Seriously, what is so great about this anime?

Daisuki-chan said:
It didn't have even the minimum amount of general appeal needed to be worth airing on TV, I imagine its producers believed.

Daisuki-chan said:
This also explains its low popularity online.

Daisuki-chan said:
It certainly doesn't hurt that it's long and thus is receiving a length boost, too (if everyone's ratings were counted it would be rated 8.75 instead of 9.10).

Daisuki-chan said:
But its self-selected audience has a proportionally high amount of love and fanboyism, so it has what it takes to make the top ten!

Vinzalf said:
Actually, it wasn't aired on TV then because the source material was not popular, but above all, because at that time novel adaptations were close to nonexistant. Production trends.

No, that's because the show finished being subbed around 2008 and there's no official English release. (love you CA <3) It has nothing to do with the format.

Daisuki-chan said:
I'm not sure about that 8.75, but you're right. The score counts after 22 episodes so, technically, the series is rated higher that it should. "Overrated" is a retarded word.

We find it to be quite unique because of all the stuff other people wrote on previous pages. And you sound a lil mad.

fanboyism,

Daisuki-chan said:
And why would the producers think that it would be popular enough to be worth "bucking the trend" for when its source material also didn't have much general appeal? Also, I happened to know of a novel adaptation that is significantly older than LoGH off the top of my head, so I doubt there's much of an issue if there's reason to believe that there's a nontrivial market for a novel adaptation.

Daisuki-chan said:
It's had two years now, so it should be about half as proportionally popular as it will ever be. Even double LoGH's popularity level is still much less popular than random new anime become all the time. Also, if LoGH truly was great to the general population then its popularity would rise even faster than normal, but that's not the case (I guess word of mouth doesn't work so well when the things people praise LoGH for just aren't appealing to very many people). So yes, LoGH is clearly a niche anime. Like it or not, that's the truth.

Shizuru said:
I've read this entire thread, and am yet to see anyone on the defending side of LoGH do anything except calmly provide what the OP has asked for- a more thorough reason as to why they personally feel this show is so wonderful.

Only one person in my recollection said that someone could go watch harem shows if that's what floated their proverbial boat. One person though, out of numerous kind and positive responses... while all the people who have decided to say not to watch it (other than jokingly) have replied with one impolite sentence that gave no logical basis for their opinion.

Daisuki-chan said:
I didn't mention "overrated". Technically anything with more than one episode or chapter is receiving a length boost on MAL, but LoGH is benefiting more than usual, because it's rather long. 8.75 is easy to calculate if you just calculate the rating yourself using all LoGH scores and MAL's current additional bayesian votes (50 votes of 7). 8.75 is still a very good rating, anyway, just not an "OMG" rating.

Daisuki-chan said:
I'm not mad. I just was answering a question in a way that poked fun at LoGH, just as LoGH poked fun at "third-rate" anime.

net_nomad said:


There are a few fangirls. :raises hand:

Vinzalf said:
I'd hardly call Anne of the Green Gables "unpopular source material". And again, they just followed the production trends of that time and made it into an OVA.

I don't see how this argument collides with mine, sorry. I've never claimed that LoGH is great to the general population (you're referring here to the "average otaku" right?) or that it isn't a niche show. I just said "LoGH is not that popular because there's no english official release and finished being subbed 20 years after its release", which is fact. Of course there may be other factors. And about people praising LoGH for not being appealing to many people, I'll just quote a previous post on this thread.

I agree completely with this, and well, you see... people who sometimes write "I love LoGH because [lots of people] don't" aren't really putting an argument, so picking on them because of that is illogical as the non-argument itself.

I know you didn't mention "overrated". I just prevented you from mentioning it ("inb4"). And yes you're right on this one, as I wrote previously. I'm repeating myself :(

Okie :3

notzky said:
Uhm, No Offense meant or anything, can this series really be compared to the other top ranking anime?.. I mean, I've watched other animes and I was really caught up in watching them, Clannad After Story was a great anime, but this was rated over that anime, Is this really better?.. I really just want to find a reaason why this is rated so much. and if possible, a reason why it must be watched..

notzky said:
Uhm, No Offense meant or anything, can this series really be compared to the other top ranking anime?.. I mean, I've watched other animes and I was really caught up in watching them, Clannad After Story was a great anime, but this was rated over that anime, Is this really better?.. I really just want to find a reaason why this is rated so much. and if possible, a reason why it must be watched..

Daisuki-chan said:
If you don't need intense pacing or fantastical or "epic" events then you might want to try LoGH if you don't find any of the four factors in the previous sentence to be boring.

Most people wouldn't find LoGH to be worthy of being in the top ten, and most people would prefer Clannad ~After Story~ to LoGH.

Baman said:
Read the reviews man, no need for us to repeat it all when it's already written down.
But yes, I'd definitely say it's a world and a half better than Clannad AS, and that's even if I look away from the horrendous fantasy "Nothing bad ever happened" ending it had.

Wait, what? LoGH is pretty much the definition of epic. I'd be very interested in seeing any anime being more epic than LoGH.

Based on what? Do you have statistics on this claim? No, I did not think so.
Simply throwing the number of top ratings for each series is not enough, you'd need people who have seen both.

Daisuki-chan said:
Your first sentence is only agreeing with me. There's no issue if the material appears to have enough potential to be worth airing on television. Your second sentence is incorrect, though, as it was not an OVA.

Daisuki-chan said:
It collides because online availability is good enough for an online community that often watches fansubs, such as MAL. Yes, I was referring to the "average otaku" (on MAL-like websites, anyway).

Daisuki-chan said:
I think you're backwards on your second point. The reason there's no official English release is because it lacks (and thus is believed to lack) a nontrivial level of general appeal, not the other way around.

Daisuki-chan said:
all I meant was that anyone's feelings on LoGH's niche status don't change the truth of LoGH being a niche anime.

Daisuki-chan said:
Anyway, I think a more neutral perspective on whether or not LoGH should be watched by someone is based on the following factors: Political, philosophical, and historical exposition along with the space opera genre. If you don't need intense pacing or fantastical or "epic" events then you might want to try LoGH if you don't find any of the four factors in the previous sentence to be boring. If you value two or more of those four factors then you should probably watch LoGH.

Daisuki-chan said:

Most people wouldn't find LoGH to be worthy of being in the top ten, and most people would prefer Clannad ~After Story~ to LoGH

Vinzalf said:
Haha, I re-read my post and yeah, it doesn't make much sense. Let me rephrase it.
You can't compare LoGH's source material with a novel like Anne of the Green Gables in terms of overall popularity. You just can't. My second sentence was referring to LoGH.

The "omg so old :(" and "omg so long D:" feelings are strong within most anime watchers. And they have all the right to feel that way.

Anime releases outside Japan have always been risky business. And you still seem to think that I disagree with you on LoGH being niche. I don't.

Sure.

Funny. Most reviewers on the anime page and opinions in this thread are pointing these factors you mentioned as LoGH's most interesting aspects. But they aren't being neutral according to you.

Anyway, this is not referring in a explicit way to the people I've mentioned on the previous sentences, but, it's easy to remain "objective" in your terms when you talk about something you found average. But what about if some friend of yours asks you in RL about one of your favs? Maybe you will find yourself dedicating 90% of the time talking about the aspecs you love most. Really, don't ask people to have no feelings or bias towards anything. Don't try to tell people how to think.

What's your point, anyway?

Err, so? Not relevant to this thread.

Judging from your posts, I think you have a personal issue with a niche show being in the top 10. That being, having a unbalanced relation between popularity (having elements appealing to most demographics) and quality measured in numbers. I don't know what to say about that, since it doesn't belong to this thread either.

martin03345 said:
God forbid a show that has few plot holes, actually has in depth character development, smart social commentary, political thought, wit and battles and being a science fiction piece that uses history as a main focus be in the top 10 over shows that are mostly flash and little substance.

Not everyone has to greatly like something to see it as a masterpiece for if that was the case, Transformers 2 would be considered a masterpiece amongst the viewing crowd due to the idiocy of teenagers and no book would ever be considered a classic due to the growing disinterest in that tiresome act known as reading

Daisuki-chan said:

People who have seen LoGH are in a self-selected group, a group of people who can tolerate or appreciate various key characteristics of LoGH. My evidence is that more loved anime tend to become more popular, unless they are only loved by a niche. New fans are created mostly by them liking things they found based on positive word of mouth, so the most popular anime tend to have nice or even excellent ratings. With LoGH I'm not sure what people can say it excels in to people not interested in the space opera/politics/philosophy/history niche LoGH rests in. Sure, it did well at what it meant to do, but where are the fantastical characters and plot elements that most anime fans crave? There's no magic, the sci-fi is not heavily focused on or exploited in a unique way, none of the characters are "cool as shit", "badass", "sexy" (requires fanservice or a "sexy" personality type), or "moe" (by "normal" standards), and the pacing is not intense, but slow. Do you really think that LoGH would have a rating higher than FMA (much less Clannad ~After Story~) if enough random anime fans were forced to watch it so that it was rather popular instead of rather unpopular? I'm pretty sure it wouldn't have quite so extreme of a rating in that case.

martin03345 said:
God forbid a show that has few plot holes, actually has in depth character development, smart social commentary, political thought, wit and battles and being a science fiction piece that uses history as a main focus be in the top 10 over shows that are mostly flash and little substance.

Not everyone has to greatly like something to see it as a masterpiece for if that was the case, Transformers 2 would be considered a masterpiece amongst the viewing crowd due to the idiocy of teenagers and no book would ever be considered a classic due to the growing disinterest in that tiresome act known as reading

martin03345 said:
It's not really subjective to say strong, realistic, well developed characters is what makes a story great, in fact it's more objective. When looking at a work, whether be a novel, anime, movie, etc. all the great titles within each given form of media is judged first and foremost by how well the characters are developed and how that humanity strikes a chord with the viewer. Again, a person may not enjoy that, but one can easily say it's more shallow to enjoy pretty sparkles and explosions over a well executed story which is what LotGH is (from what I've seen) because one actually hinges on having to think and they other is more mind numbing of a task. This isn't judging the material, but how it's executed. One can say the story was done well, just the substance of it is dull.

One thing I don't like about the OVA though...the fighters look like garbage. They need to revamp the Valkeryies into something like Macross haha

Vinzalf said:
Judging from your posts, I think you have a personal issue with a niche show being in the top 10. That being, having a unbalanced relation between popularity (having elements appealing to most demographics) and quality measured in numbers. I don't know what to say about that, since it doesn't belong to this thread either.

Daisuki-chan said:
I know LoGH (or whatever) fans aren't some monolithic group that sneers at everyone, but it seems like many LoGH fans do more or less subtly imply that if you don't appreciate LoGH then you have bad taste, which I find to be in poor taste myself.

I don't see this happening for other fanboy magnets like Death Note, Code Geass, Haruhi, TTGL, FMA, One Piece, Bleach, or Naruto.

Daisuki-chan said:

A lot of what you said is subjective, and the value of anything is always subjective. An issue is that while these things are true and valuable to you, they aren't true and/or as valuable to various others. One person's substance is another person's boredom, and one person's flash is another person's substance. It doesn't make sense to recommend LoGH to everyone given that the "normal" anime fan wouldn't find it as appealing or exciting as they'd like it to be.

Daisuki-chan said:


It's relevant to people who are considering watching LoGH when they see it rated higher than Clannad ~After Story~. I was trying to respond to someone who wouldn't likely get anything more than more of the same that he or she found in reviews, but was still unclear if those things would actually appeal to him or her.

orzel286 said:
did i get it right - if it's niche anime with low popularity then it shouldn't be even in top 15637730? it can't be scored higher than 4?

what's wrong with being "niche"? has anyone seen someone bashing bentley, rolls-royce, koeningsegg for being "niche"? also - niche manufacturers don't offer their cars everywhere (analogy to not-airing LotGH) - becouse of 1001 reasons.

don't see a point with crying (sry couldn't find a better word :/) about "it's niche, so it's not for everyone" :| that's EXACTLY how it should be - if everyone was riding maserati, then it's a complete failure as a niche brand (btw - the more niche, hard to get, expensive a car is, the more hardcore fans will it have)

EtherSword said:
Jeez, I never had to do so much research before for an anime. But this post here (thankfully) seals the deal if I will ever watch it now lol. Sorry LoGH fans, I'll be "missing out" because I am one of those people who are the type of, "people not interested in the space opera/politics/philosophy/history niche LoGH rests in." Just take a look at my top 5 anime favorites, manga (not much for now) and top 10 favorite characters and see that this isn't the type of anime I want to get into because my interests is what Daisuke mentioned in the later half of his paragraph. I like what I like. So I will be dropping it on the first episode but I wont be giving it any rating since that would be biased and that the rating system on MAL is major suckage as why I don't give any dropped shows a rating. They should really make us only able to rate a show after we seen the whole thing. =\

martin03345 said:
I never said it should be something everyone watched but I'm pointing out the fact that it was either you or other members saying it shouldn't be in the top 10 because the people who enjoy it, love it for the reasons I stated. It may not appeal to everyone, this is true, but most people are idiots. It's not really subjective to say strong, realistic, well developed characters is what makes a story great, in fact it's more objective. When looking at a work, whether be a novel, anime, movie, etc. all the great titles within each given form of media is judged first and foremost by how well the characters are developed and how that humanity strikes a chord with the viewer. Again, a person may not enjoy that, but one can easily say it's more shallow to enjoy pretty sparkles and explosions over a well executed story which is what LotGH is (from what I've seen) because one actually hinges on having to think and they other is more mind numbing of a task. This isn't judging the material, but how it's executed. One can say the story was done well, just the substance of it is dull.

But, being a lover of history, majoring in education to teach that and economics, it does fulfill my niche love like you have argued which is true, that this show may only fill that slot that many do not have, but again, the depth of character development is impeccable. I'm only 1. /4 in and you already see a lot of development in the main players of the story. Might all come off as a contradicting post but again, with the bar generally being set by most critics of story based media being about characters, I'm sure those who even find political battles to be overly tedious can appreciate the growth in the characters.

Oh an an example off the top of my head of a novel that is considered a masterpiece by most critics but dreaded by students and most book readers is A Tale of Two Cities.

Baman said:
Precisely.
If "one person's flash is another person's substance" then the terms have no meaning. No one can seriously try to claim that a shallow mash of boobs and explosions is "substance" in any way. If they did, we might as well make subjective meanings to every word, so that one persons apple was another persons car or boat, and voila, the entire language would lose any meaning.
People may have differing opinions of the amount of substance or flash in something, but then it is usually because they have little experience in the field. Like people claiming Lelouch is a deep and brilliant character, they wouldn't be doing it if they had experienced examples of actually complex and acclaimed characters.

That's the impression I get as well. She seems to make a big point of putting down LoGH in a "nice" way as to not be labeled a troll like 99% of the ones who whine about it.

Apparently, you don't know the story behind this. Pretty much every LoGH fan I've seen that plays the haughty elitist does so for the sake of trolling. When the hype backlash hit and lots of tasteless plebeians found it fun to whine and moan over LoGH and calling all the fans elitist, a lot of us fans started to respond in kind and act like the snobbish elitist we were made out to be just to piss the fools off.
And I guess it's just become a habit for some.

Then you quite obviously aren't looking hard enough. Indeed, it is likely only the thorn you seem to have against LoGH that makes you notice such behaviour in it's fanbase while ignoring the far more obvious fanboyism rage from fans of the other series.

Take Clannad for example. While rooting out troll rating accounts, I have come across a plethora of trolls boosting Clannad and sapping LogH, while only a very few doing the opposite (That is, hundreds compared to tens.). Likewise, I have seen plenty of Clannad fans screaming in rage and disbelief whenever their infallible and unquestionably best anime in the world drops from the top spot. In contrast, hardly any LoGH fans seem to care about it's rating.

And of course, this does not only apply to Clannad fans, although those are the worst I have witnessed yet. Another example is how a stunning amount of TTGL fans is incapable of defending their series from critique with other words than "EPIC!!1" and generally posting like five year olds.
I suggest you look through the various fanboy threads for the top rated anime and see for yourself.

burntlettuce said:
Everything is subjective, in terms of what you like, yes. But what actually makes a series good or not is quite different. I think to often people replace the word "like" with the word "good". Saying "I liked it, so it's good". We must understand that the two don't mean the exact same thing. People can like things with flash, with no substance. Hell I enjoyed Transformers, but we as people must be able to look objectively upon anything. I liked Transformers, but it wasn't good. And vice-versa for Koi Kaze, I hated it, but it was really good. We must always be objective, and not fall back on sayings like "while everything is subjective" because that is ignorant.

Tachii said:
Wow, surprisingly, Daisuki wrote several good points, maybe it's because I'm not a LoGH fan, but she did not sound like she was hating on LoGH or even implying in such a way. But it would not be a surprise to see the fans implying something more than what she's saying. Oh well, too many replies already, too lazy to reply 'much' here. I certainly had similar reactions to people who call TTGL boring. ;(

And I do get the impression sometimes, that several LoGH fans (you know who you are), seem to suggest that if you don't like LoGH, you have bad tastes. Even if this is sarcasm, even if it's trolling, it's done way too many times to be funny, and thus leans toward more of arrogance rather than being helpful. Instead of going above the so called haters, you've made yourself on the same line as they are.

I still don't get this objectivity/subjectivity thing. Sure, you can make a statement that well-developed characters make a story great, but whether or not you think the characters are well-developed, is mostly up for you to decide. You're given the show, but how you interpret it, and boy, in any sort of show, there's always plenty of room for different interpretations, that's where subjectivity came in. The probability for well-developed is probably easy to judge for certain characters, but there's a large gray line for lots of other characters. And if there are this large gray line, then I can't call it objectivity.

Lain666 said:
Do you imply that LoGH cannot be rated higher than Clannad, because people who have seen Clannad are too stupid to realize, even after reading reviews, that LoGH may not be for them? If I were a fan of Clannad, I would take it as an insult.

Daisuki-chan said:
That depends on what ratings and rankings are for. If they're just there for genre fans and tolerators to look at, especially in retrospect, then LoGH can be number whatever. If they're meant to represent general tastes and thus strongly recommend new anime to people who haven't seen them before, then it's obvious to me that LoGH isn't suitable to be have an extremely high rank or rating.

Daisuki-chan said:
Nothing's wrong with being niche. But something that is niche is not going to be highly good to most people, and that's not wrong, either. If it would be good to most people then I would instead call it unpopular (if it was unpopular), not niche, since it would be broadly appealing and only unpopular for other reasons (for anime newness is a prime possibility; oldness can be another to some extent (see Nausicaa for a partial counterexample), but cultural preferences shift over time, too, so popularity naturally would decrease for older and older anime). Anyway, regarding those cars, they are Veblen goods.

Daisuki-chan said:
Boobs and explosions represent sex and violence. Clearly those have more value to natural selection than philosophical exposition does. It thus could be possible to argue that those things are substantial. I wouldn't do so in the way that you do for other things, though, since I don't find natural selection to have objective value, and also generally try not to be a snob. ;p Your semantics example is pointless, as we're not talking about the meanings of various aspects of anime, but their values. Also, there's no reason for me to believe that everyone would disvalue Lelouch if they only knew more "critically" acclaimed characters. Reinhard is not a good character to me, for example.

Daisuki-chan said:
Tasteless plebians. Apparently you've been trolling for so long that you "forgot" how to stop. Well, that does make it easier to "pretend" to be a snobbish elitist, after all. By the way, becoming just as bad as your enemy doesn't make you better than them. If you instead met their feelings with calm, unbiased responses they wouldn't hate you as much and thus wouldn't hate LoGH quite as much, either.

Daisuki-chan said:
From my perspective adults are just larger children in most ways, so I fail to see the relative problem. Anyway, I wouldn't call their lack of "defense" bad, since they have no reason to "defend" their tastes, but if anything I would call the attacks of others bad. Why care if someone else has "bad" taste? Who doesn't have bad taste to most people in various ways? Anyway, I was talking about the snobbery LoGH fans express. I just don't see the same sort of thing elsewhere, but you're free to link me to some examples of other fans' snobbery.

Daisuki-chan said:
No, "I liked it, so it's good to me." is the real idea I and others like me have. Anyway, flash and substance are just too subjective to determine, and there's just no standard of goodness that is ideal for all living things that could exist within our universe's laws of physics.

Daisuki-chan said:
I'm saying that the reviews are often biased, as is especially often the case for highly rated anime's reviews. Reviews typically represent extreme opinions in the first place, are trying to convince new potential viewers that they're right, and are also trying to convince completers that they're right in order to get more positive votes. I hardly ever see a review that tries to appeal to people who could find the item appealing while explain to others why it may not be for them.

Daisuki-chan said:
I'm saying that the reviews are often biased, as is especially often the case for highly rated anime's reviews. Reviews typically represent extreme opinions in the first place, are trying to convince new potential viewers that they're right, and are also trying to convince completers that they're right in order to get more positive votes. I hardly ever see a review that tries to appeal to people who could find the item appealing while explain to others why it may not be for them.

And this show never, ever tries to evoke an emotional response. The whole series is based on having the viewer have an intellectual understanding of what happens, not an emotional one. There are, thus, no cheap tricks to elicit emotional response, nothing overly dramatic (barring a few strokes of bombast), and no characteristics that make a main protagonist or villain.

The ship designs; save for Reinhard's and a few other empire ships; aren’t cool-looking. They're not sleek pointy colourful mecha; they're ugly blocky rectangles with many holes that fire lasers into your face. The design is pretty blatant: war isn’t the only thing ugly, the tools employed are also. Millions and millions of humans die in skirmishes, let alone giant battles. The cost is so high it’s hard to imagine, but the OVA does a good job of reminding you with visceral scenes of terror and misery.

Space battles consist of pre-20th century naval-inspired conflicts, with large fleets manoeuvring into strategic spots and moving in for the kill. Attacks are planned carefully and carried out methodically, with the occasional WW2 aerial-inspired dogfights with smaller jets taking off the cruisers. It’s totally unlike nearly every other space-set anime.

The battles are also a very interesting thing to notice. A war is won through tactics and politics and not with the latest Gundam power-up. So, it is not about the specs of the spaceships. Technology plays a minor part in the story, anyway. Instead, it is about the mannerisms of the fleet leaders and not some weird special power that bends the laws of physics (and reason). Oh, and it is one of those rare anime, where war and violence are not presented as cool and awesome. They are shown to be quite catastrophic and negative for the humankind. Yes, the series is full of battles and death but it is supposed to make you hate war and not get a boner by watching some trendy anti-hero wasting hordes of aliens with a cool-looking weapon.

Daisuki-chan said:
People who have seen LoGH are in a self-selected group, a group of people who can tolerate or appreciate various key characteristics of LoGH. My evidence is that more loved anime tend to become more popular, unless they are only loved by a niche. New fans are created mostly by them liking things they found based on positive word of mouth, so the most popular anime tend to have nice or even excellent ratings. With LoGH I'm not sure what people can say it excels in to people not interested in the space opera/politics/philosophy/history niche LoGH rests in.

LoGH is a magnificent space opera that delves into philosophy and politics with an unmatched ease.

LoGH is for oldfags and space opera fans mostly.

A larger part still, though, is devoted to discussions on politics

This anime happens to be the best space opera ever

In fact you're not really meant to root for any side, you're an observer to history being made and repeated. Life is cycles.

Daisuki-chan said:

Nothing's wrong with being niche. But something that is niche is not going to be highly good to most people, and that's not wrong, either. If it would be good to most people then I would instead call it unpopular (if it was unpopular), not niche, since it would be broadly appealing and only unpopular for other reasons (for anime newness is a prime possibility; oldness can be another to some extent (see Nausicaa for a partial counterexample), but cultural preferences shift over time, too, so popularity naturally would decrease for older and older anime). Anyway, regarding those cars, they are Veblen goods.

This is apparently poetically called the snob effect. Something that's unpopular or "underappreciated" can indeed have more hardcore fans. Maybe I should start calling the types of people I was calling elitists before snobs instead.

Lain666 said:


From reviews on this site

Tachii said:
From what I read, I didn't get any of this false impression thing you're suggesting.

Daisuki-chan said:
The problem is that it seems like they think others ought to generally find these aspects to be interesting, and thus don't warn people that LoGH can fail in some ways to many (random) people.

Well, there's no "objectivity" beyond bringing up all common issues relevant to the discussion. I see loads of reviews that are just praise, praise, praise, but don't really help someone who isn't sure about the genre itself decide anything. I'm not sure which friend would ask me about my favorites (they are either already knowledgeable or are disinterested), but I'll think about it. It's not really the same thing, since a review is one way only, but I have made recommendations to friends, and I didn't fail to mention potential negative aspects that could reduce their enjoyment. I also didn't lose my composure when describing the positives (even if by giving page after page of similar information that only an after-the-fact fan would appreciate, although these happen to be most of all review voters, which rewards biased or unhelpful reviews over ones that try to both persuade and dissuade people when it could be appropriate for them), and I especially didn't dismiss or look down on problems they had with the genre, setting, characters, etc.

I know LoGH (or whatever) fans aren't some monolithic group that sneers at everyone, but it seems like many LoGH fans do more or less subtly imply that if you don't appreciate LoGH then you have bad taste, which I find to be in poor taste myself. I wouldn't go around doing anything like that towards those who didn't like the Utena movie, for example. It's not perfect for everyone, or even me, and doesn't likely appeal to most anime fans, even though I loved it. Anyway, I've seen LoGH fans tear apart anime they liked just because I liked those anime more than LoGH, only to try to "win" their argument that their extreme appreciation of LoGH was "objective".

It's relevant to people who are considering watching LoGH when they see it rated higher than Clannad ~After Story~. I was trying to respond to someone who wouldn't likely get anything more than more of the same that he or she found in reviews, but was still unclear if those things would actually appeal to him or her.

its rating is misleading to some people, and helping them find out when and when not to try watching LoGH can only be a good thing for them. Nearly 100% positive and nearly 0% disagreeing (even on which things are positive or how positive they are) responses can be very hard to process when someone wants to know things outside of what those responses mentioned. Besides, isn't informing and thus "driving away" probable <10 raters "good" for LoGH's rating and thus status? ;p

Tachii said:
But um, why exactly was this quote not quoted, then? And quoting something else, even bolding the thing? It just seem like the root of it was a misinterpretation of missing the word 'not'.

Tachii said:
I don't get the point of this. Did you miss the word not in the sentence? She says anybody not interested in the said bolded letters will not find it interesting. That's pretty much it. Hmm.

Kaiserpingvin said:

Because it was a running theme in her posts, and therefore hard to find any single thing to quote, so Lain went with instead quoting the part where it was actually pointed out the niche LoGH is supposed to fall in?

Kaiserpingvin said:
Edited away doublepost.

Anyway, I think Daisuki-chan is rather civil and sensible, and not hateful at all. I don't think it's senseless to argument it either. It's silly to just allow praise, it's fun to argue, as long as a modicum of reason and friendliness is present.

Kaiserpingvin said:
Why not?

Let's not forget we have a popularity list too. It reflects rather well on what people in general like. I do not see any reason people in general should not like LoGH either; that's up to the "people" to decide.

I see no way in which you can decide what is highly good to most people. That, again, is up to every single person to decide, let's not decide for them. That, to me, is snobbish.

Why do you seperate meaning from value? Given that "value" is not am empirical quality it really depends on the meanings of the words involved, nein?

Well, why care about whether or not other people hate a show or not?

Why care if someone else is a snob? It's the same sort of thing; it's human interaction. The important part, I think, isn't for people to have effecacious goals with their actions in cases like this. It's just people delineating themselves, creating an identity, and opposing it to that of others. There are no needws to defend anything, we do it anyway, because we are not creatures of necessity. We are the children of frivolity.

Forgive me the hobby-sociology. It's just an imperssionistic take.

In any way, personally I find it uninteresting to discuss tastes. What is interesting is to discuss quality.

See, any given way of relating to the quality of something is a possible and as such an acceptable one. But that doesn't mean they cannot be critiqued. To merely equate goodness with "I liked it" is, for example, simplistic and shallow, and perhaps not true to how the words work. Now I can say that, but that doesn't mean you must abandon it, they are just reasons you could abandon it, and the reasons I have for not agreeing. (One could well critique my "what is good is what requires a lot of skill to do" for being "hard to evaluate", "easily susceptible for emotional concerns to overrun rational", and "define your terms motherfucker", on the other hand.)

What is important isn't our overall criteria; what is important are the reasons we give for finding things good or bad. And whether we find it good or bad is to me uninteresting; what's at hand is really how good those reasons are, given certain perhaps too intuitive measures of rationality. For example, finding Legend of the Galactic Heroes good because Katerose is hot is the mark of someone truly shallow (even if I would agree that she is). While being able to give coherent, elaborate, and detail-rich explanations of why you found the recent moeblob show (say K-On!!) good would be the mark of someone with complex taste (which most would say is "good taste").

"Good" or "bad" are not, I think, evaluative judgments as much as they are placeholders for an extended argument of artistic approval or disapproval. "I don't think Asura Cryin' was good, but I really liked it" means that I cannot give an argument it was well-made, but that I would watch it again with no compunction regardless. Works well, hein?

tl;dr: My perennial bone with any discussion is the absurd focus on the conclusions and who agrees, when what really matters are the reasons you have for it. This is also true in aesthetic debate.

Well if a review would not be "biased", the review would be the original artwork itself.

Now here is where I would give examples from the highest-rated LoGH reviews of people doing exactly what you say (or, if my memory failed me and no one did, show that in this case your generalisation was correct) but for reasons wholly obscure to me, the "read more..." buttons do not work. lolinternetexplorer, I should talk my ma into getting a web browser instead of a virus.

In any case, I remember very much appreciating santetjan's review months before I actually begun the show.

Point is, talk about actual occurences, not potential disturbances.

Reviewers express their opinion, if they like the show that much than they have every right to give the highest rating. Besides, any review is by definition subjective.

I don’t understand your problem. The purpose of any review is to present what the show is about. If reviewers write that there is a war than if you don’t like watching anime about a war you can see LoGH is not for you. If reviewers write that there is politics and you hate politics, you can safely assume this show is not for you. If none of the reviewers mentions moe girls doing kawaii things, big boobs, etc it is reasonable to assume that there are no moe girls doing kawaii things, big boobs etc or such things are not important and worth mentioning in this case. The reviewer doesn’t have to make a list of things that this show is not about. It should be obvious that if an absolutely enthralling exquisite romance is not mentioned than this show is not about romance or even if there is a romantic relationship it’s not very important. Even if all reviews are extremely positive, you can still infer what kind of show it is and logic should suggest what it is not.

I also cannot see how reviews on this site fail to warn what this show is not:



After reading this paragraph it should be clear to any moe fan that this show is nothing like moe shows.

After reading these paragraphs it should be clear to, for example: CG R2 fans and Gundam Seed Destiny fans that this show has a different approach to battles and that they should not expect mechas/gundams that can beat half of the army and tip the balance in their favour in this way.

You accuse LoGH fans that they look down on people who dislike LoGH and that they call these people idiots with bad taste, but you yourself presuppose that they are idiots that cannot infer information on whether a certain series is for them from reviews.

From reviews on this site

santetjan said:
This series is overrated on this site. That is to say, with 110 episodes, your vote only counts after you've seen 22 episodes, almost a full season, and those who don't like this show probably won't wait for 22 episodes to decide.
Which is a shame, as it's only after about 20 episodes that this series progresses from something that is slow, somewhat overly bombastic, and hinting at more to come to show itself to be one of the most intelligent pieces of anime that's been made to date.

When I say 'intelligent', I don't mean it to be cunning, surprising the viewer with unsuspected plot lines or new angles to view something. Nor does it delve deeply into some obscure theory of science or arts, bombarding the viewer with ideas he couldn't have come up with himself. In fact, there's absolutely nothing in this series that is wholly unexpected or very deep. What it has, though, is a sense of scale that's unsurpassed in any anime - or, for that matter, any television show - I've seen.

Legend of the Galactic Heroes centers around - you guessed it - a bunch of people who, according to populace at large that inhabits the fictional future this series plays in, are of heroic proportions. That is to say, heroic in a very classical sense, being possibly a negative thing as well as a positive.

The series is set in a future wherein the universe known to man is divided into two camps, the aristocratic and absolutist Galactic Empire, and the democratic Free Planets' Alliance, who have been embroiled in a war for some time, seemingly
being evenly matched. This balance is shattered when a military genius with a far-reaching ambition rises on the Imperial side, prompting the Alliance to, somewhat grudgingly, give ever greater backing to the most capable officer on their own side. Both men surround themselves with able staff, who become legends in their own right.
It sounds like your average hero of freedom-versus-tyrant story, but it turns out to be anything but. First of all, the heroes do have a sense of their own importance, but also the sense to question whether they are all that special, or whether the circumstances of their times have just brought them to a spotlight which people equal to them could never have aimed at. More importantly, the main question on which the whole series hinges remains an open one. This question is the age-old one of which is better, autocracy or democracy, the problem being that a good autocracy is usually better than a good democracy, but a bad autocracy being worse than a bad democracy. Within the happenings of the show, it becomes apparent that, militarily speaking, at least, a good autocracy has an edge over democracy in terms of speed and decisiveness, and this shows in how the series progresses.

A large part of the series is devoted to showing the war and its subsequent smaller-scale rumblings. The war is fully shown from the side of the commanding officers - one of only a very few shows to do so - and does show an appropriate sense of scale. With battles involving thousands of battleships and millions of men, simple depictions of large-scale tactics take the place of views of the battlefield itself, and a considerable part of the show is, laudable, devoted to discussions on logistics and military intelligence.

A larger part still, though, is devoted to discussions on politics, all within the greater autocracy versus democracy question. Again, these thoughts never go very deep, but what strikes one is that so very many possible variables are brought up. Almost any motive of rulers or the general populace that might affect a political decision is included at some point in the show, making me at least think to myself: 'They even thought of thát one.' The show does tend, here and there, to lean toward the old 'good soldier, bad politician' cliché, but, overall, it really lacks a clear villain, instead showing each possible side (apart, perhaps, from religious fanatics) from every possible angle. Moreover, all this is shown within a future universe that is highly consistent over the full 110 episodes, even if differences between the warring sides tend to be somewhat exaggerated: in many cases whole societies seem to act a bit too much according to a somewhat radical ideology, only to make their following actions be true to form.

This being true to form applies also to most of the actions that, at first glance, seem to be overly dramatical, in the first place many of the actions of the dozen or so main protagonists. However, when thinking about the how and why of their actions, it usually becomes clear that they cannot have but acted as they did, according to cultural mores and individual character. A case in point would be the reliance of many Imperial officers on the character of some military commander to predict his battlefield tactics. This would seem lunacy, until it is remembered that the Imperial commanders are a tight-knit group, mostly of noble birth, and known to each other: each commander would know the peculiarities of all others, which become all the more predictable as the importance of gaining personal glory and honour in battle are taken into the equation.
This reliance on known characteristics of all personalities is also possible because the characters don't evolve all that much. Now, I've never understood why 'character progression' in general seems to mean having characters make a full volte-face, and I am, in fact, happy with a series that shows all characters as being fully grown, and fixed in their ways. Each has a specific role to play, and a mind-set that might be predictable, but is, again, true to form. This doesn't make the character shallow. Far from it: their characteristics mean that each takes a single position to a fitting extreme, making for interesting differences between the characters, and accompanying differences in outlook.
That said, it is indeed true that the characters may be somewhat flat, and quite a few seem to be included only to show a different point of view toward a specific situation or theory, but it is exactly this relative flatness that makes it possible for them to discuss so many situations.

As for the art, it is old and outdated, but that can't be held against the show. It is a shame that, mainly in the first season, the series is at times simply bad: persons walk in an awkward way, scenes are recycled, and even relative positions of facial structures change from frame to frame. There's no excuse for that. Technically, though, the art definitely gets better during the course of the show.
In fact, the show being old might be a boon. The creators have opted to make the drawing style relatively realistic, which fits the series splendidly. One has only to look at the manga to see how different it could have been: the style of the manga doesn't fit the show at all.
Real points have to go to the design. Again, nothing is really innovative, from the spaceships to the almost 19th century looking setting to the uniforms of the soldiers. It is, however, solid, and consistent, and really brings the world to life.

The music is outstanding. It mainly consists of generally well-known classical compositions, which, granted, have been often used before, but never have they been used to such splendid effect: especially the use of pieces during battle sequences, fitting the individual scenes to the music, is a joy to watch.

As a whole, Legend of the Galactic Heroes never tries to be overly deep, and, though it tends to be somewhat bombastic, never loses itself to any glorification. It is slow and quite meticulous, focusing on a lot of details, and consists for the largest part of dialogue, not action. The story progresses slowly, and only after about a season's worth of episodes the real story starts to evolve.
And this show never, ever tries to evoke an emotional response. The whole series is based on having the viewer have an intellectual understanding of what happens, not an emotional one. There are, thus, no cheap tricks to elicit emotional response, nothing overly dramatic (barring a few strokes of bombast), and no characteristics that make a main protagonist or villain.
I can only applaud this, considering it a feat to produce such a good series without relying on drama. Legend of the Galactic Heroes is, in this sense, the absolute antithesis of my other personal favourite, Le Portrait de Petit Cossette, appealing to the rational side of the viewer, even when the protagonists act with all their vaunted 'foppery and whim'.

orzel286 said:
So? LotGH is just like those cars it seems - NOT FOR EVERYONE. And who cares? O_o

Hah here comes "LotGH complex" - "liking LotGH implies elitism, so i dislike it's fanbase =(" LMAO

BTW - maserati has (or had? don't remember now...) quite interesting selling policy - you had to apply for a car, then they decided if you could buy it or not. Now go qq your eyes out becouse of the elitism of maserati owners LOL

One more thing - it's not that LotGH fans are snobs, it's more likely that people criticizing them, calling them "elitist fags" etc have inferiority complex imo...

eyerok said:
Daisuki-chan - please stop. You're just making a fool out of yourself by spewing all this hate bullshit just because your fav anime dropped below Lotgh in the top anime. So what? Lotgh was below 5 for about 3 months...did you see any lotgh fan whine about it in the clannad or CG forum?

you say your opinion is objective. Everybody has a different opinion; calling your own objective and everybody else' subjective is just downright retarded. You're a blind idiot you know, calling your opinion objective. Objective my ass. Just read your posts from the beginning: "didn't even have a general appeal to be aired on TV...snob effect...fanboyism...LoGH (or whatever) fans...none of the characters are "cool as shit"

You claim that lotgh fans pretend lotgh to be the most perfect anime, but the fact is the complete opposite. Just see the reviews and the opinions of most fans on this forum; they all understand and accept that lotgh has flaws that some people like yourself might consider to be serious, and its far from perfect. But Perfection is just a myth. And even though its not perfect, lotgh IS a masterpiece of an anime, a prime example of its genre; a show that provides a unique experience that you wont find in any other anime (even if you dont like it).

And I'll tell you the reason behind the "elitist" attitude of lotgh fans (what you call the snob effect) : its because people insulting the show so often, calling it bland, badly animated, boring, stupid, gay, shit etc among other things when they have stuff like CG or Clannad, shippuden or bleach in their fav list...how else would you think a sane person would respond. Just look at the stats. Lotgh is the most trolled show on the top anime page. It is the only 'top anime' with more than 3 % people rating it a "1". Almost every other top anime has less than .8 % 1's, despite the fact that (as you pointed out) it is the least watched top anime. So there you have it. Lotgh fans elitism is just something on the outside because of the trolls (and I consider you an articulate version of these mindless folks), not because we're a bunch of snobs who like to pretend that our taste is superior to everybody else'

Tachii said:
I don't get the point of this. Did you miss the word not in the sentence? She says anybody not interested in the said bolded letters will not find it interesting. That's pretty much it. Hmm.

eyerok said:
he/she didn't miss anything. Lain was merely responding to her claim that lotgh fans give a false impression about the series by not pointing out those facts in the reviews and recommendations

Tachii said:
From what I read, I didn't get any of this false impression thing you're suggesting.

eyerok said:
I admit Daisuke had some really good points there. But a lot of it was subjective. If I was her I'd write a review on it rather than get into a senseless argument in the forum.

Kaiserpingvin said:
Edited away doublepost.

Anyway, I think Daisuki-chan is rather civil and sensible, and not hateful at all. I don't think it's senseless to argument it either. It's silly to just allow praise, it's fun to argue, as long as a modicum of reason and friendliness is present.

Beatnik said:
This 'LotGH is elite' debate that's constantly raging on MAL is like a fan of Michael Bay films criticising Hitchcock film fans for being pretentious, and claiming that their opinion of Bay films being better than Hitchcock films is a completely valid opinion because everything's subjective in life yo!

^this paragraph itself will be accused of being pretentious!

^this one too, haha!

johnkx said:
I gave up at episode 10 since there wasn't any interesting event that was happening except for that fire that was started by some people rallying. I'm going to try to watch it again as soon and hopefully I see the diamond that people saw in this anime.

EDIT: I just saw why this anime is on the top 2. There were only 2k votes in it lol! I guess most people who disliked the anime didn't bother voting. CG have 54k votes. XD total landslide.

Lain666 said:
I did notice it. Daisuki-chan claims that duo to extremely positive reviews people who don’t like space opera/politics/philosophy/history would not see that LoGH is not for them, but even in an extremly positive review you can find facts about the said series, and evaluate whether your and reviewer’s opinion are not antithetic on these things. My point is that reviews unequivocally state that LoGH is a space opera that delves into politics, philosophy and history. If you don’t like space opera, politics, philosophy and history, it should be obvious from reviews that you are not target audience and it is unlikely you will like it. People are different; someone who likes stories about politics may consider the presence of politics as an advantage, while someone who doesn’t like stories about politics may find the exactly same aspect unappealing. LoGH fans are going to praise LoGH for what it is, but the things that appeal to us (LoGH fans) may be unappealing for someone who doesn’t like these things. All you have to do with a review that is positive is to discover what the reviewer enjoyed and ask yourself if you have a predilection for the same kind of things.

eyerok said:
sorry for the trouble.
You're right actually i kinda overreacted.
But I do think its a very silly (and senseless) argument; Daisuke's main point was that lotgh fans give a misleading picture and that it isnt for the mainstream audience. wow. Such a huge revelation this is. Its an obvious fact that all lotgh fans know and admit that, for example, clannad fans would probably not like something like this. They've mentioned that in reviews, posts and recommendations. Hell, they've even made jokes about it (most of which have been interpretated as 'elitsist' reactions). So her main 'argument' is not an argument at all, and its more like all this is for the sake of arguing only. Either that or Daisuke's ticked off cuz lotgh is in the top 3 right now.

Daisuki-chan said:

If I'm wrong then why did someone end up in this thread and have to be aided be me due to not being aided by the suggestions of others to "just read the reviews"?

Daisuki-chan said:
I've also seen LoGH fans going out of their way to attack other series, too. They mention LoGH as superior, presumably to pat themselves on the back or to try to get new people to try LoGH.

Daisuki-chan said:
In the end LoGH is no more or less special than any random thing in this world is, including any of my favorites. Some vocal LoGH fans' insistence that this is not the case and that thinking otherwise is wrong or due to poor taste is the only irritating part. I've seen LoGH's high ratings on various sites for years, and I understand why they exist, so I'm not hurt by them, especially since I actually liked LoGH.

orzel286 said:
@Daisuki-chan

I don't understand why do you keep posting.
LotGH is a niche anime - pretty obvious - and so what?
You seem to dislike LotGH's fanbase - ok, understood that - and so what?
:|

Yeah, oh well. Some LoGH fans don't like the idea that some people would be better off not trying LoGH, I guess. I'm not that way, though, since I accept that my favorites aren't objectively great.

"You" (meaning "one" in this case) is really not the right word. It was already proven in this very thread that the current reviews are not ideal for driving off likely dislikers of LoGH, as I had to do so myself.

Daisuki-chan said:


Even moe fans don't typically require moe at all times. Moe fans can also be fans of other things.


Again, who is just a fan of anime like R2 or Gundam SEED Destiny? Focusing on main elements and generally in only extreme (i.e. rather consistently positive or negative overall) ways doesn't represent the points of view that many people for whom the anime is not for would feel. Extreme reviews generally want their readers to agree with them, so they include a lot of subjective statements (that often sound bad to disagree with on the values of, assuming that they are true) and often also skip mentioning things that oppose their overall conclusion. An ideal review would instead try to neutrally present likely ways that various types of potential watchers might feel about the anime. I realize that this is difficult and the motivations for most current reviews are otherwise, but that doesn't make me find many current reviews ideal. If a review was ideal then it would express my opinion (unless I'm just too bizarre in this case) along with "everyone else's" opinions. Of course all of this idealism is only surely meaningful to me, so you can support the current standard of "having one conclusion" in reviews if you want. The person I helped avoid LoGH didn't likely find such reviews to be enough, though, which supports my idea that better can be done than is currently typical.

If a review was ideal then it would express my opinion (unless I'm just too bizarre in this case) along with "everyone else's" opinions.

Hey, whatever. It's a fact that not everyone processes information in the same ways. You may dislike that, but that's not very useful to those different from you. This thread already had an example of how your theory that everyone receives the same (and all relevant) information in the same ways is false.

eyerok said:
I thought it was kinda obvious seeing at his/her list. If I was him it would've been easy to realize that any way. That person didnt need to do such an 'extensive' research. I think watching one of the two better prequel movies or the first few episodes would suffice in either case, if it was hard to figure just from the reviews or recommendations

That sort of thing happens everywhere. Fanboyism is a fact of life and it cant be avoided. But I don't think the majority of lotgh fans do that.

If that is truly your belief than I dont have to reply to the rest of your post, or at least not your replies to my posts. I take back most of what I said previously. But I'd like to say you're judging things too harshly, just for the sake of 'objectivity'. I'm actually quite confused now... :P

orzel286 said:
@Daisuki-chan

I don't understand why do you keep posting.
LotGH is a niche anime - pretty obvious - and so what?
You seem to dislike LotGH's fanbase - ok, understood that - and so what?
:|

Lain666 said:
I already said that I noticed this not. If they are NOT interested in space opera, philosophy, politics and history, then they should know from reviews that CLEARLY state that LoGH is space opera that delves into philosophy, politics and history that this show may not be for them.

The reviewer liked it yes, but they DON"T like these things. In the reviewer opinion these things are good, but it’s an opinion of a reviewer, and what is written in the review doesn’t have to be true for everyone, in the review the reviewer has to express her/his own opinion.

Actually, in this case that person said she/he is “one of those people who are the type of, ‘people not interested in the space opera/politics/philosophy/history niche LoGH rests in.’ “so probably she/he didn’t read reviews at all, since those things, as I wrote above, are pointed out in reviews.

You claim that the reviews fail to mention why this show may be not good for an average fan. Moe and mecha shows are recently popular. Reviewers pointed out how LoGH differ from recently popular moe and mecha shows, so readers of a review are warned that they should NOT expect a typical mecha, moe show. I don’t see your problem here, I really don’t.

No, you don't understand what a review is, it's about evaluating film, book, anime etc and expressing the reviewer's own opinion. Reviewers cannot express everyone else's opinion, it's simply impossible. To put it bluntly, opinion is like an ass, everyone has their own.

I used word infer to be more general, but if we are talking about people who are ‘not interested in the space opera/politics/philosophy/history niche LoGH rests in.’ then ‘infer’ is an exaggeration. It is not like you have only evidences in reviews that indicate that this show is about politics/philosophy/history. There is nothing in this case that needs any deeper processing of information. All that is needed is the ability to read, these things, as I have already stated for I don’t know how many times, are clearly stated by reviewers.

Daisuki-chan said:
I don't think the majority of any fans go out of their way to do such things. However, vocal LoGH fans appear to be snobbish fanboys more often than is usual for an anime. The real problem to me is the snobbery. Anyone can be a fanboy, and they can just be ignored as an extremist, but a snob tries to justify his or her fanboyism by using faux objectivity to subjectively value things. This is the irritating part to me. If everyone in the world accepted that both their desires and their values all mean absolutely nothing to basically anyone, and that such is only rational, then the world would be a better place. ;p

Not liking A doesn't imply disliking (anti-liking) A, either.

If reviewers are just going to be as one-sided as any random voter is when voting then what's the point?

And yet not everyone obtains the information that is relevant to them, despite your ostensible claim that everything meaningfully relevant to anyone is clearly expressed.

Baman said:
It's not our fault if you want to completely disregard the common ideas of what make "good" characters or plot writing though. Merely stating that these ideas do in fact exist, is nothing more than stating the simple truth.
As I said before, you are allowed to put it all upside down and claim that plastic mere cutouts like Pikachu or Lelouch are the single most complex and well written characters in all history of fiction, but you won't likely be able to converse about quality and what is "good" or not with the majority if that is the case. So what do you gain from making up your own subjective definitions when there already are commonly accepted ones in wide use?

Lain666 said:
If they are indifferent to politics, etc and know these things are not their cup of tea, they should be prepared that this show may not be for them. If they are still going to give it a try then they should be prepared that these things may not be as impressive for them as they are to someone who likes stories about politics. “may” is a key word here.

To find out more information about a show and what a reviewer (dis)liked about this show and why she/he (dis)like it. You cannot expect anything more than a reviewer’s opinion. It’s not the point of a review to present everyone else’s opinions. A reviewer cannot read in other people’s minds and write down their opinions. S/He cannot air millions of possible opinions. A reviewer can only present his/her own point of view. A reviewer of Clannad doesn’t try to give you millions of possible opinions that people can have about Clannad.

You haven't noticed I was referring to this particular case where a person is ‘not interested in the space opera/politics/philosophy/history niche LoGH rests in.’ To find information on whether LoGH belongs to this niche is not a difficult task. This information is not unattainable, it’s stated by reviewers, not merely implied, not merely alluded, not merely hinted, it’s stated. What do you think reviewers should do? Should they make a big red neon sign to make it easier for people ‘not interested in the space opera/politics/philosophy/history niche LoGH rests in’ to notice and realize that LoGH is space opera that delves into politics/philosophy/history?

You have your own definitions of words, so if you think a review is something that expresses everyone else’s opinions why don't you write your own review? Why don’t you write a review that explains why LoGh will not be liked by person A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, J, K, L, M, N, Z, X, etc and why it will appeal to person R, T, Y, U, O, P, V, Q, S etc. Besides, if you think reviewers here did a poor job, then I ask once more, why don’t you write your own better review?

There's no magic, the sci-fi is not heavily focused on or exploited in a unique way, none of the characters are "cool as shit", "badass", "sexy" (requires fanservice or a "sexy" personality type), or "moe" (by "normal" standards), and the pacing is not intense, but slow.

it did well at what it meant to do

Daisuki-chan said:
It's your "fault" for both thinking that your minority interpretations of such ideas are "common" and that being "common" proves objective truth.

orzel286 said:
@Baman
Oh dear - this post was so full of elitism...


Elitism of maserati owners doesn't even come close :|