Michael Breakfield on Marvel's Return to Legacy Numbering").
You are making what appears to be a common mistake. The fact that Marvel is including the non-Hulk issues of Tales to Astonish (for example) is not a mistake. The premise is, what if Marvel had never renumbered their classic series? So, if in 1999 Marvel had not cancelled the classic Incredible Hulk at #474 (which includes Tales to Astonish #1-58 but does not include Hulk #1-6), then the next issue would have been #475, and so on. So then whatever number we are at today would still include Tales to Astonish #1-58 but not include Hulk #1-6. So it's not negligence, they are just working from where things were in the 1990's and going forward from there. Also, in case people are wondering, if they had decided to do a "-1" or a "0" issue along the way, those would still be "-1" or "0" for the larger series and therefore would not count towards the numbering. This is all about "how issues are numbered", not "how many issues there have been."
The opinions expressed in this Talk Back are solely those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the editorial staff of ICv2.com.
'Making… a common mistake'
Posted by ICv2 on August 16, 2017 @ 4:53 am CT
MORE TALK BACK
'Readership of US comics continues to decline…'
June 20, 2018
Dave Elliott of Atomeka saw Rob Salkowitz’s column on the middlebrow comics glut, and directed our attention to his post (originally on DeviantArt), with his outline for improved publishing programs at the Big Two comic publishers.
'Who is DC saying 'F*** You' to?'
April 11, 2018
Peter DeFelice of Pyramid Comics and Cards questions the meaning behind the cover to the new MAD Magazine #1.