How sad is it when someone's prime medium for vicarious living is webcomics? I currently read over 70 webcomics, and while some of those update rarely, and some even haven't updated since I first found them, the majority get new strips multiple times per week.
I started reading webcomics a few years ago, the first one was Penny Arcade. Big surprise. For those in the host of voices in my head that don't know what Penny Arcade is, see my profile blurb. After that, every now and then (maybe once every couple of months) I find a new comic that I like and read the whole archive, as well as add it to the list of comics I check daily. This usually triggers a sort of comic spree where I do some searching for other new comics and read those archives. I'm currently near the end of such a spree (at least I think it's near the end, it can be difficult to tell).
When I first read webcomics, I usually tried to go for the Penny Arcade style comic, about gaming and without much of an overall plot. Unfortunately, Penny Arcade is, in my opinion, the best by far of all those types of comics. The next best one I've found is Ctrl-Alt-Del, which focuses more on storyline, less on gaming jokes, although there are still a lot of those.
On a side note, Penny Arcade is still great, but over the years it's become more of a game review site and gaming news centre webcomic. As I am not that big a gamer, this disappoints me, and lets a lot of undoubtedly great punchlines fly over my head.
As a direct result of reading Penny Arcade, I began reading User Friendly. This came about from some spat between the two, and as it was mentioned on the PA website, I found UF and started reading it. While UF is still somewhat nerd-oriented, it was the first really in-depth plotline comic I read. Those types of comics are quite possibly my favorite comics to read the archives of, if not to read daily. The reason for this is quite simple: reading the archives is like reading a book, but reading the daily updates as they come is akin to reading one line of a book, and then having to wait for a day, even two or three, to read the next line. It just can't hold your interest as much.
Penny Arcade was the original webcomic, to the best of my knowledge, and so a lot of newer comics were inspired by it. That is why I consider Gaming webcomics a type of their own, because there's enough of them to be a "type". There are three other "types" of comics that I read. One I've mentioned, the plot driven comics. These I like the best, in general. Joke-a-day comics are great, but if the joke isn't particularly funny, that's an update wasted for me. Plot driven comics may not have jokes as often, although many of the good ones fit them in often enough, but almost every update is worth reading, because it advances the plot, lets you know more of the story. (One of the reasons I hate when plot comics waste updates on random sketches or something.) Of course, plot comics are better if they are updated often, while joke a day comics can be updated less often and still be good.
The third type of comic is the joke a day, no plotline whatsoever comic. Of the ones I read, this type is split into two subtypes: the one where the joke is usually very nerdy or(->boolean OR) obscure. I like those because I a a nerd, and I enjoy good nerd-jokes that many "normal" wouldn't get (which just makes it more enjoyable). The other sub-type is when the comic relies on non-sequiturs/puns/offensiveness to make the joke. I find shock-value jokes to be very humorous, although this type of comic is the only one in which I am not likely to read the entire archive of older comics once I discover it.
The fourth type of comic is the comic that never updates. I hate these comics, and yet I still retain them in my list of daily checked comics. I guess it's some vain hope of seeing the author start them up again. And just so you know, I mean they never update. I have at least 5 webcomics that haven't had a new strip since I found them and read their archives. One of them, the archives contain less than 10 strips. At least now I avoid new starting comics that I know haven't been updated in months/years.
So anyway, that was a pointless post. To reward anyone who actually read through it, or anyone who scrolled down to see if there was anything interesting at the end, here's a list of my top webcomics, organized by "type". Also, in order of best to worst (IMO of course) from top to bottom. (cross-type is not ranked).
Google them to find the websites. If you can't find it by just Googling the name, try Googling the name and "comic" or "webcomic".
Gaming/Joke A Day
Penny Arcade
Ctrl-Alt-Del
Sore Thumbs
God Mode
VG Cats
Plot-Driven
User Friendly
Something Positive
MegaTokyo
Dominic Deegan: Oracle for Hire
Least I Could Do
Friendly Hostility
Questionable Content
PvP
Order of the Stick
College Roomies From Hell
Nukees
Girl Genius Online Comics
Buck Godot Online Comics
Misfile
El Goonish Shive
Joke A Day
Subtype 1: Nerdy
xkcd
Decorum
Comedity 2.0
PHD Comics
Geebas on Parade
Suptype 2: Weird Humour
Sinfest
Cyanide and Happiness
White Ninja
Never Updates
I don't recommend any of these comics.
Anarchronism
16 October 2007
13 October 2007
potatoes
Don't be an anarchist. No, really. You shouldn't ever decide to break whatever rules you want to do whatever you want. Don't get me wrong, I'm having a great time. But I don't want you to do the same thing.
You can probably figure out why. Although I usually don't act very anarchy-ish, if I do break a rule of society here or there, it's safer for me if no-one else is an anarchist. That way if I annoy someone, they're more likely to ignore it. So please, don't ever let it become a world without rules, and I can go on breaking whichever ones I feel like.
Not that I actually break all that many, come to think of it. Occasionally I'll cut in line or something, but for the most part I'll appear to adhere to the rules as much as anyone else. The difference is, I don't follow rules because they're rules. I follow them either because they make sense to me, so I would do it whether there's a rule or not, or because someone with power over me is enforcing the rule. Of course, I suppose you could argue that everyone does that, so I'm not really an anarchist after all. Personally, I don't know who is in the majority, those who follow rules because they are rules, or those who follow rules for the reasons outlined above.
At the very least I think the idea that anarchists break every rule possible just because they are rules is stupid. I consider myself an anarchist because if I think a rule is pointless and if I can get away with breaking it, I will. That doesn't mean I have to run every red light I come to, just because it's against the law.
Ohh, oh, I've got it! Another way to repeat essentially what I just said. Isn't that exciting? Anyway, I consider an anarchist not to be someone who breaks rules, but simply someone who makes their own rules. If those rules happen to coincide with society's at large, fine. But if they don't, then an anarchist will follow their own rule, breaking whichever of societies that means. So when I cut in line, I'm following my rule which goes "I hate waiting in lines, so do whatever it takes to minimize the time spent waiting in a line".
And now for my customarily abrupt.
Anarchronism
You can probably figure out why. Although I usually don't act very anarchy-ish, if I do break a rule of society here or there, it's safer for me if no-one else is an anarchist. That way if I annoy someone, they're more likely to ignore it. So please, don't ever let it become a world without rules, and I can go on breaking whichever ones I feel like.
Not that I actually break all that many, come to think of it. Occasionally I'll cut in line or something, but for the most part I'll appear to adhere to the rules as much as anyone else. The difference is, I don't follow rules because they're rules. I follow them either because they make sense to me, so I would do it whether there's a rule or not, or because someone with power over me is enforcing the rule. Of course, I suppose you could argue that everyone does that, so I'm not really an anarchist after all. Personally, I don't know who is in the majority, those who follow rules because they are rules, or those who follow rules for the reasons outlined above.
At the very least I think the idea that anarchists break every rule possible just because they are rules is stupid. I consider myself an anarchist because if I think a rule is pointless and if I can get away with breaking it, I will. That doesn't mean I have to run every red light I come to, just because it's against the law.
Ohh, oh, I've got it! Another way to repeat essentially what I just said. Isn't that exciting? Anyway, I consider an anarchist not to be someone who breaks rules, but simply someone who makes their own rules. If those rules happen to coincide with society's at large, fine. But if they don't, then an anarchist will follow their own rule, breaking whichever of societies that means. So when I cut in line, I'm following my rule which goes "I hate waiting in lines, so do whatever it takes to minimize the time spent waiting in a line".
And now for my customarily abrupt.
Anarchronism
11 October 2007
The Daily Rant
Hey all. Guess what my rant is about. Hey, what do you know. You're either right or wrong. Or somewhere in between. Anyway, my rant is about rants. Original, eh? Probably not.
So this is my problem with rants: they're pointless. It's just someone airing their opinion about some (usually inconsequential) topic. It's absolutely pointless. Some people may say "Well, rants are useful because they can show people what's wrong with the world so it can be changed". And you might say "Hey, that's a sweet hypothesis you got there". Wrong. The only people a rant convinces are those who already believed what the rant is saying. If anyone ever points you to some rant in a blog or newspaper or anywhere and says they make some good points, none of their opinions were changed in the slightest by that rant. They just already thought the same way.
Conversely, anyone who reads a rant and doesn't believe what it has to say going in, will definitely not believe it coming out. About the only thing that will change is they will think the author of the rant is an idiot. People don't change their opinions for many things, and a rant written by a semi-anonymous faceless internet person is not one of them.
Another reason rants are useless, as well as annoying, is that they're boring. Once again, about the only people interested enough to finish reading a rant are those who already believe it, and a lot of the time even those don't bother. Face it ranters, no one cares. No one freaking cares what you think of the decorator who used too much orange in you bathroom.
And I know that, this being a rant, I'm something of a hypocrite. But I don't really care, because I doubt anyone will read this anyway, and those that do may find the intentional irony amusing. But, this being a rant, and fairly far into one, I could probably goat random words into my dongle and no one will masturbate.
I also realize that if anyone actually reads this, it will sway their opinions on how useful rants are by about as much as the points matter. I just enjoy pointless exercises in futility. (Believe it or not, that previous sentence isn't necessarily redundant.)
Well, it's about time to be hittin' the old dusty trail...
Anarchronism
So this is my problem with rants: they're pointless. It's just someone airing their opinion about some (usually inconsequential) topic. It's absolutely pointless. Some people may say "Well, rants are useful because they can show people what's wrong with the world so it can be changed". And you might say "Hey, that's a sweet hypothesis you got there". Wrong. The only people a rant convinces are those who already believed what the rant is saying. If anyone ever points you to some rant in a blog or newspaper or anywhere and says they make some good points, none of their opinions were changed in the slightest by that rant. They just already thought the same way.
Conversely, anyone who reads a rant and doesn't believe what it has to say going in, will definitely not believe it coming out. About the only thing that will change is they will think the author of the rant is an idiot. People don't change their opinions for many things, and a rant written by a semi-anonymous faceless internet person is not one of them.
Another reason rants are useless, as well as annoying, is that they're boring. Once again, about the only people interested enough to finish reading a rant are those who already believe it, and a lot of the time even those don't bother. Face it ranters, no one cares. No one freaking cares what you think of the decorator who used too much orange in you bathroom.
And I know that, this being a rant, I'm something of a hypocrite. But I don't really care, because I doubt anyone will read this anyway, and those that do may find the intentional irony amusing. But, this being a rant, and fairly far into one, I could probably goat random words into my dongle and no one will masturbate.
I also realize that if anyone actually reads this, it will sway their opinions on how useful rants are by about as much as the points matter. I just enjoy pointless exercises in futility. (Believe it or not, that previous sentence isn't necessarily redundant.)
Well, it's about time to be hittin' the old dusty trail...
Anarchronism
09 October 2007
Just so you know...
I've started a blog. I have no idea why. I seem to recall a solemn vow, involving a lot of pigs blood and such, that I would never stoop so low. I guess that just goes to show how trustworthy I am. Ah well. Just so whoever cares (read: nobody) knows, this is just me rambling about whatever I want to ramble about. I know it's completely public, and I don't care who or what reads this. However, I like uncertainty in some aspects of life, so I don't want anyone to post comments for this, if they would. I want to never know if anyone but me is reading this blog.
Knowing the internet, somebody who reads this is going to take that as a challenge and post a ton of comments. Or even just one. Let me tell that person, if they collapse the waveform of my blog anonymity, I will stop posting forever.
Well, probably not. We all know how trustworthy I am about things that don't matter. At the very least, I will cease to post for however the hell long I feel like. In all likelihood this situation will never come to pass, and if I stop posting it will most likely be because I'm too damn lazy to keep up a blog.
But anyways, I have this weird fantasy of somehow getting a ton of devoted readers who eagerly await my next post. It would be the logical next step in taking over the world. (Step one, get out of bed).
So yeah, letting you know I've started a blog, and managing to ramble incoherently for several paragraphs while doing so. Am I awesome or what?
Anarchronism
Knowing the internet, somebody who reads this is going to take that as a challenge and post a ton of comments. Or even just one. Let me tell that person, if they collapse the waveform of my blog anonymity, I will stop posting forever.
Well, probably not. We all know how trustworthy I am about things that don't matter. At the very least, I will cease to post for however the hell long I feel like. In all likelihood this situation will never come to pass, and if I stop posting it will most likely be because I'm too damn lazy to keep up a blog.
But anyways, I have this weird fantasy of somehow getting a ton of devoted readers who eagerly await my next post. It would be the logical next step in taking over the world. (Step one, get out of bed).
So yeah, letting you know I've started a blog, and managing to ramble incoherently for several paragraphs while doing so. Am I awesome or what?
Anarchronism
08 October 2007
1st post
You know what the worst part of keeping my mouth shut is? Nobody thanks me for it. My friends go out and buy me a cake for my birthday. Guess what? I don't like cake. Obviously those that ever knew about it forgot, and it's not anyone's fault. It just sucks that I smiled, thanked them for it (and I really was grateful, I didn't really expect them to do anything, it was cool that they care that much about me) and even forced most of a slice down. All the while carefully avoiding letting them know that pie is, well, 3.14...^(lim x->0+ (1/x)) times better than cake. Luckily I managed to avoid being given the leftovers. The problem is, nobody was able to appreciate the silence I kept so that they wouldn't feel bad about getting me a cake that I don't like.
Yeah, I know, I'm not supposed to do these things for others' approval. And I don't, not really. If I didn't actually care about not hurting their feelings, I would have told them I don't like cake. But it's stupid to say that knowing I did the right thing should be enough. The point is, most of the good deeds we do are defined by a distinct lack of bad deeds. But those good deeds never go rewarded properly, because to inform the recipient of them will effectively negate the ...effect. Also, I hate it when my vocabulary fails me.
Sometimes I wish I'd never made friends. Or at least only the "sort of" friends I used to have, people I really just hung around with because the alternatives were boring. But now staying at home, doing hermit-like things, isn't enough. I've become a people-junkie. I need some sort of interaction every now and then. But when I do, I feel fake. I don't have enough practice, and I can't tell if my friends actually think I'm funny, smart, or whatever I'm being at the moment, or if they merely tolerate my idiosyncrasies. Or idiocracies, it doesn't really matter which. I can't tell which is better, being the centre of attention, or quietly observing from the sidelines, so I alternate between the two. With one, I feel like a jackass, with the other, I'm too much of a loner, and my need for a fix isn't satisfied.
hunh. This pouring out my thoughts and feelings to potentially everyone on Earth wasn't as soothing as I'd been led to believe. I guess I'll have to go off myself after all.
Anarchronism
Yeah, I know, I'm not supposed to do these things for others' approval. And I don't, not really. If I didn't actually care about not hurting their feelings, I would have told them I don't like cake. But it's stupid to say that knowing I did the right thing should be enough. The point is, most of the good deeds we do are defined by a distinct lack of bad deeds. But those good deeds never go rewarded properly, because to inform the recipient of them will effectively negate the ...effect. Also, I hate it when my vocabulary fails me.
Sometimes I wish I'd never made friends. Or at least only the "sort of" friends I used to have, people I really just hung around with because the alternatives were boring. But now staying at home, doing hermit-like things, isn't enough. I've become a people-junkie. I need some sort of interaction every now and then. But when I do, I feel fake. I don't have enough practice, and I can't tell if my friends actually think I'm funny, smart, or whatever I'm being at the moment, or if they merely tolerate my idiosyncrasies. Or idiocracies, it doesn't really matter which. I can't tell which is better, being the centre of attention, or quietly observing from the sidelines, so I alternate between the two. With one, I feel like a jackass, with the other, I'm too much of a loner, and my need for a fix isn't satisfied.
hunh. This pouring out my thoughts and feelings to potentially everyone on Earth wasn't as soothing as I'd been led to believe. I guess I'll have to go off myself after all.
Anarchronism
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
