Alan Moore's entire career is built on it. However, there is a difference in that he has a willingness to carry the story forward and continue character development. He never lacks the ability to tell what happens next in a character's life, whether it be Superman, Swamp Thing, Marvelman, or Jekyll and Hyde.
In many ways, harping on the use of serial characters from our childhoods is like criticizing Homer for his use of Ulysses et al. It is the use made of these pillars of our culture (ie Superman) that is important. That said, Moore's extended runs on "minor", non-pillar/non-iconic characters (Swampy, Chester, Constantine, and Abby) are the most rewarding and memorable to me. (I haven't read enough of his ABC line to see if this is still true.) His one-off ventures into Superman/Batman territory, while instantly accessible (because he can use lots of shorthand/we all know everything about Superman/Batman/Green Lantern) and often filled with mini-epiphanies, are less rewarding than a fully-realized dramatic reality, with ties to a larger multiverse. I suspect that this aspect of U.S. serial adventure/superhero comics is the major draw for most of contemporary fandom (1963-now) --as opposed to the off-sited escapist/power-fantasy model-- but it is also a style of storytelling that made things like Terry and the Pirates, Steve Canyon, Buz Sawyer, Gasoline Alley, Orphan Annie, Thimble Theatre, etc huge hits in their day (and also why I enjoy long comics like Love and Rockets and am starting to enjoy some manga series).