New
Mar 22, 2009 10:21 PM
#401
dxthegreat said: Sin said: Neverender said: Torisunanohokori said: Wishy said: So what? You gave a 9 to Azumanga Daioh and an 8 to Lucky Star, keep saying that you gave few 10, but to be honest you haven't watched many things that really deserve a 10. Yeah. Let's bring up unrelated ratings in a childish attempt at character assassination. CODE GEASS IS A MASTERPIECE It really is. It succeeds beautifully at the most important aspect of anime in general: entertainment. In any case it's MUCH more of a masterpiece than RahXephon (which you gave a 10) hahahahahaha. entertainment is derived from all the other aspects of an anime. Saying an anime is awesome by claiming "it's got an ok story, sound, animation, characters, but what's most important is that it is entertaining" is pure bullshit. Entertainment is derived from what you enjoy. I honestly don't know anyone that wasn't hooked on Code Geass as it was airing. It was something you always wanted more of. And, when ever did I say that Code Geass had what an "ok" story, sound, animation, and characters? I'm saying it obviously had whatever was necessary in order to hook viewers like crack, and THAT'S what matters. |
All the mods fucking blow on this website except Kaiserpingvin, Cloudy-Sky, Baman and aero. PM me if you're actually good and I left you out. Oh, rule 8... ( ̄ー ̄) |
Mar 23, 2009 12:21 AM
#402
Sin said: Entertainment is derived from what you enjoy. I honestly don't know anyone that wasn't hooked on Code Geass as it was airing. It was something you always wanted more of. And, when ever did I say that Code Geass had what an "ok" story, sound, animation, and characters? I'm saying it obviously had whatever was necessary in order to hook viewers like crack, and THAT'S what matters. Then I'll be the first, i didnt care at all about CG during the second season. All elements have to work well together to be entertaining. Even if you say that its in the eye of the viewer, the basics of what makes it enjoyable (entertaining) while watching are the elements of story, sound, animation, and characters... And CG was clearly lacking in both story and characters dramatically by the second season which made it un-enjoyable. |
KetuekigamiMar 23, 2009 12:25 AM
Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
Mar 23, 2009 12:43 AM
#403
Sin said: dxthegreat said: Sin said: Neverender said: Torisunanohokori said: Wishy said: So what? You gave a 9 to Azumanga Daioh and an 8 to Lucky Star, keep saying that you gave few 10, but to be honest you haven't watched many things that really deserve a 10. Yeah. Let's bring up unrelated ratings in a childish attempt at character assassination. CODE GEASS IS A MASTERPIECE It really is. It succeeds beautifully at the most important aspect of anime in general: entertainment. In any case it's MUCH more of a masterpiece than RahXephon (which you gave a 10) hahahahahaha. I can't believe you picked RahXephon when I gave Kanon and Haruhi 10s. |
Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
Mar 23, 2009 1:14 AM
#404
Mar 23, 2009 2:29 AM
#405
lawl, lemme repeat myself: entertainment is derived from all the other parts of an anime. Therefore, saying it's good just because of "entertainment" as a seperate criteria is bullshit. This just means you can't pick out what you liked about the anime, or u just needed an excuse to rate the anime well. 5layer said: Last time I checked, anime has been invented for the purpose of entertainment, and not any other "bullshit". yes, anime is made for entertainment, and the means by which it entertain people is via story, character, voice acting blah blah blah. I didn't say creating an anime for the purpose of entertaining is bullshit, i said that claiming an anime is good by only saying "it's entertaining" without any other redeeming aspects is bullshit. Sin said: Entertainment is derived from what you enjoy. I honestly don't know anyone that wasn't hooked on Code Geass as it was airing. It was something you always wanted more of. And, when ever did I say that Code Geass had what an "ok" story, sound, animation, and characters? I'm saying it obviously had whatever was necessary in order to hook viewers like crack, and THAT'S what matters. Yes, but you implied that entertainment is another aspect seperate from the normal criteria of sound/animation etc with the line "It succeeds beautifully at the most important aspect of anime in general: entertainment.", and that code geass is good because of that. Saying that is pure bullshit. |
Mar 23, 2009 3:32 AM
#406
dxthegreat said: Ok...yeah thats true. Although saying an anime is good by saying "it's entertaining" without saying anything else isn't bullshit cause obviously theres reasons for why its entertaining.5layer said: Last time I checked, anime has been invented for the purpose of entertainment, and not any other "bullshit". yes, anime is made for entertainment, and the means by which it entertain people is via story, character, voice acting blah blah blah. I didn't say creating an anime for the purpose of entertaining is bullshit, i said that claiming an anime is good by only saying "it's entertaining" without any other redeeming aspects is bullshit. |
Mar 23, 2009 3:10 PM
#407
Ketuekigami said: Sin said: Entertainment is derived from what you enjoy. I honestly don't know anyone that wasn't hooked on Code Geass as it was airing. It was something you always wanted more of. And, when ever did I say that Code Geass had what an "ok" story, sound, animation, and characters? I'm saying it obviously had whatever was necessary in order to hook viewers like crack, and THAT'S what matters. Then I'll be the first, i didnt care at all about CG during the second season. All elements have to work well together to be entertaining. Even if you say that its in the eye of the viewer, the basics of what makes it enjoyable (entertaining) while watching are the elements of story, sound, animation, and characters... And CG was clearly lacking in both story and characters dramatically by the second season which made it un-enjoyable. LOL. Clearly lacking? There were twists and turns every episode in the story, and Lelouch was one of the most dynamic characters in any anime (not to mention virtually every important character got fleshed out enough as well). The only negative thing one could say about the story would be that it had large loopholes, but that certainly wasn't enough to detract me. The plot was much too intricate, with too many twists, to be cliche in any sense. Saying that the "story and characters" were lacking, is far from enough to have a legitimate case. dxthegreat said: lawl, lemme repeat myself: entertainment is derived from all the other parts of an anime. Therefore, saying it's good just because of "entertainment" as a seperate criteria is bullshit. This just means you can't pick out what you liked about the anime, or u just needed an excuse to rate the anime well. 5layer said: Last time I checked, anime has been invented for the purpose of entertainment, and not any other "bullshit". yes, anime is made for entertainment, and the means by which it entertain people is via story, character, voice acting blah blah blah. I didn't say creating an anime for the purpose of entertaining is bullshit, i said that claiming an anime is good by only saying "it's entertaining" without any other redeeming aspects is bullshit. Sin said: Entertainment is derived from what you enjoy. I honestly don't know anyone that wasn't hooked on Code Geass as it was airing. It was something you always wanted more of. And, when ever did I say that Code Geass had what an "ok" story, sound, animation, and characters? I'm saying it obviously had whatever was necessary in order to hook viewers like crack, and THAT'S what matters. Yes, but you implied that entertainment is another aspect seperate from the normal criteria of sound/animation etc with the line "It succeeds beautifully at the most important aspect of anime in general: entertainment.", and that code geass is good because of that. Saying that is pure bullshit. The ONLY thing I implied was that entertainment was an "aspect" of anime, and that Code Geass succeeds beautifully at it. Entertainment is, indeed, an aspect of an anime. Just because other attributes contribute to it, does not in any way mean that it isn't a separate criterion. Many different attributes contribute to how good the story is, yet it's still an "aspect" of the anime in its own right. Code Geass is an amazing show because it entertained me more than virtually any other, and saying that Code Geass is good because it succeeded at entertaining me is far from "bullshit". |
SinMar 23, 2009 3:14 PM
All the mods fucking blow on this website except Kaiserpingvin, Cloudy-Sky, Baman and aero. PM me if you're actually good and I left you out. Oh, rule 8... ( ̄ー ̄) |
Mar 23, 2009 3:34 PM
#408
Sin said: The ONLY thing I implied was that entertainment was an "aspect" of anime, and that Code Geass succeeds beautifully at it. Entertainment is, indeed, an aspect of an anime. Just because other attributes contribute to it, does not in any way mean that it isn't a separate criterion. Many different attributes contribute to how good the story is, yet it's still an "aspect" of the anime in its own right. Code Geass is an amazing show because it entertained me more than virtually any other, and saying that Code Geass is good because it succeeded at entertaining me is far from "bullshit". no, you said that entertainment was "the most important" aspect of an anime. This statement implies that there is a distinction/difference with the rest of the anime, and hence suggesting it as a seperate criterion. Suggesting that IS bullshit. i have no problem with anyone calling anything "entertaining" as long as it doesn't imply that entertainment is a criteria in it's own right. |
Mar 23, 2009 3:55 PM
#409
Mar 23, 2009 4:12 PM
#410
naikou said: Huh? You think "entertainment" is the only way to judge a piece of art? Now that's bullshit. There are plenty of aspects completely independent from entertainment that could contribute to overall rating - Such as how influential the piece was within its genre, or how original it was. ... the whole time, i was arguing that "entertainment" ISNT a way to judge "a piece of art". I don't know where you got the idea that i was suggesting entertainment was the only way to judge something... unless you weren't replying to me |
Mar 23, 2009 4:15 PM
#411
No, I was. dxthegreat said: entertainment is derived from all the other aspects of an anime. It was this statement that threw me off. It seemed to me like you thought that entertainment equated with overall rating (which, by definition, is derived from all the other aspects of an anime). Sorry if that's not what you meant. |
Mar 23, 2009 5:39 PM
#412
i think it's not only about entertainment, for me it's even more about impression. there are lots of animes i've seen which i've given decent ratings (not 10s i admit) but when i browse my list i can't even remember what some animes were all about. that usually happens if i enjoyed the series but it wasn't anything special. i probably looked forward to see every ep but it didn't touch me or even stayed in my memory. code geass imho is something like that. ok i REMEMBER what it's about but I'm not entirely sure why i liked it... now when i try to recall it i remember it being average. although i might give it the same rating if i re-watch the series. that's probably because it's been entertaining but nothing more. now even though kara no kyoukai left a bigger impression on me than code geass there are much better animes out there, but i gave it a 10 anyway because it entertained me beautifully and gave me stuff to think about too (besides the animation and music are great). there were no let-downs... but just a few minutes ago i finished re-watching jin-roh and it just blew me away how deep animes can be. i gave it a 9 though, probably because it was a little slow in the middle. so what i want to say is: code geass is for consumption, jin-roh is excellence, kara no kyoukai is a good thing in the middle |
Mar 23, 2009 5:43 PM
#413
It astounds me that this has more pages than the actual movie discussion. |
Mar 23, 2009 6:19 PM
#414
Tachii said: It astounds me that this has more pages than the actual movie discussion. How does that surprise you? This thread basically deals with many different things including the Top list, ratings, the actual movie, and anything that sprouts from that, while the episode discussion thread only deals with the movie in general with not as much room for different types of discussions. Its only natural that this one would be longer. |
Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
Mar 23, 2009 6:29 PM
#415
Cuz, I get surprised easily. Another reason is that a similar topic was like this in TTGL, and in Code Geass I recall, and that was in no way longer than the end episode discussion of it. Maybe it was just the topic title, with the caps and the 'first place'. It grabs attention. I know I first clicked this because of it, lol. |
Mar 23, 2009 7:43 PM
#416
Tachii said: Lol, aren't I just so great at naming things...Cuz, I get surprised easily. Another reason is that a similar topic was like this in TTGL, and in Code Geass I recall, and that was in no way longer than the end episode discussion of it. Maybe it was just the topic title, with the caps and the 'first place'. It grabs attention. I know I first clicked this because of it, lol. |
Mar 24, 2009 5:07 AM
#417
If only watching a piece of art in a museum could entertain me... |
Mar 24, 2009 5:19 AM
#418
Sohei said: If only watching a piece of art in a museum could entertain me... It can. I agree with naikou, i didn't really enjoy watching Angel's Egg, but i gave it an 8 because i appreciate it as art, and it is first and formost an art anime. Basic entertainment is fine, but narrative, originality, concepts, and creativity carry just as much weight for me. Movie example: Transformers might be fun to watch(not really to me but w/e), but in the end something like the Godfather is far superior because it is by far a greater artistic accomplishment. Admittedly, anime is a far crappier medium than film, and if i judged anime like i did movies, i'd only maybe like 10 shows ever. |
Mar 24, 2009 5:37 AM
#419
M_A said: Sohei said: If only watching a piece of art in a museum could entertain me... It can. You are so right. I should rate those art from a scale of 1 to 10 on how easily make me sleepy. I'll start buying those 'rated 10' arts to be put in my bedroom just so i could make myself fall asleep without using those darn sleeping pills. |
Mar 24, 2009 5:42 AM
#420
Sohei said: M_A said: Sohei said: If only watching a piece of art in a museum could entertain me... It can. You are so right. I should rate those art from a scale of 1 to 10 on how easily make me sleepy. I'll start buying those 'rated 10' arts to be put in my bedroom just so i could make myself fall asleep without using those darn sleeping pills. Well, just because you aren't into art like that doesn't mean it's boring, just means it's boring to you. That's perfectly ok, of course, but i don't know why you are sounding like your opinion is fact. Bet you are jealous of my Kandinsky painting i gots in my room. :D |
Mar 24, 2009 10:12 PM
#421
dxthegreat said: lawl, lemme repeat myself: entertainment is derived from all the other parts of an anime. Therefore, saying it's good just because of "entertainment" as a seperate criteria is bullshit. This just means you can't pick out what you liked about the anime, or u just needed an excuse to rate the anime well. 5layer said: Last time I checked, anime has been invented for the purpose of entertainment, and not any other "bullshit". yes, anime is made for entertainment, and the means by which it entertain people is via story, character, voice acting blah blah blah. I didn't say creating an anime for the purpose of entertaining is bullshit, i said that claiming an anime is good by only saying "it's entertaining" without any other redeeming aspects is bullshit. Sin said: Entertainment is derived from what you enjoy. I honestly don't know anyone that wasn't hooked on Code Geass as it was airing. It was something you always wanted more of. And, when ever did I say that Code Geass had what an "ok" story, sound, animation, and characters? I'm saying it obviously had whatever was necessary in order to hook viewers like crack, and THAT'S what matters. Yes, but you implied that entertainment is another aspect seperate from the normal criteria of sound/animation etc with the line "It succeeds beautifully at the most important aspect of anime in general: entertainment.", and that code geass is good because of that. Saying that is pure bullshit. dxthegreat said: Sin said: The ONLY thing I implied was that entertainment was an "aspect" of anime, and that Code Geass succeeds beautifully at it. Entertainment is, indeed, an aspect of an anime. Just because other attributes contribute to it, does not in any way mean that it isn't a separate criterion. Many different attributes contribute to how good the story is, yet it's still an "aspect" of the anime in its own right. Code Geass is an amazing show because it entertained me more than virtually any other, and saying that Code Geass is good because it succeeded at entertaining me is far from "bullshit". no, you said that entertainment was "the most important" aspect of an anime. This statement implies that there is a distinction/difference with the rest of the anime, and hence suggesting it as a seperate criterion. Suggesting that IS bullshit. i have no problem with anyone calling anything "entertaining" as long as it doesn't imply that entertainment is a criteria in it's own right. Entertainment is a criterion in its own right, and the review system is a testament to this fact (hence entertainment being a category which affects the "overall"). Just because there are other attributes of anime that may or may not affect how entertaining you think something is, that does not entail that entertainment isn't a separate criterion. My statement is the status quo in regards to MAL, if you think otherwise give a sufficient prima facie case or stop talking. |
All the mods fucking blow on this website except Kaiserpingvin, Cloudy-Sky, Baman and aero. PM me if you're actually good and I left you out. Oh, rule 8... ( ̄ー ̄) |
Mar 24, 2009 10:38 PM
#422
Sin said: Entertainment is a criterion in its own right, and the review system is a testament to this fact (hence entertainment being a category which affects the "overall"). Just because there are other attributes of anime that may or may not affect how entertaining you think something is, that does not entail that entertainment isn't a separate criterion. My statement is the status quo in regards to MAL, if you think otherwise give a sufficient prima facie case or stop talking. Saying that MAL does it is in no way sufficient, after all MAL has KnK marked as 7 separate movies while every other anime site has it marked as 1 OVA showing that you cant say something is automatically correct just because it is on MAL. Of course you can say you like a series because its entertaining... But entertainment isnt a lone category, its a side effect made by all other categories working together. If MAL was less oriented towards fans and more towards critiques then there would be no entry for entertainment on the review system since it doesnt tell how good a series is on a critical standpoint. In fact, Entertainment is the only part of the review that is 100% preference so saying a series is good because its entertaining is completely inaccurate since its only good to you at this point. you could say that the story or characters of a given series are good or bad but in terms of those criteria there are facts and specific ways to tell if and how a story good or if and how a character is well developed but there is absolutely no basis for entertainment except from the person thats saying its entertaining. And we were never talking about MAL, we were talking about entertainment as a criteria for judging an anime. Which is not so bad from a fan perspective, but saying a series is good or bad solely based on entertainment is, as everyone has said, bullshit. And if your using MAL as your only argument then i think you should, in your own words, "stop talking". |
KetuekigamiMar 24, 2009 10:45 PM
Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
Mar 24, 2009 11:42 PM
#423
Sin said: He does have a point, though. Entertainment is often strongly influenced by the other categories, and in that sense could be seen as more of a bundle than an individual category. For example, good music definitely adds to my enjoyment, even though music is a separate category.dxthegreat said: lawl, lemme repeat myself: entertainment is derived from all the other parts of an anime. Therefore, saying it's good just because of "entertainment" as a seperate criteria is bullshit. This just means you can't pick out what you liked about the anime, or u just needed an excuse to rate the anime well. 5layer said: Last time I checked, anime has been invented for the purpose of entertainment, and not any other "bullshit". yes, anime is made for entertainment, and the means by which it entertain people is via story, character, voice acting blah blah blah. I didn't say creating an anime for the purpose of entertaining is bullshit, i said that claiming an anime is good by only saying "it's entertaining" without any other redeeming aspects is bullshit. Sin said: Entertainment is derived from what you enjoy. I honestly don't know anyone that wasn't hooked on Code Geass as it was airing. It was something you always wanted more of. And, when ever did I say that Code Geass had what an "ok" story, sound, animation, and characters? I'm saying it obviously had whatever was necessary in order to hook viewers like crack, and THAT'S what matters. Yes, but you implied that entertainment is another aspect seperate from the normal criteria of sound/animation etc with the line "It succeeds beautifully at the most important aspect of anime in general: entertainment.", and that code geass is good because of that. Saying that is pure bullshit. dxthegreat said: Sin said: The ONLY thing I implied was that entertainment was an "aspect" of anime, and that Code Geass succeeds beautifully at it. Entertainment is, indeed, an aspect of an anime. Just because other attributes contribute to it, does not in any way mean that it isn't a separate criterion. Many different attributes contribute to how good the story is, yet it's still an "aspect" of the anime in its own right. Code Geass is an amazing show because it entertained me more than virtually any other, and saying that Code Geass is good because it succeeded at entertaining me is far from "bullshit". no, you said that entertainment was "the most important" aspect of an anime. This statement implies that there is a distinction/difference with the rest of the anime, and hence suggesting it as a seperate criterion. Suggesting that IS bullshit. i have no problem with anyone calling anything "entertaining" as long as it doesn't imply that entertainment is a criteria in it's own right. Entertainment is a criterion in its own right, and the review system is a testament to this fact (hence entertainment being a category which affects the "overall"). Just because there are other attributes of anime that may or may not affect how entertaining you think something is, that does not entail that entertainment isn't a separate criterion. My statement is the status quo in regards to MAL, if you think otherwise give a sufficient prima facie case or stop talking. I won't say that I completely agree with him, though, since an anime can have low scores in almost everything and still have a high entertainment value, in my opinion. Example: Zettai Karen Children. The story is ridiculous, the characters are blatant cliches, the music is unmemorable, and the animation is just decent. But the enjoyment factor is way up there. |
Mar 25, 2009 12:11 AM
#424
naikou said: He does have a point, though. Entertainment is often strongly influenced by the other categories, and in that sense could be seen as more of a bundle than an individual category. For example, good music definitely adds to my enjoyment, even though music is a separate category. I won't say that I completely agree with him, though, since an anime can have low scores in almost everything and still have a high entertainment value, in my opinion. Example: Zettai Karen Children. The story is ridiculous, the characters are blatant cliches, the music is unmemorable, and the animation is just decent. But the enjoyment factor is way up there. Where you agreeing with me or Sin? An anime isnt "entertaining" because its entertaining, its entertaining for reasons created by the elements of an anime whether it be story, characters, animation, music or even going further to the comedy or action. You mentioned Zettai Karen Children, and while i havent seen it i can imagine it as being entertaining for its comedy and/or action (MAL says its a comedy) so if we were to score it further i imagine it would get high marks in its comedy rating, right? But "entertainment" is too broad a word to be used as a single category for judgment, and by its nature is made up of elements taken from all the aspects of the anime which makes it entertaining. |
Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
Mar 25, 2009 12:13 AM
#425
Ketuekigami said: Sin said: Entertainment is a criterion in its own right, and the review system is a testament to this fact (hence entertainment being a category which affects the "overall"). Just because there are other attributes of anime that may or may not affect how entertaining you think something is, that does not entail that entertainment isn't a separate criterion. My statement is the status quo in regards to MAL, if you think otherwise give a sufficient prima facie case or stop talking. Saying that MAL does it is in no way sufficient, after all MAL has KnK marked as 7 separate movies while every other anime site has it marked as 1 OVA showing that you cant say something is automatically correct just because it is on MAL. Of course you can say you like a series because its entertaining... But entertainment isnt a lone category, its a side effect made by all other categories working together. If MAL was less oriented towards fans and more towards critiques then there would be no entry for entertainment on the review system since it doesnt tell how good a series is on a critical standpoint. In fact, Entertainment is the only part of the review that is 100% preference so saying a series is good because its entertaining is completely inaccurate since its only good to you at this point. you could say that the story or characters of a given series are good or bad but in terms of those criteria there are facts and specific ways to tell if and how a story good or if and how a character is well developed but there is absolutely no basis for entertainment except from the person thats saying its entertaining. And we were never talking about MAL, we were talking about entertainment as a criteria for judging an anime. Which is not so bad from a fan perspective, but saying a series is good or bad solely based on entertainment is, as everyone has said, bullshit. And if your using MAL as your only argument then i think you should, in your own words, "stop talking". There isn't a single criterion that isn't made up of other criteria. How good the writing of the story is, is strongly intertwined with how the characters are developed and utilized; how good the character development is has much to do with the layout of the story, etc. Just because entertainment is often made up of more criteria than other characteristics of a show, does not mean that it in itself isn't its own separate criterion. I say it's the status quo because that's how it is on MAL. If you think it's unnecessary then it's your responsibility to say why, NOT mine since I'm not the one attacking the current system. You misunderstand the method of argumentation; it's certainly true that just because it's MAL's system that it isn't necessarily correct, HOWEVER it's not up to the people defending the view to give YOU reasons why it should be defended, it's the other way around. So no, you have not made a legitimate case to overturn the status quo, because your own reasoning as to why entertainment isn't a separate criterion (because other characteristics of the show work together to comprise it) has been shown to be applicable to aspects of the show you already deemed as separate criteria. naikou said: Sin said: He does have a point, though. Entertainment is often strongly influenced by the other categories, and in that sense could be seen as more of a bundle than an individual category. For example, good music definitely adds to my enjoyment, even though music is a separate category.dxthegreat said: lawl, lemme repeat myself: entertainment is derived from all the other parts of an anime. Therefore, saying it's good just because of "entertainment" as a seperate criteria is bullshit. This just means you can't pick out what you liked about the anime, or u just needed an excuse to rate the anime well. 5layer said: Last time I checked, anime has been invented for the purpose of entertainment, and not any other "bullshit". yes, anime is made for entertainment, and the means by which it entertain people is via story, character, voice acting blah blah blah. I didn't say creating an anime for the purpose of entertaining is bullshit, i said that claiming an anime is good by only saying "it's entertaining" without any other redeeming aspects is bullshit. Sin said: Entertainment is derived from what you enjoy. I honestly don't know anyone that wasn't hooked on Code Geass as it was airing. It was something you always wanted more of. And, when ever did I say that Code Geass had what an "ok" story, sound, animation, and characters? I'm saying it obviously had whatever was necessary in order to hook viewers like crack, and THAT'S what matters. Yes, but you implied that entertainment is another aspect seperate from the normal criteria of sound/animation etc with the line "It succeeds beautifully at the most important aspect of anime in general: entertainment.", and that code geass is good because of that. Saying that is pure bullshit. dxthegreat said: Sin said: The ONLY thing I implied was that entertainment was an "aspect" of anime, and that Code Geass succeeds beautifully at it. Entertainment is, indeed, an aspect of an anime. Just because other attributes contribute to it, does not in any way mean that it isn't a separate criterion. Many different attributes contribute to how good the story is, yet it's still an "aspect" of the anime in its own right. Code Geass is an amazing show because it entertained me more than virtually any other, and saying that Code Geass is good because it succeeded at entertaining me is far from "bullshit". no, you said that entertainment was "the most important" aspect of an anime. This statement implies that there is a distinction/difference with the rest of the anime, and hence suggesting it as a seperate criterion. Suggesting that IS bullshit. i have no problem with anyone calling anything "entertaining" as long as it doesn't imply that entertainment is a criteria in it's own right. Entertainment is a criterion in its own right, and the review system is a testament to this fact (hence entertainment being a category which affects the "overall"). Just because there are other attributes of anime that may or may not affect how entertaining you think something is, that does not entail that entertainment isn't a separate criterion. My statement is the status quo in regards to MAL, if you think otherwise give a sufficient prima facie case or stop talking. I won't say that I completely agree with him, though, since an anime can have low scores in almost everything and still have a high entertainment value, in my opinion. Example: Zettai Karen Children. The story is ridiculous, the characters are blatant cliches, the music is unmemorable, and the animation is just decent. But the enjoyment factor is way up there. Of course, but other categories are also influenced by other categories. That's not a legitimate point in my perspective. |
All the mods fucking blow on this website except Kaiserpingvin, Cloudy-Sky, Baman and aero. PM me if you're actually good and I left you out. Oh, rule 8... ( ̄ー ̄) |
Mar 25, 2009 12:16 AM
#426
Ketuekigami said: Where you agreeing with me or Sin? I didn't even see you post, heh. I was referring to dxthegreat and Sin's argument. Sin said: lol, non sequitur.Of course, but other categories are also influenced by other categories. That's not a legitimate point in my perspective. My argument: The aspect of entertainment can't be considered a standalone category because it's influenced by so many other aspects which are already counted into ratings. Your counterargument: 1. Other aspects also influence each other. 2. Therefore: your point is invalid. You're going to have to provide some examples for that one to even begin to make sense. |
naikouMar 25, 2009 12:25 AM
Mar 25, 2009 12:33 AM
#427
Sin said: There isn't a single criterion that isn't made up of other crteria. How good the writing of the story is, is strongly intertwined with how the characters are developed and utilized; how good the character development is has much to do with the layout of the story, etc. Just because entertainment is often made up of more criteria than other characteristics of a show, does not mean that it in itself isn't its own separate criterion. I say it's the status quo because that's how it is on MAL. If you think it's unnecessary then it's your responsibility to say why, NOT mine since I'm not the one attacking the current system. You misunderstand the method of argumentation; it's certainly true that just because it's MAL's system that it isn't necessarily correct, HOWEVER it's not up to the people defending the view to give YOU reasons why it should be defended, it's the other way around. So no, you have not made a legitimate case to overturn the status quo, because your own reasoning as to why entertainment isn't a separate criterion (because other characteristics of the show work together to comprise it) has been shown to be applicable to aspects of the show you already deemed as separate criteria. My argument was never about the criteria that comprises entertainment not being influenced by other aspects, it was about entertainment being 100% influenced by other criteria and that entertainment is 100% preference making it not applicable as a stand alone category. So before you say my point is invalid, know what my point is. Im sorry but i have made a legitimate case, just because you dont agree with it doesnt make it any less legitimate then yours. At this point mine is more legitimate because i have provided examples and explained myself while you have not. |
KetuekigamiMar 25, 2009 1:21 AM
Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
Mar 25, 2009 2:07 AM
#428
There is something that is only contained in the Entertainment criteria and that is called Humour. Some anime survive on humour alone and therefore saying that they are good because they are entertaining is absolutely NOT bullshit as they may be completely hilarious even if everything else in them sucked. |
Mar 25, 2009 2:48 AM
#429
5layer said: There is something that is only contained in the Entertainment criteria and that is called Humour. Some anime survive on humour alone and therefore saying that they are good because they are entertaining is absolutely NOT bullshit as they may be completely hilarious even if everything else in them sucked. Comedy is an element that contributes to entertainment but is not exclusive to it. Humor, along with intriguing story, nice sound/animation, and fun/likable/relatable characters are elements that make up entertainment but are exclusive to actual categories. If we were to review a comedy anime then its humor would be apart of its own criteria just like if we were to review a shounen anime we would put its action in its own category. those criteria wouldnt be written off as part of the "entertainment" of the anime but would be a part of the already existing elements. If it was comedy we can say that the characters and the story create the comedy depending on what series you say. One example is Inukami. It survives on its humor but that humor is only created by the combination of its ridiculousness characters and story. And saying "an anime is good because it is entertaining is bullshit" only applies when you say that the only factor as to why it was good is that you where entertained. That is bullshit. If that is the way you think then would you say the movie parody movies (Date Movie, Epic Movie, etc.) are good just because they entertained you (if they somehow managed to do that)? |
KetuekigamiMar 25, 2009 2:52 AM
Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
Mar 25, 2009 3:02 AM
#430
Ketuekigami said: Lol, those movies failed miserably at entertaining me. But there are anime like Lucky Star (which I don't particularly like) that seem to survive on only comedy as there is nothing else in them. The only thing they have is entertainment.Comedy is an element that contributes to entertainment but is not exclusive to it. Humor, along with intriguing story, nice sound/animation, and fun/likable/relatable characters are elements that make up entertainment but are exclusive to actual categories. If we were to review a comedy anime then its humor would be apart of its own criteria just like if we were to review a shounen anime we would put its action in its own category. those criteria wouldnt be written off as part of the "entertainment" of the anime but would be a part of the already existing elements. If it was comedy we can say that the characters and the story create the comedy depending on what series you say. One example is Inukami. It survives on its humor but that humor is only created by the combination of its ridiculousness characters and story. And saying "an anime is good because it is entertaining is bullshit" only applies when you say that the only factor as to why it was good is that you where entertained. That is bullshit. If that is the way you think then would you say the movie parody movies (Date Movie, Epic Movie, etc.) are good just because they entertained you (if they somehow managed to do that)? |
Mar 25, 2009 3:23 AM
#431
5layer said: Lol, those movies failed miserably at entertaining me. But there are anime like Lucky Star (which I don't particularly like) that seem to survive on only comedy as there is nothing else in them. The only thing they have is entertainment. But the sad fact is that there are people who admit that they entertained them yet know they were terrible which is my point. That is said about all comedy though, it survives on its entertainment value... but that doesnt mean that its entertainment is the only thing about it. for comedy, its humor would be its own category. For lucky star we can say that the comedy is a effect of the characters and how they work together. If anything, we could say that "humor" is a sub category that is influenced by characters and story and that contributes to entertainment the same way as both those elements. But what you are saying is true for all anime depending on how your view is. isnt the only thing that anime has entertainment? not just comedy anime? even if you say yes that doesnt mean that entertainment is the only thing that makes an anime good or not. Example is Grave of the Fireflies. Unless your a sick bastard then it shouldnt have been very entertaining from a fun to watch prospective of "entertainment" yet it is an amazing anime. why is that? its because its elements and criteria contribute to its own type of "entertainment". The main point here is that Humor =/= entertainment as criteria. They are different things from a review standpoint. Humor is a criteria that contributes to entertainment but is its own category. And that entertainment is too broad a word to be used from a reviewer standpoint. |
KetuekigamiMar 25, 2009 3:47 AM
Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
Mar 25, 2009 5:31 AM
#432
look, the word entertainment IS just another overall rating the difference is that entertainment contains much much more personal preference and bias. Saying something is entertaining is 100% fine. saying something is entertaining with entertainment as its only redeeming quality is bullshit. It just means that because you favor an anime, you need a criterion to boost the rating of the anime but you can't find a place for such a boost in the existing criteria. The way i see it, MAL if they didn't include the entertainment criterion, would have endless suggestions suggesting different criterion that is needed. Though they may already fall under the existing categories. They thought that there should be a substitute for those criteria, and so they created a "general-purpose" rating where those people can put theirs thoughts on these criterion. However, rather than that, i believe that users are just using that criteria to assert their personal thoughts and bias on the rating of an anime in their review. and even if that wasn't the case, the entertainment criterion shouldn't exist. humour/action/romance and all these genre-specific criterion can be attributed to the various criterion available already. Humour, as stated before comes from the interplay of the jokes in the plot and the personalities of the characters (you may pick one or both to attribute the humour to) whilst action is attributed to animation. Sin said: There isn't a single criterion that isn't made up of other criteria. How good the writing of the story is, is strongly intertwined with how the characters are developed and utilized; how good the character development is has much to do with the layout of the story, etc. Just because entertainment is often made up of more criteria than other characteristics of a show, does not mean that it in itself isn't its own separate criterion. no, they are all seperate criteria. Admittedly, characters are adapted to fit into the plot, and the plot also features the interactions of the characters. However, the personality, appearance and backgrounds of the characters can and should be considered seperately from their roles. Their roles are considered in plot. Their development of character also belongs in the plot (whilst the kind of character they developed into belongs in the character criterion). The point is, whatever you try to argue, you can break and seperate the various aspects of an anime into those DISTINCT criterias. |
dxthegreatMar 25, 2009 5:34 AM
Mar 25, 2009 8:29 PM
#433
dxthegreat said: Sin said: There isn't a single criterion that isn't made up of other criteria. How good the writing of the story is, is strongly intertwined with how the characters are developed and utilized; how good the character development is has much to do with the layout of the story, etc. Just because entertainment is often made up of more criteria than other characteristics of a show, does not mean that it in itself isn't its own separate criterion. no, they are all seperate criteria. Admittedly, characters are adapted to fit into the plot, and the plot also features the interactions of the characters. However, the personality, appearance and backgrounds of the characters can and should be considered seperately from their roles. Their roles are considered in plot. Their development of character also belongs in the plot (whilst the kind of character they developed into belongs in the character criterion). The point is, whatever you try to argue, you can break and seperate the various aspects of an anime into those DISTINCT criterias. No, they are not. You're telling me without a story as a basis, you can judge the character development? How? How would you do such a thing? You can't see a character's development without interactions, and you can't have interactions without a story. No, you can NOT always break the various aspects of an anime into distinct criteria because they often rely on other criteria for their basis. naikou said: Ketuekigami said: Where you agreeing with me or Sin? I didn't even see you post, heh. I was referring to dxthegreat and Sin's argument. Sin said: lol, non sequitur.Of course, but other categories are also influenced by other categories. That's not a legitimate point in my perspective. My argument: The aspect of entertainment can't be considered a standalone category because it's influenced by so many other aspects which are already counted into ratings. Your counterargument: 1. Other aspects also influence each other. 2. Therefore: your point is invalid. You're going to have to provide some examples for that one to even begin to make sense. If you're saying that what I said was a non sequitur, the only thing I have to respond to that is, you're wrong. All I said was that saying entertainment shouldn't be its own category because it's influenced by others is not a legitimate argument, because many other categories that are assumed to be separate are influenced by other categories too. It's not a non sequitur to say that because of this, merely saying that entertainment shouldn't be its own category because it is affected by others, is not enough to have a strong case that entertainment shouldn't be its own category. I already gave you concrete examples of other criteria (aka characters and story) that are affected/influenced by other supposedly separate criteria. So when you tell me to "provide examples", it begs the question: Did you even read what I said? In the end, I view entertainment as a criterion which demonstrates how much a show hooks you to it. There's no other separate criterion that can demonstrate this, as even the "overall" score only judges how well the other criteria fit together, so I view it as a necessary part of the rating system. That's my only point. |
SinMar 25, 2009 8:37 PM
All the mods fucking blow on this website except Kaiserpingvin, Cloudy-Sky, Baman and aero. PM me if you're actually good and I left you out. Oh, rule 8... ( ̄ー ̄) |
Mar 25, 2009 8:43 PM
#434
Well, I just skimmed the previous posts, but it seems like this thread is on fire once again. Looking for some good debating or theological stuff. As such, I am once again back in the KnK 5 "OMG FIRST PLACE" thread (how long has it been?). Judging by all this talk about entertainment, I will talk about that criteria in my post. I think that entertainment is basically the bulk of what classifies a good anime. Entertainment, such as comedy, is that which is not covered in all of the major review criteria. It may make an otherwise dull anime come to life. Similarly, all the categories do not have to be met with flying colors for an anime to be the best of all time. For example, a show with great animation and story does not necessarily need an excellent sound track to be the best of all time. Conversely, a show that excels in all areas may also not necessarily be the best of all time. Ultimately, I feel that entertainment is somewhat of a vague criteria that catches, at least how I score it, the overall "feel" that an anime leaves. I've watched masterfully created anime and left without being stunned. I've also watched shows with poor artwork, etc. that still managed to pull me in and give me the full 25 minutes I invested in each episode without regrets. I'll finish with this note: how can you effectively compare such varying anime as Kara no Kyoukai and Lucky Star? By standard convention, neither share any similar qualities. Lucky Star focuses on comedy and cultural references, while KnK has masterful animation and an amazing soundtrack to back a "true" story. So going back to the question, how do you compare? The answer, in my case, is entertainment: once again, the feeling that watching each episode gives me. In this case, KnK 5 was one of the most satisfying pieces of anime that I have ever watched. Heck, I watched it twice in one week. Was it worth the time? Yes. Does it deserve it's spot on MAL (which is all completely subjective anyways)? Compared to some of the other anime up there (namely, Code Geass), I would say absolutely. |
Mar 25, 2009 10:05 PM
#435
Sin said: I already gave you concrete examples of other criteria (aka characters and story) that are affected/influenced by other supposedly separate criteria. So when you tell me to "provide examples", it begs the question: Did you even read what I said? No, I didn't see those. I didn't think that portion of your comment was addressed to me, so I didn't bother with it. My mistake. Besides, that's not exactly what I meant. I'm saying that you can't qualify entertainment as a completely separate category. The fact that there are other categories which are also non-separate does nothing to change that fact. It just means that those categories (story/characters, to use your example), also can't be considered standalone. All of those categories are double-counting certain aspects. |
Mar 25, 2009 10:14 PM
#436
Sin said: I already gave you concrete examples of other criteria (aka characters and story) that are affected/influenced by other supposedly separate criteria. So when you tell me to "provide examples", it begs the question: Did you even read what I said? Did you even read what i wrote!? How can that do anything to my argument since my argument was never about other criteria being or not being effected by other sources. Im sorry but i dont think you have any idea what im talking about... I'll quote my post just so you understand. Ketuekigami said: My argument was never about the criteria that comprises entertainment not being influenced by other aspects, it was about entertainment being 100% influenced by other criteria and that entertainment is 100% preference making it not applicable as a stand alone category. So before you say my point is invalid, know what my point is. And if as you say "There isn't a single criterion that isn't made up of other criteria" then what criteria in the anime effects animation and sound? Those are only effected by directing and have ways of judging then other then personal preference. apparently you are only hanging onto the two criteria that effect each other while ignoring the ones that are completely stand alone. And i have actually used anime titles as examples while you have not, so at this point i have a more "legitimate" argument since i am including "concrete" examples and not just stating the same thing over again in every post like you. Sin said: In the end, I view entertainment as a criterion which demonstrates how much a show hooks you to it. There's no other separate criterion that can demonstrate this, as even the "overall" score only judges how well the other criteria fit together, so I view it as a necessary part of the rating system. Um no, what hooks you depends on the series. If it is a comedy then it is the characters that hook you and if not it is the story that hooks you. What hooks you always belongs to one of the existing elements. Entertainment only applies to how well you, keyword being you, enjoyed those elements, not how well they worked... making it 100% bias. Are you saying that a criteria that is 100% bias will be accurate when rating how good something is? im sorry, but its not. |
KetuekigamiMar 25, 2009 10:23 PM
Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
Mar 25, 2009 10:24 PM
#437
Ketuekigami said: Um no, what hooks you depends on the series. If it is a comedy then it is the characters that hook you and if not it is the story that hooks you. What hooks you always belongs to one of the existing elements. Entertainment only applies to how well you, keyword being you, enjoyed those elements, not how well they worked... making it 100% bias. And once again, whether you are "hooked" to a series or not is all personal preference and is not accurate as a criteria since it is bias. Are you saying that a criteria that is 100% bias will be accurate when rating how good something is? im sorry, but its not. Ok you've changed your argument many times now. First you were arguing that entertainment wasn't a separate criterion, and now you're arguing that it shouldn't be a criterion because it's bias. Those are two COMPLETELY different arguments, but since you've presented a new argument I'll respond to it in turn. Everything is biased, there isn't a single thing category which doesn't have bias. What sounds you like could be based on nostalgic sounds you've heard as a child, and the same with animation style. What's wrong with bias? Every review has bias, but the POINT is that if many people's opinions with their bias are in agreement, it usually would consequently be a good show for most people to watch. Ketuekigami said: Did you even read what i wrote!? How can that do anything to my argument since my argument was never about other criteria being or not being effected by other sources. Im sorry but i dont think you have any idea what im talking about... I'll quote my post just so you understand. Are you kidding me? That was a response to him not you, so why are you responding to it like I was talking to you? Next time refrain from responding to responses I've made to other people or I won't give you the courtesy of responding back like I did here. |
All the mods fucking blow on this website except Kaiserpingvin, Cloudy-Sky, Baman and aero. PM me if you're actually good and I left you out. Oh, rule 8... ( ̄ー ̄) |
Mar 25, 2009 11:49 PM
#438
Sin said: Ok you've changed your argument many times now. First you were arguing that entertainment wasn't a separate criterion, and now you're arguing that it shouldn't be a criterion because it's bias. Those are two COMPLETELY different arguments, but since you've presented a new argument I'll respond to it in turn.. They are actually the same thing. When i started saying "it isn't" it means that that was my view and i was providing an argument for it. and when i said "it shouldn't be" that was implying that i was attempting to convince you that it shouldn't by explaining why it shouldn't be through bias, while in my view it still isn't. Just because two words are different that doesn't make the entire argument different. And even if that somehow made it different that in no way changed the overall point of my argument, that entertainment isn't/shouldn't be considered a criteria. Sin said: Everything is biased, there isn't a single thing category which doesn't have bias. What sounds you like could be based on nostalgic sounds you've heard as a child, and the same with animation style. Are you kidding me? how in the hell would KnK's animation style be considered good based only on bias!? and how can Tsuiokuhen's sound be good based only on bias!? those would be rated by how well they are done through directing and how well they fit to the current moods of the scene. KnK's animation is good because it it visually appealing too everyone who watches and Tsuiokuhen's sound is good because it fits the moods of the scenes by keeping true to its time period. Those are real methods of review that take very little bias into account. If you want to include nostalgia it would be in its own sub category if the series is aiming for it to be nostalgic. I would really like to hear some examples though as too how in the hell you can use nostalgia as an argument since you haven't stated a single anime as an example But on that same note, if you are talking about reviewing an older anime and giving it points because its nostalgic that is not relevant at all to its scores. Most of us might see DBZ as nostalgic but if you are giving it higher ratings for that reason then your review just became 100% more bias because not everyone will share the same nostalgia. That nostalgia you felt was influenced by nothing more then your own life experiences, not the anime itself but you yourself, making it not a reflection of the quality of the anime. A review is supposed to represent the quality of the anime, the last thing that should appear on a review is how much you personally enjoyed it. If you read some of the better reviews on MAL they talk about each aspect and how they work or don't work, and little about how much they enjoyed it until they get to the enjoyment section. Sin said: What's wrong with bias? Every review has bias, but the POINT is that if many people's opinions with their bias are in agreement, it usually would consequently be a good show for most people to watch. Whats wrong with it is that if the whole element we are viewing is 100% bias then it will tell you absolutely nothing about how good it is. Bias is used in little segments for the other categories to slightly alter the scores from person to person (and sometimes more for the more controversial series but that's besides the point). I'm sure that everyone who has seen KnK will give its animation a 9 or 10 and that margin will only appear through a small percent of bias. but entertainment is 100% bias meaning it can go from a score of 1 to 10 from person to person in the blink of an eye. How is that an effective method of review? Saying that since people are in agreement it will make it enjoyable for most people is completely irrelevant. We (or at least i am) are talking in the context of writing reviews but you just brought up the "popularity" concept as to why an anime would be considered good. Popularity is contributed to many things and the overall quality of the anime is taken into account very little. Saying that because there is a large agreement that Bleach is good makes it good for most people to watch is inaccurate because there are almost or just as many people with opposite opinions. Popularity has nothing to do with the writing of a review that depicts the quality of an anime since anime is many times popular for reasons other then its quality. Sin said: I was mistaken then. But that doesn't mean I'm not allowed to reply to it, and i will in the same way. you have yet to provide any "concrete" examples.Are you kidding me? That was a response to him not you, so why are you responding to it like I was talking to you? Next time refrain from responding to responses I've made to other people or I won't give you the courtesy of responding back like I did here. |
KetuekigamiMar 25, 2009 11:59 PM
Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
Mar 26, 2009 2:01 AM
#439
Sin said: No, they are not. You're telling me without a story as a basis, you can judge the character development? How? How would you do such a thing? You can't see a character's development without interactions, and you can't have interactions without a story. No, you can NOT always break the various aspects of an anime into distinct criteria because they often rely on other criteria for their basis. Yes, i AM telling you that. It's true, without a story a character can't develop. And you can't see the character's development without interactions. But when a character DOES interact with other characters, you can consider the personality and characteristics they displayed SEPERATELY from what they actually did. You can, using such a consideration say that they've become more mature or stronger by the impressions they give you. You can consider these impressions seperately from their actions, even if these impressions were brought on by their actions. Of course, you would need to draw upon examples of their actions in the plot to demonstrate these impressions. (Note, just needing to refer back to parts of the anime to confirm the existence of a quality which you wish to argue does not mean the characteristic criteria is overlapping with the plot criteria.) For example, in the anime "The Twelve Kingdoms" which was revered for it's character development: (Bah, i have to put on spoiler tags don't i? lol. Read this at ur own peril, and no grudges against those who don't =P) Yoko was first introduced as a girl who worries so much about what others think that all her actions was to create a good impression in others. However, because of this she was never able to make true friends with others. Towards the end of the story, Yoko had become the queen, and had made great friends in rakushun, enki and shoryu the king of en. She was able to express herself towards the end, and this was evidenced by her first proclamation to ban prostration. Prostration is an expression of manners and good behaviour but also causes the person to hide their face, the part of one's body which reveals the person's true thoughts. Thus, prostration is a direct example and representation of Yoko's past self, and the banning of prostration is a clear indication that Yoko had cast away her old shameful self. (yeah i know, Higher School Certificate English really develops your ability to write bullshit analysis.) In this analysis, whilst i may have drawn on examples from the story, they were just to back my argument of these characteristics existing in the character. I considered these characteristics separately from the character's role in the story. Sin said: I already gave you concrete examples of other criteria (aka characters and story) that are affected/influenced by other supposedly separate criteria. So when you tell me to "provide examples", it begs the question: Did you even read what I said? Now don't argue this anymore, because the example i gave you on how to break up "character development" from plot is as good as any of those examples you gave. oh and by the way, when you said Sin said: There isn't a single criterion that isn't made up of other criteria. can you explain which other criteria animation and sound is made up of? I'm not trying to argue, i'm just wondering this. Sin said: First you were arguing that entertainment wasn't a separate criterion, and now you're arguing that it shouldn't be a criterion because it's bias. Those are two COMPLETELY different arguments Please pardon me for butting in on the conversation between you two... but why is arguing that entertainment isn't a seperate criterion and providing the reasons why he doesn't think entertainment isn't a seperate criterion completely different arguments? I'm wondering this myself too. Also... as a query to what "your point" is (not trying to contribute this to my argument or anything like that). If Entertainment as a category should be including as it's the critertia which measures how much a show hooks you to it, why shouldnt criteria such as: "empathy" - how much the show relates to the viewer, "morals and value" - the various issues raised and addressed in the anime, "Intrigue" how well the anime generates thoughts and ideas within the viewer and etc etc - all these criteria be added? sure, they're based from all the other criterias of an anime - then according to you, shouldn't they be included too? Why doesn't MAL, or any other anime db review system include them as well? (If you can, please ignore any hostility. I don't have "making enemies" as one of my goals.) |
dxthegreatMar 26, 2009 2:14 AM
Mar 26, 2009 10:37 AM
#440
dxthegreat said: Yes, i AM telling you that. It's true, without a story a character can't develop. And you can't see the character's development without interactions. But when a character DOES interact with other characters, you can consider the personality and characteristics they displayed SEPERATELY from what they actually did. You can, using such a consideration say that they've become more mature or stronger by the impressions they give you. You can consider these impressions seperately from their actions, even if these impressions were brought on by their actions. LOL you don't make ANY sense. Actions ARE the story, and you just said that you receive the impressions from the actions. Thus, you receive the impressions of a character FROM the story. I could symbolize this for you and show you how it logically forms a proof that connotates this, but I grow tired. All you've proven is that once again, how you judge the characters IS BASED ON the story. dxthegreat said: Please pardon me for butting in on the conversation between you two... but why is arguing that entertainment isn't a seperate criterion and providing the reasons why he doesn't think entertainment isn't a seperate criterion completely different arguments? I'm wondering this myself too. You obviously didn't read what I said. Arguing that entertainment shouldn't be a criterion because it's bias, and arguing that it shouldn't be a criterion because it's inextricably intertwined with other categories are two DIFFERENT arguments for why entertainment shouldn't be a criterion. When you say you're "wondering yourself too" you're confused as he acknowledged that it WAS a different argument but said it didn't matter. dxthegreat said: Also... as a query to what "your point" is (not trying to contribute this to my argument or anything like that). If Entertainment as a category should be including as it's the critertia which measures how much a show hooks you to it, why shouldnt criteria such as: "empathy" - how much the show relates to the viewer, "morals and value" - the various issues raised and addressed in the anime, "Intrigue" how well the anime generates thoughts and ideas within the viewer and etc etc - all these criteria be added? sure, they're based from all the other criterias of an anime - then according to you, shouldn't they be included too? Why doesn't MAL, or any other anime db review system include them as well?) As to your first point empathy, it shouldn't be a criterion because empathy says nothing about how much you enjoyed it, and it contrasts with "entertainment" because unlike entertainment, nobody cares how it relates to you if you say nothing about how much you liked it. "Morals" shouldn't be a criterion because not everyone even views morals as being important, but you'd be hard-pressed to find someone who doesn't view entertainment value as important. And intrigue is virtually synonymous with story, as the better stories usually involve more intricate plots that generate thoughts and ideas. And Ketuekigami, I don't have time to explain the self-explanatory truth that everything has bias. When you ask, "How can anyone view KnK as having bad animation?" I say to you, it's quite easy. People look for different things in animation, some people don't like how the characters in KnK are drawn, some people don't like how at some points it looks like a 2d character in a 3rd world (which is reminiscent of a game), and I myself am one of the people who agree with my latter point. Ketuekigami said: Saying that since people are in agreement it will make it enjoyable for most people is completely irrelevant. I laughed my ass off. No it's not. How enjoyable something is says nothing about its quality. The fact that most people enjoy Bleach most certainly says something about the enjoyability of the show, but doesn't necessarily entail anything about quality. That's fallacious reasoning. After all, it would be easy to see how 5 Centimeters per Second could get a very high overall score, but a low entertainment score. OK, This is my last post over this topic. I feel that if you don't understand my sentiments by this point, then you probably never will. And thus, I think it's pointless for me to further waste my time discussing this topic. If you end up agreeing with me, great, if not that's fine. I don't care. We can just settle this as a difference of opinion. Either way, I simply don't care enough about this topic to continue this conversation. Afterall, in the end entertainment still is a criteria of MAL reviews, so what point would there be for me to continue arguing when I already have my way? You can continue to discuss your criticisms over my ideas, but I created this message because I just don't want you to hold on to any hope that I'll respond back from this point onwards. Cheers! |
SinMar 26, 2009 10:43 AM
All the mods fucking blow on this website except Kaiserpingvin, Cloudy-Sky, Baman and aero. PM me if you're actually good and I left you out. Oh, rule 8... ( ̄ー ̄) |
Mar 26, 2009 2:34 PM
#441
Sin said: Afterall, in the end entertainment still is a criteria of MAL reviews, so what point would there be for me to continue arguing when I already have my way? So your ending the conversation because you already had your way from the beginning? That's the laziest excuse I've ever heard. And since i will be wasting my time responding to your other responses, while i have arguments against all of them, i wont. Oh and if you haven't noticed through this entire argument, I was never arguing that MAL shouldn't have entertainment as a supposed category. It is fine to be used on a site that is completely from the fan prospective in which people only watch anime for enjoyment. But my whole point was that when looking and reviewing anime at a more in depth level (which some reviewers here indeed do) entertainment is not an element used to judge. It seems that even until the end you have still yet to understand my argument. And lastly, this wasn't about only MAL reviews. It was about reviewing anime in general! |
KetuekigamiMar 26, 2009 2:38 PM
Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
Mar 26, 2009 4:17 PM
#442
Sin said: LOL you don't make ANY sense. Actions ARE the story, and you just said that you receive the impressions from the actions. Thus, you receive the impressions of a character FROM the story. I could symbolize this for you and show you how it logically forms a proof that connotates this, but I grow tired. All you've proven is that once again, how you judge the characters IS BASED ON the story. k, YOU obviously didn't read what I wrote. I'm saying whilst the impressions on the character is created by the actions/plot, once the impressions are made, you may ignore the plot elements and consider only the impressions in the character criteria. Who cares if it came from the story if you're not even considering the story? (don't argue that because the impressions are made by elements in the story, that it is a part of the story. This is not true, just as a dildo isn't part of a dildo factory... I know, i'm such a dull-witted guy to come up with "dildo" lol) Sin said: You obviously didn't read what I said. Arguing that entertainment shouldn't be a criterion because it's bias, and arguing that it shouldn't be a criterion because it's inextricably intertwined with other categories are two DIFFERENT arguments for why entertainment shouldn't be a criterion. Sin said: First you were arguing that entertainment wasn't a separate criterion, and now you're arguing that it shouldn't be a criterion because it's bias. how are these two sentences the same? One side of the comparison is "entertainment shouldn't be a criteria because it's biased. The other side of the comparison... is it "you were arguing that entertainment wasn't a separate criterion" or "arguing that it shouldn't be a criterion because it's inextricably intertwined with other categories"? clearly YOU were the one that changed YOUR argument. Sin said: As to your first point empathy, it shouldn't be a criterion because empathy says nothing about how much you enjoyed it, and it contrasts with "entertainment" because unlike entertainment, nobody cares how it relates to you if you say nothing about how much you liked it. lol, i'm pretty sure that people are bound to enjoy something more if they could relate to it. Thus it has an impact on ur enjoyment. Thus, according to you, people would care about it. Sin said: "Morals" shouldn't be a criterion because not everyone even views morals as being important lol Sin said: And intrigue is virtually synonymous with story, as the better stories usually involve more intricate plots that generate thoughts and ideas. that's why you think that crtieria shouldn't be there? i thought the whole time you said that it doesn't matter if a crtieria overlaps with another. Sin said: OK, This is my last post over this topic. I feel that if you don't understand my sentiments by this point, then you probably never will. And thus, I think it's pointless for me to further waste my time discussing this topic. If you end up agreeing with me, great, if not that's fine. I don't care. We can just settle this as a difference of opinion. Either way, I simply don't care enough about this topic to continue this conversation. Afterall, in the end entertainment still is a criteria of MAL reviews, so what point would there be for me to continue arguing when I already have my way? You can continue to discuss your criticisms over my ideas, but I created this message because I just don't want you to hold on to any hope that I'll respond back from this point onwards. Cheers! lol... ur explanations to my questions made less sense than how much sense you claim whatever i said made. Making an excuse to no longer give responses when you can no longer come up with responses that make sense is weak. oh and you didn't explain what i asked before dxthegreat said: Sin said: There isn't a single criterion that isn't made up of other criteria. can you explain which other criteria animation and sound is made up of? I'm not trying to argue, i'm just wondering this. |
dxthegreatMar 26, 2009 4:39 PM
Apr 2, 2009 6:00 PM
#443
Well, it happened. KnK dropped to #3. Im not all that sad cuz it had a good run and im especially glad that LotGH took its place for now, but i still noticed a slight increase in 1-5 votes for KnK that probably caused the change. But what are you gonna do, its not enough hate to warrant complaints so i wont. Though its tight right now since the top 3 are all at 9.00 and it can change multiple times so i haven't given up hopr for KnK to be #1 again. Looks like the top 3 can go any way now. |
Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
Apr 2, 2009 7:15 PM
#444
Apr 2, 2009 10:28 PM
#445
Lol, just a bunch of accounts from LoGH recently watched list: http://myanimelist.net/profile/oberstein_fan http://myanimelist.net/profile/hasubendo http://myanimelist.net/profile/waifu http://myanimelist.net/profile/xenotype http://myanimelist.net/profile/Vayate I reported a batch of couple dozens accounts like those few weeks ago but none of them was removed. |
Apr 3, 2009 1:52 AM
#447
Apr 3, 2009 4:58 AM
#448
Just wait until Hajime no Ippo: NC ends, cause when it ends, all votes of the people who have already dropped the series and given a bad score will be invalid since it will set to finished airing, and it will most probably top most of the series in the top ten, and who knows, it might even climb to the summit :P :D I'm still stuck in the first series, so i cannot judge the sequel based on my assesment from the first season, but if it resembles the first one, then it's already a little bit overrated XD Omg, i do not hate Clannad After Story, it's what i call "fine" but heck, what is it doing up there, increasing its score gradually !?! I wont complain about KnK's dropping points, for every1 had already expected it to leave the top spot sooner or later, but it was a long run actually which was a good change for a while ^^ |
Apr 3, 2009 7:07 AM
#449
after story shows no sign of slowing down, and there is very few Clannad haters as well it seems since for a show with 13k+ members it has 12 1/10 votes (Aria the Origination already has more >_>) so i wont be surprised to see it get to 8.99 eventually... Ippo might also skyrocket to top 3 seeing how the first season is strongly rated and season 2 scores are always usually higher since all those who dont like the show have been filtered out for the most part O_o I dont mind TTGL in 1st...in fact after beign 1st so long it kinda looks weird when its not XD |
More topics from this board
Poll: » Kara no Kyoukai 5: Mujun Rasen Episode 1 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )dtshyk - Aug 22, 2008 |
511 |
by Stormen
»»
Sep 28, 8:48 PM |
|
» Which city inspires Mifune CITY?RyogiSHIKI7 - Jul 1 |
5 |
by RyogiSHIKI7
»»
Jul 1, 12:45 PM |
|
» best plot twist in anime history?sabervergarden - Feb 12, 2021 |
11 |
by sudhanshu_hbk
»»
May 11, 8:27 AM |
|
» why peaple gave this episode low rate to be lower than it deserve? this episode is masterpieceRCvvvv - Sep 17, 2022 |
17 |
by Phloup
»»
Sep 17, 2022 4:03 PM |
|
Poll: » which is the best ost from ufotabledixoncider8142 - Feb 4, 2022 |
6 |
by JJxy
»»
Mar 29, 2022 5:58 AM |