The original animated series is just kinda awful.
Iconic, yes. Influential, certainly. Responsible for making a new generation of X-men fans, beyond question.
But the art, animation, writing, acting... all of it a step down from your average cartoon from the 80s. And the 90s was the era of Batman: The Animated Series. The bar had been set and X-men had been found lacking.
No denying that intro is fucking incredible though.
I have read how others shows are better written, have more developed characters and so on. But TAS was pretty damn comic accurate, covering a lot of the Clermont run with a set group of X-men and simpler version but I thought it did a great job. Can anyone who thinks TAS doesn't hold up explain why it wasn't that good?
I don't think being comic accurate is a virtue in and of itself for an adaptation. What works in one medium doesn't necessarily work in another.
But I'm not even sure you
could call TAS comic accurate to Claremont's run, because while it carries over plot points more or less intact, the characters are not the characters that Claremont wrote. And Claremont was always a character-first writer. He was writing a daytime soap opera that happened to have a fight every few beats. And the fight was always just another way to advance the soap plot.
X-men TAS doesn't do this; it's much more focussed on plot and action for their own sake. And it had to be - TV law at the time was you can't have new viewers (or those who happen to miss a couple of episodes) feeling like they don't know what's going on. If the characters truly evolved in that soapy way then kids might feel lost.