Mikeyfell said:
How the fuck did Dan get 4 points?
The internet has destroyed debating forever.
I've seen Akira and part of Full Metal Alchemist so Anime sucks.
I've played Call of Duty so First Person Shooters suck.
What's the difference between those two arguments?
Why is one of them acceptable?
I'd actually take it a step beyond and ask how he got
any points in this debate. The first argument for which he was awarded a point was a prime example of faulty generalization which completely ignored the plethora of genres anime as a whole encompasses (everything from Slice of Life to Supernatural Horror, to Psychological Thriller, and from Romantic Comedy to Action-Adventure). In fairness though, Chris did get a point for doing the same with Western Animation and disney princesses, though I would debate the validity of that claim as well.
The second point of "There's no plot because it has to be dubbed" was a pure falsehood and easily disprovable simply by looking at...let's say Monster. Dubbing has very little impact on the plot or the dialogue (at least when the translators/localizers are worth their salt...*glares meaningfully at Zero Wing*).
Third point rather relied on personal cultural prejudice (Read: As he is less familiar with eastern culture than western, he assumes that must be true of everyone else, therefore 'western is more relatable in general') and blatantly ignored the fact that the Hero's Journey Campbell codified was the general pattern that he observed fiction in general, on a global scale. It doesn't belong to western culture.
Final point was pure apples to oranges. Quite literally, he compared what he considered the worst of japanese animation to what many would consider the best of western animation. That is not a fair comparison no matter how you slice it. You do not present a comparison of what you consider a good series of a medium to something you comsider a bad example in another medium and say it exemplifies your point. It would be like if I were to compare Ocarina of Time to Big Rigs Racing and claim that that was proof of racing games inherent inferiority. If you're going to compare things then you HAVE to use a consistent set of criteria. Good vs. Good, Bad vs. Bad, whichever, but you can't compare a Razzie to an Oscar for the sake of making a point about their respective genres.