Digital Comic Museum
General Category => Comic Related Discussion => Topic started by: Yoc on October 10, 2011, 07:42:38 PM
-
Posted on http://www.firstcomicsnews.com/?p=33444
NEW YORK – Archie Comics has revealed to the New York Times its latest move – the relaunch of a superhero comic, this time in purely digital format.
With the New York Comic Con just around the corner, Archie comics is hoping to breathe new life into characters introduced as early as the 1940s, which have since fallen out of the public eye.
Fans will have access to both Archie Comics' latest material, in the form of a six-page comic, and to the back catalogue, which will be reprinted for the first time. (my red, Yoc)
And just like the recent DC Comics reboot, the new comic will not require knowledge of decades of continuity.
The series, to be written by Ian Flynn and illustrated by Ben Bates, will feature the original Mighty Crusaders, a collective of Archie Comics' superheroes. Set years after their original adventures, the story will feature the patriotic hero, The Shield, leading a group of young superheroes to take down villains which have taken out the since-retired heroes. This new super-team will be known as the New Crusaders, which is also the title of the series.
The characters were last published by Archie Comics in 1985. DC Comics licensed the characters to revive interest in them in both 1991 and 2008, however, both attempts did not last.
Those expecting edgy stories that are a common theme these days might be surprised by the tone of the New Crusaders. "They are not going to be water-downed (sic) superheroes, but they are not going to be dark either", said Jon Goldwater, the co-chief executive of Archie Comics Publications, to the New York Times. He compared the tone of the series to popular Pixar animated movie, The Incredibles.
Tackling the digital frontier has become a priority in the comic book industry. DC Comics and Marvel Comics were at first reluctant to release digital versions of the comics on the same day as the print versions, but have since started to do so. Slave Labor Graphics, a small independent publisher, has also started to release its comics purely in digital format, and will only print collected editions of the comics.
"It's very exciting to be creating the first brand-new digital comic book label," said Goldwater. "Financially, it makes sense … We are not going to have any print costs. To be a slave to printing prices when you're starting a new venture is a tremendous concern."
Archie Comics has yet to set the price for the subscription. "Value, value, value. That's what we want to give at Archie Comics," said Goldwater, who shared that he hoped the subscription fees to be no more than a regular comic book sold by DC Comics or Marvel Comics, which regularly go for US$2.99 (SGD$3.90) to US$3.99. "We're very conscious of what's going on in the economy right now. We want to be recession busters. We don't want to gouge our fans."
============
So Marvel and SLG have jumped on the same day bandwagon? This is the first I've heard of it. I'm very curious what access to Archie's 'back catalogue' means.
-Yoc
-
Interestingly, the New York Times article doesn't mention same-day for anybody but DC:
https://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/10/business/media/for-archie-comics-a-return-to-superheroes.html?_r=3
Marvel isn't mentioned at all in that context, and SLG apparently is only doing print for collections. I wonder if that was something that got confused with the mention of "major studios."
Other interesting bits from the NYT are that they're also going to have Spanish translations and I guess the Archie-universe series about the gay kid is important.
I can't say I'm excited about yet another relaunch, especially one that's launching in six pages at full price. Especially when the story is being described as:
The premise of the digital series, written by Ian Flynn and illustrated by Ben Bates, begins with the heroes largely in retirement in a suburb called the Red Circle. Their enemies find and dispatch the heroes, forcing the next generation, who will be overseen by The Shield, to save the day, thus paving the way for The New Crusaders, the title of the series.
I mean, yeah, there's the archive, but the MLJ material is already public domain and the '60s stuff wasn't exactly a masterpiece. I guess I haven't read any of the '80s stuff, and it's possible they own the Impact run, which would both be nice to see.
So, probably worth a look, but it would be much nicer if their flagship title was full-length.
-
Although I'm off to buy a Kindle this afternoon, it's not much use for a colour comic and I'm not that keen on reading comics on the computer and I haven't tried a comic download. A 6 page comic for $2.99? Sounds like a great bargain.
As a fan of the 60's Mighty Crusaders, my initial reaction was, great. But on reflection, I dread what the new, young heroes will look like. The back catalogue would intrigue me if it involved the Archie titles. And as you point out, the MLJ material is pd and I have all the 60's titles.
As an aside, Kindle appears to support PDF and there are lot of old British storypapers available in the format.
-
I'm told Archie will be hosting digital copies of the old 40’s MLJ comics with retouched colours.
-
Epads are much more practical IMHO than a Kindle. You get the ereader function plus computer functions
-
Epads are much more practical IMHO than a Kindle. You get the ereader function plus computer functions
Depends on what you need and what you're willing to spend. I love my iPad (particularly for reading comics, but for a lot of non-reading stuff as well) but if my ONLY need was for a reader I would would have looked hard at other devices (like the Nook Color and the new color Kindle).
-
Although I'm off to buy a Kindle this afternoon, it's not much use for a colour comic and I'm not that keen on reading comics on the computer and I haven't tried a comic download. A 6 page comic for $2.99? Sounds like a great bargain.
As a fan of the 60's Mighty Crusaders, my initial reaction was, great. But on reflection, I dread what the new, young heroes will look like. The back catalogue would intrigue me if it involved the Archie titles. And as you point out, the MLJ material is pd and I have all the 60's titles.
As an aside, Kindle appears to support PDF and there are lot of old British storypapers available in the format.
I don't wish to get embroiled in the kindle/Ipad/whatever discussion, but I have to agree with Paw about the original topic of discussion. I absolutely cannot see the six pages for $2.99 price, and the MLJ material is in PD so I wouldn't see much of an advantage to the back catalogue (unless it could bring up issues of the Little Archie series which seems unlikely. I don't need access to Fly series, and the rest of the Archie Adventure series/Radio Comics from the sixties just don't appeal to me now, although I did follow the Jaguar and even the Mighty Comics stuff back in the day. There simply wasn't enough of the Red Circle material before it imploded, and I never cared for the Impact adaptions (with the exception of the too short Black Hood series). The premise of the new material absolutely turns me off, as I've had a bellyful of watered down "legacy" heroes already and don't want to see more of the same ilk.
I'm sort of glad to know that the Crusaders are back because they have many fans, and there is nothing inherently flawed with that group of characters, but I'm underwhelmed by the premise of this incarnation.
-
Yeah, I feel like I came down too hard on them and I do hope they can be encouraged into going beyond just six pages per month. The industry can definitely do with a line whose eye isn't exclusively on movie adaptations and isn't yet more of the same old grim and gritty stuff.
And come to think about it, if they were to tell a complete story in those six pages, wouldn't that be the most amazing thing on the market in decades...?
-
And come to think about it, if they were to tell a complete story in those six pages, wouldn't that be the most amazing thing on the market in decades...?
Almost revolutionary! ;)
-
There seems to be some confusion - maybe read the article again.
The $2.99 is for the subscription service, not the Crusaders comic:
"Archie Comics has yet to set the price for the subscription. “Value, value, value. That’s what we want to give at Archie Comics,” said Goldwater, who shared that he hoped the subscription fees to be no more than a regular comic book sold by DC Comics or Marvel Comics, which regularly go for US$2.99 (SGD$3.90) to US$3.99. “We’re very conscious of what’s going on in the economy right now. We want to be recession busters. We don’t want to gouge our fans.”
Technically, that's a bit vague - is the subscription for the one title or an overall service?
So, I went over to the Archie Comics website:
http://www.archiecomics.com/
and clicked on the "Digital" link at the top - that took me to iTunes. Which had an Archie APP, but I don't see comics per se.
Archie has a digital page here:
http://archiedigital.com/
So, I'm not entirely sure, but it sounds like subscription provides access to many titles, not just the Mighty Crusaders. Although, if that's all you want, then yeah it's steep.
Why don't publishers just release digital to an iTunes like platform, and let them absorb the server costs? Then it's comics for 99 cents! Yay!
-
The $2.99 is for the subscription service, not the Crusaders comic:
That was never in question, as far as I know. The question was what the subscription actually gets you. From the articles, it looks/looked a lot like it's just for the superhero material, which would be access to an archive of cleaned-up public domain material and the handful of pages of New Crusaders.
The website itself implies that the scope is wider. However, today's addition is an early issue of Blue Ribbon, and you can only browse the full list and see anything else with a subscription.
Why don't publishers just release digital to an iTunes like platform, and let them absorb the server costs? Then it's comics for 99 cents! Yay!
That's basically what they're doing (iVerse is running the server, as I understand it), but subscriptions are a more appealing business model, since revenue is more predictable. They also don't need to sell you every issue, just avoid convincing you to cancel.
(It's also why big software companies like Microsoft and Google are so gung-ho on "the cloud." Taking your monthly payment is a lot easier for them than trying to sell you an upgrade.)
I'll give it a look later and report back if someone already hasn't.
-
If someone joins please compare Archie's Blue Ribbon 3 issue with our own scans here -
http://digitalcomicmuseum.com/index.php?dlid=42
I'm curious if they are the same or 'improved.'
-
Hm. I was ready to jump on, but I don't think they're quite ready for prime time.
They have free samples, so I figured I'd try out the interface. My installation of Firefox isn't loading it for some reason (might be a plug-in, but I'd rather not have to care), and it crashed my installation of Chrome after a while. So we're not off to a good start. Worse, I'm reading on a netbook, and they've made it difficult (impossible? confusing?) to see a whole page. I think you can zoom and pan, but panning didn't work for me.
The interface is...I don't know, kind of "adorable." There's nothing cute in the design, but it's all about the "feel" of an actual comic, suggesting that you physically turn the pages, and so forth, and trying to map your mouse movements to bending the paper. That, and the tutorial video's incessant references to "Archie Comics dot com" made me feel like I was in one of those old-timey PBS specials about computers. At least they didn't use the word "cyberspace" anywhere.
Second is the price. It's ten bucks a month, which is a little insane to test drive. Weirdly, it's only fifty annually. I guess it goes to show that the goal is to stabilize revenue, here, if they're willing to discount almost sixty percent for a year's commitment. Four dollars a month is probably going to be a good deal, if I can convince myself that random Archie books are worth reading.
However, third and probably biggest, we've got technology problems already. I realize nobody else checks the Terms of Service before checking the box, but I get curious...and since I help out around here, I wanted to make sure they don't have some weird anti-competition clause or something. However, they don't seem to have one linked, or at least they set up the page wrong.
On top of that, their SSL certificate (think of it as an automatic password, if that's meaningless to you) isn't set up properly, so Firefox tries to wave me away, as if it's likely that someone is only <b>pretending</b> to serve me up Archie digital comics. This may mean that they just put a file in the wrong place or need to update a timestamp somewhere. It might mean that they bought a certificate second-hand or from a cheap/unknown dealer. Or it may mean that they have serious security problems. There's no way to tell unless they investigate it and fix the problem.
So, I'm going to hold off for a bit and try to get some useful intelligence out of their web monkeys (no offense, Yoc) before subscribing.
However, all that said, it's got promise if they can pull themselves together. I don't like that even the index is crammed behind the pay-wall, since it's their best possible advertising, but what I see looks like it'll be worth the money when they don't look quite so much like they're running this operation out of the back of a van on the shoulder of the expressway.
-
Thanks for trying John. Let us know if you decide to take the plunge.
-
I sent a message running through my issues. We'll see if they're in a position to fix things.
Meantime, I do recommend at least checking out the free books to see if/how it works for you, even though it doesn't include the Blue Ribbon book. Those of you with experience scanning and editing might also have some insight as to whether the older books are existing scans, new, or re-edited.
-
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!)
-
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
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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
-
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. :)
-
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.
-
Posted on AC Comics is Mark Heike recounting a failed proposal to Archie....
http://www.accomics.com/?p=6941 (http://www.accomics.com/?p=6941)
See the last 3rd for the proposal info.
-Yoc