The comic characters are badly written and poorly developed. In the comic, the only character who is even remotely likable is Andrea - and even she is badly written as a Mary Sue. The character development in the show has been far superior to the comics. They are more realistic and fleshed out so they are more complex and interesting than their comic counterparts. That's not to say that there have not been mistakes made with character development in the show, but in comparison to the comic, the show characters have been vastly superior.
You can't just say something like "the characters are badly written and developed" and "they are more realistic and fleshed out." Use examples. Explain why. Your entire post is just broad claims with nothing to back them up. They're completely meaningless platitudes.
I'll explain why I think the comic characters are better. The show brings its "character development" out of nowhere. Carol in S2 was weak and always crying. Suddenly she becomes a badass at the beginning of the next season and at the beginning of the NEXT season, she's a serial killer. Rick's development has been all over the place and I firmly believe that he's one of the worst written television characters on a major drama that I've ever seen. He never grows as a character, just alternates between Point A and Point B (being peaceful and overly nihilistic). Hell, half of the characters in the show don't have any personality beyond grunts and angst
Do I even need to bring up Lori and Andrea? Or Carl, the second most important character in the series who doesn't even feel like he exists anymore? Or Morgan, who also got "character development" out of nowhere that just doesn't make sense?
The show just juggles the same question every season. Should we retain our humanity or survive? What's better. It's pathetic middle-school writing. I'm not saying that that question shouldn't have ever been brought up but we're in the sixth goddamn season and that's the only thing the show bothers to ask because it can't think of anything else to pass off as "deep writing"
That ties into the villainous characters as well. Kirkman sucks at creating believable, complex villains. In the comic, the governor and Negan are ridiculous, laughable, cartoon parodies. The governor is little more than Kirkman's version of Snidely Whiplash while Negan is an overgrown, hyperactive child. Neither were even remotely sinister or threatening in the comic because they were too ridiculous and laughable. The hunters and the scavengers were just pathetic and neither presented any legitimate threat. The hunters were given the most ridiculous story - turning to cannibalism in spite of there being plenty of resources available simply because they were too lazy to learn how to hunt or fish and too weak and cowardly to scavenge. The scavengers were taken out in seconds and were never any real threat at all.
The Governor was cartoonish but he was hardly meant to be deep. He was a threat and he worked effectively as one. He killed half of the main cast and traumatized those remaining. His impact in the comic can still be felt unlike Morrissey who everyone instantly forgot about it once he died. Hell, he wasn't even complex or believable. Many people say the two Governor episodes are the worst in Season 4 by far because they're focusing on a very uninteresting character
I disagree with you on Negan but I don't know if you've read any of the recent arcs
The Termites were a complete joke in the show and I can't believe you're even bringing up the scavengers as an example considering they had like five lines of dialogue and were killed immediately. The point of the scavengers were how the CHARACTERS reacted to them--Rick, Carl, and Abe. Five lines of dialogue in this case is better than focusing the back half of the season on "claimers" when they're just completely outlandish and their only purpose to the plot to be killed. Hell, the purpose of almost any character in the show wasn't in the comics is just to die. That is frankly shit writing
And I also completely disagree about the plot arcs. Every plot arc in the show is there to kill time until the characters move onto a new season. Look at a show like Breaking Bad and how something as small as Skyler's relationship with Ted eventually feeds into the plot in a huge way. Look at TWD in which half a season was wasted on a disease in the prison. What did that contribute to besides Carol's weird serial killing habits being revealed? Hell, what did the Governor contribute to the show? You know, the biggest villain they've had yet? What about the hospital people? The termites? Every plot arc just turns into us vs. them and every group that Rick meets ends up dying. The show is like a record that's just looping over and over. Nothing's changing besides the scenery
A perfect example is the Alexandria arc in the show. The point in the comics was to show how effectively Rick's group can affect the people. Rick gets over his regrets of the past and actually steps up as a leader (something that is way less effective in the show since Rick steps up and steps down as a leader all the fucking time. Rick accepting himself as the leader in this situation was built up over many volumes). In the show, it's just all the Alexandrians getting killed. Why care about them? They're redshirts! You see, they haven't been in the outside world and are useless so they're going to die. But Rick's group is survival-hardened and not useless! They can survive! How the fuck is that even a message? It's incredibly cynical
Everything in the show is just painfully predictable and it's just a fucking chore to watch. It's so clear that Glenn's going to get killed at the end of the season and then people will be praising the show saying "Wow, we got mad at the writers saying they didn't have the balls to kill off Glenn but they just made this more unexpected!!!!! Incredible writing!" In reality, it's shit, shit writing and no different from Mazarra killing off T-Dog to make Lori's death more shocking (except in this case we wasted several episodes on the mystery of Glenn and severely hurt the show's credibility with this survival)
Imagine a group of a hundred motorcycles driving down a freeway. Eventually, they hit a junction. One road goes northwest and the other goes northeast. So one guy, we'll call him S, says, "Let's go northwest!" A mile past the intersection, a semi careens into the group and kills ninety of them. Ten are wounded, but they survive and keep going. Eventually, they hit 10,000 miles. S suddenly has his consciousness thrown into his past body right before the junction. Now, he says, "Let's go northeast!" All 100 bikers survive. Happily ever after, right? But what about the ten, no nine, who went northwest and survived? What happens to the reality they were living? Does it just disappear now that S has changed the past? It's not like only bad things happened on that 10,000 mile journey. Maybe one of them fell in love with a gas station attendant and got her pregnant or maybe one adopted a homeless kid that joined the adventure. That 10,000 mile journey would be full of stories. Romances, farewells, friendships...the loss of those ninety lives is horrible and unfortunate, but what would rewriting their history mean? The nine who survived lived full lives and did the best they could with the hand they were dealt. How could it be right to just erase all that? Isn't that worth something? Is there a point to a world where everything is happy? Are people who struggle for a better life just idiots? Being human is about fighting even when it seems hopeless and finding happiness in a world that hates it. Are you saying that's worthless?