Is Older Anime Objectively Worse?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 21 ก.ย. 2024
- To be clear, I don't dislike old anime in the least! In fact I love spotting old, hidden gems.
But... how does it compare to the newest shows? Let me know what you think down below.
Anilist: anilist.co/use...
#oldanimeedits #frieren #newanime #yuyuhakusho
I am aware there's many inaccuracies in this video when it comes to "old anime being worse than new anime", however since a large portion of the video factually explains the history of anime, I prefer to keep it seen. All inaccuracies were not done on purpose. Merely done either in accordance with Anilist/MAL or done without careful forethought. Instances like these help me learn as I move forwards and, while some comments may be harsher than others, I do appreciate those who called out what I overlooked. In the future, I hope for less video blunders such as these to occur.
You already lost me on the entire point of your video when you cited a 80% on anilist as a marker of quality, these scores don't mean much, and older shows have a way harder time getting higher average scores than new ones on these sites, because they're going to be watched by less casuals who are harsher with their ratings, using this kinda marker you're saying shows like Serial Experiments Lain are worse than the average okay to decent seasonal (Hells Paradise as an example) lmao
This definitely needed more research.
Couldn't agree more to me this is one sided & a bit ignorant.
Westernized (only) and made too simple.
No.
- more people watch anime than ever, but most are not watching that many shows, let alone all; mostly "popular" stuff (usually action shounen). Even right now a lot of people would watch Jujutsu Kaisen, but not Frieren, or Apothecary Diaries
- too much focus on the animation and not enough on anything else. Sakuga -> great show. Old looking show with meh animation -> bad show. Heck, One Punch Man 2nd season had a better story but worse animation so people hated it
- hype
- sequels tend to have higher scores are there are fewer watchers and thus raters
- people are rating stuff not between 1 to 10, or 0% to 100%... but more between 5 to 10... no wonder scores are higher
- people do not seek out older shows; the people who do, are way more likely to have watch more anime and thus be harsher with their scores
Having checked this person's anilist, they are indeed part of the squad who says everything below 6/10 in their scoring system is among the worst to graze mankind
@@GMAH111 Thank you detective.
I suppose this video was a 6 / 10 too.
Yeah, the spike being in the mid to late 2000s is pretty significant. That was around the time where these anime review sites started to get big, and so people who are active on them would probably also be more likely to rate the things they're currently watching, and oftentimes that will probably lead to a higher score. I have an account on one myself mainly to curate my backlog and do fill out scores but I've made a habit of only really updating it a couple of times a year and find that with a few months between finishing a series and actually giving it a score that I can be more objective with how I view things, a few years makes it even more noticeable.
Not to mention just different audience expectations. If someone is 15 and watches a series meant for 15 year olds at present day then it will be more catered to their tastes, but if they go back and watch a series meant for people who were 15 in 1990 it will seem kinda off. There are some exceptions of classic series that are timeless and still compete in the modern day (Jojo at the most obvious example) but they're less common.
As you mentioned split seasons that's also something that can raise a net score. There are so many anime that have bum seasons, ones that can actively drag down the entire series if you were forced to rate it as a single show, but with split cour you're allowed to rate every season individually so the only ones that actually get the bad ratings are the bad season but as mentioned because of people sticking with a show if they like it, it seems like most of the time the ratings of a series remain fairly consistent across seasons and usually will actually go up even if the later seasons are considered to range from divisive to bad.
Also what is of note is that if the video is just counting the number of anime with a specific rating it is weighted by default in favor of modern, where there's just more anime at a given time. According to Wikipedia, across all of 1990 - the entire year - there were 70 new anime releases (TV, OVA and movie). In Winter 2024, on TV alone, there are 46 series airing. For Winter '24, if you include movies and OVAs that number it 75. Even if the ratio of good to bad scores is the same, the year that does nothing more than release 4 times as much content will naturally receive more high ratings.
@@Zetact_ I forgot to consider more shows being produced; you are right.
Another thing is that the older shows created some tropes; for ex something like Sailor Moon might seem incredibly cliche today... but it was a pioneer when it aired.
In other cases the trope changes; isekai was mostly found in works intended for a female audience, but it crossed into shounen with stuff like Inuyasha, then became the gamer isekai... then reverse isekai...
OPM S2 was worse OPM S1 not just because of the drop of animation quality. The main problem is that OPM was initially a satirical show mocking battle shonens and up until the last arc of S1 it worked well. But the author extended the manga for too long and OPM became what it was making fun of: a battle shonen. The whole Garou Arc with the mini-tournanent arc was at the total opposite of what the show was initially.
People are just getting lost in the hype. The shows I've seen are good for sure, but a lot of times they just get an inssnely high rating mainly based on the popularity of the series rather than it's overall quality. Too many people rate stuff 9/10 or 10/10 without any real critical analysis, which is not a bad thing if that's how they feel towards a show they like, but it's terrible for the people who want to see something mindblowingly great and end up watching something that "did not live up to the hype".
That's when so many people come to the conversation and say something's mid purely because it isn't the masterpiece so many people said it was, regardless of how good the show actually might be.
It's always the hype.
Literally all anime is overkill nowadays is Isekai or overhyped stuff. It isn't what it used to be. And things die easily.
You really desperately needed to address the elephant(s) in the room of demographics, of when MAL was created, the state of mind that encourages a majority to 'watch the things other people are talking about', the state of mind that encourages a majority to adopt the beliefs of their peers, the increase of anime followers steadily from after Naruto, after Attack on Titan, after One Punch Man/Boku no Hero Academia, etc. etc.
That's not to say we don't have some brilliantly directed and beautifully crafted anime today, but all of these things severely change what is going to be rated highly and what isn't even going to be checked out.
Also feels like we aren't mentioning OVAs at all? or the fact that there's plenty of 90s TV anime that isn't rated highly, and if I hadn't laid it out good enough in my last post, seemingly people who seek out shows beyond the norm just rate things lower than the norm does. You can blame that on secretly the mainstream anime were all good all along, maybe this is true, but one would have to look at how those people rate the usual popular things in order to gauge this as well.
No. A lot of Older anime still Hold up even with Today.
I think what is objectively better is the pacing. But the quality of the stories is nearly the same
It's moronic to look at old series through a modern lens, when aggregator websites didn't exist until the mid-2000s. Using 80% as a base for good, for any anime that came out prior to the mid-2000s is reductive. The Japanese people who watched Joe in the 70s and the westerners who watched Eva in 97 aren't counted at all in the MAL/AL scores. The fact of scores going up or down isn't even considered either. I completely disagree with the notion that modern Anime is superior, and I hold the completely opposite opinion. A lot of 'modern' Anime is overhyped digital diarrhea or low-budget throwaway Isekai. Yes, there's great 'modern' Anime and horrendous old Anime, but people should stop holding 'modern' Anime in such high regard, there has always been great Anime.
I agree 100%.
Just the question itself is quite dumb, why do people care so much about the age of things?
this video causes me physical pain. hope you can do better next time.
Tired of overhyped of new animes and unless an older anime is having an anniversary usually only in Japan no one cares or even know what it is.
These are mostly based on Western ratings.
Also many weebs or anime fans nowadays are only into the overhyped cr@p pr Ghibli films.
Ghibli is good and have inspired a lot of other studios. But they aren't the only ones.
Ngl gang this video is very ignorant and idiotic to be quite honest with you. Older anime is hailed for having better animation, better story, and overall better in every aspect besides the corny dialogue or choppy audio. Akira is still the best animated movie of all time and hasn’t been surpassed by anything from the last 20 years. If anything anime is going down in quality and manga is rising in popularity. Due to the recent uproar of failed adaptations and praise of faithful adaptations. Fans have just stopped dealing with bad quality and are picking the best and only the best to praise which there is a very short list of. Basically there are great new gens ofc but they simply cannot compare to the powerhouse of older anime. Even nowadays people do their best to recreate the older style of anime. Shii search up what if jjk was made In 2007 and you’ll see what I mean.
Depends, not every 80-90s anime have great animation. I have been watching yu yu hakusho and there are a lot of still frames, reused shots, slides and smear animation techniques that wouldn't be acceptable in todays standard of animation. Even from a story point of view its very chaotic and other animes later are better at conveying stories, and has less plot holes as its more thought out and improved on older formula. Whoever we are probably never going to get animation as good as Memories 1995 which was peak animation done almost entirely on 1s and traditional cel animation compared to today with digital drawing tables and 3d tools which is supposed to make stuff faster and easier to fix mistakes..
That's plain wrong, if anything you're the one who is short listing by picking what you believe is the best anime movie ever and compare it to modern animes. Why did you picked Akira instead of Karin? The reality is that none hail Akira for having better animation them what we get nowadays it is hailed for having unprecedented animation quality compared to the other productions of its time. Most anime that are labeled as classic actually don't have animation that would be considered as acceptable by our current standard. Classics are classics because of what they achieved for their time not because they still do better than what we can do todays.
If 1% of the anime were great in the past, then that's quite impressive given that only 0.1% of them are great these days.
Newer anime doesn't always look as good. I really hate that ultra shiny hair thing they have in newer shows although it's not always present. I don't think that the style of the anime is even half as important as it being entertaining to watch. Which seems to be your entire focus for the video? Weird take.
Where is Eva slightly less well known than Death Note? They have trains, KFC promos, all sorts of national treasure type icons of Eva everywhere in Japan. I don't recall seeing any death note colorways/skins in modern shooters.
anilist isn't the be all and end all measure of a show's "objective quality"!
Code Geass,FMA and Eva are NOT LESS KNOWN
I don't think you understand, anybody can drop a score in MAL and it would be added to the average, and most people on MAL are people that are under the age of 30, so they're heavily biased towards newer-gen anime, along with hype and recency bias causing scores to be higher. Also kids these days flat out just don't watch much old anime so the ones watching it are typically more experienced, and rate harsher.
Also, the answer is no. Anime these days focuses way too much on animation and fight scenes and they start to lack in other areas. Look at JJK for example, and I'm going to be very clear, I like JJK, but the second season was way too focused on fighting and animation resulting in a lack of character development and wasted deaths. Then you look at older anime's like SEL and Monster that put there all into the quality of the story.
If you look at manga it's even more obvious, Berserk and Vagabond are better than any new gen manga.
I'd like to hear the reasoning behind using MAL raitings to argue how shows were recieved during the '70s. You'd be hard pressed to find the same perspecive of the target audience back then among the viewers from this side of the millenia.
there have always been good and bad plots, characters, music etc etc but the animation quality is a lot better these days. It makes it hard to enjoy old anime as much.
Not for me, alot of old ones are better then knew anime. When something truly good comes out, it timeless.
1:55 boy, akira is a movie
Can't comment on new anime as I only watch retro anime.
People should stop reviewing history tho the lens of nostalgia. Like ask people what older animes they watched, they will name Akira, LOGH, Evangelion, Monsters and few more. Ask them what bad show from that time period and what would they answer? crickets... Of course they never watched a trash show from that time period, why would they anyway? After all, pre-2010 anime wasn't yet mainstream in western world after all and only the cream of the crop reach the western audience, so if you watched a bad show it was probably because you were looking for it.
Nowadays we get exposed to both bad (and oh dear lord forbidden japan for creating such abomination) and great, we remember both due to their recency, but give it a decade or two and people will only remember the greatest of shows of the current generation, none will give a crap about the fact we got Ex-Arm.
So while rating site metrics are very unfair and inaccurate to prove the point, most people commenting should stop looking at animes through nostalgia bias.
Couldn't said it any better
I just watched the original macross and goddamn was so good
Nope quite the opposite
Anime and manga work like any other form of art and storytelling. Over time, as more stories are created there is simply more and more foundation for future artists to build on. Shows from the past influence present ones just as the stories we enjoy today will inevitably shape the future, meaning that the next great hit will have a few decades more of themes to build upon or argue with, successes to look up to and failures to learn from, ideas and concepts to be inspired by. The same way a modern artist has more tools to use and resources to learn from than a caveman the same way future mangakas will be able to create masterpieces greater than the ones before them. It's gonna be harder and harder to create a unique story but when they do eventually end up with one a lot of the hard work is already done for them
people had higher standards in the past
It’s the same to me really people are watching popular shows specifically Shonen Anime and hype them just like they did in the past, so nothings really changed really lmao, I don’t really care I just watch what I watch.
You are a funny guy XD
old anime is worse
nope and wrong
be blinded by nolstagia boomer @@trollking6315
Idk this video kinda seemed like a big nothing burger. Needed more research and more in depth delving into the topic. Not really convinced. 100% better luck on your next one! Hope it comes out better