RWBY’s Legitimate criticism vs. whining (Discussion)
By - CupcakeStriking5986
Literally everyone in RWBY discourse is exhausted and frustrated at this point. Everyone.
Those who are critical towards the show, the staff & the fandom claim ad-nauseam to be tired of no one accepting their criticism as valid and the one true way to “think more about RWBY” and people being negative towards negative videos (sound familiar). Meanwhile, those who feel positioned to defend RWBY are tired of being pigeon-holed constantly and belittled and treated with contempt and pressured to conform to what the critics want them to say all along and how most discussions have been negative by default for the past 8 years (not 1, not 2, 3, not 5, 8 years).
Everyone is exhausted. And people can wave the whole “we want the show to improve” card all they want, but (and I really wish I didn’t have to make this analogy) people who insist that the only solution to make RWBY and the discourse surrounding it better is through more of the same thing that is draining everyone in the first place are really hellbent on framing all of this like an emotionally abusive relationship.... or a mutually incompatible one, or something. Point is, they want to frame NOT the show itself but **their relationship with the show** as them being on the receiving end and that if they stay, they can make RWBY better with “love and determination” when they simply are unwilling to admit that the relationship itself is not working out.
Thank you finally someone said it.
You do realize that the analogy I presented above explains precisely *why* anyone would say the “[iCoNiC pHrAsE](https://www.reddit.com/r/RWBY/comments/n6u9sm/rwbys_legitimate_criticism_vs_whining_discussion/gx9wgoc/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3)” that you implied to be bad, right? Like you did realize that, didn’t you?
I do understand both sides are pretty annoyed I get that the critiques are tired of that phrase, and the defenders are also tired of having to say the phrase, but then comes the problem why can both sides just be respectful of each other since both seem to have such mad hate boners for each other why not just ignore each other.
We should see more people like you in the RWBY FNDM. I'm really tired of people bitching for no reason.
The most dum complaint in my opinion, is when they are not happy the characters don't make the perfect decision, wich is dum because:
1) The show wouldn't even exist or be long
2) Not even humanity makes the perfect decisions, so why should they be perfect, even better, how could they become perfect.
For me it's two things: a lot of criticisms for this show recycled over and over again and a lot of that criticism comes with the guiding line trying to prove that the staff behind this show are incompetent at their jobs. For the former, someone can cynically respond that it "says something" that these criticisms can be recycled from year to year but it actually points to a much bigger problem of stagnant discourse.
If a problem is repeated every year and the statements made in such arguments can be reasonably supported, pointing out that it continues to happen is not an indicator that the discourse is stagnant. Trying to paint it as stagnant is dismissive and quite honestly disingenuous.
>If a problem is repeated every year and the statements made in such arguments can be reasonably supported
'If' is doing a lot of work here.
It really isn't, but then this is your standard approach to any criticism or critique
Honestly, much of the *critisicm* in my experience boils down to a) they haven't paid attention to what the show explained or the context (for example team RWBY sitting around in the mansion) b) the show doesn't have a lot of time and episodes to focus on certain things (Bumbleby stuff) c) the show doesn't fit their ideas ( using the staff to move everyone on remnant to another planet, this also fits with a.)
I'm at the point where I've unsubscribed from the fnki sub because so many content there is obnoxious, if you don't enjoy the show then why continue to watch it? It's absurd to me to spend any amount of time on doing something just to hate on it, that's time that could be spent reading a book from your favourite author or play your favourite videogame.
The problem for A is that the show can be incredibly vague in what it is trying to do or portray, even if you pay attention you can come to a different conclussion from others which sadly results in parts of the fandom denegrating those with different conclussions.
B is not an excuse because RT runs the show and they know how much time they have. If they know that they dont have time to do what they want to do, they should change it or not do it.
C is related to A a lot. A lot of these kinds of "They dont like the show because it is different or it doesnt follow their headcanon" arguments fail to account that a lot of people follow the show and make different conclussions on what happens in it due to vagueness, so when they see the show building up something but its not that, it is fair for them to feel miffed.
Your last paragraph also hits one of the worst arguments that the fandom still holds on "If you dont like it, dont watch it" - Which fails to account to a few factors. For example that a lot of critical people are passionate about the show. That people who criticize it liked the show and want to like it again. The time sunk into the show and the fandom that they just cant throw away etc.
>the show can be incredibly vague in what it is trying to do or portray, even if you pay attention you can come to a different conclussion from others
I think you hit the nail on the head with this. The show is too vague about some things in it's story or takes too long to clarify, and by that point a million headcanons have been formed.
and, if you're hanging out here or otherwise with the fandom or some subsection thereof, groupthink can lead to things being assumed to be canon that may or may not be, as some line or other gets interpreted in some way that may or may not have been intended by the writers, especially if that clashes with later statements.
>The time sunk into the show and the fandom that they just cant throw away etc.
[Sunk cost fallacy](https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/economics/sunk-cost/)
> the show can be incredibly vague in what it is trying to do or portray, even if you pay attention you can come to a different conclusion from others which sadly results in parts of the fandom denigrating those with different conclusions.
You really are on to something with this one. I agree the issue is that, given the vagueness and time gap between introduction and conformation of certain plot points, it's inevitable that even the most observant of fans are going to think in a different direction. A problem arises within the fandom when the group that came to the conclusion that aligns with cannon don't understand how anyone else could come to a different conclusion lest they weren't paying attention or were lost in their own head cannon.
Yes, a lot of people do miss things or theories too early, but I feel like the groups that got their theories right and or happen to like everything the cannon did from the start aren't always capable of understanding why anyone else didn't understand why things happened the way they did. It's a case of "I figured this out, what the hell is your excuse?"
>B is not an excuse because RT runs the show and they know how much time they have.
Have you worked on any sort of production before? Just asking.
>The time sunk into the show and the fandom that they just cant throw away etc.
Yes, they can. It's a free anime in a landscape of streaming; they can find something else to do worth their time and not fixate upon a show they hate.
I have not worked on any professional productions, no. However i have worked in multiple charities and volunteered in organizing various things such as a multiple study groups for people of older age to learn how to use computers.
In all of these i had to manage things such as time and even finances and work with other individuals. I knew how much time i have for events, how much time i have for lessons and the like, as such i had to tailor my various activities to the time i had and not what i really wanted.
For example taking my work with older people and computers, my partner and i had to skip a lot of more "formal" planned parts of computer education due to the competence levels of our class. We changed the plan and what we wanted to do every time when we saw that we wont teach them the most important things in time if we go at it in the "right" way. I have multiple other examples if you want to discuss them.
While my work has been on a lot of smaller scale projects, the same logic and requirements apply to these kinds of subjects. YOU as the organizer know how much resources you have at your disposal, and you work WITHIN thouse resources as much as is manageable.
Now onto your second point, i think you are way too callous in just stating that people can just easily throw away something that has been and is probably still important in their lives.
>We changed the plan and what we wanted to do every time when we saw that we wont teach them the most important things in time if we go at it in the "right" way.
I don't understand how you can have an experience that shows you that specific circumstances can change for the worse and then say something as naive as "people know how many resources they have at their disposal." The reason why I asked if you had any experience in production is because anyone who's worked in production for a while knows that it is about managing opportunity costs that can change based on factors within and outside of a person's control. Like all the money and time in the world would not have stopped V8 delays due to covid-19.
>i think you are way too callous in just stating that people can just easily throw away something that has been and is probably still important in their lives.
I don't think I am. People need to be told that they can stop engaging with something they don't like apparently.
I understand that unexpected stuff happens. Shit happens as they say. The problem is that the "time management" and "budget" problems seem to occur as excuses in EVERY VOLUME. Thats the issue. I can understand delays due to Covid, i can understand a less than impressive volume 5 due to resource theft and the like. But once again, when every volume has these excuses applied to them ,its not just "shit happens" anymore, its a systematic problem. Something is wrong then that is not just outside influences.
>But once again, when every volume has these excuses applied to them
They don't. V6 and V7 were made under the most ideal conclusions the show has ever had and there were no 'excuses' applied to them.
>It's absurd to me to spend any amount of time on doing something just to hate on it,...
Snarking about inconsistencies and stuff is fun. Dissecting a story and how it fails to work is like solving a puzzle. And all of that can be used to learn how not to do certain things or what to avoid when writing your own stories.
So you're watching a show which is 14 episodes at 10 minutes each (roughly) just to bitch? That's making yourself miserable all to act like a cranky old person. There's also a difference between valid critisicm (characterisation not matching in episodes for example) and bitching (Nora doing nothing in volume 8)
>So you're watching a show which is 14 episodes at 10 minutes each (roughly) just to bitch?
And I go and rewatch them to check up on details I might have missed to refresh my memory. But just to bitch? Hardly. I think there's plenty to be learned from the varied problems with the show and figuring out why all the potential it has goes to waste. And it does have potential.
> That's making yourself miserable all to act like a cranky old person.
I *am* a cranky old person. But I'm not really miserable when the show delivers moments like Blake pointing to a house she herself set on fire and getting away with confessing it to an entire crowd.
>There's also a difference between valid critisicm (characterisation not matching in episodes for example) and bitching (Nora doing nothing in volume 8)
That's fair. But it can be really hard to parse the two and often complaints that are motivated by things not meeting someone's expectations are the results of genuinely bad writing decisions.
Penny being turned into a creature of flesh, for instance, didn't sit well with people because they found robot Penny interesting. That it comes out of nowhere with Penny not having any real arc or motivation to become human and the act itself only making sense if you are aware of a wholly different work that she's a reference to (Disney's Pinocchio) is what makes it bad. Someone being unable to put their finger on why it didn't sit well with them doesn't mean that it's not because of the poor writing involved.
Penny not having any motivation to be human? Since the moment we discover she is a robot, she talks about wanting to be a real girl, wich is the reason why Ruby was her best friend since she sees her as a real girl.
You say you check the details and all, but than you give us false information. If you don't watch the show to have a good time, than don't watch it, we are not interested in hearing people like you bitching just to bitch.
So their *critisicm* is in bracket a) don't pay attention. Honestly, I didn't bother reading all their comment as I knew it would be bs.
I challenge you to read the response I made to that allegation. You might learn something about criticism if you don't just dismiss things out of hand.
I challenge you to actually provide constructive criticism instead of bitching. You do that without your comment being a) b) or c) of the forms of bitching I mentioned and I'll accept it. So far you haven't.
Well, here's some then: Your criteria for what is and isn't bitching are bad.
Point a) sets it up that you can just dismiss out of hand anything that the show left unclear.
Point b) is nonsense, because not only are the writers and directors in control of the runtime, figuring out what can and can't go into the show is their job. It's perfectly legitimate to criticize them for what makes it into the show and what doesn't.
Point c) has some merit, but it's kind of vague and seems to fit with a) insofar as it's a means to just dismiss complaints about the show without having to address the substance of the criticism.
I stated that Penny has no real arc or motivation to become human and the instance you cite is exactly why I phrased it that way.
Penny talks about not being real to Ruby once in the first three volumes and Ruby ends that arc immediately by accepting her for who she is. Never again does Penny show a desire to be flesh and blood before it happens, and to make matters worse from a writing perspective, definitive proof that Penny is a "real girl" happens when she receives the maiden powers. The "real girl" debate was settled *twice*.
This isn't even getting into how the whole "saw her as a real girl" thing is an utter mess as well. Ciel Soleil saw and treated Penny as a real girl too, since she had no clue Penny was a robot.
Think before writting, she don't talk about having flesh and blood because she thinks it's impossible ( she didn't know the relics existed and what they could do ), not because she didn't want it, plus they have limited screen time so they couldn't put that much screen time in that.
So brackets a and b of the forms of bitching I referenced. Funny how all this *critisicm* falls into one of the three categories I mentioned.
Do you think it's productive to accuse someone of not thinking before writing?
Regardless, Penny not knowing it was possible to be a real girl should have killed any thoughts she had to becoming one in the first place, by your logic. As for limited screen-time, why not just cut the plot for framing her? Nothing happened there and they could have easily given her a moment where whe looks at kids playing or tickling each other and then sigh. "I wonder what being tickled feels like..." she muses before she realizes Ruby was listening.
Just because you know something will not happen doesn't mean we don't still dream about. Take example of me : I know I will never become a NHL palyer, doesn't mean I don't still dream about.
Just because she believe it will never happen doesn't mean she forgot about it, it means she put it in the back of her mind.
Animation is a visual medium. If you want a character becoming human to be a conclusive character arc, you need to find ways to convey that that character dreams about these things, either by showing with visual cues or having the character tell the audience this. If you don't, it comes out of nowhere. The one scene where Ruby tells Penny that it doesn't matter she's a robot is a conclusion, not setup for what happens in Volume 8, because Penny's feeling that she needs to become human ceases to exist as far as the viewer can tell.
Well said sir, good day
I think some people go into each episode looking for things to dislike at this point. Like I think your expectations can really influence how you feel and react to things.
I remember checking it out maybe 8 or 9 years ago, watching a few minutes, deciding I really disliked the voice acting and the animation style and forgetting it. Binging for the last 2 weeks, I just finished watching all 8 volumes a few days ago, and am definitely glad I came back to it. The story just gets progressively better. Maybe because I had low expectations the show seems so good; maybe I have poor taste; or maybe the story is just plain good? Whatever the reason, I am definitely looking forward to the story continuing in volume 9.
I learned from a young age not to engage with fandom at large, but instead to find a small group of level-headed people and talk to them. It's much more enjoyable that way
I recently rewatched ATLA, at a time when the fandom's negativity was overwhelming me (which is why I took a bit of a break from the fandom). When watching it, at times that negativity and nitpickiness would creep into my thoughts and project itself onto the show. And I realized that if people were as negative and nitpicky with ATLA as they are with RWBY, people would hate it just as much. That kind of attitude is just a self-fulfilling prophecy.
This is what killed my experience with genlock a few years back. Several of the established RWBY critics were hyping up genlock as "so much better than RWBY, it's proof that they've learned how to *really* write a show, RWBY was just necessary practice so RT could do an actual *good* show like genlock" and with every episode I watched I couldn't help but notice the things that RWBY got flak for were just as prevalent, but they just weren't getting criticized when genlock did it.
Kind of off topic, but I think that both genlock and the newest season of rvb just moved way too quickly and had character development, that should've taken much longer, squished into a single episode. I felt like rwby is kind of the opposite in taking half a season to get to the anticipated scene.
See, I feel like the show would improve if they used more time for an episode. Trying to fit a number of things in ten minutes isn't possible so it can take multiple episodes to cover an arc. Take volume 1 for example where it took 2-3 episodes to cover the initiation test and entrance to beacon. That would've fit better in one episode of 20 minutes and then it frees up an episode to use for character development (bees for example or Jaune growing with Pyrrha teaching him) or it could've been used to add to the arc with Roman at the end of the volume.
I completely agree for the second part, however I feel as though because there were 2-3 episodes for the initiation test, there wasn't only like 1 fight scene but instead had multiple that showed off the characters better than some more boring exposition.
Sure. It's great having more than a fight scene an episode in the iniatian arc but there are times where the show feels like it's rushing things because it hasn't had time to build up to events. Ending of volume 1 for example, Suns intro to Blake running away and then the fight with Roman takes place in show over a number of days but it doesn't feel like that as the episodes are back to back.
Which then begs the question and inherently the criticism of why not take the extra couple months and make longer or more episodes to make the show that much better?
I'm not so sure.
I rewatched Korra recently and my inner critic was largely silent. Sure, there are some nitpicks, but there were no glaring issues that jutted out of the final product. Simply watching the show was a pleasurable and immersive experience. RWBY attracts criticism because viewers notice problems almost effortlessly. It pulls them from the experience. More become apparent in causal review. It's not a matter of nitpicking when the nits are the size of cows.
I think that's the key difference; it's easier to criticize RWBY. Even when weeding out the headcanon protesting, which plagues all fandoms, there is a lot more casual criticism of the show. Some are hot takes, yet there is a fair amount of valid and reasonable criticism.
The issue is that criticism can build upon itself. The same issues pop up in subsequent volumes; cast bloat, agency issues, pacing, etc. So prior criticism lingers. It makes the show seem to stagnate in terms of progress, more so than it is. There have been some strides in handling cast bloat, improvements to pacing, and so on. But when a pacing/cast/agency issue pops up again, it's not taken in isolation/contextually. Rather, it's added to a growing pile and is made to be bigger than it is.
ATLA & Korra aren't perfect shows, they have critics. The difference is that mistakes are often not repeated. They're not built upon. New issues do pop up, but the refreshing stops criticism from becoming stagnant. Issues flow from one to another, there's little chance to fester. There are far fewer chances for toxicity to build up. Criticism should be a river, not a swamp.
RWBY criticism is oddly fascinating from a psychological viewpoint. u/Team_SKGA makes a comparison to an abusive relationship, which is kind of apt. Take the Monty purists, I think they represent this idea the most. The earlier volumes of RWBY have issues but are a lot more forgivable because the show is fresh and new. Criticism hasn't built up yet. As issues repeat as the volumes go on, the older volumes seem better even though they have similar problems. The mistakes are carried forward to pile up on the latest volume. The swamp expands. So some people look back to where issues weren't insurmountable and try to reason out why. And some settle on Monty as an avatar of the initial joy they found in RWBY. He came to represent the early relationship with the show, one they want to return to. It's not justifiable, and frankly awful, yet you can trace the loop of twisted logic.
Not all criticism of RWBY is bad, there is a lot of reasonable analysis available on the show. It's not immune to frustration building up though. How to handle that frustration is up to the individual. Constructive criticism is one way to do that, but it should be done for yourself. It's not reasonable to think you can 'fix' the show.
> The issue is that criticism can build upon itself. The same issues pop up in subsequent volumes; cast bloat, agency issues, pacing, etc. So prior criticism lingers. It makes the show seem to stagnate in terms of progress, more so than it is. There have been some strides in handling cast bloat, improvements to pacing, and so on. But when a pacing/cast/agency issue pops up again, it's not taken in isolation/contextually. Rather, it's added to a growing pile and is made to be bigger than it is.
I think to some extent it is *okay* to carry forward certain criticisms when you can see a particular season as an origin point for a flaw, and then that fault carries forward and becomes larger and larger, until it's eventually a giant chasm.
For example, I've had a lot of issues with how the characters have either regressed or become absurdly selfish; and while I initially thought for some of them it originated in volume 6, looking back the first hints of it are in places like volume 4. Ruby for example almost gets her uncle, Qrow killed, by refusing to take direction from him and believing she knows better than *anyone* who has more experience than her. I won't speak much about volume 5 because honestly it's a blur for me as it was *so* scuffed, but come volume 6 we've got Ruby in full on "We don't need adults! I wanna do the crime" territory.
Then come volume 7 and they're actively alienating allies because for some reason they wrongly believe they know better than everyone around them. Volume 8 comes and due to Ruby Roses choices and actions, the combined kingdoms of atlas and mantle are lost. We're given the platitude of "But they saved thousands!"... in cities that could easily parallel new york or hong kong - cities of *actual millions of people*.
Yet somehow this isn't treated like an actual issue for the character, they are apparently totally morally in the right despite getting *millions* of people killed... (of course this is unlikely to actually be meaningfully addressed in v9 and that itself is a problem for me) and I can trace the changes in character and storytelling back as far as volume 4, and they are what led to this moment. I didn't think they were a big thing in v4, I didn't even really notice them until the proverbial shark was jumped in v6.
Well, *yes*. I didn't say pointing out patterns is bad per say, only commenting on why problems stick.
I'm fine with Ruby taking the lead and wanting to involved. In fact, one of chief criticisms is she doesn't do it enough. Like Ruby wanted to help in that fight. It wasn't matter of 'Adult's bad' or teenage rebellion, more that she was desperate to be involved. Ruby is in the dark about a lot of happened at Beacon, she only has pieces of the story. When Qrow shows and tells to step back, it makes her feel helpless again. She's not willing to step back anymore.
The issue is she does in V5. Ruby takes a backseat to Qrow and Oz. She accepts information at face value and is content to leave the heavy lifting to others. It's all about obedience to adults. And it's *awful*. Her motivations that drove her to walk all the way to Haven or forgotten. Her impatience and need to be hands on is put aside by the writers.
V6 was a refreshing of Ruby as a character. It's not a 'We don't need adults' theme. Qrow and Oz have flaws, they're human. And when they succumb to their flaws, Ruby is there to fill the gap. She steps up to continue with the goals they set out to do; get the relic to safety and regroup with allies. Even if that means taking a large risk. I'm absolutely fine with that as it drives the plot forward and adds additional challenge.
It doesn't stick though. Over V7-8 Ruby sits down again. She doesn't have any major achievements over two volumes. The key plot points, wins and losses, she doesn't have much involvement in. Even when she was building up to those moments, she's often passed over for a character that did little to nothing in earning them.
So I understand the alienation comment because Ruby, and WBY, are fairly divorved from the situation at hand. For all their bluster in Ironwood's office about fighting Salem, they don't fight. They stagnant, fluff around and then decide it's hopeless so may as drop one city onto a another. And this when they have the upper-hand; Ironwood is imprisoned, Salem is indisposed, and they have a relic that can do almost anything.
I really don't think it's simply because of the show itself that these critics act this way, it's just as easy to nitpick any other piece of media (cinemasins is a testament to that), all you to do is make the decision to be in that mindset. There's so many things in ATLA which I could criticize while in that mindset, things that never go mentioned while discussing it, types of things that discussion of RWBY is littered with. This includes things that are repeated and built up.
It's also funny you mention LOK, as that show does get plenty of HTDM-esque critics, it even has a "is Garbage and Here's Why" video. And even though I like LOK way less than ATLA (for a large part because of its political commentary), even there I don't think it's simply the show that's causing that type of criticism to pop up.
You might have a point that it's simply an issue of time, that the longer a show runs the more the toxic attitude builds up, and that that might be the reason that LOK, basically a continuation of ATLA, gets that treatment. But I've seen plenty of shows that run longer without that treatment, and shows that get that kind of treatment from the get-go, shows that really aren't that different quality-wise from RWBY.
Criticism doesn't exist in a vacuum. The show is the catalyst for generating criticism. The production, writing, developments, pacing, cast management, etc. But it's not responsible for how far people take criticism, I agree.
There are pedantic people in the ATLA fandom, they do make mountains out of mole holes. RWBY is a mountain range without the need for fastidious analysis to build one. It's honestly not even fair to compare them as ATLA has advantages in screenwriting and production that RWBY can only dream of. But the main point is that many of RWBY's issues don't require nitpicking. Not that it doesn't happen, but the bulk of the criticism is focused on the larger issues.
How people express themselves is not the responsibility of the show though. There is some decent criticism of LOK, particularly of book 2. Points made reasonably and constructively. The "LOK is Garbage" videos and posts are designed to generate and foster outrage, as the critics aren't constructively processing their disappointments. They need like-minded people to support them, to connect to. It's a human response rooted in tribalism. And the creators can't fight that. They can't please everyone, they can't stop cliques from forming. So there is certainly a responsibility on the critic.
Some shows don't have as much of a major build-up of toxicity as others, sure. There are factors in place that can work against them. LOK gains harsher critics because they expected more ATLA. A lot of sequel series struggle to break away from their predecessors.
RWBY is an interesting case. It's partly an issue of time, and it's so much more as well. The story is like three plotlines in a trench coat. It's built on a rushed, excitable start that lacks polish. A collection of cool concepts with little focus and exploration. It's not perfect. Yet there is this charm and appeal to RWBY. There is enough to draw you in and plenty to discuss and have fun with.
RWBY is a wonderful experiment in show development. It pushed the boundaries of how to bring entertainment to an audience, invented a new model to follow. It's rough and stumbles often, but I love the energy it generates.
>There are pedantic people in the ATLA fandom, they do make mountains out of mole holes. RWBY is a mountain range without the need for fastidious analysis to build one.
I disagree that ATLA is that much more superior to RWBY, RWBY's sins really aren't *that* much worse than ATLA's. Sure, it's less polished, has character bloat, and rushes and skips some things, but that hardly constitutes mountainous problems with the show that ATLA has zero of. There's even one plot point in ATLA which I think is worse written than any plot point in RWBY, which if it existed in RWBY, people would have torn to shreds: Azula's plan to disguise themselves as Kyoshi Warriors, and the fact that it led her to conquering Ba Sing Se.
>but the bulk of the criticism is focused on the larger issues.
I've seen far more threads on Adam, Ironwood, BMBLB, Blake vs Alpha Centinel, even single lines of dialogue, than I have about character bloat, lack of polish, lack of screentime, and lack of exploration.
It's not a matter of superiority, it's matter of experience and production. ATLA has the advantage in a lot of areas. And by mountainous issues, I don't mean insurmountable. I mean that they're much more visible/noticeable in RWBY than a series that had the money, time, and experience to erode problems.
On a sidenote, I liked Azula's plan. It also happens in RWBY; Cinder and Co disguise themselves as students and it lead to the downfall of Beacon. It feels almost like a homage to ATLA. Critically, there's not much issue with how it plays out in RWBY. I only wish there was more of it.
> I've seen far more threads on Adam, Ironwood, BMBLB, Blake vs Alpha Centinel, even single lines of dialogue, than I have about character bloat, lack of polish, lack of screentime, and lack of exploration.
Those are the issues I'm referring to, just specified. Like the pacing and animation of fights scenes, including Blake fighting the sentinel, does attract criticism. For me, it's not at the standards set by the show itself. I know they can do better, because I've seen them do better.
Some stuff is hot takes, Bumbleby attracts some of that. But there is fair criticism on what has been presented in terms of romance structure. Adam has good criticism and bad criticism. Same with Ironwood. And it typically relates to over arching issues in RWBY. It's matter of filtering them.
>And by mountainous issues, I don't mean insurmountable. I mean that they're much more visible/noticeable in RWBY than a series that had the money, time, and experience to erode problems.
I didn't think you meant unsurmountable, I thought you meant that the severity of the issues with RWBY is high. Though I still disagree with the notion that ATLA has sanded its problems away to the point of not being noticable and that RWBY in comparison has glaring flaws, they're much closer together than that.
>On a sidenote, I liked Azula's plan. It also happens in RWBY; Cinder and Co disguise themselves as students and it lead to the downfall of Beacon. It feels almost like a homage to ATLA. Critically, there's not much issue with how it plays out in RWBY. I only wish there was more of it.
1. Students aren't a specific group of warriors, students are pretty much just part of the crowd.
2. None of the characters who could have pulled the alarm have seen CEM before. Azula even knew the Gaang knew the Kyoshi Warriors.
3. They weren't infiltrating a gigantic city with two gigantic walls who are enemies of the nation who Cinder was the princess of.
4. Their goal of the Fall of Beacon was all planned out in advance with some added improvisation to help achieve that goal. Azula's goal was to capture the Avatar, and was only made aware about Long Feng by the loose-lipped idiot King.
The only realistic outcome from Azula's perspective of the initial plan was to get spotted by the Gaang and become war prisoners, a lot of luck had to happen for her to capture Ba Sing Se: Gaang going away, King being idiot, Long Feng choosing her to lead the Dai Li even though he clearly could still give orders from his cell, and the Dai Li choosing to betray Long Feng (for reasons unknown to us since the Dai Li was never given any clear motivation).
>Those are the issues I'm referring to, just specified. Like the pacing and animation of fights scenes
Fight scenes are hardly the "larger issues" in my opinion, and having a dozen threads focusing on a single fight scene is textbook nitpicking for me. There's also plenty about ATLA fights that I could criticize while watching it.
>Adam has good criticism and bad criticism. Same with Ironwood. And it typically to over arching issues in RWBY. It's matter of filtering them.
We must be seeing different criticism cause all I hear about Adam and Ironwood is "wasted potential" "retcon" "Adam/Ironwood was right". And there's so much of it too, while watching the Jet episode of ATLA, I could even vividly imagine all the "Jet did nothing wrong" posts. And again I don't think either character is indicative of one of the larger issues of RWBY, even if it was, most posts about it don't mention that, they just focus on that one specific character. I also don't really want to filter through heaps of bad criticism just to get to good ones about two characters who are in my opinion very well written.
Well, yes that's what I said - I didn't mean they were insurmountable issues, just highly visible ones.
ATLA polished out major issues, but there's still bumps and flaws here and there. But they're not close to RWBY's flaws, gaps and plot holes. RWBY's pacing issues alone outstrip ATLA in terms of noticeable flaws. I know that sounds bad, and is pretty blunt, but making RWBY was a learning process for CRWBY.
> Azula stuff
Students are warriors - that's quite literally what they're studying to do. Both Azula and Cinder use subterfuge and disguises to achieve their goals. Cinder is infiltrating a supposedly well guarded and secure institution to the point of subverting their systems and turning the robotic army against the city/academy. And Azula concluded what was already started. It wasn't the first Ba Sing Se was assault by the fire nation and was a key prize in the war against the earth kingdom. Both her and Cinder succeeded in their plans.
There are easily parallels to draw between those two plot lines. Both plans did have risks. Like Cinder could have been recognized through her semblance or by Lionheart finding a mote of courage to warn Ozpin. Heck, Ozpin could've vetted the students better as Jaune cheated his way in, no problem. No wonder Cinder, Emerald, and Mercury slipped in so easily.
> Fight scenes are hardly the "larger issues" in my opinion
Not the biggest issue, no, but a common enough topic for discussion. The Clover/Qrow/Tyrian fight got a lot of focus, as did RWBY vs. Ace ops, and JNR+Oscar vs. Neo attracted a lot of criticism. This volume isn't an exception when it comes to criticizing fights. I don't think there's a lot of nitpicking either - the focus is on the presentation.
> We must be seeing different criticism cause all I hear about Adam and Ironwood is "wasted potential" "retcon" "Adam/Ironwood was right".
Because 'bad' stuff is what sticks. You already agree with the 'good' stuff, you have your own criticisms. But it's the dissenting viewpoints that generate discussion and stay with you.
>ATLA polished out major issues, but there's still bumps and flaws here and there. But they're not close to RWBY's flaws, gaps and plot holes. RWBY's pacing issues alone outstrip ATLA in terms of noticeable flaws. I know that sounds bad, and is pretty blunt, but making RWBY was a learning process for CRWBY.
Again, I disagree they are so far apart.
>Defense of ATLA's writing stuff
Students are still part of the crowd, though. Uniquely face painted warriors and three students from Haven with documentation are not comparable in terms of noticeability. And Azula's plan even delibirately tries to cross paths with the Gaang, the people who are pretty much 100% likely to give them up. Lionheart is also not comparable with the risk (more like certainty) of getting spotted by the Gaang, he's a broken and controlled asset who Salem himself feels confident enough about to set the plan into motion. The chance that Lionheart would sacrifice himself to tell the truth of his betrayal is like 0.1%.
The only reason Azula and the Dai Li did the one thing that would lead her to capture Ba Sing Se, is because the plot demanded it. The Fall of Beacon is a thousand times better written than the Fall of Ba Sing Se.
>Not the biggest issue, no, but a common enough topic for discussion. The Clover/Qrow/Tyrian fight got a lot of focus, as did RWBY vs. Ace ops, and JNR+Oscar vs. Neo attracted a lot of criticism.
If it's not the biggest issue, than you would agree that it is not the case that "the bulk of the criticism is focused on the larger issues". Also, those fights mentioned are all very well done fights, on the same level as ATLA in my opinion.
>Because 'bad' stuff is what sticks. You already agree with the 'good' stuff, you have your own criticisms. But it's the dissenting viewpoints that generate discussion and stay with you.
Trust me, I notice the criticism I agree with just as much the criticism I don't. The reason for that is that both are irritating in regards to the number of times they get brought up versus the number of times the good stuff gets brought up. Barely anyone mentions the good, every instance of the bad or the ugly gets at least one thread a month.
I don't think this is a matter of subjectivity - it's objectively far less developed than a show with the resources that ATLA had. RWBY's first volume is a collection of storytelling sins with the focus of a puppy. It's twenty episodes of story crammed into less than two hours of runtime. It's like a smoker trying to run a half marathon with the pacing of a 100m dash. The story arcs lack cohesion and feel tacked to each other to resemble a Year 7's first woodworking project.
They were amateurs. Admittedly so. I'm not going to pretend otherwise when they aren't.
> ATLA stuff
All story has direction, the trick is to hide the reins. The Fall of Ba Sing Se worked because the errors made by the characters, the developments that favored Azula, were believable. The Gaang aren't perfect, the Dai Li have their motives and agenda. It leads to a perfect storm. Like with Cinder and Beacon, they let Azula in.
The Fall of Beacon is no different. Like Ozpin hesitates for no good reason when it comes to securing the Maiden's powers. He's also rigid in his thinking. And then there's the simple matter of not locking the doors to the vault/putting Amber in a poorly defensible situation. Cinder is handed the keys to the fall on a silver platter - a huntress that happens to an android, that happens to be tested at the festival, and there happens to be an opponent with magnetic powers. And that happens to result in Penny's death. Even the virus is only transplanted to the Atlas forces by hoping for a mistake.
The plot has direction. Events are not planned by Cinder until she stumbles across them. And there are conveniences weaved in that work in her favor. Like why aren't the police looking to question Emerald and Mercury over the death of a book store owner? They have a body on their hands, a modern city packed with cameras, and modern investigation techniques. The murderers even walked into the store in broad daylight, there must have been dozens of witnesses. So why isn't her lackeys sitting in a jail cell while she has to go at it by herself?
Cinder's plan didn't need to be worked out to the letter before she started, neither did Azula's. Each found a way in through subterfuge, each found opportunities and exploited them. They're flexible in how they achieved their goals. And their enemies aren't all-knowing and flawless. They count on the flaws. And if it all works, if cause and effect flow, then the suspension of disbelief remains intact. I'm fine with how both storylines are presented. RWBY's is rougher, but works. It also demonstrates that CRWBY are learning from past mistakes.
> If it's not the biggest issue, than you would agree that it is not the case that "the bulk of the criticism is focused on the larger issues".
The big issues in RWBY are pacing, cast bloat, and agency. Storytelling is also up there, but there's a large streak of subjectively there. Usually, the hot topics are tied to these areas. Technical criticism, like fight choreography, is up there and has its place among the critics. But that doesn't detract from criticism in other areas, no.
As for are they good fights - 2 out of 3 are. I love the Ace-ops fight, and only have a couple of nitpicks in how Ruby was presented. The Clover/Qrow/Tyrian criticism is mostly focused on the motive and outcome, but the fight itself was good. The JNR vs. Neo fight was horrendously bad. The premise was forced, the choreography awful, and the physics ignored. The best part was the chase, which is what the whole thing should've been. Instead of a generic face-off, making it stand out as a desperate chase to get the relic back while dodging Ironwood's forces would make it unique in the volume. As it stands, it's easily the worst fight of the volume and a contender of the worst match-up of the series. Even CRWBY admits it wasn't their best work.
> Trust me, I notice the criticism I agree with just as much the criticism I don't. The reason for that is that both are irritating in regards to the number of times they get brought up versus the number of times the good stuff gets brought up.
The good stuff does get discussed, just not thoroughly. If something works, then it's usually just accepted. Not many pull apart a functional part of the plot to see why it works. Like pulling a watch apart to find the tick when all they need is the time. And it's not like everyone has the same timetables and opinions. Events get discussed multiple times as people put their thoughts into words. There isn't one post that everyone shows up for either.
I like it, both the constructive criticism and rebuttals. I love to read other opinions and consider new ideas. This discourse stops r/RWBY from being stagnant. Yes, there will be some hot takes mixed in. Yet if there is tons of interesting analysis to pore over, then I'm fine with it.
I think that you can subjectively dislike ATLA but on the other side RWBY is objectively bad and honestly is not because the writer are "bad". I think that the show as a really "hellish" production that give us a glance at what the CRWBY could do in the right circumstance. For eight year non stop even, when changing tools they kept on putting a volume out every year on the same date and they don't work exclusively on RWBY during the year.They are some episode of ATLA who frame by frame contribute to the worldbuilding of the show like in "Zuko alone", but in RWBY even the writer of the show didn't know that some really important element of the plot were a thing like the maiden, in the end it just cause a lot of confusion. Finally, i understand that RT is really community driven but i don't want to have a live stream give me some really important details about the shows, i only knew that "Mettle" was a thing after then end V8 and i find the semblance a bit offensive if it suppose to be somekind of Mental disorder.
Art is subjective, not objective.
Well it depend of what school of thought you follow, they are valid argument for both sides. But personally i think that the interprétation of a work is subjective the technical skill use to produce that work can be objectively judge.
This is the type of comment I find exhausting.
ALL ART IS SUBJECTIVE. THIS INCLUDES VIDEOGAMES, MOVIES, TV SHOWS, BOOKS AND MUSIC. IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO OBJECTIFY SOMETHING THAT ONE'S FEELINGS AND TASTES INFLUENCE THEIR THOUGHTS ON IT.
I personally love Nickelback but many people say that they're "bad" likewise I can't stand Tarantino movies because they bore me, yet other people love them AND they've won awards.
> ALL ART IS SUBJECTIVE.
Enjoyment of art is subjective (aka a preference argument). Evaluation of technique and quality is *objective* (aka an argument about expertise and execution). You may *love* art that is just stick figures, that is fine. Art that is just stick figures is not as high quality and it doesn't require as much refinement of technique as art which reflects realism.
It is entirely acceptable to like a certain number more than any others for any variety of reasons - this is a preference, and in the realms of preference no number is superior to another. But if we got into things like the usefulness of certain mathematical equations in for certain applications, it would quickly become apparent that certain equations are just *better* at certain tasks than others.
> I personally love Nickelback but many people say that they're "bad"
The reason for this is because a lot of their tracks are incredibly safe, they are a musical paint by number that doesn't push any boundaries and ends up being about as generic as it can get. Their successes come mainly from being very well connected in the musical world. Their music isn't truly "bad" enough to be flawed, but it very much fits a trend of being safe and easily mass produced pop-rock silliness; scrubbed clean of nearly all meaning, message and innovation.
In essence it's "plain white bread", just fine and perfectly serviceable for a lot of things, but bland... and many people would prefer things with more flavor or some spice or salt or something to it.
The subjectivity of art is an argument that still going on, saying that a piece of art is objectively bad doesn't mean that it can't be enjoyable, it doesn't make it worthless. RWBY has some quality and some good moment.
Jog on. I'm not debating with anyone on this.
The Room is objectively worse at being a movie than anything Tarantino has produced. That some people can find it more enjoyable is certainly valid, but using that to claim you can't measure the craft that went into something like Inglourious Basterds versus the incompetence of The Room is just wrong.
It is definitely true that there are people who react way too quickly and do not think before talking about the show, especially when criticizing it. It is also true that the show has gathered a community of personas that hate the show and attack it unfairly many times. This is sadly something that is unavoidable in the current internet age even if we acknowledge that it is a problem.
I do think however that some of the arguments you make in your post are just ouright wrong. Animation quality, fight choreography and the like arent minor details, especially in a show that is not only known for its fights but had a large initial following MAINLY due to its fight scenes (Volumes 1-3 were carried by their fight scenes). Complaining if people see problems in their current implementations is not wrong or silly, it is understandable.
You are also perpetuating the myth that RT is a small indie company. They just arent. Not anymore. This show HAD an excuse. It has none now. This is of course without mentioning that RWBY is running and making money for 8 years now. This is not a "new face" any longer. It is an established company. Is it an industry titan? No. But to pretend that RT is still this small company held up by a few plucky and young people with a passion is just silly.
What im trying to say with this comment is that you can be displeased and denegrate people who are way too negative and downright lie about the show or are hostile. But the argumentation you use is not good for that sort of thing and leans towards some parts of toxic positivity.
Thanks for your input. I’ll admit that I glossed over the impact that the fight scenes had, especially in the first 3 volumes. However, while they may have been a major element, I disagree that they carried the show. A fight can look incredibly cool and impressive, and Monty was exceptionally good at that. But these fights are a feature in a show, and that requires context like story, character motivation, world building, and so on. So to say that the fights alone were what carried the show, I would argue is inaccurate. They may have drawn people to the show, but that doesn’t mean they are the driving force. Anyone can come across a scene with Bruce Lee and feel motivated to watch a movie he stared in. But no matter how cool his scenes are, they don’t serve as the driving force in his movies. It’s the context for why the fights happen and how that push the story forward. And that is what had to happen for RWBY as well.
In regards to RT as a company, they are far larger than what they used to be. And while they are not an industry titan like Dreamworks, they are still an established company as you said. However, they still started as a small indie company when the first Volume of RWBY was In production. They had no other series before this aside from Rv.B, so RWBY was made by a lot of people with little experience. Has it ever occurred to you that starting out like that could leave some lasting impressions within the studio even as it continues to grow over the course of 8 years? Mind you that 8 years is not that long and combined with new writers, new software, internal conflicts and the like, so there may be some issues in regards to quality that one could find excusable. Not all of them. not even most. But enough to recognize that RT lacks experience compared to major players in animation.
However, this is all conjecture for my opinion. Regards of what you think, I thank you kindly for taking the time to listen to it, as well as for sharing yours.
While fights are a feature in the show, they are THE main feature. All of the things you mention, context, world-building, characters were done really poorly in the early volumes, world building especially since it harms the show to this day. All of those things were only an excuse for cool fights. Most people found the story and especially non-combat animation to be very poor at that time, the reason people watched it was mostly the fight scenes. Even trailers show this as the narrative in them is barely existant until the Gold trailer and are basically just excuses for cool fight scenes.
The show basically existed just to give the fights meaning. The fights didnt exist for the show, the show existed for the fights.
Yes, RT started as an indie company, that is why criticisms of V1-V3 were and are still rare compared to other volumes or are made in soft tones, because that is understood. Everything changed by V4 (And even then people went light on the series due to Monty and changing engines). By V5 all of these excuses sadly evaporate. By V5 the company is not only large enough in resources but also trained talent.
8 years is a LOT. Entire series have ended in less time. Even indie series. All of these excuses also fall short when considering the golden age of internet shows that we live in currently, with shows like Hazbin Hoten and Helluva boss clearly showing that even newcomers can create amazing things.
Once again, as sad as it is. CRWBY just cant be defended using these tired excuses as other companies have proven these excuses to be faulty.
Also important to note a few things that are more metatextual:
1) there is a thriving market for whining that people find entertaining for one reason or another. You have to remember that for some people, complaining about the show literally puts money in their bank accounts. Not a lot, but some. So even when they would otherwise have a more nuanced take, going all out for clicks is what makes them the cash, so that's what they do, and they whip their viewers into a frenzy for that purpose. Does this remind me of anything? Obviously, but that's beside the point anyway.
2) related, but in this culture, prediction-based reactions are big clout farms. Everyone wants to be the person who "called it" and point to the post, video or tweet where they called a certain plot thread based on something. As a result, they are incentivized to cry foul when their predictions don't turn out to be right. They can't be wrong, so the writers are bad because they didn't do the thing that would have legitimized the prediction.
I am yet to see a video with any ACTUAL criticism of the show. Every single “RWBY is bad” video ive seen is just wrong, and the creators of said videos don’t seem to understand the show and complain about the stupidest shit (looking at you hbomberguy). The show isn’t perfect and has it’s flaws, but no critic has been able to actually make a point against the show
Well...there’s eruption fang. I rarely agree with the dude, but I can see where he’s coming from to an extent. If you’re looking for legitimate criticism about RWBY, I’d say he’s your best bet.
At least he actually watches show continuously and had an understanding of what’s happening unlike most who just watch the first 3 volumes and then stop (hbomberguy, AGAIN)
Hbomb absolutely watched the show beyond the first three volumes. Where do you think he gets the clips of Adam's brand from? The video is focussed on the first three volumes and he makes it clear why, but events from later parts of the show get referenced where relevant.
If you actually watched the video you would know that he said he was making another video for the rest of the show and that for that video he wanted to focus on Volumes 1-3 Not gonna defend his video but ar least be mad at his video for a good reason lmao
I don’t like this video for a lot of reasons, mostly shallow criticism and nitpicking.
Havent seen his video in a hot minute, But I don't remember it all being nit picky (although I do remember a good chunk of it being nitpicky)
It wasn’t all nitpicks, but a good bit of it was. Him complaining about how the show didn’t do what he expected, or how he thought it did something “wrong” about a perfectly fine part of the show. He even flat out contradicts himself a lot. I remember how he was praising Avatar for how it explains bending, how the characters all new it and it was part of their lives. He then complains about how the show talks about Aura and Semblances, because nobody explains it for a while. It’s literally the same type of world building, why would anyone need to say what an Aura or a Semblance is if they already knew? Hypocritical criticism at its best
I love ATLA but the way it handled the introduction of bending was far from perfect as well, seems like a strange thing to cite as a positive example. The first conversation in the show (where they talk about Waterbending) doesn’t sound like an actual discussion Sokka and Katara would have, it’s very clearly forced. Given the show was for younger children than RWBY I can understand why they had to spell it out and I don’t hold it against it, it’s just a tiny nitpick that ultimately doesn’t matter, just like the similarly clunky way Aura was explained.
I remember the world building thing being one of his better points, Like to me Personally I find it out How Jaune needs to have Aura explained to him, Like I get he has no real experience but Aura seems like something everyone should have a basic level of understanding on, and Just thought I'd throw this out there but Its totally fair to not like a show because it wasnt what you expected or wanted which is why the title of the video was, Why RWBY Is Disappointing, Not why it's bad,
It's irrelevant to the guys point whether the video was all nitpicky or mostly nitpicky. What type of argument are you even trying to have? If you complain about the show the same way you tried to dismiss the guys comment, you would sound like you're bitching. So actually form am argument before blaming everyone else on the sub.
Holy shit where did all that come from lol I was just pointing out that I dont remember the video being too nitpicky, this wasnt an argument, me simply stating that I dont remember it being that bad, The only one Bitching here is you here chief
My take on this is the change in style. I felt as though the earlier seasons focus a lot more on the fighting, combat, lore and legitimate character development. (Something i think they moved more to in the most recent season). I feel as though some of the "complaints" you're seeing are, as you said, people who just are trying to complain about something, and some that are legitimate criticisms from people trying to help make the show better.
You talk a lot about the budget, but I don't believe the budget has to with most of the complaints that at least I've seen. I believe the ideas behind the fight scenes factor much more than the animation or choreography.
On the other hand of your post, every show should be able to receive legitimate criticism without the person being harassed for the ideas. I have seen people come out and try to talk about their problems with the show only to be disregarded as a "hater" and the post unfairly downvoted.
I understand its terrible when all you see is negative talk about a show that you like and you think that its unfair to the people who spend time on it, but if you keep pushing the people who have legitimate concerns and criticism under the rug and keep you're own criticisms to yourself, the show can never grow and realize those issues that maybe many viewers have with the show.
Maybe there's a lot of negativy because there are genuine problems with the plot of the show and people want it to be better because they care for it?
What do I know.
PS: RT isn’t a garage-based company.
You seem to know more than most of the people in this sub. It's ok to defend a show there is no problem with that but when people in this sub give any amount of valid criticism the white knights chalk it up to them bitching, and nitpicking. Then they say that iconic "If YOu DOn'T LiKE ThE SHoW StOp WatCHiNG iT." Also one of the problems I feel RWBY has is that there seems to be no passion behind it.
I'm pretty sure most RWBY fans are just anime obsessed teens that don't want people to slander their precious waifus.
As somebody who is usually pretty critical of this show, I can tell you what my complaints are. The show is kinda meh mostly, but the reason I and many others bitch and moan so much is that this show could be legit good. It wastes enourmous amounts of potential and has some really cool ideas and characters, but still often feels very amateur-ish(which might be related to the lead writers still "having room to improve").
Some of the characters that I actually find to be pretty good(like Oscar or Ren and Nora) are actually nice to watch and one can clearly notice how much the writers enjoy working with those characters, but most characters aren't that well handled rn. Especially Team RWBY. During Volume 8 I was unironically rooting for Team RWBY and Jaune to die. That's not a sign that the writers "making me(the audience) care".
That being said, I don't judge people who enjoy it. Nobody can be objective, this is just my opinion and personal experience. Pls respect that.
>The show’s quality is not nearly as terrible as people make it out to be and that should be admirable given the circumstances!People complaining about minor details such as animation quality, fight scene choreography, or whatever else, seem to forget that RWBY isn’t produced by a large studio like Dreamworks or Warner Bros.
A couple things to unpack here. Firstly, this might have been a valid excuse in the early days of the first few volumes. RT has grown considerably since then and dare I say people that forget that it's not Warner Bros. can be forgiven since it... is. RT is a subsidiary of WarnerMedia. It's not the little indy studio that it was when RWBY started. You say they're a new face in the industry, but they were founded *eighteen* years ago. After that amount of time, you absolutely should know what you're doing.
And to suggest that the fight scene choreography is a minor thing to complain about is not really a valid argument. RWBY was sold primarily on cool fight scenes. That this took a hit when Monty died is understandable and RT can be cut some slack for things not being up to par in the immediate aftermath. But cool fights need to be the focus of this show and several volumes have failed to deliver on that.
>RWBY has it’s flaws, true. But the show still displays competency.
Very little? Like, I'll drag up some positives here to not be a complete downer: I like how the animators do Neo. Since she doesn't talk, almost all of her communication is up to the animators. She has fun, and cute mannerisms, such as when she tiptoed on the airship as Cinder was planning to go after Penny. While not quite what it was under Monty, the animators found a way to translate her smugness into a fighting style that works for me.
But it mostly ends there. The writing is plagued by a lack of imagination of how the world works and what the characters in it would do. It's inconsistent and you can never be sure how characters' abilities function based on things established previously. The writing is kept vague to the point that most fans I discuss the show's problems with simply imagine a better one than the one that exists. Characters behave the way the plot needs them too regardless of previous characterization, as if they read ahead in the script or watch the show. Eddy even gave some insight recently as to how borked the process is, with rewrites happening after VAs having wrapped up their lines. Not even having a finished script to hand to the VAs is a sign of some terrible mismanagement going on.
You know he talks about people like you. Even if you don't like it, the majority do.
It's okay you don't like the show, but it isn't a reason to go bitching about it like you are some genius in writting a story. RT can't satisfy everyone, but they can satisfy a majority of people, wich is what they are doing right now since the show is a success for the company.
All the criticism I've posted on this server has been based on what was in the show or failed to be presented in it. I put a reasonable amount of thought into what I criticize and if someone can genuinely prove me wrong on something or show me something I missed, I take that into account. If you think that's "bitching" or "whining", then I recommend you try to figure out why you came to that erroneous conclusion.
I came to this conclusion because *I* enjoy the show and what they do in it and so does a lot of other people.
It's okay *you* don't like it, but that doesn't mean you should complain about it and be like " I am right and you are all wrong about your point of view because I made my research and I bet you didn't. "
And before you tell me you thought and made some research on that point of yours, EVERYONE who writtes his point of you says that, so where is the proof you are more accurate than everybody else?
Right, so here's what I think the problem is: You're conflating you enjoying something with it being good. I have no real problem with people enjoying the show. I take issue with people suggesting that means it's well-written or that criticism is "whining".
I'm not trying to suggest people are wrong or dumb for liking the show. Point is "I liked Penny's arc and how she turned human" isn't something I can or want to argue against. "Penny had a well thought out and consistent arc that lead to her becoming flesh" on the other hand is testable and can be proven wrong. Art is tricky and you can never truly objectively measure whether something is good, but there are some rules that it makes sense to follow when writing a story and RWBY violates them frequently without good reason.
And if you feel the need to test my knowledge of the show, feel free to quiz me. Like I said, if someone can prove me wrong with something in the show, I tend to accept that.
Can't argue with you there. For most of them, but I think they deserve more credits than that. It as its flaws but that doesn't mean it's badly written. I'm okay you don't like it but that doesn't mean I agree with your point of view.
I don't really have the time argue here so let's agree to disagree. Okay?
He never said he was right, and you are wrong and what do you mean he shouldn't complain, you act like complaining about problems with something is all of a sudden some kind of taboo.
Dont worry man people I this subreddit bitch and moan all the time that no one genuinely gives good criticism but when someone like you does they call it bitching and moaning anyways,
That is because most people on this subreddit behave more like cultists than fans.
Whenever I try to engage in a polite discourse with the flaws I see within the storytelling, people immediately leap onto assumptions that I am personally attacking them, or that my experiences are invalid because I am not American, or that my psychological expertise is 'invalid, because this proves true love'.
Criticism is not liked here, because people take it entirely too personally. Back when I was young(er), someone said to me - 'The first step towards fascism is when people assault you based on emotion'. - and that stuck.
People aren't willing to entertain an unpopular opinion anymore, because people are entrenched in the 'anyone who doesn't agree that Weiss and Blake belong together in hot sweet smutty lesbian love' camp and don't want to venture out of that bubble to go 'Oh, but Blake might look nice with Yang!'.
As far as competency goes, I really would have cut out a lot of the dialogue and given more focus on the actual characters, rather than shoehorning in entirely pointless plot lines. That's one of the things I can criticize them on.
They hired extra writing staff, they supposedly invested in streamlining the story, but we *still* do not know how old Cinder is. We still don't know how old Taiyang or Qrow are.
Retrospection on questions of 'why' and 'how' and personal likes and such inflected within the way of phrasing, are things that people don't do all that often.
I think there's a lot to be improved at with the people who post here and immediately get downvoted for not wearing the right 'badge'. two weeks ago, I saw someone going 'Oh, you're a member of the critical rwby place' and immediately infer things.
We are celebrating the liberation of Europe from the Nazi's here. I would like people not to be forced to wear the Judensterre simply because they do not adhere to someone's personal philosophy of how the world is.
Please, whoever reads this, if it doesn't get downvoted to becoming unseen - Try to debate and to reason, rather than to be damning someone as 'less than human' by immediately drawing assumptions.
We are all people here. We all like RWBY, and I would like to see people able to look beyond the colour of one's skin or their political allegiances, and simply be able to debate things without 'this or that thing' from the past, be it a stupid comment, or the membership of some group, coming in the way.
Have a very pleasant day, anyone who reads this.
Remember: We are all human and we are above the depravities of exclusion for race, gender, creed or orientation. We may not always agree, but people need to know how to keep an open mind.
Anyone who thinks otherwise, is a horrible human being who is closed-minded and cannot think of other people as equally fallible human beings.
I was with you until you started talking about fascism and Nazis. Please, this is cartoon discourse. It's not that deep and it's almost insulting you'd compare this to such a serious and impactful real life thing.
Do you want me to title it 'Apartheid', 'Segregation' or 'Othering'? The same concept, applied with terminology that is no less serious.
If ATLA could have a discourse on the genocide of a people (the Air Nomads), then nothing is off the table. A cartoon universe, dealing with the extinction of a species of people, something people have written theses about.
I was not talking about Fascism. I was talking about 'Othering', about what the Nazi's did to the people of Europe. Apartheid, Segregation, you could term it in any different way, all are *equally* bad, but in some countries, the terms are more loaded and more offensive.
I did not reference to people as Nazi's. I merely referenced to being forced to wear the yellow star and being vilified for what you believe in. If Avatar can speak about genocide, even if it is for children, then what would you call James Ironwood coldly executing a member of the Council? Is that not Fascism? Or is that just 'legally executing an elected official due to 'might makes right''?
I don't know where you live. All I was asking for is that people do discuss things on an equal field, without being marked with the Judensterre. If I were to get too technical, people would not understand. If I went too simplistic, people would not understand.
Segregation/stars/apartheid/othering is a morally reprehensible thing, and if I were to talk about the Khmer Rouge or the Reign of Terror, or the purges under Stalin, people wouldn't get the context, because History is no longer taught in the world, and discussion and debate is forgotten.
If it is the moment when someone's Flair gets changed by moderators to reveal that they are not people to be respected, history will repeat itself.
All I am asking for is for people to have some respect, and not to be marked with the brands and the chains of 'they believe this, so they must be wrong'. If that is fascism, then let me be a fascist. But know that whoever thinks 'They are wrong, and they must be wrong', is contributing to why people are getting afraid to speak their mind here.
I kinda stopped caring about The stuff within the show, I just got bored.
I haven’t seen much bad criticism of ruby except when people get really salty over ships (i.e bumblebee or rosegarden) which if you’re into that I get it, but it doesn’t mean the whole show is shit if a paring happens suddenly. I think people forget that we don’t need two seasons of the characters flirting before they start dating.
I don’t understand why people shit on the animation so much even in the earlier seasons the show was never unwatchable. For a passion program it looks great even now. Am not sure what software the team uses I believe they used there own. Which has evolved and groved with time just as the team has and it’s perfectly ok.
My main grind with RWBY often comes with how they handle characters and the lack of consistency and motifs in some of them. A lot the characters just don’t have reasons for why they do stuff especially the minor villains and it makes them really flat characters.