Art or a good story. what is your preference.

[Tarantino]

I've been reading comics for as long as I can remember, and I usually visit Forbidden Planet on a fortnightly basis. Whenever I'm browsing and looking for a new title to read, for me it's all about the artwork, I hardly even consider the story.

I'm not saying the story is irrelevant to me, there are certain genres that I prefer and also certain characters and as long as the artwork is to my liking I'll usually buy it.

I think, what it all boils down to, is that great art can make up for a poor story, but a great story can't make up for poor artwork and I wouldn't even consider buying a comic just for the story but I would just for the artwork.

Am I being a heathen? Or, like me, do most readers think that as comics are primarily a visual medium it's all about the art?

Tarantino

[IndigoPrime]

I think I'd split it further: art, storytelling and script. If the middle one of those isn't working, nothing can save a comic. But art or script can be a bit duff and the result still be OK. I'd sooner go for shaky art and a great script IF the storytelling is still solid (i.e. I can tell what's happening). However, I've read plenty of comics with a theoretically great script and similarly supposedly great art, but it's been a pain to tell what's going on, and that alone scuppers things.

[Dunk!]

Art.

I read, and I mean "read" in the broadest term, a lot of crap with pretty pictures, like anything Ed McGuinness draws for Marvel, whilst avoiding works others deem great due to art I can't get my head around, From Hell for example.

I am an art whore.

Dunk!

[SIP]

I have collected many awful comics on the strength of the artwork alone.....so put me down for "art" as well. Good art would make me read a bad comic strip and bad art would stop me reading potentially good ones.

[Link Prime]

It's the writer for me.
I know what I like at this stage, and can guess what the general quality of a comic will be based on the writers name alone.

So I'll pick up Unfollow cause Rob Williams is writing it, or Providence & Cinema Purgatorio based on the fact Alan Moore is writing them.
I've been reading Batman on a monthly basis since 2010- but that's been following one writer (Scott Snyder) as he's moved to three different Batman titles.

There are always exceptions of course, and also artists that I find have strong enough appeal to turn your head regardless (Francavilla, Corben, Simonson to name a few).

Fortunately, as a 2000AD fan, I'm guaranteed excellent comics to some degree on a weekly basis.

[Magnetica]

It's got to be both IMHO.

Poor art can drag a good story down.

Not sure great art can rescue a poor story. A boring story well drawn isn't engaging, it's just a few pretty pictures and for me that isn't enough to sustain interest.

[Greg M.]

It's the writer for me.

Likewise. I'll buy a comic because it's written by a specific writer - it's very rare I'll buy one solely because of the artist. (Eric Powell or Mike Mignola are two of the exceptions - obviously both are writer/artists, but Mignola used to draw for Marvel, say, and Powell still occasionally draws stories written by others.)

[Fungus]

Art. But it's 75/25.
Deadly Class is vying for my new fave comic, and I didn't pick it up for years based on art. Despite getting Remender's other titles. It was just too... amateurish, fiddly, uninspiring.
And yet the combination of script and art has completely won me over. Enjoy the art now.

See also From Hell. That did spring to mind too.

So, 75/25.

[Tarantino]

I used to be of that mind that art is like porn, who cares about the story? I suppose I do care about the story and when you get a Dredd story like America, amazing art and a fantastic story, that's what comics are all about for me. But it really will have to remain all about the artist in the long run, some of my favourites are Brian Bolland, George Perez, Carlos Esquerra, Neal Adams, Simon Fraser and Simon Bisley to name but a few.

Tarantino

[radiator]

I'm an artist, but when I buy comics, I follow writers, not artists. So long as the art is competent, fine. If the art is good or even great, that's a bonus.

[M.I.K.]

I find the idea that somebody wouldn't consider the story when buying comics, really, really weird. The art is undoubtedly what first grabs folk's attention, but if there's no substance behind it, I don't stick around.

The only time art ruins a comic for me, is when it's so bad I can't tell what the hell's going on at points when I should be able to.

[Spikes]

Mmmm, its gotta be story hasn't it? That's the foundation everything else is built upon. Owt else is a bonus.

Take the Light and Darkness War. Quality art by Cam Kennedy, but I'll probably never pick it up again, because the story isn't much cop.

[WhizzBang]

The story for me, but if the art is really bad that can sap my will to continue with the strip.

[Colin YNWA]

Yeah its a combined thing not a one or the other but I definately go more for the story over art. I can read a good story with bad art far more often than a bad story just to see the art... in fact I don't really read anything just for the art anymore.

Mind part of good art is how well it carries the story so even there its muddy!

[maryanddavid]

Leaning towards the story side, but, for example Camelot 3000 is worth reading for the art alone as is The Trigan Empire.