Feels like the New 52 is throwing out the baby with the bathwater so far...

[Jim Thompson]

People are excusing the reboot by saying that sales are now better. That's why I'm asking if they are going to reboot every time sales go down.

"Excusing" would suggest they are people who think the idea of rebooting the DCU was bad, but they were willing to overlook that because they enjoy what is being done right now. While there may be such people out there, I don't know as I've seen that thought put forward here.

[Pixie_Solanas]

Just when i'm starting to get a tiny bit blah over the whole thing (the backpage writeups really need to be worked on), they go and do a new book like "Dial H" that reassures me to no end. Of what, I don't know, but I enjoyed the book tremendously and I appreciate the fact that amidst all the corny books, dated writers, and subpar art that seems to flood around, there is still enough smarts at the top to give a book to fresh talent like China Mieville.

[Lady Obie]

"Excusing" would suggest they are people who think the idea of rebooting the DCU was bad, but they were willing to overlook that because they enjoy what is being done right now. While there may be such people out there, I don't know as I've seen that thought put forward here.

You definitely wouldn't catch me saying something like that because the DC relaunch sales may be pretty good for the modern era but if you ever go to a site that lists comics sales today compared to 10, 20, 30 years ago modern sales look pretty pathetic by comparison

I'm not sure if digital comics are giving DC much of a boost but I'm sure DC appreciates them no matter how much or how little they help

[Mat001]

People are excusing the reboot by saying that sales are now better. That's why I'm asking if they are going to reboot every time sales go down.

The two reboots that DC has done was not about sales. It was about creating interest and starting off with a new jump on point. Sales did increase, but it was not the sole goal. That's why when sales were down a number of years back, a reboot didn't happen.

[The Batman]

The two reboots that DC has done was not about sales. It was about creating interest and starting off with a new jump on point. Sales did increase, but it was not the sole goal. That's why when sales were down a number of years back, a reboot didn't happen.

The only reason to create interest and offer a clear line-wide jumping on point was to increase revenues though. I get what you're saying, but to dismiss the bottom line as a factor driving this decision seems wrong to me.

[Shadowcat2576]

It doesn't. But having the current version of the Teen Titans be the "first" one gives people an entry point into their story. Having Tim Drake organizing the teen hero community is, whatever one may think of the execution, a pretty decent concept - and one which loses its gravitas if there have been a bunch of previous versions of the same team.

The thing is though all a team book needs for a jumping on point is a plot reason to join together. You could still have the whole "mysterious organization is tracking down teen metas" plot, just have Tim, Cassie, and Bart each seperately run into and rescue Bunker, Skitter, and Soltice then band together (which is close to what happened anyway) Taking away Tim, Bart, and Cassie's history together didn't make them more interesting or easier to understand. How many volumes of JL, TT, LoSH, Outsiders, Avengers, and X-Men have we had over the years, and yet none of them needed to wipe history clean.

[Shellhead]

The thing is though all a team book needs for a jumping on point is a plot reason to join together. You could still have the whole "mysterious organization is tracking down teen metas" plot, just have Tim, Cassie, and Bart each seperately run into and rescue Bunker, Skitter, and Soltice then band together (which is close to what happened anyway) Taking away Tim, Bart, and Cassie's history together didn't make them more interesting or easier to understand. How many volumes of JL, TT, LoSH, Outsiders, Avengers, and X-Men have we had over the years, and yet none of them needed to wipe history clean.

One of the most successful reboots ever was the X-Men. Something terrible happened, leaving only Cyclops and Professor X to pull together a new team. Each new team member was introduced in a page or two, giving readers a brief look at something distinctive in terms of powers or personality. They rescue the old team, and then most of the old team leaves for other adventures. The new team got to show their stuff by going up against a lot of the old villains, plus some new threats. No past continuity was discarded, retconned, or insulted, and the new team was soon a hit.

[glennsim]

One of the most successful reboots ever was the X-Men. Something terrible happened, leaving only Cyclops and Professor X to pull together a new team. Each new team member was introduced in a page or two, giving readers a brief look at something distinctive in terms of powers or personality. They rescue the old team, and then most of the old team leaves for other adventures. The new team got to show their stuff by going up against a lot of the old villains, plus some new threats. No past continuity was discarded, retconned, or insulted, and the new team was soon a hit.

Well, yes, the same thing happened with New Teen Titans. And with Justice League. And with umpteen bazillion other teams. Until such time as it's not really anything new. It's old hat now.

[Shellhead]

Well, yes, the same thing happened with New Teen Titans. And with Justice League. And with umpteen bazillion other teams. Until such time as it's not really anything new. It's old hat now.

As a Teen Titans fan, I was amazed that New Teen Titans got off to such a strong start. New Teen Titans #1 was a messy and unsatisfactory story, although it did have some nice artwork by George Perez.

[Sacred Knight]

But it sounds like you will have them perpetually answering to the old universe vesus building the new.

The point of the reboot was to wipe the slate clean. You are learning about ALL of these characters as new comers are learning about them.

It sounds like you are wanting to grasp onto the old ways instead of embracing the fact that...This journey is starting again. You say "The clearer the universe, the more engaging the immersion for the reader" But you are not taking into consideration...They are building up a NEW clearer universe. You have to give it time.

I have the luxury of beginning again with DC with the new 52. Before this...I rarely bought a DC comic for over 2 decades. I would pick up a few here and there, but did not consistently follow DC. So this reboot is just fine by me because I am not attaching the old universe/lore/character development to the new issues...You are not suppose to.

I can understand how long time fans would do that, but they need to keep in mind that there was a massive reboot and what you see is what you get...until further developments occur in THIS universe.

This has little to do with being an older fan. I'm loving the reboot so far, so I have no problem embracing it. But still, this is about DC's choices in the relaunch. The fact is they didn't wipe the slate clean; not for everything. Had they done that then sure, there's absolutely no problem. But with their method of picking and choosing; for example, keeping things like Blackest Night, The Return of Bruce Wayne, The Death of Superman, etc, in continuity, well that brings up significant questions because these events by the very nature of the other huge changes gone on around them, couldn't have happened as they did before. Some cases are less critical than others, yes. I don't sweat the small stuff, not absolutely everything needs gone over with a fine tooth comb. But there are some biggies out there that should be addressed, even if just in exposition would be acceptable, because they're issues that will be confusing to new and old readers alike. Its not fair to just sweep it under the rug and claim people bothered by it are continuity-obsessed.

[allstarmatches]

The thing is though all a team book needs for a jumping on point is a plot reason to join together. You could still have the whole "mysterious organization is tracking down teen metas" plot, just have Tim, Cassie, and Bart each seperately run into and rescue Bunker, Skitter, and Soltice then band together (which is close to what happened anyway) Taking away Tim, Bart, and Cassie's history together didn't make them more interesting or easier to understand. How many volumes of JL, TT, LoSH, Outsiders, Avengers, and X-Men have we had over the years, and yet none of them needed to wipe history clean.

Creating an entry point isn't really about being easy to understand. It's more about letting the reader in on the ground floor of the characters' relationships. The story is very different depending on whether the characters have pre-existing relationships.

Certainly I grant you they could have gone about the story a different way. But I think the way they did it is valid. Sweeping the deck clean of all the crap that had filled the pages of the TT title for years is IMO an understandable move.

[allstarmatches]

This has little to do with being an older fan. I'm loving the reboot so far, so I have no problem embracing it. But still, this is about DC's choices in the relaunch. The fact is they didn't wipe the slate clean; not for everything. Had they done that then sure, there's absolutely no problem. But with their method of picking and choosing; for example, keeping things like Blackest Night, The Return of Bruce Wayne, The Death of Superman, etc, in continuity, well that brings up significant questions because these events by the very nature of the other huge changes gone on around them, couldn't have happened as they did before. Some cases are less critical than others, yes. I don't need everything gone over with a fine tooth comb. But there are some biggies out there that should be addressed, because they're issues that will be confusing to new and old readers alike. Its not fair to just sweep it under the rug and claim people bothered by it are continuity-obsessed.

I can't fathom why a new or lapsed reader would care whether Death of Superman is still in continuity. That's an existing fan thing, not something that will confuse someone picking up the book for the first time.

The way DC is handling it is very much like how they treated COIE in post-COIE continuity.

[Sacred Knight]

Admittedly the Death of Superman is a smaller example. It could have still happened as is with some characters omitted. Not the hugest deal. Blackest Night is a much better example of a clusterf#ck. If an unchanged big event is still continuity then it and potentially big continuity errors affect all readers. I don't know why its dumbed down to old fans vs. new. There are certain things I just wish they'd clear up as best they can for everyone. Not just for me, not just for the old school. But for the sake of a continuity that, just in the broad strokes, makes sense.

[allstarmatches]

Its already been referenced as having happened in continuity. Thus it affects all readers. If its referenced, and happens to be referenced more, people will be interested. Its not an existing fan thing, I don't even get why people are making it an old vs. new issue.

I mentioned old vs new specifically in response to your claiming it would be confusing to both old and new readers. The idea that a new reader is going to be confused over the continuity status of stories they've never read, and may never even have heard of, makes no sense to me.

I'm not reading Superman so I must ask - your post makes it sound like the death is being referenced, maybe more than once. If that's the case, why are you still confused about whether it's canon? Referencing it as having happened would seem to clear that up, right?

[Fate's Faith]

Wanted to mention something about continuity. I don't see anything wrong with people who love how continuity fits together. I enjoy that aspect myself. The problems come about when you try to figure out continuity using two different timelines. This is where problems lay. Does the new continuity need the death of Superman to sustain itself? No. The past one did though. So I think its a valid concern why are some big continuity events in the past needed to fit in the current. If I was making the decisions for the new 52, it all would be tossed... unless I could see how it fits and benefits the current story. I have not read comics in years before the new 52. Though I knew of some events, I was presented Dick's time as Batman in Nightwing #1. And for no reason I could see. Did I need to know this to enjoy the story just starting? No. Did they do anything with the information? No. Its possible in the future they will but so far it looks like an attempt to fit two timelines into one without worrying about if they should. That's where I do question how thought out things were. Now that it looks like the new 52 was successful, I expect such references to disappear and they seem to have. I took it as DC editorial hedging their bets just incase this all crashed and burned. And that's not a great way to open a new world.