Archie goes digital with 'New Crusaders'

[John C]

I haven't heard back, but giving things another look and taking a few minutes to experiment, it's not too bad.  They should still fix the problems, but:

- The screen-size problem is partly overcome by, as I guessed, zooming and panning.  It's ugly, though, especially considering that there's no keyboard control AND you can't page back and forth on the page while zoomed.  So it's double-click to zoom, drag to pan, double-click to un-zoom, drag to turn the page.  Carpal tunnel rules!

- The comic viewer is being blocked for me by AdBlock Plus, so it can be disabled for the page.  Also not a great solution.  Why is it classified as an ad?

- The SSL certificate is for archiedigital.com, whereas all their links are for www.archiedigital.com.  So, the warning is benign, but I can't help think it's going to cost them business if they don't fix it.

- The Terms of Use are also linked at the very bottom of the page correctly.

In the Terms of Service, things I see that I don't like are:

- No refund for cancellation, especially when there's no indication of what books can be read, is kind of creepy.  Cancelling also needs to be "confirmed," and isn't complete until they send an e-mail notice (and it's the customer's responsibility to know if it hasn't happened), so I worry that there's an intent to scam money from people who didn't jump through all the hoops.

- It's implied that agreeing to the terms accepts that Archie has a copyright over all their content and there's a further agreement not to "provide access" to the material to anyone.  This may be signing away the ability to invoke Fair Use and may preclude using this to borrow public domain scans.  I don't know if it'd hold up in court, but I don't like the implication.

- The Privacy Policy is extremely vague.  Granted, the only information they can possibly have is a user name, password, e-mail address, and which comics you read (hardly something a Mubarek could use to imprison you, say), but there's a lot of "we use it for business purposes," and "may enter into alliances."  They do allow requests to the information they've collected, but I don't like that there's no opt-out for passing your contact information to others.

So, ignoring the newer concerns, which are minor since I don't feel that they're binding beyond the law (i.e., I believe the courts frown upon contracts that restrict your rights), I made it through registration.

Inside, it's...weird.  Specifically, their browsing capabilities are very incomplete.  There are logos for a handful of books they probably assumed would be popular (or eyecatching, like Pureheart or Cosmo the Merry Martian), but that Blue Ribbon issue?  Not anywhere to be seen in the menus.  But you can find it through a search.

Side note:  The Blue Ribbon page makes reference to "Way-Back Wednesday," so it looks like that's when the Golden Age books get posted.

Interestingly, inside the site, the comic reader is overwhelmingly better.  The comic fits the screen size, has a full-screen option, keyboard controls, thumbnails, bookmarks, and a sound volume (ha! for page-turning).  They're doing themselves a disservice with the free sample.

As for the book itself, I believe it's the same scan--the interior front cover is cocked at the same angle and there's the same hint of a spine-roll on the fourth page.  Someone definitely went at it with Photoshop, though.  It looks a lot cleaner (and the cover has lost all the nicks), and they did a much better job than, say, the DC Archives with the bold colors, but...I don't know, it's hard to say how good a job they've done.  I see a lot of the colors looking right (on what ends up looking like whiter paper), but it seems off, somehow, and I also suspect they've down-sampled the scans a bit, maybe to save bandwidth.

And, oh!  The interior view isn't Flash, or at least not purely so.  Interestingly, that means that the browser back/forward buttons work for your paging through, zooming, and so forth.  Interesting, but I'm not sure how useful it is.  But it also brings up a downside:  They haven't put links back to the system on the individual pages, so you end up paging ALL the way back.

(No, wait.  That only applies to SOME of the books.  Others use the lousy interface on the front page.  Argh!)

[Yoc]

Sounds like a work in progress.
I tell you those terms of service things are a big turn off to me.  Especially their cancellation process or non-process from the sounds of it.  Antagonistic from the get-go.

So you think they are tweaking the Blue Ribbon 3 that's being shared here eh?  Ok, I'd assume then that they will have the same incomplete issues we do.  I'm glad they aren't going with the mega BOLD colouring at least.
Thanks for the info John, let us know if you develop anymore thoughts on the site.

-Yoc

[John C]

Ah, OK.  Cancelling isn't quite so bad.  Yes, you're paying up front with no chance of a refund (probably to avoid people taking the annual term and then bailing after a month, though there are smarter ways to handle that), but more carefully re-reading (or maybe they rewrote it in the last few hours), it's laid out in a bunch of steps, most of which are irrelevant.

Basically, you go to the site (duh), log in (seriously?), go to your subscription information, cancel, then (we're back to Blatantly Obvious Land) look for the confirmation that it happened.  Then, if you don't get an e-mail confirmation as well, bug them to make sure you're not being charged.

So, not bad, just confusing for all their painstaking clarity.

The other thing suggesting that it's copied-out boilerplate is in the Privacy Policy.  I didn't bring it up because it's not relevant to the site's purpose (as far as I know), but they mention in polite language that they'll protect your privacy, but may also sell you out in a heartbeat if it protects their business or a third party.

I got a chuckle out of that mostly because the last time I saw similar phrasing was on the Wall Street Journal's new WikiLeaks-competing whistleblower site, where it's obviously the very worst policy to have.

Back to the site, right now, my only real objection (other than the schizophrenic comic viewing software--it looks like the brain-damaged software is behind all the covers with a "Read Now!" banner--hopefully, that means they're older) is that there's apparently no way to just get a full list of all the comics posted.  It seems like they think they've got it, though, so I'm guessing it's just a maintenance issue.

[Yoc]

Thanks for the clarifications John.
When I visited a few days back the first thing I went looking for was a list of what they had.  One hopes they clue in on that soon.  We customers like to have a clue what to expect should we commit money to them.

[John C]

Especially since they're so new (and judging by a lot of things, new to pretty much everything about the digital business), it'd probably be a good idea for interested parties to drop them a constructive line listing problems they see.  Having been on the other side, I know there's a world of difference between the frustrated employee saying there's a better way to do things and a bunch of e-mails suggesting there's more money to be made if things are improved.

I think "I can't commit to a subscription without any idea of what I'm getting for it" goes a pretty long way.

[Roygbiv666]

Nice overview on the whole thing, John. Thanks.

Especially since they're so new (and judging by a lot of things, new to pretty much everything about the digital business), it'd probably be a good idea for interested parties to drop them a constructive line listing problems they see.  Having been on the other side, I know there's a world of difference between the frustrated employee saying there's a better way to do things and a bunch of e-mails suggesting there's more money to be made if things are improved.

I think "I can't commit to a subscription without any idea of what I'm getting for it" goes a pretty long way.

[dhfh]

I finally have a few minutes to comment on all this, so here goes:

First off, the model intended for distribution is, as previously stated $3 to $4 a month for access to the site, not a single title.  But the 6 page "issue" is supposed to be for a WEEKLY comic.  So, that would mean 4 issues per month of 6 pages each or about the same as a normal 24 page monthy comic.  It's all spelled out in this interview:

http://www.newsarama.com/comics/archie-red-circle-digital-111012.html

Now as far as my opinions go on the actual relaunching ... well, in short, I'm not super enthusiastic about these plans.  Basically I have 3 main reactions to this.

Point  1:  Archie seems to be using this as a way to test the waters/jump into digital-only distribution.  This brought on a serious case of deja vu for me.  For those who don't know: back in the early 1980's Archie wanted to test the waters/jump into a new distribution method called "direct marketing" and they decided the best thing to do was to bring their old superheroes out of mothballs.  I really liked theses characters and thought the idea was great.  But ultimately it proved to be a disaster.  From the beginning the new line of comics showed signs of poor management and symptoms of office politics going on behind the scenes.  Later on, after it was all over, these "rumors" turned out to be mostly true and the main cause for the audience's interest dwindling to unsustainable levels.  (Examples of the kinds of problems that resulted are: different editors going in their own directions, late books causing sudden reprint issues to take their place, and things like multiple origins for the same character coming from different writers.)

Point 2:  While the concept of new characters picking up the mantle of the old is a good, servicable way of re-introducing the superhero line, it's hardly a "new revolutionary way" to do it.  Also, it can often be handled in a blatantly contrived way that makes even new readers think "OK, this is just to start the ball rolling."  As a launching method, I think it's potentially a mark against the line.  Assuming that it seems to be a contrived plot to start the story, readers can easily end up finding the (re-)launch to be lackluster and decide there is no point in continuing to read further.  I'll be incredibly impressed if they can pull off a non-contrived start to the plot line in only 6 pages.  As described, the premise already sounds contrived, but  hopefully that won't turn people off and everyone will wait and see.

As for how new this launching method is, it or a variant has been used by at least DC's Infinity, Inc.; Dynamite's Project: Superpowers; and AC Comic's  Femforce.  And most interesting, another feeling of deja vu came to me when reading the premise:  In the 1990's DC comics decided they would try to re-enter the newstand distribution market by licensing Archie's superhero line to creat the !mpact imprint.  The Premise of the !mpact line:  after decades without any superheroes (save one) being around, a new batch of superheroes appear!  They even had a storyline where an old Shield mentors the new one.

Point 3:  Looking at the artwork doesn't make me think that this new incarnation of the superhero line is going to be a serious treatment.  By that I mean, I think the artwork conveys a more light-hearted 1960's Batman tone than the tone found in 1940's MLJ versions of these characters.  This will not make me as interested in the stories as much as more dynamic, realistic-looking artwork would.  On the other hand, if the stories are like in "Batman: the Animated Series" I'd like the comic in spite of the artwork.  (I, for one, am quite sick of the B. Timm school of artwork/animation for a subject with a serious tone rather than a caricature, as I've always regarded it as a somewhat polished version of the artistic level of an average 5 to 6 year old.)  It seems that the chances it could be serious instead of silly are even slimmer, however, if the statement "He compared the tone of the series to popular Pixar animated movie, The Incredibles" is valid.  And it's re-enforced by the fact that they gave the writing task to the guy famous for his work penning their Sonic the Hedgehog comic (which, strangely enough, already yukked up The Shield in its pages).  Also, as described so far, the concept of all the superheroes retiring to a community called "Red Circle" having "won their battle against evil" and then being nearly wiped out by the enemies that aren't supposed to be around anymore doesn't sound to me like great storytelling.  (I also don't like the Red Circle in-joke.)

I mean if you've won your battle, how do you end up being wiped out by the losers?  If the losers have escaped the prison or whatever that insured there are winners, shouldn't the winners be smart enough to realize it's time to dust off there costumes?  Even a casual read of the MLJ line here on the DCM will show that these characters are at least as vigilant as the next superhero.  And unless the supervillians have had some hidden way of getting back in shape to take on the aging Shield et al,  shouldn't they be just as out of practice as the superheroes are?  Or is it supposed to be that the villains' kids are following in their footsteps? (Ugg.)

So there's make take on this.  I just can't get over how much this seems like Archie's standard business model with respect to it's great superheroes of the past, except that this time around it looks like it may not even be as serious as the Silver Age incarnation was.

DHFH

[Yoc]

Hi DHFH,
Thanks for your post.
You've recapped their failed reboots in the 80s and 90s nicely.  I'm more a fan of the Timm school and think there is a possible niche for semi-serious, less grim heroes out there.  The Incredibles was my favourite movie that year and is still #1 computer animated movie ever.  It was what they should have made the lame Fantastic Four movies more like.  Superheroes and animation were made for each other IMO.
One hopes they've got their central idea put together and can create a more kid friendly but still dramatic use of their old heroes.  I agree the premise isn't anything special but we are only hearing the broad strokes and who knows, maybe the details will surprise us.  Not likely but hey, I recall the first two episodes of 'The Justice League' cartoon being very underwhelming and it turned into one of the best animated superhero cartoon shows ever.  Again just IMO.

As for the site - John and I both think they need to tell people what issues are available for reading so we can make an informed decision to subscribe or not.  Just splashing the Archie name on the site doesn't tell me enough.
I wish them well, these heroes were among my first exposure to the goldenage and I have a special place for them in my heart.  Archie is the only publisher still trying to appeal to a youth market and possibly create the next generation of readers.  If they can grow their company it can only be good for monthly comics as a format which seemingly is on its last legs.  I just hope they treat their heroes with respect and don't write down to their readers.

I'm enjoying this thread.  I'm glad I started it.  

[John C]

My real hope is that the origin they're talking about is something that'll happen in six pages and never be mentioned again.  Origins, frankly, are boring, and I don't know why writers keep going back to them as if their take on Krypton exploding is going to blow me away.

Art-wise, I'm not excited, but comic art today is largely trash, and the key for me is whether it can tell the story, not look pretty.  On the other hand, fingers crossed, because the design reminds me a bit of the late Mike Parobeck.  And if they're looking to target the tone of the early !mpact books (before DC top brass stepped in and knocked its legs out from under it), this could be a real treat.

The weekly schedule takes some of the nuisance out of the "six page" deal.  Hopefully, they'll write stories that suit it, rather than drag stories across infinite six-page installments.

Overall, I still think it has potential.  The sins of the past are hopefully on their mind as things to avoid, and it's worth keeping in mind that these aren't the same people (and of them, right?) who botched the Red Circle or !mpact.

[Yoc]

Posted on AC Comics is Mark Heike recounting a failed proposal to Archie....

http://www.accomics.com/?p=6941

See the last 3rd for the proposal info.

-Yoc