Support NeoGAF

[Wiseblade]

As a whole though, I don't see how a show becoming more entertaining does not make it a better show.

Because it's not becoming more entertaining. It's taken a sharp nosedive in quality from the first 9-10 episodes.

 

[Tomat]

Because it's not becoming more entertaining. It's taken a sharp nosedive in quality from the first 9-10 episodes.

We're speaking hypothetically. Obviously whether or not something is more entertaining is up to the viewer.

If a show becomes more entertaining to you than it was before, how does that not make it a better show for you?

 

[SDBurton]

Suite Precure - 09

:SDBurton

Kanade finally

Spoiler

got her Belltier!

Was starting to feel for the poor girl when she went on about

Spoiler

feeling useless and how she's been relying on Hibiki heavily during their more recent battles.

We're also starting to see

Spoiler

Siren lose interest in her objective. Her lack of drive in this episode coupled with arguing with one of her minions speaks a great deal on how her last encounter with the girls (Hibiki specifically) did a number on her. Come to the good side already Siren and fight for your love!

 

[dakkumauji]

Gintama 203

I think I lost it when this happened.

Hilarious. Absolutely hilarious. A great welcome back arc to the series. I only wish they used more of the supporting cast just to go truly all out.

 

[Chet Rippo]

Because it's not becoming more entertaining. It's taken a sharp nosedive in quality from the first 9-10 episodes.

Hypothetically. We're not talking about any specific show.

 

[Wiseblade]

We're speaking hypothetically. Obviously whether or not something is more entertaining is up to the viewer.

If a show becomes more entertaining to you than it was before, how does that not make it a better show for you?

Trainwreck effect. A show becomes so bad, that you grow to love watching what foolishness it will churn out next.

 

[Geneijin]

We're speaking hypothetically. Obviously whether or not something is more entertaining is up to the viewer.

If a show becomes more entertaining to you than it was before, how does that not make it a better show for you?

Think of it this way: does Hyouka become a better show solely because of the festival arc if you didn't like every other episode in the show?

 

[Tomat]

Trainwreck effect. A show becomes so bad, that you grow to love watching what foolishness it will churn out next.

Does that still not make it a better show in your opinion?

Think of it this way: does Hyouka become a better show solely because of the festival arc if you didn't like every other episode in the show?

Sure, why not? I still dunno though, never watched Hyouka.

 

[cajunator]

Accel World wasn't that much of a trainwreck though. It actually made sense most of the time.

 

[hosannainexcelsis]

Think of it this way: does Hyouka become a better show solely because of the festival arc if you didn't like every other episode in the show?

Speaking generally, I would think a show with some enjoyable episodes is better than a show with no enjoyable episodes.

 

[Geneijin]

Sure, why not? I still dunno though, never watched Hyouka.

So Hyouka becomes a better show because of a short number of episodes, disregarding the quality of prior episodes before it which are debatable?

Speaking generally, I would think a show with some enjoyable episodes is better than a show with no enjoyable episodes.

Yes, but enjoyable episodes nonetheless. Not an enjoyable show entirely.

 

[Chet Rippo]

Think of it this way: does Hyouka become a better show solely because of the festival arc if you didn't like every other episode in the show?

Yes, it's better than if none of the episodes were any good.

So Hyouka becomes a better show because of a short number of episodes, disregarding the quality of prior episodes before it which are debatable?

Just because it got better doesn't make the over all show good.

 

[Wiseblade]

Does that still not make it a better show in your opinion?

Of course not. The show didn't get better, I just managed to derive some twisted entertainment from it.

If I discovered that a torn shirt was great for soaking up spills, that doesn't make it a better shirt.

 

[Tomat]

So Hyouka becomes a better show because of a short number of episodes, disregarding the quality of prior episodes before it which are questionable?


Yes, but enjoyable episodes nonetheless. Not an enjoyable show entirely.

see:

Speaking generally, I would think a show with some enjoyable episodes is better than a show with no enjoyable episodes.

I don't think anyone is disregarding Hyouka's slow start.

 

[cajunator]

Episodes 1,4,5 are pretty good with the whole intro of Chitanda and what Hyouka means and all that but then its kind of pointless again until the festival arc and afterwards. Its not awful though, except for episode 6 which is sleep inducing.

 

[Geneijin]

Yes, it's better than if none of the episodes were any good.

Then I would say you weren't giving a fair assessment of the overall show's quality because of such a bias.

I don't think anyone is disregarding Hyouka's slow start.

My example was asking if you ignore the quality of a show overall if only because of a few good individual episodes.

Edit:

Just because it got better doesn't make the over all show good.

You're missing the point. I'm asking in general if a show is better because of a few episodes.

 

[hosannainexcelsis]

So Hyouka becomes a better show because of a short number of episodes, disregarding the quality of prior episodes before it which are debatable?


Yes, but enjoyable episodes nonetheless. Not an enjoyable show entirely.

You are being rather obtuse today.

 

[Articalys]

Sakurasou no Pet na Kanojo 4

Okay, yeah, this is definitely the sleeper hit of the season for me.

Spoiler

And as someone who's also made up a litany of bullshit reasons to not try learning game design in the past, this episode hit pretty close to home.

 

[Tomat]

Of course not. The show didn't get better, I just managed to derive some twisted entertainment from it.

If I discovered that a torn shirt was great for soaking up spills, that doesn't make it a better shirt.

It's not really deriving twisted entertainment if you're still entertained by watching a television show. TV shows are meant to entertain, one way or another.

You can't use a torn shirt as a rag and wear it too, it's one or the other in that case.

 

[Geneijin]

You are being rather obtuse today.

I'm not. It seems you're missing my point instead.

 

[Tomat]

Then I would say you weren't giving a fair assessment of the overall show's quality because of such a bias.

Isn't that exactly what you're doing though? You're saying just because Hyouka has some good episodes doesn't mean it's a better show because of that.

 

[cajunator]

Hyouka is a good show.
I honestly don't see why people would say it isn't. It has more good episodes than bad ones.
Even the bad ones are merely bad because they're uninteresting, but they're still well written and produced. The show drips quality in every scene.

 

[hosannainexcelsis]

I'm not. It seems you're missing my point instead.

Point me to where someone said "1 good episode makes a show entirely good." Rather, what I and I assume the other people in this discussion are saying is "A show with 1 good episode is better than a show with no good episodes." I don't see how this is debatable, and in fact this will be the last thing I have to say in this unproductive discussion.

 

[Geneijin]

Isn't that exactly what you're doing though? You're saying just because Hyouka has some good episodes doesn't mean it's a better show because of that.

I am saying that. But Chet is saying the show becomes a better show because of a few good episodes, which is why I responded as such.

 

[cajunator]

I will definitely say though that even though Jojo looks cheap as hell, its fucking entertaining to watch.

 

[Risette]

This discussion is stupid because every single episode of Hyouka is great.

 

[Tomat]

Point me to where someone said "1 good episode makes a show entirely good." Rather, what I and I assume the other people in this discussion are saying is "A show with 1 good episode is better than a show with no good episodes." I don't see how this is debatable, and in fact this will be the last thing I have to say in this unproductive discussion.

That is exactly what I am saying.

 

[Wiseblade]

It's not really deriving twisted entertainment if you're still entertained by watching a television show. TV shows are meant to entertain, one way or another.

You can't use a torn shirt as a rag and wear it too, it's one or the other in that case.

If you went to a play and the actors all messed up their lines fumbled over the props, ignored stage directions and generally messed up, it would be a bad performance. If you found the whole thing hilarious, that doesn't make the play better.

 

[Geneijin]

Point me to where someone said "1 good episode makes a show entirely good." Rather, what I and I assume the other people in this discussion are saying is "A show with 1 good episode is better than a show with no good episodes." I don't see how this is debatable, and in fact this will be the last thing I have to say in this unproductive discussion.

Uh, what? That's a different discussion entirely. As I said, you've missed my point. My point being one good episode doesn't make a show a better show. Hence, being more entertained doesn't make it a better show.

That is exactly what I am saying.

That wasn't the initial argument at all.

 

[Chet Rippo]

Then I would say you weren't giving a fair assessment of the overall show's quality because of such a bias.


My example was asking if you ignore the quality of a show overall if only because of a few good individual episodes.

Edit:

You're missing the point. I'm asking in general if a show is better because of a few episodes.

But it would get better, not that it totally excuses the other terrible episodes. I'm not saying one good episode will make a awful show all of a sudden amazing, because it won't.

 

[cajunator]

This discussion is stupid because every single episode of Hyouka is great.

Every episode is well executed but not great in terms of entertainment value. Most of the episodes are great all around though.

 

[Risette]

Every episode is well executed but not great in terms of entertainment value. Most of the episodes are great all around though.

Quality is entertainment value.

 

[Tomat]

Sorry, but it does get better after the info dump episodes (first 3 or 4 I think).

Eh, more entertaining, yeah. Better? Debatable.

That wasn't the initial argument at all.

Pretty sure it was. I stated my opinion, you said you thought it was more entertaining, but because it was more entertaining, it doesn't mean it's better (which makes no sense).

 

[PorcellainThrill]

I am saying that. But Chet is saying the show becomes a better show because of a few good episodes, which is why I responded as such.

I think a better subject for this discussion would be Sengoku Collection.

 

[Narag]

I will definitely say though that even though Jojo looks cheap as hell, its fucking entertaining to watch.

What's its measure in terms of animewatch?

 

[Geneijin]

Pretty sure it was. I stated my opinion, you said you thought it was more entertaining, but because it was more entertaining, it doesn't mean it's better (which makes no sense).

No, you didn't. You and Hosanna changed the argument rather.

Quote: "As a whole though, I don't see how a show becoming more entertaining does not make it a better show."

 

[Tomat]

If you went to a play and the actors all messed up their lines fumbled over the props, ignored stage directions and generally messed up, it would be a bad performance. If you found the whole thing hilarious, that doesn't make the play better.

Sure, it would be a bad performance. It's worth noting that unless the play is broken up into several pieces, or if I have seen the play previously, I don't really have anything to compare it to. This isn't the case for a TV show where you can compare each episode to any other episode in the series.

This is a bit of a tangent though. If I enjoy a bad performance, it doesn't mean the play was good. I never implied this was the case for a television show either. Lets say the play is broken up into two parts (two "episodes"): The first parts, the actors nail all their lines and the acting, but for whatever reason I am terribly bored with it. Part 2 comes along and the shit hits the fan, nobody does anything right, but somehow I'm enjoying this more. Overall I may have enjoyed the play more because of the second part, but I doubt I'd recommend it to others as quality entertainment.

No, you didn't. You and Hosanna changed the argument rather.

Then what the heck are you trying to say? This isn't the first time I've had no clue what the you're say when you make an argument.

 

[cajunator]

Quality is entertainment value.

No, they are not one and the same.
Quality shows can be boring as fuck.
Bad shows can be endlessly entertaining.
A lot of independent films are like this. They have something important to say and even say it well, but the execution is horrifically boring. The fact that a show has artistic and moral merit does not make that show necessarily enjoyable to actually watch.

 

[Geneijin]

I think a better subject for this discussion would be Sengoku Collection.

It would be had I watched it

 

[Risette]

No, they are not one and the same.
Quality shows can be boring as fuck.
Bad shows can be endlessly entertaining.
A lot of independent films are like this. They have something important to say and even say it well, but the execution is horrifically boring. The fact that a show has artistic and moral merit does not make that show necessarily enjoyable to actually watch.

No, a boring show is bad. Bad shows are not entertaining.

 

[Chet Rippo]

No, they are not one and the same.
Quality shows can be boring as fuck.
Bad shows can be endlessly entertaining.
A lot of independent films are like this. They have something important to say and even say it well, but the execution is horrifically boring. The fact that a show has artistic and moral merit does not make that show necessarily enjoyable to actually watch.

Entertainment is in the eye of the beholder.

 

[dakkumauji]

I think a better subject for this discussion would be Sengoku Collection.

I think Sengoku Collection is a good show. Derpfaces aside.

 

[duckroll]

Every episode is well executed but not great in terms of entertainment value. Most of the episodes are great all around though.

Quality is entertainment value.

No, they are not one and the same.
Quality shows can be boring as fuck.
Bad shows can be endlessly entertaining.
A lot of independent films are like this. They have something important to say and even say it well, but the execution is horrifically boring. The fact that a show has artistic and moral merit does not make that show necessarily enjoyable to actually watch.

No, a boring show is bad. Bad shows are not entertaining.

Time to wrap it up!

 

[cajunator]

Entertainment is in the eye of the beholder.

Thats obviously true but he is suggesting that quality means a show is guaranteed to be entertaining and thats not always true.

 

[Dedication Through Light]

I think Sengoku Collection is a good show. Derpfaces aside.

Isnt that because you seem to be a sengoku era fan?

I think Sengoku Collection had good OP and ED songs as well as an OST and some pretty interesting plot's with good background arts. Unfortunately the base concept wasn't that good, which is probably Konami's fault.

 

[cajunator]

JOJO 04

WHAT MANNER OF SORCERY IS THIS?!

ANIME OF THE FOREVER!

WWWRRRRRRYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

 

[Tomat]

Clearly Geneijin and I are not going to reach any sort of agreement here through normal means.

We'll have to resort to a fight to the death in Kill-Ballad.

 

[Geneijin]

Then what the heck are you even trying to say? This isn't the first time I've had no clue what the you're say when you make an argument.

That something being more entertaining doesn't make a show better. In this very specific case, Horizon didn't become a better show because it was more entertaining in the 2nd half. It's you and Hosanna who changed the discussion to a show w/ 1 good episode is better than a show w/ no good episodes when I never touched that argument at all.

 

[cajunator]

That something being more entertaining doesn't make a show better. In this very specific case, Horizon didn't become a better show because it was more entertaining in the 2nd half. It's you and Hosanna who changed the discussion to a show w/ 1 good episode is better than a show w/ no good episodes when I never touched that argument at all.

That would be like saying Yami to Boshi is more entertaining than Haibane Renmei making it a better show. That's also definitely not true. However that does mean Yami is one hell of a fun show to lose brain cells watching.

 

[Tomat]

That something being more entertaining doesn't make a show better. In this very specific case, Horizon didn't become a better show because it was more entertaining in the 2nd half. It's you and Hosanna who changed the discussion to a show w/ 1 good episode is better than a show w/ no good episodes when I never touched that argument at all.

It's the same argument. I do not understand how you can logically say a show that has some entertaining bits is not better than a show that has no entertaining bits at all.

This is the last post I'm making on this, because we're not getting anywhere. Regardless, it was nice to have a debate in here for once.