Marvel's strategy of constant relaunching

[R0NIN]

So we all know that Marvel will relaunch a lot of titles again and that books that were just relaunched just this past year (Fantastic Four, Uncanny X-Men, Thor, Captain America, etc.) will be relaunched yet again. It looks like the strategy of Marvel going back to their track record the past 3-5 years is to launch and re-launch every new series depending on whether there is an Anniversary issue coming up or whenever they want another #1 issue to give the title a quick though temporary boost in sales. It seems that relaunches will now occur every 1-2 years (based on previous track record) and that we should no longer hold our breath that a title will reach issue # 50 once again (with the exception of a jump to an Anniversary issue, then back to # 1 again).

So I am wondering how much of the community approves or disapproves of this strategy. I don't recall seeing a poll on this before so I am creating one (and am extremely curious what the results are).

While I'm not crazy about the idea, at least it isn't constantly rebooting like DC. The past decade was brutal on Superman fans. He was rebooted in infinite Crisis, Birthright, in his own comic, Superman origin, new 52 etc. etc. It was crazy.

[gforce99]

While I'm not crazy about the idea, at least it isn't constantly rebooting like DC. The past decade was brutal on Superman fans. He was rebooted in infinite Crisis, Birthright, in his own comic, Superman origin, new 52 etc. etc. It IS crazy.

FYP and you are darn right.

[RDMacQ]

While I'm not crazy about the idea, at least it isn't constantly rebooting like DC. The past decade was brutal on Superman fans. He was rebooted in infinite Crisis, Birthright, in his own comic, Superman origin, new 52 etc. etc. It was crazy.

Seriously, how many times do we need to see Superman's friggin' origin story? Dying planet, last son, kindly couple, SUPERMAN! That's all we need at this point. I don't see the point of just covering the same ground over and over again.

I'd argue reboots are only interesting if they cover ground that hasn't either been seen in a good long time, or hasn't been seen ever. Ultimate Spider-Man worked because it had been decades since we saw Spidey in high school, even in other media. Star Trek worked because we never saw the early days of Kirk and Spock and McCoy and how they came together. Batman Begins worked because there hadn't been a depiction of how Bruce Wayne got from point A to point B in his life on the big screen.

But Superman? Not only have we seen this in the comics multiple times, but we've also had a TV series that spent 10 years telling that story. It's been told. Move on. Wait at least a decade before you try to revisit the same story again.

[MRP]

I've been reading Marvel off and on since 1974. I couldn't care less what number is on the cover as long as I enjoy the story on the inside. Honestly, I think comics should be numbered just like most periodicals. First issue of a calendar year is Vol. I #1, if it is monthly, there are 12 issues in the volume. Calendar year ends, new volume starts, it is now Vol. II #1 and runs until #12 if monthly, next year, Vol. III #1 etc. Way too much is made of the issue number afaiac.

-M

[vh4ever]

I would say also doing these reboots are also a good jump off point for many readers. To be honest, it's not a bad way to go as you can drop a title for a couple years and then catch up usually way cheaper than cover buy buying it in a lot off ebay, as people will often puts sets from say v.3 1-24 up all the time.

Pretty much this. I just don't replace the books that get axed anymore from the Big Two. I'm going on 4 years since I've picked up a DC book after 30 plus years, and my Marvel list is dwindling as time goes by. That way when the latest Gambit volume or Scarlet Spider or Captain Marvel volume bite the dust I'm not missing out on anything, and can pick it up dirt cheap when I back issue hunt, which I do still do.

With this relaunch only Cap, the Waid Hulk and the FF stuff are shoo-ins to be purchased, the rest is a crap shoot. Definitely NOT expanding my Marvel pulls at least until 'Dark' Avengers goes back to Thunderbolts #200, but that'd be it.

[Will.S]

I used to care before but at this point they do it so frequently it's become a normal thing for them and they've slowly seemed to adapt a more "seasonal" approach for their volumes.

It has gotten pretty silly in the number of times they've done it so far though I will admit.

[RDMacQ]

I used to care before but at this point they do it so frequently it's become a normal thing for them and they've slowly seemed to adapt a more "seasonal" approach for their volumes.

It has gotten pretty silly in the number of times they've done it so far though I will admit.

And you know what? A "seasonal" approach might be an interesting way to approach this thing.

Let's say that a comic team is given 12, 16 or even 24 issues- enough time for a beginning, middle and an end. And this is done across the entire line. Then the "season" comes to a close, there's a break, and a new "season" can start up a few months later. Maybe with the same team, maybe with another team, depends on what the fans respond to and what the creators want. Changing over to something like that- and at least admitting that this is Marvel policy- might be a good way to develop interest in the series. Give them some cohesive structure rather than create this heir of just waiting for the next big event to come around.

[carabas]

Hate it, and actually have dropped many/all Marvel titles from my pull list some tim ago.

It's really annoying that when you buy an unnumbered Black Widow trade it turnes out to be a vol. 2 to somethng, and when you go back the next week and you buy Black Widow vol. 1 it turns out to be the vol. 1 to a different Black Widow series from a year or so later.

[MarvelMaster616]

I really don't mind the relaunching. So long as the stories are good, I'll give it a chance. But I find it asinine that fans keep complaining about it. They often seem to ignore that as gimmicky as it may be, it does generate sales. New #1s frequently get a big sales bump. DC's New 52 showed that and by all accounts their reboot was a success. So why shouldn't Marvel try something similar to capture more market share? They are a business last I checked.

[Castel]

Ah well, don't give much of a damn about that. What's more surprising is that people still fall for that stunt. But hey, more readers = more bucks.

The evil mouse gets its money and it keeps the books we appreciate alive.

[R0NIN]

I really don't mind the relaunching. So long as the stories are good, I'll give it a chance. But I find it asinine that fans keep complaining about it. They often seem to ignore that as gimmicky as it may be, it does generate sales. New #1s frequently get a big sales bump. DC's New 52 showed that and by all accounts their reboot was a success. So why shouldn't Marvel try something similar to capture more market share? They are a business last I checked.

Cause Marvel did do something like that and they did it in a better way so as not to annoy old fans or alienate new fans. It's called the Ultimate Universe. A start from scratch rebooted Marvel universe for the younger generation or those wanting fresh new takes on old favorites. A guess what instead of having me buy only one Spiderman comic. I was buying two because I liked both.

[ChristmasFanatic]

Doesnt bother me none. Its a shake up so I can add/take away some titles.

[Etoma]

I find it annoying and completely needless, It is a sales gimmick, and a silly one at that.