@
kuma
I wonder what's wrong with that?
About which magazines are the best, it is clear that such statements are subjective. You can’t trust because everything will have an outside effect: each one's taste. Or if looking from the objective side, should I put WSJ to be the number one because, the model is transparent? Or because they are the best-selling magazines and have lots of fans?
I don’t agree if their model is transparent. It's easy to know their characteristics. For a small example they have a tradition with "shounen classics", this is what you say if they have a shape. They can sometimes bring up new ideas, good in the beginning but unfortunately, the development is bad at the end. Inconsistent. The rest, some even don’t know where to go, there is also a miracle for
Kimetsu no Yaiba (which I thought it would be axed because always in the lowest rank) until now can
survive. The process is slow, like World Trigger, but it is slowly climbing (which I conclude that only half of the series has made it through the crisis phase). And make me sure if the age factor is not too affected as long as interesting.
If I reconsider, your statement makes sense. I don’t know very well about the management of WSJ, which surely is the ranking system and reader survey decides everything. This system can be good and bad results, both help and dependence. Let's just say that the new series lasted a maximum of 10 weeks in the lowest rank, but afterwards no effort changes in the development of the story. That would be a waste. Its effectiveness doesn’t apply to new series. This will not be a problem with
Gintama who is currently always at the lowest, as they have secured positions with a large number of fans.
I agree with what you said that WSS do careless things, and I will not try to bias on any magazine. I really like WSJ in the past, with
City Hunter or
Hokuto no Ken caliber that got famous even in various parts of the world became a phenomenal that isn’t easily found now. Or at least, an entertaining series like
Kochikame. And what I said before is that the glory has passed, that's true. I know this is wrong, there is even an influence of the genius of each author, but, the editor is also very fatal in giving direction to the author whether they are new or inexperienced.
In conclusion, well, in the end each magazine has its own management and isn’t very fair compared to it. Although sometimes there are many complaints coming in and out, but I admit if WSJ have a management that is certain and quite handled. That's what I like, about the digital version, they can at least cover up the flaws. And this also applies to WSS, although not too much different, but they are smart enough to follow the trend now.
I like WSS because they are solid, I emphasized, not containing full of great series (like the big 3) but I still enjoy it.