Ugh, I hate this "Legitimacy of Revisions" debate. I'd much rather read more on the "Is there a Difference between Quality and Entertainment Value" debate. So I guess I'll start one!
I'll start with an object example. I think all or almost all of us can agree that Kids on the Slope is better than, say, Symphogear. The former has some issues but it was obviously made with a lot of care, and it's classy too. The latter panders hard in certain respects and may charitably be described as junk food, although more objectively it's probably just junk.
And yet, KotS bored me to tears whenever the characters weren't playing music, but I was almost always having fun when I was watching Symphogear, and even the terrible Engrish was enjoyably bad. (That the phrase "enjoyably bad" even makes sense kind of goes to the core of the issue, I suppose.)
I'll start with an object example. I think all or almost all of us can agree that Kids on the Slope is better than, say, Symphogear. The former has some issues but it was obviously made with a lot of care, and it's classy too. The latter panders hard in certain respects and may charitably be described as junk food, although more objectively it's probably just junk.
And yet, KotS bored me to tears whenever the characters weren't playing music, but I was almost always having fun when I was watching Symphogear, and even the terrible Engrish was enjoyably bad. (That the phrase "enjoyably bad" even makes sense kind of goes to the core of the issue, I suppose.)