This so hilariously false by every single standardSingleFringe&Sparks wrote:No it isn't. The whole reaction-vid business wasn't around then, now people know its easy to BS hype onto Super to keep an audience because thats what nostalgia + fanfic equals. Super doesn't have superior anything to GT. Its first episode started on a plot-hole it created for its own setting after the Buu arc. GT didn't.
viewtopic.php?f=25&t=41731
Super features more and better character development, better animation (on average), superior fights, better antagonists, 3 arcs that surpass all of GT's, more and better contributions to the lore, more substance, better directing, etc. Its no contest.
How is the first episode/chapter of Super a plothole? You gave no example. However, the basic premise of GT itself is a plothole. How can the Black Star DBs even exist when the Nameless Namek never became a guardian? How could Baby have created Dr. Myuu with a Black Star ball "50 years ago" when the Black Star Balls only spread across the galaxy in the first episode? GT is so filled with plotholes that you can write a whole book to list them all:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/H ... agonBallGT
And enough with the tired nostalgia argument. In reality, DB nostalgia-tards are actually the biggest haters of Super. People that don't have much of a sentimental attachment to the franchise are usually more positive
Modern Fan magazines, fan communities and fanfiction still existed back then since the 60's. It is foolish to deny that. We know through sources how the DB community saw GT back then they were mostly unenthusiastic because GT sucked that much to them. Claiming Super has no story is so hilariously false that it discredits everything you have to say. You are making a strawman of DBS fans. The DBS fandom is actually the most objectively critical of the DB fandom. We don't see them eat up everything the show does.SingleFringe&Sparks wrote: GT didn't have the internet at the time so there wasn't anywhere for people to do this, but with Super most of this speculation isn't story related half the time. Most of it is just recaps and reactions to scenes or previews, because Super has no story. Its really not hard at all to impress the Super fandom. If its not Animation, it's trivial flashy character moments. It's nothing but momentary hype and reaction off hype. Entirely. DB's brand just gives Super enough familiarity to hype people up without the need for substance to hold interest in an unfamiliar series. A newer series would have to build itself up or risk being dropped. DB does not. It still rides off of the positive reception people have for Z, thus it takes place there.
And there is nothing "trivial" about most of the character moments in Super. It actually gave more development to most of the side cast than most of Z did and especially all of GT. And it actually had more substance to it in some parts than half of Z and all of GT. You are just in denial.
BS. Reception is a major part of why GT ended when it did. Even now, GT continues to have the lowest average review score on anime and TV review sites like MyAnimeList and IMDB. And your nostalgia argument is hypocritical. GT itself was filled with fanservice attempts and the choice to make Goku a kid again itself was blatant fanservice to early DB fans according to the writers. The bad quality of GT itself was part of why the franchise fatigue continued because GT failed to get people interested in DB again.SingleFringe&Sparks wrote: Nope. Everything in GT was about lore, even with its minor mistakes, it solely focused on continuing off Z. Super does not. GT didn't end because of reception either which is a myth given by the people who hate GT claiming justification. It ended because it wasn't selling enough merchandise during franchise fatique and GT focusing more on story over stacking transformations was what didn't produce the merchandise. Super took the opposite route by only focusing on marketing, because the nostalgia of people wanting DB back also increased the demand after BOG, just hearing Toriyama was coming out of retirement for the movie hyped people up. Super was the cash-grab off of Toei realizing DB can still sell, hence the anime adaptions of the first two movies. The only lore Super has are the things Toriyama gave for plot ideas but everything in Super is written very stand-alone from the series, like SS4.
And there is nothing standalone about Super. RoF arc happens because of the Namek arc. The U6 arc happens because the RoF arc. The Black happens because of both that and the Android arc. And finally the ToP arc was indirectly cause by the events of the Black arc as revealed in Super's last episode. So everything in Super connects to itself and the story of Z.
People compare every shonen they don't like to Fairy Tail, so that doesn't mean much. And Fairy Tail's writing is objectively way worse than any DB series.SingleFringe&Sparks wrote:I doubt that because would people still praise it if it wasn't DB? Would people only care about seeing certain characters 'shine' if not for nostalgia? People compare the writing in Super to Fairytail all the time and because Fairytail is its own brand, people judge it without preconsived hype and say its terrible. So if Fairytail's genre tropes ruin its presentation to people, then Super having the same issues should as well, but it doesn't. Those who defend it often always say "Well Z was flawed too" to justify it, and if they didn't have a nostalgia bias, they wouldn't be using Z to defend Super. Nostalgia is why people watch it regardless of quality, the people that say "shut up and watch some dragonball; you take it too seriously; I remember at 5.pm on Toonami" ec. Thats nostalgia. Unless its the casual casual dragonball fans who know of the series vaguely who defend Super, most people that dislike Super generally go through their reasons why, and their reference of Z portraying something better to them is not nostalgia. Its a comparison of expectations based on superior aspects of the past.
Your argument is self-refuting because if Super fans threw Z under the bus to defend Super, then they obviously don't have any nostalgia bias for DB(Z) because if they did they would treat Z as a sacred cow that had no flaws. Its actually the people who use Z to bash Super are the ones with the nostalgia biases, because they delude themselves into thinking the falsehood that DB(Z) didn't have the same tropes and wasn't written the same way as Super, when any unbiased viewer can see that they (and almost the entire shonen genre since Fist of The North Star) are written the same way. PlaugeOfGripes has spoken on this multiple times.
Most Super haters are typically folks that delude themselves in to thinking Z was completely different from Super (despite using all of the same tropes), people who constantly whine about powerscaling (despite most of them not even understanding what powerscaling is) and butthurt GT fanboys.
Wrong again. The complaints from dumb people about ki control and suppression have been there for all DB series. This in nothing new to Super.SingleFringe&Sparks wrote:Yes they were more objective (or at worst had negative bias nitpicking the SS4 fur color and BS). How is it that people can just flat out say they hated GT, but with Super people can reach for the flimsiest of claims to justify things Super does that are controversial? Nobody would claim characters in GT are "Heavily suppressed, mastered ki control" blah blah, for the exact same issues people claimed made GT bad. People hated Vegeta's design in GT, but defended Gohan's equally bad ROF design. Both Toriyama... unless people only hated GT because they thought it was okay that they could if it wasn't canon and believed Toriyama said somewhere that it wasn't canon (despite this being untrue), while people thinking Super is Toriyama approved, must mean they can't criticize it as harshly or with the same pious. That is also a factor.
GT did have a bad start up but the franchise fatigue started in the Buu saga, not GT. That is a fact. 20 years later it wore off with younger people who miss DB and now suddenly every installment is the greatest thing they ever watch and the only anime they are willing to watch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3O0gf6nSRvo
I've never heard of anyone claiming to like, let alone defend Gohan's RoF design (which was before Super by the way). You just made another strawman.
GT's reception today isn't any better nor worse than it was in the 90s, so clearly that means people weren't more objective then.