masterofgo said: AltoRoark99 said: How is you needing to be entertained by an anime the same as saying that a medium exists to entertain? In addition, my concern is not that commercial or mainstream anime is not to be enjoyed but rather that you should not be painting the medium in such broad strokes. I also question the liberal usage of the word "enjoyment" since the word very clearly implies feelings of joy and happiness that are not present in all things that people love. As I usually point out, it is not my place to enforce the usage of words, but I would never describe my relationship with Serial Experiments Lain as "enjoyable" despite the fact that is an anime that I really like. As an animated experience, the word would be far down my list of emotional responses.Anime being for entertainment is pretty much common knowledge. How is a show supposed to be good if I'm not entertained? You could say enjoyment is a rather broad term. I could enjoy something for its story, its visuals, its directing, something along those lines. If ratings aren't meant to be strictly personal, then why even assign the option to individual users? Finally, by the same token that ratings are meant to be strictly personal, what is wrong with someone having a rating system that is governed by certain other people's opinions? Is there something wrong with someone crafting a personal rating system that takes into account other people's opinions? I abhor numerical rating systems, but if we were to take them as a given, I do not find anything wrong with someone saying that they would take into account other people's opinions before coming to a conclusion. My favorite anime are my favorites because I enjoyed them the most. What more does anime need to do other than entertain? Well, perhaps it could inspire, but that would arguably be placed in the entertainment category. Are you sure you didn't enjoy Serial Experiments Lain at all? I enjoyed it quite a lot, despite not understanding much about it. I plan to rewatch it in order to uncover its hidden meanings. If I wasn't entertained, I wouldn't have cared about whatever meaning it had. What exactly do you mean by "emotional responses"? If someone takes others' opinions into accord while rating, I can't take them seriously. They don't exhibit their taste well if they choose to rely on what others think. It's definitely what I consider bandwagoning. |
masterofgo said: AltoRoark99 said: No. Bandwagoning is when a wide group of people take a particular opinion, usually one that becomes incredibly popular, and one jumps onto that opinion after the fact. There is also a general sense of capriciousness. Someone who bandwagons tends to be someone who changes his opinion multiple times within a short period of time, depending on what a greater group of people believe.Quality is entirely subjective to the viewer. Taking other peoples' opinions into consideration is bandwagoning at its finest. What the other poster is simply saying is that one cannot say a show is good or bad based purely on entertainment. His reasoning is a little shaky, and I do not buy it, but allow me to supplement it by simply saying that not all shows are supposed to be enjoyed. There are shows that have a more cerebral element to them, and while I can see where people find enjoyment in complex thought experiments, I think the primary purpose of certain shows is to provoke some sort of emotional response beyond simple pleasure or utility. I also would say that taking into consideration other people's opinions is incredibly important. I cannot stress this enough: few people are intelligent enough to completely understand a show. There are plenty of people who discuss shows or read about shows and express a much broader understanding when they rationalize their thoughts to other people. I would not say that this is bandwagoning. And you're one of those rare few intelligent people in this world correct? Smh. About what you are saying. Enjoyment is a very broad term. I'm very fascinated into things like the universe or other planets ect. I find things like documentary on the universe, the moon and other planets to be very entertaining. People are entertain by death note for its suspense and the chess game between the two main characters. People are entertain or find enjoyment out of serial lain for its interesting/thought provoking themes, that makes them think a lot about certain stuff. People are entertain from action series like dbz. Basically, anything that you like you enjoy. Astronomers enjoy finding new things about the universe. Einstein wouldn't be who he is today, if he did not get any enjoyment from what he was doing. entertainment/enjoyment is far too broad of a term, to just define it as action and explosion. You seem like a very intelligent person, so I find it a bit odd, that you can't understand something as simple as this. Every series has a genre tag to it, and people look for whatever tag they are interesting in. Basically when you see series tag as, suspense, action, mystery, suspense , physiological ect. These are basically different form of entertainment. What category you find the most enjoyment out of. it is as simple as that. |
keragammingMar 12, 2016 1:12 PM
TheBrainintheJar said: Irrelevant. The fact their kids draw it is an EXTERNAL element, so it shouldn't be used in judging a work. If a low quality anime is still very enjoyable, it means it done a few things right to make it so. A good reviewer would figure out these things. Good stories overcome their flaws. You sure like to repeat yourself and not even read what I write. The kids and painting doesn't even apply to anime. If low quality anime is still very enjoyable it means the person who enjoys it finds good things. A good reviewer will sitll cast his/her own opinion. A low quality anime can still cause 90% of the people to say event X was stupid while 10% might think it wasn't stupid. Also not everyone is a "good reviewer". The watcher doesn't even have to be a good reviewer. Any anime has a set amount of quality which is independent of the watcher. If quality would equal enjoyment every single person would rate the same anime exactly the same enjoyment-wise because according to you they're the same and the quality is static so, so should the enjoyment be. Good stories and flaws are 2 different things. If an anime is good, it can either have or not have flaws. If it doesn't have flaws, then it's flawless. If it does have flaws, it's still flawed no matter how good the story is. The fact that some people might forgive flaws doesn't mean they're not there. So you can either respond to what I actually wrote or just don't bother and save us both the effort. |
 |
keragamming said: Why do you make this assumption? So because I make a claim that is almost certainly universally true, you think that I inherently take a position where I am an outlier? An exception?And you're one of those rare few intelligent people in this world correct? Smh. keragamming said: I do not know what you mean by "broad," but you are misconstruing my argument by presenting a variety of scenarios that are not mutually exclusive with my own. Enjoyment is inherently related to pleasure and amusement, both of which are far more light-hearted, joyous, and jubilant by nature. I am simply saying that enjoyment is far from being the only metric of quality or experience.About what you are saying. Enjoyment is a very broad term. I'm very fascinated into things like the universe or other planets ect. I find things like documentary on the universe, the moon and other planets to be very entertaining. People are entertain by death note for its suspense and the chess game between the two main characters. People are entertain or find enjoyment out of serial lain for its interesting/thought provoking themes, that makes them think a lot about certain stuff. People are entertain from action series like dbz. Personally, I find that people who simply say that they enjoyed a show such as Serial Experiments Lain, or Angel's Egg, or even something like Mushishi are not doing a particularly great job of experiencing the anime. A lot of these shows move beyond merely just being enjoyable experiences. Whether they are cerebral, contemplative, saddening, depressing, enlightening, and more, none of these can be solely experienced by "enjoyment" alone. If I watch a movie like Andrei Tarakovsky's Stalker, I am not necessarily enjoying it in the same way that I might enjoy watching a comedy series. I mean as a most basic example, nobody enjoys feeling incredibly sad, that would be oxymoronic. Yet people still watch dramas. It is not only because they "enjoy" dramas, but because their experiences with dramas invokes a whole other range of emotions that differs from other shows. keragamming said: This is such a one dimensional perspective. People do not do things simply out of enjoyment, that is simply ridiculous. Scientists do not just enjoy science, they are propelled by a variety of other motivations that fixate them on the topic at hand.Basically, anything that you like you enjoy. Astronomers enjoy finding new things about the universe. Einstein wouldn't be who he is today, if he did not get any enjoyment from what he was doing. entertainment/enjoyment is far too broad of a term, to just define it as action and explosion. AltoRoark99 said: Why would something being inspirational be in the enjoyment category? If it is inspirational, it is inspirational.My favorite anime are my favorites because I enjoyed them the most. What more does anime need to do other than entertain? Well, perhaps it could inspire, but that would arguably be placed in the entertainment category. In addition, logically speaking, an anime does not need to do anything else, again, my argument is not that it has to, but that it can. To try to say that anime is solely restricted to how much you enjoy it seems ridiculous, because it robs art of its fundamental purpose. AltoRoark99 said: No, I did not really "enjoy" Serial Experiments Lain. I had no particular feelings of pleasure when watching the story unfold. I did feel things varying from anxiety to tension to trying to figure out the complexities that arose within the story. I would argue that my experience with SEL was very cerebral and I did not necessarily "enjoy" in the sense that I find it to be a fun and enjoyable experience. Rather, I would say it was a thought provoking show that had a lot of great things to say that predated the rise of the Internet phenomenon, which is why I consider it a great anime.Are you sure you didn't enjoy Serial Experiments Lain at all? I enjoyed it quite a lot, despite not understanding much about it. I plan to rewatch it in order to uncover its hidden meanings. If I wasn't entertained, I wouldn't have cared about whatever meaning it had. What exactly do you mean by "emotional responses"? The difference is pretty clear. AltoRoark99 said: That is not what "bandwagon" means.If someone takes others' opinions into accord while rating, I can't take them seriously. They don't exhibit their taste well if they choose to rely on what others think. It's definitely what I consider bandwagoning. I mean personally, I cannot take anyone who believes in a numerical rating seriously, so I do not see where factoring in other people's opinions really changes anything. We take in people's opinions all the time and allow them to affect us. Personally, I would be surprised if someone actually had the gall to say that they have never allowed someone else's opinion to affect them. In that instance, I might call that man either the smartest or the dumbest man on Earth. |
masterofgoMar 12, 2016 2:45 PM
masterofgo said: I see what you mean. I wouldn't say I "enjoyed" Lain either, well, okay, that's not completely true, I loved the atmosphere, the shot composition, everything associated with the cisuals, but the bulk of my positive response to it, most of the reason why I like it has nothing to do with that. It's "fun" to think about, it is like you say, "cerebral". Similarly, I don't think the people who say "I cried, it's amazing!" about Clannad or AB! Enjoyed being really sad. It seems people are lumping all sorts of emotial reactions together. I have always said that I rate based on "enjoyment", but "I like it" wpuld be more accurate and inclusive.AltoRoark99 said: No, I did not really "enjoy" Serial Experiments Lain. I had no particular feelings of pleasure when watching the story unfold. I did feel things varying from anxiety to tension to trying to figure out the complexities that arose within the story. I would argue that my experience with SEL was very cerebral and I did not necessarily "enjoy" in the sense that I find it to be a fun and enjoyable experience. Rather, I would say it was a thought provoking show that had a lot of great things to say that predated the rise of the Internet phenomenon, which is why I consider it a great anime.Are you sure you didn't enjoy Serial Experiments Lain at all? I enjoyed it quite a lot, despite not understanding much about it. I plan to rewatch it in order to uncover its hidden meanings. If I wasn't entertained, I wouldn't have cared about whatever meaning it had. What exactly do you mean by "emotional responses"? The difference is pretty clear. |
 |
masterofgo said: keragamming said: Why do you make this assumption? So because I make a claim that is almostcertainly universally true, you think that I inherently take a position where I am an outlier? An exception?And you're one of those rare few intelligent people in this world correct? Smh. I would've said the samethint as well. *roll eyes* Oh, BTW I like how you said "almost" which tells me you're not even 100℅ sure that what you're saying is fact. Give me statistical proof or I call bullshit on that. masterofgo said: keragamming said: I do not know what you mean by "broad," but you are misconstruing my argument by presenting a variety of scenarios that are not mutually exclusive with my own. Enjoyment is inherently related to pleasure and amusement, both of which are far more light-hearted, joyous, and jubilant by nature. I am simply saying that enjoyment is far from being the only metric of quality or experience.About what you are saying. Enjoyment is a very broad term. I'm very fascinated into things like the universe or other planets ect. I find things like documentary on the universe, the moon and other planets to be very entertaining. People are entertain by death note for its suspense and the chess game between the two main characters. People are entertain or find enjoyment out of serial lain for its interesting/thought provoking themes, that makes them think a lot about certain stuff. People are entertain from action series like dbz. Personally, I find that people who simply say that they enjoyed a show such as Serial Experiments Lain, or Angel's Egg, or even something like Mushishi are not doing a particularly great job of experiencing the anime. A lot of these shows move beyond merely just being enjoyable experiences. Whether they are cerebral, contemplative, saddening, depressing, enlightening, and more, none of these can be solely experienced by "enjoyment" alone. If I watch a movie like Andrei Tarakovsky's Stalker, I am not necessarily enjoying it in the same way that I might enjoy watching a comedy series. I mean as a most basic example, nobody enjoys feeling incredibly sad, that would be oxymoronic. Yet people still watch dramas. It is not only because they "enjoy" dramas, but because their experiences with dramas invokes a whole other range of emotions that differs from other shows. -_- when someone say they enjoyed x, it basically means they like it. If you want a in depth reason why they enjoy it, then you simple ask them to go in details. That's it. The part that I put into bold is basically what I'm saying. There are different ways one can be entertain. Synonym for entertain: amuse, divert, distract, delight, please, charm, cheer, beguile, interest, fascinate, enthral, engage, involve, occupy, absorb, immerse, engross, preoccupy. masterofgo said: keragamming said: This is such a one dimensional perspective. People do not do things simply out of enjoyment, that is simply ridiculous. Scientists do not just enjoy science, they are propelled by a variety of other motivations that fixate them on the topic at hand.Basically, anything that you like you enjoy. Astronomers enjoy finding new things about the universe. Einstein wouldn't be who he is today, if he did not get any enjoyment from what he was doing. entertainment/enjoyment is far too broad of a term, to just define it as action and explosion. Of course there are other reasons, like determination for eg. but the main reason why they didn't give up is because they enjoy what they were doing. They like there job. And one more thing. You can be entertain while learning at the same time. Like For eg. those games with the main purpose of learning while being entertaining. So I'm not saying anime or any entertainment medium doesn't involve making us the viewers learn new things or use our brains for thinking ect. That's the beauty of the entertainment medium, there are so many ways to enjoy something. Everyone has a preference, some prefer action series, some prefer thought provoking series, some prefer romance series, some prefer horror ect. Whatever type of series one prefers doesn't has nothing to do with a persons intelligence also persons can interpret a show differently, simple because people has different point of view. It has nothing to do with ones intelligence. So unless you can give me some statistical proof, I call bullshit again. Also if you go and look for the synonym for interesting. You will see "enjoyment" as one of them. And you cant deny that you didn't find serial lain to be interesting. You can try to deny it all you want, and say whatever you want to try and deny that you didn't enjoy watching lain, but if we go right into the deep root of this, it will still fall into the enjoyment category. |
keragammingMar 12, 2016 7:16 PM
| To me, all worthwhile shows are entertaining, but not all entertaining shows are worthwhile. In other words, if it doesn't keep the audience interested (in a good way), then it's a failure, perhaps due to a dull concept or lifeless characters or flawed pacing. |
keragamming said: This is not a quantitative claim. It is a qualitative one. I have no burden to provide you any statistical proof to a qualitative proof because it is quantitatively impossible to prove. However, for the very reason that educational institutions continue to teach classes on film, animation, and literature, my claim that few people will ever fully understand a show in its entirety and its complexity is far more strong a claim than the opposite claim, which is that people are perfectly capable of understanding everything about a show.I would've said the samethint as well. *roll eyes* Oh, BTW I like how you said "almost" which tells me you're not even 100℅ sure that what you're saying is fact. Give me statistical proof or I call bullshit on that. keragamming said: I do not understand how this negates my point at all. Saying that you enjoyed something can be synonymous with liking it, but so can saying "it was great," "it really made me think," "I was fascinated by it," among a number of other positive qualifiers. None of those are particularly enlightening, but none of them are necessarily synonymous with "enjoying" the experience.-_- when someone say they enjoyed x, it basically means they like it. If you want a in depth reason why they enjoy it, then you simple ask them to go in details. That's it. keragamming said: None of those are necessarily synonymous or applicable. The words "enthrall," "engage," "immerse," and "engross" are so different in definition that they barely apply, while words like "beguile" and "interest" mean things that are entirely different. Enjoyment simply means deriving pleasure or amusement. Interest means that something has piqued your curiosity. Just because you look words up on the Internet to find their synonyms does not mean that they can be used in the same context. If I said the sentence "I enjoyed this anime" or "This anime enthralled me," they mean completely different things with completely different magnitudes. Language exists to provide us different magnitudes, meanings, and ways of expressing ourselves.The part that I put into bold is basically what I'm saying. There are different ways one can be entertain. Synonym for entertain: amuse, divert, distract, delight, please, charm, cheer, beguile, interest, fascinate, enthral, engage, involve, occupy, absorb, immerse, engross, preoccupy. keragamming said: Alternatively they do not give up because it pays well, because they have to, or because they are obsessed with what they do. In addition, you cannot simply presume that people do what they do because they enjoy it. Perhaps an exaggeration, but many artists are said to have been possessed to produced the works (not literally possessed as in invaded by some spiritual element but rather possessed in the sense of some sort of almost unhealthy mental obsession), among other particular motivations that have nothing to do with them "enjoying" the work that they do. Again, my concern is not that people cannot enjoy things, but rather saying that it is the broad "umbrella" through which everything falls is incredibly suspect. The word simply is not that broad to fit so many definitions.Of course there are other reasons, like determination for eg. but the main reason why they didn't give up is because they enjoy what they were doing. They like there job. keragamming said: When was my argument every about intelligence or learning things? None of my posts have anything to do with there being some sort of exclusivity between enjoyment or intelligence, but rather that enjoyment is not the end all result of artistic experience. And one more thing. You can be entertain while learning at the same time. Like For eg. those games with the main purpose of learning while being entertaining. So I'm not saying anime or any entertainment medium doesn't involve making us the viewers learn new things or use our brains for thinking ect. That's the beauty of the entertainment medium, there are so many ways to enjoy something. Everyone has a preference, some prefer action series, some prefer thought provoking series, some prefer romance series, some prefer horror ect. Whatever type of series one prefers doesn't has nothing to do with a persons intelligence also persons can interpret a show differently, simple because people has different point of view. It has nothing to do with ones intelligence. So unless you can give me some statistical proof, I call bullshit again. keragamming said: This is ridiculous. Interesting and enjoyment have completely different definitions. One arouses your attention and curiosity. The other is where you derive amusement and pleasure. Try using the words interchangeably in every day conversation and see how well people react to you saying that they are synonymous with one another. They may hint at a similar outcome but by definition they are not the same.Also if you go and look for the synonym for interesting. You will see "enjoyment" as one of them. And you cant deny that you didn't find serial lain to be interesting. You can try to deny it all you want, and say whatever you want to try and deny that you didn't enjoy watching lain, but if we go right into the deep root of this, it will still fall into the enjoyment category. I also find it highly presumptuous and contradictory of you to say that people can enjoy whatever they want or have different tastes and subjective preferences, but you try to force upon me your particular worldview, paradigm, and definitions of particular words. You are essentially telling me that despite the fact that people are allowed to like whatever they want, I am not allowed to say that "I did not find Serial Experiments Lain particularly enjoyable, but it was still a great anime." Even if I was somehow wrong on the order of semantics, which I am not, it makes no sense to force your own opinion of my thoughts on anime. If I did not find an anime enjoyable but experienced a broader range of emotional experiences that are contrary to the idea of "enjoyment," that is my right as a viewer. Again, enjoyment largely refers to pleasure and amusement, and the implication of the word is almost always used to reference things that are fun, light-hearted enjoyable, and evokes positive feelings. The reason why phrases such as "I enjoy death" or "I enjoy heartbreak" is because a word with a positive connotation does not often go well with a word of negative connotation. People are perfectly within their rights to still enjoy these elements; I have never disputed this at all (in fact, the very fact you keep thinking I am somehow making this points makes me wonder if you are somehow misreading something I have wrote), but rather make the case that the underlying affective experiences in art are far more expansive than just "enjoyment." |
masterofgoMar 12, 2016 7:52 PM
masterofgo said: keragamming said: This is not a quantitative claim. It is a qualitative one. I have no burden to provide you any statistical proof to a qualitative proof because it is quantitatively impossible to prove. However, for the very reason that educational institutions continue to teach classes on film, animation, and literature, my claim that few people will ever fully understand a show in its entirety and its complexity is far more strong a claim than the opposite claim, which is that people are perfectly capable of understanding everything about a show.I would've said the samethint as well. *roll eyes* Oh, BTW I like how you said "almost" which tells me you're not even 100℅ sure that what you're saying is fact. Give me statistical proof or I call bullshit on that. My point is that it has little to do with someone's intelligence, but More to do with their point of view, how they see things. I will give you a real life example. A woman is making videos showing her child having a disease call progeria, her videos gets extremly popular, and she starts to go on TV programs ect. She said she is doing all this so more persons can be aware of this rare disease and make doctors put. Ore effort into finding a cure. One group will see her as a nice mother that's doing something good to the world. While another group of persons will think she is simple exploiting her child to make more money and become more popular. Even if that wasn't her intention. This can be apply to a author as well, people have different point ot view, so they may see his work in a different way, that he did not intended to. It has little to do with intelligence. masterofgo said: keragamming said: I do not understand how this negates my point at all. Saying that you enjoyed something can be synonymous with liking it, but so can saying "it was great," "it really made me think," "I was fascinated by it," among a number of other positive qualifiers. None of those are particularly enlightening, but none of them are necessarily synonymous with "enjoying" the experience.-_- when someone say they enjoyed x, it basically means they like it. If you want a in depth reason why they enjoy it, then you simple ask them to go in details. That's it. I was just saying when you ask a person how they felt about a particular show. You're going to get simple answers. unless you ask them to go more indepth. So I dont understand why if someone said they enjoyed mushishi, that means they didn't apreciate it for the right reasons? Huh? masterofgo said: keragamming said: synonymous or applicable. The words "enthrall," "engage," "immerse," and "engross" are so different in definition that they barely apply, while words like "beguile" and "interest" mean things that are entirely different. Enjoyment simply means deriving pleasure or amusement. Interest means that something has piqued your curiosity. Just because you look words up on the Internet to find their synonyms does not mean that they can be used in the same context. If I said the sentence "I enjoyed this anime" or "This anime enthralled me," they mean completely different things with completely different magnitudes. Language exists to provide us different magnitudes, meanings, and ways of expressing ourselves.The part that I put into bold is basically what I'm saying. There are different ways one can be entertain. Synonym for entertain: amuse, divert, distract, delight, please, charm, cheer, beguile, interest, fascinate, enthral, engage, involve, occupy, absorb, immerse, engross Thanks captain obvious! I didn't mean they have the exact same meanings. What I mean is that if we go in the root of all this, they all have some relation to enjoyment, which means they still fall under it. I also like how you use words like not necessarily, barely which shows that you are not 100% sure that you're right. Are you saying that Google is wrong and you're right? masterofgo said: keragamming said: Alternatively they do not give up because it pays well, because they have to, or because they are obsessed with what they do. In addition, you cannot simply presume that people do what they do because they enjoy it. Perhaps an exaggeration, but many artists are said to have been possessed to produced the works (not literally possessed as in invaded by some spiritual element but rather possessed in the sense of some sort of almost unhealthy mental obsession), among other particular motivations that have nothing to do with them "enjoying" the work that they do. Again, my concern is not that people cannot enjoy things, but rather saying that it is the broad "umbrella" through which everything falls is incredibly suspect. The word simply is not that broad to fit so many definitions.Of course there are other reasons, like determination for eg. but the main reason why they didn't give up is because they enjoy what they were doing. They like there job. I'm the complete opposite from you, I believe the word is pretty broad. masterofgo said: keragamming said: This is ridiculous. Interesting and enjoyment have completely different definitions. One arouses your attention and curiosity. The other is where you derive amusement and pleasure. Try using the words interchangeably in every day conversation and see how well people react to you saying that they are synonymous with one another. They may hint at a similar outcome but by definition they are not the same.Also if you go and look for the synonym for interesting. You will see "enjoyment" as one of them. And you cant deny that you didn't find serial lain to be interesting. You can try to deny it all you want, and say whatever you want to try and deny that you didn't enjoy watching lain, but if we go right into the deep root of this, it will still fall into the enjoyment category. I also find it highly presumptuous and contradictory of you to say that people can enjoy whatever they want or have different tastes and subjective preferences, but you try to force upon me your particular worldview, paradigm, and definitions of particular words. You are essentially telling me that despite the fact that people are allowed to like whatever they want, I am not allowed to say that "I did not find Serial Experiments Lain particularly enjoyable, but it was still a great anime." Even if I was somehow wrong on the order of semantics, which I am not, it makes no sense to force your own opinion of my thoughts on anime. If I did not find an anime enjoyable but experienced a broader range of emotional experiences that are contrary to the idea of "enjoyment," that is my right as a viewer. Again, enjoyment largely refers to pleasure and amusement, and the implication of the word is almost always used to reference things that are fun, light-hearted enjoyable, and evokes positive feelings. The reason why phrases such as "I enjoy death" or "I enjoy heartbreak" is because a word with a positive connotation does not often go well with a word of negative connotation. People are perfectly within their rights to still enjoy these elements; I have never disputed this at all (in fact, the very fact you keep thinking I am somehow making this points makes me wonder if you are somehow misreading something I have wrote), but rather make the case that the underlying affective experiences in art are far more expansive than just "enjoyment." largely refers, is almost always Why do you keep on using words like these? Are you not a 100℅ sure in what you are saying?? I'm not forcing my opinion at all, I'm just telling you how I see all this. If I did not find an anime enjoyable but experienced a broader range of emotional experiences that are contrary to the idea of "enjoyment," Could you list some of those broader emotional experience that absolutely has no relation to enjoyment/entertainment? And please don't include any more words like, mostly or very little ect. Show me that you are 100℅ sure in what you are saying. Because when you are using those words you're basically saying I'm 5℅ or 10℅ right on certain things. |
keragammingMar 12, 2016 9:17 PM
| No. Masterofgo is very correct on this subject, entertainment is far from the only metric of quality. That being said though, I truly do appreciate it when even a series that I feel is flawed in many other aspects is still engaging and fun to watch despite those problems. LilGreasyKid said: In other words, if it doesn't keep the audience interested (in a good way), then it's a failure, perhaps due to a dull concept or lifeless characters or flawed pacing. Ugh, sounds so much like Iron-Blooded Orphans you're describing, haha. On a related note, the very same rationale I described above is why Aldnoah.Zero is better than IBO, Gundam nerds. |
| @TheRefractingOne. I know that, that's not what I'm arguing about. |
keragamming said: @TheRefractingOne. I know that, that's not what I'm arguing about. Well I didn't read the entire debate, I just noticed his statement there and decided to concur in my response to OP. |
| no... absolutly not, i find the fist of the north star movie ( anime not live action) entertaining, but that doesn't mean i think its good. |
doom19876 said: TheBrainintheJar said: Irrelevant. The fact their kids draw it is an EXTERNAL element, so it shouldn't be used in judging a work. If a low quality anime is still very enjoyable, it means it done a few things right to make it so. A good reviewer would figure out these things. Good stories overcome their flaws. You sure like to repeat yourself and not even read what I write. The kids and painting doesn't even apply to anime. If low quality anime is still very enjoyable it means the person who enjoys it finds good things. A good reviewer will sitll cast his/her own opinion. A low quality anime can still cause 90% of the people to say event X was stupid while 10% might think it wasn't stupid. Also not everyone is a "good reviewer". The watcher doesn't even have to be a good reviewer. Any anime has a set amount of quality which is independent of the watcher. If quality would equal enjoyment every single person would rate the same anime exactly the same enjoyment-wise because according to you they're the same and the quality is static so, so should the enjoyment be. Good stories and flaws are 2 different things. If an anime is good, it can either have or not have flaws. If it doesn't have flaws, then it's flawless. If it does have flaws, it's still flawed no matter how good the story is. The fact that some people might forgive flaws doesn't mean they're not there. So you can either respond to what I actually wrote or just don't bother and save us both the effort. How many of the audience enjoys the anime doesn't prove quality, so let's not get into the bandwagon fallacy. It's not that not everyone is a good reviewer. Many people aren't so good at critical thinking and can have a hard time expressing their opinion. You say anime has a set value independent of the watcher, yet you don't prove it or show me the method of measuring it. Forgiving flaws doesn't erase those flaws, that's true. However, if an anime makes me forgive those flaws then there should be a good reason for doing so. |
| WEAPONS - My blog, for reviews of music, anime, books, and other things |
| If the anime was entertaining from the beginning to end then it's a quality anime in my opinion. |
 |
| Not exatcly, i remember seeing animes with medium plot and graphic but it was so warm to see that keeped me watching |
 |
| @masterofgo You're probably right about inspiration being separate from enjoyment, but that wasn't really my main point. The thing is, a story can't inspire if it doesn't entertain. The main step to forming a message to the viewer is grabbing their attention; giving them a reason to care about what you have to say. I won't care about whatever its themes are if I'm not entertained by the story. That's why I think Texhnolyze is a piece of crap. There is no objective truth in quality, so you really should try your hardest to separate other people's opinions from your own. Don't be a sheep. That just ruins the purpose of having an opinion in the first place. It's clearly bandwagoning. |
TheBrainintheJar said: doom19876 said: You sure like to repeat yourself and not even read what I write. If low quality anime is still very enjoyable it means the person who enjoys it finds good things. A good reviewer will sitll cast his/her own opinion. A low quality anime can still cause 90% of the people to say event X was stupid while 10% might think it wasn't stupid. Also not everyone is a "good reviewer". The watcher doesn't even have to be a good reviewer. Any anime has a set amount of quality which is independent of the watcher. If quality would equal enjoyment every single person would rate the same anime exactly the same enjoyment-wise because according to you they're the same and the quality is static so, so should the enjoyment be. Good stories and flaws are 2 different things. If an anime is good, it can either have or not have flaws. If it doesn't have flaws, then it's flawless. If it does have flaws, it's still flawed no matter how good the story is. The fact that some people might forgive flaws doesn't mean they're not there. So you can either respond to what I actually wrote or just don't bother and save us both the effort. How many of the audience enjoys the anime doesn't prove quality, so let's not get into the bandwagon fallacy. It's not that not everyone is a good reviewer. Many people aren't so good at critical thinking and can have a hard time expressing their opinion. You say anime has a set value independent of the watcher, yet you don't prove it or show me the method of measuring it. Forgiving flaws doesn't erase those flaws, that's true. However, if an anime makes me forgive those flaws then there should be a good reason for doing so. I never said there was a direct correlation between quality and enjoyment. That's all you, so I'm not going into that fallacy you seem eager to do so though. I don't have to tell you how you can measure the "value" of an anime. Quality is something that's factual, not subjective. Quality means something like "degree of excellence". I don't have to be able to measure it. Every anime has one. The specific degree differs from anime to anime. However it's still fixed for each anime seperately. So since you still haven't answered any of my concerns, if you're going to reply use the following sentences. This will make it easier to actually answer the issues instead of you talking about something else. "I think the amount of quality in each anime [can or cannot, you can choose which one you think is correct] be different for different people" "A higher quality anime will always be enjoyed more than a lower quality anime by everyone" Also the reason why I'm not adressing your stuff about reviewers is because it's irrelevant. If you answer these core questions they'll have a lot more value. |
|
doom19876 said: TheBrainintheJar said: How many of the audience enjoys the anime doesn't prove quality, so let's not get into the bandwagon fallacy. It's not that not everyone is a good reviewer. Many people aren't so good at critical thinking and can have a hard time expressing their opinion. You say anime has a set value independent of the watcher, yet you don't prove it or show me the method of measuring it. Forgiving flaws doesn't erase those flaws, that's true. However, if an anime makes me forgive those flaws then there should be a good reason for doing so. I never said there was a direct correlation between quality and enjoyment. That's all you, so I'm not going into that fallacy you seem eager to do so though. I don't have to tell you how you can measure the "value" of an anime. Quality is something that's factual, not subjective. Quality means something like "degree of excellence". I don't have to be able to measure it. Every anime has one. The specific degree differs from anime to anime. However it's still fixed for each anime seperately. So since you still haven't answered any of my concerns, if you're going to reply use the following sentences. This will make it easier to actually answer the issues instead of you talking about something else. "I think the amount of quality in each anime [can or cannot, you can choose which one you think is correct] be different for different people" "A higher quality anime will always be enjoyed more than a lower quality anime by everyone" Also the reason why I'm not adressing your stuff about reviewers is because it's irrelevant. If you answer these core questions they'll have a lot more value. How do I know a fixed quality exists? You don't give me any method, any way to observe it directly. I ask you for a way to measure it so I could be certain about it. For now, I don't see this 'fixed quality' you speak of. ""A higher quality anime will always be enjoyed more than a lower quality anime by everyone"" - Bandwagon Fallacy because how people react to a work is irrelevant to how good it is. How good an anime is depends on the anime itself. You need to make arguments based on the anime, its characters and themes and art and not about the audience. |
| WEAPONS - My blog, for reviews of music, anime, books, and other things |
TheBrainintheJar said: ""A higher quality anime will always be enjoyed more than a lower quality anime by everyone"" - Bandwagon Fallacy because how people react to a work is irrelevant to how good it is. How good an anime is depends on the anime itself. You need to make arguments based on the anime, its characters and themes and art and not about the audience. Bolded part: how people react=degree of enjoyement a work= anime how good it is=quality So you basically said it yourself. Loosely translated you just said "degree of enjoyment of an anime is irrelevant of quality". So therefore quality doesn't equal enjoyment. And you miraculously managed to fail the simple task i put up for you. Also it's not necessarily true that you have to be able to measure something for it to be true. Sure it does help for you to believe it. Let me turn it around for you, give me reasons why quality can be different for different people. Also if you really want to measure it, you start looking at absolutely everyting, consistency, artwork, voice acting, etc etc. Then you add a number to it. And to make it objective you let a computer do it using special software. And if you're asking me what software, I'm telling you it's one that hasn't been developed yet. This is a valid answer because back when humans didn't exist we couldn't measure the potential energy of a falling object either, but I'm pretty sure it was there. |
|
doom19876 said: I think it's pretty clear he meant that how good other people think it is is doesn't say anything about how good you as an individual think it is or how good you should think it is.TheBrainintheJar said: ""A higher quality anime will always be enjoyed more than a lower quality anime by everyone"" - Bandwagon Fallacy because how people react to a work is irrelevant to how good it is. How good an anime is depends on the anime itself. You need to make arguments based on the anime, its characters and themes and art and not about the audience. Bolded part: how people react=degree of enjoyement a work= anime how good it is=quality So you basically said it yourself. Loosely translated you just said "degree of enjoyment of an anime is irrelevant of quality". So therefore quality doesn't equal enjoyment. And you miraculously managed to fail the simple task i put up for you. Also it's not necessarily true that you have to be able to measure something for it to be true. Sure it does help for you to believe it. Let me turn it around for you, give me reasons why quality can be different for different people. Also if you really want to measure it, you start looking at absolutely everyting, consistency, artwork, voice acting, etc etc. Then you add a number to it. And to make it objective you let a computer do it using special software. And if you're asking me what software, I'm telling you it's one that hasn't been developed yet. This is a valid answer because back when humans didn't exist we couldn't measure the potential energy of a falling object either, but I'm pretty sure it was there. Your final argument is also invalid, since you haven't shown that it is, in principle, possible to create such a standard which measures things in a truly objective way (the software may just recognise the particular cultural and social values of the programmers as good, how can you remove this element to achieve objectivity?). |
| No, many shows that aren't that great can be unbelievably enjoyable. |
 |
| No, entertainment is subjective while quality is objective. |
 |
| entertainment is a part of quality ^^ |
 |
asaspades said: I think it's pretty clear he meant that how good other people think it is is doesn't say anything about how good you as an individual think it is or how good you should think it is. Your final argument is also invalid, since you haven't shown that it is, in principle, possible to create such a standard which measures things in a truly objective way (the software may just recognise the particular cultural and social values of the programmers as good, how can you remove this element to achieve objectivity?). I never said that how good people think it is, is a measure of quality nor do I object against his statement. But then again that statement isn't a reply to what I've been writing. It's pretty much like: My final argument is not invalid. Like I said, I don't have to show it's in prinicple possible to determine the amount of quality. For the same reason I don't have to prove that the sun is "hot". So unless you can prove (not make it sound likely) that the sun is actually you mean we shouldn't say it's hot? Also I wrote that even if I nor you nor he cannot prove it doesn't mean it can't be proved. Also I'm pretty sure there's gravity, prove it. If you can't we all have to assume there's no gravity in this universe. And you wrote my final argument is ALSO invalid, what else is? Also if you agree with him, give me 1 reason why quality isn't fixed other than telling me to prove that it should be measureable now. |
|
doom19876 said: TheBrainintheJar said: ""A higher quality anime will always be enjoyed more than a lower quality anime by everyone"" - Bandwagon Fallacy because how people react to a work is irrelevant to how good it is. How good an anime is depends on the anime itself. You need to make arguments based on the anime, its characters and themes and art and not about the audience. Bolded part: how people react=degree of enjoyement a work= anime how good it is=quality So you basically said it yourself. Loosely translated you just said "degree of enjoyment of an anime is irrelevant of quality". So therefore quality doesn't equal enjoyment. And you miraculously managed to fail the simple task i put up for you. Also it's not necessarily true that you have to be able to measure something for it to be true. Sure it does help for you to believe it. Let me turn it around for you, give me reasons why quality can be different for different people. Also if you really want to measure it, you start looking at absolutely everyting, consistency, artwork, voice acting, etc etc. Then you add a number to it. And to make it objective you let a computer do it using special software. And if you're asking me what software, I'm telling you it's one that hasn't been developed yet. This is a valid answer because back when humans didn't exist we couldn't measure the potential energy of a falling object either, but I'm pretty sure it was there. The energy of a falling object can me measured. It has a unit of measurement. Art's quality doesn't have a unit of measurement. Vague argument for subjectivity. I was told I should look at everything, but is that it? How do I measure? One man's great voice-actor is another one's horrible one. I need the method of measurement. asapapapdspd also explained the Bandwagon Fallacy. If I ask someone why Attack on Titan is good and they tell me because a lot of people liked it, it tells me nothing about the show - its art, characters, ideas, pacing and so forth. |
| WEAPONS - My blog, for reviews of music, anime, books, and other things |
TheBrainintheJar said: The energy of a falling object can me measured. It has a unit of measurement. Art's quality doesn't have a unit of measurement. 1. How do you measure the energy of a falling object? 2. Back in the time there were no humans there was also potential energy, but there wasn't any human proof either. The question then becomes, is it true or not there was potential energy back then too? 3. If there would always have been potential energy then it doesn't matter if it could have been proved in the past or not. TheBrainintheJar said: Vague argument for subjectivity. I was told I should look at everything, but is that it? How do I measure? One man's great voice-actor is another one's horrible one. I need the method of measurement. ?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? What is this even a response to? TheBrainintheJar said: asapapapdspd also explained the Bandwagon Fallacy. If I ask someone why Attack on Titan is good and they tell me because a lot of people liked it, it tells me nothing about the show - its art, characters, ideas, pacing and so forth. Since you seem to be incapeable of substituting words I'll do it for you. You: how people react to a work is irrelevant to how good it is Me: how people react=degree of enjoyement a work= anime how good it is=quality Result: degree of enjoyement (notice typo) to anime is irrelevant to quality So basically if you turn it into a normal sentence it'll become: The degree of enjoyment of an anime is irrelevant to quality. Now there are 3 things you can do here. 1. You can tell me I translated your words wrong and tell me which parts I translated wrong. 2. You can go into denial and say you've never said such thing. 3. You can agree with me. Also it's stupid that you call it "the Bandwagon Fallacy", because it's the opposite of my original standpoint which you started arguing. (And it's stupid because: 1. It's your argument 2. It's not your argument but then there's no reason to argue with me in the first place) Also, please don't quote me if you're not going to address what's in the quote. Also, a zeptosecond: 10^−21 seconds (0.00000000000000000001 seconds), is it real or conceptual? What about? attosecond 10^−18 s And nanosecond 10^−9 s? |
|
doom19876 said: how people react=degree of enjoyement Are you fucking wot m8? Dangalf said: No, entertainment is subjective while quality is objective. Mind if we take this to the other thread? |
| people still shit posting here? i just realized i still not make my own statement about this topic. anyways.. > quality =/= enjoyment. but quality is relevant to enjoyment. > anime purpose = entertainment > rating with quality doesnt make you automaticaly being critical. > rating with enjoyment doesn't mean "shut your brain off". > everyone has their own prefference about quality and enjoyment. |
 "If taking responsibility for a mistake that cannot be undone means death, it's not that hard to die. At least, not as hard as to live on." |
| @AltoRoark99 Not sure what you mean but yeah, sure. |
|
| It goes both ways. Quality shows are more entertaining but entertaining shows also have a quality of their own. I'm of the mind that a show's quality is based around how much you personally enjoyed it. |
doom19876 said: TheBrainintheJar said: The energy of a falling object can me measured. It has a unit of measurement. Art's quality doesn't have a unit of measurement. 1. How do you measure the energy of a falling object? 2. Back in the time there were no humans there was also potential energy, but there wasn't any human proof either. The question then becomes, is it true or not there was potential energy back then too? 3. If there would always have been potential energy then it doesn't matter if it could have been proved in the past or not. TheBrainintheJar said: Vague argument for subjectivity. I was told I should look at everything, but is that it? How do I measure? One man's great voice-actor is another one's horrible one. I need the method of measurement. ?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? What is this even a response to? TheBrainintheJar said: asapapapdspd also explained the Bandwagon Fallacy. If I ask someone why Attack on Titan is good and they tell me because a lot of people liked it, it tells me nothing about the show - its art, characters, ideas, pacing and so forth. Since you seem to be incapeable of substituting words I'll do it for you. You: how people react to a work is irrelevant to how good it is Me: how people react=degree of enjoyement a work= anime how good it is=quality Result: degree of enjoyement (notice typo) to anime is irrelevant to quality So basically if you turn it into a normal sentence it'll become: The degree of enjoyment of an anime is irrelevant to quality. Now there are 3 things you can do here. 1. You can tell me I translated your words wrong and tell me which parts I translated wrong. 2. You can go into denial and say you've never said such thing. 3. You can agree with me. Also it's stupid that you call it "the Bandwagon Fallacy", because it's the opposite of my original standpoint which you started arguing. (And it's stupid because: 1. It's your argument 2. It's not your argument but then there's no reason to argue with me in the first place) Also, please don't quote me if you're not going to address what's in the quote. Also, a zeptosecond: 10^−21 seconds (0.00000000000000000001 seconds), is it real or conceptual? What about? attosecond 10^−18 s And nanosecond 10^−9 s? I don't know much about the measuring of energy - this is deep physics. However, there are a lot of devices that measure all kinds of things: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_measuring_devices We can measure how fast an antelope runs. However, whether we exist or not doesn't effect the math. We simply report what we observe. The fact of an antelope running exists OUTSIDE of our existence. "?????" - No argument. You haven't provided a method or device for measuring 'character development' or anything else you mentioned. Again, you keep misunderstanding what I mean by Bandwagon Fallacy. Other people enjoying an anime isn't an argument for an anime's quality. That's because, in order to explain why you enjoyed an anime you need to make arguments directly relating to that anime - its story and characters and themes and art. You need the address the anime itself to argue for its quality/lack thereof. How many people enjoy an anime is irrelevant when you determine how good it is. Your favorite food isn't dependent on everyone else's opinion. |
| WEAPONS - My blog, for reviews of music, anime, books, and other things |
So because it's deep in physics you don't have to explain but if it's deep in something else I do have to explain? So basically you're saying I don't have to prove it as long as somewhere in time it can be proven it's fine? Then why then do I need to show you how to measure quality? Obviously ????? isn't an arguement, if you bothered to read what I wrote you would have read that I didn't understand what your comment was a response to in the first place. But since you didn't understand it the last time I wrote it I doubt you'll understand it this time. If according to you I misunderstand the Bandwagon Fallacy then do explain. Again, I never claimed that people liking anime had anything to do with quality. |
|
RoyalTanki said: I'm entertained by old shoujo shows like Marmalade Boy, of which I think is actually pretty bad, so no. Not necessarily. Its because you're influence by other persons opinion without realising it. Anyways I enjoyed marmalade boy, and I think it's good. |
doom19876 said: So because it's deep in physics you don't have to explain but if it's deep in something else I do have to explain? So basically you're saying I don't have to prove it as long as somewhere in time it can be proven it's fine? Then why then do I need to show you how to measure quality? Obviously ????? isn't an arguement, if you bothered to read what I wrote you would have read that I didn't understand what your comment was a response to in the first place. But since you didn't understand it the last time I wrote it I doubt you'll understand it this time. If according to you I misunderstand the Bandwagon Fallacy then do explain. Again, I never claimed that people liking anime had anything to do with quality. I'm saying I won't discuss the concept of 'energy' since it's a confusing term in physics. However, there are plenty of other examples of things that can be measured. The list of devices shows you a variety of things that can be measured and how they are measured. I need you to show me how to measure quality in order to prove it's objective, that it doesn't depend on the personality and biases of the viewer. |
| WEAPONS - My blog, for reviews of music, anime, books, and other things |
TheBrainintheJar said: doom19876 said: So because it's deep in physics you don't have to explain but if it's deep in something else I do have to explain? So basically you're saying I don't have to prove it as long as somewhere in time it can be proven it's fine? Then why then do I need to show you how to measure quality? Obviously ????? isn't an arguement, if you bothered to read what I wrote you would have read that I didn't understand what your comment was a response to in the first place. But since you didn't understand it the last time I wrote it I doubt you'll understand it this time. If according to you I misunderstand the Bandwagon Fallacy then do explain. Again, I never claimed that people liking anime had anything to do with quality. I'm saying I won't discuss the concept of 'energy' since it's a confusing term in physics. However, there are plenty of other examples of things that can be measured. The list of devices shows you a variety of things that can be measured and how they are measured. I need you to show me how to measure quality in order to prove it's objective, that it doesn't depend on the personality and biases of the viewer. I've never heard anyone say energy is a confusing term in physics either. Nice dodge. So if this example doesn't suit you you just pick other stuff no? Also Clannad 1080p>Clannad 160x90. Objectively higher quality. That's one way. |
|
| Partially yes, for about 20-40% of the time. |
 |
doom19876 said: TheBrainintheJar said: I'm saying I won't discuss the concept of 'energy' since it's a confusing term in physics. However, there are plenty of other examples of things that can be measured. The list of devices shows you a variety of things that can be measured and how they are measured. I need you to show me how to measure quality in order to prove it's objective, that it doesn't depend on the personality and biases of the viewer. I've never heard anyone say energy is a confusing term in physics either. Nice dodge. So if this example doesn't suit you you just pick other stuff no? Also Clannad 1080p>Clannad 160x90. Objectively higher quality. That's one way. Because, uh, I haven't studied physics and prefer not to comment on a term I know causes problems, based on conversations with my friends who did study? Why are you stuck on comparing it to energy measurement? What's wrong with other things you can measure? I still haven't seen how you measure the quality of anime. |
| WEAPONS - My blog, for reviews of music, anime, books, and other things |
TheBrainintheJar said: Because, uh, I haven't studied physics and prefer not to comment on a term I know causes problems, based on conversations with my friends who did study? Why are you stuck on comparing it to energy measurement? What's wrong with other things you can measure? I still haven't seen how you measure the quality of anime. I haven't studied filmology or cinematic or anime so I'd rather not go into detail how to proof their quality is fixed. YET I claim that it is like you claim there is gravity. My point is that even if you canNOT measure something it doesn't mean it's not real/true. (If you can't measure something it can still be true/real.) Count pixels, more is better. (When keeping the same ratios in mind and blablablabla.) |
|
doom19876 said: TheBrainintheJar said: Because, uh, I haven't studied physics and prefer not to comment on a term I know causes problems, based on conversations with my friends who did study? Why are you stuck on comparing it to energy measurement? What's wrong with other things you can measure? I still haven't seen how you measure the quality of anime. I haven't studied filmology or cinematic or anime so I'd rather not go into detail how to proof their quality is fixed. YET I claim that it is like you claim there is gravity. My point is that even if you canNOT measure something it doesn't mean it's not real/true. (If you can't measure something it can still be true/real.) Count pixels, more is better. (When keeping the same ratios in mind and blablablabla.) The thing is, the minimal experience I have with 'energy' is with friends who studied physics. It's a term that's shrouded in issues and laymen misconception so I preferred to use a more accepted thing that can be measured. Pixels aren't related to story quality. They're a technology issue affecting your file, not the story itself. So again, how do you measure the quality of an anime? What is quality? |
| WEAPONS - My blog, for reviews of music, anime, books, and other things |
TheBrainintheJar said: doom19876 said: I haven't studied filmology or cinematic or anime so I'd rather not go into detail how to proof their quality is fixed. YET I claim that it is like you claim there is gravity. My point is that even if you canNOT measure something it doesn't mean it's not real/true. (If you can't measure something it can still be true/real.) Count pixels, more is better. (When keeping the same ratios in mind and blablablabla.) The thing is, the minimal experience I have with 'energy' is with friends who studied physics. It's a term that's shrouded in issues and laymen misconception so I preferred to use a more accepted thing that can be measured. Pixels aren't related to story quality. They're a technology issue affecting your file, not the story itself. So again, how do you measure the quality of an anime?What is quality? You measure the quality of a anime by your own standard and biases. So enjoying a anime outside of your usual standard and bias is where the guilty pleasure thing come from, although its also influence from opinions from others. |
TheBrainintheJar said: The thing is, the minimal experience I have with 'energy' is with friends who studied physics. It's a term that's shrouded in issues and laymen misconception so I preferred to use a more accepted thing that can be measured. Pixels aren't related to story quality. They're a technology issue affecting your file, not the story itself. So again, how do you measure the quality of an anime? What is quality? So because of your own inability to explain something you just accept and avoid it, but when we're talking about anime quality which you clearly don't understand either you're going to argue with me. I've never said quality of the story. 16 pixels for something instead of 1 means it's of higher quality. So you count the pixels. Also I'd rather not talk about how to measure quality because it's shrouded in issues and layman misconceptions. |
|
| Entertaiment doesnt mean Quaity neither Quality means Entertaiment.. An high quality (art, story w/e) series can be boring as hell and a series with low quality (art, story) in comparsion can be pretty funny and entertaining... |
doom19876 said: TheBrainintheJar said: The thing is, the minimal experience I have with 'energy' is with friends who studied physics. It's a term that's shrouded in issues and laymen misconception so I preferred to use a more accepted thing that can be measured. Pixels aren't related to story quality. They're a technology issue affecting your file, not the story itself. So again, how do you measure the quality of an anime? What is quality? So because of your own inability to explain something you just accept and avoid it, but when we're talking about anime quality which you clearly don't understand either you're going to argue with me. I've never said quality of the story. 16 pixels for something instead of 1 means it's of higher quality. So you count the pixels. Also I'd rather not talk about how to measure quality because it's shrouded in issues and layman misconceptions. Well, I deal with media criticism pretty often. Unlike physics, I do have experience in critiquing art and had a lot of discussions about it. I already presented an argument against objective value. In case I didn't present it in this thread: Does gold has value? How do we decide? If gold had no use, is it still valuable? How does value exists OUTSIDE the human mind? Value is a human construct. 'Value', 'quality' and such things are ways of human beings to distinguish what they find useful, to what they find not useful. It is, BY DEFINITION, an expression of opinion. You can measure 'speed' using numbers, but what does 'fast' mean? A spaceship traveling at 100KMH is slow. A car traveling at 100KMH is fast. We decide what is fast and what is not. 'Fast' is not observable. It's something humans impose on the speed of an object according to our views. Planets aren't big. They just look huge to us. Value goes like this. We're dealing with the quality of a work of art. What's important is story, characters, themes, aesthetics and so forth. If they have objective quality, how do I measure them? |
| WEAPONS - My blog, for reviews of music, anime, books, and other things |
| What does OP mean "low quality shows"? |
| This salad is salty favored |
More topics from this board
» What anime can be considered "the Evangelion of x"?Eternal-Destiny - Dec 9, 2023 |
43 |
by AzafuseKingTora
»»
56 seconds ago |
|
» If you give an anime a 10 do you genuinely think It Is a masterpiece?Alpha_1_Zero - Apr 9 |
46 |
by TRC_Randy
»»
9 minutes ago |
|
» angry sub only usersYorda_trico - 3 hours ago |
32 |
by duchessliz87
»»
10 minutes ago |
|
» Anime show good at portraying female drama/toxicity?passtur - Today |
33 |
by LoveLikeBlood
»»
27 minutes ago |
|
» List of characters you want to shootdumbandinsane - Today |
22 |
by BetaMaleUltra
»»
28 minutes ago |