Writing vs Visuals

What's more important?

Writing or visuals?

Pic related. Looked pretty but had terrible writing.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=BogtGNnA-9k
lmgtfy.com/?q=literary device archetype
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Writing. Hyouka was a snoozefest, and no amount of flashy backgrounds could make up for that

Bad visuals can be saved by having great writing or sound.

Shit writing can't be saved by having good visuals, especially if you're going for story heavy shows.

Who in their right mind would say visuals are more important than writing. Writing gives meaning to visuals it's why Guilty Crown had incredible animation but I felt like Code Geass fights were more epic. The fights of Code Geass were built upon brilliant writing and brought out new meaning.

>terrible writing
What was terrible about it, exactly?

Hyouka fans

You just have ADHD

Writing for sure. Divergence Eve looks like ass, but it's well-done otherwise.

both

le human database boy

inb4 buttmad hyoukafags

What's more important?

Substance or replies?

Thread related. It's going to get a lot of replies but the OP has zero substance.

What was terrible about him, exactly?

What's wrong about that?

lazy writing

Why exactly?

because it makes everything convenient for oreki

Let's just get this out of the way and say Kyoani > Shaft and Hyouka did the whole talky banter thing better than Monogatari could ever dream of, all while being better produced and directed.

How so?

Memes

>how is somebody who knows literally everything convenient for someone who solves mysteries?
gee i dont know

So what about the film project arc?

That's a stupid way of seeing it, but OK.

Have you never read a Sherlock Holmes novel before?

He doesn't know everything. He calls himself a human database because he had good knowledge but no deductive power by himself.

Are you trying to say Sherlock Holmes is anything but bottom of the barrel lowest common denominator trash

He only knows facts user.

Read a mystery novel sometime. Poirot or Scherlock are not only intelligent but extremely knowledgeable in almost all topics, in Hyouka you get that same type of character but divided in two.

Too much focus on visuals isn't the problem. The problem is that shit like is what people consider to be good visuals

>cherry picking
Name something else that would justify terrible writing.

>main character that plays a role in the mysteries
>cherry picking
no

That looks good.

Why would I believe even for a second that a high school boy would have the experience as someone like Sherlock Holmes?

Don't forget they nigger doesn't like to really exert any kind of excess energy whatsoever

He doesn't. That's why the author decided to divide the Scherlock type character in two. Oreki is the wit and logic while Satoshi is the knowledge. If you still think that is too far fetched to believe I guess you don't really like any anime that features giant robots, ghosts, fantasy, sci fi, etc.

It's actually divided into four. The characters of Hyouka make up the fundamentals of the common detective archetype. It's clever or lazy depending on your bias.

Satoshi, Chitanda and Oreki are obvious. Ibara is a bit more vague.

>the mystery series is about a guy who knows lots of stuff
>this is bad writing because it makes it easier for him to solve the mysteries
This is the dumbest criticism of anything I have heard in a while.

Because the mysteries he's solving is how a door was locked despite it not being locked when the person in the room originally entered, not a sealed room murder case. The mysteries they solve are relatively simple and mundane, they're not that complex.

You didn't even finish this series, did you?

youtube.com/watch?v=BogtGNnA-9k

One of the best EDs in the past decade to be honest.

The problem isn't that you cherry picked (I'm not the guy you replied to), the problem is that you ignored a lot of what happens in the show just because it's inconvenient for your argument. You're acting like Satoshi is just there to be asked questions and give out info when something is missing, but that's just not true. Not only because he does way more than just give information, but because he's never used as a cop out when info is needed, and because the characters still do a lot of research on the side and find information in other ways, even Satoshi. Also because the info he gives out is barely ever relevant in the mysteries. The times he does explain things is things like when he explained that Chitanda belonged to one of the four rich families in town, or when he told the urban legend to Oreki in episode one, pic related. The information he gives is perfectly reasonable for a guy like him to know, and is never a cop out or even the main intel they use in solving the mysteries.

>criticizing a particular literary device as terrible writing
>all events involving said literary device is now claimed to be invalidated as good writing
>not cherry picking

That doesn't justify the claim of that character being an example of bad writing, though. Consider other things the author could've done instead of having that character;

1. Oreki could know a lot of stuff himself without need of an outside agency. But all that study would reduce his identity as a slacker, and would mean that information would have to be delivered to the reader (who probably also doesn't know a lot of the details) by Oreki himself. Pretty dull.

2. Oreki could just never know about certain convenient details of a mystery. This would essentially ruin the stories because he would be forced to make bad theories on limited information, and the reader would be ignorant of any details that Oreki is as well, forcing them to do the same. Part of the appeal of a mystery is trying to figure it out yourself as you read, and that would be undercut completely.

3. Oreki could learn that information other ways, by, say, visiting a library or talking to other characters. This is already the case for a lot of story elements, and in considering this option you realize that Satoshi is just one of many characters who deliver information to Oreki and the reader in order to inform their progress through the story and to the ultimate reveal at the end. His particular role is to deliver less exciting information quickly via dialogue.

I think when you look at this, it becomes clear that Satoshi's character was part of a solution to a problem; Oreki is a slacker who tends to be uninvolved, so how do I deliver case-related information to him and to the reader? I create a nosy busybody character who seems like kind of a douchenozzle and has other nuances to him aside from his main role which allow him to perform multiple functions for the story at once, reducing clutter and increasing the reader's attachment to him.

I think it's fine.

of course not. it nearly put me to sleep every episode. i'm yawning just thinking about it

So you're no one to talk about its writing, got it.

1. It's not a literary device you moron.
2. Just because it's a plot device doesn't mean that invalidates all criticism. Plot devices are even more representative of poor writing half the time. See deus ex machina.

yikes! You're straight retarded.

not sure what I was expecting.

And neither of those claims validates your criticism. Just because "plot devices can be poor writing" does mean this particular one is. Besides, plot devices aren't bad, they're necessary. Sometimes being done poorly is a whole different thing.

Also

>Just because "plot devices can be poor writing" does mean this particular one is
Except it is.

>does mean
doesn't mean*

Sherlock is a literal plot device.

>characterization
>not a literary device
Go be a retard somewhere else.

Yes. No one hails Sherlock Holmes as a bastion of masterful writing. It's cheap entertainment

That's a great circular argument, user.

>>characterization
>>not a literary device
Correct.

this thread is so shit

Can we stop replying to this guy who clearly has no idea what he's talking about and has already admitted to not having watched Hyouka?

Literary Techniques, on the contrary, are structures usually a word s or phrases in literary texts that writers employ to achieve not merely artistic ends but also readers a greater understanding and appreciation of their literary works. Examples are: metaphor, simile, alliteration, hyperbole, allegory etc.

>hyoukafags are this dumb

I really liked the mundane mysteries, nice change of pace to the typical murder mystery show.

>Characterization as a literary tool was coined in the mid 15th century.
>tool
>technique
>device
Call it whatever you want, it's the same thing.

why are hyoukafags so defensive of their below average series

>Gets blown out
>W-why are you guys so defensive?

but Hyouka is best anime ever next to Re:Zero.

The only person who got blown out was the Hyouka faggot who doesn't know what literary devices are.

next to Uchouten Kazoku you mean

@145023264
>why are xfags so defensive of their below average series
May you live in interesting times.

christ almighty you are dumb as fuck

Sure is a lot of falseflagging in this thread.

What? The Sherlock type character is an archetype, archetypes are literally devices.

>archetypes are literary devices.

lmgtfy.com/?q=literary device archetype

I don't know man, some arcs within Hyouka were pretty good.

Other than that I think Kyoanni can largely be described as all style no substance

see you don't know what literary devices are

>Other than that I think Kyoanni can largely be described as all style no substance
That's SHAFT.

SHAFT is a far worse perpetrator, yes

lmgtfy.com/?q=literary device archetype

Really depends on the show (I could watch plenty of things for animation quality alone), but in the case of Hyouka, visuals couldn't save it. It sure looked pretty but I dropped it because it was so boring.

Uninteresting mysteries.

Those results aren't proving you right, you know.

>Looked pretty but had terrible writing.
Fucking love this meme. Can't wait to scroll down the thread and see angry shitposting from people who were too stupid to follow the story at all, claimed it was boring, and dropped it 4 episodes in.

Don't disappoint me, guys.

Shaft has no style or substance

>In literature, an archetype is a typical character, an action or a situation that seems to represent such universal patterns of human nature.
This isn't a literary device.

Now, now, now. Shaft definitely has a style. It being shit is a whole different story.

Funny, a random post in this thread with no citations proves you right?

good writing can make up for bad visuals

good visuals often don't make up for bad writing (hyouka, monogatari, lain, texh, most kyoani and shaft garbage)

Are you telling me that LMGTFY is a citation?

You can just scroll two posts up from yours.

Hmm?

...

this shit is english 101

Hello potatoe

Just had a quick read through the thread. I was not disappointed.

One day I need to figure out what exactly Kyoani does that lights so many people's assholes on fire like this. It's gotta be an untapped energy source of some kind.

>and terms
Unless you think that "attitude" is a literary device too?

>lain
>bad writing

explain how I'm wrong without memeing

do you know how? do you still remember how to have a discussion like a normal human being and not a memelord?

People throw rocks at thing that shine.
-Taylor Swift, 2010

I really want to see those hot sources of yours that claim archetypes aren't literary devices.

You know, you sound more mad than the average poster in in this thread, especially considering most of the thread is opinions anyway.

I'm a Hyoukafag, not the guy you replied to, but the burden of proof is on you, buddy.

How about you explain how all of those shows have bad writing instead?