TheMisterManGuy

In many Japanese game series, the main character usually has an edgy, bad-ass, anti-hero to counterpart them.

 

Mega Man = Proto Man

Sonic = Shadow

Mario = Wario

Pit = Dark Pit 

Samus = Dark Samus

Ryu = Evil Ryu

 

I have to wonder, what is Japan's fascination with anti-heroes?

No. For one thing, unlike the Wii U, the Switch isn't clumsily slapped together or badly designed. There are flaws sure, but as a whole, it feels like a well made, and attractive product. Another thing, is that Nintendo is making sure they avoid the Wii U's mistake of front loading the Switch with too many games at launch, and instead, has a major first party release lined up for almost every month this year, to maintain interest and reduce software droughts. Nintendo is also doing a much better job marketing the Switch, way better than the Wii U. Them getting a Super-Bowl commercial was something they would probably never do back in the Wii U days. Then there's the hardware itself. The Switch is a much simpler, easier to grasp concept than the Wii U is. It's versatile, but it never feels bloated or confusing. It's also way easier to develop for than it's predecessor, forgoing the outdated PowerPC Esspresso crap and needlessly complicated GPGPU nonsense in favor of much simpler hardware courtesy of Nvidia, that also supports nearly every modern engine under the sun from Unreal Engine 4, to Vulkan GL, Unlike the Wii U, which Nintendo only barely managed to get Unity running on it. 

 

Do I think it'll be an instant hit? Well no, not with that price and launch date, and the fact that it'll be pretty bare-bones at launch. But by the holiday season, I think it could be a huge success. 

I would disagree. I enjoyed the DS version. However, when I got to the Wii version, I could not motivate myself past the first world.

 

A lot of the haters of The Wind Waker's style actually turned around and liked it. At least, that's from my understanding. Super Mario Sunshine? Well, I'd say Super Mario Sunshine is actually the closest we've gotten to Super Mario 64 since. So it had a new setting and a new mechanic... That's it. Otherwise, it was very much like SM64. The 3D Mario titles since, however, have changed quite a bit.

 

I disagree. Nothing about the use of the Wii Remote in Super Mario Galaxy felt worth it at all. It's the very definition of innovation to be innovation. Something that has plagued Nintendo for many years now.

The use of the Wii Remote in Galaxy was integral to many aspects of the game. Pointing at the screen to collect out of reach Star bits, or guide Mario with pull stars makes much more sense than fumbling with a second analog stick. Sure, it's not outlandish use like Skyward Sword or Red Steel 2, but it didn't have to be. Galaxy takes advantage of the Wii Remote, without abusing it.

I have not played those two games, because I do not like playing violent games. By the way, I wouldn't call Nintendo's first party titles "effortless shovelware". The example I gave - Super Mario Galaxy - is, in fact (in disagreement with me), considered the best Wii game. Yet it is one of the best examples I can think of how the Wii Remote was nothing more than gimmickry.

 

My primary enjoyment of the GCN, which kept me playing it for years, hinged on titles like Animal Crossing and Super Smash Bros. Melee (for non-competitive reasons). So for Animal Crossing City Folk and Brawl to be as disappointing as they are killed the system for me. Super Mario Galaxy was also disappointing aside from its music score. Paper Mario merely had a spinoff and has been completely ruined since. Don't even get me started on New Super Mario Bros. Wii. I rented that game and couldn't motivate myself to keep playing it at all. NSMB is the very definition of stagnation. The very definition of every single game is the same. This is a theme common with nearly all Mario franchises from the Wii on.

 

Pretty much every title I loved on the GCN was messed up on the Wii. And it's not a mere blip (aside from Animal Crossing), the direction of many series (again, aside from Animal Crossing) has changed for the worst, and it all started with the Wii.

 

I don't even include Skyward Sword, I was disappointed with many aspects of it, but I can see it as a respectable Zelda title. Not as good as Twilight Princess, but it did enough to surprise me that I enjoyed it. Zelda seems to be the only series carrying Nintendo consoles forward anymore.

The NSMB stagnation didn't start until The Wii U/3DS with NSMB 2 and U, both of which mind you, came out 3 months apart from each other, and added nothing substantial to their DS and Wii counterparts. At least NSMBWii was released a good 3 years after the DS game. Also, what about the other games I listed? Punch-Out!!, Sin & Punishment: Star Successor, Endless Ocean, Rhythm Heaven Fever, Xenoblade? I understand if you felt series like Smash or Paper Mario changed for the worst (Super Paper Mario was a fine game in it's own right, but not what many fans wanted. Sticker Star and Color Splash on the other hand...), But keep in mind, many fans felt the same way towards the Gamecube. Mario was wearing a Water powered jet pack now, and Zelda turned into a Cartoon, when fans really just wanted Mario 64 and OOT 2.0.

 

As for the Wii Remote, while sensless waggle for waggle's sake is annoying, to say the Wii Remote is pure gimmickry I'd argue isn't very accurate. With your Mario Galaxy example, while the spin attack could be mapped to a button, I say mapping it to the Wii Remote makes it far more satisfying than it would've been otherwise. And it works in Galaxy because.

 

A. It's not something that requires the split-second precision of a button press.

 

B. It required no exaggerated or broad motions, a simple flick was more than enough to make it work.

 

Galaxy also had you do other things with the Wii-mote, such as using the pointer to collect Star Bits, tilting it to move a ball or Sting-Ray, and guiding Mario across different sections of a level with the pointer. It's very intelligent use of the controller because it uses it in novel ways, without abusing it.

Speaking solely of Nintendo (I happily own a PS2, PS3, and PS4 so this isn't so much bias speaking lol) I think that the Wii era was the worst by far, and for two reasons:

 

1. Nintendo went too far into gimmickry. What makes today's consoles (including the Wii U, yes) an improvement is that they force the gimmickry on you less. Many Wii games did not allow for options in controlling them, and the Wii Remote was required to get past the main menu. On the Wii, games that didn't benefit from motion control at all, like Animal Crossing City Folk (a bad AC game, but we'll talk about that later) required it, even to their detriment (trying to make patterns in CF with the Wii Remote is the worst thing ever). And up until Skyward Sword, I never found the motion controls to add anything to games ever. Even in the loved by almost everyone Super Mario Galaxy games, it was only gimmickry to me. As I mentioned above, it is gimmickry that goes beyond gimmickry, it is annoying, and at times it made the Wii very hard to even play for me (at one point the censor's very weak power cord broke, making it impossible for me to play even GCN games that don't even need the Wii Remote until I got a new one)

 

2. The games. After the high-quality games of the N64 and GCN era I had very high expectations. Perhaps when that happens and they're bound to fail, but no, some of these games were slopped together, while otherwise Nintendo changed them to something different. City Folk is the worst offender. I loved Animal Crossing GCN so much. I accepted Wild World but thought Nintendo could do better. I was hoping that CF was when they would do better. They didn't. CF is a worse game than Wild World... Because it is pretty much a watered-down port of Wild World to the Wii. It's watered down because the developers didn't care about the game, either that or they were rushed. I don't know. Super Smash Bros. Brawl was a disappointment. Not one I can really point at and say is bad like City Folk, but too much work was put in some places as opposed to others, and it really shows. And yes, I'll even say it: The Super Mario Galaxy games are a disappointment, too. Sure they have pretty graphics and music, but I found the sheer linearity of the levels to be a disappointment compared to Sunshine and 64... And since then that's all we've gotten.

1. Have you played many Wii games? Because while there were a lot of games that used gimmicky waggle for gimmicky waggle sake, There's also games like No More Heroes and Red Steel 2 which use it in much smarter, more tasteful ways that can really add to the game. Shooters, conceptually at least, were superior with the Wii Remote due to it's IR pointer. So it's unfair to write the motion controls off as a gimmick based on the effortless shovelware, when there were games that did try.

 

2. While Brawl, Skyward Sword, and Metroid Ohter M were disappointing for some, they were more the exception than the rule. Personaly, the Wii had some of Nintendo's most varried output yet. From 2D platformers (NSMBW, Donkey Kong Country Returns, Wario Land Shake It) to RPGs (Last Story, Xenoblade) to old school revivals (Punch-Out!!, Sin & Punishment: Star Successor) and even stuff that wasn't even expected (Endless Ocean, Rhythm Heaven, Wii Sports, etc.) Sure, this is all subjective, but I'd take the Wii's first party games, over the Wii U's any day.

Maybe you don't have to look so far

 

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObeiQ8oWkMU

Let me clarify, I mean an anti-FiM that's actually good.

I'll be honest, I wasn't entertained.

 

Understandable, I see why people wouldn't want this style as a TV show, even Mighty Magiswords has better production values. Still, as a web series, I find it alright.

Cartoon Network recently has stealth premired a new mini-series on it's digital platforms called Get Em Tommy. The show is created by Victor Courtright and can be found on Cartoon Network's App and YouTube channel. The premise, stick with me here, is about a naivé pink-haired boy named Tommy, who uses different fighting moves by jamming VHS tapes into his head. If this sounds completely stupid, well... it is, but it's actually a charming kind of stupid. No, the show isn't "funny" per-se, rather it's got a distinctive charm that makes it quite amusing. As a web-series, I think it's okay. However, if this does get the Mighty Magiswords/O.K. K.O. Treatment, I feel it would need some heavy retooling. It just doesn't feel like anything that belongs on mainsteam Television, and it's even more apparent here than in Mighty Magiswords. Magiswords can work as a TV series, it just needs more even pacing, whereas this would need a near complete overhaul to make it more presentable. Still, it's worth a look if you're tired of Cartoon Network's recent barrage of lame reboots. It's still better than Teen Titans Go! But at this point... What isn't?

 

https://youtu.be/d4Gtwye1bs4

I thought this thread would be about watching episodes of MLP:FiM backwards.

Nope. It's about a show that's a good "anti-FiM". Something that has the same basic concept of a small enable of characters playing off eachother. But with the show being executed in reverse. So instead of an innocent, upbeat, educational kids show about cute ponies teaching friendship, It'd be a cynical, demented show about jerkass characters firing satire and social commentary at the viewer.

 

Actually, I think South Park could qualify as a Reverse FiM.

Think about all the things you like or liked about Friendship is Magic. The warm, inviting art style, the upbeat, optimistic tone, the idealistic nature, and the likeable characters who can serve as strong role models as they learn positive lessons about Friendship.

 

Now imagine the complete opposite of that. A rough, nihilistic world filled with sharp outlines, bleak undertones, protagonists who are narsasistic assholes to eachother, as they engage in social commentary and depressing, philosophical messages.

 

What show do you think, does a great job taking the same basic concept (group of 6 or so characters who hang around), but executing it in reverse.

Recently, Microsoft has been trying to make the Xbox brand more agnostic and floating. First, it started with the Xbox app of Windows 8/10, then it continued with them releasing their games on PC, specifically, their own Windows Store. Now, they've basically merged the Windows 10 and XB1 Xbox ecosystem's together, making it so that all games can be played on both PC and console, with the Xbox One even getting UWP apps.

 

Is Microsoft trying to turn the Xbox brand into more of a gaming client ala Steam? Granted, Microsoft has said they'd develop Steam versions of some of their games before, and I think I remember them saying something about opening up UWP format software to other distributors. But it feels like Microsoft wants Xbox to be their own "Steam" so to speak.

The seventh generation of gaming was very... Divisive among gamers. There were some amazing games last generation, plenty. But it didn't come without some problems. Game budgets exploded with the rise of HD development, so much so, that many developers went under because what was considered successful in generations past, wasn't enough to make back a budget today. New features like Downloadable Content and Software Updates were abused by publishers, looking to squeeze every cent out of their games as much as possible or cut corners to rush a product to market. But most notably, full retail games became more and more homogenized. There were still amazing experiences, BioShock, Dead Space, Bayonetta, Uncharted, InFamous, Last of Us, etc. But the aforementioned increasingly high game budgets ment that many games you see for the major consoles adopted similar tropes and aesthetics, even franchises we grew up with. This led to at best, limited game variety, and at worst some great franchises completely destroyed by being jammed into a box. Either way, whether you liked 7th gen or not, looking back, several of the foundations it established would eventually become blueprints for the current generation.

 

Personally, I think this generation in terms of games being made, has been the most refined and dynamic one yet. And that all starts with digital distribution. Digital distribution is not a new concept, it got it's start on consoles only last generation. At the time though, the format was seen as more of a novelty than a true revolution. Now, Platforms like Steam just keep growing in popularity, nearly every game on any major platform has a digital download option on their respective storefronts, and the two biggest mobile platforms for games (iOS and Android) don't even have physical Media at all. The rise in mainstream popularity of digital distribution also led to the current indie game boom. Indie games got their start last generation, but the none of the big 3 really knew how to create an environment that would reward them sufficiently, which led to most of them being PC only. Now? You'd be hard-pressed to find a major indie game on Steam that doesn't have a PS4, Xbox One, or even a Wii U release.

 

The rise of indie games, and mobile games gave developers more ways to get games out there, and the increasingly open nature of these platforms also allows game development to be more accessible. The popularity of indie games also seems to have an effect on playing habits of gamers. Minecraft, Rocket League, Shovel Knight, and Undertale have all become some of the biggest games this generation, possibly more than many of the homogenized AAA games of the past. Speaking of AAA games, the indie popularity has also seemed to affected them too. We're seeing a slow increase in AAA games that are more colorful and less trope ridden than the 7th generation, examples include Horizon: Zero Dawn, and The Witcher III. The 2 biggest console shooters right now, have nothing to do with Space Marines or generic military stories. Instead, one is a kid-friendly game about humanoid squids shooting ink, and the other is a Pixar-esque super-hero game with not only an eccentric cast, but also managed to win Game of the Year this year.

 

So while there are still quite a few problems with gaming, I think this is the most mature and refined the medium has been in years.

If Nick could catch the magic that they had with live television in the 90s, then that would be fantastic. Unfortunately, it seems like all live action TV has followed the Hannah Montana feeling that Disney started. I can't describe it, but there's a similar feeling that I can't quite put my hands on it.

It's called homogenization. Disney's success with wish-fufillment style kid shows in the mid-2000s changed executives perception of live-action kids shows. Shows like Hannah Montana came on to the scene and took the world by storm. In executives eyes, down to earth single camera shows like Lizzie McGuire, Surrealist live action cartoons like Pete and Pete, or Adventure shows like Alex Mack were no longer profitable. To get kids attention, you needed to flashy, grandiose gimmick with a laugh track and teenie boppers. Nickelodeon was hit by this, and their Live-action became less and less memorable as the years went on. Fans will debate over where this decline started, but I personally feel, it started with Zoey 101 (I was never a fan of this show, not even as a kid), and only grew with shows like iCarly. By 2010, Nick became almost completely indistinguishable from Disney Channel, and has tossed out much of it's surreal, rebellious attitude, and instead tried to mimick a brand that it once mocked for being what they themselves had become, a sterile, manufactured "dreams come true" twinkle factory for girls.

I am not confident in Nick's ability to produce quality programs even with a few exceptions like TMNT and Harvey Beaks.

The Loud House? That's pretty much the best thing on Nick right now.

Honestly, Nick struck gold with shows like Drake and Josh and Ned's Declassified. It helps shows like All That! and The Amanda Show built up to them. But Nick doesn't seem to even give one second of effort when it comes to their new live-action shows. Drake and Josh and Ned's were all clever, funny, well-acted, and all around terrific. I don't even need to watch the stuff now to know it's all straight up garbage.

 

Personally, they should drop them all together and focus strictly on animation at this point. Cartoon Network as been kicking their asses ever since Adventure Time, Chowder, and Regular Show burst onto the scene. The Loud House is a terrific step in the right direction. I just saw the Christmas Special for The Loud House and it was terrific. LH is, in my opinion, the best cartoon on TV. Using the leftover money and resources from live-action shows, they could increase the quality of their cartoons. Fairly Oddparents is a disaster and Spongebob is pretty much over.

 

So once Nick can establish quality cartoons again, then perhaps they can try to re-enter the live-action genre.

Like I said, Nick needs a balance of both good Cartoons, and Live action shows. I'm not asking for every show to be great, hell, I'm not even asking them to stop spamming SpongeBob and The Loud House on the Schedule (Times have changed and streaming apps have largely taken over scheduled television for kids). All I'm asking for, is a little more variety and quality control in the programing the network produces.

 

Animation has always been a big part of Nickelodeon, but people seem to forget that Nickelodeon's success wasn't just built on the Nicktoons, it was also built on shows like Clarissa Explains It All, The Adventures of Pete and Pete, All That, The Secret World of Alex Mack, and the multitude of Game Shows they used to produce. So while it's good to see Nick's animation division improving, it's merely a piece of the much bigger puzzle. I'd like to see ALL of Nick improve, not just one part of it.

Recently, Nickelodeon has been stepping up it's game in regards to the quality of their animated output. Starting with the cult favorite, Harvey Beaks, and continuing with the recent break out success of The Loud House. And if some of their upcoming Cartoons like Welcome to the Wayne and Pinky Malinky (which believe it or not, looks much better than the original Cartoon Network pilot) are an indication, good things might be ahead for Nick's animated lineup.

 

Such cannot be said about their Live-action shows. Unlike Cartoon Network, Nickelodeon didn't just produce animated series, they also became known for innovative Live-action shows as well. From Clarissa Explains it All, to The Adventures of Pete and Pete, to Ned's Declassified School Survival Guide. But somewhere around the 2000s, Nick just kind of, stopped trying with their shows. Now, their Live-action output is so homogenized and dry, it's almost impossible to tell each show apart. And it doesn't look like things are improving much anytime soon.

 

The only new Live-action series I enjoyed from Nick in recent years, is 100 Things To Do before High School. And in typical Nick fashion, the show was death slotted, bounced around the schedule with little advertising, and eventually axed without telling anyone. With Nickelodeon improving their animated shows, can they do the same with their Live-action? Animation will always be Nick's biggest strength, but having healthy lineup of quality Live-action shows is equally as important. I'd love for Nickelodeon to come out with another show like Pete and Pete or Ned's Declassified and actually be a success. Dan Schneider can't save them forever, and it's time Nick realizes this.

Video streaming apps are slowly overtaking traditional TV networks. They have the benefit of being both on-demand, and multi-platform, allowing viewers to take the content anywhere. However, several of the most popular ones, Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon Prime are all subscription only. While that is an attractive option for those wanting to avoid commercial interruption an get a few other perks, not everyone has the budget to add yet another streaming subscription to their monthly bill.

 

In that context, should more video streamers offer free versions? YouTube, Crunchyroll, and Twitch all come in both free and paid flavors. And some like Crackle, are free only. I believe there's room for both. Free only limits the risks you can take due to advertisers, while subscription only limits your audience, as not everyone wants to fork over $8 bucks a month multiple times across multiple services. But being free WITH a paid option seems like a happy medium. People interested can enjoy it without paying a cent, while hardcore viewers also have the option to fund directly with their subscription. It also extends to programing, as the services can still take risks even with a free ad-supported feature, as advertisements wouldn't be the only way they stay funded.

 

At least, this is the happy-go-lucky idealistic fantasy I would LIKE to believe would happen. Look, there's probably a perfectly valid business reason why Netflix or Hulu don't offer their services for free in addition to their paid models, but it would be nice if more streamers can offer both free and paid models.

I do hope Twelve Forever gets greenlit (haven't seen OK KO, so I can't comment on it, been meaning to though), but what makes you say they're guaranteed?

Remember that image that leaked on Toonzone with what looks like, a finalized version of the Twelve Forever cast? That tells me they're doing something with it. As for OK K.O., well it's been semi-leaked to have a show in development from the voice of KO. Ian-Jones Querty also isn't working on Steven Universe anymore.

 

Cartoon Network has also talked about introducing new properties through means other than a straight to TV series before, that's how Mighty Magiswords got greenlit. So the mobile game and the shorts are likely part of that initiative.

It's too early to say that now. It feels that way because a lot of pioneers of this decade are ending or have ended (Adventure Time, Regular Show, Gumball, Gravity Falls). There will always be good and bad cartoons in every decade. Hell, even the fairly lackluster 2000s had some diamonds like Avatar and Phineas and Ferb.

 

As for Cartoon Network? Well, I won't call it doomed, rather, it's future is in limbo. Most of their shows are entering their final seasons, and very little has been said about future shows. There's still time for them to pull surprises, but it does paint a questionable future for them. Well see what they bring next year when OK KO, Twelve Forever, and Infinity Train get greenlit (the former two of which are basically garuenteed, while the latter is still up in the air). So no, I don't think we're entering another Dark Age, especially since Mighty Magiswords and Milo Murphy's Law just premired.

I think I came up with a good Toronto cast now. Here it is

 

Twilight - Taja Isen (Atomic Betty)

Rainbow - Jodie Resther (Francine from Arthur)

Pinkie - Melissa Alto

Fluttershy - Holly-Gauthier Frankel

Rarity - The one who played Luna in the of Sailor Moon DiC dub

Applejack - Stephanie Morgantown

Spike - Tracy Moore

Not to mention, a lot of their edits reeked of Xenophobia, at least Saban kept the Digimon kids in Japan

That's another problem. Saban, unlike 4kids is pretty inconsistent with their practices. One minnute, you get Digimon, which keeps the Japanese setting and culture, as well as the Japanese names, anyone with a hard to pronounce name is simply given a nickname. I commend them for this... But then you get Glitter Force (AKA Smile PrettyCure) which gives all the characters English first names, but for some reason, they don't bother to localize their last names. Never mind the fact that they're doing this in 2016, the fact that they lack consistent practices for adapting anime is a big reason why their dubs lack memorability. With 4kids, you can at least know what you're getting into, as they are usually consistent with their changes, but with Saban, not only were their dubs mediocre, but they also don't have consistent enough localization practices to keep you interested.

Saban, but not by much, they neutered a lot of good anime. As for stuff I liked, 4kids had Pokemon, and to an extent I liked the Yu Gi Oh Dub, with Saban I liked Power Rangers and Digimon so they're two for two

 

4kids butchered the Pokemon the 1st Movie, but Saban butchered 3 Digimon movies AND had that awful "Hey Digimon" song. Hell to give an edge to 4kids, they had the decency to attempt to release an uncut version of Yu Gi Oh with Funimation(complete with the original names, original dialogue, original music, same VA cast), even though it only lasted for about 4-5 episodes unfortunately

 

Saban did have the early script for DBZ(which I did like) but I'm in the boat that the dub didn't get good until Funimation fully took over

My problem with Saban was that most of their dubs were just... Meh. Most of their licenses came and went, and left almost no impression on the anime community. And the corny jokes that added to Digimon came off as more cringey than funny more often than not. They were a company that did their job and were serviceable in their trade. But none of their dubs were particularly good or great, or even noteworthy. Even today, recently resurfacing as Saban Brands, the anime they currently dubbed aren't particularly infamous or attention grabbing.

 

4kids on the other hand is a company I can't help but just love to hate. For all the flak they get, they were at least so incompetent that they were just so good at making you laugh at the sheer what-the-fuckery of their bizarre practices. Edits, dialogue, changes, memorability were all mind blowingly amazing, and IMO, are a lot more entertaining than anything Saban can dish out (except for Samurai Pizza Cats). 4kids, for better or worse, took more risks, Saban mostly plays it safe.

The now defunct 4kids Entertainment was one of the most infamous and despised companies amongst the anime community. Known for importing Anime, and needlessly and mercilessly hacking them with a Cuisinart, the firm became known for outlandish censorship, bad voice acting, and shameless pandering to young children. But a very similar company existed years before 4kids' infamy came up, another company known for importing and/or adapting foreign material for an American audience, and ironically, also ran Fox's children's programing a long time ago.

 

Saban Entertainment, formally a subsidiary/co-owner of Fox's "Fox Family Worldwide" division was founded in 1983 by Hiam Saban and Shuki Levy, and became famous for it's adaptations of Japanese tokasatsu shows, most notably, the Mighty Morphing Power Rangers. They partnered with Fox in 1996 to create Fox Kids Worldwide (later Fox Family Worldwide), with it's subsidiaries initially consisting of Saban Entertainment, and the Fox Kids Network. Saban also licensed and dubbed anime series such as Samurai Pizza Cats, and distributed an early dub of Funimation's "Dragon Ball Z" to syndication. Their most famous anime property however, was Pokemon's biggest rival, Digimon.

 

That being said, comparing the 4kids dub of Pokemon, to the Saban dub of Digimon. Which company was worse with anime dubbing in terms of localization, censorship, and faithfulness to the native version? From what I've personally seen from the dub of Digimon, Saban never really got as bad as 4kids when it came to anime dubbing. Sure, there was cheesy (Read: bad) dialogue, and a few of your usual SatAM edits, but nothing particularly infamous or noteworthy. In fact, Saban's version of Digimon Adventure 01 was actually pretty unique at the time. In the 90s when distributors of anime for kids tried to erase any and all trace of Japanese culture, Saban instead embraced it. Instead of complete name changes, most of the characters were simply given nick-names, and all Japanese locations and culture in the series remained untouched.

 

I'd still would recommend you watch the Japanese version since the dub hasn't particularly aged very well, but for a SaAM dub. Meh, I've seen worse. But one thing that 4kids always did better than Saban was memorability. Like I said, Saban's dub of Digimon isn't great, but it is watchable, but that also means it's kind of dull. The 4kids dub of Pokemon alone though, is way more notable. Becoming infamous for localizing food (Jelly-filled Donuts? WTF!?) As well as being more nostalgic for most people since Pokemon was more popular with kids than Digimon. Even outside Pokemon, 4kids' dubs are stuff of legends. Aside from the excellent Samurai Pizza Cats, most of Saban's anime licenses and dubs were... Lukewarm. 4kids however at the very least, knew how to make you laugh with their pathetic attempts at censorship, blizzare changes, as well as their almost, parody style of production. Even removing basic, often all-ready-in-english text because of the corporate belief that kids are stupid, illiterate monkeys. But that's my opinion, what's yours?

You seem to forget the good shows like the original Powerpuff Girls, original Teen Titans, DC Nation (which resulted in a massive backlash when CN removed it), Codename KND, Courage the Cowardly Dog, Johnny Bravo, Dexter's Laboratory, Baby Looney Tunes, Ben 10, Foster's Home for Imaginary Friends, Ed Edd N Eddy, ReBoot, Johnny Quest, and even Cow and Chicken. Oh, and maybe Camp Lazlo to put it simply.

 

Object however you wish, but I should know; the shows CN provided before they ultimately shot themselves in the foot were the best, compared to the modern ones nowadays (aside from Regular Show, Steven Universe and Adventure Time). Sorry to say, but it seems CN has become completely devoid of their past gems, so it pretty much went down the gutter. Yes, I can still watch any of them on Boomerang, but they're randomly selected by their choices.

Well, you can still watch them online through outlets like iTunes and Hulu. Besides, I don't mean to force you to like something, but I think you're letting Nostalgia blind you a bit too much. While many of the shows you listed are indeed quite good, I don't think you've given some of Cartoon Network's other newer shows a fair chance. Aside from Adventure Time, Regular Show, and Seven Universe, there's We Bare Bears, Uncle Grandpa is basically the modern day Cow and Chicken, Gumball is still going, and even Clarence isn't too bad either.

While the show is okay, I'm still not returning to watching Cartoon Network until they escape from the dark ages and go back to restoring the majority of good shows from the early/mid 2000's and the 90's. If the parents get too overprotective over a bit of action, then they have no real understanding of true, quality cartoons.

Uh... What dark age? This is the same network that houses Adventure Time, Regular Show, Steven Universe, We Bare Bears, Gumball, and it's somehow in a dark age? Even Uncle Grandpa and Clarence aren't even that bad. Aside from Teen Titans Go to hell and Diet Powerpuff, there's nothing on CN currently that's objectively bad.