Self explanatory. I want some recommendations to some webcomics to read.

http://www.poppy-opossum.com
http://www.sabrina-online.com (Yes, it's updating) (borderline NSFW)
http://www.vgcats.com (Likewise)
http://www.goblinscomic.org
http://themonsterunderthebed.net (NSFW)
http://thepunchlineismachismo.com
http://oglaf.com (NSFW)
http://www.nerfnow.com
http://darklegacycomics.com (World of Warcraft webcomic)
http://uberquest.katbox.net

The top 5 I truly suggest reading.

https://tapas.io/series/Erma
https://tapas.io/series/thegamercat

I don't know if you'd count these as webcomics or not, but I'll include them nonetheless. Erma is another one I'd suggest.

*edit* I completely forgot about http://www.sandraandwoo.com. It's also pretty good.

Old thread with some more links: forum #208661

The Out-of-Placers comic by Valsalia is my favorite webcomic, though to be fair I'm definitely biased towards the themes of the story to begin with.

i still keep up with some on http://www.mgcomics.com/ though it seems like Akumath's main comic has all but died over the past several months as updates have slowed to where i often wonder if the comic has been abandoned or not. How MG Works still gets occasional updates but now Double-U Tea F seems to be updated the most.

kinda sad to see akumath's comic dwindle to such an incredibly slow update rate as his has been around since 2001 and the current page is 2170.

Double-U Tea F is more story driven so i can see it having a somewhat slow update pattern. as for another comic there, Ghosts of the future, that one isn't a sprite comic so it's understandable for it to be slow to update too. large fully colored, drawn pages probably take a good while to finish on top of it being story driven.

huh, looks like there's a few new comic there now. The Takedown, Aware, and woah! Marmion Grenado is a gif comic! you don't see that kind very often (and despite the name, it's full english).

My current favorite is 'A Tale of Two Rulers' by FigmentForms on Tumblr. It's a Zelda comic with an original story starring versions of characters that were seen in Hyrule Warriors: http://figmentforms.tumblr.com/post/139806271367/

Also, Prequel is always good for a laugh. http://www.prequeladventure.com/

Better Late Than Never

DMFA (The first bits aren't good but the rest is great. Sort of evolves from a joke Furcadia comic to an original setting with characters beyond "this is my gimmick").

Bittersweet Candy Bowl (This one you'll either love or hate. Volume 1 is a lot different from the rest, and a lot of the drama revolves around deconstructing common character archtypes as well as characters changing over time as reality hits like a train. Can't really say much more without spoiling it.)

8 bit theatre (ended, but a classic. Creator of the nine year Brick Joke)

Out-of-Placers
DNA
Endtown
Cheap Thrills which unfortunately ended prematurely, but still a good read.

Exterminatus Now

• Supernatural parody
• Sonic-style characters and artwork
• NSFW humor and art
• Started in 2003
• Inactive as of 2015

Jack

• Supernatural myth and tragedy
• Furry characters
• Loosely based on Christian mythology
• Over 2,000 pages long
• Warning: breaches dark and depressing topics

Lackadaisy

• Anthro cats in the 1920s during Prohibition

Crimson Flag

• Anthro foxes with magic, woo!
• Plays with slight racism, but it's downplayed
• Started in 2008, still active

https://xkcd.com/
http://www.smbc-comics.com/

hm.. currently i dont read really any webcomic besides this:
http://www.piercemecomic.com/

UnusualParadox said:
Exterminatus Now

• Supernatural parody
• Sonic-style characters and artwork
• NSFW humor and art
• Started in 2003
• Inactive as of 2015

wow, i haven't read much of that one in years but i know it is or was a good one. probably never read through all of it before though.

Lackadaisy

• Anthro cats in the 1920s during Prohibition

really liked this one for the art style and just overall it's good but is it still active and being updated?

jinkies, you're all leading OP into a rabbit hole.

http://badwebcomicswiki.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Sabrina_Online
http://badwebcomicswiki.shoutwiki.com/wiki/VG_Cats
http://badwebcomicswiki.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Goblins
http://badwebcomicswiki.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Sandra_and_Woo
http://badwebcomicswiki.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Bittersweet_Candy_Bowl
http://badwebcomicswiki.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Exterminatus_Now
http://badwebcomicswiki.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Jack
http://badwebcomicswiki.shoutwiki.com/wiki/XKCD

(for what it's worth I used to read Original Life, the Jay Naylor comic, which is all one needs to know about it)

what happened to the classics like Achewood and Sinfest? Subnormality and Sweet Bro and Hella Jeff? heck, if you want furry comics just look at Ozzy and Millie. or perhaps Poly Wags if you want an obscure not-so-serious polyamorous thing. you can rest assured all these, even in spite of their awkward starts and sharp decline in quality towards the end, are good webcomics, because they are recommended by me.

please do not read Homestuck. this is your only warning.

fewrahuxo said:
jinkies, you're all leading OP into a rabbit hole.

http://badwebcomicswiki.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Sabrina_Online
http://badwebcomicswiki.shoutwiki.com/wiki/VG_Cats
http://badwebcomicswiki.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Goblins
http://badwebcomicswiki.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Sandra_and_Woo
http://badwebcomicswiki.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Bittersweet_Candy_Bowl
http://badwebcomicswiki.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Exterminatus_Now
http://badwebcomicswiki.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Jack
http://badwebcomicswiki.shoutwiki.com/wiki/XKCD

I don't think anyone should trust wikis for judgement calls... is this site serious? Like, just reading your first link about Sabrina Online, and it all looks like an affront to criticism on a professional manner.

So, seriously: is the author of that site trying to list what makes these comics bad, or is it in a parodic fashion that I (and others) "just wouldn't understand"?

Siral_Exan said:
I don't think anyone should trust wikis for judgement calls... is this site serious? Like, just reading your first link about Sabrina Online, and it all looks like an affront to criticism on a professional manner.

there are multiple authors of this particular wiki, and all reviews are required to go through a consensus screening on the forums to discern whether a comic is of poor enough quality to warrant a review. it's not professional, at least in the traditional sense, but at the very least it contains more candid information on the comics in question (including author biographies and their ethics in relation to the comics) than you what you would find on any "professional" site.

i agree the quality varies wildly from review to review, and i wouldn't trust it for any actual opinions, but having any comic listed on there is a ballpark indicator that a small group of Internet comics nerds didn't like it, and the reviews themselves point out major flaws in art and storytelling without providing anything particularly insightful. at least it's better than a personal blog.

fewrahuxo said:
there are multiple authors of this particular wiki, and all reviews are required to go through a consensus screening on the forums to discern whether a comic is of poor enough quality to warrant a review. it's not professional, at least in the traditional sense, but at the very least it contains more candid information on the comics in question (including author biographies and their ethics in relation to the comics) than you what you would find on any "professional" site.

i agree the quality varies wildly from review to review, and i wouldn't trust it for any actual opinions, but having any comic listed on there is a ballpark indicator that a small group of Internet comics nerds didn't like it, and the reviews themselves point out major flaws in art and storytelling without providing anything particularly insightful. at least it's better than a personal blog.

Y'see, there is already a problem with "multiple authors". When any individual is given the ability to remain anonymous and, therefore, suffer no consequence, regardless of their initial intentions their actions will become malevolent. This, specifically, is a similar instance to the invisibility ring dilemma: these anonymous users are allowed to commit "murder" and get away with it. The comic, in this case, is being unjustifiably criticized.

This is furthered by a screening: Who, capitalized because it's probably one individual at a time, is the reviewer, and who is suggesting the review? As I said before, the fact that either of these are effectively anonymous aught to destroy any validity. This also means that any webcomic listed there may have been listed for shits and/or giggles. No points given for effort, I could do the same and be called out for slander...

But I am not going to say that they are intentionally doing anything wrong. And they can provide good points, citations, and insight... but I am saying that these are not what I'd suggest. A professional reviewer is far too sparse of a resource, but that doesn't justify the existence or utilization of a site that feigns it.

All in all, I wouldn't suggest anyone to use that site. You can do so, but I sincerely hope that anyone reading it acknowledges that and chooses to read the comic themselves so they can infer the quality of the comic. But... no one is ever that wise.

Siral_Exan said:
[...]

you know, you're allowed to agree with me. but only once, or else i would lose my magic.

fewrahuxo said:
you know, you're allowed to agree with me. but only once, or else i would lose my magic.

Go on?

XKCD, Dinosaur Comics, Oglaf, Digger.

Don't have much time to read webcomics these days. I prefer print comics, since webcomics almost always run out of steam long before they end.

Siral_Exan said:
Go on?

you see, i made this deal with a wizard once, that i would always have the most objectively correct opinions and be able to wow everybody with my brilliant insight on all imaginable topics, but at the cost of being an eternally misunderstood basement dweller whose brilliance is lost on deaf ears. while i take great satisfaction in being 100% correct on any subject that i choose to talk about without any self-awareness or acknowledgement of my massive character flaws that i don't work on, i am forever cursed to only ever be the most intelligent person in any conversation, because by definition i am the only person whose opinions matter.

but i'm glad that i met that wizard, for now i will never have to justify myself to anybody on this pornography website, because i know that i am always correct on everything, and nobody can prove me otherwise. or maybe it was with Satan, i don't know.

seriously, though. a comic isn't automatically bad because it's on the Bad Webcomics Wiki, it just has a higher chance of having particular flaws that better webcomics don't. so long as the review contains accurate facts and doesn't veer into a soapbox on the part of the anonymous authors, then what does it matter who wrote the review? i would be amazed if any wiki writer was so talented as to allow for a fan following.

Bad Webcomics Wiki is very critical, but the reviews should give you enough info to make a judgment yourself, although there could be spoilers. Like fewrahuxo said, webcomics don't usually get listed there unless they have some problems or a lot of haters.

XKCD is interesting in that it has fervent supporters and detractors.

Oglaf is a 100% must read.

fewrahuxo said:
you see, i made this deal with a wizard once, that i would always have the most objectively correct opinions and be able to wow everybody with my brilliant insight on all imaginable topics, but at the cost of being an eternally misunderstood basement dweller whose brilliance is lost on deaf ears. while i take great satisfaction in being 100% correct on any subject that i choose to talk about without any self-awareness or acknowledgement of my massive character flaws that i don't work on, i am forever cursed to only ever be the most intelligent person in any conversation, because by definition i am the only person whose opinions matter.

but i'm glad that i met that wizard, for now i will never have to justify myself to anybody on this pornography website, because i know that i am always correct on everything, and nobody can prove me otherwise. or maybe it was with Satan, i don't know.

seriously, though. a comic isn't automatically bad because it's on the Bad Webcomics Wiki, it just has a higher chance of having particular flaws that better webcomics don't. so long as the review contains accurate facts and doesn't veer into a soapbox on the part of the anonymous authors, then what does it matter who wrote the review? i would be amazed if any wiki writer was so talented as to allow for a fan following.

It's crass as fuck. Allow me to give you an example: I am a vindictive asshole whom holds a grudge against PurpleKecleon. With what you have provided me, there is nothing stopping me from acting on such false justice and getting Floraverse, a comic I have not thoroughly read, in a bad spotlight through this site.

This is the problem when you are allowed to remain anonymous: a user then stumbles apon the site, which does contain valid flaws (in reality too, incoherent story is absolutely true), and reads the article. They judge the comic and the artist as bad, not knowing that my vindication was at least a reason why it's on that site. Since vindication would be part of the reason why the article exist, its value should decrease... except that they can't actually know, due to the fact that I acted anonymously and someone else ultimately spoke on my behest.

Ditching my example, this is why the site is bad. In argument, any reason could get the comic under a harsh spotlight, reviewed by a person only showing the bad in the comic, and inevitably cause the comic to lose value due to either new readers or borderline readers seeing the article (the latter rarely occurs, though).

If they really wanted to make a review of a comic, they have to ditch the current format in favor of a multi-review system. By having users individually write their own reviews, it immediately dissuades or devalues reviews that only say "it sucks". Furthermore, this could encourage users to give personal experiences that have value. Particularly with simple summaries that they (the reviewer) elaborates.

Siral_Exan said:
It's crass as fuck. Allow me to give you an example: I am a vindictive asshole whom holds a grudge against PurpleKecleon. With what you have provided me, there is nothing stopping me from acting on such false justice and getting Floraverse, a comic I have not thoroughly read, in a bad spotlight through this site.

too late.

given your unusually strong opinions on the matter, i suggest you develop your own wiki and attempt to dethrone the world's leading authority on bad webcomics. given its many tangible flaws and reputation amongst some unsavory peoples, you'll have an easy time of it.

but remember arguing against someone rarely makes them change their opinion, especially when one has been blessed by a wizard.

I read the BadWebcomicsWiki, and I think perhaps someone should create a BadWikiWiki and place that as the starring example.

The entire premise of the wiki is fractally wrong -- there is a pattern of badness to the idea such that no matter what scale you examine the wiki on, it equally bad.

fewrahuxo said:
too late.

given your unusually strong opinions on the matter, i suggest you develop your own wiki and attempt to dethrone the world's leading authority on bad webcomics. given its many tangible flaws and reputation amongst some unsavory peoples, you'll have an easy time of it.

but remember arguing against someone rarely makes them change their opinion, especially when one has been blessed by a wizard.

I would if I could, but I can't since it'd be like arguing against the professor in their own class. Even if they're wrong, they have the masses and excuses to say that they're right...

But I am going to advise the OP, and everyone else reading, to not use that site. You will get better results if you just read it yourself (except for HomeStuck), and you have greater odds of getting good results if you just ask around.

Siral_Exan said:
But I am going to advise the OP, and everyone else reading, to not use that site. You will get better results if you just read it yourself (except for HomeStuck), and you have greater odds of getting good results if you just ask around.

i'm glad we can all agree not to read Homestuck.

A summary of this thread.

Now get back on topic.

fewrahuxo said:
jinkies, you're all leading OP into a rabbit hole.

http://badwebcomicswiki.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Sabrina_Online
http://badwebcomicswiki.shoutwiki.com/wiki/VG_Cats
http://badwebcomicswiki.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Goblins
http://badwebcomicswiki.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Sandra_and_Woo
http://badwebcomicswiki.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Bittersweet_Candy_Bowl
http://badwebcomicswiki.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Exterminatus_Now
http://badwebcomicswiki.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Jack
http://badwebcomicswiki.shoutwiki.com/wiki/XKCD

(for what it's worth I used to read Original Life, the Jay Naylor comic, which is all one needs to know about it)

what happened to the classics like Achewood and Sinfest? Subnormality and Sweet Bro and Hella Jeff? heck, if you want furry comics just look at Ozzy and Millie. or perhaps Poly Wags if you want an obscure not-so-serious polyamorous thing. you can rest assured all these, even in spite of their awkward starts and sharp decline in quality towards the end, are good webcomics, because they are recommended by me.

please do not read Homestuck. this is your only warning.

i am not trusting a site like that when it has comics i know are good in its coverage. Sandra and Woo, VGCats, and Exterminatus Now are not bad comics.

Clawdragons said:
I read the BadWebcomicsWiki, and I think perhaps someone should create a BadWikiWiki and place that as the starring example.

The entire premise of the wiki is fractally wrong -- there is a pattern of badness to the idea such that no matter what scale you examine the wiki on, it equally bad.

if only forum posts could be up voted...

Ratte said:
A summary of this thread.

Now get back on topic.

sorry, didn't see that till after my last edit.

Don't think Poppy can be considered a webcomic anymore since they recently went all prose-with-pictures instead of comic format. Still a good read though.

only read a few pages of a few. do yourself a favour and notice how garbage 99.9% of webcomics are before trying to search too hard.

gamercat is great. dragon's burn follows many over-used archetypes but is phenomenally well done. i also remember reading a few pages of a decent anthro one covering and satirizing a couple's life but can't recall the name.

due to the anthros and popularity i gave twokinds a few page read. like all critiquing and ranking companies i'd suggest not touching it without a hazmat suit unless you want to risk second-hand autism. same thing with homestuck but due to the terrible fandom and art i honestly didn't give it more than a minute before closing the page. can't personally rate that one at all, though it looks bad imo

TheHuskyK9 said:
Better Late Than Never

No! None of that! Shame on you!

Also how about that Victory Fire comic being posted? That's something. But if we're going for something offsite? Sinfest. Easily.

But in all seriousness, I like shane_frost's comics. They're good reads imo

The Slashers Comic is the only online one that I've ever read. You'll dig it if you're a horror film buff.

TheHuskyK9 said:
But in all seriousness, I like shane_frost's comics. They're good reads imo

Shane Frost was the only webcomic artist that made me care about robots. a good day for old me.

fewrahuxo said:
Shane Frost was the only webcomic artist that made me care about robots. a good day for old me.

Ah. Machine. I love it. I heard it has a sequel.

http://www.prequeladventure.com/

A story about a magical cat person that gets in trouble and sucks at life. (Pretty SFW)
Best experienced on a computer. Set aside a few days before you start reading.
Good story, good humor.

A bit late, but here's my list:

http://twokinds.keenspot.com/comic/ (obvious)
http://www.housepetscomic.com (also obvious)
http://www.sdamned.com (a bit under the radar comparatively, but still obvious)

http://uberquest.katbox.net
Skidd's comic. Decent so far.

https://www.anaria.net
New, the updates are few and far, but the writing is spot on so far and the art is amazing. I never see anyone talking about it so I really wanted to share it.

http://fanboys-online.com
Non furry. Funny and targeted towards gamers, sadly inactive as of 2015.

http://thisis.delvecomic.com/NewWP/
Fun and smutty read, 8/10 IGN.

Nekoama is a beast at what he does, I read every one of his Pokémon comics, because they’re so awesome! :D