Forum - View topicThe declining amounts of TV anime produced since 06.
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 |
| Author | Message | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RHachicho
 Posts: 897 Location: Essex, UK |
|
|||||||||||
Oooookay so if the graph is not representative of the Anime industry what is it supposed to be? I mean sure you said that a number that falls and falls and falls is definately declining but if it represents no usefull data it is merely a number surely? I am trying to be as polite as possible honestly I am. But if you will post up a "pie in the sky" graph and go "Anime is declining ... discuss" well that's a very short step from trolling mate. Not that I really think you're trolling you're just being REALLY touchily defensive because youre data isn't as complete as you thaught it was. You can admit that you don't know everything you know. I can guarantee you that no one here will execute you for it in any case. Or have I missed what the graph is supposed to represent? I have had some time to think and I would like to make a suggestion for you're next study if you ever doing one. Examining the output of the Anime Industry seems a poor way to examine the health of the Industry. Abunai has already piled up many factors that would make any usefull study via this angle a nightmare undertaking. I suggest persuing either profit made or people employed in the Industry. Both are very good yardsticks of an Industries health and are not apt to be influenced by other factors. At least as far as I can fathom.
I never said I didn't know anything about data interpretation only that I was no expert. Nor was I neccessarily saying that that a "Norm" was relevent only pointing out that saying that there simply isn't one is wrong. I do not know what you mean about hypocrisy sureley that is when you say something that isn't true. I admitted the extent of my knowledge before I even made my statement. That is not hypocrisy that is merely a conditional statement. Also I am not too sure how knowledge of the norm is irrelevent to a study on stability. Surely you measure stability by how much and how often the data deviates from the norm? |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
HellKorn
Posts: 1669 Location: Columbus, OH |
|
|||||||||||
|
Just would like to note one thing, in case anyone wants to take a swing at it:
This is why I find the position that anime continues to decline in (television) production to be off. The very late 90s and 2000 produce less OVAs and movies than compared to the rest of the year. (But, again, one could make an argument that priorities were shifted away from movies to shows for at least '98 and '99, as the total productions are pretty much the same.) 2000 also bears more similarities to prior to 1998 in terms of TV production. Basically, I agree with what abunai posted earlier:
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
not
 Posts: 8 |
|
|||||||||||
|
You know, this whole thread seems kind of silly. I mean everyone seems to be scrutinizing over the slightest abnormalities in the data presented.
I'm not gonna lie, probably all I know about statistics comes from Algebra II in high school, so I don't expect a common man's opinion to get taken too seriously but here it is. Whether there is in fact a "norm" or some sort of stability, I think it should be looked at on a larger scale, aka "the bigger picture". For example, the United States' economy grew significantly after the Industrial Revolution all the way through the roaring twenties until the Great Depression. Now economics was...interesting at the time, based on what they saw happening, it was easy for them to assume that they were only going to fall further and further from the economic prosperity that they were once enjoying. But later, the U.S. recovered and expanded its economy even further. The word "statistically significant" has been thrown around in this thread, and that's overall what the Depression ended up being, statistically insignificant (don't care if I get comments of "but the Depression was significant" all I can say is "yah, at the time"), even when the U.S. economy went into recession in the 70s and as it is doing now, the minor dips don't change the fact the line is still heading up overall. These minute contractions in a recessive economy hardly seem strange. If history has shown us anything, it is that recovery is the natural course after such contractions, usually to an even higher point of prosperity with more expansion of the market. Looking at a few recent years of reduced output in a market that has existed for decades seems pointless to me unless it develops into a trend over a period of time comparable to the time that has already past. But whatever, it is a silly thing to think about anyway. You people should just watch more Star Trek and Stargate to take you mind off things. 
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
ikillchicken
 Posts: 7272 Location: Vancouver |
|
|||||||||||
Well, that just seems like common sense to me. If the industry is growing at a steady rate then it seems reasonable to assume that it will continue to grow at such a rate at least until something changes in the business environment.
Well, I originally chose 2000 because that's as far back as the data went. I'll concede that having seen the data for the 90s now, the evidence for my position is somewhat weaker. (Although if you go back to 97 or earlier it does skew back in my direction.) Admittedly though it's definitely open to interpretation and depending on your point of view, 2006 can be seen as aberrant.
Yeah, again I agree that this is at least a potentially valid way to look at it. Personally, I would choose to take years with a vastly higher percentage of OVAs with a grain of salt since they're generally going to be significantly smaller productions. I won't deny that we're entering into increasingly speculative territory here.
Well it means we're getting less and less new TV shows each year. Look, I think you're really reading too much into things. It's just a trend that I observed and decided to toss out there to open up a discussion. If you think it's unimportant or not a bad thing then say so. (A lot of people have done that). I don't think any of the actual points you've made are unreasonable or problematic in themselves. It's just that you've assumed that I'm making some kind of big statement with this topic and so you've mixed in a number of rather needless shots and a general tone of contradiction. You're being overly defensive though. All I did was pass along some data I had put together, make a very simple, reasonable observation about it, and put it out there for people to discuss. I think you're letting your readiness to jump into an argument over this kind of topic prevent you from noticing that I'm not trying to start such a fight. We don't actually really disagree with each other so lets both calm down and stop fighting.
Fair enough. I don't feel that anything I've said is any worse or even as bad as the things first said to me. In any case though you'll hear no further insults from me and instead I'll be sure to deal with others insults against me via the proper channels. ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Now hang on. If you wish to end this off topic discussion that's both your choice as a mod and a probably the right choice as well. However, you have absolutely no right to first go on a big public tirade attacking me not just for my conduct here but in general and then turn around and threaten to lock the topic if I respond. If you've got a problem with my conduct in general you should PM me. If you choose to address it in public then you're opening the door to a discussion about it which in turn makes stifling my response a real abuse of power. For that reason I'm going to go ahead and offer my response. If you want to remove it you'll get no complaints from me. However it is then only fair that you also remove your last post criticizing me. ... Obviously I can't address these unspecified other instances. I could certainly point to numerous topics where I've had a perfectly civil discussion with someone depite disagreeing. That seems needless though as we really only need look at this topic where I see me getting along perfectly fine with...larinon, dtm42, PetrifiedJello and HellKorn despite them disagreeing with me. (On the other hand I see you fighting with me, dtm42 and Frazmataz while getting along with...absolutely nobody you've spoken to.) How exactly does that constitute me being the guy who can't disagree without fighting? I won't deny that I can be nasty if someone is being rude to me. However, your suggestion that this happens any time someone merely disagrees with me is demonstrably false. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
Redbeard 101
Oscar the Grouch
Forums Superstar  Posts: 16935 |
|
|||||||||||
|
Ok, after following this thread since it started I need to ask.....is there a point in here anywhere? A real actual definite point with REAL accurate facts. I mean maybe I'm just too much of a short bus person here but I don't see one concrete point at all so far. Just a bunch of theories, opinions, half-truth based assumptions, and some pretty charts/graphs that may or may not relay any concrete info. So I again ask has any real point been made here in 4 pages? Seriously. If there has been can someone please spell it out in very short and simple terms because my short bus brain sure as hell can't see one, and it's hurting at this point from trying to from point A/the OP to wherever the hell we are now. Thanks.
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
dtm42
Posts: 14084 Location: currently stalking my waifu |
|
|||||||||||
Okay, I will put it into simple terms (as per your request, not me being nasty). Judging by the graphs, especially this one, from 1997 to 2007, the overall trend has been that the amount of Anime shows being produced has increased. From 2008 onwards, the amount has been lower than the peak of 2006 and 2007, but still respectable when compared to the years 2003-2005, and more than anything 2002 or earlier. That's about all the clarity the data shows. Where the controversy starts is when someone starts to dig deeper and interprets the results in a way that others don't agree with. And no, that is NOT a dig at anyone, just a general observation. Last edited by dtm42 on Mon Aug 23, 2010 3:28 am; edited 1 time in total |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
RHachicho
Posts: 897 Location: Essex, UK |
|
|||||||||||
|
I am sorry if it appeared that by criticising the relevance of your data I was somehow starting some kind of fight or making some sort of personal attack. I acknowledge that I accused you of hypocrisy but that was rather at you're backing away from you're point in response to criticism of the data. I do not think what you did was not worthwhile. If I had thaught that you where merely wasting time I would have ignored and/or reported the post. I didn't I posted in it. Almost no one making this kind of study hits the mark first time.
So while I acknowledge that I DID make a couple of personal shots against you that was based on you're attitude not you're data or the reason for you're post. I believe I have also already suggested a couple of ways you could improve you're study. I think you are still thinking along the lines of "If they attack my data they must think I am stupid for putting it up there in the first place". This is not the case it is more "Cool he's taken the time to do this but it's a bit wrong so let's tell him how it's wrong" A few people might have been impolite about it which got youre back up and that I can entirely understand. But if you allow you're feathers to settle alot of people have merely calmly criticised. Would you rather we acted as a bunch of yes men who corroborated youre data unconditionally? You said yourself that you simply "put the data up for discussion" and I can accept that. But incomplete data like this you have to expect and Indeed should welcome alot of criticism. Just because the consensus is that the data is unrepresentative does not mean the study itself was a waste of time it is just the coclusion many of us have reached. I will leave the topic now as I have said all I wan't to say about the data at least unless you refine it further. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
abunai
Old Regular
 Posts: 5463 Location: 露命 |
|
|||||||||||
I told you to stick to the point, didn't I? I'll let this one go (and I'll even refrain from punting it off into neverland, as the same post actually contains some sensible stuff earlier in the text), since you obviously felt you needed to have the last word (very mature, btw) -- but this is all I want to hear from you on the subject. Argue the facts, and keep the personal attacks and whining to yourself. - abunai |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
ikillchicken
Posts: 7272 Location: Vancouver |
|
|||||||||||
|
RHachicho:
Okay well I think I see where you're coming from. I'm not actually trying to do a 'study'. I just was curious so I looked up a bit of data and then thought I'd toss it out here in case anyone else found it interesting. It's not 'right' or 'wrong'. It just is. You can make of it what you like so I don't really think there's anything to criticize per say. Like I said though, I don't actually have a problem with any of what you said itself so I guess whether is constitutes a criticism or simply your opinion on the data is sort of moot. So okay, we're good here. dtm42: Yes, that would be my summation as well. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
Redbeard 101
Oscar the Grouch
Forums Superstar Posts: 16935 |
|
|||||||||||
Thank you. Now this simple, as in actual size and not quality, post makes me ask this next question (and yes it's probably more rhetorical then anything else). That question is why have there been so many lengthy but honestly uninformative, and some downright useless, posts when that simple and easy one was perfectly enough to sum up things? Thank you again DTM for indulging my simple and lower functioning brain power so I could understand this mess. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Unicorn_Blade
 Posts: 1153 Location: UK |
|
|||||||||||
|
Great job on putting all of this together. I can see why the decline would take place- the whole of the worlds economy not being at its best. However, maybe this will turn out to be a good thing though? back in the old days where there were so muc hfewer channels on the TV, the quality of what was aired was generally so much better, while now 99% of it is really cr@p. Having to choose and filter what to produce, maybe the studios will go for fewer better things rather than loads of stuff among which only a few things will be decent... Much as I love anime, I think the wolrd would be a better place if some of the series would not have been made.
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group