| I think it's obvious there's no objectivity. Value only exists in people's heads. You can't measure it physically. But objectivity isn't the only thing that matters, y'know. |
| WEAPONS - My blog, for reviews of music, anime, books, and other things |
Robiiii said: Think with your own head, and problem will be solved. Simple as that It should be that easy, but I've met at least two people who ONLY watch anime that their friends or people suggest to them. I get asking for recs, but I have never taken one from anybody nor would I ever only watch anime somebody tells me to watch. |
 |
Kagami said: Robiiii said: Think with your own head, and problem will be solved. Simple as that It should be that easy, but I've met at least two people who ONLY watch anime that their friends or people suggest to them. I get asking for recs, but I have never taken one from anybody nor would I ever only watch anime somebody tells me to watch. Ye sadly its not always the case. Some ppl are easily influenced by opinions lol |
Robiiii said: Kagami said: It should be that easy, but I've met at least two people who ONLY watch anime that their friends or people suggest to them. I get asking for recs, but I have never taken one from anybody nor would I ever only watch anime somebody tells me to watch. Ye sadly its not always the case. Some ppl are easily influenced by opinions lol Its that damn sheep mindset. They follow the flock and easily persuaded by opinions :( |
|
| It's definitely not as simple as just saying objectivity doesn't exist and it's all just subjective. There's a multitude of reasons some shows consistently get rated higher than others. Some animation is objectively more difficult to execute or simply more complex than other animation. It is an objective fact that a majority of people realise this and give an anime extra points for that. Same with voice acting and sound quality. There's going to be people that don't care at all about these aspects but a significant amount of them do care. As such these factors will on average contribute to an higher score and you can thus expect with reasonable certainty that anime with high scores will have these factors. There's of course a ton of other factors that are influence the score of an anime. Certain genres might not be as universally loved and can thus be expected to be scored lower on average. The popularity of an anime can also influence the score. A less popular show's score will be more easily influenced by batches of new people watching it. There's a too many factors to realistically fully map out and so a lot of people will see all this as subjective, but it's not as if the score of a show is completely useless in determining how much you would like it. Just look at it as a chance of how much you are going to like it. Higher scores simply mean a higher probability that it will be a good show for you. |
_Ako_ said: demonskul777 said: as long as you're capable of criticising it for its flaws. Damn that mindset that just really, at the Elitist aspect... @kamisama751 shouldn't you have to evaluate this dude, I can see the potential oozing inside of him... Now, like I said, ratings are just a "number", either people/users put "value" into it and have this kind of "rules" that they have to follow, or just let it be a number. Either way works... as i specified in another reply, I don't care what the casual viewer does; but if you plan on discussing anime you should be able to judge fairly and if someone points out a flaw you should be able to accept it. whether that flaw is devastating to the anime or not is up to you. And yes, the rating is very subjective as I did say in my original post. (some flaws are subjective and up to preference, of course) @kamisama751 Guess I should join the ranks of the elitists then. |
| People should stop crying like it's the end of the world if their favourite shows are bashed and torn down. (or simply surpasses another show in terms of an arbitrary number that holds no significant value.) |
  ♰ ἡ φύσις οὐδὲν ποιεῖ ἅλματα. ♰ συκεροκυ™ |
| Ever since MAL removed the unhelpful button, I lost my hope in reading credible reviews in this site. Never cared about the rankings either since it's a load of bull anyway. |
 |
Bulmakur said: All reviews and ratings are bias, there's no objectivity. stop over valuing ratings. I rated Gintama 10 and The Tatami Galaxy 10, that doesn't mean they are equal. These ratings shouldn't be used as a quantifier of what a "Masterpiece" is. By this I mean just because Gintama is number 3 shouldn't suggest that it's better than all the series below it. Finally. Someone else who sees that the only truly important ratings are your own. |
"I'd take rampant lesbianism over nuclear armageddon or a supervolcano any day." ~nikiforova |
Mizunashi said: so cool and uncaring! wow! he really has no hope in reading credible reviews in this site! amazing! rankings? what a load of bull.Ever since MAL removed the unhelpful button, I lost my hope in reading credible reviews in this site. Never cared about the rankings either since it's a load of bull anyway. t. someone with literally all favourites in top 177 |
 |
romagia said: Mizunashi said: so cool and uncaring! wow! he really has no hope in reading credible reviews in this site! amazing! rankings? what a load of bull.Ever since MAL removed the unhelpful button, I lost my hope in reading credible reviews in this site. Never cared about the rankings either since it's a load of bull anyway. t. someone with literally all favourites in top 177 Yeah baby, I also forget the fact that I'm an awesome cook so :3 |
|
Mizunashi said: romagia said: so cool and uncaring! wow! he really has no hope in reading credible reviews in this site! amazing! rankings? what a load of bull. t. someone with literally all favourites in top 177 Yeah baby, I also forget the fact that I'm an awesome cook so :3  kiss the cook kiss the cook kiss the cook kiss the cook |
|
omfgplzstop said: But in some shows, I like it when the animation stutters. In some shows, the sound quality is deliberately reduced to achieve a different effect, one that I appreciate. So why should I consider them flaws? My perspective is the one that matters when determining the value of a show to me, because like others have said in this thread, value is subjective.. I literally explained that not everyone is going to consider a flaw devastating to the show. Either way, when a show does something not on purpose it's a bad thing, whether you like it or not. |
omfgplzstop said: demonskul777 said: I literally explained that not everyone is going to consider a flaw devastating to the show. Either way, when a show does something not on purpose it's a bad thing, whether you like it or not. Lol. Why? You can't just say it's a bad thing without explaining it, especially not when it's what I'm trying to argue against. If I watch something and an accident in the animation department changed a scene in a certain way that I feel, while watching it, is a more satisfying/enjoyable/appropriate/meaningful/whatever thing to happen at that moment than the result the creators intended, why should I consider it a bad thing? As I already said because it reduces the quality. In comedies I can see bad voice acting being enjoyable, but in any other show not. An anime with low resolution is unclear, clunky animation is just a job done bad... Liking a show because you think it's hilarious how bad everything is, doesn't make it a good show. Having the exact same story as another show is uninspired and bad, whether it's a story you like or not. Liking something unacceptable doesn't make it acceptable. Again how you score it is up to you, but liking bad things don't make them good things. Whether you like murder or not, it's a bad thing. Mistake is a bad wording for it as well, mistakes CAN improve the quality, but things done badly can't. I doubt I can reason with you though, since no matter what I'll say, you'll be like "I like it tho lol". so |
metadataSep 22, 2016 9:36 AM
| Screw you OP. I believe in objectivity. |
 |
demonskul777 said: omfgplzstop said: Lol. Why? You can't just say it's a bad thing without explaining it, especially not when it's what I'm trying to argue against. If I watch something and an accident in the animation department changed a scene in a certain way that I feel, while watching it, is a more satisfying/enjoyable/appropriate/meaningful/whatever thing to happen at that moment than the result the creators intended, why should I consider it a bad thing? As I already said because it reduces the quality. In comedies I can see bad voice acting being enjoyable, but in any other show not. An anime with low resolution is unclear, clunky animation is just a job done bad... Liking a show because you think it's hilarious how bad everything is, doesn't make it a good show. Having the exact same story as another show is uninspired and bad, whether it's a story you like or not. Liking something unacceptable doesn't make it acceptable. Again how you score it is up to you, but liking bad things don't make them good things. Whether you like murder or not, it's a bad thing. Mistake is a bad wording for it as well, mistakes CAN improve the quality, but things done badly can't. I doubt I can reason with you though, since no matter what I'll say, you'll be like "I like it tho lol". so How much bad voice acting affects a show is still subjective. Same applies to animation. Resolution is entirely unrelated to quality, only having to do with what file or screen you're using. Enjoying something for being bad doesn't mean you like it. Having an exact same story has no bearing on quality, because the judgement is for the work itself. Murder isn't objectively bad, either. Now, the act of murder is a crime. That's objective. Flaws and merits have no fixed measurement. It's up to the viewer as to how much they improve or hinder the work. |
| I love Gintama as much as the next guy, but holy shit the edginess of your post is funnier than anything in the series |
 |
| How about that abominable -0.08 drop on Clannad After Story ever since the new Gintama came out? Nice cover up attempt, I'm watching. |
 |
omfgplzstop said: demonskul777 said: As I already said because it reduces the quality. In comedies I can see bad voice acting being enjoyable, but in any other show not. An anime with low resolution is unclear, clunky animation is just a job done bad... Liking a show because you think it's hilarious how bad everything is, doesn't make it a good show. Having the exact same story as another show is uninspired and bad, whether it's a story you like or not. Liking something unacceptable doesn't make it acceptable. Again how you score it is up to you, but liking bad things don't make them good things. Whether you like murder or not, it's a bad thing. Mistake is a bad wording for it as well, mistakes CAN improve the quality, but things done badly can't. I doubt I can reason with you though, since no matter what I'll say, you'll be like "I like it tho lol". so I mean, I don't see what's wrong with using "I like it tho" as an argument when we're discussing quality. If you mean technical quality, as in, how many frames are covered per second or how accurate the sound is, sure, that's objective, but better sound quality doesn't objectively mean better anime because how good it is for you is something you decide as its consumer. "Hilarious" isn't the only thing a stutter in the animation can be. Something you like wouldn't be unacceptable to you if you liked it in the majority of cases, because those things contradict eachother in the majority of cases. It can be unacceptable to others or to some consensus, but to you it's still something you like and appreciate. I'm asking for you to define what 'things done badly' and 'quality' are, but I doubt you can actually define them objectively in a proven way that will always make them more meaningful, entertaining or enjoyable to ME. Jobs done badly is when the creator is lazy, when the animators didn't do what they were supposed to etc. Quality is different per subject. Sound quality consists of the mixing (aka the relative volume of voices, sound effects and music), the clarity of the sound, the emotion in the voice acting, the appropriate use of music during scenese... all those kinds of technical issues which should form no debate. Art and animation; the amount of frames, the consistency frames (the heights of characters can't change for no reason f.e.), the resolution, the colours (can be subjective, but only washed colours is going to be a pain to watch either way), character design (characters whose faces are all the same for no reason other than that the artist is bad at drawing are bad f.e.)... probably more, here as well. Story; the story has to be consistent (can't break it's own established rules), and has to explain things that do not make sense: plot armor, dei ex machina... those kinds of things are just plain bad writing, because the author didn't know how else to do it. Character interactions need to make sense: all too often do I see beginning authors not finish a line of dialogue, or having illogical responses. The characters personalities have to be well-established. Not all stories allow to delve into them, but they should at least feel realistic for as long as they exist on screen. Clichéd plots without any personal input, implementations of character tropes... and probably more. Those are things that are just not up to opinion; usually it's just things the creator does because they're lazy or increative or inexperienced. |
| It's impossible to objectively evaluate the quality of an object since, objectively, things don't serve any particular purpose in the world and, as such, it makes no sense to assume that some things are better than others unless our conception of the world is purely anthropocentrical. Quality is really nothing more than a human construct, meaning it has no real world representation and does not exist independently outside of a perceiving human mind. Anyone who argues against subjectivity in art is a moron, although that doesn't stop Gintama from being sheeeeet. |
AltoRoark said: demonskul777 said: As I already said because it reduces the quality. In comedies I can see bad voice acting being enjoyable, but in any other show not. An anime with low resolution is unclear, clunky animation is just a job done bad... Liking a show because you think it's hilarious how bad everything is, doesn't make it a good show. Having the exact same story as another show is uninspired and bad, whether it's a story you like or not. Liking something unacceptable doesn't make it acceptable. Again how you score it is up to you, but liking bad things don't make them good things. Whether you like murder or not, it's a bad thing. Mistake is a bad wording for it as well, mistakes CAN improve the quality, but things done badly can't. I doubt I can reason with you though, since no matter what I'll say, you'll be like "I like it tho lol". so How much bad voice acting affects a show is still subjective. Same applies to animation. Resolution is entirely unrelated to quality, only having to do with what file or screen you're using. Enjoying something for being bad doesn't mean you like it. Having an exact same story has no bearing on quality, because the judgement is for the work itself. Murder isn't objectively bad, either. Now, the act of murder is a crime. That's objective. Flaws and merits have no fixed measurement. It's up to the viewer as to how much they improve or hinder the work. I said all that. I am literally constantly explaining that some aspects of a show can be individually bad, and that how much it affects the work/how much you enjoy it is subjective. Either way, I don't think you should be using "bad voice-acting" and then say that "bad" is subjective. The issue is that it's a throw-away term, which can mean anything in the context dependingly. But I'll surrender, you're right the objectivity I'm claiming exists is not true objectivity. |
demonskul777 said: _Ako_ said: Damn that mindset that just really, at the Elitist aspect... @kamisama751 shouldn't you have to evaluate this dude, I can see the potential oozing inside of him... Now, like I said, ratings are just a "number", either people/users put "value" into it and have this kind of "rules" that they have to follow, or just let it be a number. Either way works... as i specified in another reply, I don't care what the casual viewer does; but if you plan on discussing anime you should be able to judge fairly and if someone points out a flaw you should be able to accept it. whether that flaw is devastating to the anime or not is up to you. And yes, the rating is very subjective as I did say in my original post. (some flaws are subjective and up to preference, of course) @kamisama751 Guess I should join the ranks of the elitists then. Dude, as the manager of The Elitist Club, I and they welcome you... Start to practice Elitist Lesson tomorrow... |
_Ako_ said: demonskul777 said: as i specified in another reply, I don't care what the casual viewer does; but if you plan on discussing anime you should be able to judge fairly and if someone points out a flaw you should be able to accept it. whether that flaw is devastating to the anime or not is up to you. And yes, the rating is very subjective as I did say in my original post. (some flaws are subjective and up to preference, of course) @kamisama751 Guess I should join the ranks of the elitists then. Dude, as the manager of The Elitist Club, I and they welcome you... Start to practice Elitist Lesson tomorrow... When's the exam? I don't know if I'll manage this together with college... |
omfgplzstop said: drgy55 said: I mean, there is some objectivity if you rate based on things like art/animation quality, sound/VA quality, show rather than tell mentality, informative cinematography, etc. You know, things that can be objectively good or bad. But it doesn't even matter these days for the most mainstream anime because the ratings are practically useless. But in some shows, I like it when the animation stutters. In some shows, the sound quality is deliberately reduced to achieve a different effect, one that I appreciate. So why should I consider them flaws? My perspective is the one that matters when determining the value of a show to me, because like others have said in this thread, value is subjective. Who's to say one application of cinematography is better than the other? like Lisbon said, just because several people think that it is doesn't MEAN that it is. Sure, but deliberate techniques are obvious. If a show deliberately reduces quality, like for example Monogatari (edit: Shaft in general) does this sometimes for artistic effect, then no problem. That's the creator's call, it's neither good or bad. But if a whole show has hardly any animation, is very static, has constantly horrible sound quality (for the time and the genre mind you), positions the camera in useless positions not to hide anything but just because they fon't know what they're doing... you can't tell me it was deliberate and that makes it ok. You may personally be ok with it, which is fine. I'm ok with the less than stellar animation of Higurashi no Naku Koro ni, a show I love, but I still took that into account because it could have been better (it got a 9 rather than 10 because of minor shortcomings like that). That's really my argument for why objectivity exists in reviews, is that "it could be better" mentality. There are some shows that I legitimately think are just great exactly the way they are and were made as intended with nothing held back. Other shows, not so much. |
 |
| "I rated Gintama 10 and The Tatami Galaxy 10, that doesn't mean they are equal." Then you're simply not using the rating correctly. |
| Maybe they should make a bigger points scale, like 1-100 |
| who even cares about reviews and ratings... oh wait.. *insert longest sigh ever*  |
 |
omfgplzstop said: Check your reading comprehension, I didn't say anything of the like. The whole subjectivity/objectivity buzzword talk is bullshit to start with, for you to even try to categorize me under any of both stances. He's basically trying to diminish the overall credibility of reviews, many (certainly not the majority, though!) of which are made out of good and solid arguments, by not producing anyone of his own to jump to that conclusion. Meaning, an unfounded opinion going against other people's more cultivated writtings. Lordwen said: You do seem to care, regardless. And hence the thread. That one also looks like a nice stance for a Gintama fan to defend, which doesn't serve to this thread any purpose. I mean, relativism and stating that everything is subjective in anime in particular is an old tag line that takes away any relevance for discussion. It's pointless per se, doesn't enhance any productive conversation and it's been repeated to death. No, thanks. Why do people think that an inability to objectively prove x is better than y means there's no room for discussion? Why do you assume the only thing worth discussing is which show is better? Saying a show is objectively bad doesn't enhance any productive conversation either. If anything, it sets boundaries to what you can and cannot appreciate in a show regardless of what they may mean to one otherwise due to having to follow a set objective standard. The same thing could be achieved by simply explaining that to you, that show is bad for whatever reason and hearing why people think otherwise or whether or not they agree with your stance. Once I already know the person I might care about their opinions as so to speak. The point of general discussion is not stating everyone's opinion but discussing with sensible arguments in order to draw common conclusions if possible. If this sounds so ridiculously overoptimistic or even unreal is because of the quality of the discussions by themselves.Actually, please. ""Saying a show is objectively bad doesn't enhance any productive conversation either.""" Who says X show is objectively bad and isn't even able to contend the reasons that are behind that statement? A sentence like that is the true example of what subjectivity looks like. It doesn't matter the guy is supposedly defending "objectivism". I'd take a guess and say he cared enough to make this thread because he got sick of people insisting that objectivity exists and discrediting shows and people's interests as a result of that stance. Or maybe he got sick of people missing out on some valuable discussion because of their fixation on an objective standard. That makes literally no sense. First of all for what I already said in my previous message, "everything is subjective" is something you read quite more commonly than those people you mention having a fixation in "objective standards". If anything, there's no bigger possible wall to discussion than "well, that's your opinion". Way to show you can't maintain your position with words and ideas.Regardless, "everything is subjective" is stated here to encourage discussion regarding people's fixation on both objectivitiy and MAL ratings. In the case he wanted to make a point against those things you mention there he could've done it differently. Clearly not using the complete opposite buzzword as it that is supposed to serve to any purpose. Or simply not creating a thread as unoriginal and pointless as this one. OP isn't asking people not to criticize his favorite show. He's asking people to stop treating its spot in the MAL top anime as though it is an indicator of quality. About Gintama, sure. He does say he's happy with another entry going up, to later clarify "but ratings don't matter, uh!". I just said it seems convenient to me, not even the reason why I am against this thread at all. |
 |
| Why Must the Rankings always be taken so seriously but also Gintama happens to be the problem to it..I understand it got like 3 series in the top 10 but like really? |
| "You can't spell slaughter without laughter". |
zxcasdqwe123cat said: dakotasapphire said: I kind of would agree, but I do use these ratings from thousands upon thousands of viewers to try to gage what to watch/not watch (this wont deter me from watching something that's just unknown and not actually known and bad) The same way metacritic gets percentages from all reviews but it's not an indication of anything as much as "--% this is the amount of people who like this thing at most". Generally scoring calls for objectivity because reviewers deal with someone else's expectations and hype, fans or whatever club of samey kids, and that's bullshit. It's school test stuff. They'd be better off writing how they feel, basically speaking for themselves, rather than score separately story/ animation/ etc when every score system in the internet is a different thing to begin with and screams "do I look a legit critic yet?:0". Well i'm still going to watch shows even if they're lowly rated but having a lot of people not just a niche amount watch something and all give it a 6 usually means the anime was just decent at best.Those shows are okay but honestly there's something about them that makes them boring and other people have seen that too |
 |
omfgplzstop said: drgy55 said: Sure, but deliberate techniques are obvious. If a show deliberately reduces quality, like for example Monogatari (edit: Shaft in general) does this sometimes for artistic effect, then no problem. That's the creator's call, it's neither good or bad. But if a whole show has hardly any animation, is very static, has constantly horrible sound quality (for the time and the genre mind you), positions the camera in useless positions not to hide anything but just because they fon't know what they're doing... you can't tell me it was deliberate and that makes it ok. You may personally be ok with it, which is fine. I'm ok with the less than stellar animation of Higurashi no Naku Koro ni, a show I love, but I still took that into account because it could have been better (it got a 9 rather than 10 because of minor shortcomings like that). That's really my argument for why objectivity exists in reviews, is that "it could be better" mentality. There are some shows that I legitimately think are just great exactly the way they are and were made as intended with nothing held back. Other shows, not so much. I'm not saying being deliberate makes it okay. I've actually said being non-deliberate is still acceptable if you like the end result earlier too, lol. Regardless, my point is that the fact that they're using techniques that convey information "better" still isn't objectively good or bad because people have their own perception. For you or me, those things are valuable, but that doesn't mean they are valuable for everyone. As has been stated before in this thread, the value a piece of storytelling holds is something that varies from person to person. That's why objectivity isn't something you should look for in art; because it doesn't exist there. Ok, now I have a better idea what you're saying, I didn't really get it before. So let me put my argument a little differently, we're talking about reviews, right? I could argue all day that art is entirely subjective and we shouldn't look at it objectively because a small minority of people may see big "flaws" as being appealing or charming. In my eyes, good for them, but that's defeating the purpose of a review. If I'm a horror fan looking for good horror shows, reading a bunch of reviews that say "I like it" or "I don't like it" subjectively doesn't help me. Having some sort of standard that is widely accepted as "good" is important even if art is a subjective medium. It's not like I'm not creative, I'm a musician, I love free-form jamming and every genre under the sun. I get that, and I also recognize the value in having objective standards that people can use to decide if some piece of media is worth their time or not. Saying art is 100% entirely subjective is silly, plenty of people agree on objective points of what makes film or music generally good or not. I completely agree that these same standards of what is "good" or "bad" could be seen differently by others, but surely it's not a stretch to say that if I rate an anime higher on animation quality (more fluid movement), more people are going to see that as a plus than to simply not care or prefer lesser animation quality. |
|
Bulmakur said: I rated Gintama 10 and The Tatami Galaxy 10, that doesn't mean they are equal. By this I mean just because Gintama is number 3 shouldn't suggest that it's better than all the series below it.  This is exactly why we need an option to make it so our personal ratings do not count towards the average AND why there should be a threshold of shows watched that must be surpassed for a user's rating to count. |
 |
| So many people arguing over smth that should be obvious, smh. Gintama being ranked other than 1st pretty much shows how bad MALs taste is and how they cant properly and objectively rate stuff. |
 Oshii is probably the only director that loves dogs. He thinks he's a dog himself. That's right, its slime! It will dissolve your clothing slowly before my eyes! |
Flamian said: lol that would be like 0.00001 of userbase using itThis is exactly why we need an option to make it so our personal ratings do not count towards the average agree with the other thing.. at the very least i'd be curious to see the difference |
|
| I think there is truth in this statement. |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
| Damn, I thought we were done with these kind of threads... |
WHEN IT RAINS, IT POURS. |
It has yet to be decided... In this season, if there's 2DEEP4ME series, then that's when the exam will begin as soon as that series finished airing. |
Here, I have found the Ideal top 10!! |
| I like this too 10 better, now I don't need to mentally condense all the Gintamas into one. |
 |
That is a day that I would like to see. Haters gonna hate. Gintama wasn't wellknown until it got #1 and now everybody is salty of how a good and strong show with a loyal fanbase have good positions the top 10. Gintama is what all adaptations should be, almost no fillers, with good animation where it counts (except 2015....), excellent voice acting (the best of all in my opinions, Sugita, Daisuke and Rie are a fucking blast), a big and diverse cast, awesome comedy, awesome action, interesting (but kinda flexible) plot and what I love most of Gintama: I enjoy it. It has a lot of flaws (Gintoki monopolize 90% of the good fights), the classic super regenaration and blood tanks, the strong Japanese comedy... and some regular animation in minor chapters. I really think that is one show worth of a top10 spot... but I also think that monopolizeng between 3 to 5 spots is just fanboys upvoting.. But then I remember thet are also haters (WHO DON'T WATCH THE FUCKING SHOW) that downvote and I understand a little of the fanboys. I gave the Gintama and Gintama' seasons a fucking 10 everytime. The Gintama Enchousen and Gintamaº deserves a 9 along with the MovieGoodbyeYorozuya. The Gintama Benizakura is a solid 8. And I can rate Gintama below that, even the short OVAs and Specials are well done. I love you, SUNRISE. You and Sorachi made Gintama too awesome. |
More topics from this board
Poll: » Does your first ever favourite anime(s) still holds a place in your favs?NubFix - 2 hours ago |
8 |
by Horizon248
»»
3 minutes ago |
|
Poll: » Spring 2024 my fav anime lineup yet! What is your fav series that is going under the radar?rohan121 - 6 minutes ago |
1 |
by Serafos
»»
4 minutes ago |
|
Poll: » has the majority of people (here) seen the big 3 ? ( 1 2 3 4 )ame - Apr 16 |
157 |
by Amaterasu803
»»
6 minutes ago |
|
Poll: » Hentai is the worst anime genre ever created. ( 1 2 )Alpha_1_Zero - Yesterday |
79 |
by FanofAction
»»
7 minutes ago |
|
» I made a fake anime seasonal chart using AI. Which of these sounds interesting to you? ( 1 2 )FFandMMfan - Apr 13 |
99 |
by FFandMMfan
»»
24 minutes ago |