Comments on: What Alternatives Are There To Renumbering?

By: Jarrod

Jarrod — Wed, 01 Jun 2011 02:10:16 +0000

The Superman titles used to have an S-shield with a number denoting where each issue fell within a particular story arc, along with the standard number. I always thought that was an excellent idea. I hate the idea of a company-wide “relaunch.”

By: dsylvian

dsylvian — Wed, 01 Jun 2011 00:46:57 +0000

Renumber all of the x-titles now. Part of a new Marvel Initiative ™. X.1 or something. Use Comic Book Resources X-Books forum for feedback. It is the only you SHOULDN’T do things.

By: Dave Phelps

Dave Phelps — Tue, 31 May 2011 23:43:13 +0000

The problem I have with Marvel’s renumbering is that it always seems so arbitrary and willy nilly. I could live with the Heroes Reborn restart, or when DC restarted books like Wonder Woman in the 80s because there really were significantly new directions there. The characters in FF #416 and WW #329 weren’t the same as the ones in the new series. Nowadays they’ll do it whenever. FF #1 is basically the second half of Hickman’s Fantastic Four run, continuing the various plotlines he set up there. And a lot of Marvel’s restarts have the same writers (and sometimes the same artists) simply continuing what they had already been doing. How is that supposed to be a “ground floor” for new readers?

By: Adam Knave

Adam Knave — Tue, 31 May 2011 19:39:23 +0000

Instead of numbers we switch to a high-pitched sonic system, that only trained dogs can hear.

“What’s that boy? There’s a new issue of Jimmy Olsen?”

“… down a well? AGAIN?!”

By: K-Box

K-Box — Tue, 31 May 2011 18:03:10 +0000

Part of the problem is that so many series have already been renumbered so many times that renumbering itself has become a point of potential confusion for new readers.

Let’s say you renumber all of Marvel’s titles with new number ones. If a new reader says, “I want the first issue of Amazing Spider-Man,” and he or she goes online or goes to a bookstore, they’re going to find trade paperbacks and hardcovers that already promote themselves as including the “first” issue of Amazing Spider-Man, both the Lee-and-Ditko one AND the Byrne-and-Mackie one.

Also, unless you completely reboot continuity and start from scratch, your new number one is still going to tie back into stories that were told before that point, which will leave new readers confused when they realize that they still need to read previous issues to fully understand what’s going on in a supposedly ground-floor issue.

By: Chris B.

Chris B. — Tue, 31 May 2011 17:49:56 +0000

Last year I would have scoffed at a total re-numbering off all books. However, as I’ve backslidden from comics in the last three or four months, the prospect of all new 1′s has me interested in picking up books I normally wouldn’t have touched before. Of course, the catch would be that I would want an actual ‘first issue’ for each book (i.e., character intros, story set up, and title purpose). I would be disappointed to pick up a #1 comic and find no real series establishment.

By: Kevin Hines

Kevin Hines — Tue, 31 May 2011 17:45:36 +0000

How about if each issue had numbering reflecting an arc (or direction) but inside the real issue number remained. Just in the indica – that way the issue number continues and can be used to highlight big anniversaries, but can be ignored as much as the company wants the rest of the time. And that removes the confusing volume numbers from the equation.

Does BPRD do this now? They might.

By: Simon DelMonte

Simon DelMonte — Tue, 31 May 2011 17:44:12 +0000

Why have numbers? Just use the date, or at least the month. Do magazines have numbers? Newspapers? TV shows? (OK, they do but for internal usage mainly.) No more numbers!!!