>>28985024>The fact that object A pretends to have quality Q doesn't mean that it has this quality.Literally my point, yeah.
>Capes have timelines that spanned decades.That don't attempt to tell one single story.
>This implies that runner-up of Kalos league is shit because you say so.If the set up doesnt arrive to a satisfactory conclusion then it's worth shit. And XY isnt the first pokemon series featuring Ash, so it was already shit to boot. The fact that you deluded yourself into thinking ash was gonna win THIS time matters not. Specially since, he, you know, lost.
>And yet you're arguing that Ash is shit because he is bound to fail. Irony much?As I said, and you dissed, there's a reason Sysiphus doesnt achieve his goal, that's the point of his myth.
In Ash's case, it's because he's badly written.
>That's subjective.>unironically bringing "muh subjectivity!!!"Ok, I think you're wrong, so you are. It's subjective after all :)
But seriously, why do you even argue if it's subjective.
>Explain to me why do you think he didn't had proper story with proper progression.As you can see literally on the OP of this thread, his story is still going on. So that crosses out the "had", as for progression, I already said so on the post you quoted when you brought up olympic swimmers.
>My point was that not all MCs achieve that.Most on similar anime do.
>Way to dodge.Says the guy that brought up realism and then moves the goalposts and now bring the subjectivity escape card.
>Does the concept of realism of situation as qualitative property ring a bell?Yes, and it's not applied here because first, Ash's adventures arent based on reality at all, secondly, even if they were, they are still making him do unrealistic things, so if the intent of the show is a realistic portrayal of a fictional world made to sell games to kids, thy fail at that.
