Forum Settings
Forums

Sometimes I wonder if Sturgeon's law is a cop out...

#1
Jul 21, 12:57 AM
Offline
Joined: Jul 2019
Posts: 21
I am into anime, manga and I also read fiction books.

You know what general public thinks of anime, you have probably heard it.

Some people genuinely are interested in the genre. They give it a fair chance. I have met some of such people online and a few irl too.

Sometimes after encountering a lot of disappointing material, people will ask, "why does this genre suck?" And the fans and even makers of said genre sometimes say, it is coz of Sturgeon's law. ie in oversimplified terms, 90% of everything is crap. (Such discussions also usually turn into nitpicking, throwing personal insults, strawman arguments and more.) This happens in both anime/ manga and fiction books.

Sometimes I wonder if it is a cop out...

One time some fiction fans said to me if something is popular and you don't like it, you are the problem, or there is something wrong with you, not the genre, not the majority.

So which one is it?

I can't help but feel like people will say whatever supports their preferred narrative.


I have had enough exposure to feel that yes popularity =/= quality is true.

Also, do we even know if Sturgeon's law is legit and correct? Has it been verified?

I think most anime and manga have a low budget. Japan is a small country. Asian countries cannot compare with high budget entertainment produced in Western countries. They can't compete money wise. This is not criticism or insult, it is the truth. I am from an Asian country myself.

Often, higher budget means you can afford the best- the best writers, animators, marketing teams and more. People in Western countries have more money, so consumers are willing to spend more too. That's how it works there.

Maybe that's why they say anime is low quality. They have other options in the west. They have seen stuff with better, higher budget animation and stuff.

So if someone said anime and manga are low quality, I would say well they have a much smaller budget compared to the west so yes, in some ways they are. But they are doing their best with what they have.
That is not an insult of anime or their makers or their fans. Compared to the west like Disney and cartoon Network, marvel and DC comics, etc Japanese anime and manga makers definitely have very little money and resources.

Mangakas, except the very top ones, have to take on more than one project and work very hard, just to make rent.

So in that sense, it limits their quality in some ways. It is not an attack on their talent or creativity nor on the tastes of their fans.

Yet I am yet to find an instance when one would state this opinion without being chewed out and viciously attacked. The fans usually take great offence. They defend and justify that no it is not true and attack the person and their taste.

Also, I read somewhere that in order to churn out as much material as they can, in order to produce quantity, esp lately, quality of anime and manga is being compromised. (Quora, I think)

Some people say, oh you are not going for the right stuff. Sometimes people have tried it and not liked it. Or sometimes they have to scour an entire genre for hours and hours to find something they find watchable. And it makes them wonder why are they doing this? Is entertainment supposed to be so much hard work? It defeats the purpose. They feel drained and give up on the genre.

Well just some grievances I have heard about anime from other people. Interestingly, I have similar complaints about certain fiction book genre. Maybe that is ehy, I am looking at it from this angle.

I for one, if I am being completely honest to myself, feel like there is an element of truth in the criticism and opinions people have of anime and manga and fiction books as well.

I know. That is why I watch them by myself and don't overdshare with others. They don't find it appealing and dismiss it as "garbage". Hey so does Hayao Miyazaki.

And I for one also feel we don't have to take it personally as if they are insulting our mothers. It is entertainment. It is for fun. If is okay. Whatever.
I am definitely not attacking anyone when I say anything critical about fiction books.

Just coz we love something does not mean it doesn't have flaws or it cannot be improved or cannot evolve with the times or with new audiences.

I think being honest to ourselves and accepting that yes it may have flaws is a sign of strength not weakness. That is how a genre evolves and makes progress rather than being stagnant.

Peace.

Edit: some results that come up:

https://www.thetoptens.com/reasons-why-anime-sucks/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/mybrainiscompletelyempty.wordpress.com/2017/08/14/top-ten-reasons-why-anime-sucks/amp/

https://www.japanpowered.com/anime-articles/anime-annoyances-poor-storytelling
.................

Regarding fiction books,

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/books/booksblog/2016/apr/18/romance-novels-badly-written-curtis-sittenfeld-eligible-pride-and-prejudice

The comments on this article are interesting too.

See, writers legit cite Sturgeon's law to defend rather than sincerely consider criticism and work on improvement. It is the same circlejerk. Am I the only one who feels this is counterproductive? And isn't it hypocritic? Either your work is crap and you are admitting it using Sturgeon's law or it is not crap, then, why are you being so defensive in the first place? The hypocrisy seems lost upon them. Which one is it?

Modified by PrudenceRay, Jul 21, 1:58 AM
 
#2
Jul 21, 12:59 AM

Offline
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 12676
Are you really trying to figure out whether some stupid joke law is real? lol
My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com
THE CHAT CLUB.
 
#3
Jul 21, 1:00 AM
Online
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 46267
its not verified through scientific method lol

but street observation like see how many anime are profitable/popular each season or each year?
 
#4
Jul 21, 1:07 AM

Offline
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 16280
the only 10% of anime worth watching are the ones tagged mecha
 
#5
Jul 21, 1:09 AM

Offline
Joined: May 2019
Posts: 889
Sturgeon's law wasn't meant to be taken seriously it's more of a joke then anything else.

X s t a s y

“I'm not crazy, my reality is just different than yours”
―Cheshire Cat

 
#6
Jul 21, 1:19 AM
Offline
Joined: Jul 2019
Posts: 21
katsucats said:
Are you really trying to figure out whether some stupid joke law is real? lol
deg said:
its not verified through scientific method lol

but street observation like see how many anime are profitable/popular each season or each year?
Xstasy said:
Sturgeon's law wasn't meant to be taken seriously it's more of a joke then anything else.
yet anime fans use it religiously when defending anime. Something doesn't add up here. Which one is it?
 
#7
Jul 21, 1:23 AM
Online
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 46267
PrudenceRay said:
yet anime fans use it religiously when defending anime. Something doesn't add up here. Which one is it?


thats how fandoms are dude its not only the anime fandom

heck there are things like "cult classic" and now you wonder religious things like this
Modified by ugmon, Jul 21, 2:25 AM
 
#8
Jul 21, 1:30 AM
Offline
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 743
PrudenceRay said:
katsucats said:
Are you really trying to figure out whether some stupid joke law is real? lol
deg said:
its not verified through scientific method lol

but street observation like see how many anime are profitable/popular each season or each year?
Xstasy said:
Sturgeon's law wasn't meant to be taken seriously it's more of a joke then anything else.
yet anime fans use it religiously when defending anime. Something doesn't add up here. Which one is it?

What, how do you use the idea that "90% of all things are crap" to DEFEND something? That wouldn't exactly help your defense.

It seriously is just a joke law, or one to not take seriously. Just think about it for more than 10 seconds. Saying 90% of all things is crap is immediately wrong considering subjectivity exists. That's literally all you need to realize the law is either a joke, or just straight up wrong. Barely anyone uses it unironically, you rarely even see it used ironically nowadays.
 
#9
Jul 21, 1:34 AM

Offline
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 1181
I've always thought this was complete bullshit, especially since what's considered bad a lot of times it purely subjective. That and I don't believe this 90% crap can apply to literally anything. I think it's just something people use when they personally have a hard time finding stuff to enjoy, so I'm inclined to agree.
 
Jul 21, 1:54 AM

Offline
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 23833
It depends on what you find enjoyable. I don't need high quality superhero movies to get me going. Last time I truly enjoyed a superhero movie was because of Tobey Maguire.

I enjoy watching Trafalgar Law too.
 
Jul 21, 2:00 AM
Offline
Joined: Jul 2019
Posts: 21
OnionKnightRises said:
PrudenceRay said:
yet anime fans use it religiously when defending anime. Something doesn't add up here. Which one is it?

What, how do you use the idea that "90% of all things are crap" to DEFEND something? That wouldn't exactly help your defense.

It seriously is just a joke law, or one to not take seriously. Just think about it for more than 10 seconds. Saying 90% of all things is crap is immediately wrong considering subjectivity exists. That's literally all you need to realize the law is either a joke, or just straight up wrong. Barely anyone uses it unironically, you rarely even see it used ironically nowadays.
I am not the one using it. Other people use it when defending anime and fiction books. I am the one who asks for improvement.
 
Jul 21, 2:04 AM
Offline
Joined: Jul 2019
Posts: 21
Setsuei said:
I've always thought this was complete bullshit, especially since what's considered bad a lot of times it purely subjective. That and I don't believe this 90% crap can apply to literally anything. I think it's just something people use when they personally have a hard time finding stuff to enjoy, so I'm inclined to agree.
I think people use it to defend the poor quality of what they created or what they themselves enjoy.
 
Jul 21, 2:09 AM

Offline
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 1181
PrudenceRay said:
Setsuei said:
I've always thought this was complete bullshit, especially since what's considered bad a lot of times it purely subjective. That and I don't believe this 90% crap can apply to literally anything. I think it's just something people use when they personally have a hard time finding stuff to enjoy, so I'm inclined to agree.
I think people use it to defend the poor quality of what they created or what they themselves enjoy.

Yeah, I could see that. To me it kind of feels like when people quote something like this that sounds more like an opinion than a fact they're just showing the inability to think for themselves.
 
Jul 21, 2:21 AM

Offline
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 9897
How can I take seriously an OP saying that the third largest economy in the world is more modest than Western ones and sharing clear joke blog entries to show a point?
 
Jul 21, 3:07 AM
Offline
Joined: Jul 2019
Posts: 21
I think it would be interesting if someone created a thread saying anime is garbage or why is anime so poor quality and poorly made, as an experiment. I bet, a lot of, hell, most answers would be Sturgeon's law.i can't make it coz people will see my history and then give biased answers. It would be interesting to see how it plays out.

It would also prove my point that people say whatever supports their preferred narrative.

Also, on the internet, people's tendency is to argue and oppose. They wanna argue, insult, one up, mock and win. They also practise selective listening and selective reading. they will say whatever at that moment. Even This thread is a good example of that. If I had said anime is garbage or why is anime garbage, these very people would be saying Sturgeon's law and attacking and insulting me. They are even now.and all for a fleeting moment of illusion of superiority....smh.

It kinda makes you lose faith in the community, the fans as well as the makers, like You can't trust their words, You can't trust their work. You are being taken for a ride. Smh.

I think I am done with MAL. I am gonna peace out now.
 
Jul 21, 10:33 PM

Offline
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 12676
People use joke laws when they're lazy and lazy people take them for their word. Don't let the door hit you on your way out. I think you need to check yourself before you say anything about the community.
My subjective reviews: katsureview.wordpress.com
THE CHAT CLUB.
 
Jul 22, 1:20 PM
Offline
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 31059
If you believe some bullshit meme just because someone on the internet said it, that's on you. I've always found sturgeons law to be just a shitty, toxic meme used by bitter people who don't even know 1% of anime but think they can make sweeping statements about the medium.

What determines the percentage of shows you can enjoy in a medium is literally only up to your personal taste and preferences. The narrower, the smaller the amount. The more open-minded and broad your taste is, the more shows you will be able to enjoy. Any attempts to desubjectivize these values are just toxic bullshit.

Listen, everybody wants change, don't nobody want to change though
don't nobody want to pray, till they got something to pray for
now everybody's gonna die, but don't everybody live though
 
Jul 22, 1:34 PM

Offline
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 5117
@PrudenceRay, "Sturgeon's Law" is a rule-of-thumb, i.e. "this is a convenient guideline to follow", rather than some sort of iron-clad law of nature.

Besides, a more accurate statement of Sturgeon's Law is "90% of everything is something you won't be interested in". Pretty much every piece of creative work out there has some people who like it for whatever reasons. And pretty much every piece of creative work out there has some people who dislike it for whatever other reasons.

And besides, even all anime productions are "great", it is physically impossible for you to appreciate all of it.

As for your other comments -- neither budget nor volume determines greatness. Greatness itself is subjective anyway.

So you can't really say "anime sucks compared to [other medium]". Well, you can, but what such a statement actually means is that you simply find another medium more appealing. Which is a perfectly legit opinion to have, but doesn't actually mean anime is better or worse than that other medium.
Modified by GlennMagusHarvey, Jul 22, 2:05 PM
 
Jul 22, 1:48 PM
Online
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 46267
GlennMagusHarvey said:
"Sturgeon's Law" is a rule-of-thumb, i.e. "this is a convenient guideline to follow", rather than some sort of iron-clad law of nature.

Besides, a more accurate statement of Sturgeon's Law is "90% of everything is something you won't be interested in".


quoted for truth, very well said there
 
Jul 22, 4:46 PM

Online
Joined: Oct 2017
Posts: 526
GlennMagusHarvey said:
@PrudenceRay, "Sturgeon's Law" is a rule-of-thumb, i.e. "this is a convenient guideline to follow", rather than some sort of iron-clad law of nature.

Besides, a more accurate statement of Sturgeon's Law is "90% of everything is something you won't be interested in". Pretty much every piece of creative work out there has some people who like it for whatever reasons. And pretty much every piece of creative work out there has some people who dislike it for whatever other reasons.

And besides, even all anime productions are "great", it is physically impossible for you to appreciate all of it.

As for your other comments -- neither budget nor volume determines greatness. Greatness itself is subjective anyway.

So you can't really say "anime sucks compared to [other medium]". Well, you can, but what such a statement actually means is that you simply find another medium more appealing. Which is a perfectly legit opinion to have, but doesn't actually mean anime is better or worse than that other medium.


Nice one Glenn, I immediately prefer it with your rewording. But I still find the sentiment kind of... it just seems like such a negative, cynical view to have. I mean... it will be true for some hard to please people, but I think I would say I "like" about 75-80% of anime I've watched. Nowhere near 10%. People who literally think 90% of anime are bad, well... that's kind of sad and I have to wonder if those people might be wasting their time watching anime unless those 10% of anime they do like are just orgasmically good for them.

Also completely agree with your comment about budget. It's become one of my biggest pet peeves when people conflate budget and animation quality with overall quality. Those things raise the potential but if a person is actually content with flashy animation regardless of story or chracters, then.... well, whatever makes them happy, I probably don't need to elaborate on my opinion about them and their tastes.
Watching: Haganai NEXT.

Watching Weekly: Sounan Desu ka, Tejina-senpai, Kawaikereba, Takagi-san 2, Machikado Mazoku.

Recently Finished: Shield Hero (7), Shoumetsu Toshi (7), Midara na Ao-chan (6), Miru Tights (7), Fate UBW S1 (9) / S2 (10), Your Lie in April (9), Haganai (10).

Check out my blog at http://yossanime.com/
Lastest post: Morality-Based Artistic Critique is Bunk, Part 3
 
Jul 22, 4:57 PM

Offline
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 5117
YossaRedMage said:
Nice one Glenn, I immediately prefer it with your rewording. But I still find the sentiment kind of... it just seems like such a negative, cynical view to have. I mean... it will be true for some hard to please people, but I think I would say I "like" about 75-80% of anime I've watched. Nowhere near 10%. People who literally think 90% of anime are bad, well... that's kind of sad and I have to wonder if those people might be wasting their time watching anime unless those 10% of anime they do like are just orgasmically good for them.
The people who think that Sturgeon's Law means something to them are probably people who are the pickier type in the first place, I'd guess.

But yeah, I think for most people there's going to be a natural bias toward only checking out those things that one has a probable predilection to like. There's no way to consume all the anime ever, so everyone has to pick and choose one way or another. The "Sturgeon's Law statistic" simply includes all those things in a given medium that people aren't interested in watching (or reading or playing or whatever).
 
Jul 23, 4:20 AM

Offline
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1849
"The phrase was derived from Sturgeon's observation that while science fiction was often derided for its low quality by critics, the majority of examples of works in other fields could equally be seen to be of low quality, and that science fiction was thus no different in that regard from other art forms."

So mainly this is a defence against "I watched 2 animes from this genre and it's crap...thus its fans are idiots." .

For me Sturgeon's law is more of a psychological observation "people perceive 90% of anything as crap".
Like the proverbial cherry picking - you have a bowl full of cherries: some of them will be not ripe enough, others will be overripe or damaged, others ripe but small...only around 10% will be the best from the pile.
Also different people will have different 10% from this same pile.


@PrudenceRay
I think most anime and manga have a low budget. Japan is a small country. Asian countries cannot compare with high budget entertainment produced in Western countries. They can't compete money wise. This is not criticism or insult, it is the truth. I am from an Asian country myself.

And yet Japan produces as much comics as the rest of the world together and beats every single country on number of animation projects.
In such big numbers and variety of products there is better chance to find something for your unique taste.

Also bigger budgets or not some observers are saying that the biggest USA comics companies are recently on decline and loose money from direct sells.
Many authors are migrating towards independent publishing, which means lower budget but creative freedom: more ways to manoeuvre around what the readers are really wanting to get as product.


@PrudenceRay
Maybe that's why they say anime is low quality. They have other options in the west. They have seen stuff with better, higher budget animation and stuff.

Can you give us some examples like from the year 2019 that rival in technical quality titles like Dororo 2019 (which actually had some problems), Mob Psycho 100 II, Kaguya-sama wa Kokurasetai: Tensai-tachi no Ren`ai Zunousen, Kimetsu no Yaiba, Kanata no Astra, En`en no Shouboutai and Lord El-Melloi II-sei no Jikenbo: Rail Zeppelin Grace Note and Vinland Saga?
Yes, some cherry picking from my part but you can do some cherry picking too!


Maybe Carmen Sandiego, Young Justice S3 (which is not as good visually as the first two seasons), Dragon Prince S2 and Gen:Lock.

Duck Tales is continuing from 2018 so it doesn't count.

The others are some low budget titles for kids or Adult Swim obscenities.
Or maybe I am missing something? (Like I don't have access to a lot of stuff.)

Also take note that most of those - japanese or western are actually animated in Korea, China ect.
 
Jul 23, 2:41 PM
Offline
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 31059
alshu said:
"The phrase was derived from Sturgeon's observation that while science fiction was often derided for its low quality by critics, the majority of examples of works in other fields could equally be seen to be of low quality, and that science fiction was thus no different in that regard from other art forms."

So mainly this is a defence against "I watched 2 animes from this genre and it's crap...thus its fans are idiots." .

For me Sturgeon's law is more of a psychological observation "people perceive 90% of anything as crap".
Like the proverbial cherry picking - you have a bowl full of cherries: some of them will be not ripe enough, others will be overripe or damaged, others ripe but small...only around 10% will be the best from the pile.
Also different people will have different 10% from this same pile.


@PrudenceRay
I think most anime and manga have a low budget. Japan is a small country. Asian countries cannot compare with high budget entertainment produced in Western countries. They can't compete money wise. This is not criticism or insult, it is the truth. I am from an Asian country myself.

And yet Japan produces as much comics as the rest of the world together and beats every single country on number of animation projects.
In such big numbers and variety of products there is better chance to find something for your unique taste.

Also bigger budgets or not some observers are saying that the biggest USA comics companies are recently on decline and loose money from direct sells.
Many authors are migrating towards independent publishing, which means lower budget but creative freedom: more ways to manoeuvre around what the readers are really wanting to get as product.


@PrudenceRay
Maybe that's why they say anime is low quality. They have other options in the west. They have seen stuff with better, higher budget animation and stuff.

Can you give us some examples like from the year 2019 that rival in technical quality titles like Dororo 2019 (which actually had some problems), Mob Psycho 100 II, Kaguya-sama wa Kokurasetai: Tensai-tachi no Ren`ai Zunousen, Kimetsu no Yaiba, Kanata no Astra, En`en no Shouboutai and Lord El-Melloi II-sei no Jikenbo: Rail Zeppelin Grace Note and Vinland Saga?
Yes, some cherry picking from my part but you can do some cherry picking too!


Maybe Carmen Sandiego, Young Justice S3 (which is not as good visually as the first two seasons), Dragon Prince S2 and Gen:Lock.

Duck Tales is continuing from 2018 so it doesn't count.

The others are some low budget titles for kids or Adult Swim obscenities.
Or maybe I am missing something? (Like I don't have access to a lot of stuff.)

Also take note that most of those - japanese or western are actually animated in Korea, China ect.


The Arcadia series just came out with a new season and those always look crisp.

Listen, everybody wants change, don't nobody want to change though
don't nobody want to pray, till they got something to pray for
now everybody's gonna die, but don't everybody live though
 
Jul 23, 2:53 PM

Offline
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1849
Pullman said:

The Arcadia series

1. Never heard of it (Man the visuals look creepy!). Not a fan of Trollhunters tho.
2. My point is different here - like despite everything PrudenceRay said, Japan is flooding the market with relatively good stuff.
The west has some separate very high quality titles like ATLA, the new Voltron or whatever but the rest is "very low effort script and simple geometric forms on episode but tons of it" mentality.
I like even simply looking stuff like The Hollow but obviously the west is not that interested of such types of stories. It wants "keep the kids busy with shiny things", recognizable brands or melodrama like the new She-Ra (adventure, action...where?) or Adventure Time (ironically not much adventures in it).

Everything nowadays tries to give you THE FEELS by force...many japanese titles too but at least there are some anime that aren't.
Modified by alshu, Jul 23, 11:25 PM
 
Jul 23, 4:01 PM
Offline
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 31059
alshu said:
Pullman said:

The Arcadia series

1. Never heard of it (Man the visuals look creepy!). Not a fan of Trollhunters tho.
2. My point is different here - like dispute everything PrudenceRay said, Japan is flooding the market with relatively good stuff.
The west has some separate very high quality titles like ATLA, the new Voltron or whatever but the rest is "very low effort script and simple geometric forms on episode but tons of it" mentality.
I like even simply looking stuff like The Hollow but obviously the west is not that interested of such types of stories. It wants "keep the kids busy with shiny things", recognizable brands or melodrama like the new She-Ra (adventure, action...where?) or Adventure Time (ironically not much adventures in it).

Everything nowadays tries to give you THE FEELS by force...many japanese titles too but at least there are some anime that aren't.


It's not like I disagree about the quantity or about that other guy talking bullshit about japan being a small country and not having enough money (Japan has literally more money and more population than any western country except the US), but I don't think you're being fair either. At least I thought we were talking about animation quality and the likes, not about how much you personally dig the designs or artstyle, which is how it sounds when you talk about 'simple geometric forms' and they way you talk about the Arcadia visuals despite there being nothing wrong with them from a neutral perspective.

Trollhunters/3 from Below/Arcadia has great (3D) animation from start to finish, the writing and directing is pretty good as well thanks to Del Toro and it's just overall very charming and, tbh, the visuals look less wonky than those for Dragon Prince which you already listed as an example (and which I also liked, but it has much more jarring CG that definitely took a while getting used to for me). No idea how the Trollhunter/Arcadia visuals look 'creepy', they just remind me of any well animated Pixar movie and the likes. Like How to tame a Dragon (which also had a pretty good series in addition to the movies btw).

There's plenty of other shows with good animation/visuals as well, they just fall more into the comedy or social commentary category which, for some reason, anime fans tend to completely ignore and treat like it's not actual animation. Stuff like Bojack Horseman or Tuca & Bertie or Adventure Time or Rick and Morty is visually creative and has very interesting scriptwork as well and I don't even think the animation is worse than for most anime, it is just different.

One of the main things is that western animation is more likely to animate the whole screen, foreground and background, while anime tends to zone in on one event and barely animate the background. Shows like Bojack or Tuce & Bertie have so much going on in the background, where in anime you'd often just have still images of background art, or at worst some badly animated CG characters looking identical to each other. All those things are part of the overall animation quality and visual appeal, even if you maybe only care about the designs and the action animation.

I love animation, and seeing a show fully utilize backgrounds and stuff like that is a real pleasure compared to the more static way most anime scenes use animation. That started way back with Disney and having one animator per character, not per scene, and it still prevails while anime went down a different road of having animators for scenes, not characters, and generally trying to save as much budget as possible thanks to Tezuka wanting to make anime as cheap as possible to produce. Pre-Tezuka you seem some anime which have this more dynamic disney-like style of animation, but afterwards it mostly disappeared except for like high budget movies.

Anime animation has higher peaks, as in the sakuga scenes, but even for a lot of the better looking shows those are pretty rare and in between you have a lot of basic ass animation or stills or other budget saving techniques that give the illusion of animation without actually having a lot of it (reusing frames, recaps, mouth flaps, panning etc...) that are much less present in western animation which tends to have one constant level of quality that is worse than the sakuga scenes but better than the average non-sakuga scene in anime.

Anime fans only ever remember the sakuga scenes and judge and label shows based on the extremes of animation quality they display, but I look more at the average scene. After all the great scenes tend to only be a few % of any given anime so you can't judge shows based on that. It makes more sense to judge anime on all the scenes with still and mouth flaps and minimal animation, or trying to take both into account.

Anime simply tends to put more effort into the designs and less into animation, which honestly is not a great way of utilizing the animation medium if you ask me. Do characters really need eyes that take hours to draw, rather than more simple designs with less complex eye designs but better and more dynamic animation? Even shows like Mob Psycho, which do stand out in terms of animation, can only do so because their character designs are not as complex and detailed as those of the average modern anime, and they don't have eyes that take 4 hours to draw.

Japan's fetish for designs over animation is fine when it comes to the top tier shows like Violet Evergarden which excel at both, but for the majority of seasonals the animation is very unexciting and honestly worse than for the average western animation series with simpler designs but much more consistent animation. So in my experience it's the opposite from what you say, anime is the medium that has a few amazing outliers but the vast majority are mass-produced with very basic animation and not much that stands out about them, while western animation is smaller in numbers but has better average animation and arguable a higher percentage of standout shows. Or at least their standout shows tend to get more seasons and not end as unfinished adaptions and glorified commercials for the source material.

Also I'm pretty sure the guy you replied to was more talking about stuff like disney and Pixar movies. And anime can't really compete with those in terms of the money. But in any case I'm not agreeing with him, I'm just arguing against some of the generalizations you made about western animation quality. It's a complicated topics, and both sides sacrifice some things to excel in others so having a strong preference in either direction is fine even I can't relate to that, but it can't just be brushed off as a definite difference in quality of effort.

So I just disagree with trashing the animation quality and writing of western animation. I also disagree that their designs are bad just because they're more simplistic on average. For me comics and animation are more about stylized depictions than hyperrealism or hyperdetailed designs, I had to pick one or the other. But that's simply a matter of personal taste so there is no point in arguing about it while I do think I have a case in terms of animation quality and writing that isn't just about my personal taste.

Listen, everybody wants change, don't nobody want to change though
don't nobody want to pray, till they got something to pray for
now everybody's gonna die, but don't everybody live though
 
Jul 23, 7:36 PM
Offline
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 6
PrudenceRay said:
Also, do we even know if Sturgeon's law is legit and correct? Has it been verified?


Sturgeon's law isn't a real law or anything. It's based on an off the cuff remark from a sci-fi author as a way to defend sci-fi as a worthwhile genre when it wasn't being taken seriously. The point isn't literally that exactly 90% of all pieces of media are crap it's that the vast majority of any type of media isn't really worthwhile. What is lumped into the "actually good" category is largely a matter of personal taste assuming you've had enough exposure to the thing being talked about to have an informed opinion on it.
 
Jul 24, 1:12 AM

Offline
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1849
Wow, wall of text.
Will fight it brick by brick.


Pullman said:
but I don't think you're being fair either.

Missing the point?
I am not saying that the west is incapable of...just the way it produces animated shows and invests in them is different...thus Japan releasing more watcheble stuff.


Pullman said:
not about how much you personally dig the designs or artstyle, which is how it sounds when you talk about 'simple geometric forms'

Yeah the The Amazing World of Gumball, Secret Mountain Fort Awesome and Teen Titans Go looking so gorgeous, elaborated and being a technical miracle to animate.


Pullman said:
and they way you talk about the Arcadia visuals despite there being nothing wrong with them from a neutral perspective.

I said that it looks creepy and that I don't know anything about the show except it's kind of connected to Trollhinters (which I didn't like thus not interested by its spinoffs).
Maybe it's supposed to look creepy?
Aren't you reading too much in my post?


Pullman said:
Trollhunters/3 from Below/Arcadia has great (3D) animation from start to finish, the writing and directing is pretty good as well thanks to Del Toro and it's just overall very charming and, tbh, the visuals look less wonky than those for Dragon Prince which you already listed as an example (and which I also liked, but it has much more jarring CG that definitely took a while getting used to for me).

Yeah, the DP is a bit wonky but my point was to list shows that are not mass produced fillers. If you insist I will swap it with Arcadia.


Pullman said:
No idea how the Trollhunter/Arcadia visuals look 'creepy'


Google returned this to me:



If it's not creepy to you...


Pullman said:
they just remind me of any well animated Pixar movie and the likes. Like How to tame a Dragon (which also had a pretty good series in addition to the movies btw).

And I was asking about certain period of time not about what is worthy from the whole history of animation. If I had such ambitions it would be a very very long list.
I was curious to know what the OP wanted to say, give some examples...


Pullman said:
There's plenty of other shows with good animation/visuals as well, they just fall more into the comedy or social commentary category which, for some reason, anime fans tend to completely ignore and treat like it's not actual animation. Stuff like Bojack Horseman or Tuca & Bertie or Adventure Time or Rick and Morty is visually creative and has very interesting scriptwork as well and I don't even think the animation is worse than for most anime, it is just different.

And I was talking about the technical aspects not the writing but your example is kind of wrong because Adventure Time and Rick & Morty have same elaborated animation but they are kind of exception for what CN and Adult Swim are producing.
Didn't listed them just because I was asking for examples from a short period of time: from the begging of 2019 till now (season 4 of Rick and Morty not yet released).


Pullman said:
One of the main things is that western animation is more likely to animate the whole screen, foreground and background, while anime tends to zone in on one event and barely animate the background. Shows like Bojack or Tuce & Bertie have so much going on in the background, where in anime you'd often just have still images of background art, or at worst some badly animated CG characters looking identical to each other. All those things are part of the overall animation quality and visual appeal, even if you maybe only care about the designs and the action animation.

Not sure about this Tuce thing but Bojack has super simplified design and backgrounds - not that hard to animate it.


Pullman said:

I love animation, and seeing a show fully utilize backgrounds and stuff like that is a real pleasure compared to the more static way most anime scenes use animation. That started way back with Disney and having one animator per character, not per scene, and it still prevails while anime went down a different road of having animators for scenes, not characters, and generally trying to save as much budget as possible thanks to Tezuka wanting to make anime as cheap as possible to produce. Pre-Tezuka you seem some anime which have this more dynamic disney-like style of animation, but afterwards it mostly disappeared except for like high budget movies.

Good for you...but it's missing in the most of the western animated productions too.


Pullman said:

Anime animation has higher peaks, as in the sakuga scenes, but even for a lot of the better looking shows those are pretty rare and in between you have a lot of basic ass animation or stills or other budget saving techniques that give the illusion of animation without actually having a lot of it (reusing frames, recaps, mouth flaps, panning etc...) that are much less present in western animation which tends to have one constant level of quality that is worse than the sakuga scenes but better than the average non-sakuga scene in anime.

Anime fans only ever remember the sakuga scenes and judge and label shows based on the extremes of animation quality they display, but I look more at the average scene. After all the great scenes tend to only be a few % of any given anime so you can't judge shows based on that. It makes more sense to judge anime on all the scenes with still and mouth flaps and minimal animation, or trying to take both into account.

Generally yes but there is fully animated stuff only in relatively small number of western productions. The most of the others cut corners like anime or use oversimplified movements.


Pullman said:

Anime simply tends to put more effort into the designs and less into animation, which honestly is not a great way of utilizing the animation medium if you ask me.

Stop watching anime then?


Pullman said:
Do characters really need eyes that take hours to draw, rather than more simple designs with less complex eye designs but better and more dynamic animation?

It's a different way to express yourself artistically...can't see it as "worst".



Pullman said:
but for the majority of seasonals the animation is very unexciting and honestly worse than for the average western animation series with simpler designs but much more consistent animation.

In theory yes but your shows with "average western animation" are kind of missing most of the time...because they are average by comparison to other titles not by numbers of produced projects...which is my major complaint.


Pullman said:
So in my experience it's the opposite from what you say, anime is the medium that has a few amazing outliers but the vast majority are mass-produced with very basic animation and not much that stands out about them, while western animation is smaller in numbers but has better average animation and arguable a higher percentage of standout shows.

- There are tons of mass produced crap you are ignoring.
- See above for average.


Pullman said:
Or at least their standout shows tend to get more seasons and not end as unfinished adaptions and glorified commercials for the source material.

Yeah like 2/3 the western stuff is not glorified commercials for toys/comics or some attempt the create merchandise hype.


Pullman said:
I'm just arguing against some of the generalizations you made about western animation quality.

I still stand by them.


Pullman said:
I can't relate to that, but it can't just be brushed off as a definite difference in quality of effort.

So you don't get what I am saying at all.
It's the way how the projects are picked up and invested in that leads to such differences...not that some artists are not capable or lazy or absurd things like that.


Pullman said:
So I just disagree with trashing the animation quality

A was trashing it?
Obviously not in the way you are thinking I am.


Pullman said:
and writing of western animation.

I trashed the writing too?


Pullman said:
I also disagree that their designs are bad just because they're more simplistic on average.

Bad is kind of a relative term.
My point was that the majority are way too simplified shows with way too simplified designs.
Maybe "not ambitious enough" is more correct. The companies just want to fill their programming or streaming catalogues with cheaply made shows...resulting in lower average quality.


Pullman said:
For me comics and animation are more about stylized depictions than hyperrealism or hyperdetailed designs

Yes there are minimalistic styles but also there is "no f***s given" approach.


Pullman said:
But that's simply a matter of personal taste

But I am not talking about taste...
I talk about what types of shows are produced and with what budgets.
Modified by alshu, Jul 24, 1:19 AM
 
Jul 24, 8:07 AM

Offline
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 300
I use it for genres/cliches in media that don't interest me. And, I use it subjectively because 90% of ideas that don't interest me won't be to my liking. I never use it to enforce others to follow it. It's my own taste, and I don't need to waste time watching something just because it's hailed as superior in its own genre I don't prefer. Similarly, I shouldn't dismiss it and say, "well, all shows from X genre are crap, therefore it's bad".

I hate looking at genres and completely brushing them off because "X genre is all crap/inferior/just plain bad", I have preferences, but it doesn't mean I would dismiss every show from the genres I don't like. However, many just opt to go that route which is unfortunate imo, (see any ecchi/harem/isekai/battle-shounen thread and their comments). I like to judge a show by its execution. This is my own subjective way of looking at things, if you want to go on an say "X genre is all bad" go at it, I personally don't like looking at things that way. For me, it's the same as disliking a show, yet I can still like certain arcs/scenes/characteristics within that show--if I have a genre I don't like, I can still find shows that I enjoy from it.
You can dislike these genres, as well as shows from such genres, but saying everything is automatically bad because they're labelled as such genre isn't my ideal way to judge things. That's why I use this "law".
Modified by foxsuprise, Jul 24, 8:22 AM


Thanks Nintendo
 
Jul 24, 9:14 AM
Offline
Joined: Oct 2018
Posts: 92
PrudenceRay said:
I am into anime, manga and I also read fiction books.

You know what general public thinks of anime, you have probably heard it.

Some people genuinely are interested in the genre. They give it a fair chance. I have met some of such people online and a few irl too.

Sometimes after encountering a lot of disappointing material, people will ask, "why does this genre suck?" And the fans and even makers of said genre sometimes say, it is coz of Sturgeon's law. ie in oversimplified terms, 90% of everything is crap. (Such discussions also usually turn into nitpicking, throwing personal insults, strawman arguments and more.) This happens in both anime/ manga and fiction books.

Sometimes I wonder if it is a cop out...

One time some fiction fans said to me if something is popular and you don't like it, you are the problem, or there is something wrong with you, not the genre, not the majority.

So which one is it?

I can't help but feel like people will say whatever supports their preferred narrative.


I have had enough exposure to feel that yes popularity =/= quality is true.

Also, do we even know if Sturgeon's law is legit and correct? Has it been verified?

I think most anime and manga have a low budget. Japan is a small country. Asian countries cannot compare with high budget entertainment produced in Western countries. They can't compete money wise. This is not criticism or insult, it is the truth. I am from an Asian country myself.

Often, higher budget means you can afford the best- the best writers, animators, marketing teams and more. People in Western countries have more money, so consumers are willing to spend more too. That's how it works there.

Maybe that's why they say anime is low quality. They have other options in the west. They have seen stuff with better, higher budget animation and stuff.

So if someone said anime and manga are low quality, I would say well they have a much smaller budget compared to the west so yes, in some ways they are. But they are doing their best with what they have.
That is not an insult of anime or their makers or their fans. Compared to the west like Disney and cartoon Network, marvel and DC comics, etc Japanese anime and manga makers definitely have very little money and resources.

Mangakas, except the very top ones, have to take on more than one project and work very hard, just to make rent.

So in that sense, it limits their quality in some ways. It is not an attack on their talent or creativity nor on the tastes of their fans.

Yet I am yet to find an instance when one would state this opinion without being chewed out and viciously attacked. The fans usually take great offence. They defend and justify that no it is not true and attack the person and their taste.

Also, I read somewhere that in order to churn out as much material as they can, in order to produce quantity, esp lately, quality of anime and manga is being compromised. (Quora, I think)

Some people say, oh you are not going for the right stuff. Sometimes people have tried it and not liked it. Or sometimes they have to scour an entire genre for hours and hours to find something they find watchable. And it makes them wonder why are they doing this? Is entertainment supposed to be so much hard work? It defeats the purpose. They feel drained and give up on the genre.

Well just some grievances I have heard about anime from other people. Interestingly, I have similar complaints about certain fiction book genre. Maybe that is ehy, I am looking at it from this angle.

I for one, if I am being completely honest to myself, feel like there is an element of truth in the criticism and opinions people have of anime and manga and fiction books as well.

I know. That is why I watch them by myself and don't overdshare with others. They don't find it appealing and dismiss it as "garbage". Hey so does Hayao Miyazaki.

And I for one also feel we don't have to take it personally as if they are insulting our mothers. It is entertainment. It is for fun. If is okay. Whatever.
I am definitely not attacking anyone when I say anything critical about fiction books.

Just coz we love something does not mean it doesn't have flaws or it cannot be improved or cannot evolve with the times or with new audiences.

I think being honest to ourselves and accepting that yes it may have flaws is a sign of strength not weakness. That is how a genre evolves and makes progress rather than being stagnant.

Peace.

Edit: some results that come up:

https://www.thetoptens.com/reasons-why-anime-sucks/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/mybrainiscompletelyempty.wordpress.com/2017/08/14/top-ten-reasons-why-anime-sucks/amp/

https://www.japanpowered.com/anime-articles/anime-annoyances-poor-storytelling
.................

Regarding fiction books,

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/books/booksblog/2016/apr/18/romance-novels-badly-written-curtis-sittenfeld-eligible-pride-and-prejudice

The comments on this article are interesting too.

See, writers legit cite Sturgeon's law to defend rather than sincerely consider criticism and work on improvement. It is the same circlejerk. Am I the only one who feels this is counterproductive? And isn't it hypocritic? Either your work is crap and you are admitting it using Sturgeon's law or it is not crap, then, why are you being so defensive in the first place? The hypocrisy seems lost upon them. Which one is it?


can i give my opinion as a half japanese who grew up in japan? i am asian too so i really understand that here in asia we don't have that much of a budget compared to western. but that doesn't mean we have shitty story writer here. storytelling is really affected by culture and language.we tend to like kind of story that we grew up with. in asia or at least in the country where my father grew up affected a lot by japanese culture and that is what encouraged my father to move to japan. if you grew up with american comics then you will like story that similar to it.

most of people tend to watch dubbed anime or anime with subs. the question is, what is better? subs or dubs? the answer is not both. you can't fully understand anime or manga story if you don't understand japanese at least on middle or high school level. there are people who said "why japanese comedy sucks?". is it really sucks? or it is only your brain so sucks that you can't understand that comedy is cultural. you may be wondering why detective conan beat avengers sale? one of the reason is because we grew up with it.

for the quality of the animation i will be honest with you, it is because animator doesn't paid well here. the most of the income went to directors, script writers, voice actors, etc. most of animator love their jobs so they don't mind with their salary, especially when they already used to it. a newcomer animator said why they didn't mind with low salary because even more senior and talented animator isn't paid well too. there are more anime aired every season compared to past, because of this they are forced to decreased the quality.
 
Jul 24, 10:30 AM
Offline
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 31059
alshu said:
Wow, wall of text.
Will fight it brick by brick.

Okay nice, so you're already set on 'fighting', not even considering the possibility that I might have a point and you don't have to 'fight' everything I say despite me pretty much clarifying that I only take issue with a few specific things you said and have no intention of defending the guy you replied to. I don't see this ending well with this kind of battle mentality, but whatever.

Pullman said:
but I don't think you're being fair either.

Missing the point?
I am not saying that the west is incapable of...just the way it produces animated shows and invests in them is different...thus Japan releasing more watcheble stuff.

what the fuck does 'watchable' mean? It's stuff like that which I take issue with. It means nothing. At beast it means stuff you personally find to be enjoyable to watch. Good for you. It's neither criticism of western animation nor praise for anime tho, just you telling me about your taste and preferences. You don't need to convince me that you prefer anime, I already believe that.

I thought your point was that western animation was 'very low effort' compared to anime, and I'm here to dispute that. You keep telling me what you prefer, but not actually any neutral arguments to back up your claim. I spent a whole wall of text explaining the differences between western animation and anime and how they are just differences, not 'better' or 'worse'. You prefer one side, I get it, that's totally fair, but my point still stands. Throwing around words like 'watchable' and 'creepy' which have absolutely no objective meaning in that context does not constitute an argument.


Pullman said:
not about how much you personally dig the designs or artstyle, which is how it sounds when you talk about 'simple geometric forms'

Yeah the The Amazing World of Gumball, Secret Mountain Fort Awesome and Teen Titans Go looking so gorgeous, elaborated and being a technical miracle to animate.

idk how listing random shows will make talking about 'simple geometric forms' anymore of an argument that relates to actual animation quality. You seem to be missing the point.

Pullman said:
and they way you talk about the Arcadia visuals despite there being nothing wrong with them from a neutral perspective.

I said that it looks creepy and that I don't know anything about the show except it's kind of connected to Trollhinters (which I didn't like thus not interested by its spinoffs).
Maybe it's supposed to look creepy?
Aren't you reading too much in my post?


You keep using utterly subjective, feels-based terms like 'creepy' to establish some kind of objective judgment of the designs being worse or generally less appealing and seem completely oblivious to the fact that calling something 'creepy' is a statement of no objective value, all it tells me is about your taste in artstyles and what you consider vaguely 'creepy', but you treat it like it says something about the technical value or effort put into something. I can't really say the same thing in more different ways, if you still don't understand why I'm taking issue with you trashtalking western animation based on completely feels-based adjectives like 'creepy' then don't bother replying again.





Pullman said:
No idea how the Trollhunter/Arcadia visuals look 'creepy'


Google returned this to me:



If it's not creepy to you...


No idea where you found that zoomed in, low-res youtube thumbnail but it makes a lot of sense to judge a whole franchise based on it instead of just, idk, watching the trailer for 30 seconds or looking at literally any other official poster that isn't as randomly pixelated and zoomed in.


Does this look bad to you? Neither the designs nor the animation looks bad or creepy to me. Idc if you like the content, but I do take issue when you attack the visuals of one of the better looking full-3D animated franchises out there.

Pullman said:
they just remind me of any well animated Pixar movie and the likes. Like How to tame a Dragon (which also had a pretty good series in addition to the movies btw).

And I was asking about certain period of time not about what is worthy from the whole history of animation. If I had such ambitions it would be a very very long list.
I was curious to know what the OP wanted to say, give some examples...

And I mentioned 3fromBelow and Trollhunters because they released a combined 3 seasons in the last 14 months, it doesn't get much more recent than that.


Pullman said:
There's plenty of other shows with good animation/visuals as well, they just fall more into the comedy or social commentary category which, for some reason, anime fans tend to completely ignore and treat like it's not actual animation. Stuff like Bojack Horseman or Tuca & Bertie or Adventure Time or Rick and Morty is visually creative and has very interesting scriptwork as well and I don't even think the animation is worse than for most anime, it is just different.

And I was talking about the technical aspects not the writing but your example is kind of wrong because Adventure Time and Rick & Morty have same elaborated animation but they are kind of exception for what CN and Adult Swim are producing.
Didn't listed them just because I was asking for examples from a short period of time: from the begging of 2019 till now (season 4 of Rick and Morty not yet released).

They still have more consistent and less sakuga-based animation, and they have simplistic designs that take less time to draw compared to anime designs and their fancy eyes and clothes, making it easier for them to have consistently good animation. Hence why I listed them to explain the differences between good animation in anime and good animation in western shows.

Pullman said:
One of the main things is that western animation is more likely to animate the whole screen, foreground and background, while anime tends to zone in on one event and barely animate the background. Shows like Bojack or Tuce & Bertie have so much going on in the background, where in anime you'd often just have still images of background art, or at worst some badly animated CG characters looking identical to each other. All those things are part of the overall animation quality and visual appeal, even if you maybe only care about the designs and the action animation.

Not sure about this Tuce thing but Bojack has super simplified design and backgrounds - not that hard to animate it.

That just made me facepalm. I mean, yes, that was the whole point I was trying to explain, why western animation is better animated on average and more consistent. Because they choose simplistic designs and consistent animation over complex designs and budget saving animation. Not sure why you're telling me this, I'm the one who made that point.

Pullman said:

I love animation, and seeing a show fully utilize backgrounds and stuff like that is a real pleasure compared to the more static way most anime scenes use animation. That started way back with Disney and having one animator per character, not per scene, and it still prevails while anime went down a different road of having animators for scenes, not characters, and generally trying to save as much budget as possible thanks to Tezuka wanting to make anime as cheap as possible to produce. Pre-Tezuka you seem some anime which have this more dynamic disney-like style of animation, but afterwards it mostly disappeared except for like high budget movies.

Good for you...but it's missing in the most of the western animated productions too.

Not really, not to the same degree. I even listed a bunch of recent shows that always have a lot going on the background. Of course they won't compare to disney classics, but that is not the point. The principle is the same, just executed to different degrees, while anime goes for a completely different animation system from the start. Anime barely has shows like that where you consistently get movement and animation all over the screen. Nichijou is one of the only TV series that comes to mind. In a lot of western animation it is the norm, even when it isn't done as fancily as in disney movies themselves.


Pullman said:

Anime animation has higher peaks, as in the sakuga scenes, but even for a lot of the better looking shows those are pretty rare and in between you have a lot of basic ass animation or stills or other budget saving techniques that give the illusion of animation without actually having a lot of it (reusing frames, recaps, mouth flaps, panning etc...) that are much less present in western animation which tends to have one constant level of quality that is worse than the sakuga scenes but better than the average non-sakuga scene in anime.

Anime fans only ever remember the sakuga scenes and judge and label shows based on the extremes of animation quality they display, but I look more at the average scene. After all the great scenes tend to only be a few % of any given anime so you can't judge shows based on that. It makes more sense to judge anime on all the scenes with still and mouth flaps and minimal animation, or trying to take both into account.

Generally yes but there is fully animated stuff only in relatively small number of western productions. The most of the others cut corners like anime or use oversimplified movements.

again, it doesn't need to literally be full animation like in disney classics to still be considerably 'fuller' animation than you see in most anime. And of course TV shows always cut corners compared to movies, but once again, my point is that western shows cut corners more in terms of the complexity and levels of detail in the designs, while anime has historically been cutting corners almost exclusively in the animation department.


Pullman said:

Anime simply tends to put more effort into the designs and less into animation, which honestly is not a great way of utilizing the animation medium if you ask me.

Stop watching anime then?


Wow, what a comeback. You continue to prove your rhetoric prowess incompetence. Throwing some snarky comment whenever you lack arguments is not gonna make you look better. Next time just don't reply to the parts you don't have anything to say about. Deal?

But just for the sake of it: I can criticize what I like and view it through an unbiased lens. That doesn't mean I don't enjoy it or don't want to watch it. The fact that you don't seem to be able to comprehend that based on a snarky comment like this, just makes me sad. So no, I'm not gonna stop watching something I love just because I realize that from an unbiased perspective there are some issues with it that can be critized or at least questioned.


Pullman said:
Do characters really need eyes that take hours to draw, rather than more simple designs with less complex eye designs but better and more dynamic animation?

It's a different way to express yourself artistically...can't see it as "worst".

just trying to call attention to the fact that depending on your perspective the anime approach can be criticized just as much as the western approach since you've only been criticizing the western approach of having more simplistic designs. There's no better or worse here, just different approaches.

But even japanese animators themselves have complained about the eyes taking up 80% of their time or something ridiculous like that. I really don't think it adds that much to any given show that it is worth that much time and effort. Putting that time and effort elsewhere would probably be more efficient, or even just allow animators to not have to work themselves to death trying to make deadlines. I see little downside in toning down the overall complexity of eye designs in anime a bit. It doesn't need to go back to just blck dots, but there is a lot of middle room.



Pullman said:
but for the majority of seasonals the animation is very unexciting and honestly worse than for the average western animation series with simpler designs but much more consistent animation.

In theory yes but your shows with "average western animation" are kind of missing most of the time...because they are average by comparison to other titles not by numbers of produced projects...which is my major complaint. [/quote
Sorry but I sincerely don't understand what you are trying to say with this sentence. Are you trying to say that there are less western animation series? If so, when did I ever say otherwise? The average animation is still better imo, because the average doesn't care about the overall amount of shows.
If you meant something else, please try to rephrase, idk how 'average animation' can be missing 'most of the time'. That just makes no semantic sense to me. I'm genuinely confused.



- There are tons of mass produced crap you are ignoring.
- See above for average.


both sides having mass produced 'crap' doesn't really change the overall comparison of the average animation tho.

But I think I see what the issue is. My whole point was to demonstrate that if western animation has good animation, it is constantly good, throughout the whole episode. In anime, even the better animated shows, have a lot of downtime with mediocre and limited animation and techniques like panning, zooming, mouth flaps, stills or minimal animation. That's simply how anime was historically conceived, it is an approach irrevocably tied to its production since the first TV anime.

So you get a few minutes of very good animation per episode, while with western shows you get 20 minutes of good animation per 20 minutes. That's what I'm talking about when I say average, how many minutes of actual good animation we get to see. I admitted that anime peaks higher, but even the best animated anime only have a relative low number of minutes of really good animation, which means if you average if out over their whole duration the consistency of western animation wins out. The same goes on a larger scale for the whole medium. Consistency is a much more valuable variable when talking about 'average' animation quality than sakuga scenes are. That was my whole point.

Mass-produced titles being a thing doesn't change any of that. I'll admit that I'm not that knowledgable about lower-tier western animation, but I have a hard time imagining it is consistently worse animated than lower tier anime seasonals which I have a lot of experience with.



Yeah like 2/3 the western stuff is not glorified commercials for toys/comics or some attempt the create merchandise hype.

Do you have any source for that? I don't think western animation uses the same production committee model that is based on having a handful of different sponsors all try to market their products through one anime. Wanting to cash in on the popularity of a show by then marketing merchandise related to it is not the same as making an anime just to advertise already existing toys or games or whatever.

And if you read carefully what I wrote, I talked about standout shows. I don't think any of the top-tier western animation series I watched in the last X years were based on a source material, nevermind their main measure of success being how much it improved the sales of the comic. That just doesn't tend to be how western animated series work. It's more often the other way around, that games and comics and whatnot pop up after the show becomes successful based on its original concept. With anime even among the best shows a lot of them are adaptions and for a lot of those it is never guaranteed there will be more than one season, nevermind a complete and finished adaption. That's the problem with adaptions. You can deny it all you want, I've seen way more than enough anime to know that it's a widespread issue of the medium. Nothing but cold, hard data will convince me that anime doesn't have a huge percentage of unfinished shows and a much lower percentage of original stories that aren't based on any pre-existing source material.



I still stand by them.

Congrats on caring more about being stubborn than about the reality of things, I guess?
On half my points you just completely didn't get what I was trying to say and on the other half you seem to be completely misinformed.



So you don't get what I am saying at all.
It's the way how the projects are picked up and invested in that leads to such differences...not that some artists are not capable or lazy or absurd things like that.


I mean I agree that the differences between western animation and anime are mostly based on business models and historical developments, not on talent or anything like that. It's just that your portrayal of the differences is utterly biased and one-sided and pretends everything the west does is worse and not just different, which is just plain wrong. You just sound like you're desperate to portray your own preference for the anime way of doing things as being rooted in it being objectively better or 'higher effort' or however you want to phrase it, instead of just admitting that it's simply a matter of preferences and different strengths of weakness.

I can admit the strengths and weaknesses of both sides, and appreciate either of them for their strengths (which is why I can criticize anime and, while you sound like you can only appreciate anime for its strengths, downplaying it's weaknesses, and doing it the other way round for western animation. That's why I take issue with your approach, because it is inherently biased and one-sided and not fair or neutral at all, which is what I'm trying to be since I love animation in general, no matter where it geographicall comes from or what business model is behind it.



A was trashing it?
Obviously not in the way you are thinking I am.


I trashed the writing too?

I mean you literally said everything except the few shows you like has 'very low effort scripts' and the visuals are just 'geometrical forms'. How should I not interpret that as you looking down on western animation? I don't have those kind of mental gymnastic capabilities. I call it like I see it.








Pullman said:
But that's simply a matter of personal taste

But I am not talking about taste...
I talk about what types of shows are produced and with what budgets.


Wrong. You don't realize you are talking about taste because you're full of yourself and interpret your own value judgments and generalizations as neutral observations or objective values. But you very clearly are talking about taste from where I'm standing. I've tried not to do that, but repeatedly just clashed against this 'wall' of your preferences that makes you seemingly immune to neutral arguments and reason in some specific areas of this discussion.

For example, different types of shows being produced is just a difference. When you consistently kinda trash one side based on the types of shows it is producing then you are making a subjective value judgment that that type of show is worse or worth less than the types of shows you find in anime. You are free to have that preference, but I'm not gonna let it slide if you try to sell it as an objective difference in quality between the two mediums.

But okay, let's talk budgets. What is even your point about budgets? I don't see you making any specific one anywhere. Since you repeatedly called western animation cheap and mass-produced, does that mean you think it has lower budgets? If so, you could not be more wrong. Even cheap western shows have higher budgets than most anime, which is once again because of the fundamental difference in how shows are animated in the east and the west and the different business model.

Listen, everybody wants change, don't nobody want to change though
don't nobody want to pray, till they got something to pray for
now everybody's gonna die, but don't everybody live though
 
Jul 24, 3:53 PM

Offline
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1849
Pullman said:

Okay nice, so you're already set on 'fighting', not even considering the possibility that I might have a point and you don't have to 'fight' everything I say despite me pretty much clarifying that I only take issue with a few specific things you said and have no intention of defending the guy you replied to. I don't see this ending well with this kind of battle mentality, but whatever.

So you attack (with a wall of text) and expect me to be overwhelmed and just shut up?


Pullman said:
what the fuck does 'watchable' mean?

It means "not geometrical forms intended to stuck kid's focus on the TV screen".


Pullman said:
It means nothing.

If you pay attention to what I try to say it means something.


Pullman said:
You don't need to convince me that you prefer anime, I already believe that.

I don't prefer anime, I watch some western cartoons too but can't find enough of them.
It's not just that the western cartoons are mainly intended for kids...I watch kid's stuff to but a lot of those titles think that kids are not very demanding and just give them crap: visually and as content.
A lot of the adult western animation is crap too for some reason. Apparently adults that watch them have low demands too...if you ask the producers.


Pullman said:
I spent a whole wall of text explaining the differences between western animation and anime

I know about them but this is mostly on paper and in ideal conditions. In practice there is a lot of filler content in the west and it will balloon with the upcoming new streaming services.


Pullman said:
Throwing around words like 'watchable' and 'creepy' which have absolutely no objective meaning in that context does not constitute an argument.

Watchable was about some western shows being technically unwatchable and creepy is the only thing I know about Arcadia.


Pullman said:
idk how listing random shows will make talking about 'simple geometric forms' anymore of an argument that relates to actual animation quality. You seem to be missing the point.

1. To giving some examples...and most of the shows on CN and Nick look and behave like them.
2. Technical in this case means also oversimplified designs with the goal to be the easier to animate. Like you have more moving objects but their movements are plain (with no account of gravity inertia ect) and usually done through some looped vector animation.


Pullman said:
You keep using utterly subjective, feels-based terms like 'creepy' to establish some kind of objective judgment of the designs being worse or generally less appealing and seem completely oblivious to the fact that calling something 'creepy' is a statement of no objective value, all it tells me is about your taste in artstyles and what you consider vaguely 'creepy', but you treat it like it says something about the technical value or effort put into something. I can't really say the same thing in more different ways, if you still don't understand why I'm taking issue with you trashtalking western animation based on completely feels-based adjectives like 'creepy' then don't bother replying again.

Sorry but you sound a bit wacky here - I never said that Arcadia is technically bad, I never knew about it before you mentioned it, I even proposed to substitute it with Dragon Prince S02 (which by the way wasn't animated as clunky as S01) in my list with examples.
Why are you so obsessed with this show anyway? (A rhetorical question.)


Pullman said:
No idea where you found that zoomed in, low-res youtube thumbnail

Google returned it when I searched for Arcadia...as I said above...and is low-res/high-res so important here?


Pullman said:
but it makes a lot of sense to judge a whole franchise based on it instead of just, idk, watching the trailer for 30 seconds or looking at literally any other official poster that isn't as randomly pixelated and zoomed in.

I don't care about the franchise after the first season...and the picture looks creepy to me and this is not a form of criticism from my part.
Or maybe I must repeat it again and again...and how many times until you believe me?


Pullman said:
Does this look bad to you?

Didn't watched the clip because I don't care about the franchise after the first season. I never said that Arcadia is technically bad, I never knew about it before you mentioned it.
Or maybe I must repeat it again and again...and how many times until you believe me?


Pullman said:

And I mentioned 3fromBelow and Trollhunters because they released a combined 3 seasons in the last 14 months, it doesn't get much more recent than that.

I never said that Arcadia is technically bad, I never knew about it before you mentioned it, I even proposed to substitute it with Dragon Prince in my list with examples.
Or maybe I must repeat it again and again...and how many times until you believe me?


Pullman said:

They still have more consistent and less sakuga-based animation, and they have simplistic designs that take less time to draw compared to anime designs and their fancy eyes and clothes, making it easier for them to have consistently good animation. Hence why I listed them to explain the differences between good animation in anime and good animation in western shows.

And I know about the advantages of the western animation just we don't get the good stuff very often.


Pullman said:
That just made me facepalm. I mean, yes, that was the whole point I was trying to explain, why western animation is better animated on average and more consistent. Because they choose simplistic designs and consistent animation over complex designs and budget saving animation. Not sure why you're telling me this, I'm the one who made that point.

Not much of a challenge to animate simple objects especial if you use vectors and other computer stuff. If you count those simple movements it even may come as a lower number that the sakuga + not skauga scenes in anime.


Pullman said:

Not really, not to the same degree.

I agree but I am not seeing western shows using this advantage often enough.


Pullman said:
Wow, what a comeback. You continue to prove your rhetoric prowess incompetence. Throwing some snarky comment whenever you lack arguments is not gonna make you look better. Next time just don't reply to the parts you don't have anything to say about.

I was ironic but your attempt to gloat about my stupidity makes you look a bit petty.



Will respond with the same quantity of insults, deal!


Pullman said:
But just for the sake of it: I can criticize what I like and view it through an unbiased lens. That doesn't mean I don't enjoy it or don't want to watch it. The fact that you don't seem to be able to comprehend that based on a snarky comment like this, just makes me sad. So no, I'm not gonna stop watching something I love just because I realize that from an unbiased perspective there are some issues with it that can be critized or at least questioned.

- I know that you like anime but I am not sure why you don't believe me that I like cartoons. Also you think that my preferences obscure my judgement which is not.
- More petty insults? Kind of sleepy to respond now...no deal for this case.


Pullman said:

Sorry but I sincerely don't understand what you are trying to say with this sentence. Are you trying to say that there are less western animation series?

Such that are created with enough ambition to be watchable by lets say normal kids and not being for example abominations like The Marvelous Misadventures of Flapjack.


Pullman said:
If so, when did I ever say otherwise?

This was one of the points in my post to the OP.


Pullman said:
The average animation is still better imo, because the average doesn't care about the overall amount of shows.

And I am mainly interested how many at least average quality western shows I can find...it seams not as many as average quality anime.


Pullman said:
both sides having mass produced 'crap' doesn't really change the overall comparison of the average animation tho.

As mentioned average like what you can encounter on TV averagely flipping trough the channels not average quality which is a bit rare sight.


Pullman said:
That was my whole point.

And I said nothing against that. My counter point is that you can't find them on a regular basis.


Pullman said:
Mass-produced titles being a thing doesn't change any of that.

It changes if they are creating filler content...like whole shows are exactly that.


Pullman said:
I'll admit that I'm not that knowledgable about lower-tier western animation, but I have a hard time imagining it is consistently worse animated than lower tier anime seasonals which I have a lot of experience with.

Just tune to CN, Nick or Disney (a lot of live action there tho). Even with many moving objects it looks like crap.


Pullman said:
Do you have any source for that?

Just look at the franchises: titles from Marvel, DC, Mattel, Hasbro...
Star Wars anyone?
Carmen Sandiego is a massive multimedia franchise which started as a game.
Even your Trollhunters is adaptation...wait this is actually not true...I was under impression that it's a book series adaptation...my mistake.


Pullman said:
And if you read carefully what I wrote, I talked about standout shows. I don't think any of the top-tier western animation series I watched in the last X years were based on a source material, nevermind their main measure of success being how much it improved the sales of the comic.

Give me the name...even faster search wiki for the companies behind it.
For example one of most the outstanding animated series from the last decade for me was Young Justice S1-S2...a DC title...but sadly CN failed to milk it properly.


Pullman said:
That just doesn't tend to be how western animated series work.

Even Netflix is doing it and they don't need to.


Pullman said:
Nothing but cold, hard data will convince me that anime doesn't have a huge percentage of unfinished shows and a much lower percentage of original stories that aren't based on any pre-existing source material.

I am no talking about that but enough unfinished/cancelled western show to make me sad.


Pullman said:

On half my points you just completely didn't get what I was trying to say and on the other half you seem to be completely misinformed.

So thank you for ignoring my points too!


Pullman said:
I mean I agree that the differences between western animation and anime are mostly based on business models and historical developments, not on talent or anything like that. It's just that your portrayal of the differences is utterly biased and one-sided and pretends everything the west does is worse and not just different, which is just plain wrong.

Yes you said that the first time and I disagreed in the same way.


Pullman said:
You just sound like you're desperate to portray your own preference for the anime way of doing things as being rooted in it being objectively better or 'higher effort' or however you want to phrase it

Yes this is my stance and it comes from the fact that I can't find enough cartoons to satisfy my hunger for animation and this is caused not only by my preferences and biases.


Pullman said:
instead of just admitting that it's simply a matter of preferences and different strengths of weakness.

Dude my idea of entertaining doesn't look like The Amazing World of Gumball. I don't care if you call it technically superior or whatever. To me it looks like crap and looks really really easy to produce - not a big technical achievement.


Pullman said:
I can admit the strengths and weaknesses of both sides, and appreciate either of them for their strengths (which is why I can criticize anime and, while you sound like you can only appreciate anime for its strengths, downplaying it's weaknesses, and doing it the other way round for western animation.

Yeah and humble too.


Pullman said:
That's why I take issue with your approach

You didn't care what the issue was in the first place, just wanted to write your essay about the differences...the 3-th or 4-th time I read it in some form.


Pullman said:
because it is inherently biased and one-sided and not fair or neutral at all

I got it, everyone different than you is biased, one-sided, not fair or neutral at all.


Pullman said:

I mean you literally said everything except the few shows you like has 'very low effort scripts' and the visuals are just 'geometrical forms'. How should I not interpret that as you looking down on western animation?

Not all western productions dude, not all writing in general...


Pullman said:
I don't have those kind of mental gymnastic capabilities. I call it like I see it.

You kind of missed the most essential thing.


Pullman said:
Wrong. You don't realize you are talking about taste because you're full of yourself and interpret your own value judgments and generalizations as neutral observations or objective values.

Yeah and your generalization on my generalizations is wrong too?


Pullman said:
But you very clearly are talking about taste from where I'm standing.

Wow, all this because I called your Arcadia creepy?


Pullman said:
I've tried not to do that, but repeatedly just clashed against this 'wall' of your preferences that makes you seemingly immune to neutral arguments and reason in some specific areas of this discussion.

Yeah neutral arguments calling me biased to anime...that totally convinced me.


Pullman said:
For example, different types of shows being produced is just a difference. When you consistently kinda trash one side based on the types of shows it is producing then you are making a subjective value judgment that that type of show is worse or worth less than the types of shows you find in anime. You are free to have that preference, but I'm not gonna let it slide if you try to sell it as an objective difference in quality between the two mediums.

Still no proof that I am that badly biased.


Pullman said:
But okay, let's talk budgets. What is even your point about budgets? I don't see you making any specific one anywhere. Since you repeatedly called western animation cheap and mass-produced, does that mean you think it has lower budgets? If so, you could not be more wrong. Even cheap western shows have higher budgets than most anime, which is once again because of the fundamental difference in how shows are animated in the east and the west and the different business model.

Yes there are many differences...like different economical condition thus different costs ect ...and one of those differences is in what kind of shows the western producers are investing.

And I am not going to repeat what kind the majority of them are.
Modified by alshu, Jul 25, 12:13 AM
 
Jul 24, 4:24 PM

Offline
Joined: Feb 2019
Posts: 935
shirorinkorin said:

can i give my opinion as a half japanese who grew up in japan? i am asian too so i really understand that here in asia we don't have that much of a budget compared to western. but that doesn't mean we have shitty story writer here. storytelling is really affected by culture and language.we tend to like kind of story that we grew up with. in asia or at least in the country where my father grew up affected a lot by japanese culture and that is what encouraged my father to move to japan. if you grew up with american comics then you will like story that similar to it.

most of people tend to watch dubbed anime or anime with subs. the question is, what is better? subs or dubs? the answer is not both. you can't fully understand anime or manga story if you don't understand japanese at least on middle or high school level. there are people who said "why japanese comedy sucks?". is it really sucks? or it is only your brain so sucks that you can't understand that comedy is cultural. you may be wondering why detective conan beat avengers sale? one of the reason is because we grew up with it.

for the quality of the animation i will be honest with you, it is because animator doesn't paid well here. the most of the income went to directors, script writers, voice actors, etc. most of animator love their jobs so they don't mind with their salary, especially when they already used to it. a newcomer animator said why they didn't mind with low salary because even more senior and talented animator isn't paid well too. there are more anime aired every season compared to past, because of this they are forced to decreased the quality.


Few years ago I read that 60% of the world's commercial animation is produced in Japan. This is an extravagant number, as say opposed to manga vs other countries gn publishing industries. Regarding comic artists, Belgium has actually the most per population.
European animation features better balance between wages, quality and quantity. Problem is distribution, financing and language barrier.
In fact the only case were a country produced both quality and quantity in animation, though mainly short film format, would be former socialist Eastern European countries, but there studios were state owned.
 
Top