Hamstard

[privatepepper]

It exists, and is more convincing than 2/3 of real webcomics that the authors abandoned!

http://www.hamstard.com/

I think we should try to get Hamstard on the topwebcomics.com top 100 list. Who's with me?

[dragonus45]

hmmm, i wonder if there are any nuggets of wisdom or eater eggs to be found chillin in the site. It could be viral.

[Dave Rapp]

Call me a blasphemer, but I never found Hamstard to be all that funny.

[Secret]

When I first started reading Erfworld I looked up Hamstard and went through the site and I have never seen any hints or easter eggs or anything like that....
Also I have to agree with Dave Rapp, it's really not that good.(though a couple of them are ok)

[SteveMB]

Call me a blasphemer, but I never found Hamstard to be all that funny.

Er, I think that's sort of the point -- cranking out a lame webcomic is part of what Parson's life is like.

[Xewleer]

Call me a blasphemer, but I never found Hamstard to be all that funny.

+1 The top 100 would be wasted on it.

Only read the first 20-odd. (unless I miscounted, which is an extreme possibility) If it's something that's supposed to make me laugh and it doesn't, not even once, I just don't read it. Not worth the time.

[Infidel]

Call me a blasphemer, but I never found Hamstard to be all that funny.

One of them made me laugh.

[balder]

Yeah Hamstard was intentionally terrible. I think there are 21 strips in the archives, and I wrote the whole lot of them in 90 minutes. Considering how hard it is to make a good webcomic, it's depressingly easy to make a bad one.

[Eiphel]

I always got the impression it was meant to suck. I can see it backfiring somewhat if others didn't.

[HandofShadows]

On occation you can make something a little funny by accident. Most of the time it's because the other person POV is a bit different.

[Wiseguy]

Yeah Hamstard was intentionally terrible. I think there are 21 strips in the archives, and I wrote the whole lot of them in 90 minutes. Considering how hard it is to make a good webcomic, it's depressingly easy to make a bad one.

Well congrats, it was so boring it was funny

[Bobby Archer]

Yeah Hamstard was intentionally terrible. I think there are 21 strips in the archives, and I wrote the whole lot of them in 90 minutes. Considering how hard it is to make a good webcomic, it's depressingly easy to make a bad one.

It does take a particular kind of talent, though, to make something that's so bad, it's funny.

[CecilThoreau]

When I first read Erfworld, I also checked the site, and I wasn't sure whether or not it was like a previous attempt at a webcomic. But then I found hints in the dates and such, and I realized that the quality difference was so great that it had to be a joke. I'm ashamed to have thought otherwise.

[depricated]

Ya, when I first saw Hamstard I thought it was actually funny because it was so bad.

Kind of like Rocky Horror, or Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. It was so ridiculously over-the-top and pointless that it was funny.

Umm, like unintentional deadpan I think. Or maybe intentional.

[DevilDan]

Kind of like Rocky Horror, or Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. It was so ridiculously over-the-top and pointless that it was funny.

Reading the book helps you understand "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas" on other levels.

[Tommy]

Yeah Hamstard was intentionally terrible. I think there are 21 strips in the archives, and I wrote the whole lot of them in 90 minutes. Considering how hard it is to make a good webcomic, it's depressingly easy to make a bad one.

It's a pretty damn great attempt at an awful webcomic though.

I'll concur with the others that have said they never took it to be a serious attempt at humour. I always got the impression that a deliberately awful webcomic fit Parson's personality perfectly.

[imgran]

Hamstard shoutout in Sluggy today!