The Bad Webcomic Wiki

They've threatened to put my comic on it for years and never did it. Fuck them I could use that free advertisement.

>>93987388

>How often are they wrong?
They hate Menage a 3 which I know it's far from a masterpiece, but really?, if they reviewed anime they would hate the whole genre 'cause the fanservice and nudity in every show also they included Gisele Lagace into their Hall of Fame of Bad Webcomics.

Sometimes it seems the reviews are an excuse to roast people they simply don't like, since they go out of the way in the reviews to mention in detail how awful human beings the authors of the web-comics are, and in my opinion reviews of art should separate the art from the persons behind them, it's like if somebody reviewed a Mel Gibson movie and gave it a negative review because of the racist rants that happened a decade ago, or a gave bad score to a recent Polanski movie because he raped a teenager. and fled to France like the coward he is.

>>93987708
>Menage a 3
But that comic is legit bad, after main character guy lost his virginity the whole comic went down hill. You can enjoy the lewdness of it but the comic is bad. Hell of all the characters in that story I think the only non-bisexuals are the land lord and crazy guy in his apartment from what I remember. Its not bad because fan service it's bad because it has little to no direction and the big problem at the start of the comic was resolved and nothing important has happened after it

They hate for the sake of hating. Some of the comics may deserve it to be there. But there are a lot of average or even good comics there that the reviewer just hates because the artist didn't draw a free commission for him or other stupid reasons.

>>93987388
I can't think of a single comic on there that doesn't deserve it. If there are any, they're an incredibly small minority.

Many reviews, however, either exaggerate certain elements that aren't important to why the comics suck, understate the comic's issues, or just plain miss why the comics are terrible at all. Every entry deserves its hate, but the reviews themselves aren't consistent.

>>93987699
That's because you're a goddamn attentionwhore who doesn't deserve recognition. Go back to spamming your comic here instead, you piss.

>>93987929
>even good
Name one. I dare you.

>>93987929
t. author whose comic was reviewed by them

>>93987983
Hey now. I'm not dewd. I'm don't link my comic on 4chan.

>>93987388
They have their moments but like any site dedicated to hating a certain thing they eventually become just as stupid and obsessive as the things they're mocking.

>>93988111
>Complains about not having free advertising
>Not "dewd" enough to post on a literal free advertising site