|
|
Post by K'Sennia Visitor on Oct 21, 2018 20:14:05 GMT
yabookers.wordpress.com/2018/02/02/discussion-series-vs-standalones/ According to this one reader blog, some readers actually prefer standalones because they forget about the author in between books, or they don't always like the sequel, or they feel that a lot of authors drag series out beyond the natural ending point for money. They also tend to feel bad about forgetting about an author or dropping a series when they really liked the first book. And a wish for more authors to write duologies and companion series is expressed.
|
|
|
|
Post by kateelizabeth on Oct 21, 2018 20:25:45 GMT
I prefer reading standalones, and I certainly prefer writing them. However, since my most of my sweet stuff takes place within the same county, I set up a loosely based series. Then I bundled them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jeff Tanyard on Oct 21, 2018 23:30:39 GMT
Books-in-series are where the money is made. I feel for those readers who prefer standalones, but the financial incentives for authors are what they are. *shrug*
|
|
|
|
Post by prolificwriter on Oct 22, 2018 5:27:19 GMT
The genres I write in, the readers definitely prefer series. They’re always asking about the next book! Plus, it’s easier to advertise a series. You can do a free promo on the first book and make your money back (and more!) from the sales of the rest of the series. I’ve noticed that some indies are doing well with standalone thrillers, so I guess that’s one of the genres where a series is not a must.
|
|
|
|
Post by K'Sennia Visitor on Oct 22, 2018 7:01:45 GMT
Yeah, I think series will almost always do better than standalones. Just like cliffhangers do well even though everyone complains about them. It's nice for those who prefer to write standalone though to know that in certain genres at least they could be satisfying a certain fanbase.  Most of my ideas end up in TUOK, so it's difficult for me to have a serious idea that isn't part of a series. But I'm extreme like that. I guess the biggest issues with writing series are: 1. going on too long after everyone is bored 2. too long a wait in between books makes readers forget about you 3. if the author doesn't bundle, it costs the reader a lot more money - but that's a plus for the author.  4. Changing characters so much that readers no longer care about them 5 Ruining what was once a really good story by experimenting too much and going too far I like for a series to have a specific beginning, middle, and end. And then if you wish to continue in that universe, interconnected series, prequel series, etc, can be written. But then sometimes a series can continue on quite contentedly for a long time with no one getting bored, so it depends on a lot of different variables, like anything else. |
|
|
|
Post by dormouse on Oct 22, 2018 10:44:06 GMT
How many Nobel prizes have been won by series writers?
I've not looked through the list, but the only one I can think of off the top of my head is Galsworthy. Maybe Kipling and Buck.
|
|
|
|
Post by writeway on Oct 26, 2018 5:24:32 GMT
I don't know where that myth comes from that series always do better than standalones. I write both and many of my standalones do very, very well. I am sure many authors do well with them or they would not be writing them. Maybe it depends on the genre or whatever but there are many readers who enjoy standalones. For example, busy folks like me who don't have time to get into a series. My reading for fiction is limited these days anyway but when I do read a book I want to just read it and be done with the story. Have my experience and move on. I used to read series but often times I got tired if the story ran too long. I wasn't as busy with my own work then as I am now and I don't have time to dedicate to a series because I am the type who will lose interest if I don't read the installments close together.
That "standalone doesn't sell" thing came from those so-called self-publishing experts back in the early 2000s who think everyone has to do the same thing in order for something to work. These are the same people who tell you to release a book every week and only write to market. Nope. Sure some standalones don't sell but you can say the same for a series too. Some authors write nothing but standalones and do very well. Some authors have 10 or more series (because they listened ot people) and none of them are selling. If you got a bunch of series that don't sell, what good is that?
It depends but I don't agree that standalones don't sell. They might not sell for some authors but that is not the case for all of us. That's my issue with a lot of the self-publishing advice, people speak as if someone's experience (good or bad) is universal. Nope.
Also, I'm not calling out anyone on the thread, just talking in general because this myth has always bothered me. Anything and everything can sell. It's just like people say shorts don't sell. Really? I do well with them and I sell them on all retailers for a 2.99. I write works of all lengths. We must remember there are different readers out there looking for different things.
|
|
|
|
Post by writeway on Oct 26, 2018 5:41:52 GMT
Some books do better as standalones. I feel like you should not force everything to be a series if it's not meant to be. I write what I want. I let the story speak to me and whatever it ends up being, I go with that. I don't set out to write a series. No. If the book calls for it to turn into a series, I turn it into one. But other than that, the muse dictates. I have no complaints.  Oh and if we say that series is the only way for a writer to make money, that means anyone who writes a series is doing well? That's definitely not the case. If series sell so much better than standalones how come you got so many series that don't sell? My point is, standalone or series, nothing guarantees a sale. I've seen some authors who write nothing but series because they think it's the fast track to Moneyville and most times they end up sitting there with 11 or more series behind them that aren't even selling. No matter what you write, people better want to read it. Being a series is no guarantee. People rely on the, "Well if they read the first book they will continue." Really? No. Not if the first book wasn't good or didn't hold them. I have stopped reading series in the middle of a series like book 4 or 5. A reader is not going to sit through a series just because they read the first few books if those books aren't good. So in that case, if no one buys the rest of your series, is that any different than writing a standalone? |
|
|
|
Post by writeway on Oct 26, 2018 5:46:53 GMT
Books-in-series are where the money is made. I feel for those readers who prefer standalones, but the financial incentives for authors are what they are. *shrug*
Don't feel sorry for me. There are more than enough books out here for me to read and then some. Trust me, as someone who enjoys standalones, there is no way near a shortage of them. |
|
|
|
Post by K'Sennia Visitor on Oct 26, 2018 6:40:26 GMT
There are advantages to both serials and standalones. It's great to only have to pay once and get the whole story. You don't have to rely on your memory to keep up with everything. You don't have to worry about the author destroying the awesome world and characters they built because they went too far. You can get a perfect ending and then move on. While serials are great if the story demands it because you can get a much deeper and longer story, and collecting things is fun, and authors can sometimes make more money. It's a great point though that writing a series does not guarantee yachts-filled-with-cash. A writer is under a lot more pressure to keep up the quality and perhaps up the ante with each volume. And I know many writers had to write several series before one finally caught on. So nope, definitely not a guarantee of anything. Just preference and what the story dictates. Like writeway said, not every story demands a series. Some stories would probably be ruined if they were stretched out unnaturally into a trilogy, or longer. |
|
|
|
Post by corabuhlert on Oct 27, 2018 3:53:53 GMT
I write both series and standalone and my top three all-time bestselling titles are all standalones. As writeway said, some standalones can do very well indeed and some series just don't sell. I have a few of those. And while I do write new stories for them, when I have a good idea, I adjust my expectations accordingly. |
|
|
|
Post by possiblyderanged on Oct 28, 2018 21:50:12 GMT
Books-in-series are where the money is made. I feel for those readers who prefer standalones, but the financial incentives for authors are what they are. *shrug*
Don't feel sorry for me, I'm finding plenty of standalone books to read, to the loss of those who only write serials.
People are always saying to write only series, but I'm also seeing them talk about diminishing returns on the following books. So, what does a series gain them, if the sales drop off? And I'm seeing ridiculous things, like a "series" which consist of a dozen or so short stories ten pages long, or 70 page books that when you look at them are just one book split up into three or five parts. All because only series sell.
Well, in the end, it doesn't matter. People should do what is best for them. That's pretty much the only real "rule" for this writing business (outside of writing stories people want to read).
|
|
