Why does it seem that Batman has far and away more "great read" comics than any other character...

Why does it seem that Batman has far and away more "great read" comics than any other character? Like there are dozens of "top 50 Batman stories" lists online, where most other comic character cap out at maybe 10 at most.

That's mostly just due to DC marketing the books as graphic novels. Most characters have great stories but aren't sold as individual stories, they're just part of a longer run and not as accessible to casuals who just want a single story and that's it.

Batman has an ungodly amount of stuff written, and people tend to forget the shit. I'll bet you can find a lot of top 50 worst batman lists as well.

There are just more Batman stories. No one else even comes close except maybe Superman

Yeah but 90% of Superman's reading list is just origin stories. Batman lucked out by having his first post-crisis origin be considered one of the greatest comics of all time. Otherwise I bet you'd have every writer under the sun try to take a swing at it, just like Wonder Woman and Superman.

It's cyclical

He's a popular character soooooo:
>Batman has appeared in the most DC stuff
>has gotten the most attention on teams
>gets the most solos
>gets the most elseworlds
>gets the most extra minis
>gets the best writers
>etc
People will automatically make lists of best stories with Batman, then people read them, so more lists get made and people read those, and...

All this feeds into his popularity and keeps him popular, which makes it so he gets more things.

Compare to say Flash, who, all together, have a number of nameable stories on one hand. However they (mostly Wally) have had a high number of good runs. Wally was at least readable for like 200 issues until they ruined it with Flash Rebirth. But that's not very listable.
You can tell DC realized this about Wonder Woman so they gave her a bunch of shit before and around her movie: WWEO, True Amazon, Sensation Comics, WW '77, Legend of Wonder Woman, Odyssey mini

So why don't you see something comparable from Marvel's Batman, Spider-Man?

Marvel isn't focused on things like that. They focus on floppies and events. They rarely have any interest in making profound graphic novels.

Spiderman Blue is about as close as you'll get.

Slott's gonna be on the title until he dies. At least Morrison and Snyder had the decency to move to another Bat title. Slott being on the main title will ensure it's never good again.
The minis he gets are usually the same old same old. He's the same Peter, who fits the same villains, who has the same side characters, it's in 616, etc. Sometimes it's still good and sometimes the experiments are bad, like that Spidey story that's literally just DKR.

Batman can be and do literally everything and DC is comfortable with that. Batman 66 and ASBAR are totally different Batmans. It took Renew Your Vows selling enough for marvel to give that its own little corner because you know they're seething about him not being single, childless, and being dependent on Aunt May or whatever in that. And you know Peter being Tony Stark wasn't gonna last for forever.

>until he dies
I can arrange that

>Batman 66 and ASBAR are totally different Batmans
True, but there's definitely a primary "type" of Batman that's most popular, and even within that there are dozens of really popular stories.

Well one character had to be the most popular. It turned out to be Batman.

>Yeah but 90% of Superman's reading list is just origin stories

Now you're just exaggerating

Well, do it

as a character he has a lot more simple traits which both define him and instigate/escalate conflicts. it takes less effort to write a great story with that many tools just handed to you, and once enough 'iconic' stories have been penned its in turn much easier to write a story subverting the way others have written about him.
furthermore these good stories feed into themself by strengthening the Batman brand and making him more appealing to writers who want to strengthen their own reputation

Marvel focuses on continuity and runs, not on stand alone graphic novels or stories

The best way I've heard it put is DC makes timeless classics, Marvel makes good period pieces representing when the comic was released.

>Marvel focuses on continuity

>good period pieces
>good

Eeeeeh...

I always felt like Marvel is better when it's not trying to preach hamfisted morals about whatever is going on.

Fantasy adventures and fun are better than "my opinion is right" thinkpieces by nerds.
At least to me.

a) Spider-Man isn't batman
b) You do.

Spider-Man doesn't have nearly the number of recommended stories as Batman does.

The first 10 years of ASM consist of one great story after another.

They were definitely better than most comics at the time, but let's not get ahead of ourselves. Lee's words words words style of writing detracted a lot from Ditko's art, which while good, was held back by the techincal limitations of the time.

...

I didn't know Morrison browsed Sup Forums

Also that one user's comparisons between the DC characters and Biblical ones make no sense.