| @NbQuil I'm not suggesting anything, you're the one who suggested technology objectively made animation better. How, then? Did it improve the framerate of all anime (one of the only objective ways to measure animation quality, I guess)? Then why aren't all movies released nowadays made in 24 FPS like Akira (released in 1988)? Did computers erase choppiness, wrong proportions and mouthflaps? Technology opens up new ways to work. FLCL that I mentionned earlier does take advantage of this (a scene at least comes to mind that seems traced over 3D). Is that scene better animated than the rest because it uses more modern tech? No, not really. Technically, everything is possible when it comes to animation. Tracing over 3d or painting over photos are just ways to help in the process, but they also bring their fair share of problems. Go try motion capture on a tentacle monster (-> the reason why non-humanoid CGI monsters always look stiff and ridiculous af) |
 |
Deathko said: 100% agree with what you said, I don't understand why that is so hard to get and they end up mixing everything, even after you explain it...@NbQuil I'm not suggesting anything, you're the one who suggested technology objectively made animation better. How, then? Did it improve the framerate of all anime (one of the only objective ways to measure animation quality, I guess)? Then why aren't all movies released nowadays made in 24 FPS like Akira (released in 1988)? Did computers erase choppiness, wrong proportions and mouthflaps? Technology opens up new ways to work. FLCL that I mentionned earlier does take advantage of this (a scene at least comes to mind that seems traced over 3D). Is that scene better animated than the rest because it uses more modern tech? No, not really. Technically, everything is possible when it comes to animation. Tracing over 3d or painting over photos are just ways to help in the process, but they also bring their fair share of problems. Go try motion capture on a tentacle monster (-> the reason why non-humanoid CGI monsters always look stiff and ridiculous af) cheekucheeku said: Trying different things is fun! You may not enjoy everything but surely you are going to find things that you'll love. I don't really like it being put that way. I feel like it's a matter of feelings. Depending on how you feel you will need a certain kind of anime and for that there are an infinity of factors. Now after watching too many anime.. Even I can say that we don't really need to be opiniated and the more we're not the more objective we are and that's where it gets interesting to voice our thoughts. After watching Gundam and Ginga I kind of went for the early 2000 anime I feel like I'm going to watch some more in the future though. As a matter of fact I just finished Kakyuusei and I am watching Noein (yes even though it was really hyped I still didn't watch it back then ^^). Still in between I kept watching recent animes and I'm going too watch some more because life, for me, is all about variety. How about you guys what are you watching atm? btw: Sorry I didn't read the answers before posting but i'm going to. |
DaCraziGuyFeb 17, 2019 1:10 PM
 |
| @DaCraziGuy all that means is the quality of work put into the average anime are subpar? If you are comparing the better animated shows from the past with the average mass-produced level of work we have currently, then obviously they are going to better. It's like comparing the richest men in africa with the average middle class in U.S. But if you compare those with, say, the nominees for the best animation from the cruchyroll award yesterday, then at least imo, shows such as violet evergarden and devilmen crybaby have much better animation. And the whole idea of "old is as good as new" simply doesn't uphold. If that's really true, then why are people saying otherwise? Why is this thread even necessary if old really is as good as new? Obviously people don't think so, and even if the problem lies elsewhere other than animation, the fact of the matter is that old simply isn't as good as new anymore. With the exception of the few outstanding shows from the past, on average, new anime are simply better than the |
WHEN IT RAINS, IT POURS. |
| Not all old anime is animated well. It was choppy as fuck sometimes if you look back at some older stuff. It's just like music. There is bad old music and people have been saying the same shit for generations. Just be a chad and enjoy anything from any era. |
 |
NbQuil said: @DaCraziGuy all that means is the quality of work put into the average anime are subpar? If you are comparing the better animated shows from the past with the average mass-produced level of work we have currently, then obviously they are going to better. It's like comparing the richest men in africa with the average middle class in U.S. But if you compare those with, say, the nominees for the best animation from the cruchyroll award yesterday, then at least imo, shows such as violet evergarden and devilmen crybaby have much better animation. And the whole idea of "old is as good as new" simply doesn't uphold. If that's really true, then why are people saying otherwise? Why is this thread even necessary if old really is as good as new? Obviously people don't think so, and even if the problem lies elsewhere other than animation, the fact of the matter is that old simply isn't as good as new anymore. With the exception of the few outstanding shows from the past, on average, new anime are simply better than the And the idea of "new is better" simply doesn't uphold. If that's really true, then why are people saying otherwise? Why the threads about anime dying every new season? Obviously people don't think so, and even if the problem lies somewhere else than in animation, the fact of the matter is that new simply isn't better. With the exceptions of a few outstanding recent shows, on average, new anime are simply not better. tip: Don't use very vague arguments that can be reversed or used by the other side so easily. And "this is fact because lots of people agree"... Lots of people agree there is one or many gods, lots of people agree there isn't, lots don't know. Does it make god(s) a fact? And what about those who agree there is no gods? See how far your argument is driving us of "facts" and objectivity? |
DeathkoFeb 17, 2019 3:41 PM
|
DrakoWiz said: DaCraziGuy said: You comment is pretty ignorant, there are plently of bad animation in older shows. There are a lot of inconsistencies even in the good ones. What you are doing is comparing the best old to the worse new and that is one of the things I dislike. Not everything looks like Akira or Cowboy Beebop nor is a fluid. Lupin III is an example of a show that has bad and great animation, the show that I just praised had some pretty obvious scenes were the budget was cut. Yes, I admit I did that. But fans of modern anime do the exact same thing towards older anime and bitch around about how unfair it is when they get the same treatment. They only choose the best looking ones to serve their examples and ignore the mediocre which are all too common today compared to the OVA age of the 80's and 90's for example, where everything had a higher budget on average. Also ofc anime from the 70's will look worse compared to anime from the 80's. Japan did not take animation as a serious business yet, and was more a kin to children anime and a hobby. That changed in the 80's and the OVA era hit, where suddenly there was a huge interest in animation and sponsorship from the government towards the productions in the medium. That is why most of 80's anime looks better compared to what came before and after when the economic crisis hit Japan. Suddenly there wasn't any money left to sponsor animation studious in producing high art. That is why early 90's anime look uglier and cheaper in the TV department. Then ofc the digital transition of anime from cel animation to digital. Which also was rough and produced some pretty bad quality stuff around the early 00's. Also the inconsistency you mention from older anime does not have to do with actually bad artwork, many were made by cel animation on hand, which takes much more effort than doing it by a computer. Some of the flaws displayed from cel animation are human mistakes and aren't that bad, this gives a sort of warmth to the work if you may, humanity. Where today most bad animation comes from badly integrated cgi and mediocre designs, which just look like an abomination, the 2016 Ace Attorney anime comes to mind (and most of modern anime actually cause moe), all the while having pretty backgrounds in the back. While old anime actually had human looking character designs with battle choreography and a sense of how human anatomy actually works. Ofc you can bring up stuff like "Your Name." and tell me "that realistic enough for ya?" and I'll say no cause they have no freaking noses. But this is besides the point. Ofc modern anime when it actually has budget can and looks better animation wise than some of the older stuff, like 00's mostly, cause that shit already looked bad when it came out. Most can't hold a candle towards the high budget works of the 80's and 90's, and that is all the more painfully obvious. Also why does animation quality matter so much to anime fans? Isn't stuff like story, ya know something older anime used to have, more important that just pretty visuals? If Violet Evargarden proved something, it is that no matter how pretty you look you can not make a show reliant solely based on visuals alone. So what you must get is that animation plays a smaller role than say proper cinematography and a well told story line. Cause even if a show looks like crap (for example first season of Kaiji, or Initial D) if it has a gripping story it will hook you, while fancy visuals can not do that on their own. That is also the reason why older anime is better than modern, cause most of them have both serviceable visuals (aka quality control was a thing back then) and a well thought out story, or characters to carry all of it. I'm here hoping that mistaking artstyle and animation, assuming that budget really makes the difference in how a show looks or even daring to suggest that Violet Evergarden has bad cinematography is all bait and you don't mean that. Because you don't mean that, right? |
| it definitely can be, especially if you introduce the old anime to aliens, thus making it new |
| Signature |
DrakoWiz said: jal90 said: I'm here hoping that mistaking artstyle and animation, assuming that budget really makes the difference in how a show looks or even daring to suggest that Violet Evergarden has bad cinematography is all bait and you don't mean that. Because you don't mean that, right? I guess you didn't read my entire post, I did not say that Violet Evargarden looks bad, on the contrary, just that you can not carry a show by visuals alone. That's what I understood from this: DrakoWiz said: If Violet Evargarden proved something, it is that no matter how pretty you look you can not make a show reliant solely based on visuals alone. So what you must get is that animation plays a smaller role than say proper cinematography and a well told story line. and it sounded weirdly worded to me because cinematography is a visual field. |
| @Maneki-Mew I don't believe in nostalgia glasses. Additionally, people who whine about the death of modern anime tend to be new users who never saw old anime to begin with. I was just mentionning those to reverse NbQuil's argument and show him that it was pointless, not to make a good argument myself. Some other pattern I noticed too, is that the "new = better" crowd seems to be very dismissive of anime as an art form, going all "it's just entertainment" or "le chinese cartoons". In that sense it's logical that they believe technology will naturally improve it, like they believe technology improved video games (hint: it did not in most cases). Video games, another field where the "nostalgia glasses" thing keeps being brought up by people who seem to irrationally hate anything that is 5 years old or more. |
|
| Old anime is better hands down. Nothing else should have been produced after Legend of the Galactic Heroes. |
 |
Deathko said: NbQuil said: @DaCraziGuy all that means is the quality of work put into the average anime are subpar? If you are comparing the better animated shows from the past with the average mass-produced level of work we have currently, then obviously they are going to better. It's like comparing the richest men in africa with the average middle class in U.S. But if you compare those with, say, the nominees for the best animation from the cruchyroll award yesterday, then at least imo, shows such as violet evergarden and devilmen crybaby have much better animation. And the whole idea of "old is as good as new" simply doesn't uphold. If that's really true, then why are people saying otherwise? Why is this thread even necessary if old really is as good as new? Obviously people don't think so, and even if the problem lies elsewhere other than animation, the fact of the matter is that old simply isn't as good as new anymore. With the exception of the few outstanding shows from the past, on average, new anime are simply better than the And the idea of "new is better" simply doesn't uphold. If that's really true, then why are people saying otherwise? Why the threads about anime dying every new season? Obviously people don't think so, and even if the problem lies somewhere else than in animation, the fact of the matter is that new simply isn't better. With the exceptions of a few outstanding recent shows, on average, new anime are simply not better. tip: Don't use very vague arguments that can be reversed or used by the other side so easily. And "this is fact because lots of people agree"... Lots of people agree there is one or many gods, lots of people agree there isn't, lots don't know. Does it make god(s) a fact? And what about those who agree there is no gods? See how far your argument is driving us of "facts" and objectivity? But if you reverse the argument, it's just not true. 1.) No one is saying otherwise. If you just ask people to watch a new anime and a old anime, the default answer is going to be the new anime. This thread is saying "otherwise". Do you see anyone making thread "new anime is underrated"? No because it is generally accepted that new is better 2.) Anime is not dying every season. Just because the vocal minority make thread about it doesn't mean it's dying. You can take stat such as crunchyroll user growth to see that the amount of people watching anime have clearly grown over time. 3.) The whole last part just doesn't make sense at all. There are only a handful of good "old" anime. If you randomly pick a anime from back in the day, it's highly unlikely that people enjoy it more. You can do this by just randomly picking an anime from the search function and compare the scores. Every season have at least one show that is rated 8.0+ while old anime barely have any that can hit 7.5 Just because you can take a statement and replace it with other facts doesn't make it true. I agree that it was a vague statement, but it was meant to be vague because the detail of it is supposed to be easy to understand. If that's not the case for you, then I apologize for not making it easier to understand. I just can't see why it's so hard for you to see that people simply prefer newer anime. If you show anime to someone who have never watch it, there is no way that they would think the older ones are better. |
| WHEN IT RAINS, IT POURS. |
NbQuil said: Yeah, I agree a bit on what you said and that is why I changed a bit the tittle to make it more clear. On average, new is better. But if you compare the best of today vs the best of the old days, I think that they are equals. Also, they are not that few from my pov. @DaCraziGuy all that means is the quality of work put into the average anime are subpar? If you are comparing the better animated shows from the past with the average mass-produced level of work we have currently, then obviously they are going to better. It's like comparing the richest men in africa with the average middle class in U.S. But if you compare those with, say, the nominees for the best animation from the cruchyroll award yesterday, then at least imo, shows such as violet evergarden and devilmen crybaby have much better animation. And the whole idea of "old is as good as new" simply doesn't uphold. If that's really true, then why are people saying otherwise? Why is this thread even necessary if old really is as good as new? Obviously people don't think so, and even if the problem lies elsewhere other than animation, the fact of the matter is that old simply isn't as good as new anymore. With the exception of the few outstanding shows from the past, on average, new anime are simply better than the Greatness always comes in a small amount, in the past, now and I'm sure that in the future too. But if you think that now we get a lot more "masterpieces" I think you are wrong. Psajdak said: Why would you abandon something? The idea of the post is to make people contemplate the future and the past, both are great imo.So, ummm... What are we supposed to do now? Completely abandon post 2010 anime, and look at its fans with utmost contempt? |
|
DrakoWiz said: A lot of people uses biased opinions that can be destroyed with one or two logical argument, they are stupid. I avoid doing that for that reason (except when I'm trolling). DaCraziGuy said: You comment is pretty ignorant, there are plently of bad animation in older shows. There are a lot of inconsistencies even in the good ones. What you are doing is comparing the best old to the worse new and that is one of the things I dislike. Not everything looks like Akira or Cowboy Beebop nor is a fluid. Lupin III is an example of a show that has bad and great animation, the show that I just praised had some pretty obvious scenes were the budget was cut. Yes, I admit I did that. But fans of modern anime do the exact same thing towards older anime and bitch around about how unfair it is when they get the same treatment. They only choose the best looking ones to serve their examples and ignore the mediocre which are all too common today compared to the OVA age of the 80's and 90's for example, where everything had a higher budget on average. Also ofc anime from the 70's will look worse compared to anime from the 80's. Japan did not take animation as a serious business yet, and was more a kin to children anime and a hobby. That changed in the 80's and the OVA era hit, where suddenly there was a huge interest in animation and sponsorship from the government towards the productions in the medium. That is why most of 80's anime looks better compared to what came before and after when the economic crisis hit Japan. Suddenly there wasn't any money left to sponsor animation studious in producing high art. That is why early 90's anime look uglier and cheaper in the TV department. Then ofc the digital transition of anime from cel animation to digital. Which also was rough and produced some pretty bad quality stuff around the early 00's. Also the inconsistency you mention from older anime does not have to do with actually bad artwork, many were made by cel animation on hand, which takes much more effort than doing it by a computer. Some of the flaws displayed from cel animation are human mistakes and aren't that bad, this gives a sort of warmth to the work if you may, humanity. Where today most bad animation comes from badly integrated cgi and mediocre designs, which just look like an abomination, the 2016 Ace Attorney anime comes to mind (and most of modern anime actually cause moe), all the while having pretty backgrounds in the back. While old anime actually had human looking character designs with battle choreography and a sense of how human anatomy actually works. Ofc you can bring up stuff like "Your Name." and tell me "that realistic enough for ya?" and I'll say no cause they have no freaking noses. But this is besides the point. Ofc modern anime when it actually has budget can and looks better animation wise than some of the older stuff, like 00's mostly, cause that shit already looked bad when it came out. Most can't hold a candle towards the high budget works of the 80's and 90's, and that is all the more painfully obvious. Also why does animation quality matter so much to anime fans? Isn't stuff like story, ya know something older anime used to have, more important that just pretty visuals? If Violet Evargarden proved something, it is that no matter how pretty you look you can not make a show reliant solely based on visuals alone. So what you must get is that animation plays a smaller role than say proper cinematography and a well told story line. Cause even if a show looks like crap (for example first season of Kaiji, or Initial D) if it has a gripping story it will hook you, while fancy visuals can not do that on their own. That is also the reason why older anime is better than modern, cause most of them have both serviceable visuals (aka quality control was a thing back then) and a well thought out story, or characters to carry all of it. And about art and animation, I think that it depends a lot of the genre in my case. I usually don't give a fuck, but watching a really detailed and fluid action scene of someone slicing people like in Dororo or Afro Samurai is fking cool. On the other sides, having the classic badly animated walk while talking is something I don't even care anymore even tho I can't avoid laughting. |
|
DaCraziGuy said: NbQuil said: Yeah, I agree a bit on what you said and that is why I changed a bit the tittle to make it more clear. On average, new is better. But if you compare the best of today vs the best of the old days, I think that they are equals. Also, they are not that few from my pov. @DaCraziGuy all that means is the quality of work put into the average anime are subpar? If you are comparing the better animated shows from the past with the average mass-produced level of work we have currently, then obviously they are going to better. It's like comparing the richest men in africa with the average middle class in U.S. But if you compare those with, say, the nominees for the best animation from the cruchyroll award yesterday, then at least imo, shows such as violet evergarden and devilmen crybaby have much better animation. And the whole idea of "old is as good as new" simply doesn't uphold. If that's really true, then why are people saying otherwise? Why is this thread even necessary if old really is as good as new? Obviously people don't think so, and even if the problem lies elsewhere other than animation, the fact of the matter is that old simply isn't as good as new anymore. With the exception of the few outstanding shows from the past, on average, new anime are simply better than the Greatness always comes in a small amount, in the past, now and I'm sure that in the future too. But if you think that now we get a lot more "masterpieces" I think you are wrong. I agree that in terms of masterpiece, older anime definitely dominate. But when I think of the phrase "old is as good as new", I get the impression of an average anime. So like winter 2019 as a whole vs winter 1989 or something like that. In those cases, I really do believe that new is better, but in terms of true masterpiece, I agree that some of the old classic anime are far better. |
| WHEN IT RAINS, IT POURS. |
NbQuil said: I agree with that too, the new average is better.DaCraziGuy said: Yeah, I agree a bit on what you said and that is why I changed a bit the tittle to make it more clear. On average, new is better. But if you compare the best of today vs the best of the old days, I think that they are equals. Also, they are not that few from my pov. Greatness always comes in a small amount, in the past, now and I'm sure that in the future too. But if you think that now we get a lot more "masterpieces" I think you are wrong. I agree that in terms of masterpiece, older anime definitely dominate. But when I think of the phrase "old is as good as new", I get the impression of an average anime. So like winter 2019 as a whole vs winter 1989 or something like that. In those cases, I really do believe that new is better, but in terms of true masterpiece, I agree that some of the old classic anime are far better. |
|
| The new average is probably better, yeah. It's mainly due to technology, but sure. That's usually not the criteria when comparing different times though. It's a showcase: You don't see the worst professional art ever made in the year 1700 being compared to the worst professional art ever made in 2000 and determining which era was superior. Because making something bad is easy; anyone can do that. The masterpieces of past years are supposed to be compared to the masterpieces of new years, if you want an accurate, reasonable assessment. |
 妾はアステマ, 荒廃の天使 |
Chart said: Most modern anime fans wont even watch certain shows based off animation. All they want to see is their ecchi weeb harem trash. Old anime is and forever will be objectively better than 90% of the shows coming out these days. This shitty attitude of yours doesn't really help promoting them either I'd also recommend checking objectively on the dictionary, u know, in case u feel like using words with their proper meaning |
Let all those obscure feelings we kept inside be someone else's problem.. How many of those do we still need until we're satisfied?  one two cheeku cheeku |
NbQuil said: Deathko said: And the idea of "new is better" simply doesn't uphold. If that's really true, then why are people saying otherwise? Why the threads about anime dying every new season? Obviously people don't think so, and even if the problem lies somewhere else than in animation, the fact of the matter is that new simply isn't better. With the exceptions of a few outstanding recent shows, on average, new anime are simply not better. tip: Don't use very vague arguments that can be reversed or used by the other side so easily. And "this is fact because lots of people agree"... Lots of people agree there is one or many gods, lots of people agree there isn't, lots don't know. Does it make god(s) a fact? And what about those who agree there is no gods? See how far your argument is driving us of "facts" and objectivity? But if you reverse the argument, it's just not true. 1.) No one is saying otherwise. If you just ask people to watch a new anime and a old anime, the default answer is going to be the new anime. This thread is saying "otherwise". Do you see anyone making thread "new anime is underrated"? No because it is generally accepted that new is better 2.) Anime is not dying every season. Just because the vocal minority make thread about it doesn't mean it's dying. You can take stat such as crunchyroll user growth to see that the amount of people watching anime have clearly grown over time. 3.) The whole last part just doesn't make sense at all. There are only a handful of good "old" anime. If you randomly pick a anime from back in the day, it's highly unlikely that people enjoy it more. You can do this by just randomly picking an anime from the search function and compare the scores. Every season have at least one show that is rated 8.0+ while old anime barely have any that can hit 7.5 Just because you can take a statement and replace it with other facts doesn't make it true. I agree that it was a vague statement, but it was meant to be vague because the detail of it is supposed to be easy to understand. If that's not the case for you, then I apologize for not making it easier to understand. I just can't see why it's so hard for you to see that people simply prefer newer anime. If you show anime to someone who have never watch it, there is no way that they would think the older ones are better. 1/Just lol. Talk about selective bias and only hearing or seeing what you want to. 2/Implying again that lots of people saw it/agree on it = it's objectively better. That's not what objectivity is about. 3/MAL ratings, really? Not going to explain to you why MAL ratings are unreliable, there are dozens of threads going into details on the subject. And the best argument you could come up with: "I'm superiorly intelligent and you're too dumb to understand". Not really surprised, it's an habit from people who defend your stance. Glad you were not mistaking animation and art style, but you still The bit about "only a handful of good anime" is funny too. If you think the people who watch old anime spend their lives talking about NGE and Cowboy Bebop because that's all there is to old anime, you probably just didn't look around enough. |
DeathkoFeb 19, 2019 8:05 AM
|
Deathko said: NbQuil said: But if you reverse the argument, it's just not true. 1.) No one is saying otherwise. If you just ask people to watch a new anime and a old anime, the default answer is going to be the new anime. This thread is saying "otherwise". Do you see anyone making thread "new anime is underrated"? No because it is generally accepted that new is better 2.) Anime is not dying every season. Just because the vocal minority make thread about it doesn't mean it's dying. You can take stat such as crunchyroll user growth to see that the amount of people watching anime have clearly grown over time. 3.) The whole last part just doesn't make sense at all. There are only a handful of good "old" anime. If you randomly pick a anime from back in the day, it's highly unlikely that people enjoy it more. You can do this by just randomly picking an anime from the search function and compare the scores. Every season have at least one show that is rated 8.0+ while old anime barely have any that can hit 7.5 Just because you can take a statement and replace it with other facts doesn't make it true. I agree that it was a vague statement, but it was meant to be vague because the detail of it is supposed to be easy to understand. If that's not the case for you, then I apologize for not making it easier to understand. I just can't see why it's so hard for you to see that people simply prefer newer anime. If you show anime to someone who have never watch it, there is no way that they would think the older ones are better. 1/Just lol. Talk about selective bias and only hearing or seeing what you want to. 2/Implying again that lots of people saw it/agree on it = it's objectively better. That's not what objectivity is about. 3/MAL ratings, really? Not going to explain to you why MAL ratings are unreliable, there are dozens of threads going into details on the subject. And the best argument you could come up with: "I'm superiorly intelligent and you're too dumb to understand". Not really surprised, it's an habit from people who defend your stance. Glad you were not mistaking animation and art style, but you still The bit about "only a handful of good anime" is funny too. If you think the people who watch old anime spend their lives talking about NGE and Cowboy Bebop because that's all there is to old anime, you probably just didn't look around enough. 1.) it's not selective bias if it's true. No one is making posts saying new anime are as good as old anime 2.) IF people aren't even willing to watch a show, then it's not a good show. Even in the movie industry, no matter how much critics praise a movie, if no one watches it, the conclusion is that the movie is bad. Same goes for anime, you can praise it however you want, but if no one is watching old anime, it's a good indicator that old anime is just not as good. 3.) I do agree that MAL rating is unreliable, but it's a good indicator that shows people enjoy new anime more than old anime It's funny you talk about "I'm superioly intelligent and you're too dumb to undestand" when you copied my argument and reworded it. Not really surprising, it's an habit for people who think they're elite and is too stubborn to see things in a different light. I will say that the masterpiece of the older generation is better than the "masterpiece" of what we have now, but on average, across the board, old anime is just not as good. |
| WHEN IT RAINS, IT POURS. |
| to me it's pretty much the same I guess ? I think it has gotten way more acceptable and easier to watch/obtain/hook up overall |
NbQuil said: I'm only replying to the bold parts.Deathko said: 1/Just lol. Talk about selective bias and only hearing or seeing what you want to. 2/Implying again that lots of people saw it/agree on it = it's objectively better. That's not what objectivity is about. 3/MAL ratings, really? Not going to explain to you why MAL ratings are unreliable, there are dozens of threads going into details on the subject. And the best argument you could come up with: "I'm superiorly intelligent and you're too dumb to understand". Not really surprised, it's an habit from people who defend your stance. Glad you were not mistaking animation and art style, but you still The bit about "only a handful of good anime" is funny too. If you think the people who watch old anime spend their lives talking about NGE and Cowboy Bebop because that's all there is to old anime, you probably just didn't look around enough. 1.) it's not selective bias if it's true. No one is making posts saying new anime are as good as old anime 2.) IF people aren't even willing to watch a show, then it's not a good show. Even in the movie industry, no matter how much critics praise a movie, if no one watches it, the conclusion is that the movie is bad. Same goes for anime, you can praise it however you want, but if no one is watching old anime, it's a good indicator that old anime is just not as good. 3.) I do agree that MAL rating is unreliable, but it's a good indicator that shows people enjoy new anime more than old anime It's funny you talk about "I'm superioly intelligent and you're too dumb to undestand" when you copied my argument and reworded it. Not really surprising, it's an habit for people who think they're elite and is too stubborn to see things in a different light. I will say that the masterpiece of the older generation is better than the "masterpiece" of what we have now, but on average, across the board, old anime is just not as good. >no one is making posts saying new anime are as good as old anime You'd be surprised. >even in the movie industry no matter how much critics praise a movie if no one watches it the conclusion is that the movie is bad Come on now, that doesn't make any sense. >same goes for anime you can praise it however you want but if no one is watching old anime it's a good indicator that old anime is just not as good Can the same thing be said about new anime? The answer is yes. >i do agree that mal rating is unreliable but it's a good indicator that shows people enjoy new anime more than old anime No the reason that it's a "good indicator" is because there's more folks watching newer anime than they were watching "older" anime. Did you think this through? Rhetorical question. >but on average across the board old anime is just not as good Yeah, I just can't agree to the last part. |
CabronFeb 19, 2019 10:14 AM
Please learn about cel animation and its technical process. Learn how special effects and backlighting were done without computers. |
cheekucheeku said: Of course!Come on guys make peace it's anime.. and we're supposed to enjoy it aren't we a bit missing the point..? It's only when folks make ignorant comments about old anime that someone needs to put the brakes. |
Please learn about cel animation and its technical process. Learn how special effects and backlighting were done without computers. |
Cabron said: NbQuil said: I'm only replying to the bold parts.1.) it's not selective bias if it's true. No one is making posts saying new anime are as good as old anime 2.) IF people aren't even willing to watch a show, then it's not a good show. Even in the movie industry, no matter how much critics praise a movie, if no one watches it, the conclusion is that the movie is bad. Same goes for anime, you can praise it however you want, but if no one is watching old anime, it's a good indicator that old anime is just not as good. 3.) I do agree that MAL rating is unreliable, but it's a good indicator that shows people enjoy new anime more than old anime It's funny you talk about "I'm superioly intelligent and you're too dumb to undestand" when you copied my argument and reworded it. Not really surprising, it's an habit for people who think they're elite and is too stubborn to see things in a different light. I will say that the masterpiece of the older generation is better than the "masterpiece" of what we have now, but on average, across the board, old anime is just not as good. >no one is making posts saying new anime are as good as old anime You'd be surprised. >even in the movie industry no matter how much critics praise a movie if no one watches it the conclusion is that the movie is bad Come on now, that doesn't make any sense. >same goes for anime you can praise it however you want but if no one is watching old anime it's a good indicator that old anime is just not as good Can the same thing be said about new anime? The answer is yes. >i do agree that mal rating is unreliable but it's a good indicator that shows people enjoy new anime more than old anime No the reason that it's a "good indicator" is because there's more folks watching newer anime than they were watching "older" anime. Did you think this through? Rhetorical question. >but on average across the board old anime is just not as good Yeah, I just can't agree to the last part. what are you even talking about. How does that not make any sense. Do you judge the popularity of a film by what the critics say or by the amount of people that watch it? You said it yourself, "because there's more folks watching newer anime than they were watching "older"anime". If that's not an indication of newer anime is better, therefore bringing in more viewer, then idk what is. You can't possibly expect the anime industry to grow without an improvement in quality The last part is just what all these points lead to. If you still think the average old anime is as good as the average anime we have now, then it seems like you're fixed on your opinion, no point in convincing you otherwise. |
| WHEN IT RAINS, IT POURS. |
Chart said: Most modern anime fans wont even watch certain shows based off animation. All they want to see is their ecchi weeb harem trash. Old anime is and forever will be objectively better than 90% of the shows coming out these days. Don't just throw the word "objectivity" in there if you're going to base it off of what you like or don't like. If we're talking about objectivity, then the fact that people rather watch new anime instead of old anime should be a clear indicator which one is better. |
| WHEN IT RAINS, IT POURS. |
NbQuil said: I agree that the word objective is wrong there.Chart said: Most modern anime fans wont even watch certain shows based off animation. All they want to see is their ecchi weeb harem trash. Old anime is and forever will be objectively better than 90% of the shows coming out these days. Don't just throw the word "objectivity" in there if you're going to base it off of what you like or don't like. If we're talking about objectivity, then the fact that people rather watch new anime instead of old anime should be a clear indicator which one is better. But saying that because "people" rather watch new shows is an indicator of something is wrong, the phrase: nobody's born knowing is pretty good here, if you know nothing of course you won't know what is good. Also, it's a lot easier to get into seasonal shows, every anime page features them and everyone talks about them. Getting into the deeper parts of the anime actually requires some efford and real interest, something that most people doesn't like to do. So this also makes the "people" even less important. |
|
NbQuil said: 2.) IF people aren't even willing to watch a show, then it's not a good show. Even in the movie industry, no matter how much critics praise a movie, if no one watches it, the conclusion is that the movie is bad. Same goes for anime, you can praise it however you want, but if no one is watching old anime, it's a good indicator that old anime is just not as good. Yeah, screw petty things like accessibility and video quality when a lot of them don't and likely will never have a HQ release, or the fact that very few fansubs devote themselves not just to old anime, but even to new anime that is too niche and not an immediate crowd pleaser. NbQuil said: 3.) I do agree that MAL rating is unreliable, but it's a good indicator that shows people enjoy new anime more than old anime It's not if they don't watch old anime, because they are not enjoying old anime, so there is no metric to compare. NbQuil said: I will say that the masterpiece of the older generation is better than the "masterpiece" of what we have now, but on average, across the board, old anime is just not as good. It's not like I have trust issues and all but I'm looking at the severe lack of old anime in your list and I dunno, it feels odd. |
| @jal90 @Chart and anyone else I didn't get to quote that think old is as good as new I'll just say it upfront, personally, I can't stand old anime. I've tried watching it countless time, but the art style is just too outdated for me to sit through it. It might not be comprehensible to some, but I care about the holistic style of anime just as much as the actual plot. If the show is not easy on the eye, I lose motivation to watch it. I do compromise with its source material or wiki/summary, and while the story itself is intriguing, I just can't bear to watch the animated version of it. Under the context of this thread, the premise you are arguing is that "old can be as good as new. They are equals but different". This means old is NOT seen to be as good as new, but they CAN be. Like I stated earlier, old anime is not watchable for me due to their style, and I can assure you I'm not the only one put off by it. Imo, the only way that old anime CAN be as good as new is if you are able to look past the vast difference in their style. However, that's obviously not an easy task, since if it was easy, older anime would be vastly more popular than they are now. Now, I don't know which "objective" method you use to compare old and new anime, but I use popularity. If an anime is popular, then from the anime industry perspective as a whole, they are a good anime. Obviously, I would personally disagree with some of them, but I think if we're looking at it from the anime industry as a whole, it's as fair of a method to compare as I can think of. If you disagree, that's fine. But instead of attacking my arguments, how about coming up with something better instead. |
| WHEN IT RAINS, IT POURS. |
NbQuil said: Being objective from my point of view would be, watching something for what really is and understand what it's showing, only after those steps you can make your opinion. @jal90 @Chart and anyone else I didn't get to quote that think old is as good as new I'll just say it upfront, personally, I can't stand old anime. I've tried watching it countless time, but the art style is just too outdated for me to sit through it. It might not be comprehensible to some, but I care about the holistic style of anime just as much as the actual plot. If the show is not easy on the eye, I lose motivation to watch it. I do compromise with its source material or wiki/summary, and while the story itself is intriguing, I just can't bear to watch the animated version of it. Under the context of this thread, the premise you are arguing is that "old can be as good as new. They are equals but different". This means old is NOT seen to be as good as new, but they CAN be. Like I stated earlier, old anime is not watchable for me due to their style, and I can assure you I'm not the only one put off by it. Imo, the only way that old anime CAN be as good as new is if you are able to look past the vast difference in their style. However, that's obviously not an easy task, since if it was easy, older anime would be vastly more popular than they are now. Now, I don't know which "objective" method you use to compare old and new anime, but I use popularity. If an anime is popular, then from the anime industry perspective as a whole, they are a good anime. Obviously, I would personally disagree with some of them, but I think if we're looking at it from the anime industry as a whole, it's as fair of a method to compare as I can think of. If you disagree, that's fine. But instead of attacking my arguments, how about coming up with something better instead. Like someone said to you, you haven't watched much anime, saying that you tried "countless times" is not a convincing argument. I don't know if you read my previous comment, but I already said that a lot of situational stuff affect popularity. What you are doing is like judging a restaurant because of how many people has inside. With that mentality Mc Donals should serve the best food in the world, and we al know that food is not the only reason why someone eats there, price, place and hour affects everything. In the case of anime, just the fact that a show is not airing already makes it less popular. Then, the age, something different always make a lot of people turn away. And just because it's not being talked about makes them less likely to be found. Not all the old shows are easy to find. The quality of the video is not the best in some pages. The people that actually watch old shows usually watched a lot more than your average fan. Etc. Lot of thing to keep in mind. Just the difference in exposition and who are the ones watching them already makes it hard to compare new and old. And, the "old style" is hard for your eyes? Every show has almost a different style, that is why you might find something that you like. Saying that old art style is bad really makes you look ignorant if you can't notice the difference between them. And last, most of the new shows use the same face for all the characters, just that should make you question about the art quality. VOTOMS, City Hunter and Legend of the Galatic Heroes are example of shows that have characters with different faces using realistic proportions. Being realistic is a pretty objective thing to based your opinion (abstract things can be beautiful too, not saying that realism is always the best). And I think I never attacked you in any offensive way, also, there is nothing wrong on attacking arguments that are wrong or that you disagree with(if you use a logic argument of course). |
|
NbQuil said: I'll just say it upfront, personally, I can't stand old anime. I've tried watching it countless time, but the art style is just too outdated for me to sit through it. It might not be comprehensible to some, but I care about the holistic style of anime just as much as the actual plot. If the show is not easy on the eye, I lose motivation to watch it. I do compromise with its source material or wiki/summary, and while the story itself is intriguing, I just can't bear to watch the animated version of it. You do realise that you have groomed to like the "not outdated" styles by the media? We all have being conditioned like that...but some can unplug for a while (not per se a superior thing just an option)...others can't be plugged. |
NbQuil said: @jal90 @Chart and anyone else I didn't get to quote that think old is as good as new I'll just say it upfront, personally, I can't stand old anime. I've tried watching it countless time, but the art style is just too outdated for me to sit through it. It might not be comprehensible to some, but I care about the holistic style of anime just as much as the actual plot. If the show is not easy on the eye, I lose motivation to watch it. I do compromise with its source material or wiki/summary, and while the story itself is intriguing, I just can't bear to watch the animated version of it. Under the context of this thread, the premise you are arguing is that "old can be as good as new. They are equals but different". This means old is NOT seen to be as good as new, but they CAN be. Like I stated earlier, old anime is not watchable for me due to their style, and I can assure you I'm not the only one put off by it. Imo, the only way that old anime CAN be as good as new is if you are able to look past the vast difference in their style. However, that's obviously not an easy task, since if it was easy, older anime would be vastly more popular than they are now. Now, I don't know which "objective" method you use to compare old and new anime, but I use popularity. If an anime is popular, then from the anime industry perspective as a whole, they are a good anime. Obviously, I would personally disagree with some of them, but I think if we're looking at it from the anime industry as a whole, it's as fair of a method to compare as I can think of. If you disagree, that's fine. But instead of attacking my arguments, how about coming up with something better instead. The reason why I attack your argument is that you don't take into account several elements that make your choice of popularity as an objective metric of quality kind of useless. Because media grows trends, and is constantly pushing what is new. That is not a conclusion, it is a premise and its consequence is that older stuff gets ignored. You are not taking into account here accessibility when a lot of older shows require an additional effort from the viewers to get, because they are not offered immediately to them, in many cases they were not remastered and the available copies have visual/audio issues, and fansubs will more often than not pick what people watch, and what people watch is what media has conditioned them to do so. Now, it's not my point to convince you to keep trying older anime, whatever many times you've tried ("countless"... well), but certainly the experience you appear to prove in your MAL is scarce to make any factual conclusion, and I wouldn't really put that much emphasis on your "holistic" approach. Because I apply it as well, and our decisions are obviously very different. So I don't think this alone constitutes a reason against watching older anime. |
DaCraziGuy said: Hi, I'm DaCraziGuy-sensei and I'm going to teach you to be a rational being. First, my opinion, old anime is as good as new one. Simple as that. I like both and I think anyone should think like that, accepting the new while remembering the old acknowledging the good and the bad. Despite being something simple it's something I usually don't see. Second, what triggered this rant were a couple of things, but basically it was that while I was watching "Lupin III" I though to myself "well, this is pretty well animated despite how old it is" and after that I watched the last episode of "Gotoubon no hanoyome"(show that I actually enjoy) and I said "well, this is pretty badly animated and the art was inconsistent af in this episode". A couple of other things happened but, who cares? If you are one of those that think that animation is not like it used to be, well, you are correct but that doesn't mean it's worse. Just check anything made by Bones and it's done. But if you think that old anime looks bad, here are some stuff that I hope it would change your mind: Super old 70's: Mostly 80's: A mix: Some cool shit: These are only a small part of good old stuff, but I think this is enough to make a point. Also I want to add a small thing, art is different than animation. Art is how it looks and animation how it "moves" basically. Lot of people seem to don't know that. So, what do you think of old anime and new anime? What we gained and what we lost? Class, dismiss. I think anime just gained some shitty tropes that bring it down and make it hated by non-anime fans. While old anime still have some questionable tropes, newer anime just bring it to another level of garbage. Oh well, I like older and newer anime equally anyway. |
| you're cool |
| Absolutely agree. Trash existed back then and trash exists now, just as great shows did and still do. As is the case with other entertainment mediums, it's common to see people lamenting a perceived drop in quality in a specific medium overall by simply focusing on either bottom of the barrel garbage or a mediocre flavour-of-the-month work while glossing over great stuff, all the while forgetting that bad works existed in said medium's perceived golden age. For example, it's common to see people complaining about the state of popular music nowadays while getting all starry-eyed over older artists like The Beatles, Led Zeppelin and Nirvana all the while ignoring the fact that innovative and talented artists like, for example, Frank Ocean are working today and that a lot of popular music from the past was dreadful too (Kenny G and Vanilla Ice anyone?). The same principle applies to anime. |
LoveLikeBloodFeb 23, 2019 1:55 AM
Take care of yourself |
| It applies to every medium that there are good and bad stuff in older and newer production. But anime has a problem in that majority of fanbase/otaku community is separate from those people who have history knowledge of medium, professionals or more like those who write and explore mediums phases and background and there is just too little recognition. This doesn't mean there isn't any (there are even people in Japan who orientate to study phenomenon otaku culture), but those don't get to affect community itself. Animanga community has for long time worked in a way that to get in with others you'd need to follow trends, like currently it's seasonal following and knowing big titles of ongoing season to get involved in discussion. It is secondary to know titles regarded as classics and i think how such title is given differs a lot from something like movies. Even dick length competition is just focusing how much you have watched, not on variety, age, ug or classic. DaCraziGuy said: So, what do you think of old anime and new anime? Watch both with no big issue. Over all prefer old stuff due to art style, character design among some stupid plot shit and trying to sell toys. Cheap animation product in itself doesn't bother me, it's in a way interesting to see what animators back then did to save money and maybe tried to do new things +badly animated shows are gold. What we gained and what we lost? I'm glad comedic relief characters have developed from little boy/animal/what-ever-mascot. What I miss is noses. |
 |
konkelo said: We still have those scenes were animators use the "lazy way", even in shows like mob or dororo that generally have great animation from my pov.Watch both with no big issue. Over all prefer old stuff due to art style, character design among some stupid plot shit and trying to sell toys. Cheap animation product in itself doesn't bother me, it's in a way interesting to see what animators back then did to save money and maybe tried to do new things +badly animated shows are gold. konkelo said: You are right about that, I actually didn't noticed that until you said it. And I like that too.I'm glad comedic relief characters have developed from little boy/animal/what-ever-mascot. What I miss is noses. |
|
DaCraziGuy said: konkelo said: We still have those scenes were animators use the "lazy way", even in shows like mob or dororo that generally have great animation from my pov.Watch both with no big issue. Over all prefer old stuff due to art style, character design among some stupid plot shit and trying to sell toys. Cheap animation product in itself doesn't bother me, it's in a way interesting to see what animators back then did to save money and maybe tried to do new things +badly animated shows are gold. True, there are also tricks we have gotten used to or even expect from anime, like character talks-> close picture of character and animate nothing else but mouth moving. What isn't anymore done is stuff like re-using animation cells and something dramatic happens have a still picture and zoom in just to name few, but those were also used in western animation quite plenty. Watching Ougon Bat right now and ye you can see same cells used in different eps. Tbh I don't agree with idea due to technical development animation has evolved for better. More important is how much more money is now involved in industry and more work power due to it. Most animation studios were just starting in the 60's/70's and there was a lot less animators involved for one episode. 60's and 70's movies have non-outdated smooth animation compared to cheap TV series animation of that time. konkelo said: You are right about that, I actually didn't noticed that until you said it. And I like that too.I'm glad comedic relief characters have developed from little boy/animal/what-ever-mascot. What I miss is noses. With new Dororo adaptation you can really see the difference. Even when taking account tone change in story Dororo (character) has completely different role from the original. |
|
konkelo said: I think that both things were and are important. I think that the technical development helped a lot with some things like special effects(especially their sound) and light, I agree that the budget may be a bit bigger now but it still is an issue. Animation is always related to time and money tho, + frames = better animation, not much science there. The backgrounds is simple too, +detail = better backgrounds. Character designs is almost 100% subjective, and I usually prefer the old one in this one, having characters that actually look different is something that I love.Tbh I don't agree with idea due to technical development animation has evolved for better. More important is how much more money is now involved in industry and more work power due to it. Most animation studios were just starting in the 60's/70's and there was a lot less animators involved for one episode. 60's and 70's movies have non-outdated smooth animation compared to cheap TV series animation of that time. I'm not sure what had more impact on the industry and probably money is more important(and time too), but probably your average show can look better because of how good technology is now(it's easier to do your job now so you need less time to do something decent), so I think both are important things. |
|
DaCraziGuy said: konkelo said: I think that both things were and are important. I think that the technical development helped a lot with some things like special effects(especially their sound) and light, I agree that the budget may be a bit bigger now but it still is an issue. Animation is always related to time and money tho, + frames = better animation, not much science there. The backgrounds is simple too, +detail = better backgrounds. Character designs is almost 100% subjective, and I usually prefer the old one in this one, having characters that actually look different is something that I love.Tbh I don't agree with idea due to technical development animation has evolved for better. More important is how much more money is now involved in industry and more work power due to it. Most animation studios were just starting in the 60's/70's and there was a lot less animators involved for one episode. 60's and 70's movies have non-outdated smooth animation compared to cheap TV series animation of that time. I'm not sure what had more impact on the industry and probably money is more important(and time too), but probably your average show can look better because of how good technology is now(it's easier to do your job now so you need less time to do something decent), so I think both are important things. Didn't think about sound but there I can see how technical development has helped. Special effects and light I disagree because using traditional animation medium you'd still be able to achieve similar product but you'd either need to know what to do or experiment a lot. But yeah I think my stand on this might lean too much on ~believing~, as I like to think if studios would have had enough time and money they could have done easily shows with animation rivaling 2000's and 2010's highly acclaimed shows already in the 60's with traditional way. Sadly money and time has always been issue with tv animation. How much money studios now days have compared to past would be interesting to know, also price differences in supplies and worker's payment from different decades. I think now we can just speculate, like in the 60's and 70's there really wasn't sponsors compared to now and there wasn't really "otaku" culture yet developed to sell merchandise so children were usually target audience. Supplies and pay I'm not sure, however during the 80's quite many western animation, american ones especially, were outsourced to Japan so I take it was cheaper at least from Western world. However now situation is both Japan and USA outsource animation often to South-Korea, so there could as well be change in cost to higher from past. |
|
More topics from this board
» What if aliens made every anime have aliens in it?APolygons2 - Yesterday |
26 |
by Hikinekomori
»»
28 seconds ago |
|
» Did you know people who have only 200 completed anime but more than 100 days are--LenRea - 8 hours ago |
35 |
by Hikinekomori
»»
7 minutes ago |
|
» Blu-ray is an outdated metric, Streaming services are the new standardremoved-user - Yesterday |
38 |
by ColourWheel
»»
16 minutes ago |
|
» Love at first sight XD ( 1 2 3 4 )kirAth-shiAue - Mar 24, 2007 |
166 |
by WatchTillTandava
»»
17 minutes ago |
|
» Tried going to reddit to discuss Anime, worst decision ever. ( 1 2 )kriissyy12 - Jul 4, 2022 |
93 |
by Hikinekomori
»»
21 minutes ago |