Which did it better, GT or Super?

[Cetra]

Wikipedia is an entirely reliable source. There's actually everything stopping you from changing those articles. You would have to file a request with evidence and cite your sources like they do. They are not simply giving their opinion they are just recording the results of these critics observing how well received each series is. I don't think it is groundbreaking news when they say that GT wasn't as well received/not as popular as Super. Qaaman had a poll asking people which series they liked better and 90% of the votes went to DBS. Ultimately it is up to your opinion but IMO Super does almost everything better than GT did.

Wikipedia is NOT an entirely reliable source. Try to write a scientific work for university with Wikipedia and you will get in serious trouble. Any scientist that has credibility will not allow such a thing. And I know that. I am a computer scientist.

Wikipedia is a thing for looking up basic things for a start and that's it.

[PFM18]

Wikipedia is an entirely reliable source. There's actually everything stopping you from changing those articles. You would have to file a request with evidence and cite your sources like they do. They are not simply giving their opinion they are just recording the results of these critics observing how well received each series is. I don't think it is groundbreaking news when they say that GT wasn't as well received/not as popular as Super. Qaaman had a poll asking people which series they liked better and 90% of the votes went to DBS. Ultimately it is up to your opinion but IMO Super does almost everything better than GT did.

Wikipedia is NOT an entirely reliable source. Try to write a scientific work for university with Wikipedia and you will get in serious trouble. Any scientist that has credibility will not allow such a thing. And I know that. I am a computer scientist.

Wikipedia is a thing for looking up basic things for a start and that's it.

Yeah....except the topic at hand is not a peer reviewed study or anything close to it. In this context it serves it's purpose very well all things considered. Generally it provides pretty accurate information about most things.

Besides, Wikipedia has it's own sources if you are doing a paper you just look up the source that they used and cite that. Wikipedia brings a bunch of sources together for easy access.

Point is, Wikipedia is right that there is a consensus that exists that Super>GT although of course it is definitely up to each individual's opinion.

[Rakurai]

Wikipedia is an entirely reliable source. There's actually everything stopping you from changing those articles. You would have to file a request with evidence and cite your sources like they do. They are not simply giving their opinion they are just recording the results of these critics observing how well received each series is. I don't think it is groundbreaking news when they say that GT wasn't as well received/not as popular as Super. Qaaman had a poll asking people which series they liked better and 90% of the votes went to DBS. Ultimately it is up to your opinion but IMO Super does almost everything better than GT did.

Wikipedia only cites a small portion of the fanbase, ergo these critics, and the critics that they cite probably only watched the butchered GT Funimation dub instead of the original as it was meant to be.

I'm going to post this again.

Anikore's rating for DBGT: 71 https://www.anikore.jp/anime/234/

Anikore's rating for DBS: 57.4 https://www.anikore.jp/anime/9700/

Anikore rates DBZ at 79.8. Anikore is the equivalent of MAL in Japan. The Japanese fanbase (at the very least, those who rate like to rate their anime) seems to have a different viewpoint of GT relative to Super. And I would rather take evidence in statistical samples over single critics who probably don't care about DB except for making more articles.

So yeah, Wikipedia is about as reliable of a source as my friend who makes clickbait YouTube videos just to garner more views and obtain more subscribers. It should not be taken as evidence of anything.

[PFM18]

Wikipedia is an entirely reliable source. There's actually everything stopping you from changing those articles. You would have to file a request with evidence and cite your sources like they do. They are not simply giving their opinion they are just recording the results of these critics observing how well received each series is. I don't think it is groundbreaking news when they say that GT wasn't as well received/not as popular as Super. Qaaman had a poll asking people which series they liked better and 90% of the votes went to DBS. Ultimately it is up to your opinion but IMO Super does almost everything better than GT did.

Wikipedia only cites a small portion of the fanbase, ergo these critics, and the critics that they cite probably only watched the butchered GT Funimation dub instead of the original as it was meant to be.

I'm going to post this again.

Anikore's rating for DBGT: 71 https://www.anikore.jp/anime/234/

Anikore's rating for DBS: 57.4 https://www.anikore.jp/anime/9700/

Anikore rates DBZ at 79.8. Anikore is the equivalent of MAL in Japan. The Japanese fanbase (at the very least, those who rate like to rate their anime) seems to have a different viewpoint of GT relative to Super. And I would rather take evidence in statistical samples over single critics who probably don't care about DB except for making more articles.

So yeah, Wikipedia is about as reliable of a source as my friend who makes clickbait YouTube videos just to garner more views and obtain more subscribers. It should not be taken as evidence of anything.

Wikipedia is just taking note of what information they have/are using. Obviously it isn't definitive but nothing is this is a subjective conversation.

But if we are going to be discussing anime reviews:

DBGT: 6.67 https://myanimelist.net/anime/225/Drago ... T?q=dragon
DBS: 7.78 https://myanimelist.net/anime/30694/Dra ... r?q=dragon

with the other two series as references:
DB:8.15
DBZ: 8.31

[Rakurai]

Wikipedia is an entirely reliable source. There's actually everything stopping you from changing those articles. You would have to file a request with evidence and cite your sources like they do. They are not simply giving their opinion they are just recording the results of these critics observing how well received each series is. I don't think it is groundbreaking news when they say that GT wasn't as well received/not as popular as Super. Qaaman had a poll asking people which series they liked better and 90% of the votes went to DBS. Ultimately it is up to your opinion but IMO Super does almost everything better than GT did.

Wikipedia only cites a small portion of the fanbase, ergo these critics, and the critics that they cite probably only watched the butchered GT Funimation dub instead of the original as it was meant to be.

I'm going to post this again.

Anikore's rating for DBGT: 71 https://www.anikore.jp/anime/234/

Anikore's rating for DBS: 57.4 https://www.anikore.jp/anime/9700/

Anikore rates DBZ at 79.8. Anikore is the equivalent of MAL in Japan. The Japanese fanbase (at the very least, those who rate like to rate their anime) seems to have a different viewpoint of GT relative to Super. And I would rather take evidence in statistical samples over single critics who probably don't care about DB except for making more articles.

So yeah, Wikipedia is about as reliable of a source as my friend who makes clickbait YouTube videos just to garner more views and obtain more subscribers. It should not be taken as evidence of anything.

Wikipedia is just taking note of what information they have/are using. Obviously it isn't definitive but nothing is this is a subjective conversation.

But if we are going to be discussing anime reviews:

DBGT: 6.67 https://myanimelist.net/anime/225/Drago ... T?q=dragon
DBS: 7.78 https://myanimelist.net/anime/30694/Dra ... r?q=dragon

with the other two series as references:
DB:8.15
DBZ: 8.31

That's exactly my point. The people who write these articles can be selective about their sources and biased in their tone.

Obviously MAL will rate GT lower because most English-speaking people will watch the Funi dub which they somehow made even much worse than the original. The great music, the voice acting, the dialogue, and the emotional impact of scenes are all lost in the Funi dub.

Now ofc this is not the end all be all either, but the Japanese have a far more better sense of comparison between the two series as they were meant to be. People tend to compare English GT to Japanese Super. Hell, more than half of the fanbase in the US probably never watched Japanese Z either.

[PsionicWarrior]

Wikipedia only cites a small portion of the fanbase, ergo these critics, and the critics that they cite probably only watched the butchered GT Funimation dub instead of the original as it was meant to be.

I'm going to post this again.

Anikore's rating for DBGT: 71 https://www.anikore.jp/anime/234/

Anikore's rating for DBS: 57.4 https://www.anikore.jp/anime/9700/

Anikore rates DBZ at 79.8. Anikore is the equivalent of MAL in Japan. The Japanese fanbase (at the very least, those who rate like to rate their anime) seems to have a different viewpoint of GT relative to Super. And I would rather take evidence in statistical samples over single critics who probably don't care about DB except for making more articles.

So yeah, Wikipedia is about as reliable of a source as my friend who makes clickbait YouTube videos just to garner more views and obtain more subscribers. It should not be taken as evidence of anything.

Overall score 71.0 points
456 impressions / evaluations

Overall score 57.4 points
165 impressions / evaluations

lol

[Saturnine]

I know that was a bit earlier in the thread, but personally I never saw similarities between Baby and Zamasu. Like, really.

[Rakurai]

lol

Endless lol at you for thinking we should take Wikipedia seriously when it comes to GT vs Super debates.

[PFM18]

lol

Endless lol at you for thinking we should take Wikipedia seriously when it comes to GT vs Super debates.

lol at thinking GT vs Super is even a debatable topic in the first place.

Super>>>>>>>>GT

[SupremeKai25]

I know that was a bit earlier in the thread, but personally I never saw similarities between Baby and Zamasu. Like, really.

Because there aren't any similarities between them. White hair is not a similarity, because Baby didn't have hair at all, and Zamasu has white hair because he is a Kai. And... that was literally the only similarity between Baby and Zamasu that these people found. They hate Saiyans too, I guess (actually, Zamasu hated Earthlings the most), but so did Frieza, Cell, Buu and pretty much any other major villain.

In fact, Baby is a disgusting weird machine mutant, whereas Zamasu is a splendid, vainglorious and just Kai. There is a vast difference between these two characters. Going all the way back to their goals; Baby wants to restore the planet of his people and eliminate the Saiyans, Zamasu wants to purge the Multiverse of Gods and mortals alike and be the sole deity in it. Entirely different motivations.

Zamasu was a much more memorable, iconic and popular villain than Baby (astonishing too, considering that Zamasu was introduced 20 years after Baby). Therefore, Zamasu was more successful as a villain than Baby.

[Saturnine]

I guess Baby gets wanked out of proportion because he's the only believable, sensible and half-decent villain in GT. Oh well

[Timetraveller]

I know some people prefer or simply like GT but if we want to compare which "did it better" let's see facts lol
Supreme authority of the interwebz wikipedia says:





Cheers lol

No offense, but are we really going to use Wikipedia of all fucking sites for reference? I literally make Wikipedia pages myself, what would stop me from making changes to those articles?

Like who the hell are these people even? What gives them more authority to judge the quality of a series than an entire fanbase alone? The people who wrote these articles obviously had biased agendas.

Richard Eisenbeis of Kotaku praised the series' title sequence and said "My middle-school self is so happy right now, you guys."[60]

Nostalgia much? This is the type of critical review which we're going to compare the quality of GT vs Super then?

Wikipedia is an entirely reliable source. There's actually everything stopping you from changing those articles. You would have to file a request with evidence and cite your sources like they do. They are not simply giving their opinion they are just recording the results of these critics observing how well received each series is. I don't think it is groundbreaking news when they say that GT wasn't as well received/not as popular as Super. Qaaman had a poll asking people which series they liked better and 90% of the votes went to DBS. Ultimately it is up to your opinion but IMO Super does almost everything better than GT did.

No, Wikipedia is not a reliable source and anyone can make changes. Colleges will not accept Wikipedia as a reference for anything. This is common knowledge.

Regarding popularity, I don't know the numbers but GT didn't do poorly when it aired. Besides, popularity does not equal quality. There were a number of things that most likely affected fan perception such as the"not-canon" hate from the DBZ purists who disregard anything not written by Toriyama and Dragonball fatigue. Dragonball Super had a two decade long gap and years of Toei testing the market. Many fans were just happy that it came back.

lol,those polls are skewed because the only people that vote on them are the fans who are still watching the show. Most people who dropped Super early on aren't going to be spend their time watching "Qaaman". Random youtube polls aren't credible sources either

[Timetraveller]

I guess Baby gets wanked out of proportion because he's the only believable, sensible and half-decent villain in GT. Oh well

It's similar to Zamasu as the only half-decent (despite hugely controversial) villain in Super. The only difference is that Super had 131 episodes to GT's 64. The main antagonist of the longest arc of the show was a generic superhero/villain who did nothing for 30 episodes, then got a 20 second flashback and lost to the power of friendship.

I hope the new series gives us more Zamasu-like villains and less of the silent, bland ones (Hit and Jiren) or recolours of old villains

[SupremeKai25]

I guess Baby gets wanked out of proportion because he's the only believable, sensible and half-decent villain in GT. Oh well

I wouldn't say that. Aside from this specific thread, it's not like Baby is praised -- OR BROUGHT UP -- at all on other social medias. I am fond of discussing Dragon Ball on r/dbz (very popular) and people still talk about Zamasu even though it's been more than one year since his defeat. Yet, I have yet to see an actual discussion revolving solely around Baby. The funny thing is, the most upvoted and popular post dedicated to Baby is a fan-art of Vegito Black which is basically Goku Black + Baby Vegeta.

In addition, Zamasu's popularity will increase exponentially now that Fused Zamasu will be added to Fighterz and the Zamasu arc is reaching its climax too (not that it wasn't that high before!).

To be fair though, it's not like Baby had much opposition to begin with. Who were the other major villains of GT? Super Android 17? Moving on...

Omega Shenron? Very, very unique concept, too bad that Omega Shenron had the personality of an evil toaster.

It's similar to Zamasu as the only half-decent (despite hugely controversial) villain in Super

Good villains are meant to be controversial, that is proof of his fantastic writing. If a villain is able to make you rethink about who is the good guy and who is the bad guy, then that villain is a success. And Zamasu did that. I still see people today debating on various social medias whether Zamasu's decision to slaughter that Babarian, or to commit genocide upon all mortals, was justified and reasonable. The situation is not as black and white as it might seem!

I hope the new series gives us more Zamasu-like villains and less of the silent, bland ones (Hit and Jiren) or recolours of old villains

There will never be another insane and arrogant villain like Zamasu. He literally hugged himself and merged with the very fabric of the Universe; truthfully, I fail to see how any future villain could top that.

[PFM18]

No offense, but are we really going to use Wikipedia of all fucking sites for reference? I literally make Wikipedia pages myself, what would stop me from making changes to those articles?

Like who the hell are these people even? What gives them more authority to judge the quality of a series than an entire fanbase alone? The people who wrote these articles obviously had biased agendas.



Nostalgia much? This is the type of critical review which we're going to compare the quality of GT vs Super then?

Wikipedia is an entirely reliable source. There's actually everything stopping you from changing those articles. You would have to file a request with evidence and cite your sources like they do. They are not simply giving their opinion they are just recording the results of these critics observing how well received each series is. I don't think it is groundbreaking news when they say that GT wasn't as well received/not as popular as Super. Qaaman had a poll asking people which series they liked better and 90% of the votes went to DBS. Ultimately it is up to your opinion but IMO Super does almost everything better than GT did.

No, Wikipedia is not a reliable source and anyone can make changes. Colleges will not accept Wikipedia as a reference for anything. This is common knowledge.

Regarding popularity, I don't know the numbers but GT didn't do poorly when it aired. Besides, popularity does not equal quality. There were a number of things that most likely affected fan perception such as the"not-canon" hate from the DBZ purists who disregard anything not written by Toriyama and Dragonball fatigue. Dragonball Super had a two decade long gap and years of Toei testing the market. Many fans were just happy that it came back.

lol,those polls are skewed because the only people that vote on them are the fans who are still watching the show. Most people who dropped Super early on aren't going to be spend their time watching "Qaaman". Random youtube polls aren't credible sources either

No anybody cannot just change Wikipedia the changes have to be approved and reviewed by somebody else and you need to give reasons/sources as to why you are changing it. That is just false.

This logic makes no sense. Wikipedia cannot be used as a scholarly source within the context of an academic research paper. It is not scholarly by nature so obviously it is not used in a college work. But that means absolutely nothing in this context. There's no need to be a scholar to deduce when Wikipedia observes that Super is more popular than GT. Super is more well received than GT, obviously. Wikipedia is just reflecting this obvious notion. in the DB community I'm sure there's plenty of evidence that Super is more popular and we don't need a scholarly journal to verify that. You just conveniently dismiss the credibility of anything that doesn't support your opinion.

You say "Qaaman" as though he isn't immensely popular in the DB community and his fanbase is all DB fans regardless of whether they liked Super. He has plenty of content discussing things other than DBS so I don't see why his subscribers would be a biased sample.

[PsionicWarrior]

Endless lol at you for thinking we should take Wikipedia seriously when it comes to GT vs Super debates.

I mean your main argument was that wiki only speaks for a niche then you link something with at most a few hundred votes to counter it lol
I can get behind one can't use wikipedia for advanced studies or top-notch scientific research, but for pop culture I think it gives you the basic outlines pretty fairly lol

Again I have no issue with anyone liking GT but one needs to accept its short lifespan and severe critics about everywhere are not for nothing cheers lol

[Rakurai]

lol

Endless lol at you for thinking we should take Wikipedia seriously when it comes to GT vs Super debates.

lol at thinking GT vs Super is even a debatable topic in the first place.

Super>>>>>>>>GT

Great rebuttal.

GT >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Super

Hey look, I can also use as many > signs as you can.

Endless lol at you for thinking we should take Wikipedia seriously when it comes to GT vs Super debates.

I mean your main argument was that wiki only speaks for a niche then you link something with at most a few hundred votes to counter it lol
I can get behind one can't use wikipedia for advanced studies or top-notch scientific research, but for pop culture I think it gives you the basic outlines pretty fairly lol

Again I have no issue with anyone liking GT but one needs to accept its short lifespan and severe critics about everywhere are not for nothing cheers lol

My point was to show these polls or critics mean shit when having discussions for comparison between GT and Super. Because that's not what the critics are doing in the first place. And like I mentioned before, GT Funi dub is dog trash. These critics likely watched GT Funi dub, and have no proper comparison of the original Japanese GT vs. Super.

What makes those critics' authority more credible than yours or mine?

Making your middle school self happy is a not valid point of the quality of the show.

DBS episode 39 being one of the best installment of the series to date is extremely subjective, biased, and has no guidelines about anything related to show criticism. The best of Z blow out the best of Super by far imo. Unless it's talking about the best of Super to date, then that doesn't speak much for the series to begin with considering its horrible start.

I have never heard of Attack of the Fanboy up until now.

WatchMojo.com? Really? That's a critic we're going to use now? *rolls eyes*

Wikipedia is not a good indicator of anything pop culture related. And this should be obvious. When you use Wikipedia paragraphs to back up your claims, you know you're getting desperate.

[PsionicWarrior]

My point was to show these polls or critics mean shit when having discussions for comparison between GT and Super. Because that's not what the critics are doing in the first place. And like I mentioned before, GT Funi dub is dog trash. These critics likely watched GT Funi dub, and have no proper comparison of the original Japanese GT vs. Super.

What makes those critics' authority more credible than yours or mine?

Making your middle school self happy is a not valid point of the quality of the show.

DBS episode 39 being one of the best installment of the series to date is extremely subjective, biased, and has no guidelines about anything related to show criticism. The best of Z blow out the best of Super by far imo. Unless it's talking about the best of Super to date, then that doesn't speak much for the series to begin with considering its horrible start.

I have never heard of Attack of the Fanboy up until now.

WatchMojo.com? Really? That's a critic we're going to use now? *rolls eyes*

Wikipedia is not a good indicator of anything pop culture related. And this should be obvious. When you use Wikipedia paragraphs to back up your claims, you know you're getting desperate.

Wikipedia is not the one DOING the critics, it's the one GATHERING them lol
It's not about one person's opinion being more authoritative than another, it's a mass of different opinions giving your rough statistics, feel free to check out IMDB or MyAnimeList or whatever, even in this very kanzenshuu website I bet you will have a majority favoring Super to GT despite all the criticism the former gets lol
Also your speculation about reviewers not watching the sub is just an assumption from your side lol
I didn't mention attack of the fanboy or watchmojo as I don't know what they are BTW lol
You're dismissing arguably reliable sources and use some underground japanese hardcore ones that I had to decipher with google translate with a hundred reviewers in comparison lol

[Logania]

Good villains are meant to be controversial, that is proof of his fantastic writing. If a villain is able to make you rethink about who is the good guy and who is the bad guy, then that villain is a success. And Zamasu did that. I still see people today debating on various social medias whether Zamasu's decision to slaughter that Babarian, or to commit genocide upon all mortals, was justified and reasonable. The situation is not as black and white as it might seem!

Zamasu is cool and all, but people REALLY debate whether he was right or not? Kind of odd how anyone can to be honest, it's not like Magneto or Doctor Doom for villains where they seek a true utopia of peace through...questionable actions that are believable in the world that they're based in. The dude wanted to commit mutli-universal genocide lol

[PsionicWarrior]

Regarding Zamasu he's in my opinion part of the strongest points Super offered us, with all the flaws this show has this might not be the best target