Are you capable of looking past mistakes (QUALITY, lack of budget, etc.) in manga and/or anime simply because it has a great story and/or a great cast of characters?
only plebs get can't appreciate good writing
>Story > Characters > Art Direction = Art Design > Music
>Story > Characters > Art Direction > Art Design
Objectively true. There's no point watching or reading something if the story doesn't interest you.
Why wouldn't the author just write a LN then?
Here's the way I look at it.
You have shows like [C] that have a limited budget and put their all into the show regardless.
Then you have shows like KLK that obnoxiously flaunt their low budget by doing stupid gimmicky camera pans and "drag and drop" animation.
I rather have lower quality art with low quality animation than decent art with non existent animation. Fucking cocky ass trigger.
Animation quality has surprisingly little to do with the quality of a series. This is why shows like Psycho Pass or Samurai Flamenco can be more well-liked on /a/ than KyoAni stuff.
I read and enjoyed Higurashi.
What if the animation is good?
No, it's not.
>There's no point watching or reading something if the story doesn't interest you.
This is also not true.
Well, Pyscho Pass wasn't THAT poorly animated.
I always prioritize characters first. If the characters don't hold my attention, I don't care about what happens to them.
I'm capable of looking at Mako.
I like [C] and KLK a lot.
/r/ nice (psycho) pass, chief.gif
Low budget shows can still look amazing. Kyousou Giga looked exceptionally pretty despite the obviously lower budget.
Was just about to post it.
>animation not a factor for anime
>music mattering the least when choice of music can decide whether a scene is awkward as fuck or a masterpiece
this is objectively false
kyousougiga didnt have a "low" budget
she looks sad
>expecting high focus on plot
And here we go.
Still, I consider the technical qualities of an anime one of the most important categories.
Kyoukai no Kanata in 1080p is absolutely amazing.
That's why I said "lower." There were still a lot of parts where they awkwardly stood unmoving for a while and most of the shots were just people standing still and "mouths flapping."
holy shit my fucking sides
is this actually worth watching?
Yes it's amazing.
Totally; characters make or break shows by themselves. Kill Me Baby was great despite being made for roughly $20 and a couple McChicken lunches.
Other shows can have all the art and animation in the world but if the characters are boring then the show just feels lacking. I'd say a good contrast here is KLK and Space Dandy:
- KLK has oftentimes fucking terrible animation, to the point of really interfering with my enjoyment of the show. However it has some entertaining characters and that is pretty much exactly what keeps me coming back to it each week even if the plot is going nowhere/almost in fucking circles.
- Dandy often has really fucking slick animation and never hits low points anywhere near as bad as KLK's. However Dandy himself just doesn't really feel larger-than-life like the the show itself is designed; same goes with the crew. It's a mismatch between style and writing; I expected the characters to be fucking ridiculous like say The 5th Element. But they're not. I didn't even like the ultra-campy style at first but now it's grown on me a lot but the show still just isn't there without the characters being interesting and purely episodic adventures. If there is an actual plot to Dandy then that'll save it, if not it'll just get really stale despite all the effort that went into it.
Basically this, I agree about KLK and Dandy too. KLK is like a big sine wave of quality that's shit sometimes and really fun others, while Dandy, ironically, even while trying to be all wacky never really is ever that crazy. Comma splicing.
I've gotta disagree about Dandy, even though Kill la Kill manages to kind of save itself, Dandy is exactly what I expected it to be and it's been really fun so far. It's only three episodes in and I already enjoy it more than Kill la Kill. I do agree that characters make or break shows, though.
This might be the most retarded post i've ever seen on 4chan
I've been here 6 years now
>This might be the most retarded post i've ever seen on 4chan
>I've been here 6 years now
These two claims are mutually exclusive. Did you mean six minutes?
I like mob psycho 100 even if the art looks like something I can do in 30 minutes.
I believe that style is really what is to be focused on here. You can't convey a comedic scene very well if you pour all your effort into making Akira-tier animation into it. It just doesn't come across as funny. When you have a series like Inferno Cop, the shit is hilarious because the animation style is so simplistic and plays itself off. Studio Ghibli movies are never very humorous, but the gorgeous visuals carry action and adventure very well.
I don't think that "Good" animation is an objective requirement for a series to be enjoyable, especially where it isn't proper. However, in series where it's a part of the style, yes, it greatly improves the enjoyability of it.
Yeah, Jinrui or Haibane for example didn't have a high budget but I like both shows a lot.
It goes both ways. A great story can carry a show despite mediocre animation and an abundance of QUALITY, but beautiful animation can make up for a mediocre story. pic related
>but beautiful animation can make up for a mediocre story
> but beautiful animation can make up for a mediocre story.
Yeah but I think I'm starting to finally appreciate just how good animation has gotten when I go back and watch classics.
[C] had a god tier character design on the female lead, though.
>A great story can carry a show despite mediocre animation and an abundance of QUALITY, but beautiful animation can make up for a mediocre story.
Yeah...no that's never been the case. People just tend to be more lenient with something that looks good because half of the time they're just paying attention to the visuals instead of the story or characters, it's fine to like a film for looking great but saying that it should ever compensate for a lackluster story is just plain shallow.
I'd definitely like a show to have a good story, but I want to have my cake and eat it. Since anime is a visual medium, I'd like it to have good animation and directing too. Sometimes I'm willing to watch shows just for the animation, provided it's really well-made and the story isn't offensively stupid or boring.
>but beautiful animation can make up for a mediocre story.
People actually believe this and yet people wonder why Redline bombed and poorly animated schlock like Attack on Titan was a huge success.
I didn't realize he was talking about commercial success and not his own personal opinion when it comes to enjoying an anime.
>Dandy is exactly what I expected it to be
A Scifi comedy that's not funny?
because despite episodes 19 and 22, attack on titan managed to be interesting while having good animation in the first half of the show, it really started to suffer visually in the second half of the show though
but to be fair, the manga's art is just as shit as the show's animation
>This is why shows like Psycho Pass or Samurai Flamenco can be more well-liked on /a/ than KyoAni stuff.
This is a joke right?
Fuck off IRC.
>attack on titan managed to be interesting while having good animation in the first half of the show
/a/ enjoys SamFlam ironically the bad animation just enhances the shitty writing altogether and only retards and Urobutcher cock suckers liked Psycho Pass.
I'd hardly call that shallow. On one hand you're admiring the skill of the animators and the other you're admiring the work of the writers. In what way does animating have less depth than storyteling? The shallowness comes from the way someone praises or criticizes something, not what they are praising or criticizing.
SYBIL IS CRIMINAL BRAIN IN A JAR
KAWORU DIES (big surprise there), OLD MAN DIES
There I saved you the trouble
saying the entire show was animated poorly is a retarded generalization
i'll admit that it suffered visually but it's not literal eye cancer like kill la kill
ONE can draw well, he just doesn't most of the time
His writing is fantastic though
If the movie was just a slideshow presentation with no narrative and only show off the skills of the people involved than sure but if the film wants to tell a story and fails bad at it good animation can't save it at all. It's no difference from Bayformer movies.
Shingeki has got much bigger animation problems than Kill la Kill. KLK is just punching below its weight with its general lack of animation but SnK couldn't even get the drawings on model half the time.
No dude. Samflam is unironically great. It's so entertaining, kind of like inferno cop.
Nah it's literally eye cancer, one thing is particular I hated was how incredibly murky brown the color palette for the show was, it made thinks look like literal shit. The shot cuts KLK uses is often amusing and don't detract from the characters and story however the shortcuts and poor direction of AoT was really grating episode 13 in particular was bad.
Yes. I don't know if watching it with /a/ is what made it great, but its not bad by itself
I'm a fan of Baki the grappler.
>Samflam is unironically great.
>Actually comparing SamFlam with Inferno Cop
The latter knew what it was from the start and ran with it for 12 episodes straight without letting up, the former started out as something then went retarded.
But Attack on Titan was saved by its interesting story whereas Kill la Kill is just an unfunny, boring QUALITYfest.
Regardless, the manga's art was shit so naturally the adaption probably wasn't going to be much better.
SamFlam isn't even great ironically. It's just pure shit.
>But Attack on Titan was saved by its interesting story
That's the cutest mako pic I've ever seen, fukken saved
jesus fucking christ
bad art is one thing
retarded facial expressions are another
Why wouldn't you compare SamFlam to Inferno Cop?
> but if the film wants to tell a story and fails bad at it good animation can't save it at all.
I never said it could, I'm not the anon who posted the Redline pic. I'm just saying that holding animation in equal regard to story isn't an invalid or shallow thing to do if you're approaching it in a decent way by making valid criticisms and interesting observations.
If a story is bad to the point where it hinders enjoyment (as apposed to being neutral or beneficial) then of course it becomes harder for the animation to carry the show. However, the same can be said of a good story and poor production values.
>But Attack on Titan was saved by its interesting story
>attack on titan managed to be interesting while having good animation in the first half of the show,
inb4 BUT BUT THEY FIXED IT!
Before we hit Gorilla Gate, sure. It was even AOTY.
>Attack on Titan was saved by its interesting story
>However, the same can be said of a good story and poor production values.
Disagree entirely. This show had literally no budget yet it's one of the best things I've ever seen.
>great story and/or a great cast of characters
Such a blatant subjective points.
Any retard could overlook any important aspect if they simply never pay attention to anything of what they like.
Samurai Flamenco went to shit after Gorilla and had one episode that managed to be the best of the season. That's it, it's still shit.
>However, the same can be said of a good story and poor production values.
I'm pretty sure a show with Norio Matsumoto providing key animation for three episodes(and one of them solo) isn't exactly starved for budget.
>such a blatant subjective points
nigga learn to english
ONE is a good example of how a series can be good even if the art itself sucks.
It seems pretty pleb to only watch anime for animation.
GaoGaiGar had a lot of repeating & recycled animation but if you can't look past something like that you should stop watching anime forever.
>muh brown color palette
would you have preferred a black color palette? perhaps something edgier like black and red?
Er..what? Whether the animator is skilled or not doesn't save a low budget show or makes it look better and saying he did three fucking episode (a few key scenes in those) out of 13 doesn't detract from my statement.
That Gorilla was one of, if not the best twists in anime history.
I loved Haibane but that show looked really low budget outside "that scene.
Thanks for reminding me it has been almost two decades since I saw this. Time to download.
For me, music was the saving grace of of symphogear and excused its shitty story.
Both are among my utmost favorite shows. But I merely see them as an examples of a story being so good it was able to overcome tremendous issues with production. To clarify, I personally don't hold animation and story in the same regard, but I think it's a perfectly valid stance for someone to take.
I'm just disagreeing with the notion that it's a particularly cheap-looking show. It's not particularly well-animated, but it had its share of standout episodes. I'm not disagreeing with the notion that one can't enjoy a cheap-looking show that has a good story though. LOGH looks pretty cheap most of the time but it's one of the best anime I've seen.
>It seems pretty pleb to only watch anime for animation.
Especially since most anime aren't even well animated. Most of anime's appeal to Westerners was the storytelling it brought which was entirely different from what was the standard for cartoons at the time.
Name happenings that were more unexpected.
>LOGH looks pretty cheap most of the time but it's one of the best anime I've seen.
That's a really good example. LOGH looked like ass most of the time especially those gaiden stories. But the story and characters were so engrossing that it made me forget about it.
What about shows that had bad animation and bad storytelling that were highly successful?
Are these TV-DVD-BD comparisons?
It was pretty boring and cringe-inducing pre-Gorilla Gate. Gorilla Gate could have possibly saved that show but instead it just went right back to awful pacing, boring directing, terrible script, etc.
Recycled animation, which isn't something that shocking. Half of Utena was recycled animation
No, those are season to season comparisons. Gundam SEED was notorious for reusing animation; SEED Destiny was notorious for using animation from SEED.
Stock footage comparison
You know it.
The early parts of Baki the Grappler look so shitty. I still read all of it. At least all that was translated.
Yes. Too bad KlK had neither of those
PREPARE YOUR LIVER
Hump.... did any of you saw Birdy The mighty: Decode 02?
One of the best examples on [sarcasm]QUALITY[/sarcasm].
Even so, I enjoyed it. So yeah, you can see an horribly animated series without dropping it.
Will it hurt your experience? yes, but its amount depends on the viewer
I know why this pic bothers me,
for one it doesn't look like Mako, like at all.
All you have to do is make a circle and you have Mako.
But it's because there's 3 outlines for the drawing when the original had one.
Fuck it, I'll be back tomorrow with a mako version of this that actually looks like Mako.
What exactly am I looking at here?
But Birdy Decode 2 had amazing animation for most of the part. The finale in particular is one of the best action sequences in TV anime in my opinion.
What do you mean?
Wrong or unfinished colouring.