What to do if S1 is awesome but the S2 is bad?

Ussesa said:
i'd probably like s2 too because that's what always happens. if it wasnt as good as s1 then oh well right, at least i saw it. if i dont watch s2, it's like i didnt fully complete the series and that bothers me. if s2 sucks and they come out with s3, you bet i'll be watching that too.

Frostbyte98 said:
Psycho pass s2 was shit, I heard abt how it dropped the balls hard, gave it a try for few ep, dropped it. Do whatever you feel like, depends on you totally.

oniikai said:
*coffcoff* Ore no imouto *coffcoff*

Tainted said:
I would just pretend that season 2 didn't really happen.
or just read the manga it might be better.

_Ako_ said:


Enlighten me... What series are you speaking of?

Tainted said:
There's alot of em mostly because the anime skips some stuffs and squeeze many chapters into a 20 minutes episode.

TheBrainintheJar said:
Different seasons are different anime or else there's no reason to divide them.

TripleSRank said:
Generally I'd watch both and form my own opinion. I might put off watching the second season if it has a bad rep, though.



Please go argue with the database mods, then. A lot of the "X 2nd Season" and "X S2" anime really don't need to be divided from a story perspective.

The criteria for second seasons here is rather arbitrary (particularly in the latter case I will explain): Every time the name on the BD/DVD boxes changes or there's more than a single cour between aired episodes, the anime gets split into another entry.

I mean, I can see splitting Gundam IBO and its second season apart since there's a timeskip a the circumstances change, but for something like Shokugeki no Souma where it's pretty much watching more episodes of the exact same story and context, it makes less sense to me to view it as "separate".

TheBrainintheJar said:


Let's take Freezing, Code Geass, SAO, and Date A Live as examples. Each of these's second seasons is recognized as a separate series and has a separate title. It's listed in the same in AniDB. So far, it seems the creators divided it and the databases follow their orders.

Any examples of where seasons are split but it's actually wrong to do so?

martiooo said:


NOOOOOOOOOO. Actually Season 2 was better except for the last 3 episodes. I thought it was a joke until it happened.

oniikai said:
*coffcoff* Ore no imouto *coffcoff*

TripleSRank said:

Creators putting a new subtext or flavor text (e.g. Anime Name: Flavor Text) does not necessarily warrant a new database entry imo. If this is what you mean by "following the creator's orders", the I'd disagree, particularly in the case of adaptations since the "division" is often created by the producers rather than due to adapting a sequel source material.

For specific examplea, after skimming through my list...

Definites: Honey & Clover (iirc), Spice & Wolf, Shokugeki no Souma, My Hero Academia, Little Busters!, One Punch Man

Potentials (i.e. if they get a sequel/resume airing, meaning MAL will split): Space Brothers, Hunter x Hunter (2011), Akatsuki no Yona, Re:Zero, Mob Psycho 100, Koutetsujou no Kabaneri, Hyouka, White Album 2, Amagi Brilliant Park, Heavy Object

Other potentials (i.e. those I know of that appear to be the case, but I can't confirm): Kimi ni Todoke (exquisite way to open end the first season, though), Bungou Stray Dogs, Saekano, some sports series divisions (e.g. Haikyuu!)

TheBrainintheJar said:


I don't get it. What is the criteria for separating seasons in the database? The creators decide whether releases are separate or not. Reznor decided to release both sides of The Fragile as one album. On the other hand, SOAD decided to release Mezmerize/Hypnotize as separate albums while considering them two sides of the same piece.

I don't see how anyone else is the authority besides the author. They choose when chapters and book ends.

TripleSRank said:

But the author doesn't have full control over an adaptation of their work because they don't control the money. Their publisher and other interested parties do. What you're saying only applies to manga and original anime. With adaptations, sure, the author generally does have a say in changes made to the source material, but it's not as if they can demand that the production committee adapt a certain amount of the source material, or when to change BDbox flavor text, etc.. The splitting or non-splitting of anime entries on Western databases is due to the policies of the databases-- it has nothing to do with what how the author wants their work viewed.

That's not to say MAL's policies for creating and organizing the database are particularly bad. It's just not an absolute indicator of how self-contained entries are. Some separated sequels are indeed more or less self-contained, but not all are.

TheBrainintheJar said:


You're stuck in 'adaptation and source material till death do them part'. They're separate, related works.

The production committee decides to adapat Franchise X, and splits it to two seasons. One season is called Franchise X. The other is called Franchise X Reborn. They decide to publish it like this. Should we argue otherwise?

TripleSRank said:

I'm not. For all intents and purposes related to evaluation, I consider the adaptation and the source to be distinct. However, I don't think it makes sense to carry the separation much further beyond that, especially when combined with knowledge of how the anime industry works. Continuous works often need to be split apart-- even inconveniently-- for financial reasons. The producer, the marketing, and indeed the production committee are not who I believe we should be looking to in terms of authorship and, creatively speaking, "ownership" of the story even though they are responsible for the decisions concerning how the story is released. Rather, it is the original creator, the director(s), the series compositionists, and the storyboarders.

To say that every anime should be taken completely standalone "as it is released" seems more like a lazy shortcut in evaluation rather than a genuine attempt at fairness, to me.

Robiiii said:
Lemme explain
If season 1 is highly praised by fans and season 2 just isnt good at all (according to fans) what to do?

Try to explain if you decide to do so

TheBrainintheJar said:


Then do tell, what criteria should we use? Should Geass and R2 be separated and why? Should Redial be considered a separate work or not and why?

TripleSRank said:

I can't say for the examples you mentioned because I haven't seen both of either.

Regarding criteria, when referencing the source's format (i.e. whether additional seasons are part of the same original work or part of a sequel to the original work) isn't sufficient due to the nature of the work, there are a few ways you could look at it in terms of whether separation is warranted, I think. Works that aren't completely continuous (i.e. contain a timeskip at the beginning of the new season) are an easy out since the passage of time within the story usually changes aspects of the narrative present in the preceding release. Similarly, works that are told in "sagas" are easy to separate because each season/saga deals with a different overarching plotline, particularly when the grander overarching narrative that connects the sagas is loose.

Of course, this is pertaining to works that have an ongoing narrative in the first place. How a heavily episodic work is cut up isn't much of an issue in my opinion, barring heavy tonal changes that take place over time.