Top Ten Relaunch wishes

[greg]

OK, y'all have convinced me. NO variants!

I am open to flip covers - how about you?

Yep, I'm open to that.

Are they all the SAME BOOK like Magnus #5? That's not a variant, that's a winner!

[400yrs]

I don't know about flip books. They can be good as a supplement, but both Marvel and DC had to go back on back up stories recently.

If readers feel like they are being charged more for essentially a back-up story, there will be scorn. Whether sales are lost on that.....

If you are charging the same amount as a regular book and are just taking away ad space or something, then yeah. It could be a good spot to try out a new character or a spot to feature / tryout new writers and artists.

I like what Image and DC have been doing in previewing new books in the back of their comics.

[greg]

I like what Image and DC have been doing in previewing new books in the back of their comics.

I wonder where they got that idea... oh yeah... Magnus #5!

[400yrs]

I like what Image and DC have been doing in previewing new books in the back of their comics.

I wonder where they got that idea... oh yeah... Magnus #5!

The Rai / Magnus books were flip books with original Rai content. Image and Vertigo have been previewing pages from upcoming #1s so readers can get a sample of a new book.

Putting in an original story is nice, but putting in a preview of an upcoming issue would keep costs down and could help generate revenue on the new book. It's probably a bit more practical unless you have some artists who do good stuff, but want to get noticed and will work for free.

[cplsimon]

Ok so I want Operation Stormbreaker. It was a great concept. It looked really cool.

[Daniel Jackson]

Ok so I want Operation Stormbreaker. It was a great concept. It looked really cool.

I agree. The Teutonic Knight was a great villain. It would be neat to him battle against the Good Skin.

[cjv]

1) Focus on continuity and story telling. What happens in one book should be mentioned/commented on/effect the stories in other relevant books. I hate it when Spider-Man fights a villain in NY and he destroys half of NY, only you don't hear about it at all in FF or Avengers.

2) "World outside your window". This means many things. Relatively realistic physics. Dead means dead. No "super alien technology". No "1800 alien races". No gods. No mystical. People aren't "used" to seeing super heroes. People don't wear spandex and capes to fight bad guys.

3) Focus on story OVER splashy art. Simple, realistic art that tells the story is fine. Don't need pin ups, splash pages every other page, women who look like they couldn't balance on two feet, etc.

4) Slow starting on, slow expansion. One thing that Valiant started off doing well was a slow buildup. Start with one or two books, get a good back story and character development, than add another book or two. Now, they have some backstory and well developed characters already, so they don't need to start AS slow. But if they start putting out 5 or 6 or 10 titles right away, I think they will be in trouble.

5) Focus on building the universe first. How/why does it exist? What is different from our universe? If it is an continuation of the Valiant Universe, tell as what has been happening in the interim.

6) Not every guest character, cameo appearance, or super powered being deserves their own title. Not all characters/groups can carry their own title.

7) Treat that fans right. New fans, and old fans. Gold books were cool, but they started to get out of control. Something to recognize fans, fan effort, is always fun. Not variants, which are sold in the marketplace, but things like the coupon issues. A free give-away 0 issue was great as well, which brings us to..

8) An early crossover event, like Unity, done correctly could really draw people in. Done poorly, and it will cement the doom. Correctly means focusing on the story, that it actually advances the universe. Poorly means you need to buy every issue to understand what is going on, or that it is a crossover just to be a cross over.

9) Publish on a set schedule.

10) Nod to the old. Recognize the past. Respect it, build on it, but don't be limited by it.


(BTW, I still think Pierce could come back and replace the Solar character as the "mother" of the universe. Just as Solar has his split personalities, "Good Pierce" could have split of "Sick, Mentally Deranged Pierce".

[wrunow]

1) Focus on continuity and story telling. What happens in one book should be mentioned/commented on/effect the stories in other relevant books. I hate it when Spider-Man fights a villain in NY and he destroys half of NY, only you don't hear about it at all in FF or Avengers.

2) "World outside your window". This means many things. Relatively realistic physics. Dead means dead. No "super alien technology". No "1800 alien races". No gods. No mystical. People aren't "used" to seeing super heroes. People don't wear spandex and capes to fight bad guys.

3) Focus on story OVER splashy art. Simple, realistic art that tells the story is fine. Don't need pin ups, splash pages every other page, women who look like they couldn't balance on two feet, etc.

4) Slow starting on, slow expansion. One thing that Valiant started off doing well was a slow buildup. Start with one or two books, get a good back story and character development, than add another book or two. Now, they have some backstory and well developed characters already, so they don't need to start AS slow. But if they start putting out 5 or 6 or 10 titles right away, I think they will be in trouble.

5) Focus on building the universe first. How/why does it exist? What is different from our universe? If it is an continuation of the Valiant Universe, tell as what has been happening in the interim.

6) Not every guest character, cameo appearance, or super powered being deserves their own title. Not all characters/groups can carry their own title.

7) Treat that fans right. New fans, and old fans. Gold books were cool, but they started to get out of control. Something to recognize fans, fan effort, is always fun. Not variants, which are sold in the marketplace, but things like the coupon issues. A free give-away 0 issue was great as well, which brings us to..

8) An early crossover event, like Unity, done correctly could really draw people in. Done poorly, and it will cement the doom. Correctly means focusing on the story, that it actually advances the universe. Poorly means you need to buy every issue to understand what is going on, or that it is a crossover just to be a cross over.

9) Publish on a set schedule.

10) Nod to the old. Recognize the past. Respect it, build on it, but don't be limited by it.


(BTW, I still think Pierce could come back and replace the Solar character as the "mother" of the universe. Just as Solar has his split personalities, "Good Pierce" could have split of "Sick, Mentally Deranged Pierce".

Very well said, great post

[kevinbastos]

1) Focus on continuity and story telling. What happens in one book should be mentioned/commented on/effect the stories in other relevant books. I hate it when Spider-Man fights a villain in NY and he destroys half of NY, only you don't hear about it at all in FF or Avengers.

2) "World outside your window". This means many things. Relatively realistic physics. Dead means dead. No "super alien technology". No "1800 alien races". No gods. No mystical. People aren't "used" to seeing super heroes. People don't wear spandex and capes to fight bad guys.

3) Focus on story OVER splashy art. Simple, realistic art that tells the story is fine. Don't need pin ups, splash pages every other page, women who look like they couldn't balance on two feet, etc.

4) Slow starting on, slow expansion. One thing that Valiant started off doing well was a slow buildup. Start with one or two books, get a good back story and character development, than add another book or two. Now, they have some backstory and well developed characters already, so they don't need to start AS slow. But if they start putting out 5 or 6 or 10 titles right away, I think they will be in trouble.

5) Focus on building the universe first. How/why does it exist? What is different from our universe? If it is an continuation of the Valiant Universe, tell as what has been happening in the interim.

6) Not every guest character, cameo appearance, or super powered being deserves their own title. Not all characters/groups can carry their own title.

7) Treat that fans right. New fans, and old fans. Gold books were cool, but they started to get out of control. Something to recognize fans, fan effort, is always fun. Not variants, which are sold in the marketplace, but things like the coupon issues. A free give-away 0 issue was great as well, which brings us to..

8) An early crossover event, like Unity, done correctly could really draw people in. Done poorly, and it will cement the doom. Correctly means focusing on the story, that it actually advances the universe. Poorly means you need to buy every issue to understand what is going on, or that it is a crossover just to be a cross over.

9) Publish on a set schedule.

10) Nod to the old. Recognize the past. Respect it, build on it, but don't be limited by it.


(BTW, I still think Pierce could come back and replace the Solar character as the "mother" of the universe. Just as Solar has his split personalities, "Good Pierce" could have split of "Sick, Mentally Deranged Pierce".

Very well said, great post

Agreed. Fantastic

[Ryan]

1) Focus on continuity and story telling. What happens in one book should be mentioned/commented on/effect the stories in other relevant books. I hate it when Spider-Man fights a villain in NY and he destroys half of NY, only you don't hear about it at all in FF or Avengers.

2) "World outside your window". This means many things. Relatively realistic physics. Dead means dead. No "super alien technology". No "1800 alien races". No gods. No mystical. People aren't "used" to seeing super heroes. People don't wear spandex and capes to fight bad guys.

3) Focus on story OVER splashy art. Simple, realistic art that tells the story is fine. Don't need pin ups, splash pages every other page, women who look like they couldn't balance on two feet, etc.

4) Slow starting on, slow expansion. One thing that Valiant started off doing well was a slow buildup. Start with one or two books, get a good back story and character development, than add another book or two. Now, they have some backstory and well developed characters already, so they don't need to start AS slow. But if they start putting out 5 or 6 or 10 titles right away, I think they will be in trouble.

5) Focus on building the universe first. How/why does it exist? What is different from our universe? If it is an continuation of the Valiant Universe, tell as what has been happening in the interim.

6) Not every guest character, cameo appearance, or super powered being deserves their own title. Not all characters/groups can carry their own title.

7) Treat that fans right. New fans, and old fans. Gold books were cool, but they started to get out of control. Something to recognize fans, fan effort, is always fun. Not variants, which are sold in the marketplace, but things like the coupon issues. A free give-away 0 issue was great as well, which brings us to..

8) An early crossover event, like Unity, done correctly could really draw people in. Done poorly, and it will cement the doom. Correctly means focusing on the story, that it actually advances the universe. Poorly means you need to buy every issue to understand what is going on, or that it is a crossover just to be a cross over.

9) Publish on a set schedule.

10) Nod to the old. Recognize the past. Respect it, build on it, but don't be limited by it.


(BTW, I still think Pierce could come back and replace the Solar character as the "mother" of the universe. Just as Solar has his split personalities, "Good Pierce" could have split of "Sick, Mentally Deranged Pierce".

good stuff

[leonmallett]

...2) "World outside your window". This means many things. Relatively realistic physics. Dead means dead. No "super alien technology". No "1800 alien races". No gods. No mystical. People aren't "used" to seeing super heroes. People don't wear spandex and capes to fight bad guys.
...

While I largely agree with the principle (and the others you laid down!), doen't this principle argue against the X-O suit?

[Knightt]

I hope that there are TRADING CARDS !!! I really enjoyed the Valiant trading cards and would have liked them MUCH better if there was something more than comic book covers.

Can you imagine how nice a Marvel Masterpieces 1996 version of Valiant characters would be ? All painted up in Boris and Julie Bell beauty or by Joe Jusko ? Even if not those three artists, get some of those guys who do a great job with the computer painting.

Also, I will go as far as to say Valiant trading cards done up monthly like the Wizard Magazine holofoil trading cards. Back in the day, the images on the cards were mostly of Image characters but how great would it be to see X-O Manowar in holofoil (a normal card, diecut or etched !!)

But I would not like to see a $#itload of cartoony sketch cards or no nothing autograph cards. IF they were to do artist/inker/writer LEGACY Valiant talent (Shooter, Layton, PERLIN, Chen, Jackson etc) autograph cards, I would like to see them done on those cards with the cutout section of holofoil like on the new Thor movie cards.

[cjv]

...2) "World outside your window". This means many things. Relatively realistic physics. Dead means dead. No "super alien technology". No "1800 alien races". No gods. No mystical. People aren't "used" to seeing super heroes. People don't wear spandex and capes to fight bad guys.
...

While I largely agree with the principle (and the others you laid down!), doen't this principle argue against the X-O suit?

Well, tehcnically speaking,the XO Armor is not a piece of technology, but rather a living being.

But I am more thinking about a broad expansion of using "alien technology" to explain everything. I should have also included "no infinite number of 'scientific geniuses'". Looking at Marvel (not sure about DC) but it appears as if scientific geniuses are a dime a dozen, that alien technology is just raining from the heavens, and both of those are used to explain the fantastical technology that almost everyone seems to possess.


Chris

[leonmallett]

...2) "World outside your window". This means many things. Relatively realistic physics. Dead means dead. No "super alien technology". No "1800 alien races". No gods. No mystical. People aren't "used" to seeing super heroes. People don't wear spandex and capes to fight bad guys.
...

While I largely agree with the principle (and the others you laid down!), doen't this principle argue against the X-O suit?

Well, tehcnically speaking,the XO Armor is not a piece of technology, but rather a living being.

But I am more thinking about a broad expansion of using "alien technology" to explain everything. I should have also included "no infinite number of 'scientific geniuses'". Looking at Marvel (not sure about DC) but it appears as if scientific geniuses are a dime a dozen, that alien technology is just raining from the heavens, and both of those are used to explain the fantastical technology that almost everyone seems to possess.


Chris

Fair comment Chris; I was just being pedantic when I posted.

The problem is that there is a degee of fantastical technology built into the base concepts already: Armorines, HARD Corps power uploads, Bloodshot's nanites, the afore-mentioned X-O suit; ultimately it was extrapolation of science-fiction ideas, but it was all beyond then - or even current - technology.

That is why I would argue that the hard-science argument is a notional fallacy that never served to establish the parameters of the shared universe; it was a redundant argument to hide behind when really those examples were, and still are, examples of hand-wavium.

There was no science behind the death-energy manipulation of characters like Shadowman, Dr Mirage or Darque, yet that did not stop me being very entertained by the stories involving them. That is why I caution against the hard-science notional-fallacy. Rigid adherence is a crutch and not a linch-pin to telling good stories in my view.

[Knightt]

Because you used the words pedantic, extrapolation, notional fallacy, and adherence, I am not even going to read your post.

(somebody got a new Big Words Dictionary)

[cjv]

...2) "World outside your window". This means many things. Relatively realistic physics. Dead means dead. No "super alien technology". No "1800 alien races". No gods. No mystical. People aren't "used" to seeing super heroes. People don't wear spandex and capes to fight bad guys.
...

While I largely agree with the principle (and the others you laid down!), doesn't this principle argue against the X-O suit?

Well, technically speaking,the XO Armor is not a piece of technology, but rather a living being.

But I am more thinking about a broad expansion of using "alien technology" to explain everything. I should have also included "no infinite number of 'scientific geniuses'". Looking at Marvel (not sure about DC) but it appears as if scientific geniuses are a dime a dozen, that alien technology is just raining from the heavens, and both of those are used to explain the fantastical technology that almost everyone seems to possess.


Chris

Fair comment Chris; I was just being pedantic when I posted.

No problem!

The problem is that there is a degee of fantastical technology built into the base concepts already: Armorines, HARD Corps power uploads, Bloodshot's nanites, the afore-mentioned X-O suit; ultimately it was extrapolation of science-fiction ideas, but it was all beyond then - or even current - technology.

I think there is a difference, however, between something that can be legitimately conceived of given our current scientific knowledge (even if we can't build it yet) and something completely imaginary written off as "alien science" or "person so-and-so is an unrecognized scientific genius".

Nanite technology, for example, is something we can really see a future in, even if we can't do it ourselves right now. On the other hand, some "imaginary material that can be compressed as a liquid but shoot out via pressure through nozzles and harden into a substance stronger than steel and still flexible discovered by a high school kid" - well, that seems to be stretching it a little.

(On a side note - why hasn't any spider villain ever simply taken a sample of webbing, analyzed it chemically, then found some way to dissolve/neutralize it?)

If you look through the big two companies, and list super heroes that owe their powers to "unimaginable alien technology" or "scientific genius that is beyond our understanding", it is pretty long. Then, if you add in all the nuances, gadgets, and minor items that heroes have used that are attributed to both of those, the list is HUGE!

I am not saying there can't be any. I simply don't want it to be a convenient "catch all" to explain something. Yes, there will always be some stretching of the imagination, and some suspension of disbelief, but one of the things that made Valiant I so good, IMO, was trying to minimizing the fantasy and stick to realistic/understood/existing science, when possible.

Yes, Armorines are a stretch, and some others, but they are trying to limit them, and/or explain them within the confines of the existing universe, not just say "some new alien technology".

That is why I would argue that the hard-science argument is a notional fallacy that never served to establish the parameters of the shared universe; it was a redundant argument to hide behind when really those examples were, and still are, examples of hand-wavium.

I am not saying that everything must be hard science, but I would like some adherence to real scientific principles, or at least a "hand-wavium" explanation based on real science.

There was no science behind the death-energy manipulation of characters like Shadowman, Dr Mirage or Darque, yet that did not stop me being very entertained by the stories involving them. That is why I caution against the hard-science notional-fallacy. Rigid adherence is a crutch and not a linch-pin to telling good stories in my view.

And I, for one, didn't like the "death energy" manipulation explanation (still liked the comics, though). IMO, a crutch is simply being able to say "it's alien technology" or "it's magic" or "it's the invention of a super genius" and leaving it at that. It takes much more skill to use existing knowledge, existing understanding, and weave an explanation around that which still makes sense and couldbe scientifically plausible. Even the explanation of the necromantic energy was still explained carefully, within the realm of the comics. It became a little too "all-powerful" in my opinion later on, more like Marvel or DC "magic", but I got the impression that initially it wasn't going to be. Maybe I am wrong.

Ultimately, good comic stories can be told in any understanding of reality. Just because Marvel and DC use those convenient options doesn't mean the stories aren't as good. However, one thing I liked about early Valiant (which they got away from after a while) was that they DID try to make the science realistic, they DID try to limit the "alien technology" crutch. Not that they never used it, but it wasn't overused. And that's what I hope to see in the new stories.

The certainly may be good stories even if they don't do that, and the certainly may be bad stories if they do, but IMO they will be sticking closer to the original Valiant concept if they do try to limit those convenient explanations for technology/events/materials beyond our capabilities.

Chris

Chris

[X-O HoboJoe]

...2) "World outside your window". This means many things. Relatively realistic physics. Dead means dead. No "super alien technology". No "1800 alien races". No gods. No mystical. People aren't "used" to seeing super heroes. People don't wear spandex and capes to fight bad guys.
...

While I largely agree with the principle (and the others you laid down!), doen't this principle argue against the X-O suit?

Well, tehcnically speaking,the XO Armor is not a piece of technology, but rather a living being.

But I am more thinking about a broad expansion of using "alien technology" to explain everything. I should have also included "no infinite number of 'scientific geniuses'". Looking at Marvel (not sure about DC) but it appears as if scientific geniuses are a dime a dozen, that alien technology is just raining from the heavens, and both of those are used to explain the fantastical technology that almost everyone seems to possess.


Chris

AKA the Reed Richards effect?

[cjv]

...2) "World outside your window". This means many things. Relatively realistic physics. Dead means dead. No "super alien technology". No "1800 alien races". No gods. No mystical. People aren't "used" to seeing super heroes. People don't wear spandex and capes to fight bad guys.
...

While I largely agree with the principle (and the others you laid down!), doen't this principle argue against the X-O suit?

Well, tehcnically speaking,the XO Armor is not a piece of technology, but rather a living being.

But I am more thinking about a broad expansion of using "alien technology" to explain everything. I should have also included "no infinite number of 'scientific geniuses'". Looking at Marvel (not sure about DC) but it appears as if scientific geniuses are a dime a dozen, that alien technology is just raining from the heavens, and both of those are used to explain the fantastical technology that almost everyone seems to possess.


Chris

AKA the Reed Richards effect?

As good a term as any! I was thinking about SpiderMan and his webslingers, but I like "the Reed Richards effect".

Chris

On another side note, I think we should try to develop a list of the "super geniuses" in both DC and Marvel, as well as heroes who use either alien technology (to explain something that would have no explanation in a real world scenario) or simply explain away any technology as "well...so-and-so is a genius, so he just invented it". - the Reed Richards Effect.

[X-O HoboJoe]

...2) "World outside your window". This means many things. Relatively realistic physics. Dead means dead. No "super alien technology". No "1800 alien races". No gods. No mystical. People aren't "used" to seeing super heroes. People don't wear spandex and capes to fight bad guys.
...

While I largely agree with the principle (and the others you laid down!), doen't this principle argue against the X-O suit?

Well, tehcnically speaking,the XO Armor is not a piece of technology, but rather a living being.

But I am more thinking about a broad expansion of using "alien technology" to explain everything. I should have also included "no infinite number of 'scientific geniuses'". Looking at Marvel (not sure about DC) but it appears as if scientific geniuses are a dime a dozen, that alien technology is just raining from the heavens, and both of those are used to explain the fantastical technology that almost everyone seems to possess.


Chris

AKA the Reed Richards effect?

As good a term as any! I was thinking about SpiderMan and his webslingers, but I like "the Reed Richards effect".

Chris

On another side note, I think we should try to develop a list of the "super geniuses" in both DC and Marvel, as well as heroes who use either alien technology (to explain something that would have no explanation in a real world scenario) or simply explain away any technology as "well...so-and-so is a genius, so he just invented it". - the Reed Richards Effect.

It's either make it up on the spot or steal something from Galactus when he's arguing with the Silver Surfer and the Watcher.

[yardstick]

One thing that comes to mind is to see the return of Japan's Dragon City and Tohru as Rai. I just loved that whole concept and I think it was a huge mistake when they got rid of both.

Heavy use of the Harbinger Wars as the baseline to start the titles. This gives every title automatic modern day continuity (Harbinger/H.A.R.D. Corps), future continuity (First Rai, Grandmother) and historical continuity (Rai 0), without having to worry about Solar, Magnus or Turok.

[yardstick]

The original (just-post-Unity) Shadowman mask and symbol/outfit.

[leonmallett]

...2) "World outside your window". This means many things. Relatively realistic physics. Dead means dead. No "super alien technology". No "1800 alien races". No gods. No mystical. People aren't "used" to seeing super heroes. People don't wear spandex and capes to fight bad guys.
...

While I largely agree with the principle (and the others you laid down!), doen't this principle argue against the X-O suit?

Well, tehcnically speaking,the XO Armor is not a piece of technology, but rather a living being.

But I am more thinking about a broad expansion of using "alien technology" to explain everything. I should have also included "no infinite number of 'scientific geniuses'". Looking at Marvel (not sure about DC) but it appears as if scientific geniuses are a dime a dozen, that alien technology is just raining from the heavens, and both of those are used to explain the fantastical technology that almost everyone seems to possess.


Chris

AKA the Reed Richards effect?

Ithink that phrase neatly outlines the problem.

[leonmallett]

And I, for one, didn't like the "death energy" manipulation explanation (still liked the comics, though). IMO, a crutch is simply being able to say "it's alien technology" or "it's magic" or "it's the invention of a super genius" and leaving it at that. It takes much more skill to use existing knowledge, existing understanding, and weave an explanation around that which still makes sense and couldbe scientifically plausible. Even the explanation of the necromantic energy was still explained carefully, within the realm of the comics. It became a little too "all-powerful" in my opinion later on, more like Marvel or DC "magic", but I got the impression that initially it wasn't going to be. Maybe I am wrong.

Ultimately, good comic stories can be told in any understanding of reality. Just because Marvel and DC use those convenient options doesn't mean the stories aren't as good. However, one thing I liked about early Valiant (which they got away from after a while) was that they DID try to make the science realistic, they DID try to limit the "alien technology" crutch. Not that they never used it, but it wasn't overused. And that's what I hope to see in the new stories.

The certainly may be good stories even if they don't do that, and the certainly may be bad stories if they do, but IMO they will be sticking closer to the original Valiant concept if they do try to limit those convenient explanations for technology/events/materials beyond our capabilities.

Chris

Chris

I favour a soft reboot of the line (as it sidesteps the aging issue - the real-time idea was nice, but never really a good vehicle to be able to portray individual characters long-term on the whole).

Assuming that starting point, a scientific-basis for 'stuff' framework as you set-out could work, however I expect that within time the framework would become stretched as new creators come aboard - that tends to be the way of things doesn't it?

Within that though, I would favour the inclusion of characters like Darque, Shadowman and Dr Mirage - they were novel characters in my humble opinion. I also like the Armorines concept - they always felt more engaging and sort-of-comic-book-plausible than say Marvel's Guardsmen (excepting Michael O'Brien over there). Yet as you observe some of those concepts are not for everyone.

I would argue that one of the strongest runs in VALIANT was possibly Shadowman under Bob Hall; Hall simply got on with telling a good story with good characters that recognisably violated physical laws as we know them. If in trying to adhere to 'real science' (a misnomer here of course) means no Shadowman in the Bob Hall mode (which was far superior to those first few issues in my view), then how palatable is that?

[leonmallett]

Because you used the words pedantic, extrapolation, notional fallacy, and adherence, I am not even going to read your post.

(somebody got a new Big Words Dictionary)

Sorry.

[Knightt]

Because you used the words pedantic, extrapolation, notional fallacy, and adherence, I am not even going to read your post.

(somebody got a new Big Words Dictionary)

Sorry.

LOL, I kid... I am a kidder. I obviously DID read what you wrote, right ?