia, both of which are a good thing.

 

In addition to Batman, I am a huge Hulk fan and am building my run. However, I have no interest at all in the second series. The books I do have from the second series I got randomly and I think I only have 3 in total. No interest what so ever. My collecting goals with that title stopped after the first run. After all, I still remember how excited I was getting issue 377 off the newstand whereas I didn't collect at all when the new Hulk 1 came out.

 

Thoughts?

 

DAM

[fantastic_four]

I agree, the renumbering is a stupid marketing decision. Long live Action Comics #800 !!!

[Hensley300]

As a collector and a reader, it pisses me off. Especially the thing they do where they keep the current number and then put the number the book would be on if not for the reboot. Keep on or the other and leave it with that. Preferably, don't restart the series back at issue one unless its a good reason.

[scottish]

It's certainly just ONE of the reason's they lost me.

[Hensley300]

They didnt lose me scottish in that sense, but in another sense, I feel as you do. I have lost that childhood innocense of a good comic read. That was lost in bad stories and over priced books. I do believe marvel is trying very hard to recapture that though. I still buy 2 copies a month each of x-men, x-statix, daredevil, and spider-man. But I don't cop for very many limited series or here today, gone tomorrow start up characters.

[Mister_Comics]

I brought this up a few months back. Same title BTW.

 

I didn't buy into all the UNSLAUGHT BS back then and the starting of the new volumes. When volume 2 started of FF, Iron Man, Cap, and the rest, they lost me. I'm betting thats what a lot of us readers did. Quit buying. You could hear the thud of their jaws hitting the floor when those MARVEL executives seen the sales drop. So what did they do? Start another new volume and put the number that the book should be at. Now they got everyone confused and lost some more readers. They keep trying, but the only thing thats gonna save their bacon is to go back to what comics were.

[Kevin Boyd]

Well, as much as I hate the new renumbering of long-running titles the whole Heroes Return relaunch actually made me buy FF, Iron Man, Captain America and the Avengers. The Marvel Knights relaunching of Daredevil got me buying Daredevil again. In each of those cases Marvel went out of their way to find creative teams that "fit" the titles and made the relaunch worth looking at.

 

Why? Because before the reboot the titles (aside from Waid and Garney's Captain America) sucked. The whole Heroes Reborn was actually good in some respects, as for most fans, absence makes the heart grow fonder and the Liefeld books, in particular, pointed out just how far those titles had strayed from their roots.

 

So, if the relaunch helped increase sales AND KEEP new readers, then I can't argue with the success of the tactic. Would the relaunches have been as successful if the old numbering system had been kept? Probably.

 

On the other hand, now that Marvel acknowledges previous runs by the two-tiered numbering system on certain titles they can have their cake and eat it too! Anniversary issues in the old system get special recognition even though they may be a non-anniversary number in the new system, and vice-versa. Essentially Marvel now has the opportunity to release more double-sized special issues per year.

 

-------------

 

The Spidey reboot was just plain dumb, and I don't think it increased sales much because the same mediocre writer was in charge when they did relaunch.

 

Ditto for the Hulk. Although for some reason it does not have the two-tiered numbering system.

 

As for some of the more recent cancellations and relaunches - aside from Captain Marvel's sales spike - I don't think they've helped at all with sales, but were done to keep Rob Liefeld from getting future royalties on the titles Cable, X-Force and Deadpool. It was announced today that Soldier X (formerly Cable) was being cancelled with issue #12.

 

-----------------

 

Kev

[dam60]

No disrespect intended - I hadn't yet seen that post

 

DAM

[Hensley300]

Yea, I only got into cable around issue 89. The stories are good around that time till the last issue, 100. But I opted not to collect Soldier X though I did read the first issues. i just felt the series and stories weren't going anywhere. Same with deadpool though I still hold out hope for X-statix. I think here they screwed up rebooting the series with a weak name and Im still waiting for the stories to keep the same momentum as when they first brought in that new team with issue 116. But I have been very pleased with the Hulk, Spider-man, and X-men v1+2 story lines for the past year or so.

 

[dam60]

I do buy Ultimate Spider-Man, but I don't know why. The early USM, especially the first TPB was really great. For the most part though, I just read:

 

Batman

Detective

JLA

Green Arrow

GI Joe

 

Those are my monthly books. I hear the new Hulk stuff is great, but to me there is only one Hulk writer - Peter David. God, did he do some great work on that series!

 

I really just focus on back issues now . . .