How do you rate anime?
| There is a lack of interesting topics on the front page right now and polls are fun. So I thought I'd ask everyone something I'm curious about to get a feeling for where people land on this subject. I think it's a personal decision and how people rate is totally up to them so I'm not looking for any serious debate but I hope for some good light discussion. Of course, objectivity is not 100% possible or debatably not at all maybe, but even if you think that way, we can make attempts at it. So consider my use of 'objective' here to mean 'trying to be objective'. Personally, I used to be someone who tried to weigh both objective quality and subjective qualtiy equally, but over time I rated more and more based on enjoyment. Now I rate only on enjoyment. I felt like when I rated stuff I really didn't like highly because of what other people said that's kind of wrong. And anime become known as 'objectively' high quality often just as narrative that forms around popular shows. So, for me at least, I felt I was too influenced by others when deciding on 'objective' quality. |
YossaRedMageJun 10, 2019 2:10 PM
| “In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule.” -Friedrich Nietzsche Aggregate scoring is bad for the anime fandom |
| my opinion follows: There is no such thing as good taste in art. Any art quality is subjective. Thus everything I rate is highly subjective. This means I rate shows based on my enjoyment of that show. |
| I personally think I rate anime by both enjoyment and objectivity as there's a strong correlation between the two aspects; high quality anime makes me happy and low quality anime makes me angry. YossaRedMage said: I felt like when I rated stuff I really didn't like highly because of what other people said that's kind of wrong. And anime become known as 'objectively' high quality often just as narrative that forms around popular shows. So, for me at least, I felt I was too influenced by others when deciding on 'objective' quality. It sounds like you didn't try to commit to the objective side of things, granted, it's hard to get into if you don't a bases for a lot of the things you're watching. Knowing or having seen what's good story, characters, animation and sound allows you to have a much better grasp of what is "objectively" good. But the fact that you are influenced by other's opinions isn't altogether a bad thing, but understanding it and accepting it are very two different beasts. And objective quality doesn't mean you'll enjoy something either nor does bad objective quality mean you'll dislike it as many popular shows have proven. |
| It might be unusual but tbh I rate with scores. |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
| There is no such thing as a perfect work in my opinion, if something is good then it's good but it also has some minor faults. Overall I rate based on my enjoyment, if I rate an anime 10/10 then it's only because of my personal enjoyment.In other words as far as quality goes there isn't an anime that can reach a 10/10 in all fields imo. |
 |
| I rate mostly objectively, but enjoyment is an important thing, too. I usually give a show +/- 1-2 points based on my level of enjoyment |
 |
| Mostly objectivity, but I belive enjoyment is for the most part a natural consequence of being objectively good. I don't remember of something I thought to myself: "This is supposed to be good but I'm bored". If I'm not interested in what I'm watching, there is a reason for it |
 |
| The maximum score for anime I really enjoy but nothing special obectively is 8, but the maximum score of what I think objectively good but I don't like it is 6 (maybe the minimum is 6 too though, or 5).. I am not really sure but I guess I prioritize enjoyment more ... |
"The Slave is the have-not, the oppressed one with nothing to spare. But because the Slave is in that despairing situation, having nothing, it can kill the Emperor !" |
| Well, since objectivity isn't legitimately obtainable, enjoyment seems the only actual option |
I like to base the idea, not practice, of critique around 3 principles.
However conflating subjectivity and enjoyment is a narrow view of what subjectivity is. Enjoyment is within subjectivity but subjectivity not entirely made up of enjoyment, there are other factors that go into it. To name a big one is interpretation, specifically of objective merit, you can measure something qualitative like art and animation to industry norms or previous works in a franchise objectively and make an educated interpretation of it. YossaRedMage said: If you don't have much of a base for your own critique and are so easily influenced by others, that means you were still learning how the process works as you probably didn't have anything to contribute or argue against.Personally, I used to be someone who tried to weigh both objective quality and subjective qualtiy equally, but over time I rated more and more based on enjoyment. Now I rate only on enjoyment. I felt like when I rated stuff I really didn't like highly because of what other people said that's kind of wrong. And anime become known as 'objectively' high quality often just as narrative that forms around popular shows. So, for me at least, I felt I was too influenced by others when deciding on 'objective' quality. To put things simply, it's not a process of leisure it's quite the opposite, it's majorly a critical discussion and study of a work and medium with yourself, pushing the limits of your knowledge about all the elements that go into said work and medium. It's quite literally an academic process, which is why it's so frustrating to me when people so readily and ignorantly dismiss objectivity out of context. The best way to expand your knowledge when starting out i think is to contrast and compare your already complete critique and see where that lands with other peoples, don't merely just have mental notes of a feeling or referential thought, complete your analysis then see if you missed something or weren't alone about and argue them. Critique doesn't mean you stop enjoying things, far from it. Critique can certainly hinder enjoyment when you're able to see the flaws in something especially if you already don't enjoy it, but the opposite is also true where critique facilitates enjoyment way higher than just how something makes you feel, and that's priceless to me. I would be consciously lying to and ignoring a part of myself if i didn't do it. |
 I don't believe in the Devil. You should. He believes in you. |
| The two things are highly interconnected. The foundation of enjoyment is quality, therefore if something is well done, it'll be enjoyable to watch. Problem is when people are too stiff when thinking about quality and close themselves into the classic elitist mindset where something can only be high quality in a certain way and everything outside of that is inherently trash. Many times I argued with people who said something is shit because such a ridiculosu story can't be taken seriously despite it wasn't even meant to be taken seriously in the first place and what metters is if it makes sense in-universe. |
  |
FoxFire75 said: It comes more naturally and isn't as daunting as you think if you've already seen a lot of shows, most people are probably better at it than they think if they apply themselves, but it's definitely a lot of work if you strive to learn constantly and write your own reviews as a critic. I was just trying to lay it out for OP since he's dabbled, but probably too strongly if it called for a response like this.Lunilah said: To put things simply, it's not a process of leisure it's quite the opposite, it's majorly a critical discussion and study of a work and medium with yourself, pushing the limits of your knowledge about all the elements that go into said work and medium. It's quite literally an academic process, which is why it's so frustrating to me when people so readily and ignorantly dismiss objectivity out of context. The best way to expand your knowledge when starting out i think is to contrast and compare your already complete critique and see where that lands with other peoples, don't merely just have mental notes of a feeling or referential thought, complete your analysis then see if you missed something or weren't alone about and argue them. For people like myself who use anime as entertainment, just to relax and have a good time, this sounds like work. No offense. I do not care how other people rate or why, mainly because I use my ratings only for myself ( watch it again ? recommend it or not ? ). I guess everybody has a different approach and of course, all possible approaches are fine. |
I don't believe in the Devil. You should. He believes in you. |
| I rate mostly if not purely on enjoyment. A lot of times it goes hand in hand with objectively good shows, but cases like Mushishi, Natsume's Book of Friends and Ping Pong the Animation I'm not exactly going head over heels for them I do find though after seeing more and more that objectivity slowly does start to play a bigger significance in enjoyment. Like I've been noticing lately I've taken more judgment on the overall production of a show, and have also been more critical on voice acting lately |
 'On-Hold' is another way for a completionist to say 'Dropped' |
| I thinks any drama author should strive to maintain the balance between internal logic and enjoyment. Internal logic provides weight that multiplies the enjoyment of any given moment. Pure enjoyment means logic is messed up and everything feels shallow and stupid. You can't relate or invest in events or characters as anything can happen at author's whim. Incosistent characters, contrived scenarios, etc. just for the sake of cheap enjoyment. That's for dramas. Comedy is a completely different beast. And yes, objectivity does exist. Objectivity is facts. You see/or don't see something that exist. That's fact. And you build your subjective opinion on those facts. In theory, critiques are the people who can see a lot more facts than your average viewer. And they shed light on those facts to make them more recognizable. So objectively all the elements are there in a show. Your opinion is strongly connected to them. |
FrostLichJun 10, 2019 10:11 AM
| The overwhelming majority portion of my score is my personal enjoyment and what I personally take away from it, with a heavy preference given to those works which can make me really either think or feel something extraordinary - ideally both (and if so, you're probably destined for a top slot in my consideration). Those things which I find inspiring, moving, and fascinating are all highly personal and specific to me, my wants, my life and past experiences and idiosyncratic interests though, so I recognize them as entirely subjective and I'm perfectly fine with that. That being said, I may either mentally or on an actual ranked list add or detract a point for some stellar technical feature or subpar one like animation quality, voice work, or glaring narrative inconsistencies (plot holes in the script), but only about a point. What the show provided for me to think about or enabled me to feel is more important and, after all, why I watch. |
| I rate for a little of both. If I'm not enjoying it, I'm not gonna finish it, but good writing and characters are a bonus that make me enjoy the show even more. |
avdx101 said: Lunilah said: Critique doesn't mean you stop enjoying things, far from it. Critique can certainly hinder enjoyment when you're able to see the flaws in something especially if you already don't enjoy it, but the opposite is also true where critique facilitates enjoyment way higher than just how something makes you feel, and that's priceless to me. Well said! I'm really tired of all this ''objectivity doesn't exist'' bullshit. In every damn thing there are objective aspects that can be evaluated. Yeah, you can't have 100% accuracy, but at least it guides you while scoring something. People who buy into those "objectivity doesn't exist'' cliche most likely haven't been a serious artist in their life. Ask any animator if they think the animation quality of My Sister, My Writer is just as good as that of Mob Psycho. Why should they even work hard on improving their skill if they are relativist? Obviously "objectivity" isn't the accurate term, but art is inherently intersubjective and there are intersubjective standards by which we can evaluate a work. That doesn't mean we don't have disagreement between what the intersubjective standards should be, but the fact that it is intersubjective, not simply subjective, means we can have rational debates on that, even if there is no guarantee that there'll be consensus. Just like we can and should have rational debate on ethical issues even if consensus may never be reached, even if we can't do scientific experiment on that. In short, people should read Kant. |
 |
| I stopped worrying about any observable quality a long time ago. I love too many "bad" shows to care. Don't get me wrong, I value solid workmanship as much as anyone. The ability to tell a proper story -- one that actually makes sense throughout -- is rare. I just happen to (greatly) enjoy many poorly written and poorly animated works. And reward them with great scores too. |
Gen_Lightsbane said: I presume you have a notion or moral gripe with enjoying bad shows and scoring them appropriately/completely? Along the lines of it otherwise being a bad thing to enjoy something that is "bad".I stopped worrying about any observable quality a long time ago. I love too many "bad" shows to care. Don't get me wrong, I value solid workmanship as much as anyone. The ability to tell a proper story -- one that actually makes sense throughout -- is rare. I just happen to (greatly) enjoy many poorly written and poorly animated works. And reward them with great scores too. |
I don't believe in the Devil. You should. He believes in you. |
CHC said: avdx101 said: Well said! I'm really tired of all this ''objectivity doesn't exist'' bullshit. In every damn thing there are objective aspects that can be evaluated. Yeah, you can't have 100% accuracy, but at least it guides you while scoring something. People who buy into those "objectivity doesn't exist'' cliche most likely haven't been a serious artist in their life. Ask any animator if they think the animation quality of My Sister, My Writer is just as good as that of Mob Psycho. Why should they even work hard on improving their skill if they are relativist? Obviously "objectivity" isn't the accurate term, but art is inherently intersubjective and there are intersubjective standards by which we can evaluate a work. That doesn't mean we don't have disagreement between what the intersubjective standards should be, but the fact that it is intersubjective, not simply subjective, means we can have rational debates on that, even if there is no guarantee that there'll be consensus. Just like we can and should have rational debate on ethical issues even if consensus may never be reached, even if we can't do scientific experiment on that. In short, people should read Kant. Basically there is such thing as human biology. Most of art forms heavily rely on it - a picture that's more pleasant to a human eye (a kid scribble vs Shinkai's background), music that's not just a set of sounds that don't go together, writing that makes you relate to a character more. So becoming better at any skill is to being more pleasant to a human eye/brain/etc. They're all basically biologists. Sure, there is some degree of subjectivity and personal preference in art, but all in all, we are all humans and are prone to similar things. |
Gen_Lightsbane said: I stopped worrying about any observable quality a long time ago. I love too many "bad" shows to care. Don't get me wrong, I value solid workmanship as much as anyone. The ability to tell a proper story -- one that actually makes sense throughout -- is rare. I just happen to (greatly) enjoy many poorly written and poorly animated works. And reward them with great scores too. Any examples of such works? I just think that you value some things that are well done (in your opinion) in otherwise mediocre or bad show. You actually don't see those parts as bad. |
| You can't really criticize something objectively unless you're educated enough to do so... That being said, I've taken enough writing classes to know poor story structure from a well-written one, but by no means am I a professional. However, I have absolutely no fucking clue when it comes to animation so I end up not saying anything, unless if it's so bad even someone as artistically challenged as I can realize that you fucked up. After a certain point it becomes too tiring, so yeah, mostly (~80%) subjective for me. |
Imperio_nJun 10, 2019 11:53 AM
 |
Aldnox said: Hyper-realistic art is the easiest to objectively measure, as the closer to reality it looks the better it is no matter how you feel.Reminder objectivity in art doesn't exist, and if you believe it does, I think School Days and Chaos;Head are good, which shouldn't be possible since, being objectively bad, no one should like them as it's based on fact and not opinion. OT: Enjoyment of course. If you're able to draw the line so distinctly between objectivity and subjectivity, you should recognize you can enjoy something that is low quality, as they're completely different things. |
I don't believe in the Devil. You should. He believes in you. |
Aldnox said: When you measure it against real life, you can determine how good it is, it doesn't matter what you prefer.Lunilah said: Hyper-realistic art isn't objectively good either. I prefer pixelated 2D graphics in games instead of hyper-realistic looks.Hyper-realistic art is the easiest to objectively measure, as the closer to reality it looks the better it is no matter how you feel. If you're able to draw the line so distinctly between objectivity and subjectivity, you should recognize you can enjoy something that is low quality, as they're completely different things. |
I don't believe in the Devil. You should. He believes in you. |
| Based on enjoyment only. Because it's easy, and I don't waste my time thinking about a score or comparing several shows to decide on a score. Plus, anything you enjoy is good. |
 |
| I like to believe I have good taste so I rate based on enjoyment. So if anyone wonders if something is objectively good just look at my list for confirmation |
| poop |
| objective = factual right? the objectivity i prefer is when an anime is trying to be hard fiction (example hard science fiction or hard fantasy) that tries to be more realistic than normal and also if there is really an objective way to measure an anime that means the anime industry should not be affected by sturgeons law (90% of everything is trash) but that is not the case ye there is some objectivity in anime like tropes/cliche/formula like today with isekai, moe/cute girls doing cute things, battle shonen, etc but those are not guarantee of success and as they say there is no originality or something new anymore and it boils down to execution so i rate base on enjoyment most of the time |
| ITT: People patting themselves on the back for the vain and self-affirming belief that their opinions are quantifiable as objective due to their experiences with an absolute shit show of a medium. |
I'm also filled with pure-hearted ulterior motives. |
Lunilah said: I presume you have a notion or moral gripe with enjoying bad shows and scoring them appropriately/completely? Along the lines of it otherwise being a bad thing to enjoy something that is "bad". There is absolutely nothing wrong with enjoying something that is poorly crafted, as long as you acknowledge it as such. FrostLich said: Any examples of such works? I just think that you value some things that are well done (in your opinion) in otherwise mediocre or bad show. You actually don't see those parts as bad. Oh, I see them as bad alright. The best example would be Black Bullet. I freaking love Black Bullet. But I'm not going to stand here and call it a good anime. I see it for what it is. It is obviously not Patlabor 2, but it doesn't have to be. |
Gen_Lightsbane said: Of course, just curious on why you stopped acknowledging it through appropriate/complete scoring. If not that then i assume just not something you care to take seriously anymore, as one person mentioned earlier, fatigue.Lunilah said: I presume you have a notion or moral gripe with enjoying bad shows and scoring them appropriately/completely? Along the lines of it otherwise being a bad thing to enjoy something that is "bad". There is absolutely nothing wrong with enjoying something that is poorly crafted, as long as you acknowledge it as such. |
I don't believe in the Devil. You should. He believes in you. |
| i rate based on how much i can relate to/feel for the anime thats enjoyment i guess but there are anime that i would give high scores to that aren't the 'i enjoy watching this anime'type |
| Well.. Didn't really encounter any things that would be objective measures of art.. For example, art styles are different, there is no such thing as better art, only more pleasant to me, as I believe it.. Like, I prefer it being moe, or some other things, but it doesn't mean that moe is objectively better or anything.. Same goes for realistic art.. It's just matters of preference.. Same with storytelling or characters.. Preferring for foreshadowing to be written in one way doesn't mean that it's a better work than one that is without a foreshadowing.. Or different tropes are still tropes, you just prefer one over others.. Or character development is also a trope, which you prefer to see written in one way or another, but it's all just a trope that isn't even necessary for any anime work, it's just matter of preference.. So in the end.. I didn't really encounter arguments about really strong objective measures.. I only see people mentioning that objectivity is possible, but nothing in particular is being mentioned.. I wish people who are believing in objectivity would present more measures in particular, saying more about it.. |
Peaceful_Critic said: deg said: ye there is some objectivity in anime like tropes/cliche/formula like today with isekai, moe/cute girls doing cute things, battle shonen, etc but those are not guarantee of success and as they say there is no originality or something new anymore and it boils down to execution Encounter with tropes has more to do with experience than anything else. Someone who mostly watches sports anime probably is more familiar with its tropes than other people who don't really watch that genre. Likewise, the sports fan wouldn't be able to recognize the tropes in a romantic comedy, so it'll feel fresher. This isn't even mentioning how others may value originality or uniqueness more or less. nah i see objectivity as something reoccuring or reproducible since objective means factual right? the reason you presented is just lack of experience or being a noob but that does not take away on the fact that tropes for example already exist its only new to the viewer but not new to the medium (like anime) |
Peaceful_Critic said: safaenaw second account confirmed, turn in your username and pwdeg said: ye there is some objectivity in anime like tropes/cliche/formula like today with isekai, moe/cute girls doing cute things, battle shonen, etc but those are not guarantee of success and as they say there is no originality or something new anymore and it boils down to execution Encounter with tropes has more to do with experience than anything else. Someone who mostly watches sports anime probably is more familiar with its tropes than other people who don't really watch that genre. Likewise, the sports fan wouldn't be able to recognize the tropes in a romantic comedy, so it'll feel fresher. This isn't even mentioning how others may value originality or uniqueness more or less. Lunilah said: Hyper-realistic art is the easiest to objectively measure, as the closer to reality it looks the better it is no matter how you feel. Not true, there are other ways to judge hyper-realistic art aside from how realistic it is. Like the atmosphere, faithfulness(i.e in cases like trying to make a realistic pokemon), attractiveness, and memorability among other things that you'll judge cartoonish art by as well. It's only good as far as what your measure is if your standard for good realistic art is solely how realistic looking it is then the most realistic art would be better. Comparatively, to someone who values faithfulness in the artwork that is closer to the original, but they wouldn't necessarily choose the most realistic. |
| poop |
Peaceful_Critic said: deg said: Well, you can't judge objectively how original or reused a trope is unless you literally have seen everything. There are some tropes that may show up more like tsunderes comparatively to hemideres, but I'm still only saying that based on my subjective experience. You also have to consider disagreements on what characters fall under said trope. Some characters may stray away so much that others might not consider them under that label.nah i see objectivity as something reoccuring or reproducible since objective means factual right? the reason you presented is just lack of experience or being a noob but that does not take away on the fact that tropes for example already exist its only new to the viewer but not new to the medium (like anime) you do not have to watch everything though i mean just exposing yourself on sites like TvTropes or even discussions here on MAL or just actively seeing PVs of new anime can give you an idea of common tropes in anime for example and like i said tropes are a form of objectivity and thats what matters more |
Peaceful_Critic said: It is true, there are just multiple factors you can choose from to measure for whatever the purpose may be, as you laid out, i just named one of the many to facilitate the point of objectivity in art existing.Lunilah said: Hyper-realistic art is the easiest to objectively measure, as the closer to reality it looks the better it is no matter how you feel. Not true, there are other ways to judge hyper-realistic art aside from how realistic it is. Like the atmosphere, faithfulness(i.e in cases like trying to make a realistic pokemon), attractiveness, and memorability among other things that you'll judge cartoonish art by as well. It's only good as far as what your measure is if your standard for good realistic art is solely how realistic looking it is then the most realistic art would be better. Comparatively, to someone who values faithfulness in the artwork that is closer to the original, but they wouldn't necessarily choose the most realistic. |
I don't believe in the Devil. You should. He believes in you. |
| 0% voted for As objective as possible yet a lot of people preach their favorite shows as if their opinion is one of the 10 commandments. Same goes other way around as well. If you like a show people will tell you it is shit because their taste is superior. |
| Don't be a self pretentious that is the most gayest thing ever English Dubs are better than subs You all have anime profile pic so you opinion doesn't count Your Waifu is trash Cory in the house is the best anime https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFQQALduhzA Japanese are one of the most xenophobic nations My Anime List looks like a website from 1990s |
More topics from this board
» MULTIPLE UNRELATED anime that you think could be set in the same anime universeIpreferEcchi - 11 hours ago |
15 |
by Longnines
»»
15 seconds ago |
|
» Things you are jealous of in anime ( 1 2 )IpreferEcchi - Apr 20 |
51 |
by Longnines
»»
2 minutes ago |
|
» What will be the next KyoAni project? Tell me your thoughts. ( 1 2 )Pinoffin - Yesterday |
69 |
by Longnines
»»
4 minutes ago |
|
Poll: » Legs or arms?Absurdo_N - 5 hours ago |
20 |
by SuperAdventure
»»
10 minutes ago |
|
» Do you fantasize about anime while you sleep?Alpha_1_Zero - Apr 24 |
30 |
by Shirayukin
»»
12 minutes ago |