OnlineBookClub.org

What do you prefer book series or standalone books ?

I prefer standalone books.

I prefer a series. A trilogy is perfect. For a mystery, typically a stand-alone is fine because what I really enjoy about those is solving it. But with sci-fy/fantasy I love when the author takes the time to write a really developed story. Which is hard to do in 350 pages.

As a kid I devoured series books, but now not so much. Actually, I'm so put off by series and the self-perceived pressure to continue on with the following books, that if I learn that it is from a series I just won't read that book.

I like standalone books more. I just don't get too much time for a series.

I prefer standalone. I’m not into series, be it books or movies

It depends. If there is a strong central character I really like, then a whole growing series with them can be addictive in a special way (though sometimes you have to suspend disbelief with regard to their age - Reg Wexford was solving crimes until he was well over 100 if you took it too literally!). Yes, children DO have a fascination with series - and as I know from my own experience with the 'Chalet School' series, even as adults you can obsessively chase up some of the titles you missed! I was interested to read that the psychological crime writer Minette Walters has always eschewed the idea of a serial character though readers have begged her otherwise. And Conan Doyle ended up loathing Sherlock Holmes but still had to bring him back to life!

I prefer series. It mostly comes down to the characters for me. If I really enjoy the characters, then I want to read more about them. I love well developed worlds or mythos, societal structures or inventions that seem plausible, or just descriptions of everyday life, as long as you have interesting characters to populate them. I found the world of Eragon fascinating, yet I haven't been able to finish the series because the characters were just not interesting enough to compel me to read more.

I think what I like most about a series is that you get to see the characters change and grow, hopefully, and the situations they are in also change. I loved the Percy Jackson series for both Percy and Annabeth, but I struggled with the Heroes of Olympus series because I didn't really like most of the new characters. I kept at it because I wanted to see what happened with Percy and Annabeth.

As a kid, it was always about reading more and more, so I needed a series to function. If I read a standalone, it was for class, so it inevitably wasn't as good.

Now that I'm older, I've really started liking books that are short enough to read between all of the other stuff I'm busy with. I feel like a standalone is often better at being a story about a singular meaning. I still like to read a series, but I feel like it's harder to find a series that really fits together well as a whole.

It depends on the style. If it's a murder mystery, it really doesn't matter if it's part of a series. I just want to know who died and how the killer is busted. The fact that there may be a central cop or something in all of them doesn't matter, as past cases rarely come into play and each can be read in any order as if it were stand alone. If it's character driven, I prefer a series so the world and characters can develop properly without feeling forced. Then reading them out of order bothers me, even if each has a distinct plot not necessarily dependent on previous novels.

I love books in general. Standalone books are nice so that you don't get bored of a genre or a writers style. Series are good if you grow attached to the characters but going back and forth between stand alone books and a series can make you forget what was going on.

Its really just dependent on your mood/ interest.

I always look for standalone books when I'm looking for a new book. There have been lots of times when I read a book and then discover it's a part of a series. With a series I feel like I'm committed to reading all of the books in that series.

I like a series. If the series is good, I have something to look forward to after the first book. If it's not good, I look at it like it was a standalone and feel no obligation to stay on the series.

I prefer a series.
It does depend on the type of book though. But the type of books I like are YA dystopian which tend to work best as a series.

It depends on the book, the theme and the scale. A series requires some commitment from the reader, who must get seriously involved with the first installment for him to read a second or a third one. There are some stories that need to be told in a long and extended way, which can require more than one book. There are others that, given its brevity and its finale (whether it's an open or a closed one), benefit from employing a single delivery.

I like both. It really just depends on my mood. If I want a quick read, I go for a stand-alone book. Sometimes I feel like a long adventuren so I will grab a series.