Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[ScottMon]

I started reading this comic about a few months ago.  I like the characters and storylines.  And the improvement in art is fantastic. 

But I thought the dialogue was a tiny bit stale.  But as with the Art, the writing is improving dramatically.  (Pun intended.)  Its a great twist, having Hanners as the breakout character to disturb the scene. 

Great Job!

Scott Monster.

[Jackie Blue]

That's funny, I think the writing has been in steady decline for nearly two years and really reached an all-new nadir with last week and the week before.  Jeph's writing of arguments is, to be polite, bad.

[ScottMon]

That's funny, I think the writing has been in steady decline for nearly two years and really reached an all-new nadir with last week and the week before.  Jeph's writing of arguments is, to be polite, bad.

Well, each to their own.  I like the fact that his characters are yelling and getting emotional brings a lot of depth.   Until now, it reminded me a little of that TV show "Friends."    Its cool watching the characters grow a spine.

[Jackie Blue]

I didn't say the subject matter was in decline.  I said the writing was.

[Barmymoo]

Actually I think his arguments are fairly true to life. I've always wanted to argue in a way that wouldn't look really stupid on paper, but when you're angry you say stupid stuff and look really dumb.

[Jackie Blue]

I'm not going to debate fanboys.  I stated my opinion.

I've read novels, seen movies and TV shows where arguments were well-written.  Myself and the half dozen people I know who read QC all agree that it has been getting worse and worse and reached an all-time low with the argument week.

Carry on.

[ScottMon]

I'm not going to debate fanboys.  I stated my opinion.

I've read novels, seen movies and TV shows where arguments were well-written.  Myself and the half dozen people I know who read QC all agree that it has been getting worse and worse and reached an all-time low with the argument week.

Carry on.

I don't mind if people disagree with me.  I simply wanted to give the Artist a thumbs up on his efforts.

[Jackie Blue]

Understandable, but Jeph gets so many thumbs up his ass in this forum that I periodically feel the need to be (apparently) the only person who ever says anything that is remotely less than "QC is the best webcomic ever!"

[Surgoshan]

Of course it's not the best webcomic ever. 

Calvin and Hobbes is the best webcomic ever.

No, it doesn't matter that C&H isn't a webcomic, nor that it ended a long time ago.  It's still the best.

[Jackie Blue]

I wonder if I'll get banned for saying that Templar, Arizona is by far the best webcomic ever.

[ScottMon]

Understandable, but Jeph gets so many thumbs up his ass in this forum that I periodically feel the need to be (apparently) the only person who ever says anything that is remotely less than "QC is the best webcomic ever!"

Considering he's doing it and I'm not paying for, I have no reason to complain. 

[Butch]

Really, the arguments are much more efficient and open than real debates.  Not only does it help to end arguments and keep them from taking up an entire week of strips, but I'd love to have arguments with this kind of expediency in reality.  Sure, nothing really gets solved, but when has a real-life argument ever solved anything?

[Surgoshan]

I disagree with the "steady decline" that you're talking about, but I do agree Jeph's doing a shitty job with the arguments. He just basically went with the most stereotypical argument-scene imaginable.

You're right.  Whenever I get into an argument with a girlfriend, I try to make sure it's unique.  I keep a scrapbook so I can make sure that I never have the same argument twice.  I try to vary location, cause, pointless insults, the number and type of people watching, and the surveillance equipment.  The girlfriend is, of course, incidental to the argument.

[thatryanguy]

I just find it odd that on a forum decidated to a specific comic, where people who are fans of the comic congregate and discuss things, anyone would find it neccesary to go out of their way to be negative about it, specifically because noone else does =^

From a writing perspective, if you've been working on a comic for 8 years, and the characters have grown and developed over that time like the ones in QC have, a good writer isn't always in control of what's going to happen. Your characters take on a life of their own, and can react to things in surprising ways. It being a "stereotypical" arguement means it's one that people will have much more often than any less typical arguement. Why should characters who Would react that way, Not react that way, just because it's not unusual?

If you ask me, Bad writers are the ones who develop a character, and then have them act or react in ways they wouldn't, just because they wanted a story to progress in a different manner.

[Jackie Blue]

I find it odd that anybody would ever think that a forum for discussion of a comic should be limited to praise.

And I think that part of why the writing of the argument was bad was precisely because it was so out of character.  Dora has never acted like that or really given much indication she would, and Marten's "Fuck this.  I'm leaving" was similarly out of character.

That's all beside the point that I just think the writing was bad from a stylistic standpoint.  Not because the characters "acted wrong" or "reacted wrong", just because the actual writing was bad.

[thatryanguy]

Noone ever said it should be limited to praise, I'm just saying you should Expect to see a lot of praise on a forum populated by people who enjoy it, and that specifically choosing to be negative specifically because few other people are is unhealthy.

Honestly I find the behaviour to be totally in place with Dora's character, with the insecurities she suffers regarding her brother. She was upset beyond rational thought, and took offense to what was said to her. That's totally normal as far as I'm concerned. As far as Martin's reaction, just because someone hasn't lost their patience before is no reason to believe they are unable to. And as he's the kind of person who would prefer to avoid conflict, naturally he'd want to get out of that situation and calm down.

Edit: I will admit to kindof enjoying the irony in saying something like "you shouldn't be negative just to be negative" in a forum for a comic that started off populated entirely with goths, ex goths, emo/hipsters who spend half their time complaining about other people/bands/etc, and a psychotic robot who enjoys nothing more than screwing with people XP

[Jackie Blue]

I'm not specifically choosing to be negative, I'm just choosing to express my opinion as some kind of karmic police to the sheer hyperbolic praise that gets lumped on in the forum.

[ScottMon]

I'm not specifically choosing to be negative, I'm just choosing to express my opinion as some kind of karmic police to the sheer hyperbolic praise that gets lumped on in the forum.

I didn't post anything remotely hyperbolic.  I liked the comic and dropped a friendly word.  It was the least I could do, considering that I read the whole thing for free.    Its called gratitude.  I'm somewhat annoyed that my good intentions were being interpreted as unbridled gushing of a "fanboy."

If you feel the need to insult those that disagree with you, thats your problem, not mine.   

[thatryanguy]

Understandable, but Jeph gets so many thumbs up his ass in this forum that I periodically feel the need to be (apparently) the only person who ever says anything that is remotely less than "QC is the best webcomic ever!"

I'm not specifically choosing to be negative, I'm just choosing to express my opinion as some kind of karmic police to the sheer hyperbolic praise that gets lumped on in the forum.

Alright, I guess I misunderstood the intent of that original post. I apologize, clearly you wouldn't be here if you Only had negative things to say, especially with a 1000+ postcount =^

[Jackie Blue]

I usually only post in the Music forum.  I just like to pop in here now and then to make sure Jeph's ego doesn't get too big.   

[thatryanguy]

Well then I'm sure he appreciates your efforts, as a swollen ego could only result in unpleasentry.

In abundance o.o

[Jackie Blue]

No, Jeph doesn't like me.

I'm pretty sure he'd ban me if there was any halfway decent reason he could use to justify it.

[thatryanguy]

*Laughs* Well then he must.. at least...... Admire your dedication to the cause...?

[Hamster]

Mmm, people are getting argument skills convinced with writing skills.

The arguments are streamlined, to the point, and concise, yes, but by "bad writing" I think whatisname means that they aren't realistic.

[thatryanguy]

Naw, I've myself been in arguements that went almost the exact same way, irrationality and "screw this, I'm out" attitudes included.

[idiolect]

I'm relatively new to the forum, but I'm pretty sure if Jeph wanted to ban you, he'd ban you, not search his conscience desperately looking for some "justification" for it.

Also, why have the last three threads I've read been 80% zerodrone internet drama?

(The above was meant rhetorically, and for obvious reasons I am now going to continue ignoring this thread, so don't post anything that expects a response from me). 

[Jackie Blue]

The arguments are streamlined, to the point, and concise, yes, but by "bad writing" I think whatisname means that they aren't realistic.

Good gravy!  No, by "bad writing" I mean "I do not find it enjoyable".  I don't dislike Stephen King because he has bad plots, I dislike him because he has bad writing.  It's a very simple concept, people.  Sheezers.

@idolect: The reason you perceive threads as "zerodrone internet drama" is because you're new enough not to understand the incredibly subtle nuances of my various posting styles.  I think you'll find that most threads I participate in are "drama" free.

Like that bird in that one Tom Robbins book says, "People of zee wurl, relax!"

[ScottMon]

Good gravy!  No, by "bad writing" I mean "I do not find it enjoyable".  I don't dislike Stephen King because he has bad plots, I dislike him because he has bad writing.  It's a very simple concept, people.  Sheezers.

And I disagree with your opinion.  I have enough intellectual integrity to admit when I'm wrong, but my honest opinion is that there is improvement of dialogue, letting the characters develop.  And I've been an avid book reader for the last 30 years. 

You're not Mr. Jacques, having some fun at my expense, are you?