Timewaster's Guide Archive
General => Site News => Topic started by: Spriggan on February 04, 2004, 08:47:45 AM
-
I was looking through our site report for last year and though you might find some of these numbers intresting.
Obvisly the Forum is the busiest part of TWG, but it was looked at 10x more then the actial main page. Now most of this activity comes from page reloads when you load new topics.
As for most looked at deparments, video games comes in #1 with webcomics comming in a close number 2. Surpriseingly RPGs is a distant 3rd. I find it odd that deparments that rarely get updates are our #1 and 2 respectavly. In fact they beat out the main site page (wich is right after RPGs).
here's the complete list:
#1 Videogames
#2 Webcomics
#3 RPG
#3.5 main page
#4 Movies
#5 Table Top games
#6 Tower of Cheepness
#7 CCG
#8 other
#9 books
January saw webcomics comming in #1 and VG #2 with rpgs falling behind the main index page.
Now maybe, since webcomics and VG are currently the main draw to the site, we should have more articles. I'm working on a VG one now, and can do others once I get my hands on a working PS2.
-
I'm planning on a review of the NWN expansion packs, once i finish HOTU and try out a few of the prestige classes in multiplayer.
-
And just to take care of this before people start posting it. I wasn't saying we should shift our focus at all, I know most of our reviewers are RPG buffs, and that actauly getting artices up (no matter what they are) is more important. I was just pointing out that RPGs, despite being the largests section, is a sunificant 3rd place (by about 18% less views then the number 2 place). And try to encourage those that have been thinking of doing reviews for these deparments to do so.
-
no, i think you're right. it'd be great to have more content fo the areas that are drawing more viewers even when they dont' have content.
It only makes sense, after all.
I guess I'll start reviewing all the web comics I read.
Of course, the problem is getting the reviews done. From what I understand, we dont' get NEARLY as much VG material to review. And people don't write as many reviews. If we had people contributing more, that'd be nice. It's hard for me to do VG reviews and articles because I'm short on cash and my current computer just won't run new stuff.
But Web Comics and free stuff.... well.... we have little excuse for that. Let's get some people doing that stuff.
-
I'll really try to get my Commandos 3 review done this week. I promised it a month ago.
-
Okay, okay. I'll review some more webcomics.
BTW--the reason we get webcomics pageviews is because the comic artists like to link our reivews of them. I'll bet the reason we get video game hits is because far more people do searches for VG reviews than other types. Realize that neither of these reasons are all that likely to keep people coming back. Our RPG and tabletop content, however, is more unique, and I think it will be more likely to attract repeat visitors.
It's not all just about the raw numbers.
-
no, it's not. But we dont' have much of a problem providing content for table top or RPG. if we can give unique content to those areas, people may come back.
-
no EUOL's right on the numbers, but one I think does matter is that more people look at those pages then the main site page. That shows that people are going to different deparents to see what we got.
-
on this note, I do have a huge list of regularly read comics. But while I like EUOL's format for reviewing books, I dont' so much the format he's been using for Web Comics. Would it bother anyone if I reviewed comics with a different format?
-
You mean paper comics? I wouldn't mind at all if you ignored my format--you would have to treat them much differently than webcomics. Very different genres.
-
actualyl, I meant webcomics. I've already reviewed print comics much more like a book.
-
Oh. We've generally tried to keep webcomics to a select few reviewers, but you're a special case (seeing as to how you're an excellent writer, not to mention a comics expert.)
However, I kind of like the uniformity of the review styles. The other concern I have is that you'll give us a huge influx of positive reviews, since you would be reviewing the comics that you like. I think that the collection is already too slanted toward the positive end.
Anyway, what would you like to change about the review format? If you were to begin doing webcomic reviews, I would rather change the current format and have us both use a new one than have two separate formats going for new reviews.
-
I was mostly planning on writing it as prose instead of breaking down the categories. The categories implies they're independent. To me, it's the integration of art and story, or art and joke, or all three that makes a comic good. By flowing it all together as prose, my review would show that fundamental assumption better.
I can do the standard format. It just feels more like homework and less like "this is why you should/should not read this"
If you're worried about not havign enough bad ones, I can put out some ones for comics I've stopped reading for various reasons (I got bored, they became unreliable, they stopped being funny, etc)
we should also review every comic that gets self promoted on our board. I go try them out at least, even though many are not very good.
-
do you think we should go through and update any old reviews? Like how Megatokyo is no longer funny and had been turned into a romance novel. Or how Sunday Morning Breakfast Cereal has ceasted to exsist.
edit:ah, found it in keepspace, which is the hellhole of webcomic hosting (even with a broad band connectoin it took like 5 minutes to load), but it appears to now have been updated for months. but the comic is completely different (art and other wise) and I can't find and of the older comics from when we reveiwed it. http://smbc.keenspace.com/
-
Yeah, Keenspace is inherently evil, but at least it provides free hosting. Keenspace/spot is having load issues today though. It's not usually THAT slow, though Keenspace is notoriously slow.
I was wondering if that was the same guy. I didn't think it was.
-
the name is the same, Zach Weiner.
-
Well, I went to review Shaw Island. But I realized the EUOL has all these category designations under each aspect he reviews. I don't see a delineation of these aspects. It seems kinda silly to categorize the art in a web comic as "Web Comic" since that's obvious, but maybe i'm missing some subtlety. EUOL, do you have more detail?
-
THere should be an article somewhere where he mentions all the various classifications.
-
ok, I found it. I will proceed.
-
Sorry I didn't respond here earlier, SE. Personally, I don't mind if you just write your articles straight through without any breakdowns. In my mind, it really helps me fill out a review if I consider each aspect of a comic. Otherwise, I find myself focusing only on story and characters. Occupational hazard.
Anyway, if you feel comfortable following all my categories and what not, go ahead. However, don't feel that you have to. I personally think they make a review more readable, but if you're going to do a whole series of webcomic reviews, there's no reason why you can't just determine your own criteria and do block-text reviews instead.
Of course, we'd probably want to post up an article on your personal review criteria as opposed to mine. Just a thought.
-
which in turn would give us more material, eh? An article on my theory of Web comics (which is connected to comics as a whole). It's been recommended before. I'll have to write something. Then maybe I can send it off as a proposal for elsewhere.
-
Here's something I came across while hoping one or the other had press/media contacts. I like DC graphic novels better, but aparently:
Spider-Man outsells Batman and Superman COMBINED (i figured with his movies, he'd outsell, but combined? I'm a little surprised, though I wouldn't be too surprised if they were comparing ALL Spider-Man titles -- including Venom-- against just the self title Supes and Bats)
Marvel also has numbers showing that more of their readers play console video games than DC comic readers. Which is weird, but shows there's more crossover interest potential there.
SO it seems more advantageous to run Marvel related content than DC content. Weird, huh?
-
marvel's a hot comadoty right now. They've acualy worked out a deal with Pixar for them (pixar) to make CG moves based off the characters.
-
Yeah, it's because of two things: they finally started to find a balance between comic book and film for their adaptations, and they're actually working on movies.
DC keeps talking about making movies. Talking about who to cast as batman or Superman or Wonder Woman, but they never actually DO anything. Unlike Marvel, which has at least THREE films coming out this year.