Solo Leveling
| Instead of the dnd like, it's more of your typical mmorpg dungeon. |
| The dungeons are literally just Skyrim caves. |
| Go read Berserk and One Piece they're the best thing ever |
| no shit, Sherlock |
Reply to Saimatsu_Fan
Angglio_1 said:
I don't hate SL, just that I had a realization that their dungeons, compared to Frieren and Dungeon Meshi, suck. but as others said, they'll explain it later on in the series. So I'm not that critical about it
I don't hate SL, just that I had a realization that their dungeons, compared to Frieren and Dungeon Meshi, suck. but as others said, they'll explain it later on in the series. So I'm not that critical about it
>compared to Frieren and dungeon meshi
can't anime fans have an opinion on something without comparing it to other stuff
| @Saimatsu_Fan What are you on about? Opinions are generally formed because we compare it to something. We have opinions on when something's good or bad based on other things of similar nature we've consumed. |
| Subarashii |
Angglio_1 said: I'm not familiar with DnD or medieval Isekai and my only exposure on dungeons is from shows Dungeon Meshi and Frieren. Dungeons there have a history and ecosystem, dungeons in Solo Leveling is just a cave. I raised my eyebrow when they referring to those caves as a dungeon. The dungeons are artificial fakes, so of course they suck. It's part of the story and you'll get an explanation at the end of the story for why all this is. |
Reply to Saimatsu_Fan
Avicebrons said:
@Saimatsu_Fan What are you on about? Opinions are generally formed because we compare it to something. We have opinions on when something's good or bad based on other things of similar nature we've consumed.
@Saimatsu_Fan What are you on about? Opinions are generally formed because we compare it to something. We have opinions on when something's good or bad based on other things of similar nature we've consumed.
which is bad way of analyzing media
| @Saimatsu_Fan Not really. Quality is literally born from the comparison of things. If you showed someone Ex-Arm 40 years ago then they'd have a much more positive impression of it than now. Even though inherently, no content has been changed. That's obviously because our standards have changed. Why has it changed? Because more stuff has come out and technology has improved. For instance, we know the CGI is bad because we've seen what good CGI is and we also know what to expect from average CGI in a modern show. Imagine for instance trying to criticize the writing of the first piece of writing ever to have existed. It would be extremely difficult. Having zero frame of reference means we have a hard time imagining how it could be improved and what specifically the weak points are. Or imagine eating your first hamburger ever and then someone asks you if it's a good burger. You might be able to answer if you liked the food or not, but you wouldn't be able to answer if it was a good burger, because that's the only burger you've ever eaten. It's not the ONLY way to analyze media, if that's the direction you want to go. Which I agree with. But to say it's a bad way to analyze media is simply wrong. It can be a bad way to analyze it, but the word "can" is a key distinction. |
| Subarashii |
Reply to Saimatsu_Fan
Avicebrons said:
@Saimatsu_Fan Not really. Quality is literally born from the comparison of things. If you showed someone Ex-Arm 40 years ago then they'd have a much more positive impression of it than now. Even though inherently, no content has been changed. That's obviously because our standards have changed. Why has it changed? Because more stuff has come out and technology has improved. For instance, we know the CGI is bad because we've seen what good CGI is and we also know what to expect from average CGI in a modern show.
Imagine for instance trying to criticize the writing of the first piece of writing ever to have existed. It would be extremely difficult. Having zero frame of reference means we have a hard time imagining how it could be improved and what specifically the weak points are. Or imagine eating your first hamburger ever and then someone asks you if it's a good burger. You might be able to answer if you liked the food or not, but you wouldn't be able to answer if it was a good burger, because that's the only burger you've ever eaten.
It's not the ONLY way to analyze media, if that's the direction you want to go. Which I agree with. But to say it's a bad way to analyze media is simply wrong. It can be a bad way to analyze it, but the word "can" is a key distinction.
@Saimatsu_Fan Not really. Quality is literally born from the comparison of things. If you showed someone Ex-Arm 40 years ago then they'd have a much more positive impression of it than now. Even though inherently, no content has been changed. That's obviously because our standards have changed. Why has it changed? Because more stuff has come out and technology has improved. For instance, we know the CGI is bad because we've seen what good CGI is and we also know what to expect from average CGI in a modern show.
Imagine for instance trying to criticize the writing of the first piece of writing ever to have existed. It would be extremely difficult. Having zero frame of reference means we have a hard time imagining how it could be improved and what specifically the weak points are. Or imagine eating your first hamburger ever and then someone asks you if it's a good burger. You might be able to answer if you liked the food or not, but you wouldn't be able to answer if it was a good burger, because that's the only burger you've ever eaten.
It's not the ONLY way to analyze media, if that's the direction you want to go. Which I agree with. But to say it's a bad way to analyze media is simply wrong. It can be a bad way to analyze it, but the word "can" is a key distinction.
if you have to compare X to Y to prove that X is bad/good, then you have no real valid arguments
| @Saimatsu_Fan You're forgetting that that in and of itself is a valid argument. Showcasing that something of a similar nature is capable of executing a similar concept better proves that it was lacking in said concept. You'd generally use comparison as an augmenter, and not the entire basis though. But it can be a good way to push your argument if you don't fully know how to articulate it. That is very different from not having an argument at all though. But again, it's just objectively wrong to claim that comparisons are bad and it apparently means you have no valid argument. |
| Subarashii |
Reply to Saimatsu_Fan
Avicebrons said:
@Saimatsu_Fan You're forgetting that that in and of itself is a valid argument. Showcasing that something of a similar nature is capable of executing a similar concept better proves that it was lacking in said concept. You'd generally use comparison as an augmenter, and not the entire basis though. But it can be a good way to push your argument if you don't fully know how to articulate it. That is very different from not having an argument at all though.
But again, it's just objectively wrong to claim that comparisons are bad and it apparently means you have no valid argument.
@Saimatsu_Fan You're forgetting that that in and of itself is a valid argument. Showcasing that something of a similar nature is capable of executing a similar concept better proves that it was lacking in said concept. You'd generally use comparison as an augmenter, and not the entire basis though. But it can be a good way to push your argument if you don't fully know how to articulate it. That is very different from not having an argument at all though.
But again, it's just objectively wrong to claim that comparisons are bad and it apparently means you have no valid argument.
comparisons aren't bad, they're just not the sole reason why X is good/bad, which is something tons of people do
| @Saimatsu_Fan I agree. But the one you responded to really just said: I don't hate SL they'll explain it later on in the series I'm not that critical about it Making it abundantly clear that he does not hold it against SL nor is it the sole reason why it's bad. Yet you jumped in headfirst against the most innocuous comment about SL, chastising it for daring to make comparisons to other shows. I might've sided more with you if his comment was something like "Solo Leveling is so bad because Frieren exists".What he said was even very reasonable. He watched other shows that had a similar concept and came to the realization that said concept in those were executed better. He wasn't exactly trying to make an essay deep dive analysis on SL, using Frieren and Dungeon Meshi as framework. He was just communicating this realization that came from watching other shows. |
| Subarashii |
Reply to Saimatsu_Fan
Avicebrons said:
@Saimatsu_Fan I agree. But the one you responded to really just said:
What he said was even very reasonable. He watched other shows that had a similar concept and came to the realization that said concept in those were executed better. He wasn't exactly trying to make an essay deep dive analysis on SL, using Frieren and Dungeon Meshi as framework. He was just communicating this realization that came from watching other shows.
@Saimatsu_Fan I agree. But the one you responded to really just said:
I don't hate SL
they'll explain it later on in the series
I'm not that critical about it
Making it abundantly clear that he does not hold it against SL nor is it the sole reason why it's bad. Yet you jumped in headfirst against the most innocuous comment about SL, chastising it for daring to make comparisons to other shows. I might've sided more with you if his comment was something like "Solo Leveling is so bad because Frieren exists".What he said was even very reasonable. He watched other shows that had a similar concept and came to the realization that said concept in those were executed better. He wasn't exactly trying to make an essay deep dive analysis on SL, using Frieren and Dungeon Meshi as framework. He was just communicating this realization that came from watching other shows.
it's a stupid realization considering all of these series have different plots, premises and tones and the only similarity is that they have dungeons
| @Saimatsu_Fan Alright, then say that if you want. It won't change the fact that his realization came about from watching other shows. And just to be clear, just because a show has a different plot/tone/setting and whatnot, doesn't mean elements can't overlap. Contextually they might be different, but you can definitely gain insight on different ways to handle a certain aspect, even if it's under different context. Hell, even if he went into an actual real life cave and had that realization, then it would still be valid. If anything, I think it's harmful to be this overly protective against any form of comparison. You're just projecting a bubble that doesn't allow one to get to the crux of the issue. The comparison, no matter how dumb you may think it is, made him realize that he believes the dungeons in SL sucks. No matter what you think, it won't change how he feels about SL's dungeon. So isn't it better to let the comparisons slip through, so that you can actually tackle the root criticism? Otherwise you're just creating an echo chamber where we have to pretend that other (potentially better) shows doesn't exists. |
| Subarashii |
More topics from this board
Poll: » Ore dake Level Up na Ken Episode 11 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Stark700 - Mar 23, 2024 |
339 |
by han1kw0n
»»
Oct 16, 2:13 PM |
|
Poll: » Ore dake Level Up na Ken Episode 12 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )ChizuruNakamura - Mar 30, 2024 |
538 |
by DarkSeiD_7432
»»
Oct 12, 7:55 AM |
|
Poll: » Ore dake Level Up na Ken Episode 6 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )ChizuruNakamura - Feb 10, 2024 |
452 |
by XxXVertigoXxX
»»
Oct 10, 2:28 PM |
|
Poll: » Ore dake Level Up na Ken Episode 3 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Stark700 - Jan 20, 2024 |
362 |
by JinGoa
»»
Oct 3, 12:18 PM |
|
Poll: » Ore dake Level Up na Ken Episode 10 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 )Stark700 - Mar 16, 2024 |
189 |
by GentleIce
»»
Sep 13, 9:51 PM |