Why do people like FMA Brotherhood?

>MAL
Oh how this place has fallen.

Given that mostly adults are doing the ranking and it's ranked so highly, it's clear it does have entertainment value for adults. It's subjective.
You don't have to like it, just accept your spot in the minority.

Also episode 3 is set up at the beginning to show a jaded young man. He changes throughout the series. Unless your problem is just him being an atheist.

Also, that thing that the guy said about knowledge being more valuable is total BS. Never happened.

Still not sure what you mean, but having to pay a price for something is hardly an invention to be ripped off, especially since in FMA it's an overarching theme.

FMA is above everything a shounen. It's strengths are:
> Interesting combat without too much speedline/power level-based resolution
> A very well planned structure with a beginning, climax and end (this makes it an unicorn in shounen-land)
> It has a specific story it wants to tell
> Diverse and fleshed out cast (admittedly a given in the genre)

As for it being the #1 anime ever, MAL is shit

>> Interesting combat
Literally beats the final boss by punching him real hard.
>> A very well planned structure
Goes from dark episodic stories (Rose, Shou Tucker) to generic shonen action about defeating the 7 bad guys filled with slapstick comedy.
>> It has a specific story
A hugbox plot where the m.c. has no tough choices to make and anyone who is opposed to white knight mc with his own morals needs to be evil (Scar's random killing of Winry's innocent parents)
>> Diverse and fleshed out cast
Most side-characters are completely dropped and only referenced in the epilogue where cliche'd happy endings are forced for every character.

Why are FMAkids so delusional? Your black-and-white, childish story is basically a poor man's One Piece. Just because it ended doesn't make it good, get higher standards.

Attached: naruto.jpg (1855x1300, 859K)

There's a lot of things I just don't like that I still recognise are very good, like Mushishi. But FMA:B is simply very badly made at least in these first three episodes.

No I mean the whole scene itself. Plus everything else that i've heard happens.

And I can usually enjoy shonen and overlook severe faults, but with this almost every scene has something unforgivably bad and i'm just not prepared to watch 61 more episodes of it. Maybe i'm being a bit harsh but i've seen other anime get absolutely shit on for stuff FMA:B is doing even worse.

And i'm aware MAL is shit but you can usually at least count on something rated high to be enjoyable y'know? Even if most of the true gems are outside the top 100.

Wait, you stopped after the first three episodes? My god no wonder your opinion is so shit. That's less than 5% of the series, and one of the major criticisms of the show (even from the people who like it) is that the first episodes are more rushed/flat because they were trying not to rehash the old series too much and get to the meat of the series.

The ten first chapters are mediocre adaptation in Brotherhood; Check the 10 first one in the original fma

>Nobody responded
You are completely correct.

>Just because it ended doesn't make it good, get higher standards.
When you complain about black and white stories and slapstick comedy and happy endings, it sounds like you just don't like shounen.

FMA babies aren't capable of addressing or refuting criticism. The only case they can make for their series is that it ended and it's popular on MAL.

Attached: 1495807058857.png (280x250, 44K)

more accurately watch the first 13 eps of original and then start from 04 in brotherhood

Based. Hunter x Hunter is far better

Attached: 1561748838589.png (640x480, 325K)

If a show can't hook me in three fucking episodes (Hell it should do it in one, i'm an easy guy to hook) Then it isn't good. Watch episode 3 again and honestly defend it to me. Honestly try to explain why I should've kept watching after that.
Maybe. Right now I need to cleanse my pallete.
Except this series is trying to be edgy and philosophical and is praised by adults. If it doesn't want to admit its shonen-ness I won't treat it like one. And I do enjoy shonen anyway (Naruto when I was a kid, JoJo, Avatar Last Airbender if it counts) Is it high art? No, but it is compared to this.

May give HxH a go soon as thats another i've been putting off, although the shitpostings of its fans in every thread are annoying.

Or don't because you're a total faggot, OP

The ending is shit but Mustang is one of the best characters in shonen which makes the anime great.

Attached: 1dlf8uUNeNzY2JGJov6_9aTuBgJl8epoIgwAjJzNaFQ.png (700x1029, 586K)

The show has the context of the prior series you idiot. What you are complaining about is the equivalent of skipping an episode and being upset that the truncated recap at the beginning of the new episode was flat.

I'm not saying you have to like it though. Just stop shitting on it when you have different tastes. Nothing is objectively good, but FMAB is widely enjoyed, so you really aren't going to win. But what can I expect of a tool who enters into a threat with a "Plz mods no deleto"

A reboot should be rebooting the story but I will try that route.
>Nothing is objectively good
Incorrect. Read a book.

And I didn't say "Plz mods no deleto" I said they can delete if they want, because its just a rant.

I read the manga and liked it.

Obviously the mods can delete whatever they want, so why say it? You were just trying to pull the same kind of shit. Obviously you didn't say it exactly or I wouldn't have said "deleto". It's just a "I dun really care" "lol delete if you like faggot" teenager tier move.

Which fits if you are sheltered from enough where you think there is pure objectivity in art. But sure. Tell me which book will objectively have the right philosophy. I'll go read it.

I hate it with a passion, but I hate FMA in general. Dubfaggots ruined it for me.

>Except this series is trying to be edgy and philosophical and is praised by adults.
Being adult has nothing to do with liking or not liking an action show. In any case, FMA isn't as edgy as the first arc would lead you to believe.

>Incorrect. Read a book.
Different shows appeal to different people. I don't believe that everything is subjective but I'll say this. Have courage in your preferences. If you can't watch mushishi, mushishi is a shit show. No need to call it very good just because it was a pain in the ass in a particularly refined sort of way. If you really like naruto, naruto is a great show. No need to shit on it just because some people on the internet will laugh at you. In the end the only thing that matters is whether or not you enjoyed watching it.

its really really really boring, I watched the whole thing because I am willing to push through something that is shit in the beginning if it can grow into something good, but this garbage never did. it was just really bland and failed to pique my interest for the full 60 episodes or whatever it was

Based. Fuck burgers for overhyping this, rest of the world doesn't give a single shit anymore.

I hope that vic mignogay gets arrested

And to clarify since that may have come off as condescending, I only said that because I find it unfortunate how many people will barely finish a show, and then recommend it anyway because it's a high masterpiece or whatever. Or the opposite, they'll binge through a really fun show and then
>6/10 guilty pleasure haha

Neat.

Based

To make it short the belief that art is subjective is the path that leads to the extinction of good art and hence it refutes itself. I'm not getting into this now but the measuring sticks by which the quality of art can be ascertained are fully agreed upon and have nothing to do with enjoyment and popularity.

Completely false. There is the baseline of "objectivity" in that most humans have a similar subjective base, but culture defines that.
It's a stupid argument to have in a FMAB shit thread, but all that needs to be said is most people enjoy it who watch it, and most people who rate it rate it highly.

no it wasnt neat, it was a slog. fucking 60 episodes of nothing

So if the quality of art has nothing to do with enjoyment, why should we care about quality again? Why not care about the splorgness of art instead of its quality, splorgness is another metric that has nothing to do with enjoyment, I can give you a list of objective criteria for how to determine it if you want.

Neat blog

Okay so i'm very much enjoying Dumbbell's this season, more than most other anime i've consumed. Are you saying I should give it a 10 because of how much fun i'm having? Or perhaps there are levels to quality and "enjoyment" is the lowest measure?
Okay i'm really not interested in getting to deep into this argument and I am aware i'm in the minority on this one. But lets say I upload a YouTube video where i'm acting like a retard and throwing paint at a canvas. This then goes viral and loads of people enjoy it. Does the painting then deserve to go on display in the Smithsonian?

>"Why should we care about quality again?"
Because art is important. Not addressing the rest of this post.

sorry i hurt your feelings by expressing my thoughts about your favorite anime in a thread about said series

I can't wait until that faggot vic goes into jail

>Are you saying I should give it a 10 because of how much fun i'm having?
Yes, 10 means you had a ton of fun watching it, nothing more nothing less. A 9 would also be OK if its not in the 5th percentile or whatever of how much fun you had.

I genuinely don't understand this mentality where your scores are different from your preferences.

>Because art is important.
Because we enjoy it

The reason Ed could trade his gate/knowledge for Al's body was because Al unknowingly traded his body for his own knowledge, this made knowledge of the truth equivalent to Al's body due to equivalent exchange.Not sure where you're getting the love thing from though.

Probably no, because we subjectively decided what goes in the Smithsonian. But if you could go find a list of the objective rules for art the Smithsonian uses I'll listen. Given that the Supreme court defined art indirectly as "you know when you see it"...

I've literally seen a pile of wood with a hockey stick out of the top of it at a Stanford Art museum (and not a pop up one, but a full in building display at the art museum). So maybe?

Sorry you thought for a moment you were important enough to do that ;)

>Dropping fma for hxh
You've got it backwards you ding dong

>I genuinely don't understand this mentality where your scores are different from your preferences.

Let us say that there are two sports teams, one from your region and another from a different region. In this scenario we will say that the other team outperforms yours on average. You may then be able to say that you prefer your team despite the other team being objectively better.

Attached: 20180804_123932.jpg (5312x2988, 2.46M)

>Because we enjoy it.

There we have it ladies and gentlemen. The death of culture. The reason why we have nothing but superheroes in cinemas. The reason the amount of books Americans read each year is in freefall. The reason Banksy has so much fame.

I'm done with this conversation. If you can't understand levels of value outside of base enjoyment there's no reason speaking to you. Enjoy the rest of your day.

And that's where the popularity vs enjoyment dilemma comes from. But you're pushing for some third quality divorced from anything else that we should for some reason care about. And to make it more attractive you hijack existing words like 'good' and 'quality' that have pretty clear existing meanings already.

and im sorry that youre an assblasted retard

Go watch some PragerU and blog about it
Funny thing is all the tools who know what "true" culture or meaning is all find it fits relatively well with what they valued already

see:

If culture is about watching shit I don't enjoy and will dread rewatching I want nothing to do with it.

Attached: 1406317088647.jpg (554x439, 59K)

>But you're pushing for some third quality divorced from anything else that we should for some reason care about

Is quality of writing not relevant to the quality of a (typically) story based medium?

Pretty subjective desu

Go to a writing class and tell the teacher that when your work is critiqued.

>chibi humour makes up half the show
Stop watching anime

The plain english meaning of the phrase 'quality of writing' refers to things like, was it immersive, was it boring, which ultimately reduce to whether you liked it or not.

If you take that phrase and redefine it to match a list of criteria that are not correlated to stuff we actually care about (such as enjoyment when consuming the work), then no, it is no longer relevant.

Huh? What do you mean by this? 95% of Yea Forums uses MAL. The same was true 10 years ago. You don't need to try so hard to signal to fit in.

Oh, darn, I forgot subjective criticism exists. My bad. Truly it is the 40 year old non-tenured professor at a college who has objective knowledge of art and writing.

>Someone older than me who's been studying this his whole life couldn't possibly know more than me.

>can't he just give the other one for his mom?
He tried that you idiot, it took his leg for knowledge.

Oh, darn, I forgot knowing more was the same as having a knowledge of objective quality.

Why do some people get so angry when some character in a show makes fun of religion? I've heard similar complaints about Rick & Morty.

Because it reminds non-plebs of their atheist phase when they were 12 before they came back to God the following year, and they know those 12 year olds are who are being targeted.

So its because they associate atheism with 12 year olds?

Because you're a retard. Clearly the problem is with everyone and not you.

Edgy atheism and scoffing at religion is exclusively done by autistic people and young teens/tweens, yes.

What would an ideal expression of one's atheist views sound like to you?

It's because a lot of the new "counter culture" among young people is conservative. People don't become conservative with age as much as the meme people say goes.

Modern edgy kids aren't atheists. They cry out Dues Vult or joke about SJWs. It was the 1990s and early 2000s edgelords who went all fedora.

So in summary, fucking idiot OP stopped watching after 3 episodes. It went too slow for him because he has no attention span or interest in the show to begin with. He dropped it and made this garbage fire of a thread.

Got it.

If you're going to ape platitudes about how everything is subjective and give all valuations equal weight without concern to what degree of arbitrariness is present in those scales then you're (subjectively) objectively retarded.

That or you could just say that you're a hedonistic nihilist so you can spare everyone the argument with a brick wall.

There are objective qualities that the teacher could grade you on. Setting aside grammar (as I doubt you would argue against it), if it is a story then they could critique the consistency of the objects on the story (locations/descriptions of individuals or objects), character consistency (would a character reasonably know this information? is how a character is being presented consistent with how they have been presented before?), or if the themes of the story work in conjunction with the narrative. Supposing instead that it is instead a paper in favor of an argument then they could critique your arguments in your writing (does what your saying actually argue your point, or is it tangential?).

Don't worry about it, is not being genuine. All expressions of atheism likely piss him off, but the baseline endorsement of God everywhere is fine.
See

I don't scoff at people who hold beliefs about higher powers or spirituality; I scoff at people who insist their interpretation of some fairy tail book is correct and all other interpretations of various fairy tail books are wrong.

Or you could fucking just go read something as basic as Sartre and settle down.
I believe that there are subject rules all things play by, and that you can discuss why those rules are there and what matters, or even if they should matter.
OP was doing the whole "I don't care if most people like it or agree it is well made, it is objectively shit because I say so".

Some of those things may be objectively present (eh) but again, the weight put on them is subjective. I literally critique med students on their writing for a living, so I understand the value of properly communicating... but I also realize that the standards I set for people are different from my colleagues because we value different things. SUBJECTIVELY

None. God objectively exists and Jesus is his prophet.
Based.

AYO
Too slow

Young religion fags are the new fedora tippers

>Some of those things may be objectively present (eh) but again, the weight put on them is subjective. I literally critique med students on their writing for a living, so I understand the value of properly communicating... but I also realize that the standards I set for people are different from my colleagues because we value different things. SUBJECTIVELY

I don't really think that I can argue against that, although I feel that the arguments of 'the quality of any art is subjective' and 'qualities of art can be objectively argued but the weight of these qualities is different from individual to individual and so critique is subjective' are fairly different.

Unrelated, but I'm actually working on my med school application right now.

Attached: Gomen, Gomen.jpg (436x467, 49K)

yeah, because there is much more value in consuming art that you don't enjoy (or at least less). WTF are you even getting at? It's not like hollywood is trying to actually create good "art" they are trying to make money with the artform of film.
Sure, there are exceptions, but hollywood is about making money at the end of the day. Why do you think we get reboots of 20 yo brands more than original stories?

FMA 03 was good, although FMA B was shit when it failed miserably at being a battle shonen

Sure you can, but if you're going to argue from the point that all systems of valuation are subjective because they were conceived as the result of human experience (which is obviously not objective), there's no point in further discussion. You have to take for granted a logical framework which exists because it's functional (arbitrary as that function may be) in order to have a discussion.

The value lies in learning something, understanding a different perspective, or critically thinking about something you normally would not consider.

Not really. Objectively we can say there is more green than red in that photo. Or count the number of pixels. Or in a painting the brush strokes. Or even in a broad sense the closeness it resembles the thing it was painting/the object it was trying to represent (similarity in colors, how many shapes are shared, etc.). But all of that "data" is useless for drawing most meaningful conclusions. The subjective bits are the things we enjoy talking about, but people get stubborn or don't like thinking about their opinions as not "the truth" so people cling to systems that let them think they are objective.

If you want any tips on the app I can give you some, but best of luck either way.

Yeah, problem is I gave a logical framework of subjective value an art has based on who enjoys it. I was arguing against someone who claimed objectively that my logical framework was shit, which led to the devolution of this whole mess.

FMAB is a alternate version of the story. it cuts out some things early on. this is typical with OVA versions which get made here and there with anything that has a following. its better drawn and lays out some things that are not covered by the original

it only exist for fans of the original. if you dont like that one you wont like brotherhood

the reason it was made was probably 1 segment in the original mentioned in passing practically which resurfaces at the end with the direct implication that rose was raped by soldiers. a woman from the middle east was raped by a group of western soldiers and she lost her mind and ended up having the baby. if you look at a map and acknowledge that most of the story takes place in europe its like well what is that turkey? some EU soldiers raped some girl in turkey

the problem is that they removed some things like the chimera execution and earlier the parrot thing was done differently so very early in all of it there is a change in tone which persists. even up to the end in which nothing is really sacrificed for everything to be OK. its like it was white washed by america just to show on adult swim and pray nobody thought we needed to stop the war on terror

Hopefully that application is for next year. Or is like, a secondary application for this year.

Otherwise you're kinda fucked this cycle my friend

Your words of reason are lost on this brainlet. He can't concieve of value outside of what makes him feel good.

Attached: 1440168666-20150821.png (684x1416, 278K)

Did Arakawa read B't X?

>This isn't magic, it's science
>Fedora atheism
>Homunculus
>Main villain is god
>MC want to save his brother and he hang out with a humongous mecha (Arakawa mixed both)

Attached: B't X 16_02 (14).jpg (2000x1497, 1.62M)

I think she also played that PS2 game: Shadow of Memories, similar story about alchemy.

Because your logical framework for valuation of art is so utterly steeped in subjectivity that it doesn't permit any rationale in discussion. It strips meaning from not only critique of the work, but from the work itself. And sure, you can argue that the work is inherently meaningless (as all things are), but again, that's pointless for discussion.

While those qualities do not have any clear application are there not qualities which do have application and can be somewhat measured? Suppose a biologist and I were to both look at this image, the biologist may critique the clarity of the image and how it is perhaps useful for visualizing the insect and plant whereas I am more interested in how it is visually reminiscent of an individual with their hand on their head. Both of us appreciate the image in our own ways and the degree of quality for both of us could be easily changed (a less/more clear image for a biologist and the positioning of the leg for me).

No questions currently but I'll see if I can come up with some.

More accurately it is a few secondary applications for 2020.

Wouldn't be surprised, FMA might just be the most derivative manga i've ever read. And worst of all it can't surpass anything it derives from in any area.

...all frameworks are formed entirely subjectively. My argument isn't that we shouldn't value anything, but rather that we should look at more than one way of valuing things. My argument is that enjoyment of media is the core for the value of it, because media that is not meant to be enjoyed or at least evoke some emotion is not meant to be consumed. And art not meant to be consumed is not art.

It's like you only read one bit of the conversation. People were defending specific criticisms of the plot well before the OP went into full objective vs subjective territory.

Oh sure, but those are subjective criteria. We can say objectively that there are measurements we took there, but the value of those measurements to humans is subjective.

But I believe we both agree on the general idea yes. You can often make objective, discrete observations (especially when working with a relative measure as a base) but the discussion that follows is subjective. We appreciate in our own ways.

You have to take for granted the idea of degrees of subjectivity in order to have a discussion. A functional framework layered upon another and so on becomes (subjectively) objective, even though the underlying framework was entirely subjective to begin with. Pure hedonism is a system of valuation, but not one that lends itself to discussion, because it does not adopt the pretense for "objective" criteria by which value can be communicated semi-universally.

The fact you put quotes around objective is enough.
The people here are so afraid of discussion that the moment subjectivity entered at all (not "everything is meaningless" mind you, but whatever) they started going straight for God and objective truth.

In order to have a genuine discussion, you'd have to get off Yea Forums

"Everything is (inherently) meaningless" is simply a corollary to "all valuation is entirely subjective."

>objective art flaggots get BTFO
How does Yea Forums do it? Even with all it's flaws it still manages to maintain a level of quality far above the other media boards.

Yes, we seem to have the same understanding.

I don't want to derail the thread much further so I will keep the application questions short. There are times when what I have to say is short enough that it only gets about half way to the character limit but I am hesitant to add more if it doesn't strengthen what I am saying. Is the length of writing viewed as important from your perspective? Obviously I have more than just a couple sentences, but I don't want to add any "fluff" in if I can help it. Also, supposing that you review the personal comments essay, how highly do you value what s said in it?

That's the same slippery slope people used to say "if we let gay marriage exist, we will have to let people marry dogs".

Easy alternative: I find meaning in something, it is meaningful to me because I enjoy x about it so see value in y. I take great meaning from pursuing that thing. I can still recognize that other people don't find it meaningful, and that it is not objectively meaningful.

My life is full of meaning, I just recognize that the things I value are not universal.

You don't have to hit the limit, but it's better to use what you get. I like to see when people can tie in a short actual experience, so it doesn't feel like fluff, but feels more genuine. So instead of saying something just... well like a theoretical response to a question, tell a little family anecdote or how the question reminds you of a problem you had at work or something.

Applications are a narrative. Try to keep it feeling like a story you are telling to describe you, rather than a series of questions you are forced to answer. I know that's kinda vague... but it's tough to say more than that haha

But yeah scores matter a lot. The subjective essay matters most if a) it's shit b) you already had a good shot or c) you happen to stumble into the theme the school is pushing.
I got lucky and wrote a lot about "interprofessionalism" because I started as an engineer, worked in a pharmacy and shadowed all over so I could make that theme worked, and the school that accepted me had just started an interprofessionalism course (that was bullshit but hey, they got me that MD)

>There we have it ladies and gentlemen. The death of culture
imagine unironically saying this in an anime board, while discussing anime
imagine having this little self awarenes

>implying anime is culture
It's as cultured as eating shit.

Alright, thanks for the info user!

I actually have one more question but it isn't about essays. I have a few years of work as a scribe and scribe trainer under my belt now and I've been trying to decide if I should continue to get experience as a scribe or if I should try to branch out a bit into different work, any thoughts?

That's an easy fallacy to break: a man is eligible for marriage. A dog is not.

And you simply offer a non-contradiction. Because you and others are the only ones capable of assigning value to x, if no one assigns value to x, it has no value. It is inherently without value. You even say it yourself, it is not objectively meaningful. We simply ignore the fact that the act of assigning value is meaningless in order to discuss the value assigned.

But before a man and a man were not eligible to be married. Now they are. Could not the same be changed for a dog? (I in no way support that, just saying your absolute "eligible" qualifier doesn't work).

You are hung up on the fact that I am making subjectivity openly the basis for "objectivity". My problem is with the idiots in this thread who reject subjectivity as the basis for objectivity.

Tough to say without more info. At this point, it likely doesn't matter much for this round. I'd say a few years is solid enough for one thing, if you feel you are weak in other areas it may be worth branching out... but again, I have no idea.

Branch out to cover weaknesses, but not simply for the sake of branching out. Devotion/showing you can commit to something long term is a value they sometimes look for.

I said "a man" specifically to highlight individuality. You can define eligibility for marriage on an individual basis without applying the context of a specific partner. A man can meet that eligibility as an individual, a dog can never.

I'm not denying it, I'm simply saying that without some degree of "objectivity", discussion becomes fruitless.

people just pretend to like it because you can show it to normalfags

I don't even see that desu. Most normalfags would just see an annoying kids show and turn it off.

lurk more before you bait