Sunday, February 21, 2010

xkcd store update

this new-stuff-in-the-xkcd-store post turned out way longer than I was expecting. Like the other store posts, I found that I got oddly passionate about the subject. I think it's because this is where xkcd makes money - if it weren't for the store, randall would need a real job. The store is basically the fuel for this comic. Anyway, it's a long and an angry post, feel free to skip it.

-------------------------

Well, as the xkcd homepage is telling us, there is some new shit in the store. I am the expert on new xkcd shit, so let's take a look.

First off, the prints. Looks like the new ones are comics 627 and 688. Both of these are actually images which I think work better as posters than as a comics - especially the Tech Support one, which literally says it should be printed out and put up (luckily it doesn't say "everyone, buy a print of this in the store, put it up, now you are a computer expert!"). "Self-Description" is really more the kind of thing where when you see it, you say "Huh" rather than "ha," so as a poster, a reader is not expecting a joke, and shouldn't be disappointed. (theoretical experiment for xkcd fans: Put up a poster of "Self-Description" and see if anyone laughs at it and tells you it's funny. no? that is what I thought).

But the broader point about the prints is this: the pricing. Now I'm not the first to bring this up (Rob and Super Sam seem to have been, according to my old e-mails) but look: It's all well and good to charge $15 for prints (well, maybe not, but if people are willing to pay it, fine). But don't go and pretend you are doing some cool, radiohead style edgy anti-corporate rebellious thing. Randall writes that he's pricing the prints "Radiohead Style," but that's a blatant lie. Radiohead style would be letting people pay however much they want, including nothing. INCLUDING NOTHING. That is key. Click that link, and read the last sentence of the second paragraph real close: "And it's perfectly acceptable to pay nothing at all." That's what makes it crazy! No one cares that you could pay more than a usual price for the album, that's not news (What! Radiohead will be glad to take money you want to give them! Well stop the presses, mother fuckers!)

No. The point is that they were giving their album away for cheap or free. That is the news. That is the significance. That is what it means to price something Radiohead style.

To do what Randall does in his story - to say "You can pay me whatever you want, as long as it is above the price of $15, which is, come to think of it, kind of a lot for a black and white printed piece of paper" - that is not selling something radiohead style. That is trying to get their cool cache without having to actually sacrifice any income. LAME.

Also! I know, you thought I was done, I thought so too, but it was a lie - ALSO: Note that the minimum price for all the prints is $15. Right? But look closely! The default price is a whopping $25! If you want to pay less than $25 - I'll remind you that this is for a single sheet of paper with some black ink on it - you have to actively lower the price if you want to pay less than that. Meaning, there is a certain amount of pressure on you if you do so. You may think I am exaggerating and being paranoid, and I am, but I ask you THIS: Why is the default price $25? Why not $15, which is really high enough?


also, it may mean nothing, but I see that comics 500 - 700 are only represented by a mere 4 prints, while the earler comics get 15. I would say that that's because there are fewer good ones recently, but hey, I am probably biased.


Was I going to say something else? Oh yes. The posters! of course. Gravity Wells and Movie Narratives are now available as posters. RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU ARE SURPRISED! I sure am not. The pattern with this is pretty clear: Randall makes a comic that is huge, and detailed, and took a ton of work. It's so big that you have to click it to see it full size, it doesn't fit within the confines of a mere website. And we all go, "dang, say what you will about how lame the content is, that shit took effort." And then he makes it into a poster to sell, and we go "Oh, right. That explains it."

Here, I'll quote from my Gravity Wells post, which in turn quotes from the Movie Narratives post:

The last overly-complex comic he made was the Movie Narratives chart, and back when he made that, I wrote two things about it that I think are worth mentioning now:
But is there anyone out there who seriously doubts that this will not be turned into a poster, probably before christmas, and that Randall had this in mind when he made it?
Clearly my prediction was wrong, and this is still not available as a poster. So I admit that I was overly critical on that one, and Randall did not act as lame or pathetic as I said he would. That's nice. Likewise, I think this comic feels like an advertisement for a soon-to-be-available poster, but until that is actually the case, I for one will not say anything.

Well, so much for that. Now the comic is an advertisement for a poster and I can say whatever I want. What I want to say is this: xkcd, the comic, is basically just an advertisement for xkcd, the store. The comic continues to somehow create this nerd cult for the comic and for its products, and for some stupid reason people don't seem to realise that that's all the comic is. That's why he needs to dumb down the math and science: so that more people will get the jokes, and therefore, will be susceptible to his comic-based advertising.

Look at the 3 newest shirts - woodpecker polo, Mr. Hat polo, raptor polo - and the tie, as well, which is new: none of them make sense on their own. They don't have a self contained joke, like the old shirts. A person who does not know xkcd will not understand those shirts. And that's the point! The point is so that people can buy them and feel like they are part of the club, and have fake-nerds come up to them and compliment them on their shirts and make them feel special, or so that non-xkcd fans can ask about them and the wearers can feel superior while explaining this particular piece of the Club Uniform. The comic just advertises the shirts etc and gives readers a false sense of nerdiness and non-cool coolness. People buying the shirts makes Randall realise he has to keep appealing to as broad an audience as possible.

it's a terrible cycle and i hate it, the end.

87 comments:

  1. Riddle me this, "Mr." Wheeler: would YOU rather be the richest man on Earth or be a robot that can fly and shoot lasers? Huh? HUH?! Not that simple, is it, smart guy?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Richest man on earth. Then you could use your money to help fund laser-shooting / flying research. BEST OF BOTH WORLDS, MOTHERFUCKER.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Ahah! So basically you are admitting that you are a hypocrite for hating Randall. Good to know.

    ReplyDelete
  4. It's obvious, R. Poor Randall's strips about the reality of kids in fantasy novels was really based on experience. Except instead of fantasy, it was sci-fi. (Probably something Heinlein-esque, a land with vastly different sexual norms as well.) Randall was once the Gary Stu child hero of this parallel sci-fi universe, and was granted the opportunity to have himself transormed into an awesome flying laser robot.

    But Randall knew he couldn't turn his back on his loved ones and his homeworld, and this would make life back on Earth practically impossible. He tragically refused the operation and instead, has been living a tortured life, trying to make sense of the fantastic sights and uncanny mores he was exposed to as a child. He was fascinated by science, but somehow... he was always a bit "off" from the expectations of our world.

    Until one day, when he turned to the internet, and his bizarre ramblings managed to strike a chord with this world's nerd population. Now, he finally has a chance to be a success and gain wealth by this world's rules. Wealth, and influence. And with this influence, he will hopefully someday manage to create here on Earth the paradise he saw in his youth. Even as he suffers the slings and arrows of our misguided criticism in exchange for his sacrifice of an immortal, laser-slinging robotic life!

    Shame on us all.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I do find the the comparison to the Radiohead album sale rather disingenuous - it may be the same "style", but in the way that the panelling on old station wagons were "styled" to look like wood.

    I don't think there's any fundamental problem with the fact that he offers prints for whatever price he chooses, but why anyone would ever in their right mind actually *pay* for one of these prints is beyond me - high quality, high resolution prints of something that is intentionally drawn to look like it was doodled on a napkin?

    ReplyDelete
  6. See, the fundamental problem is where Randall tries to pass himself off as generous, when he's clearly getting desperate.

    ReplyDelete
  7. "Oh yeah, I'm letting you pay however much YOU want for this. I'm going to suggest $25, and set a minimum at $15, but you know what was cool about Radiohead's system? Sky's the limit. You could pay two or three hundred dollars for it if you wanted. There's no stopping them! We just had to get rid of the dumb part where you could pay less than what the album is worth."

    Also notable is that Radiohead's purchasing system didn't have a default price. Just a blank box that you filled in.

    ReplyDelete
  8. and according to the article, it constantly told you that "srsly, you don't have to pay anything. for rlz." IE, strongly encouraged you to pay nothing if you wanted.

    ReplyDelete
  9. That pricing scheme, especially the default adding of $10, is a bullshit cry for donations. It's called Paypal, Randall.

    Carl, this post sums up why it's actually become harder for me to keep up with xkcd these days. It's not just emulating Garfield in terms of predictable suckiness, but marketing, too. Knowing that each comic's joke will become a packaged shirt or poster if enough geeks laugh at it makes me feel cynical for some reason. I have nothing against capitalizing on fan favorites, but I can't shake the perspective of "Randall wants to capture money in a bottle again."

    ReplyDelete
  10. in randy's defense, he does need money from his readers. being freelance like that makes it very hard not to try and sneak yourself into financial security one way or another - can you honestly say you wouldn't be willing to do similar if you had as uncertain a paycheck as he does?


    at the same time, it's a damn shame that his bigger concern was "shit i'm going professional now, i gotta make sure i get a steady cash flow in" and not "shit i'm going professional now, i gotta make sure the comic reaches a certain standard of quality".

    ReplyDelete
  11. I think it's worth noting that it's not exactly desperation, though. I don't think he's in danger of going broke. It's just "oh, time to boost my cashflow again." It probably happens whenever there's a lull in sales, or perhaps whenever he hears there's a new model of gphone coming out.

    ReplyDelete
  12. And it's fucking annoying that Randall is earning cash for such a shitty comic. He could always go back and get an actual job as a math teacher or a NASA roboticist or something, but instead people pay him to make shitty comics and shitty T-shirts and decent posters.

    ReplyDelete
  13. It outrages me a great deal still that he expects $48 (that's around £35?) for a fucking polo shirt with a raptor/black hat guy on.

    $32 (over £20) for a tie? A fucking tie? It's a fucking tie! That's insanity.

    I could just buy a bog standard black tie and some white thread and make the same xkcd tie, and sell it for half the price.

    I wish I could sew.

    ReplyDelete
  14. CARL, YOU'VE FINALLY UNCOVERED THE SECRET OF XKCD.

    xkcd started as a webcomic but has devolved into a webpostersellingbusiness. The "comics" are just filler inbetween the posters that Randall hocks to his rabid fanbase. They are unimportant; they don't make money and therefore Randall has no motivation to make them funny, save for the aformentioned thing-from-a-random-comic-put-onto-a-piece-of-overpriced-item-of-clothing market.

    Carl, your best posts are the ones about meta-xkcd stuff rather than the comics. The current one, 705, is a man standing with a square held to his circle for THREE PANELS. THAT IS SOME BORING SHIT. The posts about the xkcd store or Rob's essays about common things xkcdites cry about and reassure each other with in their thrice-weekly circlejerks are THE BEST of this blog.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Seeing this from Randall brings up unhappy thoughts of how it's happened with Onstad. :( Achewood was much better before he realized that with his fanbase, he could afford to put out one comic a week and a ton of merchandise.

    At least nothing's lost here. He's just fucking the same dead stick horse that's covered with several years worth of his crusted semen.

    Also, I hate it when donations are requested when merchandise is available. You don't ask for donations when you're making a profit from forty fucking eight dollar polo shirts.

    ReplyDelete
  16. That is a fucking nasty picture you just conjured up King, and I thought Randall was pretty bad for stick figure sex, now we've got you to thank for turning to towards beastiality

    ReplyDelete
  17. I still love Achewood, though I hate the sporadic posting schedule. But it's much, much better than if he stuck to an arbitrary schedule of updates and forced himself to publish subpar material to keep up. You know, hypothetically.

    ReplyDelete
  18. This is my first post here: I'll be brief. I had a very long introduction typed up because, like all people on the Internet, I like to talk about myself. I lost it when I accidentally used a mouse gesture to go back, instead of open a new page, because, like all people on the Internet, I'm an idiot.

    I enjoy XKCD. I also enjoy this blog. The criticisms here are well thought out, very logically sound and well written. I have no choice but to agree with the group here on many points, because like Rob, I agree that art is objective, and there are definable things that make art (comics) good and bad. BUT, just because I have been informed of the flaws in the humour of XKCD, that doesn't mean I have to not like it. I like lots of low brow things, while understanding that they are not the most clever or witty things in the world. I don't think XKCD sucks, but I agree with most criticisms here none the less. It's nice to discover this site isn't just petty name calling and random complaining as I thought it was going to be. It's a well written critique, and I enjoy well written critiques, even if it's on things I like.

    Now then, Randall making comics to intentionally create posters. I can't say I didn't see this coming either. Moment I saw that Gravity Wells, I knew it was going to be a poster. I guess my question is... is this a bad thing? Carl, I can clearly see that you don't like it, in fact you seem downright passionate about this topic, I'm just curious why. I can see the main argument for it... that Randall smelled those dollar bills a few years back, realized he could just keep building a fan base with more of the same jokes that keeps him "cool" and then market the shit out of his comic and go home stinking rich. That he is in fact making comics now with the sole intention of making himself money, and that the entertainment is in fact secondary now to the profitability of his website. I wouldn't disagree with this... I would even say I subscribe to this theory, it just doesn't bother me. In my mind, I imagine that most people who start webcomics, do so with the hope (read dream) that it will one day become super successful and they will become rich just from drawing comics 3 times a week. For this to work, the comic has to start out very entertaining, to get a fanbase, and then once the fanbase is solid, it just needs to maintain a fair amount of consistency so as to allow for the introduction of more merchandise. This seems like a pretty damn solid business plan... assuming you can build that fan base. Randall has that fan base, and you can be damn sure he's going to milk it for all he can. Not only do I not see a problem with this, I'd call him a fool not to do it. If people are willing to pay 15 bucks for a print (seriously... who will do that? Someone will do that. You know it, I know it, and Randall knows it), then that's what their worth. Something is worth what someone will pay for it...

    But, I digress. I was hoping Carl would elaborate on this point "it's a terrible cycle and i hate it, the end." Everything you said up to that point, I agree with 100%. His comic is an advertisement for his store. The point we don't agree on is that you don't like it, and I think it's a good idea. I was hoping someone, if not Carl himself, would elaborate on this feeling.

    ReplyDelete
  19. @Rinnon: I'd largely agree with you. Maybe what pissed Carl off is the Radiohead thing (I had to look up the article, as I'm clueless re: popular music), which seems a bit dishonest. I'm all for him making whatever money he wants off of it...maybe he'll actually learn something about business.

    ReplyDelete
  20. In my mind, I imagine that most people who start webcomics, do so with the hope (read dream) that it will one day become super successful and they will become rich just from drawing comics 3 times a week.

    You would then have to imagine that most people who start webcomics are fucking morons, because that virtually never happens. Most people start webcomics because they think they're funny and want to share their jokes, or because they want to do something fun, or whatever. Not as part of some plan to get super rich.

    This seems like a pretty damn solid business plan... assuming you can build that fan base.

    "The plan seems like it would work...assuming you can get the plan to work." Insightful shit, homes.

    Ultimately, just because someone is able to get suckers and fans to buy his shit doesn't mean that his shit doesn't stink. It's not okay to sell shitty merchandise and shitty prints and be a huge douche about the price scheme just because someone will give you money.

    But then again, you DO seem to believe that everyone starts webcomics so they can make money off them, so maybe you really ARE enough of an ultracapitalist nutjob to think that economic incentives are the only motivation for any behavior, and thus are a complete justification and accounting for everything.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Bash him all you want on the prices, because he's being fucking stupid, but I'm really not seeing any grounds to attack him for selling inside jokes and posters of massive "comics." If his buyers want inside jokes, so what? Doesn't pertain to you; doesn't pertain to me. Makes someone money and makes someone else happy, even if it is some bizarre fan/cult thing. As for the posters, I was actually [briefly] considering buying one. I probably would have gone for the gravity wells one if it weren't littered with stupidly obscure/lame jokes.

    ReplyDelete
  22. "You would then have to imagine that most people who start webcomics are fucking morons, because that virtually never happens. Most people start webcomics because they think they're funny and want to share their jokes, or because they want to do something fun, or whatever. Not as part of some plan to get super rich."
    Hehe, I think you're reading a bit too far into my statement. Maybe I wasn't clear enough in my emphasis on the word "dream". Do you not have any unrealistic aspirations for hobbies you do? That one day it sure would be nice if you could make a living doing something you enjoy? You're damn right most people never get to that point. Someone going into actually thinking it's a viable business... well of the few webcomics out there that make profit, there are a thousand others that failed. I agree with you. That being said... EVERY Web comic I have ever read with some sort of regularity, has had a store to sell their shit. Be it prints, or books, or what have you. Maybe you're right and they didn't ever think about this possibility when they started, and they actually came up with it down the road. I don't think that's the case, but since I'm not a mind reader, I can't tell what people who started web comics are thinking. I don't actually think most people who start webcomics are "motivated" by financial gain, I just think that all or most of them "dream" that it would be great.

    ""The plan seems like it would work...assuming you can get the plan to work." Insightful shit, homes."
    Touche. Pretty stupid thing for me to write in retrospect. But again, I think you're looking at my wording rather than at my meaning (which may have been lost due to poor wording). My only intention was to state that if you have a fan base, and the only thing that fan base has in common is that they all love your comic, it seems like a sound business practice to market comic based merchandising to them.

    "Ultimately, just because someone is able to get suckers and fans to buy his shit doesn't mean that his shit doesn't stink. It's not okay to sell shitty merchandise and shitty prints and be a huge douche about the price scheme just because someone will give you money."
    I didn't really touch base on his merchandise being any good, but what's so bad about it? I agree selling shitty merchandise at absurd prices isn't cool, and is morally questionable. But why is his merchandise shitty? I'm not talking about the prints though... I can see why someone would be pissed off about the prints, more that I think about it. 15 bucks alone is too much for a print, but 15 bucks "minimum" is almost insulting. So, if when you talk about shitting merch and douchebag priceschemes... well if we're talking about the prints, you're right. If you're talking about the other stuff, shirts etc. Other than that they are bit expensive (but not actually that much more than a lot of online shirts with "humorous" internet memes on them), I don't see what's "shitty" about them.

    "But then again, you DO seem to believe that everyone starts webcomics so they can make money off them, so maybe you really ARE enough of an ultracapitalist nutjob to think that economic incentives are the only motivation for any behavior, and thus are a complete justification and accounting for everything."
    As I already mentioned, I don't think everyone starts webcomics to become rich. I just think people who start them would love to reach a point that they can live off of doing something they love. If that makes me an ultracapitalist nujob... so be it. But for those who that option becomes just that... an option, a possibility. Why shouldn't they try to make money off it?

    ReplyDelete
  23. if you're buying from the site, you have to pay a minimum of 15 dollars and wait for shipping.
    congratulations, you now have something that looks like it was scribbled on a napkin. also, it's not that funny.

    alternatively, you could copy out the comic and print it off.

    or, you could spend five seconds and draw your own.

    though the last method may cause rabid xkcd fans to try to kill you

    ReplyDelete
  24. According to the site, people have been asking how they can donate. If that's true, you can't really blame XKCD for giving them a way to donate by paying extra for a print, can you?

    And they are signed, which increases the value to fans. Obviously it wouldn't mean much to a non-fan, but why would they even be on the site in the first place?

    ReplyDelete
  25. I want the poster of this: http://goatkcd.com/627/

    ReplyDelete
  26. Rinnon: I've wondered a lot about why it is that Randy's poster grabs come off as so cynical, when I really like the webcomics business model. It's one of the best free content models out there.

    It has a lot to do with the fact that he releases it first as a comic, and then in the product description notes that he's added something to it. Like "hey, did you like this poster filled with little details? Well I added some more if you give me $20!" XKCD fans especially seem like they'd be really big on details, so it seems kind of exploitative.

    I think the other part is just that he releases it as a comic. It feels deceptive. As this website can attest, some of his fanboys think that the poster comics aren't poster grabs. Releasing it as a comic feels like he's trying to trick people into reading it and saying "oh can we have it on a poster now?" instead of just saying "hey guys, I made a poster, you should buy it."

    Lots of places sell posters; they pretty generally don't release them as comics first. Lots of comics also offer prints of individual comics, or the original art, or similar. The difference is these comics actually have art to them, so you aren't paying for something you could print out for free at home with no loss in quality. You are paying for a real product.

    Lance: I can blame XKCD for not letting fans donate however much they want, and maybe including a gift at certain donation levels. Say $5+ gets you some buttons or stickers, $15+ gets you a print, etc. If he's truly trying to "enable donations" and not just sell a product that's way more expensive than it needs to be, he should actually let people donate.

    And maybe donors don't want a shitty print? Maybe they just want to throw money at Randall and leave?

    ReplyDelete
  27. All this talk about the store reminds me of that Dinosaur Comics shirt I wanted really badly but never got around to buying, and now it is gone forever (I am talking about the one with the "To Do List").

    Also of all the things to make a shirt of, why the woodpecker? I don't get it. Was it really that popular?

    That he is in fact making comics now with the sole intention of making himself money, and that the entertainment is in fact secondary now to the profitability of his website.

    I think the problem with that is there's no reason for that except laziness. There's plenty of webcomics with stores that still do good comics (of course, I have no clue if those artists live solely on store sales or not, the only one I know of is Homestar Runner, but that's a cartoon, not a comic).

    Hell Penny Arcade is a full-on business, and while their comics aren't always stellar, they at least put effort into them. So xkcd trying to primarily push merchandise isn't really a good excuse for why the quality of comics has gone down.

    ReplyDelete
  28. To my knowledge, A Softer World, Questionable Content, Scary-Go-Round, Overcompensating, and Dinosaur Comics all make a living off their webcomics. There are doubtless others (and I'm probably reading them).

    ReplyDelete
  29. hey guys did you know that xkcd causes cancer

    I can't PROVE it but it MUST be true!

    ReplyDelete
  30. anon 4:48 i have no idea what yuo are talking about

    ReplyDelete
  31. @Rob: What, so Dinosaur Comics is made by a man called Dinosaur Comics? IS THAT RIGHT?

    @Carl: "That is trying to get their cool cache without having to actually sacrifice any income."
    R. Munroe is trying to get hold of Radiohead's secret storage place, hmm? Hmm? Or is it possible you meant "CACHET", the actual word that has the actual meaning you actually meant?

    THUS YOUR POINTS ARE TOTALLY INVALID HAHA

    CAPTCHA: Fallse. Which is how Carl spells "false", which is WHAT CARL IS.

    ReplyDelete
  32. I bet you guys didn't even know about XKCD's plot to lull us into thinking technology is soooo kewl and not even suspecting the robot uprising. Chumps.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Wait!

    Not long ago you made an empassioned (if full of logical fallacies) rant about XKCD being ubiquitous--to the point that you could not escape it. (Fallacy 47 of 127 of this rant was, you actively search for XKCD to justify your seething hatred of its existance)

    Now you are frugging on the soapbox, shilling the XKCD merchandise (under the pretense that you don't want us to buy it). Your veneer is slipping ...RANDALL.

    I have a feeling all 15 commentors here (including me) have been HAD! We have been righteously trolled.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Randall's shirts are expensive and shitty. They have stupid designs, they don't seem particularly well-made, they aren't clever, there's no joke. There's not even any value to them, unless clannish shibboleths are really your thing. Do you want a shirt that means absolutely nothing to anyone who's not another XKCD fan, but will trigger a throwaway "Oh, hey, I like XKCD too" response in someone who is? FORTY BUCKS PLEASE.

    Why shouldn't they try to make money off it?

    Because their comic is fucking shitty and awful and their merchandise is fucking shitty and awful.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Anon 6:31 - that was Rob's rant, not Carl's.

    Also, no thanks for reminding me how horrible xkcd #631 is.

    ReplyDelete
  36. I wonder whether or not Randall realizes just how badly he is exploiting his rabid fans. I can easily imagine him thinking that he's truly offering them something of high quality. Still I have to agree, either way he'd be dumb for not cashing in.

    @Rob: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_self-sufficient_webcomics

    ReplyDelete
  37. There is a wiki list for everything apparently! I wonder how complete it is.

    ReplyDelete
  38. "Not long ago you made an empassioned (if full of logical fallacies) rant about XKCD being ubiquitous--to the point that you could not escape it. (Fallacy 47 of 127 of this rant was, you actively search for XKCD to justify your seething hatred of its existance)"

    I know this is difficult for a person of your mental caliber, but if you look at the bottom of the post in large text you may be able to make out "Posted by Carl.
    Read on once you've found it.
    [40 minutes later]
    What? Couldn't have taken you that long. Ok, go
    on the ubiquity rant.
    Done? K. Now find the "Posted by Rob" text. It should take you less time than before to find it now.
    [55 minutes later]
    ...What?
    Ok, whatever, you've found it. See, Rob and Carl are /different/ people. Say it with me. Different people. Different people. It's a hard concept to grasp, I know.

    Ok, done.

    ReplyDelete
  39. I love how in this day and age any time someone encounters something they disagree with they call it a logical fallacy.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Hey Rob, your FACE is a logical fallacy!

    ReplyDelete
  41. @Rob: That's because logic, like most things, is subjective! And if you don't agree with my logic, there must be a logical fallacy in what you said! Mike clearly gets it!

    But in all seriousness, you make a good point about the posters. You're right, a lot of other comics make posters without making them comics first. Or, rather, they may make posters BASED on a comic... but when they do it, you know it wasn't their intention to turn it into a poster, it was just an unexpectedly popular comic, which "postered" well... So I never thought of it like that. Gravity Well and the Movie one are both clearly posters, right from the begining. Though, I don't know that I agree with you that it's exploitative of his fanbase. It seems like this could go down one of 2 ways. If Randall makes the poster comics with the intention of baiting his fanbase into clamouring for a poster version and then answers with something like this: "Very well, you shall have your poster if you so wish it! But only because you wanted it so badly, did this happen! Feel honoured and purchase with confidence that YOU the reader made this happen!" then it seems exploitative, and I agree with you. However, if he makes them thinking to himself "I'm going to make a poster, and before I put it in the store, I'm going to post it as a comic to get it some attention." then I don't know that I'd agree it's exploiting his fanbase, it's more advertising to his fanbase through his comic. You could also view this as a negative point if you chose.

    It doesn't bother me personally, because I actually enjoy the "poster comics" as comics themselves, since I find them entertaining. If you of course don't find them entertaining, then it would feel like shameless marketing of a new product though.

    ReplyDelete
  42. lol @ commifags getting butthurt at somebody actually being able to make money off something

    ReplyDelete
  43. I can think of another comic that posts comics as posters (and he SPECIFICALLY CLAIMS THEY ARE POSTERS). Everytime (must be about once every 2-3 months now) Tim Buckley will do a poster and he will post it as if it's another comic so 1/3 of the week's comics are taken up by a poster, but you go to the forums and everyone eats it up, they don't care that they lost out on a (subpar at best) comic for a poster, because it's a freaking poster that was probably just as epic or funny as the comic that would've been in its stead and nobody minds that Tim specifically states either in his news post or in the forums that "prints will be available for $x in x sizes and will be available at x convention, or Digital Overload or just through the store". Now I know that CAD is pretty shitty, but at the same time, I guess there's a difference between specifically making a poster out of something that at least required a bit of work (come on, as shitty as CAD is, he at least makes a slight attempt to have background, recognizable characters and occasionally another expression outside of B^U) and you just scribbling out a bunch of weird lines and throwing in lame nerd jokes.

    ...hmm, maybe Randall does put more work into his posters than Buckley does, but still, there's yet another example of a poster grab comic (well, it's been established for years that he has no shame, so this isn't news to any one)

    ReplyDelete
  44. Rinnon: Which is totally fair. It probably wouldn't bother me as much if I liked XKCD (though in fairness I usually think the posters are pretty neat, with gravity wells excepted).

    ReplyDelete
  45. @Anon 9:11 (=O): I may be a commie, but you sir are a terrorist! Which makes me the lesser of two evils!

    @Cam: I'm not familiar with Tim Buckley's work, but if when he makes a poster he tells you straight up it's a poster, I agree more with his methods than Randalls.

    @Rob: Yeah, I suppose if you don't like XKCD to begin with, a bigger version of an XKCD comic wouldn't be all that appealing in any case!

    ReplyDelete
  46. "I love how in this day and age any time someone encounters something they disagree with they call it a logical fallacy."

    They learnt the meaning of "fallacy", along with the meaning of "tautology" and the Principle of Explosion, in the Randall Munroe School of Logic.

    ... ah, NOW we know what that school in Laos thing was actually for!

    ReplyDelete
  47. lol @ xkcdfags getting butthurt at finding out that they have horrible taste

    ReplyDelete
  48. Heh, the moderation my comment on slashdot got was *hilarious.*

    +1 Insightful
    -1 Troll
    +1 Informative
    -1 Flamebait
    +1 Informative
    +1 Insightful

    And my comment was just pointing out that it's not as simple as "just stay away from XKCD if you don't like it."

    ReplyDelete
  49. Thanks for giving permission to not read this; I would have read it otherwise.

    ReplyDelete
  50. @Mike: Hahaha, I read that comment! Or at least, I read a comment that was very similar, if not yours exactlty. It was actually that comment that made me decide to check out this site. Well, that comment, plus the one that linked to this site. While I actually like XKCD, I do understand how you feel. It's not always just "Stay away from X" if you don't like it. Example: I hated the movie 300. Absolutely hated it. Was super excited for it when it came out, went into it excited... kept myself excited through half the movie, and walked away absurdly disapointed. You try avoiding people talking about that movie. All the quoting... all the references in other humour... all the people talking about how great it was, and that anyone who thinks otherwise "Just can't enjoy good filmmaking". So, I understand how you feel completely, even if we don't agree.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Rinnon you are my favorite kind of commenter here. I wish the internet had more of you. I hope you stick around! It is fun to debate the relative merits of individual comics with people who are actually capable of entertaining thoughts that disagree with them.

    ReplyDelete
  52. "also, it may mean nothing, but I see that comics 500 - 700 are only represented by a mere 4 prints, while the earler comics get 15. I would say that that's because there are fewer good ones recently, but hey, I am probably biased."

    500-700= 200 comics represented by 4 prints. 1-499 = 499 comics represented by 15 prints. 2% vs. 3.006%. Not statistically significant.

    ReplyDelete
  53. That doesn't actually prove that the difference isn't statistically significant, but it is suggestive.

    ReplyDelete
  54. @Rinnon You probably did read that comment. I was accused by several people of getting my pants in a wad or something like that. I don't think some people realize just how pervasive some things are. People would regularly link XKCD on a retail-workers gripe forum I visited.

    I don't post on here often, but I still try and read the comments, since I like the community, and I often think Carl/Rob/et al have solid points. I'm with Rob, I hope you stick around, if at least to keep us honest in the criticisms we level. I'm not for hating for the sake of hating. Bitching for the sake of bitching, sure, but that's different.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Lexa: Except it's not 1-499, it's 123-499. So it's 3.9%, so the early comics are twice as well represented as the new comics in terms of prints. Isn't fun when we think like adults?

    ReplyDelete
  56. @Rob & Mike: Haha, thanks! I was pretty biased against this site before I actually got here. I was under the impression that the only thing that would be happening on this site would be hating for the sake of hating, exactly as Mike puts it. Sort of an "anti-popular culture" vibe that some teenagers seem to think is cool. That if everyone likes one thing it's cooler to hate it and be different (hint: I find this attitude immature). Clearly that's not the case here, as I mentioned in my first post. If it was, I wouldn't have bothered posting at all.

    Seems like most people here have damn good reasons for disliking XKCD and that just interests me. I understand why some people don't like reading critisisms of their own tastes, it can feel like a personal insult when someone explains why something you like is actually not very good... which is probably why Mike got so many negative comments back on Slashdot. I don't think this attitude is very useful for personal growth, but I understand it. I enjoy reading critisisms of things I like though, as long as they're critisisms and not JUST bitching (the bitching IS entertaining though!). It helps me refine my own tastes, or at least helps me determine what it is I like about things. Maybe I'll find out I don't like XKCD after all! And that's fine.

    As far as keeping anyone honest... Mike, you're giving me too much credit. I'm just here for the same reason you are, I like the community, I like Carl/Rob/et al's points on humour and lastly, like most people on the internet, I am shamelessly willing to talk about myself or my opinions anywhere someone might be willing to read what I have to say!

    @Carl: Hold on a second. I'll admit I'm not very good with statistics... but if you only count comics 123 through 700, aren't you not representing 100% of the comic base? If you're going to break it down that way so that only comics with prints represent the start and finish... shouldn't it be 123 to 442 and then 505 to 688 for consistency? Just cutting off the first 122 comics so the % of representation goes up doesn't seem like good statisticing (Unless I am completely off in my understanding of Statistics).

    ReplyDelete
  57. I'd like to also extend a welcome to Rinnon, who sounds a lot like I did when I first found this site. By now though, I seem to be getting in on the complaining a lot.

    I still like the occasional thing about XKCD... I just feel too conflicted to want to label myself as a FAN, especially when the fans can be as rabid as they are on this slashdot article... the "how dare you speak ill of our stick god! Surely you can't even read slashdot and call yourself without loving XKCD too, hur hur! If you don't like it it must be because you're too DUMB to get the enlightened jokes like I can!" attitude pisses me off even more than any one bad strip.

    ReplyDelete
  58. "Surely you can't even read slashdot and call yourself a true geek without loving XKCD too"

    damn, that's the second time in just a few days I've fucked up my comment from trying to go backspace something. Maybe I am too dumb to get the XKCD jokes, hur hur.

    ReplyDelete
  59. http://xkcdsuckscommentboxsucks.blogspot.com/

    ReplyDelete
  60. @ Cam:

    ...hmm, maybe Randall does put more work into his posters than Buckley does

    On the flipside of that, though, Buckley puts more work into his comic than Randall does.

    I mean, CAD is infinitely more awful than xkcd. Don't get me wrong. I don't think anything xkcd can do, not even 631, will ever top the CAD miscarriage storyline.

    But still, as you said, Buckley DOES do backgrounds, and even if his art is copy/paste and everyone has the same facial expression, they at least HAVE facial expressions and the art alone isn't horrible if you try and ignore that everyone looks the same. And he does have unique characters with their own personalities (even if those personalities are stupid or annoying)

    So while CAD is a worse comic for different reasons, I can admit, he does put more effort into his comic than Randall does.

    For the poster thing, I guess I don't care one way or the other what Randall does, but I do think if he's going to make poster comics, he should have the poster available in the store at the same time the comic goes up. I say this because if he's really keen on making money on it, he needs to grab the impulse buyers. The people who will read the comic and go "OH MAN I WANT THAT" and go to the store immediately and plunk down 15 or 25 bucks or whatever and order it right away. By having the posters appear a few months later (as he did with the recent ones) he probably loses out on a few sales of people who wanted it originally but then decided they didn't really after thinking about it for a while.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Now that is some good meta, R.

    ReplyDelete
  62. @Ambivalicious: Clearly you are correct. But luckily, since I AM an XKCD fan, I was able to understand your first post without the need for you to correct it! Hur hur hur! But thanks for the welcome! And Speaking of slashdot and complaining though... why the hell did they put XKCD on the front page? I may like XKCD, but I don't think it's front page news when a new comic comes out. Even by Slashdot's own standards: "Surely you can't even read slashdot and call yourself a true geek without loving XKCD too" they EXPECT you to already know about XKCD! Yeesh. Oh well.

    @Nate: Good point on putting the posters up right away. Not only are you right on the point that it would catch impulse purchasers, it would also be nice of him to be brutally honest about the fact that he is posting a "Poster" in his comic strip.

    @R.: Hey Man, what's your problem? Just because you don't like the text box, why don't you just not use it? No one is FORCING you to use it! Besides, it's completely subjective! *I* like it just fine! Is it REALLY so important that you needed to start a blog about it? Don't you have anything better to do then complain about a comment box?

    ReplyDelete
  63. It just occurred to me that Xkcd is very similar to the Big Bang Theory. You get nerd-culture references or science buzzwords followed by laughtrack thus implying something is funny about them. The same way calling something a comic implies that there are jokes involved.

    ReplyDelete
  64. Now now, Big Bang Theory has "jokes" besides "science, amirite?" and "star wars, amirite?"
    It also has "nerds are sometimes awkward, u no?"

    ReplyDelete
  65. @Anon 3:30:!!!

    Don't get me started in Big Bang Theory... a show ABOUT Geek Culture, that is writen BY non-geeks FOR non-geeks. This is NOT a show that I was meant to enjoy.

    Actually, I suppose that means I disagree on your analogy. XKCD is written about geek culture, by a geek, for geeks. Even if you don't like the jokes in XKCD, they almost feel more "authentic" than the ones in Big Bang Theory, which feel like they are geek culture referances by someone who is not actually a geek.

    ReplyDelete
  66. "why the hell did they put XKCD on the front page? I may like XKCD, but I don't think it's front page news when a new comic comes out. Even by Slashdot's own standards: "Surely you can't even read slashdot and call yourself a true geek without loving XKCD too" they EXPECT you to already know about XKCD!"

    That's exactly the pervasiveness that's so offputting in xkcd and especially its fanbase in general (or at least the morons who post on the comic specific threads, that is), and that the Slashdot commentators failed to grasp. OF COURSE the "correct" attitude is just to ignore and accept it, BUT, there is a limit for everything. We are only human.

    As for being "expected" to like xkcd, yes, THAT is the rotten point. And that's a rotten point, as I see it, in nerd culture as a whole. You're EXPECTED to like Star Wars, Tolkien, Terry Pratchett, Douglas Adams, Orson Scott Card, Firefly, animé, or some kind of combination of them. I thought, as a quasi-nerd myself, that the point of being a nerd is not to give a DAMN about what people expect from you, and being exactly what YOU want to be. But it seems that, as a "counter-culture", the nerd "movement" has fallen in exactly the same track that every other counter-cultural movement has ever fallen, like the Punk movement, for example. And its sad fate is to be swallowed by yet another counter-cultural movement. We'll see the day of people who're utterly sick of Internet lingo and mannerisms, who can't stand sci-fi, and who think all Internet memes (without circumflex this time!!) should die a painful death.

    And I'm really completely indifferent towards that.

    ReplyDelete
  67. "why the hell did they put XKCD on the front page? I may like XKCD, but I don't think it's front page news when a new comic comes out. Even by Slashdot's own standards: "Surely you can't even read slashdot and call yourself a true geek without loving XKCD too" they EXPECT you to already know about XKCD! Yeesh. Oh well."

    And they say you can just ignore XKCD if you want. Seriously, Slashdot people, THINK.

    Also, I started noticing... people hate hatesites, don't they? They think it's a waste of time to spend it with people that have the same interest -- or, rather, lack of interest -- in something that you have...

    But fansites are okay? Does it make sense? No, I don't want excuses such as "people are more welcome to praising than criticism", that makes as much sense as saying a pop cultural reference is always funny.

    That's all. Mole out.

    CAPTCHA: tingl. There's a very easy pun here, but I won't be the one doing it!

    ReplyDelete
  68. In advance, sorry about the double post. Apparently, there is a 4096 character limit on posting! Instead of scrapping half of it, I'm just going to go ahead, be an ass, and post it all anyways.

    @Fernie: I am conflicted by your post. On the one hand, I agree that being expected to like a set of entertainment just because you are classified as a "nerd" is somewhat ridiculous, on the other hand... I happen to like everything you wrote there, and now I feel stereotypical! Oh well. I agree with everything you said about being a nerd becoming a counter-culture movement, and as much as it's a shame, it seems like that's the fate of most large sub-culture groups. They all start off not caring what anyone else thinks of them, then they ban together because they share interests and shrug off the fact that others think they are weird. Then, they start to expect all new members of this group have the same tastes as them, and if they don't they aren't a true *insert title here*

    @ProMole: I don't know about you, but most of my life I was brought up being told "hate is a strong word" and "you don't hate him, you're just mad at him" etc etc. Hate is a "negative" emotion and any site that is built around the hating something must be a negative place! Right? I think the problem is that most people are just ignorant of what these sites are actually like, because they would never go to one. I know, because it was just 3 days ago I was ignorant of the details of this site. I like XKCD and a site called XKCD sucks strikes me as a rather hatefilled place to go. The only thing my mind could imagine would lie in wait there, would be people with anger issues who have nothing else they can think of to take it out on, than this comic. That clearly, the only reason for said site to exist MUST be because someone needs to hate on something, and arbitrarily chose something popular. With this predisposition, it feels only natural for "hatesites" to be hated. Negative emotions flying around, mean people saying mean things for no reason. That's what people imagine hate sites to be. What they don't imagine is well constructed criticism, entertaining writing, and reasonable people. I am even reluctant to say that XKCD Sucks is a hate site. My programming is kicking in and telling me "hate is a strong word..." A the wonders of childhood conditioning.

    ReplyDelete
  69. @Rob: Earlier you said a few things. First:

    "[...]XKCD fans especially seem like they'd be really big on details, so it seems kind of exploitative."

    I thought about this for a while, and now I have a counter point to make. First off, exploitative is a word that has a negative connotation, when I don't necessarily think that what he does is negative. Randy has a fan base which he knows are big on details, he knows they will like this poster, so he adds more details to make it a more worthwhile purchase for his fans. He is giving his fans what they want in a product, more detail. In a way he is exploiting the knowledge he has about what his fans want, and then giving it to them in product form, but I don't really see that this is a bad thing in any way. In fact, this seems like a GOOD thing from a consumer standpoint. If we're talking strictly about content, and you're suggesting that 20 bucks for a few extra details isn't right, I would argue that you are not paying 20 dollars for the details, you are paying 20 dollars for the poster paper, the ink, the time it took to print it, and the little details are an extra bonus. If he offered the same poster, for the same ammount, but did NOT offer a few extra details, would you feel the same way?

    Next you said this:
    [...] Releasing it as a comic feels like he's trying to trick people into reading it and saying "oh can we have it on a poster now?" instead of just saying "hey guys, I made a poster, you should buy it.""

    Your second point I feel is one of a few possibilities for the reasoning behind releasing the poster as a comic first. I will simply state another possibility: Randy has an idea for a poster. He decides to draw up Gravity Wells and he likes it. He thinks it will sell well, but he's really not sure. What if he decides to put it up as a comic to test the waters on how well it might sell. If the forums talk about how much they want a poster version, great! It'll sell well, and he can proceed to place an order. If everyone say's it's okay, but not great, maybe he should hold off and not place an order to have it in the store, might not be profitable. No deception is intended, just market analysis before introducing a new potential product (It doubles as advertising for the product no doubt). This somehow feels far less malicious, and like better business at the same time. I don't know what it costs to put up new items in the store, but I'm sure it's not free. I'm sure he doesn't just print them off as the orders come in. If they are of even remotely decent quality (arguable), he probably orders them from a printing company, and he probably saves for ordering in bulk too, as opposed to 1 or 2 at a time. He of course wants to order in bulk to make sure the poster is in stock to ship out when someone orders it. As someone who has run a small business before, I know that it's hard to decide what to stock, and what to not. It costs money up front to stock something, and if they sit on your shelves it's a wasted investment. The ability to know for a fact (or near fact) your fanbase wants a product you are thinking of stocking would be immensly helpful.

    ReplyDelete
  70. Rinnon, we're not strict about posting here, we've all double posted before, especially because of the 4096 cap

    ReplyDelete
  71. New one is so godawfully lame. I'm a philosophy major, so you'd think this sort of dumb conversation would be right up my alley, except I've heard basically these exact musings a billion times before and it's so fucking boring. Next up: Randall writes an entire comic going "Whoa, man, condemned to be free, that's pretty fucking mind-blowing man!" and we all roll our eyes.

    It doesn't help that Randall's only exposure to philosophy seems to have been from That Pretentious Undergraduate Twat who is a perpetual dumbass and never stops namedropping random philosophers he doesn't understand and acting like he's blowing everyone's mind. (I wonder: Am I that twat?)

    ReplyDelete
  72. I think the next time I see someone wearing an XKCD shirt, I'm gonna punch 'em out. Then, when they lay on the ground, their hip shirt covered in mud and tears welling in their eyes, they'll whimper "why?" I shall reply by calmly but silently pointing at their shirt. Then I will void my bladder on it and probably go get a sandwich. Or maybe a bagel.

    ReplyDelete
  73. Oh man I didn't realize that my post was relevant to the store rant AND the latest comic.

    Also, it's kinda dumb.

    ReplyDelete
  74. Fuck fuck fuck

    The new one is so fucking stupid. And the shitty dialog on top of that.

    FUCK YOU, MAJORITY, AND YOUR AWFUL TASTE

    ReplyDelete
  75. I like Matt's idea. I also dislike the comic, mostly because the joke is so, so obvious. Which makes me wonder: is this Randall juxtaposing the predictable joke with the unpredictable assault (kindly explained post-punchline, of course)?

    ReplyDelete
  76. Does this mean that assault laws are irrelevant?

    ReplyDelete
  77. Not long ago I saw some fat dude with a ponytail wearing a "Science: It works, bitches" shirt. I was like Oh, how fitting. Also, was xkcd 703 so awesome, causing so many people to link to it, that now the first Google result for xkcd is that comic? Really? Because before, I could just type xkcd into Firefox's address bar and it'd go boom and bring me to the latest comic, but now it just brings me to that abortion.

    ReplyDelete
  78. Rinnon: yea, pretty much. It's still not a reason, but I guess you got on the kernel of the question.

    ReplyDelete
  79. Here's what $15+ gets you:
    http://i.imgur.com/dfByY.jpg

    To be honest, it is better than I expected, being printed on card stock and not plain letter paper.

    ReplyDelete
  80. the question is, who is responsible for that fold going down the middle?

    ReplyDelete
  81. If you pay 15, they fold it

    ReplyDelete
  82. "Radiohead style", ay? Unbelievably apt then that just as I was reading this, my iTunes was singing at me "... arrest this man he talks in maths."

    ReplyDelete
  83. So this is a bit not related, but it's my first time ordering from them for my boyfriend as a birthday gift and did you actually receive a shipment confirm from them? I've emailed, no phone number to find, no word from them about the shirt actually being shipped to him.

    No idea if he'll get it in time and no idea if I just threw my money into a sink hole.

    Any advice based on your shirt ordering experience?

    ReplyDelete
  84. I've never ordered anything from them, but I've also never heard of any complaints (not that e-mailing me is the likely action of someone who's had a bad experience with the store, but it's not totally inconceivable).

    I suspect you'll be fine, tons and tons of people have successfully bought xkcd shirts (otherwise I wouldn't see them all the time), and if his store got even a little unreliable he would lose a huge amount of business. He has a VERY strong incentive to keep people happy.

    ReplyDelete