Which do you prefer with trilogies?

[andrewburt]

So, which do you prefer for trilogies, three separate books or all in one?

We're publishing a very long three-part science fiction book; it's 250,000 words long (compared to your common SF novel at about 80-100,000 words). It naturally falls into three books, based on time, but the main characters progress through all three and it's one unified, epic story. We're releasing it both in ebook form and in print.

Which excites you more as a reader, reading something like that all at once? Or do you enjoy it more when it's in three books, with three covers, getting excited to wait for the continuation and conclusion? (And if so, how long between releases?)

[Rich_D]

I prefer all at once. Terry Brooks now breaks most of his novels up into trilogies and it drives me nuts.

[LuvReadin]

All at once, otherwise I end up having to reread the previous ones to set the scene again. From a marketing point of view, there's an opportunity for a price reduction if you have all three together. I would prefer a collection of three separate books to one massive book, though.

[jgaiser]

If I know I'm going to read them all, I prefer one book.

[Asawi]

Unless the first one is free standing I would not start reading it until I knew for sure that the series would actually be completed.
So even though I may not read them all at once I want them all to be published before I start!

[murraypaul]

All at once.
If the entire book is ready to go now, it doesn't benefit me as a reader for you to delay the release of the second and third portions.
Plus, realistically, you would charge more for three separate small books that you would for one large one.

[Yapyap]

Separate books, although it's good if they're all available at once.

Ideally, there would be a choice for the reader/buyer between an "omnibus" version (possibly a little cheaper than the separate volumes) as well as separate volumes. That way, those who don't want to risk a time/money investment of buying a very long unknown book can buy & read it one volume at a time, while others could get the omnibus.

I admit that eReader era has made it a little less of an issue, but as a rule, I don't really pick up very thick/long books by unknown authors or unless they're part of a series I'm already into - they seem too intimidating. Although even with a Kindle, I keep postponing starting books that have the little line of dots (indicating relative length) going all the way to the other side of the screen, and just keep picking shorter ones instead...

[HarryT]

Definitely all at once.

[David Munch]

Real books: Divided. Easier to hold the books, and its a psychological thing that I can see how far I have until the end. And I like book covers.
eBooks: One big file. Much easier.

[andrewburt]

Originally Posted by Asawi

Unless the first one is free standing I would not start reading it until I knew for sure that the series would actually be completed.
So even though I may not read them all at once I want them all to be published before I start!

Very valid point. All three are in hand, so I'm thinking that -if- we release them as three separate volumes, we'll do so very close together, like a week or two apart. I agree, I hate it when volume 1 and 2 comes out and the publisher never releases vol.3. With a famous author you know he'll get the volumes published, but otherwise, yeah, it's understandable. (In this case the author is Henry Gee, who if you read the science magazine Nature you might recognize as a senior editor and the guy who runs the Nature Futures science fiction series. So he's not a total unknown, but he's not best known as an SF writer.)

So, good point, and for purposes of the question, let's assume they're all released within a short time period even if released separately.

[DuskyRose]

All at once. I don't read any book that I know is going to be a trilogy until it's all out in print.

There's one book in print I've been checking up on at Amazon, that sounds good, but I won't bother with it because of the complaints that it 'just stops' and ends in a cliffhanger. I don't do cliffhangers anymore. To disappointing when no followup ever comes.

[DuskyRose]

Originally Posted by andrewburt

So, good point, and for purposes of the question, let's assume they're all released within a short time period even if released separately.

I'll repeat what someone else wrote....

Physical books, easier to hold separately.
Ebooks, one file is prefered, but I can do separate just as easily. If the covers are kick-ass, that'd be a bonus. (I do like a good cover!)

As long as I knew they were coming out together, or what the date between them is, I'd be good. I just wouldn't start them until I had them all in hand.

Separate books. I rarely spend large sums of money on novels, so separate volumes is the only way to circumvent sticker shock.

[frostschutz]

I have a GRR Martin 4 book bundle which is just way too long to handle. With the Kindle app on the Android phone it's possible to "scroll by accident", and wham I'm suddenly in a different book entirely, and the longer the book is the longer it takes to find the place where I'm actually supposed to be at. Also the "table of contents" list grows so longer and is hard to navigate on many readers. And in general readers handle small files better than large ones.

So I prefer separated books, if it'd be too long otherwise - bundled short stories are okay.

[Suzanna]

Marketing wise, I think it would be a good idea to release them separately and then release an omnibus/bundle afterwards. You'll then have four releases instead of one. From what I've read from self-published authors who've done this, the omnibus edition doesn't actually cannibalize sales of the individual stories. Both will sell and you'll maximize your visibility.