What are your thoughts concerning 'multi-line' series?

[Twyla]

By "multi-line series", I am referring to simultaneous publishings of similar stories featuring the same characters but using (slightly) different titles?

Just a few examples for clarification:

Multi-Line Series
~ X-Men
~ Uncanny X-Men
~ Astonishing X-Men
~ Ultimate X-Men
or
~ Spider-Man
~ Amazing Spider-Man
~ Sensational Spider-Man
~ Spectacular Spider-Man
~ Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man

NOT Multi-Line Series
~ 2000 Series (different timeline)
~ Ultimate Series (alternate timeline)


Now that we've got a halfway-decent definition, what's YOUR opinion on the matter?

[kdmelrose]

NOT Multi-Line Series
~ 2000 Series (different timeline)
~ Ultimate Series (alternate timeline)

Ultimate X-Men shouldn't be under your "X-Men" heading, as it's part of the "Ulimate Universe."

[sabba]

don't like it too many comics get around but again I'll might become hypocrite and do something similar

[kdmelrose]

As to the topic at hand ...

With some characters there's a certain logic to multiple titles: For instance, Detective Comics currently focuses on Batman as the World's Greatest Detective, while Batman is devoted to straight-out superheroics. (There's also a difference in format, in that Detective, as written by Paul Dini, has self-contained, done-in-one stories, while Batman utilizes multi-issue tales.)

X-Men, too, can be rationanlized somewhat, in that the sprawling central cast means you either have to focus on a handful of characters while placing others on the shelf, or spread them out over multiple titles. Every character is somebody's favorite, so two or three "core" titles means most X-fans can find something, or someone, that they like.

I don't entirely understand the need for three core Spider-Man books, though, but that may be because I've never been a fan of the character. Is the tone significantly different from title to title, or is it simply a case of the market being able to (reasonably) support three books? I don't know; I don't read the core books, only Spider-Man Loves Mary Jane.

[The DarkMind]

i've never been a fan of the multi-line series, especially when it comes to the spiderman titles, likewise with the batman titles and superman line. it's simply too much happening with the same character at one time that typically all ties into the same continuity. if each issue stood alone as it's own story it would be more tolerable but since story-arcs run for multiple issues, it just over extends and over saturates the character and the market respectively. it's not that i have anything against these characters as i love all three that i've listed, but i have pretty much stopped reading them, picking up the occasional issue only because things will happen in one title that i don't read that heavily impacts the title i do read.

similar to this would be team members who have their own monthly solo title as well. wolverine is a big one that comes to mind. i'm a total wolvie mark but he's either gotta be doing his own thing with his own title, or joined up month to month with the x-men. not both and certainly not when the events of the wolverine line are effecting the character in the x-men line and vice verse. Likewise with batman. How can one man have time to fight along side the JLA and defend the city of Gotham at the same time? Especially when the events are both come into play with the next milestone "Crisis" marketing ploy when the company essentially says "opps, we f'd up, time to fix things and straighten everything out again" which allows much more revenue with a new mini/maxi series that also crosses over into every major title the company has then taking the sometimes used "it never happened" route.
the x-men line though doesn't EXACTLY fall into the same category since most of the time the different x-men titles feature a different cast. when jim lee relaunched x-men it became two titles, x-men starting over at issue 1 and uncanny continued the regular series. while both books had points where they would cross paths, it was kept to x-men was the blue team and uncanny was the gold team. sure that gets screwed up over time and characters will jump back and forth and make cameo's, but for the most mart, that type of a multi-line works because its different characters under the same line with slightly different titles.

this would probably make much more sense if i wasn't sitting at work trying to hammer it all out as quickly as possible, but it should still make several valid points.

[Mike225]

I have faith in Grant Morrison, so I'm going to say Batman.

[Hob Anagarak]

Depends on how it's handled.

In X-Men, I don't mind, but I get most of the books anyway. I like the variety of characters between the books, and the continuity of Summers and Frost as headmasters seen in the different books. (Though Xavier's does seem to be turning into the Arkham of Marvel. i.e. there's no control over what goes in or out.) The Wolverine thing was getting ridiculous when they even spoofed it in the books that he said he couldn't be everywhere at once. They've been working on that though, the NA lineup seems to be up in the air, and he was at least limited to being on the Astonishing team for a bit.

Superman, not so much. (I count Supergirl here too, and JLA, technically speaking.) Action Comics and Superman don't seem to connect at all, barring events like "Up, Up and Away". Don't know if there's supposed to be a detective/superhero thing like with Batman's main books.

Which leads me to Batman. Personally, I don't see Batman spending time with the League if he's as devoted to Gotham as they play him off as most of the time. Granted, he /had/ the Bat Family, but that was nixed with War Games.

I think the JLA and JSA Classified books are a great idea, by the way.

In a nutshell, I guess I think it works better with teams instead of solo characters, from a fan standpoint anyway.

[Scribe]

I think they have their place. It kinda sorta works with X-Men since they are essentially a universe into themselves these days. I really don't understand how Spiderman, Batman and Superman can star in five monthly titles. It confused me as a kid and I still don't read them to this day.

[theflash]

i don't mind the multi title per character thing over at DC because they seem to have a far higher sense of quality and storytelling than their Marvel counterparts. for example you get great story in Batman and in Detective Comics month in and month out, whereas you might get lucky and get a decent story in one of the five or six X-men books this month. if i had the choice, i would have one comic per character or team and leave it at that. but the bean counters won't have that. you gotta sell a character till he's worn out.

[jparks]

I don't care for it myself. The only exception is if the spin-off stories are telling a different story that's taking place in the same world. For example the X-men reference to different stories telling story arcs that involve different characters. But not the three or four differencing versions of the same character. That just takes distracts from the characters as far as I am concerned. Is Nick Fury white or black or male or female... depends on the book you are reading. To me that just destroys the character.

[kdmelrose]

Aren't there just two versions of Nick Fury: the Ultimate version and the "regular" one?

[Mike225]

There was a Max version, too, wasn't there?

[Jamir with an E]

Personally, as some have (in a sense) said in previous posts, a character or group with multiple titles is a good idea if each title truly brings something different to the table. The Batman/Detective comics take mentioned earlier is a good example. What was done with Super Man in the 80's - The Superman title focusing on Super Man, super heroic action, etc; Action Comics being a team up book and the Adventures of Super Man (though this approach ended quickly) being smaller in scale and focusing on the supporting characters, 'man/woman on the street" types, et.al - is, to me, a blue print of how to approach this (thematically if nothing else).

Also, being an old school soul from time to time, having one editor dealing with multiple titles ("X-Men" and all related titles for example) to make sure things are kept tight - or at least efficiently dealt with - for the sake of established continuity (if applicable) also falls into the good idea catagory.

[Paul Sanderson]

There are too many such titles. Marvel in particular likes to flood the market with multitudes of crappy titles.

[JAQ]

i've never been a fan of the multi-line series, especially when it comes to the spiderman titles, likewise with the batman titles and superman line. it's simply too much happening with the same character at one time that typically all ties into the same continuity.That's why they should lighten up on the continuity. Superman's a busy guy, and he's gotta be doing enough in a month to fill 100 pages of comics. So as long as there's a market for it (which is the only reason publishers does this), why shouldn't DC publish that much? Just let Busiek tell his stories in Superman, Johns and Donner tell theirs in Action, Cooke his in Confidential, Verheiden in Superman/Batman, Morrison in All-Star, Meltzer in JLA, etc. and stop worrying about whether "Last Son" happens before, during, or after "Camelot Falls". For five decades, the writers of Action and Superman never bothered with continuity between their stories beyond making sure that mauve kryptonite worked the same way, Jimmy was about the same age, and Lois' hair style fit her current model sheet... and I understand he became fairly popular that way. :)

[Paul Sanderson]

There are only so many really good creators in comics to go round. Diluting the character too much means you end up with plenty of crappy comics starring Superman, Batman, Spider-Man etc. when those sorts of characters should only be handled by the best. If there's a demand for those characters, then why dilute sales of all those myriad titles by putting put dozens of them? Why not just 1-3 maximum and increase the sales of those instead? There's no logical reason for doing a dozen X-titles, I'm sorry.

[Ron Phillips]

This isn't really pertinent to this thread, but comic discussion has a forum of it's own. This topic really isn't related to creating comics, at least in the form it has taken.

Comic Books (http://digitalwebbing.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=9) should be the catch-all for discussions like this. This really isn't a creator issue. A fan issue? yes. A publisher issue? yes. Creator. No.

[heartofglitter]

I have a totally different opinion to most people on this issue I guess; I love multi-line series; and this maybe a really crap and selfish reason, but the reason I love them is that, if I'm not happy with what's happening in one comic I can read another and still see all my favourite characters.
Say with X-Men, Rogue is having man-trouble again where the other X-girls are trying to steal her man, I get fed up? I read another X-Men comic where Rogue is actually happy with her man. :laugh:
Yes a silly reason I know, but I guess I also get upset is a character dies or something unfortunate happens to them.

Another hard fact is, that Marvel and DC are going to keep recycling the same old characters because they know they're popular. These are characters that have been around for decades and are still making sales because they're known, they're popular and people love them. Why are they going to stop making multi-line series now?
Companies are often scared of picking-up all new characters and stories because there's always the risk of people not accepting them. Why read something new and unknown and not your favourite old characters?
I wouldn't really say I'm a fence-sitter on the issue because I do love all the different X-Universes and the Batman stories; but at the same time original stories and characters are the reason I love Devil's Due Publishing, Top Cow and Image. They're always spewing out new and fantastic things that I love to read.

[The DarkMind]

That's why they should lighten up on the continuity. Superman's a busy guy, and he's gotta be doing enough in a month to fill 100 pages of comics. So as long as there's a market for it (which is the only reason publishers does this), why shouldn't DC publish that much? Just let Busiek tell his stories in Superman, Johns and Donner tell theirs in Action, Cooke his in Confidential, Verheiden in Superman/Batman, Morrison in All-Star, Meltzer in JLA, etc. and stop worrying about whether "Last Son" happens before, during, or after "Camelot Falls". For five decades, the writers of Action and Superman never bothered with continuity between their stories beyond making sure that mauve kryptonite worked the same way, Jimmy was about the same age, and Lois' hair style fit her current model sheet... and I understand he became fairly popular that way. :)

If titles were kept as totally seperate then yes, you are 100% correct that it doesn't make a lick of difference how many titles a character has. The problem comes into play with todays fans being so huge on continuity and the little editors notes next to something a character mentions referring the reader to a different title from 4 months ago.

My opinion, and by all means you can agree or disagree, is that if a character is going to have multiple titles then each should be its own self contained continuity and not criss crossing between each other as they often do. After all, each issue that comes out monthly could span anywhere from a few minutes to a few days or more because it's obviously not set in real time with the reader.

These are stories after all. Tales of what the hero has accomplished and as such there's no reason WHY there can't be multiple story tellers...other then it has to be done right and from the equivalent perspective of sitting around a campfire and telling just one part of the tale at a time regardless of chronological order.

Unfortunetly there will always be the extreme fanboy that knows the exact panel count of every issue and exactly what happens in that panel to question how something can happen in this title when it didn't happen over in this one. Much like the stereotype Trekkie asking why Kirks communicator was on his left hip then switches to his right, and magically is back on his left again during scene 23.

[Paul Sanderson]

I have a totally different opinion to most people on this issue I guess; I love multi-line series; and this maybe a really crap and selfish reason, but the reason I love them is that, if I'm not happy with what's happening in one comic I can read another and still see all my favourite characters.
Say with X-Men, Rogue is having man-trouble again where the other X-girls are trying to steal her man, I get fed up? I read another X-Men comic where Rogue is actually happy with her man. :laugh:
Yes a silly reason I know, but I guess I also get upset is a character dies or something unfortunate happens to them.

Another hard fact is, that Marvel and DC are going to keep recycling the same old characters because they know they're popular. These are characters that have been around for decades and are still making sales because they're known, they're popular and people love them. Why are they going to stop making multi-line series now?
Companies are often scared of picking-up all new characters and stories because there's always the risk of people not accepting them. Why read something new and unknown and not your favourite old characters?
I wouldn't really say I'm a fence-sitter on the issue because I do love all the different X-Universes and the Batman stories; but at the same time original stories and characters are the reason I love Devil's Due Publishing, Top Cow and Image. They're always spewing out new and fantastic things that I love to read.

Surely, say 3 Spidey, Batman etc. titles, is enough of a choice for you or for most anyone, especially if those 3 were of a very high standard.

[heartofglitter]

There can never be enough Batman to satisfy me! :laugh:

[galmando]

i agree with JAQ to an extent, if writers want to write their stories each month in different titles then so be it.

but as said by many it really comes down to a a fan pint of view. what irritates me is that in the wolverine origin story he's half way around the world but then in astonishing he's back in the xavier mansion. or that scott emma etc are in space in a astonishing but tryin to save the world grounded on earth in uncanny.

i know these are all seperate stories but it really takes something out of the story with these types of situations. i guess we worry about continuity too much though.

most of the stuff in spiderman stories wont be a big part of his history, only the big events. does anyone even mention spiderman? The Other these days. i think thats following the same shtick as the clone saga (which at leat gave us ben reilly)

[Joshua P]

I think some books definitely can handle multi line. Superman comes to mind. I don't think any series should have the insanity the Xmen have with ALL of their books (I once counted 18 X books on marvel's line at any one time...insane) Some of them do merit a hundred pages. Batman, Spiderman and Superman, and X Men all merit it.

That said, multi line books are a big detriment for new readers. I know when I look at a whole flock of superman/batman titles I haven't the faintest idea of where to begin. There's a line there between expansion and sheer glut.

So I guess I'm for it...but in moderation. Spiderman has right now four books if you count Ultimate. (I don't count team books like JLA...those are ensemble books and not just specifically to one character). Loosening continuity is okay so Bendis can tell his spiderman and David can tell his spiderman as well. But I think comic companies need to really analyze how much they expand. I'm willing to buy up to 4 comics...but I don't NEED them. And any more then that would cloud someone's ability to jump in a new book.

Just my opinion.

JP

[Paul Sanderson]

There can never be enough Batman to satisfy me! :laugh:

Well, you're a Batman fan, you rate very highly on that score ;) :happy:

I agree, Joshua P. If it's done in moderation, I think that's fine.

[fluxchild]

My opinion on the matter is that it really depends on the characters. Spiderman should only have one book, if there is another book it should be like McFarlane's Spiderman...outta continuity.
I agree with Batman and Superman having multiple titles because of the focus on different aspects of their adventures.
The Xmen should have two books along with solo titles of certain characters. You never know who's an Xmen or an enemy anymore, and for a person who reads comics on and off it's a little disappointing to try to get back on a Xtitle, and the enemy they were facing last time I read is an XMEN>>>Sabretooth to be specific. They would do good to trim back the fat, and stop playing hide the agenda with all the characters.

The only problem I have with Jla and BATS AND Supes is they need to touch on what's happening in the respected titles. At least mention in passing that Batman should be at the Watchtower instead of chasing a rapist through Gotham.

[Moonrider]

I dunno...back when Sensational Spider-man have Mike Wieringo doing the art around '98 I prefer to read that because of the cartoony look and its lighter stories compared to Amazing or Spectacular. It's in-continuity, and it was around the end of the Spider-Clone thing and Peter was all gloomy in other books. If Spidey only had one book at the time, I would have given up reading Spidey altogether.

[Aaron Wilder]

I think that for multi-line books like X-Men it would almost be better for them to publish one TPB every month with all the different X-teams intercut as one big storyline.

With single characters multiple books don't make sense to me unless they're done Gotham Central style where the character isn't the main focus of the book.

[L Jamal]

What would prefer over a line of books is simply one book that came out more frequently. Instead of Batman and Detective Comics give me one book every 2 weeks Detetective comics starring Batman or 1 book that's twice as big.

HOnestly, I don't really buy any character that have more than one books except Conan and Red Sonja. With Red Sonja I only get the mini-series. With Conan I get the HC of the main book and the mini series as they come out.

Other than that I skip Spidey, Batman, Supes, x-Men, etc. The only thing approaching a multiple line book I read is Captain America and New Avengers and I'll be picking up Mighty Avengers as well.

[Paul Sanderson]

I think characters like Superman, Batman and Spider-Man can support two regular titles, I don't think that's a problem. It's when the figure starts blowing out to 4 and more (some, like X-Men, have routinely gone over 8 issues), I think that's way too much. Over saturation with maybe one or two strong titles and several very weak ones, I feel, does more harm than good.