Topic: other reader opinions? (Read 31841 times)

schmeeble · « **Reply #50 on:** 14 Sep 2009, 11:06 »

i mean, you were questioning the semantics of the statement about semantics...

Jace · « **Reply #51 on:** 14 Sep 2009, 11:46 »

Quote from: zagraf on 12 Sep 2009, 09:02

T Campbell

T Campbell doesn't always drink beer, but when he does, he prefers Dos Equis.

WoweeZowee · « **Reply #52 on:** 14 Sep 2009, 13:34 »

Quote from: nicoley on 13 Sep 2009, 20:46

I agree 100%. We don't have to come here just to worship Jeph, and Im not trying to bag on him or anything. I myself love the comic and wouldn't change anything about it. Of course, sometimes I wish the comic focused more intently on the characters like it used to, instead of rolling with the punches, but its still a great comic! Jeph doesn't have to listen to us and 99% of the time he probably doesn't.

all I'm saying is we should be allowed to speak our opinions, whether they be slightly negative or whatever.

Exactly! Precisely! Somebody gets it!

WoweeZowee · « **Reply #53 on:** 14 Sep 2009, 13:38 »

Quote from: Hat on 14 Sep 2009, 04:57

I'm not entirely sure you know what semantics is or if you do you drastically underestimate its importance

Lol, are you serious? SAY SOMETHING RELEVANT instead of nitpicking trivial word choice. Debating semantics not clever, funny or helpful and moves nothing forward. PLZSTOPIT.

Eris · « **Reply #54 on:** 14 Sep 2009, 17:28 »

Was there actually a question in the first post that we are supposed to be answering? I mean, I read the post and couldn't see a question, but there are people who keep banging on about how people aren't answering a question. Oh wait, I guess "I would be interested in what the other readers think about the current plot, etc" is what is being referred to.

If you are just wanting people's opinion on the comic, then that is what you are getting from all the posts (that aren't about semantics), so maybe you should rethink your wording rather than just telling people to stop getting off topic.

Hat · « **Reply #55 on:** 14 Sep 2009, 17:38 »

basically if a statement is semantically inaccurate it is another thing that we have a word for. That word is incorrect

if I question the semantics of your statement it means that I consider your statement to be incorrect or in laymans terms, wrong

is it a bit more clear now? I am not just questioning his semantics, I was flat out saying that he was wrong.

Sorry I even tried to post in this horrible abortion of a sub-forum, I have learned my lesson and I will never try it ever again I promise

jeph · « **Reply #56 on:** 14 Sep 2009, 18:05 »

Quote from: Zombiedude on 14 Sep 2009, 06:53

What do you mean man? A fart can totally move the story forward in groundbreaking ways.

oh no my fart-fetish story arc has been leaked to the public

JD · « **Reply #57 on:** 14 Sep 2009, 18:07 »

I have my sources.

jeph · « **Reply #58 on:** 14 Sep 2009, 18:10 »

this thread

oh, this thread

jeph · « **Reply #59 on:** 14 Sep 2009, 18:17 »

[img width= height=]http://www.questionablecontent.net/random/fffff.png[/img]

[img width= height=]http://www.questionablecontent.net/random/smugosaurus.png[/img]

[img width= height=]http://www.questionablecontent.net/random/911bird.png[/img]

jeph · « **Reply #60 on:** 14 Sep 2009, 18:22 »

[img width= height=]http://www.questionablecontent.net/random/smugosaurusdance.gif[/img]

JD · « **Reply #61 on:** 14 Sep 2009, 18:27 »

Hello there

schmeeble · « **Reply #62 on:** 14 Sep 2009, 18:46 »

SigPig · « **Reply #63 on:** 14 Sep 2009, 22:34 »

What no more TC Campbell stuff? Those were the only reason I kept coming back to this thread.

Is it cold in here? · « **Reply #64 on:** 14 Sep 2009, 23:57 »

Quote from: nicoley on 13 Sep 2009, 20:46

... Of course, sometimes I wish the comic focused more intently on the characters like it used to, instead of rolling with the punches ...
all I'm saying is we should be allowed to speak our opinions, whether they be slightly negative or whatever.

Sometimes I feel the same way, but on reflection I won't make that my opinion. If the strip spent more time on character development, I'd find myself missing the comedy. I just want more of everything. Greed, not opinion.

nicoley · « **Reply #65 on:** 15 Sep 2009, 19:11 »

cant we all just get along?

nichidani · « **Reply #66 on:** 15 Sep 2009, 19:19 »

play whiny poster off, keyboard cat...

nicoley · « **Reply #67 on:** 15 Sep 2009, 21:49 »

hahah this thread is amusing me to no end... You guys are funny

nicoley · « **Reply #68 on:** 15 Sep 2009, 22:03 »

Quote from: Is it cold in here? on 14 Sep 2009, 23:57

Sometimes I feel the same way, but on reflection I won't make that my opinion. If the strip spent more time on character development, I'd find myself missing the comedy. I just want more of everything. Greed, not opinion.

Yeah, well Im not saying I want all the comedy gone, the comedy is what makes QC QC. I guess just a nice balance of comedy, and progressive story lines would be good for me.

JD · « **Reply #69 on:** 15 Sep 2009, 22:14 »

Pleased to know I'm so entertaining.

jonarus_drakus · « **Reply #70 on:** 16 Sep 2009, 04:39 »

And you sig is the first time I've seen the word 'stoic' used in far too long...

JEPH! USE THE WORD 'STOIC' IN THE STRIP MORE!!!

ahem... >cough<

Im sorry, I'm inocent, i swear

schmeeble · « **Reply #71 on:** 17 Sep 2009, 17:31 »

rabidcentipede · « **Reply #72 on:** 17 Sep 2009, 19:04 »

HAY GUYS I totally think Jeph should stop doing this whole "story" thing and just focus on the one-strip gags with pintszie and farts, amirite?

also, hannersXmarigold FTW!!!!

and the art is like naruto and naruto is cool so tha art is cool.

Carl-E · « **Reply #73 on:** 17 Sep 2009, 20:28 »

Wow. 2 pages of flames in 6 days. Very little about the intended topic, though - so I'm gonna put a few opinions out there...

I'll be honest, I'm fairly new to the world of webcomics. I'd followed XKCD for a little while after seeing print versions for years (I teach Math). It linked here, and I thought I'd need to read from the beginning to get it. I was put off by the indie references (hey, I'm old and out of touch, deal with it). I came back one day and saw Hanners Sledding, and had to find out WTF was going on. So I started reading, backwards at first, then back to the beginning. I love it.

But remember, please, it's a "slice of life" comic (little robots aside). I've seen a lot of others - Anders loves Maria, Red String, Octopus Pie, and several I can't recall. Some I've stayed with, others I abandoned pretty quickly (4 years of LICD archives, and it was still mostly one-off sex gags, I can live without it).

Now, I've probably seen a little more of life than most of you. And life is like this, people come and go, things change, stories continue without you, and you may never know what really happened. You laugh, you cry, and you make the best of it.

Of all the comics I've seen so far, none compare with QC. Sure, I miss some of the older characters, and I'd love to know what happened to them. They may reappear, like Steve did, with a condensed storyline that catches us up, like an old friend. They may not. I know full well that old friends can vanish off the face of the earth despite the best of intentions!

Do I want the story to go in a particular direction? No. I tried that with my life, and that didn't work. Do I miss old characters and want them back? Sure. Will I be upset if it doesn't happen? Naah... the new ones are fun, too. You lose old friends, you make new ones.

The art work is fabulous, and as Jeph has said, it's always changing. He's an artist, and won't mind constructive criticism. I put up a whole tirade about the fancy dress hats a while ago (I don't know if you saw it, Jeph - it's here). Did he take it well? Don't know, don't care. It was my opinion, and like assholes, everyone has one (and is entitled to it). Also like assholes, no one else has to look at it if they don't want to!

Of course, it would be easier if i weren't SHOVING IT IN YOUR FACE!!!

[flame:burner=low]So, maybe it's time to start a new "semantics" thread so people can give their opinions about the comic in here? [/flame]

Is it cold in here? · « **Reply #74 on:** 17 Sep 2009, 20:36 »

"Fabulous" is the word I'd use for Phil Foglio's artwork. My opinion is that where Jeph excels is at facial expressions, and Jeph disagrees with that opinion.

schmeeble · « **Reply #75 on:** 28 Sep 2009, 16:32 »

Quote

[flame:burner=low]So, maybe it's time to start a new "semantics" thread so people can give their opinions about the comic in here? [/flame]

Moxie · « **Reply #76 on:** 28 Sep 2009, 16:56 »

Quote from: epoch on 14 Sep 2009, 06:51

My biggest problem with it right now, is that it seems like there's only one or two comics per week that push the story forward and the rest are just one-offs. I wish there was more stuff to push the story ahead.

My opinion. We get 5 comics a week. If all 5 comics a week pushed the story forward, we'd through through stories at an amazing rate, and Jeph would most likely get burnt out from having to continually push current stories, as well as future stories. It makes sense for him to push the story a little at a time, and let the rest be fun. The man has got to rest his brain occasionally!

raoullefere · « **Reply #77 on:** 29 Sep 2009, 02:56 »

Quote from: Is it cold in here? on 14 Sep 2009, 01:02

the type of smooth extroverts who integrate themselves into new situations painlessly and quickly.

The two of those we have in the strip seem, to me, to be more than sufficient. Well, okay, Tai isn't smooth, but she makes up for that with extra extrovertiveness (extroversion? extrovertiness?). As far as I can tell, Tai lives so much on her skin there's nothing inside. I will add that while Wil and Angus may be square pegs, Marigold seems to be an irregular polygon. And I don't have the geometry to try to describe Hannelore.

As for the old characters disappearing, I understand the 'whys' of that. Sometimes one feels like one has gone as far as one can, especially with a minor character dreamed up to fill a specific purpose. Sure, you can send him/her in a new direction, but that too often involved retconning and/or trying to think about that character in new way. It's much easier simply to introduce someone new to fulfill that function.

Of course, sometimes said minor character is easy to evolve and before you know it, she's become a major character, brimming with possibility. Funny how what is essentially having a conversation with yourself works.

edit: damned semicolons, fixed

Carl-E · « **Reply #78 on:** 29 Sep 2009, 08:02 »

Hanners is non-Euclidean.

I like what you said about the minor characters, too. Witness Raven, originally a one-liner ("Dora, you're not goth anymore, whine, whine") who evolved a lot, verged on a main character, then...

what? Disappeared?

Reminds me of the Darwin Society's motto - "Evolve or Die"

It won out over the less insistant, "Adapt or trip over your extra feet", but the artwork for that one was funnier...

thret · « **Reply #79 on:** 01 Oct 2009, 06:05 »

I think what hooked me on QC was the inexplicable father-suicide arc. Jeph did something special there.

THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)

Author Topic: other reader opinions? (Read 31841 times)