Forum - View topicEpisode reviews and scores
|
Goto page 1, 2 Next |
| Author | Message | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Rogueywon
Posts: 252 |
|
|||||
|
I know my post-count is low compared to most people on here, but just wanted to make a quick point about the episode reviews that ANN has started doing.
I like them. They're a good thing. The reviewers write well and even when I don't agree with a review, I like reading it. But... I think they'd be better if you "did a Eurogamer" and ditched the scores. Two reasons for this. First, I think the logic of episode review scores might be a bit wonky. In general, a single episode is going to constitute no more than 1/12th of a show's length. Broadly speaking, an episode of a 1 or 2-cour show is equivalent to a single chapter of a novel - and nobody reviews novels on a "by chapter" basis. With the exception of a few slice of life and comedy shows (plus filler episodes in the long-runners, I guess), few episodes are self-contained. So one episode of a show might be essentially set-up for the events of a later episode (particularly true of 2-cours, which can take their time a bit more). Does that mean that the "set-up" episode is a worse episode or less important for the show? Not as a general rule, no, even though the "pay-off" episode may be more satisfying. There's also the possibility in a few cases that the whole point of an episode might not become apparent until you've seen later episodes. To take an example from an older show, the first half dozen or so episodes of My-HiME look like typical genre fodder (I nearly dropped it after episode 4) - but events later in the series put them into an entirely different perspective. Episode reviews that provide a narrative commentary only can acknowledge that kind of issue - but forcing a review score onto it is creating hostages to fortune (and also potentially forcing the reviewer to feel that they have to justify themselves later if events do take an unexpected turn). Over in gaming-land, a lot of sites that have kept review scores don't use them now for episodic games (like Telltale's) until the final episode is available, for basically this reason. Second, I think scores aren't generally a good thing for forum civility. They inevitably lead to prolonged discussions along the lines of "OMG, this site rates Product X lower than Product Y, how wrong can you get?" In Eurogamer's case, the long-running joke was the 8/10 they gave the original Halo (a fair score to my mind, but I'm in a minority), which led to a decade of cracks about "so it's better than Halo?" whenever a game scored higher. Review scores are polarizing by their nature. I can see that when you are reviewing a $60 game or a full-season anime boxed set, there might be a case for using them as you are having to make a recommendation to the readers as to whether they should part with a significant chunk of cash. But applying that logic to weekly episodes (which most people are watching via subscription services which doesn't charge per-episode) makes less sense. Just my two cents. |
||||||
|
||||||
nobahn
 Subscriber Posts: 5120 |
|
|||||
Post-count doesn't mean jacks---. Personally, I have a lot of respect for those users who only post something when they have something worthwhile to post (e.g., bravetailor)*. And does this mean that I've posted a ton of crappy postings? When compared with bravetailor, the answer is an unequivocal "yes".
My dear sir, that is well said. *There are others, I just can't think of their usernames off of the top of my head. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Zac
ANN Executive Editor
 Posts: 7912 Location: Anime News Network Technodrome |
|
|||||
|
We hear this suggestion every now and then - the answer is that we'd like to do away with them, but from a business perspective it's a bad move to do away with them entirely. People like scores; overwhelmingly they are what a great majority of readers expect and want. Taking them away is bad for business.
I like the answer for this question Jeff Gerstmann gave recently, which can be summed up thusly: "I'm interested in giving people more, not less." It isn't like the scores are the only thing you have to go on - you can make a personal choice to disregard the score if it bothers you or feels meaningless, and instead focus on the written review itself (every review writer in history will love you forever for doing this, myself included). People who like the scores (or like arguing with the scores) have them, people who don't like them on a fundamental level can ignore them. It's better to have them included for the (dramatic majority of) people who want them than to do away with them entirely. For there to be less information in the review, even the score, to me seems like a bad move, and right now I have zero plans to remove them from the daily streaming reviews. Thanks for your considered and thoughtful input. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Rogueywon
Posts: 252 |
|
|||||
Fair enough. You guys have a business to run, so that's a perfectly fair answer. I'll be interested to see how the Eurogamer experiment ends. Their discussion threads seem to be a more harmonious place since they ditched scores. But that might be because all of the people who were fighting each other over review scores have all joined up on the same team to complain about the lack of them. 
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Key
Moderator
 Posts: 18223 Location: Indianapolis, IN (formerly Mimiho Valley) |
|
|||||
|
Let's also not forget, too, the well-recognized fact that many series fluctuate in quality over the course of their run, even within a one-cour series. As someone who does both the full-length and episode-by-episode reviews, I have long been bugged by the necessity to only give Overall grades in the former case when there were clear differences in quality between different parts of the series. (It starts poor but gets better or vice versa, or has a couple of episodes that are stinkers in an otherwise-quality show or a couple of quality episodes in an otherwise-stinker of a show, for instance.) Assigning by-episode grades corrects that. This can be seen most strikingly in Nic Creamer's episode reviews for SAO II, where he ranges from a D to an A based on the individual episode.
Now, I agree that that episode grade format is more prone to generating volatile reactions (a problem it shares with the Preview Guide), but frankly, any episode which gets people riled up like that is going to cause controversy anyway. |
||||||
|
||||||
One-Eye
 Posts: 2261 |
|
|||||
Its not the scores that is the problem with civility, its how some people behave. Some people will get bent if you give a B+ grade and argue heatedly that something deserves an A-, as though a B+ is a failing grade. This is no different than some users who complain that something shouldn't have a dub because they only watch subs and they think that video home release will come sooner without a dub, thereby generating animosity amongst dub lovers. Its no different than a forum user who gets upset because an anime is not a literal adaptation including every scene/frame/dialogue from the source material and declares the anime to be a failure. And woe unto the reviewer that is not familiar with every piece of canon and non-canon material in every medium of a particular franchise because there will be people who will complain about that. Some fans don't react particularly well if a reviewer or other forum member considers some scenes in an anime distasteful, then there is the possibility that "Shonen Jump Weekly" label starts getting thrown around. So since all of these things (and more) that I mentioned lend themselves to uncivility, should something be done about them too? Perhaps we should have rules or eliminate any talk about source material, dubs, fan service, etc?
Isn't Eurogamer grading with "Essential, Recommended or Avoid" categories? I could see people arguing about those, just like people will argue over a thumbs up or thumbs down system. People will have different tastes, different opinions and so there will always be disagreement which is ok. The challenge is encouraging people to be respectful and for the community to encourage respect for one another.
And that's perfectly cool and your post count doesn't matter to me BTW. Its what you say and how you say it. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Redbeard 101
Oscar the Grouch
Forums Superstar  Posts: 16939 |
|
|||||
I gotta agree with this. I have noticed an increase in the volume of volatile threads with the rise of episode reviews here. It's nothing alarming but it is noticeable for those who have been here long enough I think. The thing is I feel that most times in those situations the scores simply serve as a convenient point for users to post their ire and vitriol. They'd do it regardless but the episode grade simply gives them a convenient excuse I think. Like you said Key I think if an episode is going to generate that sort of heat it will do so with or without an episode grade. More anime being pushed out now via streaming than ever before means more chances for heated volatile threads/discussions. The episode reviews are just a scapegoat if you will for starting problems. I also agree with the notion that the episode reviews are very handy for shows that can change in quality. Beyond SAO II another prime example is Cross Ange I think. One week it could be an A or B and the next a C or D. It's also one of the most heated series discussions currently. Even without the episode grades it still would be. I'd rather have the episode grades and be forewarned about drops in quality then not have them and solely go by a complete series review which won't have the time to more adequately go into depth in regards to the highs and lows of a show. They're still very handy for someone wanting to check out a show that is completed already, or as a recap/end to a series. Having the episode reviews is like having the commentary during the football game and not just the halftime show commentary or post game show. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Key
Moderator
Posts: 18223 Location: Indianapolis, IN (formerly Mimiho Valley) |
|
|||||
Is is sad that I actually had to look up what Shonen Jump Weekly meant? 
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Errinundra
Moderator
 Posts: 6534 Location: Melbourne, Oz |
|
|||||
|
^
Apparently some people think it's perjorative. Strange. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
nobahn
Subscriber Posts: 5120 |
|
|||||
|
^
Very strange. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
dtm42
Posts: 14084 Location: currently stalking my waifu |
|
|||||
Well, that's because it is. I rarely see people on the internet actually embrace that term. Practically no-one likes being labelled a Shonen Jump Weekly, and it's unusual to see anyone who actually refers to themself as one. It is almost always used as an insult with negative connotations. I'm curious; if someone called you a Shonen Jump Weekly, would that make you defensive? Or would it make you proud instead? |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Errinundra
Moderator
Posts: 6534 Location: Melbourne, Oz |
|
|||||
|
Proud, most assuredly.
Anyone who uses the term perjoratively is openly declaring their supprt for injustice. Who would be that foolish, even if it were true? I try to conceal my anti-social beliefs. 
|
||||||
|
||||||
Alan45
 Village Elder Posts: 9861 Location: Virginia |
|
|||||
|
Someone who uses Shonen Jump Weekly as a negative is resorting to simple name calling in an attempt to discredit the other viewpoint. Name calling in an argument is usually an indication that you have run out of either facts or logic to support your position and have essentially lost the argument.
@dtm42 Taking a label intended to be derogatory and embracing it is time honored method of draining the meaning from the term. |
||||||
|
||||||
Touma
 Posts: 2651 Location: Colorado, USA |
|
|||||
If so it is probably much more sad that I did not look it up because I assumed that it was Shonen Jump Weekly. 
I did not understand how it applied in the context used, but I was not curious enough to put any thought into it. Now that I know that it probably means person who cares about social justice I still do not understand how it applies. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
dtm42
Posts: 14084 Location: currently stalking my waifu |
|
|||||
Oh, indeed. The gay community have been very adept at doing this, and it's paid off quite well. "Queer" used to be a nasty slur but nowadays it is so mild it would be embarrassing to use it as an insult.
Hardly. You can be against injustice and yet not want to use the term (for a variety of valid reasons). But I really don't want to start a pissing match, so I'll take my leave. And this subject is wildly off-topic anyway, so better to quit while we're still ahead. |
||||||
|
||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group