| We often complain that MAL's top anime list is filled with sequels and seasonal anime but have you ever wondered how it would look like without those? Neither did I. Anyway, I removed all the sequels and recently aired anime to put together MAL's actual top 50 list and here's the result: Rank 50 on this list equals to rank 154 on the original list which means about 2/3 are sequels and recently aired anime. Which one do you like more? The original or the adjusted version? I'm quite surprised how many older titles (pre 2000) made it into the list. |
| This makes way more sense to me. Some people might be cheesed about Shingeki no Kyojin, see a few comments about including other season rankings, but I think it's right about where it should be at 36. |
 |
| The "removed sequels" rule is no good. There's no Monogatari left, no Attack on Titan. None of these is really a recent show, and I'd prefer to replace such entries with a reference to the full franchise, ranked along their highest entry. Else too much gets lost and picking becomes too arbitrary. Example: "Shouwa Genroku Rakugo Shinjuu: Sukeroku Futatabi-hen" is recent (2017) and a sequel, and doesn't make the list. The far lower rated first part of what is essentially a split-cours makes it, but far lower ranked than the franchise as a whole would be. |
inimJul 14, 2023 4:10 PM
 |
| Wish you could filter out movies/ovas from it too. |
 |
inim said: The "removed sequels" rule is no good. There's no Monogatari left, no Attack on Titan, no Mushishi. None of these is really a recent show, and I'd prefer to replace such entries with a reference to the full franchise. Else too much gets lost and picking becomes too arbitrary. Example: "Shouwa Genroku Rakugo Shinjuu: Sukeroku Futatabi-hen" is recent (2017) and a sequel, and doesn't make the list. The far lower rated first part of what is essentially a split-cours makes it, but far lower ranked than the franchise as a whole would be. Attack on Titan and Mushishi are both on the list and Monogatari is just not good enough. The other Monogatari entries are ranked that high because everyone who suffered through Bakemonogatari and still continued will of course love it and give it a high score. This whole mean franchise score doesn't make any sense because then some 20 sequels will distort the score so much that it will be meaningless again. |
ateks said: For Mushishi & AoT I stand corrected, the problem with multiple franchise entries rated at the first season only remains. E.g. Mushishi would be a lot higher if the highst entry (=the finale) would be picked, similar for Fruits Basket. And using words like "suffer trough" doesn't really help with my impression of arbitrariness. Stating the the cut-off year for "recent" already would be an improvement. Another AWOL candidate is 3-gatsu, another split-cour your method fails to give due credit to.inim said: The "removed sequels" rule is no good. There's no Monogatari left, no Attack on Titan, no Mushishi. None of these is really a recent show, and I'd prefer to replace such entries with a reference to the full franchise. Else too much gets lost and picking becomes too arbitrary. Example: "Shouwa Genroku Rakugo Shinjuu: Sukeroku Futatabi-hen" is recent (2017) and a sequel, and doesn't make the list. The far lower rated first part of what is essentially a split-cours makes it, but far lower ranked than the franchise as a whole would be. Attack on Titan and Mushishi are both on the list and Monogatari is just not good enough. The other Monogatari entries are ranked that high because everyone who suffered through Bakemonogatari and still continued will of course love it and give it a high score. This whole mean franchise score doesn't make any sense because then some 20 sequels will distort the score so much that it will be meaningless again. |
inimJul 14, 2023 4:21 PM
| |
| Nice compilation, however, I'd go myself with including mean scores of franchises, to make the whole score distribution fair towards shows that have a lot of entries varying in quality. Something like @Felori mentioned earlier. By that, no anime franchise wouldn't look as being favored or disfavored by the toplist's mechanics. |
| Like others suggest, an average/mean score of all seasons with I think excluding other types of entries if say the main type of the anime in question is a TV series would probably be more realistic but nonetheless this is a great and clean list. EDIT: I'll probably contradict what I originally said but after some thought going by mean score of all entries cannot be justified too tbh for 2 reasons, 1- some seasons have less or more episodes than other seasons of the same anime, 2- some seasons are split into 2 parts and therefor 2 entries with 2 different scores and therefor counting them separately for the mean score just don't feel right to me. First point can probably be ignored but the 2nd one is tricky. Going by the highest rated one doesn't work either, first season or maybe last season(assuming isn't split into 2) is close enough and being close enough is enough and for that, once again, this list is great. |
TheBerserkerJul 14, 2023 5:02 PM
| the score of the sequels does matter, yes there is score inflation, but on that same note sometimes series get much better as they go on, and some other times series turn into shit as they go on. obviously none of these ways are perfect, but I think the "average of all seasons" would give the most reasonable results. like 3 out of the 4 kaguya sama entries would make it to this list, but it's not here, just because s1 wouldn't be here. there is jojo, which you can almost argue that each part should be counted as a new series. fruits basket, ashita no joe, and mushoku tensei are also 3 more that suffer from the same problem. |
| Also available at: YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCK8spdL1M_J-z0vO2C7jPLw Second Channel: https://www.youtube.com/@AshPolygonsDo/videos Twitter: https://x.com/APolygons2 Backloggd: https://backloggd.com/games/lib/rating?page=8 IMDB: https://www.imdb.com/user/ur107632777/?ref_=uspf_nv_profile |
Adnash said: I recall that such a list has been compiled, and found that averaging all entries of a franchise also has its issues. E.g. AoT has a few extremly shitty cash-grab OVAs and loses disproportionally for entries hardly an hour long while the main thing is an epic. I'd personally prefer to go with the highest entry of a franchise, but probably both methods are similarily unfair - just for other shows.Nice compilation, however, I'd go myself with including mean scores of franchises, to make the whole score distribution fair towards shows that have a lot of entries varying in quality. Something like @Felori mentioned earlier. By that, no anime franchise wouldn't look as being favored or disfavored by the toplist's mechanics. |
| |
ateks said: We often complain that MAL's top anime list is filled with sequels and seasonal anime but have you ever wondered how it would look like without those? Neither did I. Anyway, I removed all the sequels and recently aired anime to put together MAL's actual top 50 list and here's the result: Rank 50 on this list equals to rank 154 on the original list which means about 2/3 are sequels and recently aired anime. Which one do you like more? The original or the adjusted version? I'm quite surprised how many older titles (pre 2000) made it into the list. This list isnt too bad actually, improved enormously, even for orginization purposes the season listings should just fall under one show rather then seperate entries. My guess is too much of an effort to overhaul the website, too many people pissed their 300 logged shows turn into 95. I see the list still has a recency bias such as for Vinland Saga, Jujutsu Kaisen, Demon Slayer, Ousama Ranking. I think most of us can agree say thats far too early or undeserved to be put there. For that you will probably have to try the ANN list. I wish perhaps the MAL userbase was a bit more mature or curious. It would help a variety of anime reach more people if they were in the top 10. @Felori says this list is a gimmick but i believe far more then people realize use it as a guideline to start their journey into anime. I discovered a 4chan chart earlier before i was aware of this website and it certainly engaged me to seek out a variety of shows. Seasonal mindset brainrot. My elitism i showing i guess. |
| that looks way better, no TYBW really fixes it. |
 |
| It still includes a lot of anime that reached high propelled only by recency bias and fancy animation so it's still a non-reliable list in my eyes. |
| No list will be completely reliable. FMAB is notorious for having a fanbase that is OBSESSED with that #1 spot. Remember when Oshi no Ko held the top spot for a short time earlier this year? People stopped paying attention to that battle after the "Let's All Love Lain" cyber-attack though. |
MedK001 said: As for actual feedback, I'm supposed Dragon Ball is nowhere to be seen in the top 50, but series I've never seen anyone talk about like Space Brothers and Rainbow are. Ratings aren't about the popularity of the show you know. |
inim said: Hmm, I think I saw such list posted somewhere, but I can't remember which thread it was and what were the criteria for it. If we are thinking about the same fanmade toplist, with the whole franchises listen in place of singular entries, I think the author excluded some types of shows from their definition of "anime franchise". I don't remember the details, though.I recall that such a list has been compiled, and found that averaging all entries of a franchise also has its issues. E.g. AoT has a few extremly shitty cash-grab OVAs and loses disproportionally for entries hardly an hour long while the main thing is an epic. I'd personally prefer to go with the highest entry of a franchise, but probably both methods are similarily unfair - just for other shows. I agree that the "anime franchise method" is definitely not a flawless one, but at the same time I feel it'd be the most fair and free from flaws method to determine the actual score of certain franchises, compared to few solutions suggested earlier. At the end of a day, it will be still looking for something less unfair than the other suggestions. Each method has its pros and cons, and it's impossible to pick one that would be acclaimed as "genuinely fair" by all fans. However, from all methods suggested earlier, I think the closest to "fair rating" is that method with anime franchises. |
Felori said: I think it's too much work to do tho. Would be easy to write a mean for every anime franchise, but you have to handpick the story-relevant side stories for every entry, since nobody wants omakes and co to count into the mean score, I guess. That poor person doing that will go crazy. ^^ Like I suggested, the best and easier way is to exclude movies and OVAs altogether regardless if they're relevant to the plot or not and only count the TV series entries unless the anime is mainly an OVA or a film series, still, I have 2 problems with mean score I mentioned already one of them can probably be ignored but it still bothers me, the 2nd is the problem of split seasons into 2 parts and therefor 2 entries, whether we count them separately or count only the mean score of the 2 parts will result into 2 different average scores for any anime with at least one split season. |
Felori said: Adnash said: Nice compilation, however, I'd go myself with including mean scores of franchises, to make the whole score distribution fair towards shows that have a lot of entries varying in quality. Something like @Felori mentioned earlier. By that, no anime franchise wouldn't look as being favored or disfavored by the toplist's mechanics. I think it's too much work to do tho. Would be easy to write a mean for every anime franchise, but you have to handpick the story-relevant side stories for every entry, since nobody wants omakes and co to count into the mean score, I guess. That poor person doing that will go crazy. ^^ MangoSamurai said: @Felori says this list is a gimmick but i believe far more then people realize use it as a guideline to start their journey into anime. I discovered a 4chan chart earlier before i was aware of this website and it certainly engaged me to seek out a variety of shows I think people who are watching anime for long don't care that much anymore, but especially young people who just started, are easier to influence. Let them not stay from the light then, I don’t think you realize how big that market of young lambs. Felori said: Adnash said: Nice compilation, however, I'd go myself with including mean scores of franchises, to make the whole score distribution fair towards shows that have a lot of entries varying in quality. Something like @Felori mentioned earlier. By that, no anime franchise wouldn't look as being favored or disfavored by the toplist's mechanics. I think it's too much work to do tho. Would be easy to write a mean for every anime franchise, but you have to handpick the story-relevant side stories for every entry, since nobody wants omakes and co to count into the mean score, I guess. That poor person doing that will go crazy. ^^ MangoSamurai said: @Felori says this list is a gimmick but i believe far more then people realize use it as a guideline to start their journey into anime. I discovered a 4chan chart earlier before i was aware of this website and it certainly engaged me to seek out a variety of shows I think people who are watching anime for long don't care that much anymore, but especially young people who just started, are easier to influence. You cannot i imagine the size of that market i think, its probably quadrupled in size since Tiktok. Lead them go in the light rather then the isekai hell |
Felori said: That's true. People often think about the most popular shows with the highest mean scores grouped into franchises, but such system would require grouping ALL franchises in consistent way, no matter the popularity of it. That kind of work would require truly titanic amount of effort and time. We are talking about the whole anime database after all, haha.I think it's too much work to do tho. Would be easy to write a mean for every anime franchise, but you have to handpick the story-relevant side stories for every entry, since nobody wants omakes and co to count into the mean score, I guess. That poor person doing that will go crazy. ^^ Besides... Felori said: Overall the ranking list is just a little gimmick people shouldn't care so much about. This. It's just a fancy feature that shouldn't be seen as infallible oracle's verdict on what anime is better than the other. Personal enjoyment is the most important, after all. MyAnimeList, as the name suggests, encourages users to create their own lists of shows they have seen, and allows them to rate those shows as they like. Toplists are surely helpful, same as reviews and recommendations, but I wouldn't get heated up over them. :P |
ateks said: Maybe this one and i think i have a solution to the sequels problem. Try:Which one do you like more? The original or the adjusted version? (season 1 score × eps count + sequel score × eps count) ÷ total eps count That way you'll get an average score per eps. |
| The score of sequels heavily depends on the % of watchers who didn't stop at the first season, to the point that it can be quite unreliable. For example, Yuru Camp s2 is rated 0.26 higher than s1, but after comparing the scores of only those who watched both seasons I found out that s1 is actually liked more. On the other hand, MAL users have a bias against incomplete stories. I don't think it's just because the climax is in latter parts, I feel like people literally consider the lack of a definite conclusion a malus, when rating anime. My solution? Allow users to give "franchise scores" alongside rating each entry separately. The franchise score will be set by default at the weighted (based on watchtime) average of all the entries you watched and rated, but you can freely change it as long as it is comprised between the lowest and the highest score you gave. This way, you get to decide the impact of each season into your opinion of the franchise as a whole. |
ateks said: inim said: The "removed sequels" rule is no good. There's no Monogatari left, no Attack on Titan, no Mushishi. None of these is really a recent show, and I'd prefer to replace such entries with a reference to the full franchise. Else too much gets lost and picking becomes too arbitrary. Example: "Shouwa Genroku Rakugo Shinjuu: Sukeroku Futatabi-hen" is recent (2017) and a sequel, and doesn't make the list. The far lower rated first part of what is essentially a split-cours makes it, but far lower ranked than the franchise as a whole would be. Attack on Titan and Mushishi are both on the list and Monogatari is just not good enough. The other Monogatari entries are ranked that high because everyone who suffered through Bakemonogatari and still continued will of course love it and give it a high score. This whole mean franchise score doesn't make any sense because then some 20 sequels will distort the score so much that it will be meaningless again. But completely excluding them also doesn't make any sense, as it also unfairly pits completed series as a whole, vs just the first season of other series. Take Hunter x Hunter for example, if that were broken down into seasons as most other shows are, then just season 1 (the hunter exam arc) rated on its own, would drag HxH much farther down the list then the 3rd place you currently have it. So, either way you have a very skewed system. The only way to have any kind of accurate measure, would have the ability to rate every series as a whole. |
Jackson1333Jul 14, 2023 9:08 PM
| Nice to see fmab still on the top lmao |
| . |
| How about combining sequels instead of excluding them? If so, Yakusoku No Neverland must not be on Top 50 (because season 2 was really bad) |
 |
| I agree with everyone who says it'd be more accurate if you took the average score of any show with multiple seasons. euford said: As pointed out here, Things like Yakusoku No Neverland and One Punch Man would slide lower due to their sequels, while other shows would likely go up higher. Probably even leading to shows that aren't currently on this list to replace ones that are.How about combining sequels instead of excluding them? If so, Yakusoku No Neverland must not be on Top 50 (because season 2 was really bad) Also, I don't see the point in removing recently aired shows. Unless they're literally still airing, they should be fair game. |
FanofActionJul 14, 2023 9:31 PM
ateks said: That is a good point I had not considered.This whole mean franchise score doesn't make any sense because then some 20 sequels will distort the score so much that it will be meaningless again. |
| その目だれの目？ |
inim said: ateks said: For Mushishi & AoT I stand corrected, the problem with multiple franchise entries rated at the first season only remains. E.g. Mushishi would be a lot higher if the highst entry (=the finale) would be picked, similar for Fruits Basket. And using words like "suffer trough" doesn't really help with my impression of arbitrariness. Stating the the cut-off year for "recent" already would be an improvement. Another AWOL candidate is 3-gatsu, another split-cour your method fails to give due credit to.Attack on Titan and Mushishi are both on the list and Monogatari is just not good enough. The other Monogatari entries are ranked that high because everyone who suffered through Bakemonogatari and still continued will of course love it and give it a high score. This whole mean franchise score doesn't make any sense because then some 20 sequels will distort the score so much that it will be meaningless again. You suggested picking the highest score for the franchise, which introduces a huge sampling bias towards people who didn't drop season 1, which is kind of what this list wanted to avoid. Besides, is there really a sequel that's that much better than the original? |
| I always wondered about that and yep, looks better definitely. |
 |
JaniSIr said: This argument really makes clear to me that we are talking about two different types of anime. Group one is the type where after a successful first season it's decided to milk the cow dry, and sequels are produced. Typically this results in a sequence of 1-cour shows of decreasing quality, and a number of interim finales. I think this is what you talk about.inim said: For Mushishi & AoT I stand corrected, the problem with multiple franchise entries rated at the first season only remains. E.g. Mushishi would be a lot higher if the highst entry (=the finale) would be picked, similar for Fruits Basket. And using words like "suffer trough" doesn't really help with my impression of arbitrariness. Stating the the cut-off year for "recent" already would be an improvement. Another AWOL candidate is 3-gatsu, another split-cour your method fails to give due credit to. You suggested picking the highest score for the franchise, which introduces a huge sampling bias towards people who didn't drop season 1, which is kind of what this list wanted to avoid. Besides, is there really a sequel that's that much better than the original? Then, there are long narrations with an a-priori funding horizon of multiple, typically 4, cours. In them, pacing and dramatic arcs are very different. Typically they take a few seaons for character and world building. Typical fans of type 1 (1 cour planning) now drop and shout "boring!", ADHD style. But with type 2 of shows, enjoyment goes up over time, because at some point the story sets in and has well developed characters and worlds to work with. Examples of punished shows (in terms of lower rank or absence from the list) by OPs list due to the "first season" method include Fruits Basket, Mushishi, Monogatari Series, Kaguya-sama wa Kokurasetai, Gintanama, AoT, 3-gatsu no Lion, Clannad, Violet Evergarden and so on and so forth. I think it's obviously that depending on method one systematically is lobsided towards either one of those two types. On top of that, MAL lumps together seasons into "long shows" for older entries. For example Legend of the Galactic heroes has four distinguishable seasons, but only one MAL entry. This, btw, explains in part why pre-2000 shows seem to perform better. OP's methods prefers them. Long story short, OP's methodical decisions create a bias. Any other method also would create one. As a fan of longer, novel based and character driven shows (type 2) I feel that OPs list is worse than the original MAL one, because it disporoportionally disadvantages my prefered type. |
inimJul 15, 2023 4:02 AM
| |
inim said: Well, the only way you could eliminate bias is by only asking people to rate exactly what you want to treat as one...JaniSIr said: This argument really makes clear to me that we are talking about two different types of anime. Group one is the type where after a successful first season it's decided to milk the cow dry, and sequels are produced. Typically this results in a sequence of 1-cour shows of decreasing quality, and a number of interim finales. I think this is what you talk about.You suggested picking the highest score for the franchise, which introduces a huge sampling bias towards people who didn't drop season 1, which is kind of what this list wanted to avoid. Besides, is there really a sequel that's that much better than the original? Then, there are long narrations with an a-priori funding horizon of multiple, typically 4, cours. In them, pacing and dramatic arcs are very different. Typically they take a few seaons for character and world building. Typical fans of type 1 (1 cour planning) now drop and shout "boring!", ADHD style. But with type 2 of shows, enjoyment goes up over time, because at some point the story sets in and has well developed characters and worlds to work with. Examples of punished shows (in terms of lower rank or absence from the list) by OPs list due to the "first season" method include Fruits Basket, Mushishi, Monogatari Series, Kaguya-sama wa Kokurasetai, Gintanama, AoT, 3-gatsu no Lion, Clannad, Violet Evergarden and so on and so forth. I think it's obviously that depending on method one systematically is lobsided towards either one of those two types. On top of that, MAL lumps together seasons into "long shows" for older entries. For example Legend of the Galactic heroes has four distinguishable seasons, but only one MAL entry. This, btw, explains in part why pre-2000 shows seem to perform better. OP's methods prefers them. Long story short, OP's methodical decisions create a bias. Any other method also would create one. As a fan of longer, novel based and character driven shows (type 2) I feel that OPs list is worse than the original MAL one, because it disporoportionally disadvantages my prefered type. But you know, being long is not an excuse for the beginning to be boring. And in general I'm a strong believer of the optimal anime length to be somewhere between 12-26 episodes, with only a few exceptions actually being worth watching longer. You mentioned Attack on Titan, but honestly, I consider season 4 a huge flop. Don't even feel like finishing it, I read the last 9 chapters of the manga, and MAPPA action is not particularly good anyway. |
JaniSIr said: First, "boring" is highly subjective. To me there's little more boring than shounen action, school and ecchi. I am not entertained by fights of any type, so some of the most boring shows are e.g. Code Geass, Fullmetal Alchemist or Demon Slayer. Taste differs, and "boring" is not even close to an objective criterion. All approaches to pacing and storytelling are equal, and our preference seem to be 180 degrees different. Which is fine, but becomes a problem when one of them is picked as an "objective" method to create ranking lists. Second, my ideal length of a show is 4 cours, which is 52 episodes.inim said: Well, the only way you could eliminate bias is by only asking people to rate exactly what you want to treat as one...This argument really makes clear to me that we are talking about two different types of anime. Group one is the type where after a successful first season it's decided to milk the cow dry, and sequels are produced. Typically this results in a sequence of 1-cour shows of decreasing quality, and a number of interim finales. I think this is what you talk about. Then, there are long narrations with an a-priori funding horizon of multiple, typically 4, cours. In them, pacing and dramatic arcs are very different. Typically they take a few seaons for character and world building. Typical fans of type 1 (1 cour planning) now drop and shout "boring!", ADHD style. But with type 2 of shows, enjoyment goes up over time, because at some point the story sets in and has well developed characters and worlds to work with. Examples of punished shows (in terms of lower rank or absence from the list) by OPs list due to the "first season" method include Fruits Basket, Mushishi, Monogatari Series, Kaguya-sama wa Kokurasetai, Gintanama, AoT, 3-gatsu no Lion, Clannad, Violet Evergarden and so on and so forth. I think it's obviously that depending on method one systematically is lobsided towards either one of those two types. On top of that, MAL lumps together seasons into "long shows" for older entries. For example Legend of the Galactic heroes has four distinguishable seasons, but only one MAL entry. This, btw, explains in part why pre-2000 shows seem to perform better. OP's methods prefers them. Long story short, OP's methodical decisions create a bias. Any other method also would create one. As a fan of longer, novel based and character driven shows (type 2) I feel that OPs list is worse than the original MAL one, because it disporoportionally disadvantages my prefered type. But you know, being long is not an excuse for the beginning to be boring. And in general I'm a strong believer of the optimal anime length to be somewhere between 12-26 episodes, with only a few exceptions actually being worth watching longer. You mentioned Attack on Titan, but honestly, I consider season 4 a huge flop. Don't even feel like finishing it, I read the last 9 chapters of the manga, and MAPPA action is not particularly good anyway. As for attack on Titan, I don't consider it a flop or look into specific seasons. In my rating, the seasons rank just mid at 5/10 to 7/10, overall the show would not make my top 100 at all. It's still a shounen meat mecha show with teen protagonists, nothing that excites me. |
| |
inim said: JaniSIr said: This argument really makes clear to me that we are talking about two different types of anime. Group one is the type where after a successful first season it's decided to milk the cow dry, and sequels are produced. Typically this results in a sequence of 1-cour shows of decreasing quality, and a number of interim finales. I think this is what you talk about.You suggested picking the highest score for the franchise, which introduces a huge sampling bias towards people who didn't drop season 1, which is kind of what this list wanted to avoid. Besides, is there really a sequel that's that much better than the original? Then, there are long narrations with an a-priori funding horizon of multiple, typically 4, cours. In them, pacing and dramatic arcs are very different. Typically they take a few seaons for character and world building. Typical fans of type 1 (1 cour planning) now drop and shout "boring!", ADHD style. But with type 2 of shows, enjoyment goes up over time, because at some point the story sets in and has well developed characters and worlds to work with. Examples of punished shows (in terms of lower rank or absence from the list) by OPs list due to the "first season" method include Fruits Basket, Mushishi, Monogatari Series, Kaguya-sama wa Kokurasetai, Gintanama, AoT, 3-gatsu no Lion, Clannad, Violet Evergarden and so on and so forth. I think it's obviously that depending on method one systematically is lobsided towards either one of those two types. On top of that, MAL lumps together seasons into "long shows" for older entries. For example Legend of the Galactic heroes has four distinguishable seasons, but only one MAL entry. This, btw, explains in part why pre-2000 shows seem to perform better. OP's methods prefers them. Long story short, OP's methodical decisions create a bias. Any other method also would create one. As a fan of longer, novel based and character driven shows (type 2) I feel that OPs list is worse than the original MAL one, because it disporoportionally disadvantages my prefered type. It kinda depends on who the list is for. Do you want it to be for people who are looking for new anime to watch that they will "probably like" or do you want it to be for hardcore fans who want to see their favorite anime as high as possible in the ranking? It's just not possible to make a list that will satisfy both groups. The list above is rather for new fans who are looking for "good" anime to watch without suffering through 200 episodes first before "it gets good" and I personally think that should be the main purpose of top lists in general. |
ateks said: First, of course there is no unbiased list, which is why MAL does what they do and keep the data fairly raw and uninterpreted. They do simply know that any aggregation of shows into franchises or similar introduces bias. MAL's list already has a strong bias towards shounen shows due to their mass appeal and demographics. So I personally don't use MAL ranking at all, but the more "elitist" https://anidb.net/anime/?noalias=1&orderby.name=1.1&orderby.rating=0.2 with an older and less casual audience. The problem is not to "correct" MAL for me, I already know I don't have a mainstream taste, which MAL reflects.inim said: This argument really makes clear to me that we are talking about two different types of anime. Group one is the type where after a successful first season it's decided to milk the cow dry, and sequels are produced. Typically this results in a sequence of 1-cour shows of decreasing quality, and a number of interim finales. I think this is what you talk about. Then, there are long narrations with an a-priori funding horizon of multiple, typically 4, cours. In them, pacing and dramatic arcs are very different. Typically they take a few seaons for character and world building. Typical fans of type 1 (1 cour planning) now drop and shout "boring!", ADHD style. But with type 2 of shows, enjoyment goes up over time, because at some point the story sets in and has well developed characters and worlds to work with. Examples of punished shows (in terms of lower rank or absence from the list) by OPs list due to the "first season" method include Fruits Basket, Mushishi, Monogatari Series, Kaguya-sama wa Kokurasetai, Gintanama, AoT, 3-gatsu no Lion, Clannad, Violet Evergarden and so on and so forth. I think it's obviously that depending on method one systematically is lobsided towards either one of those two types. On top of that, MAL lumps together seasons into "long shows" for older entries. For example Legend of the Galactic heroes has four distinguishable seasons, but only one MAL entry. This, btw, explains in part why pre-2000 shows seem to perform better. OP's methods prefers them. Long story short, OP's methodical decisions create a bias. Any other method also would create one. As a fan of longer, novel based and character driven shows (type 2) I feel that OPs list is worse than the original MAL one, because it disporoportionally disadvantages my prefered type. It kinda depends on who the list is for. Do you want it to be for people who are looking for new anime to watch that they will "probably like" or do you want it to be for hardcore fans who want to see their favorite anime as high as possible in the ranking? It's just not possible to make a list that will satisfy both groups. The list above is rather for new fans who are looking for "good" anime to watch without suffering through 200 episodes first before "it gets good" and I personally think that should be the main purpose of top lists in general. Second, "suffering trough 200 episodes before it gets good" made me smile. Ever considered that character development can be entertaining, and "before it gets good" often means the point where a story driven narrative kicks in and replaces world and character building? I may enjoy the 200 episodes before more than the showdown ... |
| |
| It definitely looks cleaner when the sequels are not included. I'll still never understand why people get so upset about scores and rankings. However, it is usually the case that sequels or prequels are quite different and vary significantly in quality, which is why such a list would not really represent the top 50. |
inim said: You are measuring ratings, which is literally just the average subjective opinion of people...JaniSIr said: First, "boring" is highly subjective. To me there's little more boring than shounen action, school and ecchi. I am not entertained by fights of any type, so some of the most boring shows are e.g. Code Geass, Fullmetal Alchemist or Demon Slayer. Taste differs, and "boring" is not even close to an objective criterion. All approaches to pacing and storytelling are equal, and our preference seem to be 180 degrees different. Which is fine, but becomes a problem when one of them is picked as an "objective" method to create ranking lists. Second, my ideal length of a show is 4 cours, which is 52 episodes.Well, the only way you could eliminate bias is by only asking people to rate exactly what you want to treat as one... But you know, being long is not an excuse for the beginning to be boring. And in general I'm a strong believer of the optimal anime length to be somewhere between 12-26 episodes, with only a few exceptions actually being worth watching longer. You mentioned Attack on Titan, but honestly, I consider season 4 a huge flop. Don't even feel like finishing it, I read the last 9 chapters of the manga, and MAPPA action is not particularly good anyway. As for attack on Titan, I don't consider it a flop or look into specific seasons. In my rating, the seasons rank just mid at 5/10 to 7/10, overall the show would not make my top 100 at all. It's still a shounen meat mecha show with teen protagonists, nothing that excites me. AoT had like a pretty decent plot, and was very edgy. Most shounens I would consider a form of torture. |
Felori said: It would be nice, if the site gives you the mean of all seasons of a show (including plot-relevant movies and ovas) and ranks the anime like that. The lack of option to score the whole series is one of the main reasons I don't bother to score anime for my list. |
Tiosar said: Doing that is another problem. There are shows spanning decades, such as LotGH, Gundam, Lupin etc. where "franchise" has a completely different meaning. I'd call the current way to release a show split-cour rather than franchise. This method comes from "superhero cinematic universes" and is marketing strategy and investment safeguarding more than anything else. In the 1970s, one cour shows hardly existed. The smallest unit usually was a year, which means four cours. Around the 2000s, the common size was two cours. Note that the release strategies and 1, 2, 4 cours target length dramatically changes the pacing and narrative options. No character and world building in short-breathed 1 cour projects, ADHD rules.Felori said: The lack of option to score the whole series is one of the main reasons I don't bother to score anime for my list. It would be nice, if the site gives you the mean of all seasons of a show (including plot-relevant movies and ovas) and ranks the anime like that. And then there are franchises in which each new season is done by a different studio and producer, e.g. Genshiken. The more one goes back in time, the more the release policies start to differ. And finally, there are reboots, continuations after long hiatus and remakes, do they count into an "average score" for a franchise? E.g. Fruits Basket from the 2000s and the modern remake - same franchise? What about Cutey Honey, 70s show counts in? Long story short, MAL does the right thing to treat each season as it's own unit. Aggregations cause more problems and border cases than they are fixing. And given release and market realities changed over the decades, finding a one-size-fits all approach including all of anime is even harder. |
inimJul 15, 2023 8:26 AM
| |
inim said: I see where you're coming from, however, there are ways to overcome this. First thing that comes to my mind is allowing custom sorting, e.g. I put some titles together and give a score to the whole group. It won't work for MAL ratings, but will help people like me.Tiosar said: Doing that is another problem. There are shows spanning decades, such as LotGH, Gundam, Lupin etc. where "franchise" has a completely different meaning. I'd call the current way to release a show in marketing and investment safeguarding 1 cour batches split-cour rather than franchise. And then there are franchises in which each new season is done by a different studio and producer, e.g. Genshiken. The more one goes back in time, the more the release policies start to differ. In the 1970s, one cour shows hardly existed. The smallest unit usually was a year, which means four cours. And finally, there are reboots, continuations after long hiatus and remakes, do they count into an "average score" for a franchise? E.g. Fruits Basket from the 2000s and the modern remake - same franchise? What about Cutey Honey, 70s show counts in? The lack of option to score the whole series is one of the main reasons I don't bother to score anime for my list. Long story short, MAL does the right thing to treat each season as it's own unit. Aggregations cause more problems and border cases than they are fixing. |
Tiosar said: I agree there are always ways. The question I raise is whether or not the result would be superior to the "keep data raw" approach MAL runs currently. In my job (databases) I'd call your proposal "views". One keeps the data raw and unaggregated, and puts structural layers on top which can result in alternative "views".inim said: I see where you're coming from, however, there are ways to overcome this. First thing that comes to my mind is allowing custom sorting, e.g. I put some titles together and give a score to the whole group. It won't work for MAL ratings, but will help people like me.Doing that is another problem. There are shows spanning decades, such as LotGH, Gundam, Lupin etc. where "franchise" has a completely different meaning. I'd call the current way to release a show in marketing and investment safeguarding 1 cour batches split-cour rather than franchise. And then there are franchises in which each new season is done by a different studio and producer, e.g. Genshiken. The more one goes back in time, the more the release policies start to differ. In the 1970s, one cour shows hardly existed. The smallest unit usually was a year, which means four cours. And finally, there are reboots, continuations after long hiatus and remakes, do they count into an "average score" for a franchise? E.g. Fruits Basket from the 2000s and the modern remake - same franchise? What about Cutey Honey, 70s show counts in? Long story short, MAL does the right thing to treat each season as it's own unit. Aggregations cause more problems and border cases than they are fixing. Another real option is using weighted scores. For example anidb uses normalized scores, which means they take the median of a voter's total votes as "5/10" and modify their absolute scores. So somebody who has an average of 7.5/10 and somebody with average 5/10 can be compared. Person A's 8/10 is nearly the same as person B's 5/10 when summing up. I'm not sure, but I think IMDB has more corrections, such as a factor to remove recency and genre bias. Let' s face it, younger shounen fans have a higher average for their favorites than elitists. With weighted score lists, the "raw" version we currently have is just another view. |
inimJul 15, 2023 8:37 AM
| |
| @inim It would be really interesting to see how the rankings would look like if normalized scores were implemented on MAL. |
| Naisu, though entries look as horrible es evar pero~ rip jujutsu there |
 |
More topics from this board
» Which anime do you rewatch all the time?Rally- - Oct 3 |
47 |
by dndlion
»»
38 seconds ago |
|
» Waifu War V5 (Anniversary-Edition!) (Round 1) ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )TheMinkalex - Sep 28 |
256 |
by Sheol01
»»
2 minutes ago |
|
» What was your 1000th anime? ( 1 2 )Shizuna - Jun 25, 2024 |
52 |
by AllAlone8
»»
2 minutes ago |
|
Poll: » Are you fan of specific anime or general genre ?tchitchouan - 12 hours ago |
20 |
by WaterMage
»»
3 minutes ago |
|
» Any figures you would like to see as a Fate Servant?Fukoku - Oct 5 |
35 |
by dndlion
»»
5 minutes ago |