Just because something is formulaic doesn't make it inherently bad - Double and OOO also both go hard on the 2-parter formula, but they're still a lot of people's favourites even a decade on. Honestly, for all the praise Gaim gets for not relying on the formula, it probably does help that it came after Wizard, which was both formulaic and not well-received, with some of the criticism coming down to it looping the 2-episode MOTW plots when it should've been devoting time to the overarching story. For Gaim to then come along and do exactly that...

There's probably also an element of Gaim attracting Urobutchi fans over from Madoka, cause I remember feeling like Gaim was suddenly so much bigger than Fourze or Wizard, but maybe that was just me getting deeper into the fandom.

Edit: Wrong thread

To clarify, I wasn't asking if Gaim was still considered good. I was just wondering if it was still seen as being unique and a change of pace, or if a lot of more recent shows have started to take on a more Gaim-like structure.

Also, on that note...what's the general consensus on everything that has come out since Ex-Aid? And how do they compare to what came before? That's around when I stopped following the series, but I'm picking back up again now with Geats.

I don't think anyone ever stated in this conversation that a show was bad because it was formulaic - just that certain ones followed a formula and certain ones didn't. But if that's just context you're providing for the rest of your comment to make sense, then carry on.

For post Ex-Aid seasons:
Build is considered good. It has a strong story that paces itself well. Great characters and doesn't meander too much.
Zi-O his hot garbage. Having the same basic premise of Decade (Protagonist that's destined to be evil going around through various points in Heisei Rider history obtaining powers and learning lessons), and making the same mistakes of thinking a confusing plot means it's good. It disregards it's own rules it sets up and just has no idea what it's trying to do.
Zero-One is average. Despite the hype of being "THE FIRST REIWA SERIES!" it doesn't do anything special concerning the franchise. COVID also fucked things up a bit for it, but ultimately, it's a decent enough season.
Saber was Saber.
Revice was also trash, but with potential that they opted not to follow, making it a disappointment as well.

The shows between Ex-Aid and Geats, excluding Build, were honestly all let downs. Saber is the most mixed bag, as while I didn't find it enjoyable, others felt it picked up in the latter half.
Compared to what came before, well, it's hard to say. I feel Zero-One is on par with Wizard and Drive in terms of "Adequate", while Zi-O and Revice dance around Ghost's quality. I consider Build to be on par with Ex-Aid as a higher quality series.

Like I said, Saber is a mixed bag, and answers vary depending on who you ask, while the other 4's general consensus are what I listed.

Here's what I've gathered based on the circles of the internet I'm in.

Build - Seen as one of the best seasons, often complimented for its serialized plot. The final stretch of the show is very contentious among fans, though.

Zi-O - You either love it or you hate it with very little inbetween.

Zero-One - Same as Zi-O. Most people cite its second act as its weakest. COVID hitting at the time makes certain aspects understandable though.

Saber - Starts off weak but gets better as it goes.

Revice - The newest punching bag for the fandom since Ghost.

Geats - Everyone seems in love with it so far.

None of these are my personal thoughts, just the ones that I read most often.

Zi-O is a season that I think the less seriously you take it, the more fun you have. That sounds like a very backhanded compliment but it is ultimately a lot of nonsense and you do just have to accept that that's what it is and submerge yourself in it. Some surprisingly good drama hidden in there too, though!

I should've stopped following KR after Build, not after Ex-Aid... back then, before returning in Revice (which I thought was appropriate time to do so as it started strong, but alas).

Revice's the opposite of Saber where it started off strong but gets worse as it goes.

And later on... only the side contents are still as good as its early part.

On the subject of Gaim, I think it has a similar issue to Ryuki where its novelty has worn off over time as other shows did similar things to it. That being said it certainly still has some very unique aspects imo. The best part of Gaim for me has to be Micchi's slow burn downfall throughout the show. Absolutely brilliant and not something I think any other Rider show has done nearly as well.

I know we haven't really established what the "formula" is in the context of this discussion, but the main parts that made Fourze a standout unique series that holds up well is the heavy elements surrounding the High School environment (as opposed to more adult characters), the reliance on friendship and teamwork (as opposed to the lone hero), and a general positive tone (as opposed to remorseful or hopeful).


I still find Ryuki to be a novel series that holds up well. Yes, I agree a show can lose its novelty over time. Gaim to me still feels like one of the least Kamen Rider-y Kamen Rider shows, and that's not a knock against it, but an aspect that preserves its spot as a unique and worthwhile show even to this day.

The problem with Zi-O is that this show loves its predecessors more than its own story. If he has the choice to play with the guests or develop his story, Zi-O will always choose the former. And that's why I can't be mad at him and will always prefer Decade. This show is literally a fan of other rider shows.