Why is this considered THAT good?

The show is ok, good main characters- HORRIBLE and laughable villains. The show has high points, but many low points and because it was cancelled; it sort of developed a cult following due to the utter void of good Sci-Fi shows on at the time. IMO, Farscape was far superior to Firefly in almost every way.

I suspect your problem with it is the same as mine's always been: you expected science fiction but you didn't get it because it's not science fiction.

It's a character drama that just happens to be set on a spaceship in the future. If you like the characters (and that's what seems to attract most fans) then the flattering-to-deceive nature of its science fiction credentials won't matter. You could put the characters on a sailing ship in the 19th century and you'd have about the same kind of show.

I'd give it a solid 6 but I suspect it's one of those shows where you either rate it really high or take exception to the hype and score it low.

the show was great from the first one i ever watched, the crew are dynamic, they have personalities, they are a space family, it like space piracy, it deserves evry score it gets considering how old it is its better than a lot of shows today that imo arent as good, i wish there were more episodes, i think this is the biggest waste of a franchise ever, not saying its a star wars/trek beater just that it holds its own very well, to the cast and crew i for one think you made a damn near perfect show, its a shame others didnt agree.

[deleted]

I think the main reason is that fans fell in love with the setting and the characters.

I personally don't really get it either. The main problem with Firefly for me was the writing. I think Joss Whedon tends to get a little self-indulgent with some of his writing, with lame attempts at "clever" -- aiming at Aaron Sorkin's style but without the wit. And Firefly seems to be his most self-indulgent. I found the dialogue throughout the show ranged from mediocre to groan-worthy.

And surely even die-hard fans of the show can agree that it has one of the worst intro credit sequences in (semi-) recent history?

While I enjoy the show and consider it very good, I don't get it, either. It's rated (right now) as the #16 best TV show of all-time, which is just bafling to me. I like it, but not enough to put it in a Top 20.

I don't even think it's best show by Joss Whedon, but it is subjective, after all. I do think sci-fi gets more of the cult following vote than anything. Battlestar Galactica is another one I don't understand the high rating for, as that's a show I don't even like.

But to each their own...I'm glad there's a fanbase for shows like this because it is outside of the norm.

Because it IS THAT GOOD...I'd say , EVEN BETTER...

9.2 happens to be the #1 & 2 highest rated films of all time... Seriously: shows are severely overrated. It's understandable given how modern shows often feature half a dozen seasons. Those actually going through with it obviously tend to love it and all others may feel obliged to abstain, given how they haven't seen half of it. Also being around for so long surely creates fandom. Strangely Firefly did not really go that way.

I'd say it's a very good show. It's close to deserving it's rating in relation to all the other shows, which are usually overrated. Personally I gave it a 7 and considered an 8. Now I am tempted to revise it for an 8 somewhere down the road. I think I should do that if I am just as fond of it in a year. Yet I won't now, after a very, very good first impression. Mind Star Trek made an impression for decades and that's a quality that set standards. I'd prefer another episode of Firefly yet to take that as the only criteria would be very short sighted. Twin Peaks may have shaped all TV shows we currently enjoy, changing TV forever in it's wake. It achieved that even after just the 1st season I'd claim. Both are rated lower.
I really liked it and saw quite some rare qualities, innovation and a generally high quality in it. An 8 is like "among the best shows ever" in my book, going with the top 250 movies starting at 8.0. Even a 7 is a very good rating for a series as far as I am concerned. That's because I'm the guy that goes through all five seasons of a show, enjoying it and still rating it 5/10 at times (that's guilty pleasure then). Obviously the actual rating for shows is more like 8+ for each and every moderately popular show, which is absurd.
I'd say we'd do well working a little on the show ratings, making them anywhere near compatible with film ratings. It's fine if the best show ever gets about the same rating as the best film ever even if the film was more on point, used better FX and generally sports a budget per minute that's visibly like a hundred times higher. As is the show ratings are just ludicrous generally.