>>92 All of what you said applies to indie comics as well. The problem is that those were infiltrated by SJWs even before the mainstream. So basically, manga has less SJW bullshit. But since I'm autistic, I'll go over your points, assuming you're only talking about big-two capeshit, anyway. >With manga, the events in the world have lasting impacts and ramifications on the world and setting This does happen with comics more than people think. Batman is never going to die forever, but side characters can. He's on his fifth or sixth Robin at this point. DC has four or five different generations of characters who have built up over time. The problem is that the "second generation," the Justice League guys, are cash cows and will never actually age out. But they do things to slowly age them. The original Robin (and the second and third, now) have grown up. The second Flash died and his sidekick got promoted to be the third Flash. Second Flash came back, but the third one is still around. And the fourth one, but people don't like him as much. Superman had a son, and despite efforts by one writer to get rid of him, it seems like he's too popular and is sticking around. Any actual discussion about capeshit really requires defining what era you're talking about, because things do change. But yeah, since the universes go on, and Bruce Wayne is never going to permanently stop being Batman, the change isn't always as pronounced as it can be in manga. Of course, this is really a problem with cash cow franchises. See: the entire Buu arc being about downplaying Gohan and making Goku the hero again, despite everything before that leading up to his departure and replacement. >The narrative is much more streamlined and accessible Agreed. This wasn't a problem until the late '80s, but it's certainly a problem now. Reading from the start is impractical, and you need a damn Masters Degree in History of the DC Universe to understand modern shit. That said, once you do, the absurd depth of the history is cool. >There is a definitive end point in sight by and large Sure, but I never saw this as a problem. The existence of sequels doesn't make previous entries bad. The Force Awakens doesn't make The Empire Strikes Back bad, and Superman #640 doesn't become bad just because Superman #641 is bad. These universes keep going, but they're made up of many smaller stories which do have endings. Some are only a few pages long, some are hundreds of issues, but they do have endings. This is why you hear fans refer to "runs" by single creators. Those might be long stories, but most writers wrap up their stories by the end. The next writer does a sequel. >The characters actually undergo development rather than reverting to archetypes See point 1 about events having lasting impact. This is the same point. There actually is more development than the uninitiated give credit for. Again, less so for the really big cash cows, but even they get it to a degree. And "development" isn't always necessary for a story to work. Static characters are fine when used correctly. Goku barely changes, and that's fine. There's about a million characters that are full on ripoffs of Goku, and plenty of them are fine as well. Who is the comics equivalent? Superman? Batman? Spider-Man? The biggest cash cows. But they have changed over time. Compare a story of theirs from the '50s or '60s to today. People do this, and then call it inconsistent when they realize the characters are different now. But no, it's that they actually did develop. Sometimes it's just slow maturity, as is seen very well in '60s and '70s issues of Spider-Man, or sometimes it's big events that shake the character, like Batman being shaken by the death of the second Robin. Actually, the first Robin growing up provides a good example, from an idealistic kid who brings comic relief, to slowly becoming a brooding teenager who rebels against his father figure, to eventually getting over that stage and basically becoming a more stable version of Batman, even replacing him for a while. This only works because it's a story that took 75 years to tell. It was so slow, you don't even notice it's happening, because it feels natural. >With manga, the writer by and large is the same and there is no jarring transitions between creative direction Most "runs" are relatively standalone, and sequel stories don't ruin that. Granted, there are times when creative teams change in more abrupt fashions, but it's not as big a problem as people imply. Sometimes it's actually done well, like when the original creator of Spider-Man, Steve Ditko, quit right on a cliffhanger, and never told anyone else what the Green Goblin's secret identity was going to be. But luckily, his replacement, John Romita, was actually really good, and the transition isn't very jarring. His run is arguably even better than Ditko's. And decades later, Ditko would admit that Romita was right when he guessed that the Goblin was supposed to be Norman Osborn. I honestly can't think of any really bad examples of creators being swapped in the middle of a story and ruining things. Though I'm sure it's happened. >No lazy exposition in marketing Exposition in marketing? Like what? Telling people in commercials that Peter Parker is Spider-Man? What does this even mean? Also, comics barely have any marketing to begin with. I don't think most normalfags even realize that new issues of Batman or Spider-Man are still being published. >No confusing numbering system or continuous resets Agreed about the numbering system. And the worst part is that it doesn't even match up with the resets. Largely because the resets aren't even real resets. Once you get into the continuity, you realize that neither DC or Marvel has ever been truly rebooted. Marvel's never claimed to, and DC's reboots are always trying to have their cake and eat it too. Some things continue from the old continuity, but some things are changed. It's never a full reboot, it's some elements of history being changed around them. The only real reboot was when they made new versions of characters like The Flash and Green Lantern in the late '50s, but they quickly retconned the idea that it was actually an alternate universe, and the original guys from the '30 and '40s still existed in another universe, and thus the complicated multiverse bullshit was born. But again, once you understand the multiverse, it's pretty cool. That's why every time they try to get rid of it, to appeal to casuals who claim it's too confusing, they end up having to bring it back, because it's actually more simple and part of the histories that make the series fun. What you want out of western comics does exist in indie comics and self-contained stuff out of the big two. The thing is, nobody cares about those. The big two are the more popular ones and the shared universes are too big a part of that. Though they do need to cut back on the crossovers big time, and cut it with the renumbering bs. Marvel's been doing "Legacy" numbers, where they print "#1!" in bold, then under it, admit that it's really #687 or whatever. This would be fine if the numbers at least corresponded to when a new creator started a new story or something. But instead it's just used when sales are tanking because they've turned everything they have into SJW propaganda, and they know a few people will buy everything with "#1" written on it, so they start series like Captain Marvel at #1 like every eight months, even though it's never actually a new start.

>collect ? they're massively produced and widely avaible products. Collecting isn't a word you ought to be using when you mean you consume products. >first line Don't generalize >narrative false and a generalization >definitive end point couldn't be falser >and large is the same Couldn't be falser. The market dictates. >no exposition in marketing ? that can't be right >no confusion I mean, not that anything should confuse you true. But it's not really relevant to begin with. You read a shitty spiderman comic and it literally doesn't matter what number you give it for its not relevant. In that sense I don't understand your confusion either. But so much for someone that decided to collect purchasable goods. I guess I'm overstating your intellect here and you find these type of stories were there's a reset at every chapter confusing to follow. Oh no so deep. Spiderman feats the bad guy of the month. There's thinly clad womyn though so it's mature! >2nd post is pol boogeyman retardation straight off of some wikipedia, unwanted in its nature it dictates very much the direction this thread will not go in because this place is dead.

I agree, OP, except some manga lack character development. Something I'd like to see more of in manga though is full color. >>124 >The existence of sequels doesn't make previous entries bad. One volume isn't the same as a sequel to a previous work. They aren't standalone, and neither is an issue of a comic. So these long running comics are one giant incomplete work that aren't meant to ever be completed. It's the same way with most American television shows. It's meant to never end so that it can be milked for as long as possible, then wrapped up quick if lucky or just plain cancelled with no resolution if not. This doesn't mean you can't like the issues anyway despite that, I can relate to enjoying unfinished cancelled works. Plot lines do get wrapped up and it's really enjoyable, it's just that new ones are constantly introduced so it just keeps going forever. Obviously there are exceptions to this, as you've already stated. >>128 >couldn't be falser How so? I can pick up just about any manga off a shelf in a bookstore and expect that it has an actual ending, the same can't be said for comics. There are exceptions of course, see Detective Conan (of course even that one has an actual ending planned to be released when the author dies). There are also obvious instances of padding where publishers wanted to keep shit around longer than the author intended, but even in those cases they still finish the work. You can see this for example in big long running Shonen Jump works. >The market dictates. What are you even trying to say? In most manga there is a single writer who stays on for the entire work. Comics often have writing teams and the main guy tends to get replaced over the life of the comic. There are exceptions of course, but this is way more prevalent in comics. >pol I could already tell you're not from around here, but this takes the cake. Seriously, just go back. You said it yourself, this place is dead.

>>128 >2nd post is /pol/ boogeyman Are you seriously trying to say western comics haven't been completely overrun by SJW nonsense in the last few years? Anyone who is even vaguely aware of western comics knows you'd have to be ridiculous to deny what has happened. >wikipedia You seriously think that level of autism comes from Wikipedia? Now you're just being disingenuous. Also >Spiderman feats the bad guy of the month. There's thinly clad womyn though so it's mature! First of all, modern comic stories take like six months minimum to actually complete, and there usually ends up being a crossover in that time. There are very few "bad guy of the month" stories anymore. Secondly, there are very few thinly clad womyn anymore, at least in the last five or six years. The people in charge of the comics industry have been very loud about how they are proud to be getting rid of that. Maybe in the '90s you could have had a point. And into the 2000s you could have had a point about violence being a fake veneer of maturity. But now you have nothing. >>130 You can view them as one giant incomplete work, and I actually think there is a very strong appeal to that. But at the same time, you can view each story as a complete work as well. Or each run. Or you can take very long views and still find characters who actually died and stayed dead, and read their entire story. People complain about cash cows like Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman just continuing forever. Except technically the original Superman, Batman (and later Robin), and Wonder Woman all actually did die at different points. And stayed dead. Their stories are over and you can read all of them if you want. It's actually quite doable. On the other hand, there was the one time the original Superman and Lois Lane came back as Black Lantern zombies in Blackest Night, but either you don't count that, or you do, and just read that one extra story. Also technically I think in Convergence Brainiac recreated Pre-Crisis Earth-Two right before it got destroyed and saved it, so technically there might be alternate versions of Superman and Lois of Earth-Two that are still alive. And maybe Wonder Woman of Earth-Two. I'm not sure if she was already dead by the time Brainiac created the alt-timeline. But technically that's an alternate timeline and not quite the same people. This was made clear the first time Earth-Two was recreated and they did a whole Power Girl story about how they're not really the same people who died originally. Plus they're not important anyway. The original Batman is for sure for real dead with no alt-timeline versions, though. For now. I mean he's been dead since the '70s so it's a bit late to bring him back now. And his death is important to Huntress of Earth-Two, who they would probably rather continue to use instead of another Batman.

>>92 >>With manga, the events in the world have lasting impacts and ramifications on the world and setting >The narrative is much more streamlined and accessible >There is a definitive end point in sight by and large Here's where I realize you don't know shit about comics outside from capeshit.

It's not really the content, it's the culture. In Anglophone comics, you get Heroes, who Win, and Villains, who are Evil, which is retarded and results in the production of retarded narratives. Like, even in Fist of the North Star, the ultimate villain doesn't get killed, he just realizes he can't win and decides to suicide-heal the planet. I could theorize about what causes this, but they'd just be theories.

>>169 >Like, even in Fist of the North Star, the ultimate villain doesn't get killed, he just realizes he can't win and decides to suicide-heal the planet. Wait, are you implying that western villains do get killed? Because everyone knows that characters in superhero comics never actually die. That applies to villains as well. Or are you trying to argue that Fist of the North Star is corrupted by western influence or something? >Heroes, who Win, and Villains, who are Evil DC actually does something interesting with this. There's a group of villains called the Crime Syndicate, and they're the evil doppelgangers of the Justice League who are from the backwards universe. Actually there are three different Crime Syndicates from three different backwards universes (four if you count a significant alternate timeline), but they're functionally the same and you don't need to worry about that. Anyway, on the Crime Syndicate Earths, things are backwards. George Washington was the King of America who stopped British war for independence. The Confederacy won the Civil War after rebel Abraham Lincoln shot President John Wilkes Booth. The main thing to worry about though is the fact that the doppelgangers of the DCU heroes are evil and the doppelgangers of the DCU villains are good. Except the Crime Syndicate killed all their enemies, and now the doppelganger of Lex Luthor is the only hero left. In order to beat The Crime Syndicate, the Justice League and Justice Society realize that they have to take the fight out of the Crime Syndicate universe, because the difference between the Crime Syndicate universe and every other universe in the multiverse (except the other universes with other Crime Syndicates, but that's a complicated thing) is that in most universes (including the real world, according to this), good always triumphs over evil in the end, but in the Crime Syndicate universes, evil always triumphs over good. So they trick the Crime Syndicate into following them out of their own universe, and then they can beat them. But the thing is, the Justice League and their equivalents always win on every world, and Luthor, the Legion of Doom, and their equivalents always lose on every world. Also Lois Lane is always the love interest of the greatest hero on every world. What this means is that the DC heroes are destined to win in every universe. Superman and Batman and the rest NEVER lose, and not just because good always wins. If there's a universe where evil always wins, then Superman and Batman are evil to fit it, because they have to always win. And by contrast, the main multiversal trait of Luthor and the villains isn't that they're evil, it's that they're losers, and they will always lose no matter what universe. They're only evil in most universes because they're destined to lose, and in the universes where good is destined to lose, then the so called "villains" become good. Incidentally, Abraham Lincoln and John Wilkes Booth are treated as a superhero and supvervillain, respectively, since Lincoln is evil in Crime Syndicate worlds, and Booth is good. The same doesn't go for George Washington, who is evil on Crime Syndicate worlds, but obviously considered good in other universes. Also, Bruce Wayne is still good in Crime Syndicate universes, but he gets shot with his parents, and his brother, Owlman, is his equivalent on the Crime Syndicate. Owlman actually exists on the Justice League Earth as well. On all worlds, he's Thomas Wayne Jr, who was put in a nuthouse by his parents when Bruce was a baby, like Rain Man. And of course later he gets out and becomes a supervillain. Crime Syndicate Owlman is treated as a doppelganger to both Batman and Owlman. Doppelgangers can be the doppelgangers of multiple people on other worlds. The Crime Syndicate version of The Flash is Johnny Quick, but there's also a Johnny Quick AND a Flash on the Justice Society's Earth, and Crime Syndicate Johnny Quick is considered the equivalent of both of them. This element, that the heroes being "good" is actually a secondary feature to the heroes being winners, is explored a little in a miniseries called Superman Beyond, which is part of a bigger story called Final Crisis, where Superman has to merge with his Anti-Matter Crime Syndicate doppelganger, Ultraman, to form a pure essence of Superman which can then be powerful enough to power a machine called the Superman Thought Robot, which exists inside the collective minds of the readers... or something like that. They form two halves of a whole, and both are necessary, because the pure essence of Superman isn't good or evil, it's just a winner. The Superman Thought Robot is still sort of defeated, but the bad guy is still beaten and Superman (and Ultraman) revived because in the meantime, they used the Thought Robot's power to change the very book they're in so that the last panel has "To be continued..." written on his gravestone. Because while they can lose minor battles, in the end, they always win. This is supposed to imply that they really represent hope, because as long as there's a future, you can keep trying to win until you do. But it kind of muddies the message when you realize that it also implies supervillains never had a choice to be evil, and they're just destined to lose no matter what. Now, I realize that this probably all fits what you describe as a "retarded narrative," but idk, I like this meta stuff. I need to find more manga that gets into weird mind-bending stuff like this.

>>169 I don't even understand what point are you trying to make, could you please show examples or something?

>>175 Not everyone's as autistically masochistic as you. People don't want headaches from trying to read stories.

>>184 >using autism as an insult >on a sudanese sand-castle-building imageboard

>>191 Masochistic is more insulting in this context then.

>>194 Well sure, that part of the insult is completely correct and appropriate.