XKCD

[Kraft]

I think that was more for the rollover texts sake.

[ravenzomg]

I’m afraid the “joke” is really that simple. But you just made me go check xkcd, which is something I actually like less than xkcd. Thanks a lot *mutter mutter*

your avatar just completely made the tone of that post for me, i hope you're happy =D

[BRPXQZME]

I try.

(oh Lord, I try / to carry on; [second verse; second refrain; rock out real hard])

[DRAVIL AGFAHY]

I like the statistics work the best, like today's or Internet maps.
sometimes the jokes, yeah, aren't funny, and Munroe fluffs up the punchline which really makes it worse.

[Softspoken]

I actually really liked today's, because the alt-text completely changed the mood for me in an instant.

[Sleaw]

Alt text does not a good comic make.

I hear that one a lot - if the comic itself wasn't funny or interesting, but the alt text was, then the comic is good. If the comic itself was funny, and the alt text adds nothing, then the alt text is a bonus and the comic is good. That just means that for every comic, there's a double chance if it being 'good' - alternatively, Randall could write five alt texts for every comic and the odds of them being gems would be much higher! It's a very skewed way of thinking. If you don't want to fall in that trap, you need to be consistent - if you didn't like it until the alt text, then the comic itself wasn't good, and if you want to take the alt text along in judging the comic then you should always do so, and then you'll have a lot of boring, irrelevant post-punchline dialog over the course of xkcd (more than there already is, I mean).

[Softspoken]

Or maybe I could just enjoy a webcomic. : )

[Sleaw]

Oh, by all means. I just saw an opportunity to complain. Carry on.

[Kazerad]

Alt text does not a good comic make.

I hear that one a lot - if the comic itself wasn't funny or interesting, but the alt text was, then the comic is good. If the comic itself was funny, and the alt text adds nothing, then the alt text is a bonus and the comic is good. That just means that for every comic, there's a double chance if it being 'good' - alternatively, Randall could write five alt texts for every comic and the odds of them being gems would be much higher! It's a very skewed way of thinking. If you don't want to fall in that trap, you need to be consistent - if you didn't like it until the alt text, then the comic itself wasn't good, and if you want to take the alt text along in judging the comic then you should always do so, and then you'll have a lot of boring, irrelevant post-punchline dialog over the course of xkcd (more than there already is, I mean).

If the result is something funny, does it really matter where the humor is?

Maybe it's just my inner Scott McCloud talking, but I don't see anything wrong with stowing a punchline away in mouseover text. Or even having multiple punchlines to increase the chances of a "hit". Other than tradition, there is little practical reason a comic needs to have a single punchline located in the final visual panel.

[unbridledExüberance]

Alt text does not a good comic make.

I'd actually have to argue that. True, it does not make a good comic by the strictest definition of the word 'comic', but it does make a good comic-caption combo. Close enough.

[BRPXQZME]

I for one agree with what Sleaw said. I do not begrudge so much the use of a title or alt text to have another shot at a punchline. I do begrudge it if it is the only one (if/when it should have been been in the comic proper in the first place—after all, “the main thing is...”). I don’t particularly like it, but it’s better than the usual situation with newspaper strips where a cartoonist must often have several in store and ask others which one fits, then throw some perfectly good ones away—but you see, that’s what makes it a job. Yes, there are a few with a direct line to God who then tells them without them having to ask someone else, but for each of those, there’s 99 who only think they do.

The accessibility issues* and waiting half a second to see things,** however... that I do take issue with. SMBC’s instant mouseovers are much better, as much as I don’t really care for that comic; you even get another panel of art out of it, really.

Hm, I think I lost direction in what I was sayin’. Anyway, yeah, it’s poor conveyance.

* Accessibility is serious business.
** Making people wait for a static medium is an interface FU if there ever was one.

[crypticMushroom]

I'll admit there was a time for a while where I thought it had jumped the shark but some of the more recent comics are cool. I thought the "Umwelt" comic just changed with your window size to mess with people but

show spoiler

hide spoiler

I recently looked at it with Chrome instead of Firefox and my brain exploded. Then I tried Explorer and laughed my ass off.

And I like the giant charts, he states they aren't perfectly accurate every time but they are interesting. The ocean depth chart is coolest if you save the bottom right corner for last.

[The Dr.]

On the subject of alt-text - I think it shouldn't be the ultimate dependent on which the comic is funny or not. I think just the comic in itself should be humorous, with the alt-text adding a little bit of bonus funny to it. For instance, Zach Weiner of Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal often has funny little bonus tidbits at the bottom (if you mouse over the red button) but the comic it supports is equally funny. I think all comic makers should remember that a comic should be funny independently, not relying on anything else to have humor.

[Isoraqathedh]

Well, connectives,mjuxtaposition and the Electric Field Creation are an art.

Explosions aren't funny.

Injuries aren't funny.

Explosive injuries, well…

[crypticMushroom]

First, not all of the comics depend on the alt text to be funny. http://xkcd.com/1026/
Second, I think his overuse of alt-texts was a joke to begin with, as they would have appeared to only those who knew to look for them...

[Sleaw]

No offense, but 'they don't all do this' is not a really strong argument... Also, I thought that comic wasn't fun to begin with anyway, but then, I feel that about most xkcd's these days.

[Roundy210]

I don't understand today's comic at all.

Normally I like XKCD but...

how is this supposed to be funny?

[Sleaw]

It's a parody. There are a lot of comparisons between different political figures that go like this, only usually they're subtle, so you have to really think what quote is from who and often you'll be surprised to find out they said certain things. Today's comic mocks this practice by making the difference overly obvious.

In other words, the point of this comic is 'popular media are stupid, I can't believe I'm the only one seeing this'.

[Dentrala]

As much as I hate exaggerated farce of xkcd's mindset, I'm afraid for this strip Sleaw is pretty spot-on.

[weirdguy]

overall the message is somewhat heavy handed and not really that clever

compare to the smbc book of "illusions"

[Kíeros]

Okay, so is anyone going to use these approximations? I like the P/E Rest Ratio; We don't get it on the formula sheet and 6π⁵ is easy and accurate enough for me, so I may start using it soon.

[Dentrala]

The one for avagadro's is pretty clever, but they're deliberately overcomplicated.


In other news, today's, although on a more serious note, was pretty alright, and although somewhat exaggerated, probably fairly accurate to a lot of people in his situation. I mean, just having Firefly cancel like that? Without warning? It's a tough thing to cope with, but it always passes with time.

[Izzus]

I think XKCD is largely hit or miss.

[Crystamanthequin]

I actually like XKCD every now and then. I can hope for a good laugh every time a comic comes out at least, most of the other people that I know seem to have mixed feelings about the comic though.

[eruditeColossus]

This comic is incredibly relevant to Homestucks. Mostly because of our own cast member who did this.