I'm aware of the difference.
That’s good to read though it makes what you say next all the more baffling.
And no, I'm not joking. I really don't get how anyone can watch anything animated and claim that they don't care about how animated it is so long as the art work looks nice.
Dude why are you being extreme? Literally no 1 said that they “don’t care” about the animation. The actual position is that good animation quality on its own isn’t sufficient for (many) viewers to have a positive opinion of the overall aesthetic quality of the show when they think the art style is lacking.
To me, that'd be the same as watching a TV show and not caring about the quality of acting because the actors are good looking.
A better analogy (which maybe was what you actually meant) would be something like appearance vs body language specifically, but I still don’t think it’s fair to compare the appearance of a person to the artstyle of a full anime in terms of skill required to produce the final shown product.
Also when criticizing the artstyle, a key issue is that it’s overly simplistic which would never be an issue for a real person since by definition the ‘artstyle’ in real life is extremely ‘detailed’ by default.
Movement and body language can add layers to a scene, accentuate emotion and add dynamism, which in itself is entertaining to watch.
I don’t necessarily inherently disagree with that; however...
The idea that it's okay to swap all of that for a nice looking static image is one I can't agree with.
Again you’re being extreme. The position that some people actually have is that the perceived increase in animation quality from XY to SM for them does not compensate for the perceived decrease in artstyle quality from XY to SM. Again there’s only so much that the fluidity of transitioning between images can do for someone’s overall impression of the aesthetic quality of the series when they think the images themselves look atrocious; it works both ways.
FYI, I don't care what the Japanese fandom thinks.
That’s fine; the point I was trying to make was independent of whether you do.
Nor do I care for this second-hand anecdote that you're providing here, as I can just as easily provide my own anecdotes to back up my point. Neither would be sufficient proof.
Testimony from a reliable source is accepted as a valid form of evidence. Unless you can give testimony concerning general fan perception from a person who’s more credible than
@Dephender, your testimony doesn’t have the same value (especially over here where Dephender is widely acknowledged as the most informed member).
n fact, I'm not sure why you're starting this argument. If you understand my values and position on this beforehand then, what, exactly, is the issue? What are you trying to prove? That I'm in the minority? That my opinion doesn't match the so-called "consensus"? I knew that already.
It’s good that you know that though: “All I'll say is that while some may have been put off by the re-design, there were others who were attracted by it” made it seem like you were trying to imply that the divisions were more even, so I just wanted to make it clear that the general consensus isn’t on the side of people that “were attracted by it.” Whether that has any meaningful value to this discussion is a different matter, but the reason I brought it up was because you felt the need to make that last statement in the first place.
If you all wanted to do was explain to me why someone may value art work over animation, then fine, I'll take it under consideration. I'm inviting that discussion, after all.
Bascially yeah. Both artstyle and animation are important to the overall visual quality of the product, so it’s understandable why a trade-off for 1 over the other would result in controversy.
However, I take exception to your attempt to diminish my opinion with your "fyi"; as if my view is somehow worth less because it doesn't agree with what you perceive as the "consensus" view.
I’m not sure where you’re getting this interpretation from (especially when I previously said that it’s fine if you value the animation quality over the artstyle), but what I said regarding that was to distinguish the truth from what the default interpretation of your last statement would be to most readers (that the 2 sides of this issue would be closer to evenly distributed).
EDIT:
t's just that, Pokemon wasn't one of those exceptions for me. Outside of battles, there was very little in the show that was visually stimulating.
That brings us to another issue which is that battles have become far less of a priority in SM than they were in previous series to the point where the best animated work occurs in slice of life scenes instead of battle scenes. This distribution of animation focus is also an aspect for why a large section of viewers would be “turned off” by the current product.