>It's too risky to not cater to teens and otaku so lets not change
>(1990s-2005)Harems make money so lets make lots of those
>(2005-) This moe thing is popular so lets make lots of those
>Digital animation makes things cheaper, so lets flood seasons with multiple shows made at the same time with half of the animation outsourced for QUALITY and we'll make our money back on one of them.
>now lets adapt any manga that fits our criteria since a 3rd of the work is done.
>make sure it's not a finished manga or it'll never sell!
Am I missing anything?
You sure took your time choosing a gif m8.
Except moe (at least to the extent of shows carried exclusively by moe) is a fad that is already starting to fade. People that thought that this was going to take over somehow and be all that anime was going to be were idiots.
Yeah, you missed the part where before all of that you got nothing but horrendously low budget 26-52 episode children's shows and OVAs for "adults" that, if you were lucky, released one episode every 4 months.
I lost my one from Soul Eater Not! and just used WUG.
You know the one I mean.
>horrendously low budget 26-52 episode children's shows and OVAs for "adults" that, if you were lucky, released one episode every 4 months.
Still got my vhs of Sol Bianca.
While what you say is true, it just makes it seem like the industry took one step forward and then two steps back.
>repeating arguments from 1991
Good one. I laughed.
Here is a 2014 movie.
>MUH OLD ANIMES
Most anime were either some kid's show/very family friendly/ for actual girls/ Some run of the mill Mecha trying to copy Gundam/Macross or some one shot OVA.
Anime creators in the 80s liked cute girls, GAR AND scifi, had passion while also having japan at its best back in the 80s/90s.
It's evident that there's wonderful work in modern times too with things such as Tatami Galaxy, Casshern Sins and Texhnolyze being of note but damn the industry overall is trying hard without actually seemingly liking anything but cute shit/trying to make money of otaku.
this type of motion seems really uncanny because the software that does the motion smoothing seems to be poorly optimized. Likely because they can't afford the good software/ animators used in real movies. Rotoscoped or CG can look great but it ends up costing more than hiring slaves.
On that note, is Africa the next Korea for making anime?
>Just keep going around with a misaligned hand?
If the operator stopped it at that point then it means he needed it like that to perform a certain operation. There are reasons why people need special licenses to operate heavy machinery.
Not to mention that if a car's steering wheel can be made to self correct to a neutral position so could a robot's hand.
I used to feel the same way, till I found a job and other things to worry about. I just watch anime in between work to escape from bullshit, so I want it catered to my mood and desire.
I couldn't care less about a masterpiece or animation quality, a light hearted SoL or romcom with decent characters works for me.
Keep it coming Japan.
Why the fuck are you still complaining about this, what would you expect them to do? Making anime is not very profitable at all, if they don't do this shit they would have a high chance of suffering losses. Going with a high budget unique series is like flipping a coin, you can never know if it will be successful enough to turn in a profit. Companies almost went bankrupt trying to do this. All they can do is either pander to hardcore fans with whatever seems to be the thing at the moment or try to reach a wider audience, which is a lot riskier but can turn in better profit if successful. Either way you faggots are complaining.
You are incapable of enjoying good anime now that you have a job/busy life? What?
Every time, somebody posts this.
>I love eating garbage
>There should be no alternatives to garbage because I love it so much
>Food is terrible
Exactly, if you watch fansub, its free, so why are people so asspained about it is beyond me.
Regardless, every season has a few series worth watching, so its alright in the end.
The age of moe died years ago. We are sliding down the path of chuuni and light novels now. Get with the times gramps.
>implying this is a bad thing
If he's willing to sacrifice luxuries to do it, then that just means he has that much more love for it, and that love will likely translate into his work.
>(1990s-2005)Harems make money so lets make lots of those
But more harems are made now and in recent years than were ever made in the 90s or early 00s. Last season alone had 6 harem shows that I know of and there's always at least a couple in every season.
>(2005-) This moe thing is popular so lets make lots of those
Your date is off by like 20 years. And before it was called moe it was called "kawaii," and people like you have been complaining about it since before you were born.
Most people do activities that equate to the amount of effort it takes to animate for enjoyment, as well as work 8-9 hours a day.
If he were doing something truly labor-intensive, I would agree with you, but he really isn't.
Here are some recent shows people in the west will regard as classics in 20 years:
>Shingeki no Kyojin
>Sword Art Online
>Hunter x Hunter
These are the same kinds of shows that nostalgiafags today wish anime were still filled with. Too bad KyoAni killed anime forever in 2009 when it invented moe with K-on. Now we'll never see dark, mature action shows ever again.
Holy shit how fucking new are you?
>why is every show not an animated film
Please kill yourself. You idiots always love forgetting that for every GiTS quality anime, there were about twenty full of fucking QUALITY and other shit.
SnK was an original idea
But i sill wanna throw up when I associate it and the word classic together
It's literally the exact same thing. A general buzzword that babbies who wanted "muh serious fightan" anime applied to SoL, romance, or any show with a female main cast. It's the exact same narrow-mindedness, exact same lack of perspective on the industry as a whole.
They killed the industry so hard it experienced an unprecedented boom in production and sales through the late 90s and 00s. If growth has tapered off, it's plateaued at a level above anything the 80s anime industry could have believed possible.
>A mysterious enemy piloting giant robots attacks the Earth, and humans are powerless to stop their advance
>but the hotheaded MC discovers that he has the power to summon a giant robot that he alone can pilot
>later, other people also get giant robots.
That applies to a lot of (non-mecha) shows/stories in general, though.
>main character discovers he has the ability to fight the thing
>other characters later start fighting the thing too
Not that I think SnK is that original, but these are very broad similarities you're sketching.
Gintama characters complaining how they aren't selling very well because they aren't moe enough or indeed moe at all.
That's not what's being talked about. See >>124883584
The term "moe" only came into popular usage around the turn of the millennium, the very late 90s and early 00s. Prior to that, the same basic concept was called "kawaii" by anime fans, or the "culture of cute".
There are nuances to the word moe that only otaku care about, for most people it's a vague term you can apply to any series with cute girls.
There's a large number of people who believe that, in both Japan and the west. Invariably they are people who have pretensions about the "importance of fiction" and often crave the approval of intellectuals and snobs.
I think for Miyazaki, it's more that his aesthetics run toward old fashioned humanistic storytelling and modern anime culture is too insular and cut off from mainstream society to really connect with that.
This is a wish-fulfillment medium and 'realistic' shit doesn't really offer wish-fulfilling shit.
Just because you don't like something doesn't mean it's bad. And that includes unrealistic shit.
Maybe Madoka, even without being that good, for being the first mainstream Mahou Shoujo to go the dark-ish route.
All the rest is garbage, and hopefully time will prove that.
So caricatures are bad satire? Over-the-top shit is bad? Experimental writing is bad? Visual-focused films are bad? Does this apply to all art? Do you hate impressionism and cubism?
Anime has been copying earlier anime for years now and steadily decreasing in quality as result.
I really wish Japan had a cultural analogy to the Vulgate because then they'd know that 'a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy' just does not fucking work.
Chinese cartoons just happens to be the medium we seem to be caught in. In other circumstances it might be confucian philosophy and we might be as happy dedicating our live to that
Literary fiction is a bit different from film or animation in terms of what people strive for, but you're right about short fiction elitism in particular being very abstracted and irreverent these days. Still, there's a pervasive assumption that in order for fiction to be good it must somehow reflect reality in form or in content.
And if you press really hard about why that is, you'll find the reasoning has nothing to do with aesthetics and everything to do with some cobbled together philosophy about fiction.
>I really wish Japan had a cultural analogy to the Vulgate because then they'd know that 'a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy' just does not fucking work.
Making completely original work doesn't work, as it usually flops.
>This attitude of yours is the reason you can't draw.
Jimmies are always rustled when I spell it out for you like this. It's ok, I'm used to it.
>I prefer to have my characters be somewhat grounded in reality
Why though? Just for the sake of aping reality? What's the actual aesthetic appeal? Do you not even care HOW the characters mirror reality as long as they do in some way?
>time will prove that
Time only preserves the popular stuff, anon. Everything else will be forgotten.
ITT: shonen/seinen/grimdark fags BLOW THE FUCK OUT
anime = moe
now fuck off and thanks for the fish
I can give examples from everything I listed that I would say are obviously very good but completely contrary to realism. Care to say how you think I've missed the point?
That just makes your post completely irrelevant though.
Why point out that 'some' fictions happens to pursue realistic when the poster you're replying to obviously to referring to something that don't?
I wouldn't mind if all anime is moe.
Everything else is usually shit anyway.
Reading comprehension anon.
I said it's not the goal, but it's a necessary COMPONENT.
Not everything is black and white. It's not like it has to go full realistic or full unrealistic. You can't completely seperate those two.
What I mean is experience is necessary for one's imagination. That's all.
Whatever you do, don't jerk off to this.
Originality is extremely overrated, and most anime do not even try to be original. You still do get a few original anime and manga that dare to be a little different, but most follow proven formulas and just riff on those.
And it's a good method, since it allows you to focus on execution rather than original content, and that's what makes anime enjoyable to watch.
Not really. You can complain about it all being the same shit, but there's about 4x more anime being produced now due to cost reduction from digital animation, and likewise there's a much bigger variety. In the same season, you have straight mecha shows, harem shows, sports shows, fujoshit shows, romance shows, action shows, comedy shows, SoL shows, action shows, fantasy shows, realistic drama shows..there's way more variety than you're seeing.
Because appreciation of art is about aesthetics, not philosophy. But, it turns our you're just like the people I mentioned earlier, who don't actually have any aesthetic basis for preferring realism but do so out of some half-baked philosophical reasoning.
People who complain about moe think that it's a worthwhile expenditure of their time to complain about an industry that produces dozens of shows and tons of comics a year not targeting them in every single instance.
If you really want to play with semantics, then saying that fiction is necessarily realist means that saying any non-realist fiction is bad is an empty truth.
>All known all white bare white body fixed one yard legs joined like sewn. Light heat white floor one square yard never seen. White walls one yard by two white ceiling one square yard never seen. Bare white body fixed only the eyes only just. Traces blurs light grey almost white on white. Hands hanging palms front white feet heels together right angle. Light heat white planes shining white bare white body fixed ping fixed elsewhere. Traces blurs signs no meaning light grey almost white. Bare white body fixed white on white invisible. Only the eyes only just light blue almost white. Head naught eyes light blue almost white silence within. Brief murmurs only just almost never all known.
It's a limitation of language, really. Barring logically necessary statements, everything you say draws on reality in some way.
That's idols for you. To this day I don't understand the cult around them. You can stick literally any half-way talented girl on stage in a ridiculous costume and within a month she'll have a legion of worshipers ready to devote their life savings to buying anything vaguely associated with her. And I just don't get it.
Well, maybe I shouldn't use the word "realism".
I mean to say that experience is important for one's imagination. The more you know, the more ingredient you have for your fiction.
Manga>Anime movies/Ovas>Anime t.v>H-manga>VN>Eroges>LN>Web Novels
I think most of them just don't like anime as a medium. They like a few individual anime series which are invariably dissimilar from the majority of anime, so the only conclusion you can draw is that they simply do not like anime as a whole.
That makes your point's relevance to the original topic depends on your definition of experience though.
If you only qualify 'experience based on realistic human relationship' as the valid experience here, then you are mistaken.
What a platitudinous statement, and it's nothing but a retreat from the topic. From the start the point has been that the aesthetics of fiction are not evaluated by their adherence to reality.
These are all seinen magazines.
No, this was >>124884069
Miyazaki's original statement can be seen many ways, as the responses to it show, but this particular interpretation of it, that fiction is evaluated by its adherence to reality, is what sparked this argument.
This is my favorite seinen manga.
>My point was that fiction is just a recombination of the reality one experienced.
This is just plainly false. Unless you take it in the most abstracted, irrelevant way, in which case you're just reciting platitudes again.
Well, that is not to say that there does not exist language for describing something that does not exist, sometimes it's a paradox (Berry paradox) so you do not necessary need to barr logically necessary statements either.
The conclusion: The problem with the industry is that it's full of otaku
> that is not to say that there does not exist language for describing something that does not exist
It's all by analogy to our reality, though. Like, a unicorn doesn't exist, but I could talk about it, right. However, I would probably say it's a horse with a horn, or maybe an arrangement of such-and-such particles in such a way, but that's still a description relying on our reality - on horses or particles existing. Outside of necessary truths, our language stems from our experience of reality and refers to things in reality, so we can't say anything else that isn't grounded in reality.
An aesthetic discussion in anime should focus on how effective its components are. If something works or doesn't work, if something is appealing, then try to explain why, or if its disagreeable, try to figure out why.
If ultimately your dislike of something boils down to
Then we arrive back at one of my original points: why is that bad?
>it's not irrelevant as well
Again I ask: why is a lack of realism bad? There's this heavy implication that it is, yet there's no follow up reasoning. You just assume I'll agree that being "unrealistic" is an inherently negative attribute.
Saying something is "unrealistic" begs the question: what's the aesthetic value inherent in realism?
Also I want to clarify something: I'm not saying realism has not aesthetic value, that's not what I'm implying. I'm asking you to justify your opinion with aesthetic arguments rather than an implied argument from authority where reality is greater than fiction.
Essentially prove to me you're arguing aesthetically and not just using top-down philosophical reasoning.
You guys should really make a local definition of realism or realisitic or real in the context of aesthetics for this discussion if you would like to reach any conclusion or satisfactory level of debate.
To be honest, I don't know what you're getting at. I'm saying that the inability of fiction to be completely ungrounded in reality has less to do with the limitations of the human mind and more to do with the limitations of language - if I could conceive of something completely unconnected to our reality, I would not be able to refer to it or describe it.
I say first that you are an idiot for dismissing everyone who writes on a certain theme when there are vast differences in style and ability between them, and second that you had better not be calling Woolf an absurdist.
I'm using this post >>124884069 as my conception of the opposing view point, so I guess for my argument "realism" means "reasonably comparable to what you might find in real life."
Or maybe something like "not contrary to common wisdom or accepted facts".
It's not a very literary or rigorous definition, but it's one I see thrown around a lot when ordinary people call this or that "unrealistic" in fiction.
I'd say "realist" is "aiming to mimic reality" and "realistic" is "succeeding in mimicking reality." Realist probably has more to do with the depiction than the subject, relative to realistic, I guess.
Moe shows outside of K-on haven't ever sold well. CGDCTs is usually <10k.
And animation quality is still generally up from the 80s and before, TV anime there were all stills and reused sequences
tl;dr: Realism is real life 3DPD. Anime is 2D.
Even real life actors play unrealistic roles on their movies. So, stop asking for realism. If every fictional character were realistic there would be no Dragon Ball, no Superman, no Star Trek, no Lord of the Rings, no Hamlet. Fictional characters are inherently unrealistic, because that's what fiction is about.
About the body, it's only a matter of taste, some people prefer ugly waifus, others prefer more beautiful ones.
It's quite easy to understand.
Not exactly - if it's impossible by definition, then that's different; . I mean, for example, qualia. Our language cannot describe what "purple" looks like, because "purple" has nothing to do with reality. Words refer to things in reality, and you learn their meanings through experience of that reality, so of course you can't write fiction that isn't somehow grounded in that reality, since there are no words for it, and even if you invented any, there would be no way to communicate them to others.
The excuse for not having engaging, compelling plots, situations, and characters, in a nutshell.
>It doesn't have to be good, it's made up anyway.
There are good and bad realistic elements, and there are good and bad fantastical elements. Most of the time, poorly done fantastical elements aren't redeemed by the default of the fantasy being genre.
As I said, the issue with what I'm talking about is that even if you invented a word for it, you'd have no way to communicate it to people. I mean, if I say "hilk" means any crab that has been out of the water for over four hours, then you know what that means now. But if I'm talking about purple, and I say "merst" is how I personally experience purple, you don't gain that same understanding, do you?
This thread is stupid. Anime, especially tv anime or ovas made for adults, has always been for and by otaku. All the moe haters here are just nostalgic for a handful of shows but if they went back and rewatched those shows now I bet they would still find elements of those things they say are ruining anime now.
>tfw no waifu