Incursor
[@Starless](/images/3146546#comment_10577741)
Or rather, what made it profitable to care about us during G4 no longer applies.
[@Waldo.](/images/3146546#comment_10577727)
MYM was supposed to be the adult audience appeal with stronger writing and connection with G4. It failed to satisfy in that department and the younger audiences who wouldn't mind are gravitating to TYT which has more focused appeal. This is what caused the decline of G4; its need to balance kid/adult appeal meant it reached its limit of the latter in S5, when cartoons with better widespread/adult appeal became the norm and caused them to gravitate away from G4.
TLDR; they're trying to appeal to adults (like being a G4 sequel) was beyond what they could do successfully (given that bar has been raised) and thus a critical/financial failure they're moving away from.
Question is if G5 wasn't billed as a sequel to G4 but was otherwise the same, would we have cared enough about it that it would have had what success/popularity it did?
Or rather, what made it profitable to care about us during G4 no longer applies.
[@Waldo.](/images/3146546#comment_10577727)
MYM was supposed to be the adult audience appeal with stronger writing and connection with G4. It failed to satisfy in that department and the younger audiences who wouldn't mind are gravitating to TYT which has more focused appeal. This is what caused the decline of G4; its need to balance kid/adult appeal meant it reached its limit of the latter in S5, when cartoons with better widespread/adult appeal became the norm and caused them to gravitate away from G4.
TLDR; they're trying to appeal to adults (like being a G4 sequel) was beyond what they could do successfully (given that bar has been raised) and thus a critical/financial failure they're moving away from.
Question is if G5 wasn't billed as a sequel to G4 but was otherwise the same, would we have cared enough about it that it would have had what success/popularity it did?