I'll be honest with you, /co/. I originally came here for the animation, but you people are slowly getting me into comics.
That said, is Gotham Central worth a read? I've always loved stories that focus on ordinary people that in-universe aren't that important (think redshirts from Star Trek) instead of the major in-universe heroes, so the concept makes it sound like it'd be right up my alley.
>>91706570
If you like police procedurals and the Batman universe then yes.
>>91706570
Absolutely, yeah. It's some great stuff.
>>91706570
It's very well done. It's a bit nihilistic for my tastes, but if you have to have nihilism in your Batman, this is the way to do it.
>>91706570
It's fucking awesome.
Go read it.
>>91706570
Not really, it's super overrated, not thoroughly researched and the characters can get annoying at times.
Yes it's pretty good throughout
Check out Hitman from DC if you want the pinnacle of ordinary people that aren't important
I loved it, and like you say you seem to be a good fit for the concept.
>>91706570
Just read the first issue and decide for yourself.
>>91706570
Yeah, is pretty good.
Plus you can use it as an in to 52.
>>91707394
>>91707419
OP here, just read the first issue. Seems pretty dope. I was worried that since I'm new to comics that Gotham Central wouldn't be that great to start with, but I'm apparently familiar enough with the Batman mythos that I'm keeping up fine.
>>91706570
>I originally came here for the animation, but you people are slowly getting me into comics.
Another one has given in. When will the degeneracy stop?
>>91707775
Alright, faggot, the cartoon side of /co/ created bronies, I don't think you have any room to talk.
>>91707817
And they were rightfully quarantined. Comicfags still haven't been, unfortunately.
>>91706570
If you decide to read it, read afterwards Crisis Aftermath: Spectre mini for closure.
>>91707394
All you need to know is Gordon bullock and a handful of batman villains who have all appeared in a movie before. It's really easy to read without any prior knowledge
>>91706921
How do you mean not researched?
Did OP die because I'm enjoying the storytime
>>91714456
I think the guy who posted the first issue was just a random anon giving a sample