Is rating anime series a good thing??

Imaishi said:


No. It's not the point, like at all. Why would that be the case?
It's meant as the quickest (and least insightful, but gives the general idea of perceived quality and enjoment) way for one to give their opinion of the show

it was never meant to be objective

jal90 said:
@Saucy I think I haven't explained myself well enough. The aggregate score doesn't give a fuck about personal interpretation. It picks data and displays it after applying a formula that is the same for every entry. It's pure statistics, and yes, it's undeniable and objective because regardless of intent or reasoning the process is the same every time and is standardized. So no matter if you rate a show a 9 because it's good to you or because it's a masterpiece, it means and weighs the exact same for the average and ranking in the site.

Saucy said:
But that's exactly my point. It's utterly useless. It's objectivity is only in the fact that it does statistic analysis on things which are inherently qualitative. Metacritic and Rotten Tomatoes are complete garbage for this exact reason.

Saucy said:
In my opinion, if you're going to use numbers, then break down the medium into parts to evaluate such as sound design, art design, plot, etc. At least then you can break down the difference between two movies or anime with the same score to see where their weaknesses and strengths lie.

jal90 said:

Yes, and my point is that you are asking for something that right from the beginning is not intended and the moment it allows any account to rate at will can't pursue. What you set as useless is related to a purpose that the tool has no reason or intent to cover.

On the other hand, evaluation of anime is qualitative but it can be made ordinal as soon as we compare and decide that one is better than the other. With that taken into account it makes sense to apply a number scale.


Uhm, I am totally against that. It is already implemented for reviews and it's even actively encouraged by the staff, and I just don't see the point. Breaking down into parts to me ignores the fundamental view of the bigger picture and if anything judgements should work towards finding the connections between these parts and why they work as a whole. It's obviously up for debate and the staff itself doesn't agree with me but quite often when I see sound, art, plot, characters and enjoyment rated and commented separately in reviews I miss the explanation on how they combine and what makes this combination work or not.

jal90 said:
By the way, I think you may find the rating system of Animenewsnetwork interesting, @Saucy. It's not numerical, the labels are tags like "Not really good", "Bad", "Great" or "Masterpiece".

Saucy said:
Again. What I'm not asking anything of the scoring system. I am simply telling you what it is meant to accomplish. You obviously disagree with what numbers represent and since I've already gone at length about why your disagreement doesn't make sense, I don't want to repeat myself. Numbers are inherently objective and you admit that yourself when you say:

"it can be made ordinal as soon as we compare and decide that one is better than the other."

This is the fundamental flaw at applying numbers to compare which is "better" than the other. Not only is the evaluation of "better" extremely subjective, it doesn't even map onto the values people assign to numbers. The idea of "better" only works in an internal system where the only reference point is your own opinion. Only in the context of your own evaluation does it make sense to say that yes, 7 is really worse than 8. But when you start mixing your 7's with other people's 7's, the value of 7 stretches beyond any meaning. Some people's 7's are basically the most terrible anime shows ever. Some people's 7's are amazing anime shows that are rated higher by many others. It just doesn't make sense to combine these numbers into an aggregate score.

Now, statistically, maybe the discrepancies between how people see a 7/10 might average out, but I don't really know. I'm inclined to think that no, they won't, and my evidence is simply the fact that average-quality anime do not have an average-quality scores.

Saucy said:
And again, your opposition to breaking down anime into technical parts just further undermines the scoring system. Breaking down into categories is even more objective and even more contextual for consumers, yet it ignores the whole picture. Sure. But you can't have it both ways. You can't tell me that I can put an objective number on "the whole picture," but I can't break it down into categories and score them individually. It doesn't work like that.

jal90 said:

No, I didn't admit that numbers are inherently objective. Don't twist my words. What I said is that statistics applied through a standardized formula are inherently objective because they remove bias in their judgement and conclusion, but numbers can be used in any way or form. They are simply tools. This would be like saying that my post doesn't contain any subjective input because letters exist and have a meaning regardless of what I write with them. Obviously that is not the case.

You talk about fundamental flaws and yet the reason why you call them flaws is not grounded on any intent or purpose the number scale as a system has, neither as a tool nor as an aggregate of ratings. So if you want to make this your personal case and preference feel free to but don't treat this discussion as something with a clear and inequivocal answer, because all you've brought is your own conclusion with no reason for me to assume that it factors in the intent of the scale to start with.


It doesn't work like what exactly? Did I mess up again with my wording?

I am not telling you anything. I am showing my personal disagreement and stating why I don't find it useful for myself. I didn't think I had to clarify this but okay. Do you explain me how my opposition to breaking down undermines the scoring system? Do you mind explaining me how is it more objective and contextual for consumers? It doesn't even add more information because the consumer doesn't know how much each element factors in and how they combine. Saying that the sound design of the show is wonderful doesn't really give more information, let alone more objective information (like wtf?) than saying that the sound design of the show is essential to its overall purpose.

Saucy said:
Well, it's clear you either don't understand how language works or how numbers work, and to sweeten the pot, an "or" could also mean you don't understand both.

Either way, letters are not the same a numbers and I hope I don't need to explain why that's the case since it's so obvious that I would even a high-school drop-out should understand the difference.

Saucy said:
Without going into advanced mathematics, numbers have an equal distance between one another, which is an inherently objective quality. Without that quality, statistical analysis is not possible. This is how you admitted that numbers are inherently objective. I don't know why you're trying to fight that admission since it is literally true and denying it leads to manifest absurdity.Why is statistical analysis not possible without objective numbers? The same reason that it's not possible with words. 1 has to always equal 1 for any sort of mathematical and statistical calculation and everything you do in statistics is eventually converted into numbers. But that's not really important.

Saucy said:
Yes, numbers are tools, and they are objective tools. If they were not objective, the whole foundation of mathematics and logic would crumble. Remember, mathematics is simply a product of abstraction of logic into symbols.

Saucy said:
The whole thrust of my argument is that people are using objective tools subjectively, which defeats the purpose. Crime statistics have faced that problem for decades when dealing with dark figures of crime because for any representation of crime statistics, there is an unreported number hiding in the background. There are criminologists in criminal literature who have expressed the concern that if crime statistics are a "measuring stick," we don't really know how far apart the units are.

Saucy said:
That is my concern with using numbers to score art. There is really no way of telling what the scale actually means and represents. A scale's inherent useful quality is a uniform distance between units, but the way you're suggesting it should be used creates an uncertainty that undermines the idea that there is an equal distance between each number. This renders the scale useless, especially when the distance between the numbers is dynamic. It would be one thing to have a scale that is consistent in the difference between its numbers, albeit the distance isn't equal, but here, the distance can change from person to person and putting these different distances together creates a clusterfuck that to me ceases to have any usefulness.

jal90 said:
The only arguable assumption this site makes when factoring in and comparing results is assuming that everybody understand the scale progression the same. That is, that a 9 is higher than a 8 for everybody and a 3 lower than a 4.

Saucy said:
Here is maybe another way of putting the same proposition in a way that you may grasp.

Saucy said:
If I have to ask you or anyone else why whether a 6/10 means the anime is bad, the scale has already failed its purpose. The purpose of the scale is to convey any given user's subjective opinion of the quality of the anime. An aggregation of that score is meant to represent the average opinion on the quality. Discounting statistical issues with how bad mean scores are versus median scores, if I have no idea what a 6 means to someone, they have failed to convey their opinion. I mean, sure, MAL puts a nominal tag on each number, so when a 6 is labelled "Fine," maybe you can assume their opinion is that it was really "Fine." But the way I have seen most users use the scoring system on MAL and other sites suggests that such labels rarely accurately map onto their respective values.

Saucy said:
I truly hope you're kidding when you say you don't understand how breaking down elements of an anime is more objective than simply scoring it as a whole. There are a few methods of scoring aspects of things to end up with a final score, which I don't really need to mention. Suffice to say, the more detail you provide in your assessment, the more information you give. If you simply spit out a score, there is little value in it. Now, if you score different elements, let's stick with sound design, then you can provide more information to people who find it relevant. Perhaps someone is really into piano scores and and colourful art. In that case, Sakura Trick might be a great recommendation for them. But had that information been omitted, then maybe they wouldn't end up watching it purely because the average score was 7.16.

Saucy said:
The "you don't get to do that" reference was to your attempt to a false dichotomy of either treating something as a sum of its parts or as a whole. You can do both.

jal90 said:

Wow, are you going to stop being a fucking moron for the sake of being a fucking moron, or are we done with talking like people now?

Saucy said:


I think that's all I really need to quote...

Whiskeyjack1k said:
I use ratings just for me. I find them fun and enjoy evaluating shows that way. That said I don't pay much attention to general ratings, nor do I let a number impact my enjoyment of a show. It's all personal at the end of the day.

Saucy said:



Yes it was. Numbers are inherently objective. One hour from now is always one hour from now. -10 Celcius is always 10 degrees more than -20 Celcius.

The whole point of reducing things into numbers is to provide an objective scale of comparison between two things. A number score means nothing without comparison, but when you apply that to art, the value of numbering quickly breaks down.

I cannot conceive of what else you could possibly think when you see a 9/10 other than a 9/10 is objectively better than an 8/10, which is exactly what a number scale is meant to represent. If you rate one anime a 5/10 and another an 8/10, you cannot logically claim that the former is better than the latter. Of course, it may very well be that you like the 5/10 more than the 8/10, but in that instance, the numbers contradict your evaluation, which negates the purpose of the scoring system.


You can argue about what exactly the scare measures, like for instance whether it measures the merit/quality of the anime or simply user enjoyment, but it is still objective. It is still purporting to compare something as being objectively "better" or "worse" than something else. In the realm of art, I think it's utterly useless and the fact that you don't perceive it to be objective just proves that number scores have little value in letting us know if something is worth our time.

Imaishi said:

It was... why exactly? Because you said so? That's nothing more than you assumption.

Numbers aren't inherently objective. They aren't even inherently objective in mathematics, contrary to what you claim in further posts. They always need a context, the same space, units, you name it. Otherwise they mean nothing and can't be compared. Depending on the metric space, the distance between them might vary, once again, unlike what you're claiming.

Anyway, comparison to Celsius is stupid, because the numerics in scoring system obviously aren't a count of anything, there is no unit of quality, and no way to measure it, unlike temperature. And that's fine. The digits here function as symbols, symbols for subjective opinions. Whether or not one uses the exact words MAL does to describe the specific score doesn't matter, as they still serve the purpose of quickly expressing your opinion, and putting different works in order. Yes, you like a 9/10 more than a 5/10 show. There's nothing objective about it, though, and there is no need for it to be.
The scores work for any given individual, and looking at their list you can see what they like more, what they like less, and get a general idea of their taste, and if it's similar to yours, you can use it to find new stuff to watch.
They also, taking the average, work for anime community as a whole, show what people tend to like and dislike. Even if people use the scale in different ways, they all work on increasing or decreasing the average score, and contribute to making something that represents a popular opinion.

It's you who's trying to force strict and objective meaning on the scoring system, but there is no need for that, and I sincerely doubt that was anyone's intention, because you don't need to think long to see it wouldn't make any sense.
There's no need for any of that for it to work well.

No one is arguing such a scoring system is perfect, it certainly isn't. It's not very insightful either, but it serves its purpose. For how quick, simple and intuitive numbers are, it does a very good job.
It can't replace well thought out and written opinions and reviews, but it doesn't require effort yet still provides some useful information. The numbers in it don't have to behave like a scale of temperature to make sense.

Saucy said:



Give me an exact evaluation of what a 7.32 means when you attach it to Attack on Titan and I'll concede every single one of your points.

Imaishi said:


Did you even read what I wrote?
That's exactly why the problem with numbers lies on your side. You want them to mean concrete things, because they function like that elsewhere, but it isn't, and doesn't have to be, the case with numerical scoring system.

7.32 is liked more than 7.30 and liked less than 7.40. That is enough. It served its purpose.
You see fullmetal alchemist rated 9.25 and you instantly know people love the series, it's averaged score is close to the maximal score one can give, meaning only few outlying people dislike it, and when you see Argento Soma scored 6.89 you know it's not to everyone's taste, and thus, you're less likely to like it. With Pupa being scored 3.72, WAY lower than almost any show you come across, you instantly know almost no one likes, and you probably won't either.

When instead of that you use scores of concrete people, whose taste you know, they become even more useful. When you and a person like similar things, and you see him watch new anime and score it 10, you're instantly interested and want to give it a try too.


It doesn't have to be concrete, strict and very informative to be a useful tool. No one is arguing it's perfect and infallible, but it works. People like it and understand it. It's a fact.

Saucy said:



I'm not really sure you understand what you're saying, or what I'm saying. I could use the pointless rhetorical question of "did you even read my post," but I'm not that much of a fan of redundancies, albeit I indulge in them from time to time.


I don't really understand how your statements are meant to help your disagreement with me since you either help my argument or simply state irrelevant things. There is almost zero context in why a 7.20 is "more liked" than a 7.19. There is almost zero context in why FMA is a 9.25. There is almost zero context in why AS is 6.89. You can't quantify "enjoyment" or quality of this kind of medium in this kind of way. You're misusing numbers, which are inherently objective (and no, I will not spend three paragraphs belaboring this obvious point. "Inherent" doesn't mean "eternal and unalterable," you can assign meaning to anything to change it and just because you assign a subjective meaning to an objective thing and use it subjectively does not mean the thing ceases to be inherently objective, it just means you're not using it objectively).

I think it's patently laughable to suggest that just because FMA has a very high score, the majority of people are sure to like it. No. If you are the type of person who looks at a numeric score and uses that information to determine whether you will enjoy something, you are a sad a pathetic excuse for a human being. I don't care if I'm being condescending or rude, I have no patience or time for people who are so intellectually lazy that they would forgo giving some experience a try simply because some aggregate or even non-aggregate score has given them the impression that it's not worth their time. Unless this experience is highly time-consuming or expensive, there is really no excuse for falling to the opinions of the masses, as if because something is popular or unpopular has any sway on its merit. Some of the most amazing music is heard by few and some of the most terrible music is idolized by many.


If by "it works" you mean that it's a terrible tool to determine the quality of anything, then yes, it works well. If you meant that it lets people decide whether to watch something or not, that's not what it's for. If you meant that it lets you know how much the average user enjoyed something, then again, it fails miserably because the "average" user doesn't exist, nor does the score reflect anything meaningful.


It's useless information. You've done nothing to argue for its usefulness and that can be easily explained. That's because there is nothing to argue for.

EmmKayJeeBee said:
Is rating anime series on MAL a good thing?
If so,I think rating anime kind of takes away a person's enjoyment of the anime.I think they thinking about giving the rating to the anime rather than enjoying and actually connecting to it.
What do you think?

Imaishi said:


There is no need for context as to why any given series has a particular score, for that you can read reviews, discussions and other more elaborate ways of judging a piece.
Numbers are not inherently objective, not if you have ever got any education on maths beyond highschool level of basics. That, or you don't know what objective means. Something objective is true and not up to interpretation. Numbers aren't that. But that is irrelevant to the thread.

Temporarily ignoring the pathetic insult thrown in the middle of discussion, no, I'm not determining whether I enjoy something using the score, I never argued for that so learn to read. I'm not forgoing any anime because their score might be low, a click away is my list which proves that, but yes, I will do that for a medium that I'm less invested in, that I have no inherent love for like anime, because consuming media isn't free, there is both money and time involved, and it's true for anime as well.
I don't spend so much time on video games, nor I'm willing to experience bad games, so if a game is not universally loved like, say Witcher, I'm not going to waste my time nor money to gamble a try. Of course, in the end, that might turn out to be a bad decision, but you can't really know whether you will like something until you give a try, there is no tool capable of predicting that.
There is no way to objectively measure a quality of a show, to form a verdict that would be true for everyone. The merit of art is decided by the consumer, it doesn't exist in and of itself. There is no strict definition of a 'good' piece of art.

People, though, tend to like and dislike the same, or at least similar, things. That's how we work. It's a fact that for any given person, they are more likely to enjoy the music of Adele and think highly of it, than even the most critically acclaimed metal band. And numbers are useful to convey that.
I might dislike Kimi no na Wa, hell, I think it's garbage, uninspired and full of lazy writing, from a hack director that beats the same dead horse 5th time in the row. I had a bad time watching it. But a potential consumer is statistically more likely to share the opinion of those who love it than mine.
And numbers provide this information. They're not 'determining' anything.

It's not useless information. People use it, on daily basis, so it's useful, and that's a fact. It's stupid to argue against that. It might not be useful to you, if magically your opinion never aligns with the popular one, but whatever man. No one is saying one should blindly follow it, but there are choices to be made when consuming media, you can't see and try everything. If I want to watch a movie with my girlfriend, we will pick something that is highly scored, and in genres we're interested in. It would be stupid to pick some random shit and totally ignore popular opinion and bias. You want to minimize the risk of watching something you dislike.

Anyway, I'm ending the discussion here, I'm not willing to spend any more time on a manchild throwing insults around and being condescending as shit.

EmmKayJeeBee said:

If so,I think rating anime kind of takes away a person's enjoyment of the anime.I think they thinking about giving the rating to the anime rather than enjoying and actually connecting to it.

Stripes said:
I don't care about the ratings per say. I don't think they're very accurate either because most the people on here don't know how to rate because everything is a 7 or up. But I don't think it's the worst system either.

Energetic-Nova said:


Some people are like that and then there are other people who never give anything a 10 and have an average of 3-4. It balances out.

Stripes said:


I think the ratio of people dropping scores between 2-5 often enough are exceedingly rare. I think I've only seen one or two people have under a 5 mean score. And the casuals or even the normies who use this site are gonna most likely rate everything high because their tastes never develop.

I'd say it's a 1:5 ratio at best considering majority of MAL scores are in the 7 to 8 ranges and hardly ever dip into the 5's.