I wonder if OotS has updated today, ha ha ha ha ha.
Order of the Stick (OotS), by Rich Burlew, is a comic that I used to be kinda into, but no longer. It’s pretty funny, and it has the geek factor of being based on Dungeons & Dragons in a self-aware way.
But I finally lost interest due to the lack of regular updates. A while back, I was part of a discussion with Lore when he was getting Bad Gods together, and he was trying to decide whether to update three times a week, or once a week with three items at a time. I said, people like frequent updates more. Others disagreed, saying that people like predictable updates more, and once a week was fine, as long as it’s there when you think it’s going to be there.
I’ve since changed my opinion to agree with them, not in small part because I realized how frustrated I got with the lack of OotS updates. Originally the note at the top of the pages said “updates Monday, Wednesday, and Friday”, but that would kinda slide to Monday at 11pm, then maybe Tuesday, then maybe a double-comic on Wednesday, etc., etc. I got involved with the OotS forums for the sole reason of debating this point…and, oy, well, I’ll get to the heart of that in a minute, but for now I’ll say someone pointed out that he had only missed a few updates, and we were still getting nearly the same number of comics we would if he were on the schedule. That’s true, but…something just feels wrong about not getting them when we’re told we will.
There’s a useful discussion to be had here, and to the OotS forum’s credit it was handled relatively intelligently, but essentially it came down to two extremes, both of which make me want to put a fist through a wall. The opposing arguments are essentially as follows:
- OotS isn’t updating on schedule, and I’m [pissed off/never reading anymore] because we’re not getting the updates we deserve.
- You don’t deserve anything…you’re getting these comics for free, so be happy with what you get and stop complaining.
The first point’s pretty easy to see through: it’s true, you don’t deserve anything from Burlew. If you’re angry, sorry, but it’s up to you if you don’t want to read it any more. And in fact I’m not even sure if there were any people arguing that point very strongly; I think that may have just been the primary accusation from the second group, when people had the nerve to complain.
It’s an interesting issue, really. At what point are the creators beholden to the viewers? If at all? It’s a bit more clear cut (well, a bit, anyway) when you’re talking about a commercial venture dependent on advertising dollars generated through your product. People get angry enough about the wrong couple getting a divorce in their favorite soap opera, they start writing letters, and if they’re really bonkers enough to make a monetary effect (or to give the producers a fear that they actually can), the writers change it.
But when you’re getting something for free, what hook do you really have into the author? Only what he gives you, and only what he feels like accepting. But in most cases, wouldn’t you figure he has to accept some sort of obligation? If he really didn’t care about making people happy, why bother publishing the comic for the public at all? Even if he says it’s just for the joy of making a worthy piece of art, there’s nothing to prevent him from creating that work of art on his computer, then saving it to an obscure part of his hard drive, where no one else will ever see it. The decision to put it on the web necessarily means the desire to have an audience, and therefore some interest in that audience being pleased with the work. (And don’t hassle me with people creating art specifically to offend—they’re offending someone, but I’d still venture there’s a secondary audience to whom they can say, “see, I made those people unhappy.”)
Ah hell, more to say about this, but I’m pushing reader attention span down here. Let me finish about OotS—I said there “used to be” a message with MWF updates, but seeing he couldn’t manage that, he changed it to Monday and Thursday. But seeing he couldn’t manage that, he changed it to: “Until the end of August, OOTS updates at random, at least twice per week. There is no schedule.” But apparently he can’t even manage that, because there was one update this week.
And I know the second isn’t coming, even though he still has 2 hours to get it together…it’s because he’s away at Origins International Games Expo, where he’s hawking his newest OotS book and his OotS board game. Mm-hm. Actual Burlew quote:
So if you’re one of the lucky first 750 people who get to our booth at Origins next Thursday, you can get your hands on the next OOTS book four months early–and get it autographed by me while you’re at it.
Holy shit, 750 books? $30 each, with a midsize publisher, he has to get a good percentage of that. And that’s just advance sales.
I tried to point out on the forums that the comic might be free, but he’s selling significant merch based on it. I generally got snippy replies from other fans to the effect of, “Rich has made it clear that he will run his business the way he wants to, and doesn’t need help from us.”
Yeah. Just our money. So fuck ‘im. I do occasionally give money to independent web people with good stuff, but I’m not going to consider giving Burlew any, even though I’m interested in his board game. I know authors don’t have to love the fans, and when they seem to, it’s probably half just to keep them happy, but whatever. When the illusion’s clearly not there, and I understand how little Burlew actually thinks of his fans beyond a source of income, I just have no interest handing it to him.
For bonus irony, a user named Dragon Child on the OotS forum went to Origins today and got to playtest the game. Part of his (and/or her) review:
I don’t want to give too many of the jokes away, but the illustrations on the cards are -hilarious-. The kobolds are zany cute, and the “The comic is late!” card is great.
Yeah, nice. Reduce the complaints of your audience to a joke inside the product you’re selling to your audience. Well done.
July 2nd, 2006 23:11
Well, you have to understand that most of the people with whom you’ll be dealing on web forums and things operate under the assumption that thinking is a very, very difficult task. This is why they have difficulty distinguishing between, say, valid grievances and petty attacks on their idols.
This is evidenced by the fact that it appears they completely missed the point. Unless you were arguing that Rick was not, in fact, going to run his business the way he wanted, their replies seem kind of off-topic and superficial. Plus, they contradict themselves a bit by first claiming that he’s not making anything from what he’s giving to the audience, and then defending him “running a business”. Which is it? Either defend him because he’s not making money or defend him because he’ll make money however he damn well pleases, but they can’t have both.
Unfortunately, criticism will not typically come from the dogmatic fan base who would buy his stuff even if he personally shat in each of their ovens and then set them to self-clean. Thus, anyone with even a valid grievance will find themselves the butt of a diehard-fanbase-pandering joke that serves to reinforce the reluctance to complain and to encourage the cattle-like conformity that leads to increased profit and more rabid dedication.
Alas, if you’re going to start cutting yourself off from content just because the creators are outright assholes, you’ll inevitably end up living in a shack in the mountains with no running water, let alone Internet access.
July 3rd, 2006 07:30
Yeah, this has kinda been annoying me too, but patience is a virtue, as they say, and if he says that everything will be all normal again by some time in August then I’m prepared to believe him. If things are STILL not back to normal, then I’ll be a little angry.
July 3rd, 2006 08:11
I just stick it in my category of “from time to time,” comics I check back on every few weeks. That can be rather fulfilling, especially when you can catch up on multiple comics at a time.
July 3rd, 2006 08:26
Berlew has come off in the forums as something of a prick. But if that’s a criterion for media consumption, I’d have to start throwing away LOTS of stuff (There goes Star Wars! There goes Harlan Ellison!)
I do wish Berlew would show a little more consideration. That said, I enjoy the strip. Best policy is to follow Minivet’s advice and check it every week or so.
July 4th, 2006 23:47
I came here looking for the DFC archive, but had to comment on your post.
The problem with the OoTS schedule is that it’s wildly unprofessional. What he _should_ do (but won’t; the “something of a prick” comment is correct) is queue up a bunch of comics and then release them according to schedule. Instead we get d3-1 comics each week, depending on how he is feeling and how busy he is that week.
Even if Burlew only had time to write one comic a week, I wouldn’t complain–so long as it appeared on a fixed schedule.
July 5th, 2006 00:10
Yeah, one of my friends said she can’t get angry about missed schedules. But it’s a bit more than that, isn’t it? There’s some “fuck you, readers” mixed in with it. Especially because “how busy he is” is usually about what he’s working on that he can sell his fans.
I find this issue interesting because I keep going back and forth on it. He deserves to make a living. But if he’s making a living off fans of his comic, doesn’t he owe them something? No, it’s a free comic, he doesn’t. But he expects to make money from those people, so maybe he does. But not everyone buys things, so he doesn’t owe those people anything. But how else does he expect to get an audience for his products? Why have a public, free comic at all if you don’t owe them anything, why not just make and sell comic books full time? He can’t, because he needs the market appeal to sell things. Ah so them maybe he does owe his audience something?
Back and forth, back and forth. I can’t make up my mind on this.
Oh, and p.s.: ugh, the DFC archive, I never got that story together, but there’s so much I have to do with my site anyway. Check the Wikipedia entry.
July 5th, 2006 09:20
Maybe it’ll help if you look at a different commercial model, rather than wrestling with these questions related to webcomics only.
Not every consumer buys Proctor And Gamble Specialty Brand Hyperproduct when they see ads for it during Popular Reality TV Series (9:00 PM on Nationally Broadcast Network, check local listings). Yet the broadcasting station does rely on money from those advertisements to maintain itself. The viewers aren’t directly paying the station for the service they receive, yet it’s still in the station’s interest to present that service professionally.
July 5th, 2006 09:30
I figure it thus:
Regularity of updates and probability of regular updates are two properties people will pin your site, along with how funny it is and the design and artwork and whatever else applies. If you miss updates, you’ll lose visitors. See Homestar Runner, which hadn’t updated for a month now and I haven’t been visiting. I might go factcheck and see if it has updated (and it has, but the point remains.)
Losing readers means less customers. Heck, annoying your readers means less customers because you’ll knock them under the threshold when they want stuff.
Websnark (who no longer updates, but still is pretty influential) basically suggests that when you start making money from the comic you start owing your fanbase.
July 5th, 2006 16:26
“I just stick it in my category of “from time to time,” comics I check back on every few weeks. That can be rather fulfilling, especially when you can catch up on multiple comics at a time.”
Agree wholeheartedly. Especially for something as story-driven as OoTS. Wait a week, come back, get a large chunk of the story. I can’t see this being as fulfilling with, say, a Penny-Arcade style comic of (nearly) exclusively one-offs.
July 5th, 2006 18:14
I don’t mind infrequent updates so much if there’s an RSS feed. I started cutting Lore a lot more slack when I no longer had to remember to check The Ratings once a week (and usually be disappointed by no update) because my reader would check for me.
You also have to remember how few fans probably check the message board. Onstad was really mean when he modded his own board on Dumbrella. And when he bothers to post on TOUAMB it’s usually to mock his own fans. But we find his work entertaining enough to put up with it. Although it does taint my enjoyment a little.
The closest analogy I can think of is Bill Waterson. I enjoy Calvin & Hobbes slightly less after reading his opinions in the 10th Anniversary Book.
But I’ll keep checked OotS for updates weekly or so. But then I didn’t know he was being a dick because I really only visit for the forum for stuff like the What Haley Said compilation or the OotS Deck of Many Things.
July 5th, 2006 18:55
Heh, see, I didn’t know about Onstad modding his own board…that was before I got into Achewood. Though it supports my current theory that it’s better to keep some distance between creator and fans, despite the fact that technology makes it easier.
July 5th, 2006 19:56
Onstad was brutal as a mod. He would lock or delete anything even mildly off-topic (such as, “hey, I had a Suburu Brat!). He also hated predictions. Finally he just closed the board down entirely, although he was nice enough to give a couple days warning.
He did admit to altering posted strips based on fan reaction. Looking back I think this was the main reason for him closing the board. He may have bitched about off-topicness and people questioning him skipping days but I think it was the fans convincing him to alter a “finished” work that really got under his skin. Now he seems to only fix obvious errors, like a glass disappearing for 2 panels or Ray having no nipples.
July 28th, 2006 12:55
This whole thing is probably why comics pros used to praise Charles Schulz for putting out a daily strip for 50 years. It sounded like faint praise, but it really is a virtue to be that businesslike about your art.
My guess, as a lazy creative person myself, is that Burlew fools himself about what he can do. I think he knows it’s not nice to make promises he can’t keep. It’s just that, as he makes them, he’s convinced himself he can keep them. He’d annoy people a lot less if he just said “I’m unable to meet a schedule.”
With print comics, I usually get the paperbacks anyway–I’d rather get a big chunk all at once, and I don’t have to get annoyed with the immediate production schedule… a lot of my favorite artists can’t meet a schedule anyway.
December 5th, 2006 14:06
Um, Spinn, you have just about used up my patience waiting for A-1. As one whom often highlights his frustration with the difficulty of reaching/obtaining/maintaining an audience, I thought you might like to know.
December 6th, 2006 16:45
Kinda forced to side with the Spoon here. A diatribe like this coming from someone who’s in the habit of not updating or pulling entirely the most popular areas of his site for months at a stretch IS kind of amusing.
December 6th, 2006 17:30
Eh, nah, I didn’t say anything to Loki because he has a point. But this diatribe was about Burlew constantly making and breaking promises. I at least had the forethought not to make any.
December 6th, 2006 21:57
I, for one, am content with the six doses of amusing.org each week. I just hope this post doesn’t jinx it.
December 7th, 2006 09:40
A post from July is now the most active one?