God awful T.V. characters in U.S. T.V.

thank you, con for your arguments From this debate, we are trying to decide the state of current television characters and the quality of the content they are in. you say that for something to be quality it has to be realistic. that all the characters are unchanging and have negative tendencies. just because a scenario is unrealistic to doesnt make it of less artistic quality many great books have been written about the fantastical world and such many fantastical tv shows have been born. just because you don't notice a character change or because the situations are similar doesn't mean that the show is at a loss. some people prefer it like this because then they know the show and can rely upon it for a well executed and consistent form of entertainment to adopt into their watching habits. the negativity and raw characteristics of a character are to show they people are not all white knights and are real with fears and problems saying that is a disadvantage is ludicrous as it is a technique that has developed over the recent years in media and has done very well for all forms of film and television. above was the main gist of what we have both been saying as is evident you have not addressed the problem of people having personal preferences and are cherry picking points in order to misrepresent the reality here which is that media is what we want it to be and the way we decide that is what we watch. Vote Pro because I know that is quite a short ill just take you last speech point by point read it if you wish but at this point the winner is clear. lets start where you did with the big bang theory which you have said is good but you have only seen to season 6 so no spoilers but if your main criticism is that characters like Sheldon don't grow and develop as a person in the latest few seasons compared to his first few we see a man who has changed quite substantially you just need to look into the bigger picture. your jest at Game of thrones a TV show that is now surpassed its books in terms of lore and canon evidence you state that after reading six books you were disgusted by the entirety of the series and morally refused to read the last but if you were really that disgusted why didn't you just stop reading after the first one why did it take you six books of sizable length to realise this wasn't for you. on that what you have found profoundly abhorred others have raised as one of the best books they have ever read. your attack on the walking dead franchise seemed to just boil down to the fact they should have had bigger guns which counter to what you claim would have drawn away from the feel of survival its the same reason they don't let some cars race with onboard computers that will calculate the exact distance off the ground every part of the car has to be to maximise aerodynamics people don't want an easy win they want to see that characters struggle and the true core of humanity survive and win out. your main problem seems counter to the rest of your argument where you say that because he starts to focus on something different in the character and him isn't the same Walter as he used to be that is both good and bad as it suits you apparently. Realism is not everything people prefer just to chill out and watch something a little bit more relaxed and fantastical who are you to critisize them for that. i thank you for this debate I enjoyed it.