| e.g Anime XX is terrible because it's otaku pandering. This kind of opinion is the worst and for me this word should not be allowed to be used in an actual discourse. Why? pander to someone/something /ˈpæn·dər ˌtu, ˌtʊ, tə/ — phrasal verb with pander to verb to please other people by doing or saying what you think they want you to do or say Pandering means it caters to a certain group of people. If people say something like Eromanga sensei or Umaru or some ecchi harem loli with weeb culture as "otaku pandering" and instantly denounce it simply by this reasoning, why don't many people denounce anime that "panders" to other group of people? For example, Gangsta/Baccano/91 Days for being "classic western pandering" or Angel's Egg/Cat Soup/Lain for being "artsy pandering" or something like OPM/MHA for being "western superhero pandering" or perhaps JJBA/Hokuto no Ken as "Machismo pandering"?? Do any of you not find this kind of "pandering" denouncement as ridiculous?? Why only "otaku pandering" is frequently used and often being viewed as negative? IS IT WRONG FOR STUFFS BEING TARGETED TOWARDS CERTAIN GROUP OF PEOPLE?? Common claim: >But otaku/weeaboos are fat skum of the earth who lives under their mothers basement and sucking their family money!! I'm here defending anime which have been denounced solely for being "otaku pandering". Not everyone can enjoy "otaku pandering" shows yeah, but newsflash my fellas, not everyone can enjoy "classic western pandering", "artsy pandering", "machismo pandering", and other types of "pandering" because they too are targeted towards certain audience and not everyone can enjoy it. Belittling stuffs that's targeted towards certain target audience, no matter how niche they are, is disgusting. Pandering is the lowest of the low type of buzzword. You can just say that it's not your cup of cake, as how I am with My Hero Academia, Utena, Tatami Galaxy, and many other stuffs I watched and scored low on MAL but higher on kitsu. That's my take on it. So what about you?  |
YouAug 7, 2017 7:22 AM
 |
| > i don't watch kids shows because it's pander towards kids... well, yeah... you are free to do that... it's only a problem if you deapthorated it to me... |
 "If taking responsibility for a mistake that cannot be undone means death, it's not that hard to die. At least, not as hard as to live on." |
| no.. its just a way for butthurt anime "fans" to dismiss things that they don't like especially the: "im so manly cause i watch this kind of anime and don't like this" "look how not cringe i am" "look how smart i am" crowds |
   |
| "gratify or indulge (an immoral or distasteful desire or taste or a person with such a desire or taste)." The implication with the term is not simply being targeted at a certain type of fan, but doing so in ways the person using the term finds to be distasteful, and/or pandering to desires they find to be not worth pandering to, and which they therefore criticize. That's why people who dislike ecchi will use it for ecchi shows, and anti SJW-hatemongers will use it for anything that has homosexuality or gender fluidity in it while elitist hunters will use it for anything with well written dialogues and any level of sophistication to it. And so on. If you see it mostly used for certain types of shows, it is because those kind of shows have more people who dislike them, I guess. People don't have particularly high opinions of thirsty Otaku who care about nothing but seeing animated tits and panties so it is most often used to refer to anime that indulges them. What else is new? Also the general issue with pandering is that it is not the same as targeting only a certain type of people. It is usually used for shows that have a general, widespread appeal but chose to include pandering to certain groups because they feel that either they make up the vast majority of viewers (which would offend other viewers who do not care for such base pandering) or that the other viewers won't mind. Using it as a criticism is totally fair. Your mistake is using 'pandering' interchangeable with 'being a type of show' but that's not really the same. Pandering is something that happens on top of/despite what type of show something is. Only when the type of show and its target audience is very obvious and the pandering is limit to that target audience, can it be used interchangeable. You're pretty much only talking about this subset of shows. And of course it isn't nice to shit on shows for what they are just because you don't like what they are trying to do. But it's also pretty common and to some degree logical that you have a bad opinion on these kind of shows, otherwise you wouldn't dislike them in the first place most likely. |
| I probably regret this post by now. |
| I think it can be a valid criticism. It's just ironic because if you watch anime and argue about "otaku pandering" on the internet with kids I instantly get suspicious of a person covering their tracks for lack of a better term. :3 Like, to level with OP a bit, yea, it's a bit ridiculous to see people berate an entire show because it happened to feature a recluse or two; as if those characters can't be interesting in their own right, there wasn't anything else going on in the show and the fact that they're super swag and throw house parties every night and can't get into the head space of a somewhat nerdy character whatsoever. It's cartoons at the end of the day let's all chill out a bit. |
Clebardman said: Where?@You there's another thread created today about the same shit where the actual definition of pandering has already been posted. What's the purpose of this thread? Pullman said: So you mean something like No Game No Life or Eromanga sensei have widespread appeal? Because this is the 2 shows I see this "otaku pandering" word are being used as criticism the most. Because I believe siscon fanservice appeals to a niche target audience which is sisterless guy (I'm sisterless so despite I dislike this two due to other reasons, I like Yosuga no Sora and some other siscon stuffs). So well, I guess stuffs like Lain/Texh is pretty much the same which caters to people who likes "Show, don't tell" cyberpunk so much? I have to admit that I'm typically audience who likes being spoonfed/ "tell don't show" by infodumps a bit more (albeit not as much as Heavy Object first episode narrative) than usual people so I can't get to this type of show. Yet I never see this two being denounced as "cyberpunk pandering" at all."gratify or indulge (an immoral or distasteful desire or taste or a person with such a desire or taste)." The implication with the term is not simply being targeted at a certain type of fan, but doing so in ways the person using the term finds to be distasteful, and/or pandering to desires they find to be not worth pandering to, and which they therefore criticize. That's why people who dislike ecchi will use it for ecchi shows, and anti SJW-hatemongers will use it for anything that has homosexuality or gender fluidity in it while elitist hunters will use it for anything with well written dialogues and any level of sophistication to it. And so on. If you see it mostly used for certain types of shows, it is because those kind of shows have more people who dislike them, I guess. People don't have particularly high opinions of thirsty Otaku who care about nothing but seeing animated tits and panties so it is most often used to refer to anime that indulges them. What else is new? Also the general issue with pandering is that it is not the same as targeting only a certain type of people. It is usually used for shows that have a general, widespread appeal but chose to include pandering to certain groups because they feel that either they make up the vast majority of viewers (which would offend other viewers who do not care for such base pandering) or that the other viewers won't mind. Using it as a criticism is totally fair. Your mistake is using 'pandering' interchangeable with 'being a type of show' but that's not really the same. Pandering is something that happens on top of/despite what type of show something is. Only when the type of show and its target audience is very obvious and the pandering is limit to that target audience, can it be used interchangeable. You're pretty much only talking about this subset of shows. And of course it isn't nice to shit on shows for what they are just because you don't like what they are trying to do. But it's also pretty common and to some degree logical that you have a bad opinion on these kind of shows, otherwise you wouldn't dislike them in the first place most likely. |
|
| Usually if I see somebody lambast something for being otaku pandering then I take mental note to place less value on their opinions in the future, so I'd say I can't, or rather, I see no reason to. I've already written my thoughts more extensively in the thread that this is basically a duplicate of, though, so eh, I won't reiterate myself. The reaction it evokes from me can be summed up as "ugh" |
 |
You said: Clebardman said: Where?@You there's another thread created today about the same shit where the actual definition of pandering has already been posted. What's the purpose of this thread? Pullman said: So you mean something like No Game No Life or Eromanga sensei have widespread appeal? Because this is the 2 shows I see this "otaku pandering" word are being used as criticism the most. Because I believe siscon fanservice appeals to a niche target audience which is sisterless guy (I'm sisterless so despite I dislike this two due to other reasons, I like Yosuga no Sora and some other siscon stuffs). So well, I guess stuffs like Lain/Texh is pretty much the same which caters to people who likes "Show, don't tell" cyberpunk so much? I have to admit that I'm typically audience who likes being spoonfed/ "tell don't show" by infodumps a bit more (albeit not as much as Heavy Object first episode narrative) than usual people so I can't get to this type of show."gratify or indulge (an immoral or distasteful desire or taste or a person with such a desire or taste)." The implication with the term is not simply being targeted at a certain type of fan, but doing so in ways the person using the term finds to be distasteful, and/or pandering to desires they find to be not worth pandering to, and which they therefore criticize. That's why people who dislike ecchi will use it for ecchi shows, and anti SJW-hatemongers will use it for anything that has homosexuality or gender fluidity in it while elitist hunters will use it for anything with well written dialogues and any level of sophistication to it. And so on. If you see it mostly used for certain types of shows, it is because those kind of shows have more people who dislike them, I guess. People don't have particularly high opinions of thirsty Otaku who care about nothing but seeing animated tits and panties so it is most often used to refer to anime that indulges them. What else is new? Also the general issue with pandering is that it is not the same as targeting only a certain type of people. It is usually used for shows that have a general, widespread appeal but chose to include pandering to certain groups because they feel that either they make up the vast majority of viewers (which would offend other viewers who do not care for such base pandering) or that the other viewers won't mind. Using it as a criticism is totally fair. Your mistake is using 'pandering' interchangeable with 'being a type of show' but that's not really the same. Pandering is something that happens on top of/despite what type of show something is. Only when the type of show and its target audience is very obvious and the pandering is limit to that target audience, can it be used interchangeable. You're pretty much only talking about this subset of shows. And of course it isn't nice to shit on shows for what they are just because you don't like what they are trying to do. But it's also pretty common and to some degree logical that you have a bad opinion on these kind of shows, otherwise you wouldn't dislike them in the first place most likely. What I bolded probably is relevant for cases like the ones you described. But also, yes No Game no Life has wideapread appeal. Even I loved it :> And Eromanga also was one of the most popular anime in its season. Idk how else you want to define widespread appeal. The show accumulated more viewers in one season than Tex did in 15 years so yeah, weird comparison. Personally idk what people see in the show, it definitely didn't interest me, but I could see ecchi fans as well as romance fans or slice of life fans or comedy/rom-com fans giving it a try and the latter ones being disappointed if it ends up only pandering to the first kind of fan (idk if that is actually what's happening since I havent seen it). But forget all that, my main point was that just because some people use terms questionably that doesn't devalue the original meaning of those terms. You shouldn't stop taking the term itself seriously, but rather stop taking the people who misuse them seriously. Language is never at fault, it's always the people who use it. I was just trying to show that there are a bunch of relevant ways in which pandering can be legitimate criticism so it is stupid to completeley stop taking the term seriously. |
| I probably regret this post by now. |
Pullman said: I thought eromanga-sensei was popular due to the "endorsement" of anime youtubers such as Digibro, Gigguk, bestguyever, etc?? Many watched thair channels ofc but for me all anitubers sucks so well.You said: Where?So you mean something like No Game No Life or Eromanga sensei have widespread appeal? Because this is the 2 shows I see this "otaku pandering" word are being used as criticism the most. Because I believe siscon fanservice appeals to a niche target audience which is sisterless guy (I'm sisterless so despite I dislike this two due to other reasons, I like Yosuga no Sora and some other siscon stuffs). So well, I guess stuffs like Lain/Texh is pretty much the same which caters to people who likes "Show, don't tell" cyberpunk so much? I have to admit that I'm typically audience who likes being spoonfed/ "tell don't show" by infodumps a bit more (albeit not as much as Heavy Object first episode narrative) than usual people so I can't get to this type of show. What I bolded probably is relevant for cases like the ones you described. But also, yes No Game no Life has wideapread appeal. Even I loved it :> And Eromanga also was one of the most popular anime in its season. Idk how else you want to define widespread appeal. The show accumulated more viewers in one season than Tex did in 15 years so yeah, weird comparison. Personally idk what people see in the show, it definitely didn't interest me, but I could see ecchi fans as well as romance fans or slice of life fans or comedy/rom-com fans giving it a try and the latter ones being disappointed if it ends up only pandering to the first kind of fan (idk if that is actually what's happening since I havent seen it). But forget all that, my main point was that just because some people use terms questionably that doesn't devalue the original meaning of those terms. You shouldn't stop taking the term itself seriously, but rather stop taking the people who misuse them seriously. Language is never at fault, it's always the people who use it. I was just trying to show that there are a bunch of relevant ways in which pandering can be legitimate criticism so it is stupid to completeley stop taking the term seriously. |
|
| If that is their only criticism, no. It's lazy and unhelpful. I'll start to take them seriously once they can argue why that pandering hurts the narrative of said specific anime. A critique is a point for improvement. Hence a critique must come with a justification. Throwing buzzwords is not helping anybody. |
 You gave up your freedom of speech when you clicked Agree to the User Agreement This is not a public platform. My gaze is the measure of all things: I stopped considering "anime" a helpful tag Recommended Essays Exploring Actually Excellent World-Building |
| If it applies to things I don't like (tsundere, yandere, incest, rape, sexist tropes, harem, edginess, etc.) it's a good criticism If it applies to things I like (older girl, nice girl, friendship, heroes, romance, etc.) it's a bad criticism. |
| Depends on who's saying it and how they're saying it. |
| Uses the word pander. Does not know the base meaning. OK. |
You said: I agree that one shouldn't put down a work's value just because it panders to a certain audience, but on the other hand, I don't see why the term "pandering" or specifically "otaku pandering" is a bad thing. Certain things are more or less clearly written to appeal to certain tastes -- the same could be said of all stories, frankly.I'm here defending anime which have been denounced solely for being "otaku pandering". Not everyone can enjoy "otaku pandering" shows yeah, but newsflash my fellas, not everyone can enjoy "classic western pandering", "artsy pandering", "machismo pandering", and other types of "pandering" because they too are targeted towards certain audience and not everyone can enjoy it. Belittling stuffs that's targeted towards certain target audience, no matter how niche they are, is disgusting. Pandering is the lowest of the low type of buzzword. You can just say that it's not your cup of cake, as how I am with My Hero Academia, Utena, Tatami Galaxy, and many other stuffs I watched and scored low on MAL but higher on kitsu. That's my take on it. So what about you? The main reason why "otaku pandering" gets flak isn't because otaku are "fat skum of the earth who lives under their mothers basement" -- no, that's actually the excuse concocted after-the-fact. The main reason for the flak is because this type of content is seen as unusually frequent in recent anime series, according to the perceptions of the people giving this flak, and they themselves are probably not a fan of it for one reason or another (any reason, from "I want to see more narrative innovation and artsy storytelling" to "the pictures one gets from a Google Image search would embarrass me if I were to mention the series in front of my friends", and beyond), and so they want their preferred tastes to get more attention. |
| Avatar character is Gabriel from Gabriel DropOut. |
Tarextherex said: Thats only your perspective on "good", which is subjective af. I can't take your opinion seriously either when you belittle actually good shows as ____ pandering Sure every anime can be marketed to a target audience. Otakus though? There is nothing to say about them, they are simply defined by their obsession with anime and nothing else. Such shows have simply nothing going on for them, it's just some random moe-ish artstyle, some wish fulfilling ass premise about some loser suddenly being awesome in some isekai shit where every dere likes the protagonist. This is just titillation for weebs, it doesn't try to convey any other emotion at all. What if I only care about the girls personality in harem? What if I don't give shit about your so called "emotions"? What if that's my perspective of "good"? What if I say that you're just "overanalyzing"? "Objectively good doesn't fucking exist" - Digibro. |
|
| Dude, I watch animated 16 years old protect the world for my enjoyment. The real question is, Can you take ME seriously? |
 |
| The 'pandering' argument means the anime uses shitty, pointless content only to please a select group and not to offer anything more. The content doesn't have to be unique in any way, but rather just have the requirements to satisfy the audience. It panders to ecchi fans by giving them big boobs, but doesn't do anything with it. Look at all those ecchi anime which aren't even sexy, |
| WEAPONS - My blog, for reviews of music, anime, books, and other things |
You said: The difference between Lain/Tex and a pandering show is that the author wanted to achieve something with it, with Tex he wanted his characters to have a more realistic suffering (something like that, I am overly simplifying an interview I read some time ago).Clebardman said: Where?@You there's another thread created today about the same shit where the actual definition of pandering has already been posted. What's the purpose of this thread? Pullman said: So you mean something like No Game No Life or Eromanga sensei have widespread appeal? Because this is the 2 shows I see this "otaku pandering" word are being used as criticism the most. Because I believe siscon fanservice appeals to a niche target audience which is sisterless guy (I'm sisterless so despite I dislike this two due to other reasons, I like Yosuga no Sora and some other siscon stuffs). So well, I guess stuffs like Lain/Texh is pretty much the same which caters to people who likes "Show, don't tell" cyberpunk so much? I have to admit that I'm typically audience who likes being spoonfed/ "tell don't show" by infodumps a bit more (albeit not as much as Heavy Object first episode narrative) than usual people so I can't get to this type of show. Yet I never see this two being denounced as "cyberpunk pandering" at all."gratify or indulge (an immoral or distasteful desire or taste or a person with such a desire or taste)." The implication with the term is not simply being targeted at a certain type of fan, but doing so in ways the person using the term finds to be distasteful, and/or pandering to desires they find to be not worth pandering to, and which they therefore criticize. That's why people who dislike ecchi will use it for ecchi shows, and anti SJW-hatemongers will use it for anything that has homosexuality or gender fluidity in it while elitist hunters will use it for anything with well written dialogues and any level of sophistication to it. And so on. If you see it mostly used for certain types of shows, it is because those kind of shows have more people who dislike them, I guess. People don't have particularly high opinions of thirsty Otaku who care about nothing but seeing animated tits and panties so it is most often used to refer to anime that indulges them. What else is new? Also the general issue with pandering is that it is not the same as targeting only a certain type of people. It is usually used for shows that have a general, widespread appeal but chose to include pandering to certain groups because they feel that either they make up the vast majority of viewers (which would offend other viewers who do not care for such base pandering) or that the other viewers won't mind. Using it as a criticism is totally fair. Your mistake is using 'pandering' interchangeable with 'being a type of show' but that's not really the same. Pandering is something that happens on top of/despite what type of show something is. Only when the type of show and its target audience is very obvious and the pandering is limit to that target audience, can it be used interchangeable. You're pretty much only talking about this subset of shows. And of course it isn't nice to shit on shows for what they are just because you don't like what they are trying to do. But it's also pretty common and to some degree logical that you have a bad opinion on these kind of shows, otherwise you wouldn't dislike them in the first place most likely. If the author's aim aligns with the taste of a group then it is not pandering. That's where I think most posts of "these shows pander to elitists" fail, I never heard of such a consistent group/audience in Japan. It is related with the intention of the authors so it is difficult to be certain about it even with the ecchi stuff. It has become kinda buzzwordy towards such shows and that's why I wouldn't take them seriously but don't mix authors creating something because they want to explore their creative limits then be liked by a certain demographic with authors that will limit their creative limits to the sake of being liked by a certain demographic. Usually authors think at what they want to produce and editors think at what sells to create a mid-point but when both think deliberately at what will sell then that's pandering if you find it immoral or distasteful. |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
| Honestly, the only thing I can take seriously is either a fappble loli waifu or fappble imouto. Anything other than that, are always below the surface; in the back of my mind. Examples are : -My life - Your life - Everyone's opinion - MALer - CE - FG Ehhh what else... ffs AD just for the sake of it :/ |
| It's been bothering me all day that I didn't really explain myself better in this thread, so here goes. At the heart of criticizing something for pandering is that, usually, there's a certain amount of content within a series not trying to appeal to them and that's being treated as a legitimate negative and not just an issue on their own level. It's not a criticism about the content of its series on anything except the most superficial level - it's a complaint about something just not trying to appeal to them as an audience member. It's entirely biased and rooted in what they tend to seek from entertainment - and I do not consider that a problem in of itself in the slightest, it's just goddamn annoying whenever people are going to try to present themselves like they have some sort of journalistic objectivity with the arguments they're making whenever the arguments their making are entirely subjective and dependent on why type of audience member they are at their foundation. If it's treated as "I just don't like this type" rather than something trying to be more than that, then I see no issue with it. But because it's something that doesn't apply to me and mostly just lies with them at the same time, I see no reason to take it particularly seriously, either, unless people want me to start getting serious every single time I see somebody say something like "lol this series is shit it's just blatant otaku pandering bleh bleh bleh," which I do not want to do myself because it seems like it'd be stupid and overly-sensitive of me. Which is why I take issue with it on the most fundamental level as anything other than a complaint over a series, and why I don't have plans for giving it credit as anything except a personal issue one can take with a series rather than anything potentially helpful or constructive towards the product in question - which I do make that the distinction between a "criticism" and a "complaint" here, because a criticism I would be something that I feel I would be able to fairly discuss and express my own interpretations over, and I see no reason to view that as the case with something that's just basically "I do not belong to the audience that it was primarily trying to please so therefore it's shit." Marking something negatively for focusing on appealing to a demographic that a given individual is not a part of is not something I'm particularly keen on validating as anything more than a personal issue with something, rather than anything really constructive or helpful or could go towards benefitting the work in some way or can even be really discussed. It's a complaint about audience appeal and little else. So yeah. Of course I don't take it seriously. I see absolutely no reason why I should view it as anything more than just an issue on an individual level, and I feel like people have that right to take issue with it on such a level. The endgoal isn't to force people into liking the same things as me or changing their tastes. I just see no reason why it should be legitimized and treated as being more than what it is at the foundation of it - being "it doesn't appeal to me." And at the very least, I can't escape the feeling that people who say this about certain kinds of pandering towards audience types that they don't belong to wouldn't be something they'd welcome whenever other people start calling for changing niches that they themselves do actually belong to in most cases, regardless of however the "it's just pandering to these types of people" may be applied. I don't think many people would like changing the stuff they like most about certain series solely for the sake of broadening the audience, or in turn limiting said audience, and I don't see how the breadth of an audience a product can appeal to is related to the quality of the product in question, past only the amount of people that may or may not like that aspect of it. And that doesn't belong on just a show's primary function, by the way - it can most definitely be applied to things that have pandering in them yet don't necessarily bank on said pandering as the primary means of appeal and still be the exact same line of reasoning. |
ManabanAug 7, 2017 4:50 PM
|
| Well the term does have meaning to it, so it can be a valid criticism. It's just a shame that more often than not people tend to throw it around with no second thoughts and bring it down to the level of a simple buzzword with no real weight or context to it. Still, it's rather obvious when "pandering to otakus" is exactly what a show is doing. Toss in a bunch of harem tropes without utilizing them in any creative or meaningful fashion, then labeling it as otaku-pandering is perfectly reasonable. And considering how common these shows are, it's rather easy for people pull this term up as a way to criticize something, using that to avoid constructing actual arguments. |
AltoRoark said: Still, it's rather obvious when "pandering to otakus" is exactly what a show is doing. Toss in a bunch of harem tropes without utilizing them in any creative or meaningful fashion, then labeling it as otaku-pandering is perfectly reasonable. If it were applied so consistently then I wouldn't see any reason for the term to be devalued to me as what it is. Yet, there were people above were talking about they felt the breadth of appeal NGNL had, and at the same time it's something that's still very often accused of existing to be otaku pandering (hence why it was brought up to begin with), which can just go to show that it's not really something that's going to be agreed on because of how whoever is going to set their threshold for a certain type of content. Which threshold and tolerance based criticisms, like would be the case here, don't really seem like they should be taken with more than a grain of salt to me because they're just something set more at the individual in question's level. But yeah, if more people would actually put this into practice and solidify what they mean with it instead of how vapid it can often be used in application, then at the very least I wouldn't see it as such a worthless thing to say about something - albeit with what I said above, I doubt I'd view it as a legitimate criticism either as much as just a complaint one can have with something. But at least it'd be somewhat more indicative of something's content past just what they're vaguely defining as being pandering, so there'd be some semblance of value to saying it for me at the very least. From where I stand, though, it does currently seem like often times, it will just haphazardly be applied to everything that's harem/ecchi (or can even be slightly interpreted as being as much) without a second thought, and that's kind of why it gets as grating as it does to see put into effect on such a widespread level as well as why I'm just not going to take it seriously whenever it's so often used in such a way. |
ManabanAug 7, 2017 4:53 PM
|
TheBrainintheJar said: The 'pandering' argument means the anime uses shitty, pointless content only to please a select group and not to offer anything more. The content doesn't have to be unique in any way, but rather just have the requirements to satisfy the audience. It panders to ecchi fans by giving them big boobs, but doesn't do anything with it. Look at all those ecchi anime which aren't even sexy, Well you're fine with Political pandering, so it's rather hypocritical to criticise anime pandering to their legitimate audience. Political pandering annoys the actual audience, whereas catering to the audience is what the fans want. |
TheBrainintheJar said: You mean when ecchi shown halfheartedly/not even trying to make the fanservice appealing and just throw it randomly? So that's your definition of pandering? The 'pandering' argument means the anime uses shitty, pointless content only to please a select group and not to offer anything more. The content doesn't have to be unique in any way, but rather just have the requirements to satisfy the audience. It panders to ecchi fans by giving them big boobs, but doesn't do anything with it. Look at all those ecchi anime which aren't even sexy, zal said: how do you know and differ a show where it caters to a certain audience unintentionally and when the creator intentionally targeted it towards a certain audiences? You said: The difference between Lain/Tex and a pandering show is that the author wanted to achieve something with it, with Tex he wanted his characters to have a more realistic suffering (something like that, I am overly simplifying an interview I read some time ago).Where?So you mean something like No Game No Life or Eromanga sensei have widespread appeal? Because this is the 2 shows I see this "otaku pandering" word are being used as criticism the most. Because I believe siscon fanservice appeals to a niche target audience which is sisterless guy (I'm sisterless so despite I dislike this two due to other reasons, I like Yosuga no Sora and some other siscon stuffs). So well, I guess stuffs like Lain/Texh is pretty much the same which caters to people who likes "Show, don't tell" cyberpunk so much? I have to admit that I'm typically audience who likes being spoonfed/ "tell don't show" by infodumps a bit more (albeit not as much as Heavy Object first episode narrative) than usual people so I can't get to this type of show. Yet I never see this two being denounced as "cyberpunk pandering" at all. If the author's aim aligns with the taste of a group then it is not pandering. That's where I think most posts of "these shows pander to elitists" fail, I never heard of such a consistent group/audience in Japan. It is related with the intention of the authors so it is difficult to be certain about it even with the ecchi stuff. It has become kinda buzzwordy towards such shows and that's why I wouldn't take them seriously but don't mix authors creating something because they want to explore their creative limits then be liked by a certain demographic with authors that will limit their creative limits to the sake of being liked by a certain demographic. Usually authors think at what they want to produce and editors think at what sells to create a mid-point but when both think deliberately at what will sell then that's pandering if you find it immoral or distasteful. Also Tex is nowhere near realistic for me. |
|
| Yes, because when I like something I WANT them to make more of it or things similar to it that I'll enjoy. Pander away pandering panderers. |
KruszerAug 7, 2017 9:59 PM
| "The name's Gambit. Remember it." -Gambit "X-Men '97"  |
| Artsy pandering? lol... If a hardly-marketable series is "pandering" to a very small portion of the anime fanbase, and/or the defining characteristics of such series are actually so broad that they can't really be summarized into a defined genre, I can't think of it as pandering. |
| So, if we use "pandering" by dictionary meaning for this discussion; are we also use the word "otaku" by dictionary too?? |
| Don't like it? Just stop watching/reading it. Why become a masochist that keep going through something you don't like and bitching in the end of it? |
| Yes. Because a lot of shows are filled with nothing but one thing (namely ecchi), and that makes it shit, and only watchable by people with no taste, or who like that one thing. |
| Be thankful for the wisdom granted to you. |
You said: Idk just your own judgement based on what pandering means or just take the words of the authors for it in case there are some interviews available. zal said: how do you know and differ a show where it caters to a certain audience unintentionally and when the creator intentionally targeted it towards a certain audiences? The difference between Lain/Tex and a pandering show is that the author wanted to achieve something with it, with Tex he wanted his characters to have a more realistic suffering (something like that, I am overly simplifying an interview I read some time ago). If the author's aim aligns with the taste of a group then it is not pandering. That's where I think most posts of "these shows pander to elitists" fail, I never heard of such a consistent group/audience in Japan. It is related with the intention of the authors so it is difficult to be certain about it even with the ecchi stuff. It has become kinda buzzwordy towards such shows and that's why I wouldn't take them seriously but don't mix authors creating something because they want to explore their creative limits then be liked by a certain demographic with authors that will limit their creative limits to the sake of being liked by a certain demographic. Usually authors think at what they want to produce and editors think at what sells to create a mid-point but when both think deliberately at what will sell then that's pandering if you find it immoral or distasteful. Also Tex is nowhere near realistic for me. I said realistic suffering (pain) as you can read in the answer to question 5 here: https://eyeresist.wordpress.com/2007/06/21/texhnolyze-interview/Trying to convey something is not the same as managing to actually do it. |
zalAug 8, 2017 6:57 AM
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
Aria-da-Capo said: small or big depends to the populations of the group. Do you get salty if the amount of "ecchifag" and "otaku" are both larger than "artfag"? Also anime that offers more than 70% about artsiness do exists. Artsy pandering? lol... If a hardly-marketable series is "pandering" to a very small portion of the anime fanbase, and/or the defining characteristics of such series are actually so broad that they can't really be summarized into a defined genre, I can't think of it as pandering. MortalMelancholy said: lets change the word ecchi with surrealism, machismo, angst, atmospheric, moe, boring dialogues, excessive expostions, adult characters, stoicism, and many other things. Besides no anime consists of only ecchi so far I watched. Every single ecchi I know have plot. Yes. Because a lot of shows are filled with nothing but one thing (namely ecchi), and that makes it shit, and only watchable by people with no taste, or who like that one thing. UknwWhu said: This is bull. Pandering for you seems to means popular stuffs. I have to say this: Everything panders, whether it be popular due to larger population of the target audience, or niche due to lesser target audience. Of course more studio makes anime with premise that panders to larger populations due to money. But your last paragraph is a total bull generalization that all popular stuffs have weak, repetitive, superficial characters, etc. How many popular anime have you watched (based on your definition of pandering as popular's premise)? Who are you to say that it's weak? People criteria of being strong or weak differs. Why do you need "realistic" hair colors? Do you want to project your taste of being one of "realistic pandering" that less stuffs like that being produced to the industry or the fans of the "unrealistic haircolors"? Disingenuous thread. The purpose of this thread is a presentation of a superficial definition of pandering. Yes words can and do have a variety of meanings attached to them and shows do have certain audiences they target. That is a fact everyone here is fully aware of. But the fact of the matter is, anime pandering does exist. There have been numerous threads decrying the lack of variety in the current anime being pushed by Japanese studios. It all has a certain purpose to it, that is profit making through interest in anime. Yes I am aware of the fact that every studio wants to make a profit. But how many DBZ, One-Piece, Naruto's (sorry Boruto), Gintama, Pokemon's is enough? Not only do we have shows and mangas for these productions, there are games, toys etc. Anime pandering is about exploiting the growing interest in Japanese media. A studio simply finds a manga (if none exists they make an OVA) that they feel will sell, and exploit if for as long as possible. Every executive knows that manga like Nijihara holograph will not sell as an anime, why invest in something complicated? Have you not learned anything from Apple's runaway success. Anime that panders sells anime with weak stories which are repetitive, superficial characters that would not be found in the surface of the earth with natural hair colours that would leave a scientist buffled. |
|
UknwWhu said: Oh look, we have a cute little elitist here! What do you know sweet summer child? I used Cambridge definition, you used the definition of "pandering" out of your mind, and then suddenly announce the superiority of your "taste"? The concept of "taste" is totally subjective, and if you believe that it's objective, then please watch this Digibro's video:You said: small or big depends to the populations of the group. Do you get salty if the amount of "ecchifag" and "otaku" are both larger than "artfag"? Also anime that offers more than 70% about artsiness do exists. lets change the word ecchi with surrealism, machismo, angst, atmospheric, moe, boring dialogues, excessive expostions, adult characters, stoicism, and many other things. Besides no anime consists of only ecchi so far I watched. Every single ecchi I know have plot. This is bull. Pandering for you seems to means popular stuffs. I have to say this: Everything panders, whether it be popular due to larger population of the target audience, or niche due to lesser target audience. Of course more studio makes anime with premise that panders to larger populations due to money. But your last paragraph is a total bull generalization that all popular stuffs have weak, repetitive, superficial characters, etc. How many popular anime have you watched (based on your definition of pandering as popular's premise)? Who are you to say that it's weak? People criteria of being strong or weak differs. Why do you need "realistic" hair colors? Do you want to project your taste of being one of "realistic pandering" that less stuffs like that being produced to the industry or the fans of the "unrealistic haircolors"? That is why I said your thread is disingenuous? Clearly we are not on the same level. Your premise was to dilute the concept of pandering to otaku with subjectivity, to detract from your crappy taste in anime. Cheers That's the reality, bruh. Taste are all equivalent, it's good if you have explanation as a back up to explain why your favorite anime is your favorite, which makes your opinion more worthy but it's all still a subjective one and can be debunked anytime by criticizers. Now say, who's disingenuous here? If you stll think that you're "ingenious", then please give me elaborations, sweet summer child. |
|
| When someone labels a show "otaku pandering" it's less of a criticism of the show, but more of a direct jab at people who like the show. You said: Notice how none of this really sounds like a way to denounce a show? Yeah because them saying "otaku pandering" isn't really denouncing the anime, but you and anyone who likes it for being that "otaku""classic western pandering", "artsy pandering", "machismo pandering" Think of it this way, quite a number of shows PANDER to certain watchers and all shows at least CATER to a certain audience. The reason why "otaku pandering" sounds bad and has negative connotation is because "otakus" have a pretty bad reputation. In any case, I do agree that whether or not an anime "panders to otakus" doesn't really have any bearing on how good an anime is. So people using it as a means of casting aside an anime without actually taking the time to think why they dislike it. I believe you yourself mentioned NGNL vs Eromanga-sensei on this when conversing with Pullman. In terms of fanservice and "otaku pandering", rather similar. However NGNL does things right, with more likable characters, has a overaching plot that seems to move forward, some pretty well-thought out games AND A BETTER BEST GIRL. Eromanga-sensei have a bunch of characters who don't much to the character interactions, it just doesn't feel like it is going anywhere with its story and we get really well-thought out... favservice scenes. |
| If your favourite character is Tsutsukakushi Tsukiko, you are my soul mate. Been a long time since I've been here, I'll continue expressing myself freely and believe everyone should too. My MAL Interview |
| Every critique needs to be backed up.That said, pandering is a completely valid critique. |
 |
You said: Clebardman said: Where?@You there's another thread created today about the same shit where the actual definition of pandering has already been posted. What's the purpose of this thread? Pullman said: So you mean something like No Game No Life or Eromanga sensei have widespread appeal? Because this is the 2 shows I see this "otaku pandering" word are being used as criticism the most. Because I believe siscon fanservice appeals to a niche target audience which is sisterless guy (I'm sisterless so despite I dislike this two due to other reasons, I like Yosuga no Sora and some other siscon stuffs). So well, I guess stuffs like Lain/Texh is pretty much the same which caters to people who likes "Show, don't tell" cyberpunk so much? I have to admit that I'm typically audience who likes being spoonfed/ "tell don't show" by infodumps a bit more (albeit not as much as Heavy Object first episode narrative) than usual people so I can't get to this type of show. Yet I never see this two being denounced as "cyberpunk pandering" at all."gratify or indulge (an immoral or distasteful desire or taste or a person with such a desire or taste)." The implication with the term is not simply being targeted at a certain type of fan, but doing so in ways the person using the term finds to be distasteful, and/or pandering to desires they find to be not worth pandering to, and which they therefore criticize. That's why people who dislike ecchi will use it for ecchi shows, and anti SJW-hatemongers will use it for anything that has homosexuality or gender fluidity in it while elitist hunters will use it for anything with well written dialogues and any level of sophistication to it. And so on. If you see it mostly used for certain types of shows, it is because those kind of shows have more people who dislike them, I guess. People don't have particularly high opinions of thirsty Otaku who care about nothing but seeing animated tits and panties so it is most often used to refer to anime that indulges them. What else is new? Also the general issue with pandering is that it is not the same as targeting only a certain type of people. It is usually used for shows that have a general, widespread appeal but chose to include pandering to certain groups because they feel that either they make up the vast majority of viewers (which would offend other viewers who do not care for such base pandering) or that the other viewers won't mind. Using it as a criticism is totally fair. Your mistake is using 'pandering' interchangeable with 'being a type of show' but that's not really the same. Pandering is something that happens on top of/despite what type of show something is. Only when the type of show and its target audience is very obvious and the pandering is limit to that target audience, can it be used interchangeable. You're pretty much only talking about this subset of shows. And of course it isn't nice to shit on shows for what they are just because you don't like what they are trying to do. But it's also pretty common and to some degree logical that you have a bad opinion on these kind of shows, otherwise you wouldn't dislike them in the first place most likely. ...I have a younger sister, and I like the concept of siscon fanservice. Then again, I enjoy it from a voyeuristic perspective rather then a self-insert perspective, so *shrugs* At least your willing to admit that you prefer a 'Tell Don't Show' series. A lot of people seem to be afraid to admit this as if they don't get it. While I prefer a Show-Don't-Tell narrative, for some works it's preferable to get an info dump that can be referred back to, rather then trying to keep track of all the assorted details. |
"I'd take rampant lesbianism over nuclear armageddon or a supervolcano any day." ~nikiforova |
You said: MortalMelancholy said: lets change the word ecchi with surrealism, machismo, angst, atmospheric, moe, boring dialogues, excessive expostions, adult characters, stoicism, and many other things.Yes. Because a lot of shows are filled with nothing but one thing (namely ecchi), and that makes it shit, and only watchable by people with no taste, or who like that one thing. Yes, ecchi is certainly replaceable with all of those things; though it's still the most common (and likely) example. You said: Besides no anime consists of only ecchi so far I watched. Every single ecchi I know have plot. They have plot the same way countries like the Democratic Republic of the Congo and North Korea have democracy. |
| Be thankful for the wisdom granted to you. |
zal said: You said: Idk just your own judgement based on what pandering means or just take the words of the authors for it in case there are some interviews available. how do you know and differ a show where it caters to a certain audience unintentionally and when the creator intentionally targeted it towards a certain audiences? Also Tex is nowhere near realistic for me. I said realistic suffering (pain) as you can read in the answer to question 5 here: https://eyeresist.wordpress.com/2007/06/21/texhnolyze-interview/Trying to convey something is not the same as managing to actually do it. Tex is by far one of the most unrealistic anime I've seen. Does anyone in life lives so stoically and macho? BurningSpirit said: When someone labels a show "otaku pandering" it's less of a criticism of the show, but more of a direct jab at people who like the show. You said: Notice how none of this really sounds like a way to denounce a show? Yeah because them saying "otaku pandering" isn't really denouncing the anime, but you and anyone who likes it for being that "otaku""classic western pandering", "artsy pandering", "machismo pandering" Think of it this way, quite a number of shows PANDER to certain watchers and all shows at least CATER to a certain audience. The reason why "otaku pandering" sounds bad and has negative connotation is because "otakus" have a pretty bad reputation. In any case, I do agree that whether or not an anime "panders to otakus" doesn't really have any bearing on how good an anime is. So people using it as a means of casting aside an anime without actually taking the time to think why they dislike it. I believe you yourself mentioned NGNL vs Eromanga-sensei on this when conversing with Pullman. In terms of fanservice and "otaku pandering", rather similar. However NGNL does things right, with more likable characters, has a overaching plot that seems to move forward, some pretty well-thought out games AND A BETTER BEST GIRL. Eromanga-sensei have a bunch of characters who don't much to the character interactions, it just doesn't feel like it is going anywhere with its story and we get really well-thought out... favservice scenes. The reason why 'otaku pandering' is considered bad, is because the content added by pandering is supposedly weak, shallow and pointless - big boobs, pointless battles, etc. Nyu said: TheBrainintheJar said: The 'pandering' argument means the anime uses shitty, pointless content only to please a select group and not to offer anything more. The content doesn't have to be unique in any way, but rather just have the requirements to satisfy the audience. It panders to ecchi fans by giving them big boobs, but doesn't do anything with it. Look at all those ecchi anime which aren't even sexy, Well you're fine with Political pandering, so it's rather hypocritical to criticise anime pandering to their legitimate audience. Political pandering annoys the actual audience, whereas catering to the audience is what the fans want. What is 'political pandering' and how am I okay with it? |
| WEAPONS - My blog, for reviews of music, anime, books, and other things |
More topics from this board
» How to make your social-media algorithms send you posts about the seasonal anime you're watching?thewiru - Yesterday |
10 |
by valico
»»
4 minutes ago |
|
» Waifu War V5 (Anniversary-Edition!) (Round 1) ( 1 2 3 4 5 )TheMinkalex - Sep 28 |
204 |
by eroguy
»»
6 minutes ago |
|
» 🍷 AD Summer 2025 Best Girl Contest ( 1 2 3 4 )Shizuna - Sep 28 |
180 |
by eroguy
»»
14 minutes ago |
|
» Do you remember characters names?Dragevard - Oct 6 |
20 |
by Adnash
»»
16 minutes ago |
|
» Underrated/unpopular music artists for OP and EDs in popular shows?W3TFT - 9 hours ago |
5 |
by ProudElitist
»»
22 minutes ago |