Dragon Powered Does Reviews - Now Open For Volunteers!

[Rob]

All websites are ok. All.  ;)

[Shouri]

Adding my site to the list!

http://www.springiette.net

;D

[Richard]

Well, I'll give my site a shot.

www.interversecomics.com

[Dragon Powered]

Well, Richard, I'm going to have to pass on your site I'm afraid.  You're really not a webcomic, you're a web service, which is a whole different animal.  The comics aren't designed to fit your site, nor is the site designed to fit the comics.  There is very little I could suggest.

Also, with that, I'm going to be taking a bit of a vacation from the reviewing.  My time is very limited right now, and I have some projects that demand my attention.  I'll still be around, tossing in my two cents worth and likely giving Rob an article or two, but nothing on a schedule for now.

I'll let you all know what's happening soon.

[Rob]

If you are interested in getting your site reviewed please go ahead and volunteer here. Dragon is taking a vacation for awhile. He may be coaxed back into action at some point or another may rise to take his place but if we have volunteers in the queue it will be easier to to get someone going on the project eventually.

Richard I don't think Dragon knows that all those comics are yours but even if he doesn't he has a point. I think one of the things we've never done with our reviews is review a site with multiple comics on it. Even my site has 3 running right now with a fourth coming soon and that never occurred to me.

I think what most likely would need to happen is for each one of your comics to be reviewed individually. At least that's the way Dragon has been running his reviews... giving each comic it's moment under the spotlight. I think it would be much more complex to try and review a site with several comics running and perhaps in some ways extremely repetitive.

That doesn't mean it doesn't need to get done though. And since each comic is sort of hosted in the same way it shouldn't be too tough. Consider yourself at the head of the line. One way or the other.

And thanks to everyone who has volunteered to get get reviewed. I hope the process was instructive for you and that it was worth your time and helped you in some way.

And a HUGE thanks to Dragon who was here for months week in and out, slaving away whilst his real job was crushing him for time. Not only as a reviewer but as a site admin/mod as well. Enjoy your vacation bud and if you need anything please hollar. And please don't be a stranger.  ;D

[Dragon Powered]

Oh yes, I don't mean to sound like I won't be doing reviews any longer.  I'll do a review for anyone that wants one.  I'm just saying I won't be doing it on a schedule, at least for now.  I have things that need to be caught up.

Rob has been gracious enough to allow these reviews to be displayed here for the community, and I appreciate that, so yeah I'll continue to do them.

Richard, maybe I'm a bit confused as to what your site actually does.  Maybe that's a design flaw, maybe it's just my own tired and deep-fried brain cells.  If indeed it is to be considered a webcomic per se, there are some issues that should be addressed... such as color (yellow on pea-soup green does not a pretty make).  I could discuss the issues with you directly, if you wish, rather than drag your site through the proverbial sludge pits for all to see.  Or I could do a full review.  Rob has said controversy can be a good thing.  Just let me sharpen my claws and teeth first.

[Richard]

As Rob said in his previous post, we do indeed do all of our own webcomics. Our site is much like Rob's own Remedial Comics: utilizing the same domain name and background scheme for multiple webcomics. My partner and I write for all of our comics. I don't particularly find it difficult to believe that we provide webcomics, but I guess I can't see from your perspective.

At this point I will have to say an emphatic "No!" to one of your reviews. While it is one thing to be told you do not like one of our background colors, it is another thing to be told beforehand that you intend to drag my site through proverbial sludge.

Consider my request withdrawn.

[Rob]

At this point I will have to say an emphatic "No!" to one of your reviews. While it is one thing to be told you do not like one of our background colors, it is another thing to be told beforehand that you intend to drag my site through proverbial sludge.

Consider my request withdrawn.

Knowing Dragon as I do Richard I can tell you I think he was just kidding. All his reviews have been very fair I think. Maybe even too fair for one or two.

As for aesthetic stuff like color scheme? I've alway taken all of that stuff with a grain of salt. I once had someone tell me the colors on my site (not Remedial Comics but an old site back when I was learning HTML) made their eyes bleed and their spleen explode. Hyperbole.

Site functionality is important to us and our readers. And that's what I tend to look at most when I look at another site. Ease of use, layout, is the site doing what we want a webcomic site to do? The rest, story, color scheme...that sort of stuff is more of a taste thing and I tend to put less emphasis on that.

But everyone takes what they will from a review. I've seen people here and on other sites ask for a review and then ignore everything the reviewer says and defend all the choices.

I did that once too. I had readers telling me they hated my nav buttons and I explained to them that functionally my buttons were superior to the under comic nav buttons. And they were. But readers hated them. So I eventually pulled my head out of my butt and changed them.

The point of a review is to take what you think is valuable and improve. But you can't always tell what is and is not valuable. So I see them as useful exercises in additional perspectives.

Now Richard I know you roll with a whole posse in your crew. You had like what....3-400 people behind your table at CTCon? LOL. If you all like your layout as is and you think you've gotten enough perspective on it then you probably don't need a review. But Dragon is a professional web designer. And there are rules for all websites. All websites. So if you want some feedback regarding that I'm sure something useful will come out of the review. But you have to take the good with the bad. That's the reality of reviews.

[Richard]

Really my response was kind of knee-jerk. I wasn't taking Dragon's response as "kidding" like you, since I don't know him. Honestly my first reaction to his post was: "What do you mean I'm not a webcomic?"

I was taking his post as if he was serious, one that seemed to suggest that it would only be harmful to get one of his reviews. I am fine with constructive criticism, I just shy away when people mention just plain nasty criticism.

[Dragon Powered]

Yeah ok.  The 'dragged through the proverbial sludge' is a tongue-in-cheek representation of what all sites that ask for a review are subjected to.  By no means do I say I would be giving 'nasty criticism', that's not me, I don't do that.  What I do give is an honest review of the overall website from a web consultant's point of view.  If I see things wrong, I tell you, if I see things I like, I also tell you.  I take the time (sometimes over a period of several days) to peruse the website and the content, and the review reflects not just the technical aspects of the site nor just the view of the comic, but rather how the entire package works together from an outsider's standpoint.

However, requesting a review requires thick skin.  By making a request you're saying "hey, I think my content and presentation are pretty nice, but I realize I'm looking at it through rose colored glasses, so I'd like the opinion of an outsider who might see flaws I've missed."  You have to be prepared to set your baby on the stage and roll with both the jeers and the cheers.

I remember reading a review here, from a previous reviewer, on Amanda's comic site.  It was obvious from the start that he hated her site. I mean, he really tore into it.  But in response Amanda thanked him for taking the time to review her site and accepted his criticism in stride.  That's class, and it's the way you have to be when you ask for a review from anyone.  By the way, I don't agree with that reviewer... I think her site is cute in its own way.

Maybe you're not ready to have your baby poked and prodded just now, and that's fine.  I won't poke any further than this little response to:

Honestly my first reaction to his post was: "What do you mean I'm not a webcomic?"

The "About Us" page states "InterVerse Comics LLC is a new independent comic book publisher that publishes in-house comics online and in print form. We cover a variety of different genres and themes with our properties. We are always on the lookout for new ideas, artists, and properties, so submissions are always welcome."

Nowhere in there does it say these are your comics. It says you're a book publisher with different artists and properties. That's a service.

/poke

[Rob]

I think Richard is trying to set up Interverse as a kind of small press much in the way Swinsea is doing with Isakai.

He's open for adding/hosting additional comics other than the ones he writes.

But he'll tell you that the majority of the comics on Interverse right now; which is his website, are written by him. That certainly isn't clear from the about us you quoted DP and so I can see how you might have gotten thew wrong impression.

It's certainly reasonable to say Interverse is a service but right now I'd say it's more accurately described as an on line publisher of multiple properties several of which are created in house. It's one of those things where if you want to get into the piggly details you have to have the whole "what is a webcomic website?" conversation. There are many different kinds of site and not all offer the same stuff. The very fact that Remedial Comics has 3 different comics with a 4th on the way (with a different combination of authors and artists on each one) means one could argue that it isn't purely a webcomics site. The blogs and reviews could add to that argument. The fact that I'm working on a print project now that (assuming the publisher picks it up they would get temporary publishing exclusivity) once the rights revert I hope to add to the site for sale in print would add even more evidence. The animations I'm planning on doing for Remedy... yep even more evidence.

My point being that if we narrowly define a "webcomic" site it begs the question what is and what is not a webcomic site? Is Interverse a publisher of webcomics that also does webcomics? Is Remedial Comics an entertainment destination that also does webcomics? Is Rooster Teeth Comics not a website because Rooster Teeth deals primarily in social networking and machinima?

And how do you review these sites in comparison to your standard Wordpress/Comicpress no frill webcomic?

I know the answer to these questions in my own mind but it is something you sort of have to define for yourself. And if Dragon, you are uncomfortable reviewing sites that operate beyond the scope of a standard webcomic site, or if you Richard are wary of getting your site reviewed because it doesn't fit into the exact mold of a standard webcomic then that's fine.

It's your time and therefore up to you.

I personally don't think it could hurt and it might help. But again that's just one man's opinion.  :-\

[Richard]

Hey, thanks for the words and interceding there, Rob! You are spot on about us, we do indeed do all of our own comics and we are open to the possibility of more comics by other creators in the future.

Now, to address Dragon's post...

I'll be honest, but not harsh. My reviews will probably be a little bit tongue-in-cheek, we aren't business people here looking for brass tacks. We're here for a bit of fun and to promote ourselves.

This was from the first post of yours that I read in this thread. In it you clearly state that you'll be honest with your reviews, but not harsh. So I happily applied to this website as I am always prepared to some thoughtful criticism. And then I receive this response from you:

Richard, maybe I'm a bit confused as to what your site actually does.  Maybe that's a design flaw, maybe it's just my own tired and deep-fried brain cells.  If indeed it is to be considered a webcomic per se, there are some issues that should be addressed... such as color (yellow on pea-soup green does not a pretty make).  I could discuss the issues with you directly, if you wish, rather than drag your site through the proverbial sludge pits for all to see.  Or I could do a full review.  Rob has said controversy can be a good thing.  Just let me sharpen my claws and teeth first.

You clearly suggest that I shouldn't get a review done. You suggest telling me in private rather than "drag your site through the proverbial sludge pits for all to see." Then as you go on to say that your review would be controversial. Your final sentence declaring that you need to sharpen your claws and teeth do not seem to be done in good humor or jest, just rather peculiarly antagonistic. I'm not sure whether I caught you on a bad day, your first impression of my site caused you to go blind, or the thought that I was some sort of "service" infuriated you. 

All of what you said in this post seemed to fly in the face of your initial post stating that you would be honest but not harsh. It is hard not to construe those previous words as harsh, harder still without any indicator that you were being tongue-in-cheek with the last comment (I would suggest possibly using a smiley or some other indication.) This is in the internet, and without facial or body cues all I have to go on is your text...  :o

Maybe you're not ready to have your baby poked and prodded just now, and that's fine.  I won't poke any further than this little response to:

Honestly my first reaction to his post was: "What do you mean I'm not a webcomic?"

The "About Us" page states "InterVerse Comics LLC is a new independent comic book publisher that publishes in-house comics online and in print form. We cover a variety of different genres and themes with our properties. We are always on the lookout for new ideas, artists, and properties, so submissions are always welcome."

Nowhere in there does it say these are your comics. It says you're a book publisher with different artists and properties. That's a service.

/poke

To respond to that point, your quote indicated that we do indeed make our own comics. "In-house" means that we are the ones who make the comics, not somebody else.

That being said, I'm perfectly willing to get some of our comics (or the entire site if that's the route you want to take) reviewed. That is if you are still operating by the principles you set forth in your first post in this thread.

Believe me, the "baby" phase of most of these comics were over months ago. I began writing most of them at the beginning of last year. At this point the most I would consider any of them to be is a sullen teenager  :P

[alf-alpha]

Well, Hi. I 'm a newbie here...probably new to whole webcomic thing. I tried to get my stuff published but I failed. However,put the whole story online...not even my site..I just signed in a comic hosting community,and the site was ready to view. I would really love a word about this webcomic of mine. Here's the link: http://viraltrsr.thecomicseries.com/comics/1/

[dgabrielm]

Hello,

I've just set up my website so there isn't much there but I've just put it through a major re-design with extra features etc. If it's all still going on I'd really appreciate a critique. My style of website is not the most conventional and I just use paint to make the graphics, but anything I can do to improve it - I can and will.

http://cartoons.dariomincioni.com

Thanks in advance
p.s. don't forget to check out the 404 page, I'm pretty proud of it :D

Dario

[Vas Littlecrow Wojtanowicz]

If you are willing to review NSFW sites, I am game to be reviewed. I always appreciate learning more ways to improve what I do.

http://barxotka.com/ (crime drama with mature themes)

and

http://rasputincatamite.com/ (coming of age/horror with gross-out, rebooted)