One would think, if anyone is consistent, that if Another was highly received, with all its gore, that this would also be popular... but no, somehow.
Both have gore, that is undeniable, and that by itself doesn't make anime better or necessarily worse (although if it's there for no reason then it's worse rather than better, and this is what I thought happened with Another). Both really tried to up themselves several times throughout the series.... maybe Ou did more, considering the nature of the game, but... that is the point, at least the gore here made sense... happened due to a conscious decision, whether insane or not, whereas with Another it just happened due to some unspecified supernatural force. Not that the 'king' here totally isn't 'supernatural', but there is an attempt at an explanation, whereas in Another there is only history (both do have attempts at understanding these background forces, but only one is 'conscious' per se, and so feels like Ou makes more sense due to this).
So, do people prefer random accidents over deliberate games? I've no idea. But, I certainly prefer Ou, even if it could be slightly more gory in comparison to Another, because it makes sociological sense, and also... there were these sort of cathartic moments in some of the characters' lives... not all, but then Another practically had none of that from what I can remember...
While both can be observed from a sociological 'what if' perspective, conscious games make more frightening sense because this is more likely to happen in real life too. Absolute monarchies still exist, and while they don't normally send messages to people's phones the concept remains the same; people can turn on each other (as in Lord of the Flies too), even if survival depends on cooperation... and would even more likely to not help anyone if survival actually depended on hurting others, even if there might be a chance of collective survival if, in many cases, understanding the cause would resolve it.
Both have gore, that is undeniable, and that by itself doesn't make anime better or necessarily worse (although if it's there for no reason then it's worse rather than better, and this is what I thought happened with Another). Both really tried to up themselves several times throughout the series.... maybe Ou did more, considering the nature of the game, but... that is the point, at least the gore here made sense... happened due to a conscious decision, whether insane or not, whereas with Another it just happened due to some unspecified supernatural force. Not that the 'king' here totally isn't 'supernatural', but there is an attempt at an explanation, whereas in Another there is only history (both do have attempts at understanding these background forces, but only one is 'conscious' per se, and so feels like Ou makes more sense due to this).
So, do people prefer random accidents over deliberate games? I've no idea. But, I certainly prefer Ou, even if it could be slightly more gory in comparison to Another, because it makes sociological sense, and also... there were these sort of cathartic moments in some of the characters' lives... not all, but then Another practically had none of that from what I can remember...
While both can be observed from a sociological 'what if' perspective, conscious games make more frightening sense because this is more likely to happen in real life too. Absolute monarchies still exist, and while they don't normally send messages to people's phones the concept remains the same; people can turn on each other (as in Lord of the Flies too), even if survival depends on cooperation... and would even more likely to not help anyone if survival actually depended on hurting others, even if there might be a chance of collective survival if, in many cases, understanding the cause would resolve it.