Why can't modern anime writers write romance as good

>>149374614
>the girl I loved all along was the girl who was helping me fall in love with the girl I thought I was in love with
ehhh

Because VGAI was a manga.
WAY better than the animu.

>>149374739
Not the ending. Ai also has a god tier VA, Megumi Hayashibara, who you don't get in the manga.

https://a.pomf.cat/ewooia.webm

>>149374614
You have got to be joking, this show was a mess, the did the "i'm gonna die/disapeer if you don't love me" shit like 10 times, back to back.

>>149379694
That's one way to admit you're an idiot. Way to completely miss the point.

name 5 modern romance anime that aren't harems

there's your answer

File: zzz2.jpg (7KB, 135x200px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 135x200px

>>149382036
They are probably all shojo.

>>149374614
I read the manga and superplayboys don´t impress me at all. Quite forgettable.

>>149374614
> romance as good as Video Girl Ai

There's a lot of boring shows that are aimed only at teenagers, and can only be tolerated by teenagers.

>>149374614

Mainly because modern anime caters to NEET and losers, so writers have to dumb down how romance actually works to "extremely hot and perfect girl gets in love with MC without personality"

>>149382151
What's wrong with shoujo

>>149374614
Video Girl Ai was great for the visuals, not the writing.

>>149374614
Because you're older now and expect more

File: (You).gif (4MB, 480x270px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 480x270px

>>149374614
>Why can't modern anime writers write romance as good as Video Girl Ai?

Not saying VGAI is perfect or anything, but maybe it's because of the insular nature of the culture, and the predominant mindset that women are somehow enigmatic figures that men are unable to understand, instead of flesh-and-blood humans with feelings, emotions, appreciations and expectations just like they are.

It helps to understand how a relationship starts, grows and ends in order to write about one. Unfortunately, those relationships are starting to disappear.

>>149387383
So basically, anime doesn't have romance because the japanese don't have romance? That's plausible.

>>149387383
You mean normal relationships are starting to disappear?

Just watched this last year and it was utter garbage. Not in the beginning maybe, but during the final episodes increasingly so.

>>149374681 Good point but I find sometimes simple concepts that have been done already can still be good if the story is fleshed out well. It's like criticising a painting for it's plain frame.

>>149374614

I like Video Girl Ai. But if you think its the best love story ever, that's pretty sad.

>>149387574
Perhaps 'disappear' is too strong a word. It's more like a growing lack of understanding as to what truly defines a solid relationship, with two people being aware of their own needs while acting for the benefit of the other, and being able to express both of those things equally.

With the sheer level of detachment that the Internet allows, and the supposed increase of the home-bound way of life all over the world, nevermind just Japan, it makes sense that our creative works would lose sight of how to define a real romance.

Japan may be becoming a nation of Shinji's, is what I mean to say.

>>149390055
>It's more like a growing lack of understanding as to what truly defines a solid relationship
You understand your worldviews are screwed by the fact you are an antisocial person that spends his time shitposting on an imageboard? The sense of what defines relationship, or romance, whatever you are to call it, isn't disappearing. Not all artist lose their touch with reality, you are just looking at very niche medium that is propelled towards certain market, and the generalizations you are trying to make it based on this are huge.

>>149390253
Not him but where exactly is the sense of portraying real relationships existent? Sure, anime is niche and not representative, but look at big Hollywood movies or TV. Do they really portray real relationships? It seems far less likely now.

>>149390253
You're assuming that I'm antisocial, but my understanding and analysis comes from the fact that I know what it means to actually be social.

Posting on an imageboard doesn't make me antisocial.

You're also under the impression that I believe this to be a broad analysis of our society as a whole when that isn't necessarily the case.

If we take the medium of entertainment as a descriptive slice of how people may relate to one another, and take into account the fact that that same entertainment actually affects HOW certain people relate to one another (hence: imageboards), you can't say I'm completely wrong.