— — — —— — —
×
— —— —
— — — —— — —
×
— —— —
— — — —— — —
×
— —— —
← darkroom
Remove/lower the minimum word count for reviews
The vast majority of shows I look up have zero reviews, and the few that exist are typically packed with filler in order to meet the minimum word count. I think the minimum word count policy hurts the writers, the readers, and Anilist because it encourages readers to go to other sites for more useful reviews. The readers suffer because there is nothing to read, the writers suffer because no one reads them, and anilist suffers because their users are encouraged to go elsewhere.
There are a lot of people on anilist, but even the most popular show here with 100,000 followers only has 2 reviews, a few have maybe 3 or 4 but most have none. I have gone through reviews on other similar sites and 95% of reviews are less than 300 words, so potentially 95% of reviewers are being turned away by the current 500 word limit. The size and layouts of these other sites are similar, the only difference is the word limit.
People are in a hurry. They are often looking for quick opinions before watching a show, and then come back after the show to read and vote on the longer ones. If the short ones are not available, they are not as likely to watch the show and come back to read the long ones. This is how shorter reviews help foster a more active review culture, like kindling for a warm fire. If someone completes a show with no reviews then they can quickly hype it up with a short review so others know to try it, until enough people watch it that one of them can write a decent long review. With a word limit it just takes longer for those first few reviews to finally appear and so it is far less likely to catch the attention of someone who can write decent, descriptive reviews. So the short reviews and long reviews have a symbiotic relationship.
If a review is actually so short that its bad, and voting exists, then its quality will be reflected in the votes. There is no reason to be afraid of the shorter reviews. Since the highest ranked reviews are shown at the top, the short ones will tend to not be seen unless sought out. In the rare cases where there will only be 1 or 2 short reviews: If a bad review is short, at least you don't waste much time reading it. Compare this to having no reviews at all, or 1 or 2 long-winded reviews that might end up being equally as unhelpful as a short review. Bad & short reviews are technically more useful than bad & long reviews, because they take less time. Even if you don't agree with that, a few short reviews are better than no reviews at all. Whats really important is that there is a decent amount of reviews for readers & upvoters to choose from. Then there's a higher chance of the top ones being good. If the supply of reviews increases, the amount of people voting on reviews increases, the motivation to write better reviews increases, the chance of someone writing a "great" review increases. Once they're upvoted, the visible "top reviews" and thus the overall quality of visible reviews increases as a result.
Meanwhile the people who prefer shorter stuff can still be included, they don't have to go to another site and can stay on anilist.
Plus, reviews are inherently subjective anyways, differing from person to person, some probably should be short! Let us judge which reviews are worth reading for ourselves, with our votes. Please drastically lower the word limit, to maybe 100 words tops, or just remove it entirely.
[EDIT: "How do shorter reviews increase the quality? Won't it just make more bad reviews?"
By retaining readers & driving competition amongst reviewers. Bad reviews won't get as many upvotes as the well-written ones so you don't have to read them unless there is nothing better available. As more reviews are added, the better reviews are upvoted, and the overall review quality increases because most people will only look at the first few top rated reviews. Meanwhile shorter reviews are still available further down for those who prefer them. And there is a far smaller chance of finding a page with no reviews, increasing visitor retention. It is best of all worlds! A barrier to entry like a word-limit only limits the number of early participants in the review competition, leading to much slower growth, less readers who are looking for quick opinions, fewer upvotes, less motivation for writers, & a longer period of lower quality reviews. And without this barrier the bad/short reviews still don't even have to get seen since they'll be at the bottom of the list, so there is really little downside to having no word-limit.]
[MORE EDIT: If you're going to defend the word-limit, make sure you read this post fully first. Failing to read it is only going to act as further evidence that longer posts really do create a barrier to entry.]
2200 characters (which is the minimum length for reviews to be acceptable here, there is no 'minimum word count') is... half a page's worth of text.
It is ridiculously easy to hit that amount within thirty minutes to an hour if you actually have anything insightful to say.
If you can't even manage to come up with enough things to say about an anime or manga to fill half a page, chances are that you probably don't have anything to say that would justify making a review.
Don't think anyone could have worded this better
how is implying that nobody who prefers things short can be "insightful" the best way it could have been worded? if it were ridiculously easy then there should be more reviews! Since Dunkan's comment is short, then by his own standard it must be un-insightful, right?
There was hardly a hostile or abrasive tone at all in this conversation, nor the responses. How does that equate to "bullying" you? That's an incredibly falliable way to deconstruct someone's argument.
They are insinuating that I am incapable of writing 500 word essays and that people who prefer things short have nothing insightful to say, when the post really had nothing to do with that. It's they who are being abrasive. They're choosing to ignore my point in place of belittlement and snide misdirects like "must not be insightful". That simply has nothing to do with my point or anything other than insulting people who like short reviews, and I'm not going to pretend such a short-sighted & dismissive response "couldn't have been worded better".
- continue this thread →
They are insinuating that an interesting perspective is worth more words than boiling down a perspective into fewer words. If you're drawing that line, then you are over-reaching on the basis that you believe you may not have the potential to do such a thing. If you are, then you could very easily prove them wrong and you wouldn't have misinterpreted it in such a way by having such confidence in your abilities. There is nothing snide about making such a remark. In fact, every professional writer I know of has quoted something similar in that if an idea can't be expanded on thoroughly, it likely wasn't interesting to begin with. The more you feel the need to reduce stances into fewer words or perhaps into labels, then yes, you aren't doing a very good job at reviewing work. That's why it is a skill. You have to keep in mind, you are not writing about a perspective but "reviewing" a show in its entirety within one. More words mean more ideas and concepts are communicated.
By definition, the idea of a review would, yes, technically, encompass no restriction to a word count. However, being able to review a show in 100 words is hardly interesting, insightful, or in my opinion, worthwhile. If anything, that would reduce the amount of intellectual discussion to be had on something, for if someone touches on the entirety of a show in detail, literally as the definition of review would imply, they would be able to do so. I have never seen a "review" of a show made in less than 500 words, because it's just less engaging to read. This by no means make their perspective invalid, but it does make it less informed, believable and, as stated above, interesting. The purpose of the review is to engage the reader on your stance on whether it's something worth watching or not. Reviews aren't interesting on this website for a number of personal reasons; the one that comes to my mind is that very few of them choose to share an interesting perspective on a show and directly mimic what either a more valued opinion believes or what the consensus believes. However, that is an entirely subjective lens to view it from, as what is interesting to me may or may not be interesting to someone else. If you're going to get overly semantic about the kind of language people are using in their responses by "misinterpreting you", does that not insinuate that you may have, perhaps, communicated it poorly? Because it's one thing if some are misunderstanding your point and you are to correct them, but if most if not all according to this thread are, that may suggest there is an issue elsewhere and not within the reader's comprehension. This is not an attempt to spitefully rebut you but to illustrate there may be a clear gap between what you have communicated and what others have interpreted, and I don’t believe it is the reader’s fault if the statistical majority “misinterpret” what you have sought to communicate. That would lie in the responsibility of the writer. If you're looking for a website to reduce the word count severely, you may want to look into websites like Letterboxd, for this website is not of that and has far stricter in comparison but also very accessible guidelines that very, very few people protest against. And while it is perfectly within your own right to want shorter reviews, most who choose to read reviews do so knowing what they're getting into, so you should be arguing in favor of why it’s a good idea to reviewers and readers and not just yourself, as moderators aren’t going to change the website merely on one person’s preference.
And because I know you will persist on it, no, I am not insinuating you are a bad writer or incapable of mustering at least 500 words, but rather the practice of not being able to do so in detail is a symptom of being one. Again, if you are able to do so, then you will not have found offense in my remarks speaking figuratively. But if you do take offense to it however by drawing that non-existent line, that is your own doing, not my own, for I am talking conceptually, not exclusively.
And I mean not to say this with haste; this response is roughly less than 800 words, giving you a rough indicator of AniList’s guidelines and what they expect. It, truthfully, isn’t much. Please do not misinterpret my tone as being “spiteful”. Blunt and candid it may be, however like everyone I talk to, I give nothing to my utmost respect when approaching their discussion. This includes you.
Maybe I didn't make this clear enough: I want to read shorter reviews, not write them. And in some cases, I just want to read a single review and this site won't have any while others will have many, and it encourages me to go to those other sites when I would rather just get everything here. Does that make sense? You get that I'm not trying to write them, right?
That... does not change anything about what I have said in the slightest.
If the one reason why somebody, anybody, is not writing a review for an anime or manga is the fact that they have to write half a page of text... then it's probably for the best that they don't have a review up.
If you really want to read 'reviews' that consist of little more than 'this anime sucks because it's bad.', then sure, go ahead, find some site that allows that. Literally nobody's stopping you from doing so. But deflating the already slightly laughable standards for reviews on AL any further is just about the worst decision that could be made.
It should change the "you" in your original post, because "I" am looking for a higher supply of reviews, not looking to write them. If you want to pretend you were talking about other people you should have said "they." That's what it changes.
Back to the point, you agree the review standards here are low, and agree that I should go elsewhere for better reviews, but you still maintain that it is "probably for the best" to keep things how they are here? What is this "probably" based on exactly? Why not just let people vote for what they think is best, like the other sites with proper review systems do?
I feel like you're losing track of what your own point was supposed to be at this point.
I never said 'go elsewhere for better reviews', I pretty much said the exact opposite of that. The only way you could interpret my sentence that way is if you consider literal one-line reviews to be better than fleshed-out ones, which... I guess to each their own, but... dear lord.
Talking about things I never said, I never said that it's ' "probably for the best" to keep things how they are here '. I said that it's definitely better to keep it to this level than is to lower the standards even further. The 'best' thing, considering the questionable quality of half the reviews on here, would very likely be to do the exact opposite of what your original point was trying to be.
Considering that you just went and said that you wished people read your idea 'properly', it's pretty interesting that you seem to have completely misread both of my arguments.
- continue this thread →
My point is that there are almost no reviews here, and that their standards are low because there are so few of them. And because of that I do have to go to other sites, which i won't advertise without the mods permission, that have dozens of well written reviews on this same show, but also have "this anime sucks because it's bad" like you said. That's why i interpreted what you said literally. The bad/short reviews just don't get as many upvotes as the well-written longer ones. You don't have to read the bad ones even though they exist. So people are encouraged to write exactly what they feel at the optimal-length for that anime, and overtime the most descriptive ones are upvoted, and the quality increases. A barrier to entry only limits the number of participants in the review competition, leading to slower growth & potentially stagnation if there are better alternatives elsewhere. Without this barrier there is much less chance of finding too few reviews and learning to go elsewhere. After a short time, the bad/short reviews still won't even have to get seen since they'll be at the bottom of the list. So as it stands there are good reasons to remove the limit, and seemingly no real defense for it other than "well the reviews here are already terrible, so we can't lower the limit" when my whole point is that the limit is what causes the bad reviews.
Ridiculous. You think world-renowned critics who write capsule reviews do so because they don't have any insightful things to say? Most capsule reviews out there have numerous more points than a lot of the reviews here combined. And neither you nor anyone for that matter has any objective measurement of review quality since there is no such thing. Opinions on art are subjective, so is the number of thoughts that make up said opinions and especially so is the number of words employed to articulate them. This is conceited and preposterous.
I'd like to see some examples of reviews that are below 2200 characters and are better than actual, worthwhile, over 2200 character reviews.
That doesn’t answer my point about subjectivity at all, but here you go:
Not only is this review incredibly close to 2200 characters, which is really funny, it doesn't bother discussing any of the points it makes. I haven't watched this movie, and after reading this I still don't know anything about it.
I'll stick to the over 2200 character reviews.- continue this thread →
Why would you expect to learn anything about it in that sense? You’re not supposed to read reviews until after watching the title. Do you often enjoy spoiling yourself?
y'all need to stop this -__- the toxicity from this thread is greatly increasing the current rate of global warming (and it's constantly taking up one of the only 3 forum activity spots TT)
btw #RamNeedsMoreLove :P
- Length does not necessarily equal quality. This applies to both the writer who should not have to conform their thoughts to some stringent word-count minimum, as well as to many readers who may want something very short and to the point. Additionally, people should be able to rate a show without writing anything (apologies if this is possible, today is my first day on anilist so I'm still learning it)
- Review helpfulness should be judged by us readers without any undue outside influence (anilist word min in this case). The community may very well have found direct and concise reviews to be the most helpful, but we will never know since anilist prohibits such expressions. In fact, comparing to favorable reviews seen in other companies we know people very often preview to read reviews which are short and sweet. At the end of the day, we should have the choice to read/write our desired length.
- Law of large numbers. By turning away the majority of would-be reviewers you are not only promoting a myriad of biases, but limiting your sample size which is about the worst thing you can do to find a reliable score.
Today is my first day on Anilist, and I have to say I'm very disappointed to see what I thought was an honest and intelligent request marginalized and dismissed with such ignorance and closed-mindedness.
Thanks for reviving the thread, since the issue still stands. Frankly, I think the reason this has been dismissed is the moderators who've participated. Most Internet moderators feel the need to impose their own opinion as that's what they do with authority. There isn't a single argument for the rule here that has any sort of logical backing, whereas we've made plenty. All the mods have said is that they don't like short reviews, so they shouldn't be allowed.
2200 words is neither half a page nor does it indicate quality as OP mentioned above: length does mot equal quality and further drawn out posts only deterr from reading it whole.
Ironically i think exactly this is what happened here as you seemingly didn't bother reading OPs full text as he invalidated your answer in the original post.Most professional Movie and Show reviews are usually also around the 500-1000 CHARACTER count, with more detailed versions, encompassing many pages, in the full version.
But usually in magazines for example reviews are not even half a page, which is quite alot on word with 12 size.
its 2200 characters not 2200 words and yes 2200 characters is half a page. Half a page for a review is not a drawn out post, its an extremely bare minimum post.
Funny that you are trying to shit on someone for "failing to read" while failing to actually read the post yourself lol
Most professional Movie and Show reviews are usually also around the 500-1000 CHARACTER count, with more detailed versions, encompassing many pages, in the full version.
Yes, exactly. The full version is what we want, not the bog standard drivel people make for clicks.
Magazines have a physical amount of space for them to take up, so yes they will be shorter.
delete this nephew
I will delete this when someone actually reads it properly and responds in a way that convinces me the site somehow benefits from the word limit. As it stands, it encourages users to use other websites for something as simple as a review.
I just checked my shoddy review of FLCL and it has less than 500 words lmfao I beat the system
it's because you used images. I think the image links count into the limit.
No I made the review long before there was a word limit :p
OH, yeah, you're probably right. Also I'm pretty sure the characters from images count too, for anyone wondering. So a possible way to write a shorter review is to include more images.
When I wrote mine it was legit all text
why should he delete this?
he's making an interesting point while being reasonable with his arguments.
it's good for the communityi really appreciate that. maybe I am just not explaining it well, i feel as though everyone is overlooking my point, and are only willing to focus on the negative side without considering the long-term benefit.
i understand how you feel. i honestly do think people tend to overlook some points just because they find something they don't agree with. people should try to be more constructive instead of just discarding an argument without really thinking much about it
people hate change, especially when they're used to the old
I'm still confused is @So1us actually your nephew? Or is this some kind of joke that I'm not cool enough to understand?
Since this isn't middle school, you should be able to reach the 2200 character count with ease. If you have trouble writing that many characters for a review after watching a series then you shouldn't be writing one in the first place.
its not because I want to write short reviews, i want to read short reviews, or just any reviews at all, without having to go to other anime list sites. If you can't read my 100 word post in full without missing the point, what does this say about 500 words?
One workaround that may be a possibility on the writer end of things could be them summing it up in a TL;DR but that's up to the writers jurisdiction. I'd much rather an in-depth review that would entice me to watch a show as opposed to a "This show was great.It was so great that you should watch it too". The word count is easy to reach anyways so really there is no need for a change.
you would still have long reviews, even if there is no word-limit. surely you would agree having no reviews at all on most anime here is a big problem? the most popular anime here, attack on titan, with 100,000 followers, only has 2 reviews.
I think that may be a moot point. Most people write reviews for shows after they're done.
The bigger problem is lesser known shows not having enough and people being less likely to watch them as a result. It'd be nice for them to have them, because a lot of other sites might not.
hold on, I'm going to check how many boku no pico has
- continue this thread →
it was for season 1 specifically, which is completed. but fine we'll pick a different one that is completed: Death Note. It has 90,000 people following, 70,000 have completed it, and it has... 4 views. So it's not a moot point, it applies everywhere in the site, on every anime, unless you have a counter-example.
EDIT: btw on another un-named site with a similarly sized audience, AoT season 1 had 330 reviews. the only difference between the review systems is the word-limit.
[Removed]
Thank you for the clear response. I maintain that I think this word limit is the source of the "low standard" reviews. A few low-quality reviews is better than no reviews at all. If 2200 character reviews are really better, people will upvote them on their own. Maybe increase the word-count as the number of reviews increases? I hope you guys reconsider.
@Zex
(am I allowed to do that? I'm kinda new and I don't think I read anything about not @-ing the mods)Do you think it would be possible to add a comment section under the show? It would work just like regular activity posting I guess? Idk about the details, but could you consider it?
ThanksEdit: sorry Ing, didn't mean to do that
[Removed]
We can do that? I didn't know that. And they show up on the show's description when looked up? Then could there be a bot that makes a review thread for every show that comes out once it's done?
That'd solve all the problems here without requiring the addition of any new features right?
@DragonFyre So I wrote this in my far too long analysis of the issue (this thing :P), but people just in general tend to stray from writing short commentary in forums. And having such a bot would likely overrun the entire forums system which I for one would very much dislike. And if you simply change the system so that forums for anime don't show up in the general forums: then forums like this (btw #RamNeedsMoreLove) wouldn't show and people that want their forums to show up won't. Then if you add a tag that toggles between showing and not: that would have to be made concrete, and if a commenter wanted their post shown then there must be a system to show the whole post but that's against the original intention of the whole plan... etc. etc.
Any edited to the current forum system would likely just end in complete chaos, and one of the best things about anilist is its perfect, simplistic organization and beautiful aesthetics.
My previous solution might work around the whole issue but like @Zex said it's not really worth the endless effort. After all, anilist is more of an anime community site rather than a review site like MAL (which is why I decided to join here rather than there). <- in the same way the review section isn't super eye-catching nor obvious because that's not what the anilist gods want.
So reallly, let's dust off our hands with this thread unless someone can come up with an actual cheap solution ;)
~NishiTsuki out
And also
#RamNeedsMoreLove
- continue this thread →
No, the bot only posts when a show is over, like in reddit's "anime name" episode X discussion thread, except it would only happen when the show finishes
Do you think the concept of capsule reviews is somehow illegitimate or have you no idea they even exist?
I think I see where you're coming from here, but usually I just skim the reviews.
Also the long reviews would be super long anyway and probably would be that long even if the limit was lowered.Maybe we could have like a disquis or comment section for each show instead of changing the review word limit itself, since reviews I believe are supposed to be long-winded and written by people who are passionate about writing them
I too prefer to just skim reviews when looking for new shows. However, I still want to see the most upvoted reviews, to get an idea of how many people it represents. That's the main problem with only having a comments section: they will tend to only show in posted order, whereas we want to see reviews in ranked order. The ranked order is also why I think the word-limit is unnecessary: if a long review is better than people will upvote it, and if a short review is bad then it won't get upvoted. But when a word-limit is introduced there is less competition for reviews, leading to an overall lower quality as well as lower supply.
But when a word-limit is introduced there is less competition for reviews, leading to an overall lower quality as well as lower supply.
I think you should have put that reasoning into the OP.
While I personally don't agree and don't see how low effort, low word count reviews would spur writers to make better, dense, and well reasoned ones; I think putting your reasoning up front could have saved you some agony from replying to people that are utterly baffled at the conclusion low word count -> more better reviews.
You might be right about the OP, but I already did mention that more competition helps drive the quality up, and I figured this is common enough knowledge considering the vast majority of successful websites (won't mention them here without mods permission) for ranking and reviewing have no arbitrary lower-limits. All you need to do is go to an anime site you think has the best reviews for lots of obscure anime, and see for yourself if they use a long or short word-limit, chances are they don't have one. There is no reason to be scared of short reviews. All they need is the upvote option, and people voting, and the best will soon rise to the top. If there are no reviews, and the few that exist are fluffed, the whole review-voting economy stagnates. Since it costs less time to read short reviews, short reviews bring more readers in, which brings in more votes, which motivates people to write better reviews.
If you still don't agree that low word count -> more good reviews I suggest you instead ask yourself how 2200 character limit -> more good reviews : Why 2200 characters? why not 20,000? Who is this limit actually helping, and how does that compare to who it could be helping? Who does the alternative actually hurt? Is there any evidence it's actually working better than the competition? So far I'm confident nobody can answer these simple questions, yet it is still defended, likely because we get the idea in school that if somethings too short, it can't be good. It is a misconception that truth or utility are proportional to length. There is much more to it than that: the shortest adequate review is the best, that "adequate" length just needs to be found over time by people voting, and to find it they need to go through shorter (too short) reviews first.
Other people made the case for why low word count reviews generally result in low effort bottom of the barrel content, and you admitted as much.
In contrast to your reasoning for a lower word count resulting in better reviews, comparing to other sites —which might conflate correlation with causation— curbing low word count reviews directly leads to less low effort content.
I spoke in another reply to you about how fostering a good review culture isn't a simplistic problem, and it definitely has no simplistic and counterproductive answers like the ones you offer.
- continue this thread →
Quote them, you liar. Nowhere did I agree with such a thing. All of their responses have been as empty as yours. Nobody here has yet given an argument as to how the word-count helps, and I have explained half a dozen times now that a lower barrier to entry will drive competition and raise the quality of the top reviews. This is common knowledge if look at any successful review site. Not a single person has been able to argue against this so far. They just have to ignore the point completely and repeat "but but then there will be bad reviews" and they ignore how the votes will hide them, they just ignore the whole argument and repeat their premise. If you see otherwise, quote them, or admit that you have no argument and lied just to fit in with the herd.
well disquis has an upvote system, so there could be a like system similar to activity posts
this site could use a chat, but I think that might be draining on resources
Dunkan85 basically already said everything but anyway- short reviews are merely opinions, and there are many websites were you can read those (AL included, the forum is filled with opinions on anime, just search for the series you are interested in). We don't need short - often effortless and mindless - opinions among the reviews, and if you had searched the forum before submitting this thread you'd know the mods have repeated many times they are not lowering the cap.
no amount of extra words is going to turn an opinion-piece into anything other than an opinion-piece. an arbitrary limit only makes for less genuine reviews, which steers readers away, which steers reviewers away, which is why this site has so few reviews, and why the ones that exist are so low quality despite being 500+ words long.
I don't think anything you've said is true. You can't really know this:
less genuine reviews (...) steer readers away, which steers reviewers away, which is why this site has so few reviews,
I guess anyone is entitled to their opinion, but if you don't have data to back it up you can't really use it to justify your demands.
Also, I don't see how the existing cap has worse effect than no cap at all. The reviews you're preventing from being published using the cap are only the short ones, which are mostly bad. What you say in the post about competition is, again, your opinion based on nothing. There's no guarantee that removing the cap will result in the scenario you proposed. People are lazy, they could as well only read the short and bad reviews and upvote those.
Could we find a way to improve the quality of the reviews? Yes, definitely. Is that way removing the cap? Probably not. If it were me, I'd create a team of people who have somewhat professional knowledge on writing (journalists, published writers, degree in literature or something like that). Then I'd host reviews competitions, with the above mentioned team as judge. This would definitely make people want to write good reviews, especially if there were prizes like custom tags, custom colours etc. Just a random idea though, I don't expect this to be actually implemented (I'd totally take part into suchs competitions though, aww).
It's not an opinion that this site has very few reviews compared to other sites, it's a fact. just pick any anime here, and then compare its reviews to the reviews it has on another site. You will be lucky if anilist has any reviews for that anime at all, and the few that exist are low quality, while the other sites will have dozens of reviews for the same anime, and STILL the top reviews will be better than anilists. It's not an opinion, anyone can see it for themselves. you just have no evidence to support your argument so you want to dismiss it as an opinion.
"Could we find a way to improve the quality of the reviews? Yes, definitely"
Obviously, because 9 out of 10 decent websites already figured this out decades ago: the answer was to increase the supply of short organic reviews to create an environment which better rewards long and descriptive ones, just like I've been saying. The fewer people writing, the fewer people reading, and the lower quality the reviews get. You don't need to waste a "team of people" on a problem that has already been solved. The votes are the judges, the dedicated human judges idea is extraneous. We need fewer arbitrary restrictions, not more.
I don't see any issue with quality over quantity. Imo the people who would write good reviews already do. They wouldn't find it an incentive to know their review might be buried by many short and bad ones. At least that's what it is for me, as someone who writes/will write (hopefully) decent reviews (not going as far as to call them good, but I do try my best).
Anyway, I can see your point but you should simply acknowledge that this matter has been discussed many times, and AL mods don't want to take that direction. I guess everyone has the right to complain but if you know it's useless you should stop, you're just wasting your time.
While that is an understandable preference, the issue is that the site currently lacks both quantity and quality, and that most anime have no reviews at all, non-existent reviews make for the lowest quality reading experience. This can be verified by looking at the reviews on other sites and comparing them to those here. 95% of reviewers are being turned away by the current review rules here, and probably an even higher percentage of potential readers are turned away by anime with zero reviews. Do you really believe 95% of people have nothing to say? If they had nothing to say, they wouldn't be there in the first place, and if it weren't worthwhile, they wouldn't be getting upvotes. How would you feel if I just presumed your reviews "must not be good" without even reading them? You would think this unfair, wouldn't you? If the short reviews have nothing to say, but still get more votes than someone's long review, what does that say about the writers of the long reviews? I prefer to think the review ecosystem here is dead, and that its not the writers' fault. I'm sure your reviews are fine, and I'm not trying to call out any particular writers here, I'm only saying there aren't enough writers, reviews, & readers here because there is not enough attention reward for them, because there are too many anime with no reviews, because 95% of reviewers are turned away. This is why quality & quantity are interlinked. The more reviews there are, the higher the chance that there are good reviews, and the higher the chance that there is something to keep a reader. Short, long, bad, & good reviews all have a symbiotic relationship. No matter which type of review you prefer, excluding the kind you don't like ends up hurting in the long run.
Imagine you have a log of wood, kindling (much smaller pieces of wood) and a match, and you want to start a fire to keep warm. Without the kindling, the match is not enough to ignite the log, and without the log the kindling will not burn for very long. Without either, there is no fire. The same is happening to the reviews here: we have some logs but we need kindling or the system will stay frozen.
you should simply acknowledge that this matter has been discussed many times
I tried using Anilist's search as well as Google but couldn't find anything else related to this, and no one else has mentioned this being a duplicate. If you could link me to one of those many discussions that could be very helpful, I would appreciate it.
You are absolutely correct. There is no objective measurement for a "good" review and word count is definitely not one of them. Of course there is no good one-line review but capsule reviews (consisting of one to two paragraphs) have been a staple in art criticism for a long time. Large word count doesn't somehow mean that said words are "insightful" and small word count doesn't somehow mean reviews are lazy.
Further, the point you have already made should more than suffice. The presence of "bad" reviews is preferable to the complete absence of any reviews. The word count is clearly dissuading people and that's the reason most of the titles here have either no reviews or two at best.
I fail to see any worthwhile rebuttals in this thread. The only arguments I've seen revolve around this unsubstantiated idea that longer reviews that force writers to be either circumlocutory or even logorrheic are not only objectively better but so objectively better that the complete absence of reviews is preferable to having those objectively abysmal capsule reviews that supposedly amount to "this anime sucks". This thread is absolutely absurd.
Exactly, thank you. The best response I've gotten so far is that Anilist is a non-profit and might not care about traffic. But I still think its in their best interest because reviews are almost extraneous in their current state. Someone mentioned a comment system but that won't help create any competition for the top reviews so the same problems would persist. Hopefully they figure something out.
As someone who's been on AniList more than a year and read exactly four and a half reviews here during that time I should probably refrain from commenting on this topic, but well...
Yeah, while it might be hard to argue that 2200 characters is a lot, I'm pretty sure I've seen more than enough shorter reviews on MAL which I didn't deem worthless whatsoever. And, to support your arguments, I rarely read more than ~100-200 words from a review when I'm trying to decide if I feel like watching a show or not. On the other hand, if I wanted to read a review of a show I already watched in order to compare my impression with other people's opinions, then 2200 characters seems to be a laughably low number.
In other words, I think both long and short reviews have their place and may be useful, even if for different purposes.
I don't think the reason many shows don't have reviews is due to the minimum character requirement, but simply due to lack of interest in writing a review.
I don't see a review of 2200 characters or less being worth reading. Hell, I think that's too low, if the character limit were increased I wouldn't mind. If you're serious about writing a review rather than "lol this show sucks xDDDDDD", reaching 2200 characters should require no effort.
if you check on other sites, more than 9 out of 10 reviews are somewhere between 100-300 words. thats much more than one sentence, and they get upvoted so they are clearly worth something to someone, even if its not you. but they would still not be allowed to share those thoughts here. do you really believe >90% people don't have anything worth reading? "should require no effort" is plainly ignoring the practical side of the problem: that only applies to people who don't value their time. most people value their time and so prefer things be concise.
I don't know what sites you're visiting where more than 9 out of 10 reviews are between 100 and 300 words, but they're not the ones I visit.
that only applies to people who don't value their time
Don't pretend all reviews are 30,000 words, because they're not, but the good ones are certainly over 2200 characters. How are we still discussing this? Anyone who is unwilling to write 2200 characters should not be writing a review.
It starts with an I, ends with a D, and is 4 characters long. you can see that literally 9/10, maybe even more if you keep counting, are within a few hundred words just at a glance, they would not make the limit here. You might not visit them, but they still exist and are solid evidence of the effect of a word-limit on the review count.
And I'm not pretending any review is 30,000 words... but don't pretend long reviews take the same amount of time to read and write as a short one.
How are we still discussing this? Anyone who is unwilling to write 2200 characters should not be writing a review.
Because your reasoning is circular, and isn't very convincing in comparison to the evidence & arguments I have already provided throughout this thread.
I'm talking about one that starts with M, and with t, and is made up of 3 words. It's the most popular site of this nature.
They take 5 minutes to read, and you gain more insight than if you were to spend 5 minutes reading 2200 character reviews instead, because they're not restricted and can actually elaborate on what they're saying.
There's nothing circular about "A review that's less than 2200 characters is a most definitely a poor review simply due to being too restricted to provide actual insight." and "If you're not willing to write 2200 words, you shouldn't be writing a review."
5 minutes is far too long for people trying to get a quick impression: they're probably choosing between a few anime, and want to see a few reviews for each choice. if each review took 5 minutes itd be at least 15 minutes of reading and they could sample a good portion of the anime in that time, which defeats the purpose of reading the reviews in the first place. After they watch the show they are invested and are more likely to check out those longer reviews.
The circular reasoning is that "the reason 2200 characters is good is that anything that is not 2200 characters is bad" That's not explaining why people upvote short reviews, its completely ignoring the uses of shorter reviews I mentioned just above. It ignores the fact that tons of anime have zero reviews. It hinges on your arbitrary standards for "actual insight" & "shouldn't be writing" when we can easily see over 90% of people do not agree with this standard and that the review system here has an alarming lack of activity as a result
The "high" word count is easily reachable if you actually have some in-depth analysis to offer, and it keeps people from writing shitpost reviews (mostly).
If you can't write an 8th Grade level review, write something shorter and post it on global.
Christ knows we need something other than good-night posts on thereif it were easily reachable there wouldn't be so many shows with thousands of followers and zero reviews. this doesn't happen on other sites and if you look the majority of the reviews are indeed below 2200 characters on these other sites. some are upvoted so they clearly had something worthwhile to someone, just not to you. even if you are only concerned about yourself, there are also long ones that are upvoted that you can be reading. you would only see the "shitposts" if you went looking for them, you weirdo. and why this bias against 7th graders? they can't have an opinion? (jk)
Bitch who the fuck are you calling weird? At least I ain't in this thread trying to act like the victim when people disagree with me. Check your shit little man, we ain't friends.
I'm calling you weird, because you're worried about posts that would be invisible unless you explicitly go and look for them. That's weird to me.
Also you ignored my points, predictably.
Why would anyone pay attention to your points when you're out here calling people weird? The fuck kind of logic is this?
God, it must be an absolute trip inside your head.- continue this thread →
You had already ignored my points by the time i called you weird, so don't pretend that's your excuse :P
The reason there's shows with thousands of followers and zero reviews is due to lack of motivation/interest in writing a review. Seriously, 2200 characters is nothing. The post I'm replying to right now has nearly 600 characters.
that simply begs the question: what causes this lack of interest on Anilist and why don't other sites with similar followings have this problem? On a not-to-be-named site where AoT S1 has 120,000 followers, very close to anilist's 100,000 size, there are 300+ reviews whereas anilist has 4. That's a big difference. Why are people interested in reviewing it there, but not here? the only difference between the rules is the size-limit.
Because said site is the go-to anime listing site, people will post their reviews there instead. No reason to write a review here when you can go write it on that site. I know people who are both here and on that site, and they write reviews that are over the 2200 character limit, and they post them on that site and not here.
- continue this thread →
the not-to-be-named site is not anime specific, and does not have the most reviews. there are multiple sites where people are leaving lots of reviews, not just that one. so having a "go-to" alternative doesn't explain it, because there are multiple alternatives available that don't suffer from that same go-to site. the only difference is the word count limit, which 95% or more of the reviews there don't meet.
Also when i said anilist AoT has 4 reviews, i actually meant 2* lol, 1 out of 50,000 left a review
@DragonFyre lmao ><
but back to the issue: I'd say the whole issue could be resolved by just adding a comment system (with no word limit and required sections for say story, visuals, audio, etc) on top of the review system but in a less accessible position for viewers and equally accessible for editors. :D
(it's big brain time 🤣)
The review system's set up so that potential viewers aren't flooded with underdeveloped judgements about anime and manga 🤑. Other sites like MAL try to resolve this issue by using a system of upvotes and downvotes, but this creates another issue that this often ends up being the victim of heavy opinions and so reviews that bleed with sarcasm and humor often occasionally end up upstaging more helpful ones (not that humorous reviews are bad or anything :P. they just tend to push ratings one way or another).
Like in the reviews for SAO (which has an avg rating of 7.56 there -which is honestly pretty good- and truth be told is really not the worst anime you're going to see in your life -__-) and yet this is the top review page:
That's an average of 4.25... which -let's be real here- is much more likely to be seen here:
Oh God, I can't believe that's in my history now 😂But in all seriousness, as So1us argued, a word limited review system usually hinders folks from reviewing works (especially short or unknown works that many feel isn't really "worth the time" to spend writing up a review on ☹️ saddddddd). So there should be a tool to more easily write down opinions, while the old system of quality(despite what some might say) reviews remains unchanged.
--- Now, many people commented that reviews should just have the word limit reduced; but I doubt this would really make any large change since either someone is willing to put in the time to edit or not (as said by numerous people, 2200 character limit isn't very difficult to achieve 😐) ---
Now, let's say that this hypothetical comments system is put into effect. Well, if such a system were to be put into effect, realistically speaking very few people would be inclined to read much longer reviews. <- this is probably an issue the anilist gods 🙇 are trying to avoid. Moreover, a comments system would usually be followed with an upvote/downvote system, which again would not be ideal.
--- A previous mod mentioned earlier that forum threads do not have said word limit and so any short review can be written here; but reallyyyyy, as one can see on this site, this doesn't tend to happen either because this would be put in as a new forum thread and would therefore bring in more attention (and potential criticism) than desired, because forums don't have a history of being used in such a way and so one is simply unwilling to break a very clean precedent (of using anime review forums only for passionate or "unpopular" opinions), or they just don't think it's a big enough issue to post about
¯\(ツ)/¯(I personally think the 3rd is the most likely ;P)------ also, someone mentioned earlier, a possible system of increasing the word limit as more reviews are written, but this would simply give earlier reviewers greater benefit and hence more weight in their opinion (and also would be heavily susceptible to trolls 👹-esp since this would concern unknown works). And any system that gradually removes old reviews (and say requires users to edit and repost them) would simply being chaotic (and would also result in an unhealthy community that attempts to write a review simply to remove some previous one... so yah, no ---
Back to the comments system, an ideal comment system should be required to have meaningful reviews (or this should at least be attempted to be enforced 👍). This could be done by anilist's current "advanced rating system" option (👏gotta applaud them for that btw; really nice idea... if only more people used it TT). If a copy of this system is used with a new one that requires a comment for each respective score, then reviewers would be required to reevaluate their review as they're posting and would be hindered from writing spam reviews (this is of course still susceptible to trolls 👹 and such folks who may simply put one extreme or another with rubbish for comments, but this system could at least be easily modded by mods since such a detailed system would make it clear whether a review was meaningful or not -and if not, mods could easily pull down the comment and request for edits to be made since comments are set apart from forum comments that are chronological and chained).
So now, we have both preserved a detailed review system and created a new much more accessible comments system that is both resistent to trolls 👹 and unhelpful comments and furthermore encourages members to partake in.
However, this does not yet resolve the afore-mentioned issue of the comments system upstaging the current review system. For this matter, I would propose that previous comments be put in a less obvious position (say at the bottom of the left sidebar), while reviews are made more noticeable.
--- someone also mentioned review competitions and the likes, and while this system would indeed be both a great event and addition to this community, it hardly gets to the core issue of unknown and short works (since the community would generally stray from these pieces and a judging community capable of reviewing all such pieces -and their respective reviews- is hardly reasonable -there's like 15821 anime on just MAL 0_0) ---
Now, this is of course still up to the anilist gods 🙇 to put into place and the proposed system of course still has its issues ☠️. For one, a comments system for popular pieces would likely have to many reviews to peruse and an upvote/downvote system as I mentioned before has its flaws. Additionally, multiple review systems present the obvious problem that one system tends to overshadow the other (and even with my mentioned solution, this might still take place, despite efforts by the anilist gods 🙇). And of course, the bigger issue is that such a system would require heavy investments to create (while, let's be honest here, there really isn't enough offerings/sacrifices AND ANILIST DOESN'T EVEN ASK FOR IT 😵 <-(me collapsed from shock); heck, I didn't even know where to donate until I searched it on google... it's here by the way 🙂).
So yes, the whole issue is really up to those that are sacrificing their own time and effort to regulate this site; please, let's stop complaining to them (note, I didn't say stop commenting for anyone who was about to comment that 😘... although I guess I was sort of, potentially, possibly annoying them with my constant posts to fellow anilisters -while frequently referencing them as a joke :P -sorry btw if that's the case m(｡_｡；))m). I personally disagree with the comments that this thread should be deleted (although, I myself find having this thread constantly come up pretty annoying 😛), but really, let's calm down and think over any posts a bit deeper (and slower for my sake :P) and stop writing posts in such a way that you know will get "negative" responses (God, I feel like I'm back in elementary (༎ຶ⌑༎ຶ)).
Anywho, I've seen a mod on this site sooooooo
HERE HERE CLICK HERE PLEEAAASE
:P
~NishiTsuki out >_<
lmao, just realized no ones probably going to read this since it's so long :P oops...
I read it! It was a breath of fresh air to see someone here actually considering a solution to the problem. All these people claiming they like things long but when you go through all the work they just ignore it! So I thank you for putting real thought into this. I definitely agree that the "downvote" option causes problems, only upvotes should be implemented.
In regards to the comments solution, I have two main issues:
- A single person can leave multiple comments, whereas reviews normally only allow one review per account.
- Comments are not usually ranked in order of upvotes, whereas reviews typically are. So you'd have to scroll alot to reach the good ones.
And a third problem beyond the comments section:
- Having lots of reviews is necessary to increase the overall quality of the "top" reviews. The more reviews there are, the higher the chance that one "strikes gold" so-to-speak. If the feedback is split into different sections, there is a lower chance of someone writing a good review.
So in the end I think a comments section, while cool in its own right and useful for its own purposes, would still leave the "not enough reviews" problem needing to be fixed.
lol; when I wrote "comments" I meant more like a second review system (ranked by votes & not like a forum thread with multiple submissions -like in MAL)
And a "top" reviews a hard thing to qualify. The way I see it, this method would allow the half-hearted folk to do as they please (half-heartedly) and the serious ones who want to write a huge review... well, write a huge review :P
oh i see what you mean, well that would solve the ordering problem, but we still wouldn't want people "commenting" twice. and at that point its basically the same as review system, so it would be like having 2 different review systems at the same time. (which could be interesting, we could see which one gets more attention!)
- continue this thread →
so yah, one also wouldn't be able to review twice (unless you mean in both systems by which then I'd say go ahead; you're probably a more reputable source then :P). And in the earlier post I mentioned that the second review system would follow anilist's current advanced rating system (with the addition of respective reviews) so really the two systems would hardly coincide (although like I said depending on how the second system is added, it may steal the limelight from the current system). In the end, it's really anilist's call
this is WAAAAY too long, but it's nice that someone did a big think about the issue. Also what advanced rating system?
Also btw don't use emojis when you type a lot of text. People will generally assume it's copypasta.
This thing:
And thanks for the advice :P kinda like emojis, though TT
how do you put the circles over it?
Also I forgot, but I already have that enabled. I just never use it because I can't really rate any of the stuff properly other than the plot since artwork and music is either good or bad to meIma probably be criticized for this, but I just use preview on my Mac... :P Hey, it's the fastest method...
@nishitsuki I strangely do not have this option....
@Zex So is that a no?
I also went to write a short review without realizing there was a min word count I ended up just padding it out with badly written writing because i wanted to be able to post it rather than delete what I wrote. The word limit just means that anyone who has less time won't be making a review. Which caters more towards the hardcore fans of a series IMO because who else would spend that much time writing reviews?
who else would spend that much time writing reviews?
Someone dedicated to writing the best review they can and who puts in a considerable amount of effort. Honestly, I don't want to read anything less than this.
Which caters more towards the hardcore fans of a series IMO
Counterpoint: Literally all of the reviews I have written so far were for anime I hated.
Also, for the love of god, please let this thread die already.
Yeah it caters towards people have more extreme feelings for a show since those are people who would be more willing to spend a lot of time writing a review. Personally those are typically the reviews I'd rather avoid. And I think it sucks that we can't just write something shorter. Typically people who hate a show would be people that just drop it and move on but in certain cases especially with really unsatisfying ending that isn't the case. Also while the OP might be a bit crazy why do you want to bury a thread just because you don't agree with it?
holy shit there's so much wall of texts here
lol, sorry :P I'd rather write up a huge analysis of the situation and prevent further discussion so that I can enjoy my valuable 3 forum spots than have a huge debate that rapidly increases in anger and toxicity :P
also
#RamNeedsMoreLove
Yeah like @Dunkan85 said I think a review shorther than the minimum words can't even be said is a review.
It's not much.
If the minimum word count would have to be removed, we would have tons of troll reviews. I'd rather see no reviews than see a review "LOLOLOL SHIT ANIME 1/10 " and that's all. (Because trust me, many would do that if they could.) I don't see how a review of 100 words is good and what you could understand from it.there is nothing to stop someone from copy-pasting a troll-ish thing a few times to reach the word limit. if they do the mods can just delete them whether they are long or small, regardless of the word-limit.
and even if a trollish review didn't get deleted it would be outvoted by the better reviews so they will hardly be noticed. Without the word limit its easy for someone to quickly write up a better one to outrank it.
Also, you can get a lot from 100 words. more importantly, people like me don't want a lot. we want just the right amount. if you're trying to get impressions for a show without spoilers, shorter reviews are more likely to be spoiler free. If i hear too much, or get too hype, I'll come in with expectations that might not be met. So i really just want to find something I can read quickly that covers the which categories the show excels in and which it doesn't, with maybe a quick explanation for each category. I agree 100 words is too short in most cases, but usually anything past 300 is likely entering spoiler territory. And in rare cases one sentence is seemingly enough. After I watch the show, or if i can't decide whether or not to watch, I'll come back and read the really long ones and then vote on the most helpful and accurate.
I have to agree with the ideas you've presented. No word count would result in more reviews being written. Just as all viewers have their own tastes, people should be able to see a larger variety of reviews.
If it's short and crappy like some fear, then it'll get downvoted. If it's short, succinct and delivers the information that the reader wants to know, then it's doing its job as a review, and gets upvoted.
@Zephyrus Just putting this here so this thread doesn't blow up again, but I'd appreciate it if you and anyone else about to comment would read at least this (if not the remainder of the posts, although I'll admit there's a fair deal...) before going further down this rabbit hole :P Thanks! (and sorry for asking you to read such a long comment ><)
woa, this thread is so damn long lol. The first part was actually hilarious, and was like I was at the theater xd
lol the first few replies i got were all "if its not long, it can't be good" so i made my posts longer for them
No one said "longer=good" and if you're being intellectually honest then you already know that.
Since this isn't middle school, you should be able to reach the 2200 character count with ease. If you have trouble writing that many characters for a review after watching a series then you shouldn't be writing one in the first place.
We don't need short - often effortless and mindless - opinions
a review shorther than the minimum words can't even be said is a review.
2200 characters should require no effort.
It is ridiculously easy to hit that amount within thirty minutes to an hour if you actually have anything insightful to say.
Those are all statements yes. None of which say something is automatically good because its longer. Hence my statement, "no one said "longer=good""
- continue this thread →
But i never said "longer=good" either lol. So who here is the one being "intellectually dishonest?"
I feel your pain. Simple request was met with hostility.
The mods on this site are the worst.
Okay so, I don't see what hostility you are talking about? Unless you classify being blunt and disagreeing as hostile I have no clue where you see this supposed hostility...
Since this isn't middle school, you should be able to reach the 2200 character count with ease. If you have trouble writing that many characters for a review after watching a series then you shouldn't be writing one in the first place.
We don't need short - often effortless and mindless - opinions
2200 characters should require no effort.
It is ridiculously easy to hit that amount within thirty minutes to an hour if you actually have anything insightful to say.
Only the first of those can really be read as hostility. The other answers aren't even personal, they are conceptual. The last one also includes a "you", but that isnt a direct adress of you, the author, but a "you" pertaining to the author of any review. And it's not hostile.
And even the first comment is barely hostile, it would be much more exact to call them unfriendly. Hostility carries with it a connotation of aggression and antagonization, none of which really apply to these. Stop overreacting to people writing in a way that isn't totally diplomatic when you request something that has been denied many times before.
I take issue with the way you treat reviewing as if it were a market. Good reviews are a creative effort of people with passion. I don't see how "driving competition" by flooding the site with garbage one-line-reviews would entice anyone who actually cares about writing something worthwhile to write more. You are ignoring the facticity of how reviews are mostly voted on and what "competition" does in this case:
-
"Good" reviews aren't always voted to the top. A lot of the time reviews with scores people agree with are voted to the top. We have had reviews that were actually just "This was amazing I cried the feels 10/10" copy-pasted 50 times reach fairly high upvote counts before they were removed.
-
What reviews rise to the top is also influenced by how popular a reviewer already is, or how many of their friends from wherever upvote every review they make
-
How many upvotes a review can gather also largely depends on how long it remains featured in the 4 featured reviews on the main page. Someone could write a great review, but if it is only shown to the public for 30 minutes, whereas another review remains on there for almost a week (both of which have happen fairly regularly, with end of season and mid-season being the usual points in time this occurs respectively), then the one remaining on the homepage for longer will be read and voted on by more people, many of which will also be voting based merely on the score assigned.
-
If garbage-tier reviews already have a daunting amount of upvotes, people who do care about their work being read when putting a lot of effort into a review will feel discouraged. You already pointed out the reason yourself in your OP: most people will only ever pay attention to the top 2 reviews at most, so if you do not beat those in upvote count, your effort may be perceived as "wasted". Good reviews could "rise to the top", but it also largely depends on luck as pointed out earlier.
Nobody will write a review for a show because others have already written a review for it. If anything this is a deterrent. This "competition" isn't a driving force, but a discouragement. Aside from the fact that reviews shorter than this comment will seldom have anything of value to say, your main idea of how this would affect reviewing is utterly misguided. Probably because you don't actually write reviews yourself.
Case in point, letterboxd is the wild west for reviews, and most top reviews are uninformative one-liners or jokes. There is a reason I will never post anything I put serious effort into on that website.
you treat reviewing as if it were a market
Reviews are consumed by readers and produced by writers, both of which require time and attention, that's why its like a market.
You are ignoring the facticity of how reviews are mostly voted on
I'm going off the reviews, both top and bottom, i see on other sites and comparing them to those here and the observed trend is that sites with higher supplies of reviews tend to have overall higher quality reviews in their top 3.
"Good" reviews aren't always voted to the top
They don't have to always be voted to the top, just getting there every once in a while would be an improvement over the current system.
How many upvotes a review can gather also largely depends on how long it remains featured in the 4 featured reviews on the main page
true but this doesn't affect 99% of reviews, only 4 at a time.
If garbage-tier reviews already have a daunting amount of upvotes, people who do care about their work being read when putting a lot of effort into a review will feel discouraged.
This doesn't seem to be the case on other review sites, can you give an example?
Nobody will write a review for a show because others have already written a review for it
then why do other sites with reviews have hundreds or even thousands of reviews per show which hardly vary for the most part? why didn't they stop after the first 10~20 if not to create a better one?
Reviews are consumed by readers and produced by writers, both of which require time and attention, that's why its like a market.
No, this is quite simply not true. A market necessitates transactions. What reviews are is a platform for conversations. I'm not selling you a product when people are reading my opinion. It isn't like a marketplace of ideas either, since the aim of a marketplace of ideas differs a lot from the aim of a review: the former intends to find the best idea by virtue of having ideas freely compete; the latter presents an opinion by an individual. It is, quite simply, not a market. And the idea it should be treated as such ignores the reason why people write things: were this a market, then I would get something from my readers, some form of compensation. But I don't. This is not a transaction. I write because I want to. There is also no such thing as a correlation between supply and demand in many cases. Really the only time this is the case is when people review based on community suggestions (I know there are a few people who do this) or one could argue this is somewhat implicit in seasonals reviewing (which I'd argue is inaccurate, since focus of reviews on current productions is ubiquitous with reviewing as a whole).
If you make people not want to write because their effort is drowned by low-effort one-liners, you are creating a net loss of worthwhile reviews. Now, I'm not going to act like the standard for reviews on here is high to begin with, but lowering it and opening the floodgates to asinine comments that really belong into an episode discussion thread surely won't be encouraging to anyone who gives a shit.
I'm going off the reviews, both top and bottom, i see on other sites and comparing them to those here and the observed trend is that sites with higher supplies of reviews tend to have overall higher quality reviews in their top 3.
As someone who has actually led a review club on MAL for one and a half years and read several handful of hundreds of reviews on the site, I can simply not agree with this take. There are a few regulars whose reviews are decent enough, but most top reviews on MAL or comparable sites are... pretty bad if you ask me. Many reviews that are worthwhile often don't make it through, because especially on MAL the abundance of reviews per entry paired with the fact that most people vote on reviews directly after a show concludes, means that the top 4 reviews will always stay the same, and they will almost always be by the people who submitted first and had good luck in the "who can stay on homepage the longest"-RNG. Again I know this, because I aactually am a reviewer and many (this used to be all) of my online friends are, as well.
EDIT: Also, I'm pretty sure that almost none of those good reviews you like don't meet this site's minimum requirements, and I especially doubt that their creation was facilitated by the fact that other people are able to write oneline reviews.
They don't have to always be voted to the top, just getting there every once in a while would be an improvement over the current system.
...How so? How would it be an improvement to have a lot of bad reviews at the top that likely keep out potentially good reviews in the future, over just not having reviews at all? If you really want to read a review for a certain anime and don't care about the quality you can go elsewhere. Though, and this needs to be pointed out, other sites also have a minimum requirement for review length. The only exception I know of that is really prominent is letterboxd, which has the worst reviewing climate of any platform maybe ever (not counting youtube comments section).
How many upvotes a review can gather also largely depends on how long it remains featured in the 4 featured reviews on the main page
true but this doesn't affect 99% of reviews, only 4 at a time.
...No? It affects all of them. That's where all reviews gather most of their upvotes. It affects all reviews, not equally but randomly, which in turn can be discouraging for people who put stock in their reviews being read (who in turn would be enticed by anime that do not have reviews yet!).
If garbage-tier reviews already have a daunting amount of upvotes, people who do care about their work being read when putting a lot of effort into a review will feel discouraged.
This doesn't seem to be the case on other review sites, can you give an example?
Uhm... what?! Of course it's a case on other review sites as well! You don't se those reviews because, well, they haven't been written because of this?! And if you mean you don't hear people talk about this, then you probably haven't actually talked to many people who actually write reviews about this part of the topic. This is really egocentric of me, but, like, case in point this applies to me.
I genuinely don't understand what you are trying to say with this. The issue I was talking about is factually a thing, and this cannot be disproven. How you would even be able to "perceive" this on another site is beyond me though.
[...] then why do other sites with reviews have hundreds or even thousands of reviews per show
Because those shows are popular. Those shows are getting a lot of reviews from overeager newcomers, which is fine, but it's also the case on Anilist as well. You don't seem to realize we have like, what, 1/30th of the userbase MAL has. But we still have anime with over a dozen reviews. Now, I'm really interested where you get these "thousands" of reviews per show from, because that number surely is wrong, but that's besides the point.
If you are going to argue that the proof is in the pudding, then I will gladly inform you that your exposure to the reviewing community seems to be minimal at best. Because the proof is in fac in the pudding, but if you actually cared to look you would find that what you say is totally off-base.
I know many people (me included) who have quit reviewing seasonals on MAL because it turned into a glorified ratrace. In the last year or two, it had someone (namely Karhu) post low-effort reviews to farm upvotes just because you can easily abuse the system (by posting reviews before the show has even concluded) without getting your shit removed. If you genuinely believe this "driving force" of competition does much of anything to encourage taking your time to write something worthwhile, when how many votes your reviews can garner largely depends on luck, then you are, quite simply, wrong.
Again, what you are asking for is essentially the system letterboxd has. Other anime sites have minimum requirements as well, and they are just slightly more lax than those found on here. Now take a look at letterboxd reviews and tell me whether you sincerely believe this is the superior approach. Your comments often invoke some sense of empiricism; I recommend you take it one step further and actually look at sites that give you what you are looking for.
Hint: reviews there are terrible.
EDIT: I have made a few changes to this comment to make it more complete. I also want to add that if your next response just misses the point like this last one did, I'll just not respond. As a matter of fact, what you are asking for isn't even what is the standard on most sites you likely reference, and those sites that conform to what you are demanding are utterly terrible for reviews as a whole. And luckily your idea will not get implemented either way, so unless you have anything substantial to add, I'll leave it at that.
What reviews are is a platform for conversations
Then what is the point of separating forums/comment sections from reviews in the first place?
I'm not selling you a product when people are reading my opinion
Well whether you mean to or not, it costs people time to read your opinion. That cost is what creates a value market.
I write because I want to.
That's great! Want is what drives markets, countered by people's limited time, which creates value.
the abundance of reviews per entry paired with the fact that most people vote on reviews directly after a show concludes, means that the top 4 reviews will always stay the same
This can be largely fixed by not allowing people to vote from the front pages. Also compare this to Anilist's current situation: there aren't even 4 reviews to pick from for most shows lol.
...How so? How would it be an improvement
Because even having 3 bad reviews + 1 good review is better than having just 3 bad reviews, like it is right now.
you can go elsewhere
Correct, that's what I have to do already, and I said that in my OP. That's the entire problem.
That's where all reviews gather most of their upvotes. It affects all reviews, not equally but randomly
Like I just mentioned higher up in this comment, votes from the front pages should be disabled. And they're not selected "randomly" the highest voted ones are picked.
can be discouraging for people who put stock in their reviews being read
Stock? It sounds like you are treating reviews like a market ;)
Uhm... what?! Of course it's a case on other review sites as well!
The other review sites have hundreds of reviews per show, whereas here there are only 1 or 2 per show. Clearly Anilist is the place that is discouraging reviewers, not those other sites.
The issue I was talking about is factually a thing, and this cannot be disproven.
lol
How you would even be able to "perceive" this on another site is beyond me though.
I just look at the review counts, the mixture of review styles, their upvotes, and which kinds make it to the top, and then I compare to the ones here on Anilist.
Because those shows are popular. Those shows are getting a lot of reviews from overeager newcomers
I already stated in a separate thread that the shows I looked at had similar numbers of followers, the shows are popular on both platforms, so that's not what is making the difference.
If you are going to argue that the proof is in the pudding, then I will gladly inform you that your exposure to the reviewing community seems to be minimal at best. Because the proof is in fac in the pudding, but if you actually cared to look you would find that what you say is totally off-base.
LOL... wow so much proof-pudding, I'm full!
I know many people (me included) who have quit reviewing seasonals on MAL because it turned into a glorified ratrace.
But you just said earlier that you "write because you want to" was that not true? Are you agreeing now that other people's reviews and votes affect your own willingness to create them, as in a market?
Again, what you are asking for is essentially the system letterboxd has. Other anime sites have minimum requirements as well, and they are just slightly more lax than those found on here
Yea, pretty much. I think capsule review sizes should be the lower limit, somewhere around 100 characters. I think MAL
Now take a look at letterboxd reviews
I just looked letterbox's AoT page and the top reviews are all 500+ chars and are very to-the-point. the extremely short ones are toward the bottom and not upvoted except for one because it is funny. It's just like I predicted?
I recommend you take it one step further and actually look at sites that give you what you are looking for.
You are recommending I do that thing i already did and detailed in my OP? You're just admitting you didn't read my OP lol
Hint: reviews there are terrible.
reviews everywhere are terrible, but they are extra bad here.
if your next response just misses the point like this last one did, I'll just not respond
I have a feeling you won't respond either way.
Then what is the point of separating forums/comment sections from reviews in the first place?
The function of a comment section and a review is very different. Both present opinions sure, but usually you read the "Best" reviews with the aim of receiving an informed, well-though-out and well-argued opinion. On the other hand comments allow everyone to express their opinion in a looser format. I feel like you are not being really intellectually honest here, just like with the rest of your comment.
Well whether you mean to or not, it costs people time to read your opinion. That cost is what creates a value market.
This is an extremely loose definition of a value market. As per this definition, almost any action that has you interact with another human being would be seen as a transaction by virtue of "costing you time". But this still doesn't hold up because, again, the reviewer doesn't gain anything from it, and there is no process in reviews comparable to many defining parts of value investing, like buying shares (what are shares in a review?), as well as the numerous obligations that come with selling stocks to investors (like a promise for profits). And since I am not writing because I'm obligated to my investors (readers), but because of my own want.
That's great! Want is what drives markets, countered by people's limited time, which creates value.
Want is what drives markets, yes. But this would be the demand, not the supply. I'm the supply in this case. This perceived value may be created on the readers' side (is this review worth reading/worth my time), but the analogy doesn't carry over to the creation process much if at all.
This can be largely fixed by not allowing people to vote from the front pages. Also compare this to Anilist's current situation: there aren't even 4 reviews to pick from for most shows lol.
This would be even worse for many reasons, but it's another can of worms I'm not willing to open at this point. It's not the point of this thread either way.
even having 3 bad reviews + 1 good review is better than having just 3 bad reviews, like it is right now.
Except your suggestion would likely result in 2 bad reviews at the top for many entries, instead of maybe one passable one. Let me put it this way: do you really think those unable to write a worthwhile review within the space that is currently mandatory would be able to write worthwhile capsule reviews? Those have their place, but they also require much more skill to pull off well and end up substantial enough (which in my eyes most professionals still fail at most of the time). People here don't have this skill. I don't know where you are getting the idea from that there would come any good reviews from sub-100-words comments. It's possible but the talent certainly isn't here.
That's where all reviews gather most of their upvotes [the frontpage]. It affects all reviews, not equally but randomly
they're not selected "randomly" the highest voted ones are picked.
No, it is mostly random for how long reviews stay on the homepage, where they will gather more votes. Which reviews become the highest voted is largely random. I have explained this in detail in my original post, as other factors go into it as well (like, a lot of the time people will upvote literally anything so long as they agree with the score).
can be discouraging for people who put stock in their reviews being read
Stock? It sounds like you are treating reviews like a market ;)
Fun retort, but it's ignoring the source of the discouragement. The source isn't merely that people are reading it because the people wouldn't think your review valuable, but that no matter how valuable it is, the exposure it'll get depends largely on luck. If anything, in this case the source of discouragement could be read as explicitly coming from the fact it is not a competetive market.
The other review sites have hundreds of reviews per show, whereas here there are only 1 or 2 per show. Clearly Anilist is the place that is discouraging reviewers, not those other sites.
Yeah, but those other review sites also have people discouraged by pre-existing reviews still? You "lol"'d at it, but this is just a factual thing. I know people who post mostly to MAL who have been discouraged by this. The larger number of reviews on there merely stems from the fact that more people use MAL. Even though the userbase on AL is smaller and thus a higher percent of the community is likely active, MAL still has 15 times the traffic.
But you just said earlier that you "write because you want to" was that not true? Are you agreeing now that other people's reviews and votes affect your own willingness to create them, as in a market?
It is similar to a market because preexisting works can be discouraging, but it is not like a market because the intrinsic motivation for writing isn't facilitated by whether other reviews already exist. Like I said in my first answer, this "competition" is in any case not a driving force, but a discouragement. A market encourages competition, whereas the system of many reviewing sites discourages it.
Re: letterboxd
The 5 most popular movies of the yearhttps://letterboxd.com/film/parasite-2019/
https://letterboxd.com/film/avengers-endgame/
https://letterboxd.com/film/joker-2019/
https://letterboxd.com/film/once-upon-a-time-in-hollywood/
https://letterboxd.com/film/us-2019/9/15 of the top reviews are humorous comments or one-liners. If you pick and choose, choose a representative sample and stop cherrypicking for the sake of the argument.
What reviews are is a platform for conversations
The function of a comment section and a review is very different.
Everyone knows comment sections are for conversation, reviews are not. That's why review sections typically don't have a reply system. You're the one not being intellectually honest.
As per this definition, almost any action that has you interact with another human being would be seen as a transaction
Yes, value markets can be applied to almost every aspect of human life. I'm sorry if that is news to you, but that's life. Anything that is limited and demanded creates a value market. That's the definition of a value market.
Except your suggestion would likely result in 2 bad reviews at the top for many entries,
Oh, you mean like exactly what Anilist has right now? So at worst nothing would change, and things would almost certainly improve after that like they do on regular sites with good review systems. So it should be an objectively positive trade.
do you really think those unable to write a worthwhile review within the space that is currently mandatory would be able to write worthwhile capsule reviews?
Yes, and if you bothered to read the rest of the thread, you'd see we confirmed this to be the case: 95% of reviews are below 300 words, and most of the top voted reviews are less than 500. That proves that good, desirable reviews are being rejected with the current limit.
People here don't have this skill.
Yes, and I'm explaining why that's the case. The skilled writers have moved elsewhere because this site doesn't foster a productive writing environment for them.
Yeah, but those other review sites also have people discouraged by pre-existing reviews still?
No. That's why there are 20x more reviews on those other sites despite having similar sized audiences. THIS site (Anilist) is the one that actively discourages them from writing.
-
I know I'm late to the party, but I actually appreciate this thread and I'm coming in to add my two cents, not that anyone asked for it. I feel like my opinion is somewhat valid seeing as I, you know, write reviews here.
I'm more or less fine with the character limit, but that's partly because it doesn't hinder me. Even on Goodreads, which doesn't have a character limit, my reviews tend to run a bit longer than a typical MAL review. And the word count isn't necessarily why there aren't as many reviews. It could be as simple as we have less members than MAL.
That said, longer reviews aren't necessarily indicative of quality; my reviews are proof of that. Capsule reviews are absolutely valid and if they weren't, I doubt they'd be used professionally in the capacity that they are. Do I tend to prefer meatier reviews? Yes, but I'm a man and even if I wasn't, I wouldn't be every woman, thus one opinion shouldn't count for everyone.
In short, while I'm pretty fine with the limit, I understand why others might not be.
of course your opinion is valid! I have no issue with longer reviews, when I finish a show I like to read long reviews like yours. But when I haven't watched the show yet I prefer shorter ones.
It could be as simple as we have less members than MAL.
This is true but I have already adjusted for the difference: Anilist's AoT page has roughly 110K followers where mal has roughly ~1.1 million (10x difference) but anilist has 2 reviews for it while mal has 670 reviews (a 335x difference) so with population adjusted Anilist still has 33 times fewer reviews per follower.
The minimum wordcount (which is very modest, shorter than most school essay length requirements) creates an effort floor so the review sections are not flooded with nonsense. That is an actual problem that many sites have and is the main reason I have never and will never post anything on MAL, speaking as one of this site's more prolific reviewers.
Of course it does not completely eliminate the problem, but the vast majority of reviews on this site at least attempt to be genuinely insightful critical work. Whether or not they actually are is obviously a matter of opinion.
As a number of people have pointed out; there is nothing to be gained from removing the word count requirement. If you have such a brief thing to say about a show just post it on the Global feed.
EDIT: If I could propose a change to the review formats though, I think the numerical score at the bottom of the review should be optional (though putting it where it is now is definitely better than if it were at the top).
As a number of people have pointed out; there is nothing to be gained from removing the word count requirement.
As I already pointed out, there is actually a lot to be gained in terms of review activity & diversity.
If you have such a brief thing to say about a show just post it on the Global feed.
I am primarily interested in reading capsule reviews rather than writing them, and it needs to be fast and organized because I'm just trying to pick a show to watch. The global feed is not organized to efficiently search for capsule reviews.
As I already pointed out, there is actually a lot to be gained in terms of review activity & diversity.
I mean you have said things about this yes, but they're things that I don't agree with. If you want a huge amount of short reviews you should just go to MyAnimeList for that, that niche is already well and covered.
I am primarily interested in reading capsule reviews rather than writing them, and it needs to be fast and organized because I'm just trying to pick a show to watch. The global feed is not organized to efficiently search for capsule reviews.
And I am interested in both. I'm of the opinion that it's very hard (maybe impossible) to have anything meaningful to say about a show in less than a half standard page of text.
I think what you are looking for is less reviews and more recommendations, which I'd argue aren't really the same thing. (and to be as fair to you as possible you are hardly the only person who seems to care about this given how many annoyed DMs I used to get about not tagging my reviews for "having spoilers" in them).
The fact of the matter is that the review format here is geared to encourage fairly thorough criticism, which is something that I actually quite like, as it provides stark contrast to, again, a site like MyAnimeList. Or to use a different medium for an example; Letterboxd or RateYourMusic, both of which are absolutely pocked by very short low-effort reviews.
To slightly change my phrasing, I do not think there is anything desirable to be gained from loosening the modest requirements for reviews here. If you want sites that encourage free-for-alls in reviews, they are out there.
you should just go to MyAnimeList for that
That is already what I do, as outlined in the OP.
I think what you are looking for is less reviews and more recommendations
No it's definitely reviews, capsule reviews, the kind found on the site you just suggested. Recommendations help finding new shows, reviews help deciding which recommendations to pick.
I'm of the opinion that it's very hard (maybe impossible) to have anything meaningful to say about a show in less than a half standard page of text.
You can have that opinion, of course, but keep in mind that there are other humans who value their limited time and might see drawn out writing as wasteful and inefficient.
The review format here is geared to encourage fairly through criticism
How so? I'm curious because I don't see systemic criticism of reviews anywhere here, but I could very well have missed it.
That is already what I do, as outlined in the OP.
Then I don't actually see what the problem is.
It's definitely reviews, capsule reviews, the kind found on the site you just suggested.
Admittedly this is hairsplitting but I would really term those recommendations in most cases.
You can have that opinion, of course, but keep in mind that there are other humans who value their limited time and might see drawn out writing as wasteful and inefficient.
What I would tell you is to then not read long reviews, which you already say you don't do. I again don't see an issue.
For some reason the post editor is not letting me quote your last point (if you want my opinion the part of this site that most needs an overhaul is the forums, on that note), but what I mean is not criticism of the reviews, it is reviews which are thorough criticism. "Thorough" here not being a positive or negative quality judgment, just speaking in terms of the level of detail.
You're free to consider that a waste of time, of course, but I and many people here prefer it. Your proposed dropping the word count requirement would not offer the kind of reviews you like alongside the ones I write and prefer to read, it would displace them entirely.
- continue this thread →
Then I don't actually see what the problem is
It's the second sentence in the OP: having to go somewhere else for reviews hurts Anilist's user base.
I would really term those recommendations in most cases.
OK well call them what you want but the rest of the world calls them "capsule reviews". Regardless of the name It's the rules they are subjected to that matter. Recommendation systems have different rules than review systems, typically a recommendation is from 1 anime to a 2nd anime, whereas a review pertains to just one single anime.
Your proposed dropping the word count requirement would not offer the kind of reviews you like alongside the ones I write and prefer to read
What is this based on? You really can't find a single review on those other sites that you like?
The restriction is unfortunate. I don't see why it couldn't be removed and to let the community use the voting feature that already exists to decide whether shorter reviews have value.
I'd like to use reviews to know whether or not a show is worth watching and the restriction feels like it pushes for people to write a synopsis. It seems difficult not to spoil a show when you impose a restriction like that.
It seems like people oppose your suggestion because they have an idea of what they want from reviews that's in line with how things are now. They have no reason to want change and think they will get nothing out of it, they don't care that it's something others prefer and won't hinder their enjoyment.
The restriction is unfortunate. I don't see why it couldn't be removed and to let the community use the voting feature that already exists to decide whether shorter reviews have value.
This worsens an already-existing problem where people up or downvote reviews based on how much they agree with them instead of anything about the text of the review itself.
I'd like to use reviews to know whether or not a show is worth watching and the restriction feels like it pushes for people to write a synopsis. It seems difficult not to spoil a show when you impose a restriction like that.
I have run into this mentality several times and it is bizarre to me. Why would you read a review for a series you haven't seen?
It seems like people oppose your suggestion because they have an idea of what they want from reviews that's in line with how things are now. They have no reason to want change and think they will get nothing out of it, they don't care that it's something others prefer and won't hinder their enjoyment.
Contrarily, I think the change is being pushed for because people don't understand that it in fact would.
There is an idea I see being batted around here that reviewers want their reviews to be read by the largest amount of people possible and have them treated as essentially recommendation guides. There's certainly nothing wrong with that format, but it's not really what most criticism is or aspires to be. If I want recommendations on here, I can easily ask for them on Global or on the forums, and if I want quick opinions on a specific series I can do the same.
There's nothing to really be gained from a show having, say, 30 or so reviews that all just boil down to "this is good and you should watch it", without discussing why the writer thinks its good, giving any examples of its strengths, analyzing the context in which it was made and why, etc. Nothing to be gained, at least, that is particularly desirable.
And if you disagree and think that a more free-for-all format is preferable, an anime site that has that already exists and is called MyAnimeList.
It's just strange to me that people seem so eager to push out the community that's already well-established here in favor of making things more like MAL. I don't think this comes from any place of malice, of course, but the idea that all western anime fan communities should be fundamentally similar is bizarre.
Why would you read a review for a series you haven't seen?
To see what other people who have seen it think about it. Imagine you have 5 shows to pick from and only time to watch one, the reviews can help you pick.
Right, I phrased that poorly, but see my point here:
There is an idea I see being batted around here that reviewers want their reviews to be read by the largest amount of people possible and have them treated as essentially recommendation guides. There's certainly nothing wrong with that format, but it's not really what most criticism is or aspires to be. If I want recommendations on here, I can easily ask for them on Global or on the forums, and if I want quick opinions on a specific series I can do the same.
There are many other places on the internet (and even other places on Anilist) to get quick recommendations. It's just not what the reviews section is for.
Asking on forums or global isn't even close to fast enough. And your "there are other places" sounds like "If you don't like it you can git out!" which is already what people do which is why this whole thread exists to begin with. Of course we already know we are free to go somewhere else, the point is to offer constructive criticism to Anilist.
so reviews that all just boil down to "this is good and you should watch it", without discussing why the writer thinks its good, giving any examples of its strengths, analyzing the context in which it was made and why, etc.
The reviews that do the best job of analyzing while being concise will rise to the top, assuming the community decides it with the voting feature that currently exists.
If the amount of words is so important they could implement a way of seeing how long a review is at a glance. Outside of an influx of short reviews making it more difficult to find the longer ones is there a drawback? How does giving other people what they want make things worse for you?
It's just strange to me that people seem so eager to push out the community that's already well-established here in favor of making things more like MAL
OP is offering feedback to improve a site he currently uses, we're all aware of MAL. You're implying that people with an opposing opinion to you are not apart of this community, we are this community. Reviews weren't always here, they're not what define anilist.
Just put blank spaces lmao, it'll count towards the minimum word count.
The best method of remediation of this problem is implementation of one negative and one positive method of demonstration of whether each review is liked or disliked, which shall be combined with the ability to designate which review shall be presented first to the observer. The aforementioned system is already existent at "http://reddit.com", whereby comments are able to be sorted by how many positive and negative votes they have received. This system shall be superior to all else because it shall force reviews that the user-base of "http://anilist.co" like not to be observed less, whereas observation of reviews that are designated as more desirable shall be prioritised.
yes this is a very bizarre rule regarding reviews, the other databases do not have such a requirement, i even made a review larger than 2200 characters and it still does not accept it so it might be bugged alltogether, there is a difference between review and essay, a normal review should not be that long
I don't think it's that much. If you're writing a review, you should be covering more than enough content to reach the limit. Of the four reviews I've done, only one that just barely reached the character limit, but that's also because I didn't like the show and the show itself was as deep as a puddle.
what standard of "should" are you using? do you think most shows should have zero reviews even after thousands of people have watched them? and did you read the bit about how 95% of reviews on other sites do not meet the 500 word limit?
Do you think most shows should have zero reviews even after thousands of people have watched them?
Most semi-popular and modern series will get reviews no problem since anime/manga has exploded over the years as well as AniList being a relatively-up-and-coming listing site, compared to something like MAL. As such, don't believe the character limit is the biggest reason for lack of reviews.
And did you read the bit about how 95% of reviews on other sites do not meet the 500 word limit?
I didn't read a single bit of your post because I'm not reading all of that. I merely commented off the title. I have no issue with lowering the character limit, I just don't think it is that big of a number. Regardless, by having such a low limit, it allows for more troll/low-quality reviews to be written. I'd rather there be a low number of decent quality than a surplus number of garbage.
I don't know if I want anilist to become letterboxd
Do you want the majority of shows to have zero reviews even after thousands of people have watched them?
Yes. I would way, way rather have shows and manga only have thought-out long reviews from people passionate about the show than have a bunch of 2 sentence "lol this show sucks" reviews. I already downvote and report most of the trash/joke reviews I see already.
edit: also my favorite manga series could be evidence for this. of my 6 favorites, there are:
2 extremely popular manga (one piece and chainsaw man)
a manga with 3 reviews
a manga with 1 review
and two manga with no reviews at all (which i might review eventually)Yes. I would way, way rather have shows and manga only have thought-out long reviews
"zero reviews" means there are zero "thought-out long reviews." And if most people agree with you then those superior, longer reviews should be voted to the top on their own, no?
another result is the recent reviews feature, which i've used to find lots of good animanga, will be completely clogged with short trash reviews of the most popular franchises.
and no, i don't trust thought out long reviews to get voted to the top over joke ones
the recent reviews feature [...] will be completely clogged with short trash reviews
That's a fine point, but this could be resolved with a simple filter-by-length option.
i don't trust thought out long reviews to get voted to the top over joke ones
Is this based on observation? On other sites, the top reviews are almost always "long" (around 500 words) even though there is no word limit required.
I know this is an old thread, but you seem to still be active on it and quite passionate on the subject, so I guess I'll give my two cents :P. 2200 characters is VERY short. In fact, most current anilist reviews are ones that I think are too short to make any meaningful points. There are very few reviews that make it just past the word count that are actually of quality.
Now, granted, longer =/= better inherently. Actually, shorter oftentimes indicates that the creator of the essay was careful with their wording, and communicated their point efficiently. It's why a 5 minute Digibro video (back in the day, anyway) will always be infinitely more rewatchable and entertaining than some bloated 40 minute video essay that makes a few substantive points, but not enough to justify its run time. One of these reviews was careful about not wasting the viewers' time.
That being said, a 5 minute youtube video is still FAR longer than 2200 characters. And while longer =/= better, and shorter often DOES indicate quality, there comes a certain point where an essay is so short that it can't say anything meaningful unless the topic is truly so limited in scope that two minutes is enough to say something substantive about it. When reviewing an ENTIRE anime, it's damn near impossible to say anything meaningful within 2200 characters. Maybe if you were only talking about one specific aspect of the show, you could have a quality review under 2200 characters, but that defeats the entire point of reviewing an anime! The point of these reviews is to be indicative of your opinion of the entire show, not just one facet of it.
But you could argue, so what if there's garbage, short reviews? Free market, yeah? It opens up the anilist reviews market and drives competition! It will bring people flocking to the anilist reviews page because there will be more reviews and more engagement! I don't really agree with this though. If anything, removing the word limit will lower the average review quality because of the reasons I've listed, and I feel like, if anything, that would dissuade people from putting effort into reviews.
For the record, the voting system doesn't help with this whatsoever. What gets you likes isn't a quality review, it's how much your review agrees with the popular opinion. Most people don't even READ the review before clicking like, they simply see the final score at the bottom. (I actually quite hilariously tested this one time by writing a review for A silent voice that gave it 100/100, but the text itself actually reviewed Re:zero instead of koe no katachi. My like ratio was STARTLINGLY high, nearly 100% upvotes).
So, people will see that the quality of their review doesn't affect their internet updoots, and then the site will be flooded by a deluge of shitty, low effort reviews that still get upvoted because they conform. I frankly do not think that having shorter reviews would drive up the amount of quality reviews. If anything, it would send it plummeting.
It's not even hard to hit 2200 characters. That's like, comically easy to hit actually. If you have a good typing speed you can do it in like 15 minutes of stream of consciousness writing. If you have a well rounded vocabulary, it's probably not too hard to make the character limit with UNDER 500 words. Just look at how many fairly lengthy words I'm using in this very post! If you really want to write a quality review for a show, this miniscule hurdle should not stop you. I don't believe that the number of people who want to write good reviews but can't because of this preposterously easy standard to abide by is at all sizeable enough to warrant a site wide change of this nature.
I kinda skimmed through the thread and I kinda see OP's point. First, let me agree that having a min word count gatekeeps for more insightful and quality reviews. Plus, it's not that hard to type that out granted that you know what you're saying and you've organized things in your head. And yes, shorter reviews are low effort.
However, OP is speaking from the perspective of a reader. I personally wouldn't want to always have an in-depth grasp of an anime before watching. Sometimes, watching anime ain't that deep. I think OP would sort of want something similar to skimming through amazon reviews. And sometimes, something like "watch if you like Katekyo Hitman Reborn" is insightful enough.
Because of this, here are my suggestions:
a.) Review Summaries + Score
Somehow incentivize reviewers to put efforts onto their review summaries. Perhaps clarify the purpose of it? People sometimes put "My First Review of [insert anime]". Instead, clarify that it should be a short and concise text that grabs the gist of the review and/or whether you recommend it or not. In addition, the reviewer's score could also show beside it.
As a result, you could either quickly browse through the short summaries and see the score OR actually click reviews and get an in-depth review. However, this won't change the fact that not many people would want to type long reviews.
b.) Reviews vs Comments
While we keep the current review section, we can have a separate comment section for short reviews (with a maximum word limit). Hopefully, this would get people to review anime more. And maybe encourage people to write more lengthy reviews. Honestly, putting your hard worked review for scrutiny is very intimidating. Even writing a seemingly "lengthy" body of text is (I'm a university student, so half a page is nothing; but it is intimidating to others tho).
So yeah, hope this made sense and hope it helped.
Yeah, your points do make sense and thanks for contributing to the discussion! I see your point about not wanting to have a complete grasp on a show before watching it, since obviously that goes into the realm of spoilers, but that's why spoilers have to be indicated in some way in the review and why a lot of reviews currently have a spoiler-free section before delving into the nitty gritty specifics of a show. A lot of reviews are spoiler free entirely while easily making the character threshold! So while I see the point, I don't think it's an incredibly pressing issue, even if the site remains unchanged.
Review summaries are actually sometimes implemented mostly like you posited, albeit not through the summary directly. The summaries, as far as I can tell, are used more like youtube titles so that it grabs your attention. However, written directly into the review, usually at the bottom, oftentimes there's a summary or a TLDR or something like that. But the summaries are indeed nifty to have every so often, and maybe it could be changed such that reviews have a title AND a summary.
The comments idea isn't terrible, but I also feel like it's a bit redundant considering that there are forums discussing these anime, and entire recommendation threads where the point is to recommend a show without spoiling it. I think review summaries are just a better way of getting the job done than "comments" without adding a kind of unnecessary feature.
2200 characters is VERY short
There are very few reviews that make it just past the word count that are actually of quality.
So I've heard, but the fact stands that 95% of reviews are below this limit. "VERY short" and "actually of quality" are entirely subjective. There are short reviews on other sites that are highly up-voted, proving that these short reviews are of quality in the eyes of someone even if its not us. Even if we assume all short reviews are bad, the fact stands that shorter reviews lead to more active review sections which then draw in superior long-form reviews. So we have to put up with the low quality to some extent in order to get a higher overall quality.
there comes a certain point where an essay is so short that it can't say anything meaningful
Definitely, but I would say that lower limit is less than one sentence. When we look on other sites, reviews that are less than one sentence see a significant drop in voter approval. But once one proper sentence is completed, that is sufficient to derive some degree of meaning. The more one reads into something, anything, the more meaning one can derive from it. A single sentence can carry tremendous meaning particularly when taken in relation to the speaker/writer.
removing the word limit will lower the average review quality
that would dissuade people from putting effort into reviews
If voting ratios and totals can be taken as a indicator of quality, then this has been directly disproven by other sites. Short reviews on other sites have equal or higher voted ratios than long reviews here on Anilist. Skilled writers are what raise the average review quality, not word limits. Skilled writers are motivated by a large number of readers, so they look for busy review sections. The review sections here are not busy, so skilled writers are turned away, so the review quality here remains low to average.
What gets you likes isn't a quality review, it's how much your review agrees with the popular opinion.
This simply begs the question: what generates the popular opinion? Perhaps its an objective quality that doesn't match your (or my) subjective standard of quality?
Most people don't even READ the review before clicking like
I don't know about "most" but this is certainly true to some extent. However, it has been proven that the longer text is the less likely someone is to read it in full. So do we want to make this vote-without-reading issue better or worse? If we want it to get better, we need shorter reviews that are more likely to be read.
I actually quite hilariously tested this one time by writing a review for A silent voice that gave it 100/100, but the text itself actually reviewed Re:zero instead of koe no katachi. My like ratio was STARTLINGLY high, nearly 100% upvotes
LOL! That is pretty funny! Can I ask was it on Anilist or a different site? And did it out-perform the highest rated reviews in terms of votes? I think a good joke like that is better than the worst "real" reviews so I can imagine that it would out-perform at least a few.
It's not even hard to hit 2200 characters. That's like, comically easy to hit actually.
Agreed. I can copy-paste my way to 2200 characters in seconds. However, that is not the core issue. The issue is that there is a very low supply of reviews on Anilist in comparison to most other places.
Just look at how many fairly lengthy words I'm using in this very post!
And I appreciate your effort and courtesy, and I enjoyed reading your response, but please recognize that you repeated yourself multiple times in order to achieve this length. Additionally, please observe that the shorter replies in this comment thread tend to have a higher number of votes than the long ones, because they are more likely to be read and understood.
All that said, thank you for your thoughts :)
[Edited because I messed up the quoting format, sorry]
I'ma respond to each paragraph in turn.
FIRST PARAGRAPH: While 'quality' is subjective, 'having substance' is arguably not as subjective, and that's mostly what I mean by 'quality'. A review shorter than 2200 character will be of very little substance, because when applied to something as broad as an entire anime, it's difficult to really say something meaningful within that span of characters.
I agree that removing the character minimum would lead to a more active review section, but what I'm more concerned with is whether that activity is something beneficial to the anilist community, and generally constructive. I don't think removing the character limit will be beneficial to this site or the community.
As for "very short reviews on other sites" I'ma assume you mean Amazon. If you don't then my bad, and you can correct me on it. On Amazon, the primary purpose of reading a review is to know "is this product a scam, will it ship to me in a damaged state, etc." It's the landscape of these specific concerns that lends itself well to short reviews. On anilist, nobody is concerned about whether or not a product is a scam. When we read a review, we're either looking for in depth analysis, or a cursory overview of what a show's good or bad aspects are, and whether it will appeal to us. Both of these take a fair amount of characters, even the cursory overview, and I think the character limit actually helps those looking for even just a cursory overview, as it eliminates a lot of garbage without enough substance to tell you whether this show will specifically cater to your tastes.
Also, at what point does a review just become a forum comment? Why have reviews anymore once reviews are no longer on average than a comment on a forum? The only purpose of a review in that instance would be ease of access, but at least to me, reviews are supposed to be more in depth than comments. That's their function on this site.
SECOND PARAGRAPH: There is genuinely no way a single sentence can convey a meaningful review of an entire show unless it is a run-on senntence. At least, I haven't seen a single sentence that does that. The closest I've seen a sentence get to doing that is some of the first sentences of anime reviews on Youtube, but even then, the point of those sentences is to be an attention getter, which is then expanded upon throughout the video.
THIRD PARAGRAPH: Am I just not getting what these other sites are? I mentioned Amazon before, but with how many times you've said "other sites" it's making me question that assertion. Do you mean Myanimelist? I'm not actually sure if MAL has a word minimum, but the most highly upvoted reviews on MAL tend to be fairly long in my experience (although I haven't been on MAL in a while, admittedly).
Skilled writers do raise the average review quality, but I feel as if the word minimum filters out people who aren't even trying to be skilled or insightful, and only those people. And the anilist reviews section is fairly busy, at least in my opinion, though "busy" is subjective.
FOURTH PARAGRAPH: I don't get how this question is relevant to the discussion.
FIFTH PARAGRAPH: I don't think the shorter reviews would help much, and in fact, lowering the average writing quality of the reviews would make this problem worse. I myself don't read most anilist reviews, but if they're like, REALLY long I tend to start paying attention because that means the writer put in effort (or at least tends to mean that). Although this is a subjective anecdote on my end. Still, I just don't think shortening the reviews would make people more likely to read them, since the ones shorter than 2200 characters wouldn't have enough substance to even be worth reading.
SiXTH PARAGRAPH: It was on anilist but unfortunately it was deleted. I took screenshots of it, not 100% on if I got the like ratio in there doe since I mostly wanted to capture the review itself for posterity. It was a good 20 minutes or so of upvotes before it got a single downvote tho, that I remember.
SEVENTH PARAGRAPH: On the topic of low amount of reviews, it's worth noting that anilist is a fairly tightly knit community to begin with. Sure, most english hardcore anime fans know about it in my experience, but in terms of cataloguing anime MAL has the lion's share of the market.
EIGHT PARAGRAPH: I could've absolutely trimmed down the comment, but I don't think I repeated myself too much? Well, that's beside the point. Also, I don't think comments are necessarily able to be directly compared to reviews like that. A comment is often meant to be a short bit of discussion, whereas reading any review is a commitment. Only nerds like me who love typing essays for the hell of it will read posts from other nerds who love typing essays for the hell of it.
And thanks for your effort and courtesy too!
I don't know if "competition amongst reviewers" is a thing? Please correct me if i'm wrong. But the thought of someone publishing a review to outperform other reviews in number of votes is so bizarre to me. Regardless of whether a review is long or short, I think most reviewers write them because they want to lay their thoughts out and vouch for or against a series. And relying on the number of votes is such an unreliable way of judging because from what i've observed, people tend to just upvote positive reviews and downvote negative reviews on a series they like.
I don't write lengthy stuff all that often so i don't know if 2200 characters is too long or not. But i fear if the minimum word count is to be removed, the review would be flooded with funny one-liners and that would get the most upvotes, just like the reviews on Steam games. People would upvote because it makes them happy, which is not what the purpose of a review is.
It's certainly not a formal competition where a winner and loser are declared (although there are actual official Review competitions you might find interesting). The competition is inherent and the goal is exactly as you described:
I think most reviewers write them because they want to lay their thoughts out and vouch for or against a series
That's exactly right, but there are a limited number of readers and so reviewers must compete for their attention if they wish for their vouching to be heard. So imagine there is a series you love and you see that its top review is positive but doesn't quite do the show justice in your opinion. You want a review that does the show justice, so you start writing one. However, if the review is not as good as what already exists then your effort is effectively wasted, so you have to do "better" than that top review. This is where the implicit "competition" begins.
People would upvote because it makes them happy, which is not what the purpose of a review is.
The "purpose" of a review is different from reviewer-to-reviewer, and especially different from reviewer-to-viewer. If a viewer is made happy by a review its typically because they agree with it, and if they agree with it its typically because have values that were met. Different people have different values, and so they value reviews differently.
So instead of competing for likes they're competing for exposure? That still doesn't sound right... When i wrote my review, i'm just being subjective and honest. I know the reality is that most people just press like and dislike based on whether it has values they agree with, but that's not how it should be. Likes and dislikes should reflect the thoughts presented and quality of the writing, or at least appreciate the efforts the reviewer put.
It's true that the review feature caters heavily to the writers (and readers who like to read i guess?), and I don't think that's a bad thing. I don't think little to no reviews is necessarily a bad thing either. And inciting people to write reviews by lowering the standards would lead to more reviews with lesser thoughts put into it. Instead of reading dozens of short reviews where i have to make my own judgement based on the consensus (which is something i could do by looking at the score distribution anyway), i'd rather read one with well thought-out reasoning in it. I know this opinion is fully subjective, but so is yours, no? So i think calling longer reviews "undesirable to many people" is a bit of a stretch.
So instead of competing for likes they're competing for exposure?
Pretty much, but not everyone is equally competitive about it. To be specific: some just want upvotes, some want to change people's minds, some don't care either way. What these different people all have in common, and what constitutes the competition, is that their reviews will all be shown in the same list for the same readers. So even if you yourself are not feeling competitive when you write, someone else who is competitive still has to compete against you.
When i wrote my review, i'm just being subjective and honest
And that's great! If readers pick up on your honesty then they are far more likely to be influenced by your words. So, whether consciously or not, your desire to be honest aids you in the competition.
Instead of reading dozens of short reviews where i have to make my own judgement based on the consensus (which is something i could do by looking at the score distribution anyway), i'd rather read one with well thought-out reasoning in it.
Same, I love the score distribution feature but I can't trust it on its own. I need to read the words of someone who I'm confident thinks like I do, preferably without any spoilers.
I know this opinion is fully subjective, but so is yours, no? So i think calling longer reviews "undesirable to many people" is a bit of a stretch.
My opinions are definitely subjective, but I'm not demanding anyone agree with my opinions. What's objectively true is that:
1) the rate of reviews-per-capita on Anilist is significantly lower than on other sites,
2) more than 95% of all anime reviews are below 500 words
3) there are thousands of shows here with zero reviews, and many popular shows have less than 5 reviews
4) longer reviews (or longer anything) are statistically less likely to be read than longer reviews, just due to the fact that it takes time to read things and people have limited time.Because of points 1, 2, & 4 I think its objective & accurate to claim longer reviews are undesirable to the majority of people. Of course, it would be wrong to say its undesirable to everyone since there are clearly some people here on anilist who desire them.
2200 is a reasonable minimum. It ensures the reviews on an anime's page actually had effort put into them, and have something to say beyond thing good/thing bad.
And reviews mostly get upvotes based on whether or not people agree with the conclusion/score. Trending shows that people recognize get read, and the ones that parrot the popular opinion get upvoted.
I can think of several examples of essay-length reviews I wrote where I went into explicit detail about my opinion of a highly popular anime, looking at it from multiple angles and ultimately giving it a low score, and getting buried in downvotes... Only to get blown out of the water by a minimum-word fluff piece that essentially said "This anime is perfect and precious and I will defend it to the death" a week later.
Why do most anime not have reviews? Probably because this site is really young, and most active reviewers these days are busy chasing seasonal releases.
Trending shows that people recognize get read, and the ones that parrot the popular opinion get upvoted.
Is that supposed to be a bad thing? If the goal of a reader is to see what people think of a show, or to find a specific reviewer who shares their interests, the most popular opinion is inherently going to be the most useful because it represents more people and is thus more likely to represent them.
I can think of several examples of essay-length reviews I wrote where I went into explicit detail about my opinion of a highly popular anime, looking at it from multiple angles and ultimately giving it a low score, and getting buried in downvotes... Only to get blown out of the water by a minimum-word fluff piece that essentially said "This anime is perfect and precious and I will defend it to the death" a week later.
That sounds like a perfect example of longer reviews being undesirable to many people.
Why do most anime not have reviews? Probably because this site is really young
Objectively false. This thread alone is 3 years old already. It's not just the total number of reviews that is low here, its the rate at which they're produced. The user bases are comparable to other sites, the only difference between them and Anilist is the word-limit. You don't have to make arguments based on "probably" when we have objective data: 95% of reviews are below 2200 characters, so that's obviously the reason why there are so few reviews here.
That sounds like a perfect example of longer reviews being undesirable to many people.
And those are the people we'd rather not cater to :)
Objectively false. It's not just the total number of reviews that is low here, its the rate at which they're produced. The user bases are comparable to other sites, the only difference between them and Anilist is the word-limit.
Ehhhh. Idk how many people use AniDB (or if they even have reviews), Kitsu (they don't have reviews), AnimePlanet, or MAL (other than they have many many more people. There are many differences though rather than just "word limit" (which we don't have a word limit, we have a character limit, its a detail many people misunderstand). MAL does have many many more users so of course they will have more reviews in general. We also don't allow reviews of airing shows or mostly unwatched shows/manga, we don't allow users to shit on fans/or spend time praising fans, we also have a higher character limit. Trying to categorize this as "the character limit is the only difference" is the actual "objectively false" characteristic here.
Us having less reviews is likely in part because of the character limit and I say good riddance to not having those reviews on the site.
And those are the people we'd rather not cater to :)
Then you would rather not cater to 95% of people and I think that's an egotistical decision.
Idk how many people use [...]
That's OK I do and I've already accounted for the different user base sizes: The rate of reviews here on Anilist is 20-30 times lower than average after adjusting for population, not before.
We also don't allow reviews of airing shows or mostly unwatched shows/manga
That is an important difference, but the shows I used as reference were all out for at least 2 years already, so that's not a factor here. So yes the word count is the only relevant difference here and you don't have any data or reasoning to say otherwise.
I say good riddance to not having those reviews on the site.
We already know what Anilist says, the goal is to change what you are saying.
Then you would rather not cater to 95% of people and I think that's an egotistical decision
You keep citing this 95% number but have no methodology or raw data to back it up. It also just doesn't even apply here to how you are using it.
Sure its "egotistical" creating our own site is egotistical. Every group/site in existence is catering to some sort of market, they literally can't do otherwise.
That's OK I do and I've already accounted for the different user base sizes: The rate of reviews here on Anilist is 20-30 times lower than average after adjusting for population, not before.
Cool!
That is an important difference, but the shows I used as reference were all out for at least 2 years already, so that's not a factor here. So yes the word count is the only relevant difference here and you don't have any data or reasoning to say otherwise.
Ah yes this mythical unsourced data. Anyway so it still does matter because again the requirements on dropped shows is still important and the reviews people posting for airing anime that they never updated after completing. So yes those are still important no matter how much you want to dishonestly handwave them away.
We already know what Anilist says, the goal is to change what you are saying.
And you still aren't doing a good job :)
Oh, you want to know why this site is different from other sites?
I have two computers right now. I have a desktop that's over a decade old, and is so outdated that I physically can't update it to modern day standards. Starting a few years ago, I began losing contact with several sites that wouldn't work with such an old browser; Wikipedia, Doordash, Amazon Music, Yahoo, turbotax, so many different sites, and I'm not exaggerating that Anilist was the first one to go. You have to have such a state-of-the-art set-up to use this site, I still can't make it work at my local library. I lost touch with this site for years before I got my new laptop.
And I can still use MAL on the desktop, so what does that say? MAL is way, way more accessible for a higher number of people?
