Things that grind your gears

[Ripper 30]

Valueing the quality and contribution of a story based only on how much new "lore/information" it throws (aka, how many extra words it can be added to a wiki article) over things like themes & ideas, character development, conflict, pathos, you know, the stuff that makes a story...well a story, my braincells die whenever someone disregards them in favor of BS information. On that same note, the criticism of "there's no story" thrown around to anything that doesn't have (big) in-universe status quo change melts my braincells.

The orginal three tournament arcs from the manga are the most prominent victims (to varying degree) of both things by portion of the fandom.

Look at JoJo, it doesn't dwell in much things and moves on still its entertaining as fuck, but one piece or Naruto fans shit on DB because it doesn't have many backstories and vast lore.


Also, one of most annoying aspects from New DBS fans after Zamasu arc is how they deflect shit writing in DBS on DBZ, and use the "you're blinded by nostalgia" card everytime. Look at the comments on Swagkage videos on Super for example, that guy actually summed up the state of franchise well in his videos. DBZ had flaws but they weren't as bad as DBS ones, Since DBS takes Z's Flaws and cranks it upto 11.

[PFM18]

Also, one of most annoying aspects from New DBS fans after Zamasu arc is how they deflect shit writing in DBS on DBZ, and use the "you're blinded by nostalgia" card everytime. Look at the comments on Swagkage videos on Super for example, that guy actually summed up the state of franchise well in his videos. DBZ had flaws but they weren't as bad as DBS ones, Since DBS takes Z's Flaws and cranks it upto 11.

It's just addressing a double standard. DB/Z/original manga are not given the same treatment as Super. People will complain/criticize things about Super that apply just as much as the original series. It is consistently contradictory and hypocritical. In addition to not even bothering to understand the story they are criticizing. They just ignore entire plot elements or just don't bother comprehending it and then go on to "criticize" it while barely knowing the first thing about it.

[Ripper 30]

Also, one of most annoying aspects from New DBS fans after Zamasu arc is how they deflect shit writing in DBS on DBZ, and use the "you're blinded by nostalgia" card everytime. Look at the comments on Swagkage videos on Super for example, that guy actually summed up the state of franchise well in his videos. DBZ had flaws but they weren't as bad as DBS ones, Since DBS takes Z's Flaws and cranks it upto 11.

It's just addressing a double standard. DB/Z/original manga are not given the same treatment as Super. People will complain/criticize things about Super that apply just as much as the original series. It is consistently contradictory and hypocritical. In addition to not even bothering to understand the story they are criticizing. They just ignore entire plot elements or just don't bother comprehending it and then go on to "criticize" it while barely knowing the first thing about it.

Dude, Dragon Ball Super started in 2015 but all the critical reviews of Original series have been going on from way back. Dragon Ball Dissection has been going on for years when DBS hadn't started. Again, deflecting it won't save its shitty writing. I have gone in detail about each point I made. Whether it's the godawful writing with Trunks outta nowhere slicing Merged Zamasu or the repeated Forced Development of Vegeta to the point that he has became a One-Dimensional Tsundere Stoic guy now. We don't need to deeply comprehend shit it does, if in Original Run Future Trunks had magically surpassed SS2 Gohan and killed Cell or Goku in SS3 was going head to head against Kuririn then it would make sense for DBS fans to shit on Z but that's not the case. DBS writers don't think about consistency and continuity or making sense but only doing things for fanservice. Read the Interview of Toriyama with Toyotaro, he even told him that things don't really need to "make sense" which sums up the state of franchise. Look how stupidly they are muddling the plot by incorporating Broli into the Main story just because he's famous character. Again, Episode 100 of DBS sums up why it deserves all the hate it gets, Kale is not only wrecking Goku But reciting Broli's lines, why? Because of fanservice. You can defend it all you want but truth is, it's not only repeating the flaws of Original Run but taking them further.

[The Patrolman]

Valueing the quality and contribution of a story based only on how much new "lore/information" it throws (aka, how many extra words it can be added to a wiki article) over things like themes & ideas, character development, conflict, pathos, you know, the stuff that makes a story...well a story, my braincells die whenever someone disregards them in favor of BS information. On that same note, the criticism of "there's no story" thrown around to anything that doesn't have (big) in-universe status quo change melts my braincells.

The orginal three tournament arcs from the manga are the most prominent victims (to varying degree) of both things by portion of the fandom.

Look at JoJo, it doesn't dwell in much things and moves on still its entertaining as fuck, but one piece or Naruto fans shit on DB because it doesn't have many backstories and vast lore.

Man thats annoying with those fanbases

[Forte224]

Also, one of most annoying aspects from New DBS fans after Zamasu arc is how they deflect shit writing in DBS on DBZ, and use the "you're blinded by nostalgia" card everytime. Look at the comments on Swagkage videos on Super for example, that guy actually summed up the state of franchise well in his videos. DBZ had flaws but they weren't as bad as DBS ones, Since DBS takes Z's Flaws and cranks it upto 11.

It's just addressing a double standard. DB/Z/original manga are not given the same treatment as Super. People will complain/criticize things about Super that apply just as much as the original series. It is consistently contradictory and hypocritical. In addition to not even bothering to understand the story they are criticizing. They just ignore entire plot elements or just don't bother comprehending it and then go on to "criticize" it while barely knowing the first thing about it.

The hell are you on about dude? What planet do you live on? The original series gets soooooooo much criticism, especially on this site. Are you just ignoring all of it so you can feel better trying to make people's complaints against Super illegitimate? I don't get it.

And, this has already been covered in another thread, can't remember where but it's recent, but just because Super and DB/Z do similar things wrong it DOESN'T mean they do them to the same degree. If you can't accept that a lot of people don't like Super as much as you, then maybe the internet just isn't for you man.

But saying stuff like there's a "double standard" and "DB/Z/original manga are not given the same treatment as Super"? That's just you being purposely blind.

[zarmack]

Look at JoJo, it doesn't dwell in much things and moves on still its entertaining as fuck, but one piece or Naruto fans shit on DB because it doesn't have many backstories and vast lore.

This is a false analogy. JoJo actually dwells a lot on its past lore. Parts 1, 2, 3 and 5 are all connected because of it.

And much of what made the Saiyan and Namek arcs great was because of how much it expanded the franchises lore while connecting it to the relevant stories they told. So this kind of undermines your arguments.

[zarmack]

Also, one of most annoying aspects from New DBS fans after Zamasu arc is how they deflect shit writing in DBS on DBZ, and use the "you're blinded by nostalgia" card everytime. Look at the comments on Swagkage videos on Super for example, that guy actually summed up the state of franchise well in his videos. DBZ had flaws but they weren't as bad as DBS ones, Since DBS takes Z's Flaws and cranks it upto 11.

It's just addressing a double standard. DB/Z/original manga are not given the same treatment as Super. People will complain/criticize things about Super that apply just as much as the original series. It is consistently contradictory and hypocritical. In addition to not even bothering to understand the story they are criticizing. They just ignore entire plot elements or just don't bother comprehending it and then go on to "criticize" it while barely knowing the first thing about it.

Dude, Dragon Ball Super started in 2015 but all the critical reviews of Original series have been going on from way back. Dragon Ball Dissection has been going on for years when DBS hadn't started. Again, deflecting it won't save its shitty writing. I have gone in detail about each point I made. Whether it's the godawful writing with Trunks outta nowhere slicing Merged Zamasu or the repeated Forced Development of Vegeta to the point that he has became a One-Dimensional Tsundere Stoic guy now. We don't need to deeply comprehend shit it does, if in Original Run Future Trunks had magically surpassed SS2 Gohan and killed Cell or Goku in SS3 was going head to head against Kuririn then it would make sense for DBS fans to shit on Z but that's not the case. DBS writers don't think about consistency and continuity or making sense but only doing things for fanservice. Read the Interview of Toriyama with Toyotaro, he even told him that things don't really need to "make sense" which sums up the state of franchise. Look how stupidly they are muddling the plot by incorporating Broli into the Main story just because he's famous character. Again, Episode 100 of DBS sums up why it deserves all the hate it gets, Kale is not only wrecking Goku But reciting Broli's lines, why? Because of fanservice. You can defend it all you want but truth is, it's not only repeating the flaws of Original Run but taking them further.

Now some of these complaints are reaching.

1. What "repeated forced development" are you talking about? DBS merely showcases the type of guy Vegeta is post-Buu, its doesn't pretend its some new development for him. And there's nothing objectively one-dimensional nor stoic about him in Super. He actually shows just about as much emotional range in Super as he did in Z.

2. " if in Original Run Future Trunks had magically surpassed SS2 Gohan and killed Cell or Goku in SS3 was going head to head against Kuririn then it would make sense for DBS fans to shit on Z but that's not the case."

Future Trunks surpassing SSJ2 Gohan in the Cell Games wouldn't be a stretch at all. If he got a rage boost like Gohan did it would have happened.

And the complaints about Goku using SSB with Krillin has been addressed by the show itself. SSB was outright stated from the start to have perfect ki control and Goku was outright stated to have held back with Krillin and only used SSB to test his resolve and help him regain his confidence. So that argument makes little sense.

3. How is Kale (a legendary saiyan) being as strong as she is a flaw when there's no internal reasons why she shouldn't be?

4. And how is bringing Broly into the main story muddling the plot when any fan with common sense knows that the old Z Broly films are not being connected to the main story and Broly is being rewritten to make him fit in?

[Lord Beerus]

Hell, Dragon Ball Online has a lot of great tidbits of lore and world building, but until you actually use that to create a good story with fleshed out characters, that's all it's ever going to be... a lot of great tidbits of lore and world building.

You saying Dragon Ball Online is just lore and world building?

Yeah. That's what it is.

[PFM18]

The hell are you on about dude? What planet do you live on? The original series gets soooooooo much criticism, especially on this site. Are you just ignoring all of it so you can feel better trying to make people's complaints against Super illegitimate? I don't get it.

I never said that the original series is never criticized.

And, this has already been covered in another thread, can't remember where but it's recent, but just because Super and DB/Z do similar things wrong it DOESN'T mean they do them to the same degree. If you can't accept that a lot of people don't like Super as much as you, then maybe the internet just isn't for you man.

The double standard I am referring to is in regards to the fact that the "problems" are to the same degree. The "problems" more specifically I'm referring to, aren't even really problems they are just things that they don't criticize about the original series and they do for Super. For example:

"Too many tournaments!"

When ODB had 3 tournaments to Super's 2.

"Too many transformations!"

When the main cast had the same number of transformations in Super as Z-era DB, and in Z they had way more transformations for the antagonists/villains.

Just two things that are criticized in Super, but exist to a higher extent in the original series but is never criticized for it.

But saying stuff like there's a "double standard" and "DB/Z/original manga are not given the same treatment as Super"? That's just you being purposely blind.

At this point it is so prevalent it is more so just stating the obvious than anything else. Somebody reiterated several other examples in addition to what I mentioned.

- power scale inconcistencies (present during original run)
- the milking-out like a cashcow-argument (present during original run)
- the content is sometimes childish of nature (it was a children's show too during the 80s and 90s)
- it's too much about Goku and Vegeta (it was very much about Goku and Vegeta during the original run too, they are the main characters)
- too much fighting (why do you expect, it's the successor to the godfather of modern Shounen)
- too much cheesy dialogues (they were definetely there too in the original run)
- the other characters are 'fodder' (they were fodder too in the original run)
- the arcs aren't long enough (what about the TOP, if that's not long enough for you ...)

[Forte224]

I never said that the original series is never criticized.

Then what's even your point? They're not criticizing it as much as you want them to? I shouldn't even have to say why that's an incredibly flawed viewpoint.

The double standard I am referring to is in regards to the fact that the "problems" are to the same degree. The "problems" more specifically I'm referring to, aren't even really problems they are just things that they don't criticize about the original series and they do for Super. For example:

"Too many tournaments!"

When ODB had 3 tournaments to Super's 2.

"Too many transformations!"

When the main cast had the same number of transformations in Super as Z-era DB, and in Z they had way more transformations for the antagonists/villains.

Just two things that are criticized in Super, but exist to a higher extent in the original series but is never criticized for it.

Who says these things? I've never seen these complaints, definitely not here. The ACTUAL complaints I've seen are that the transformations and the tournaments are poorly executed and lacking in dramatic/emotional value. Which is totally legitimate. Are you sure you're not over simplifying their arguments to delegitimize them?

At this point it is so prevalent it is more so just stating the obvious than anything else. Somebody reiterated several other examples in addition to what I mentioned.

- power scale inconcistencies (present during original run)
- the milking-out like a cashcow-argument (present during original run)
- the content is sometimes childish of nature (it was a children's show too during the 80s and 90s)
- it's too much about Goku and Vegeta (it was very much about Goku and Vegeta during the original run too, they are the main characters)
- too much fighting (why do you expect, it's the successor to the godfather of modern Shounen)
- too much cheesy dialogues (they were definetely there too in the original run)
- the other characters are 'fodder' (they were fodder too in the original run)
- the arcs aren't long enough (what about the TOP, if that's not long enough for you ...)

That specific post was already replied to by Skar and partially by myself in that same thread. I'm not repeating it here. The main point is, that DOES NOT mean those flaws were executed equally as poorly in both series. Getting shot by a nerf gun and getting shot by a shotgun are, on the surface, the same thing. Both are getting shot by a gun. But one hurts WAY worse. Just because Super and the original series share flaws, that does not make those flaws equal definitively.

If you want to disagree with those people and actually go into detail about why the flaws are executed exactly as poorly in both shows (something I've NEVER seen you do) that's great. But if all you're doing is trying to delegitimize people's feelings on a show by posting something as shallow as a venn diagram with no further detail, then that's completely different and doesn't promote good discussion in any way.

Good lord this is annoying to do on a phone.

[ABED]

The double standard I am referring to is in regards to the fact that the "problems" are to the same degree. The "problems" more specifically I'm referring to, aren't even really problems they are just things that they don't criticize about the original series and they do for Super. For example:

"Too many tournaments!"

When ODB had 3 tournaments to Super's 2.

"Too many transformations!"

There's a cumulative effect. While DB had those things as well, Super just adds to it. So no, Super doesn't have just 2 tournaments, DB now has 7 tournaments (3 in DB, 2 in DBZ, and 2 in Super).

[HipMasterDan]

Retconing Bardock from a brilliant scientist to a Saiyan warrior and then retconing it again to a loving caring father.

[Lord Beerus]

Retconing Bardock from a brilliant scientist to a Saiyan warrior and then retconing it again to a loving caring father.

Bardock was never a brilliant scientist to begin with.

Or is this a joke that I easily walked into?

[PFM18]

Then what's even your point? They're not criticizing it as much as you want them to? I shouldn't even have to say why that's an incredibly flawed viewpoint.

That people don't approach both series the same way. They are biased about it. THey give things a pass on the original but not on the original series.

Who says these things? I've never seen these complaints, definitely not here. The ACTUAL complaints I've seen are that the transformations and the tournaments are poorly executed and lacking in dramatic/emotional value. Which is totally legitimate. Are you sure you're not over simplifying their arguments to delegitimize them?

These sort of things are extremely prevalent. Not sure where you've been, but I see this all the time.

But SSG and SSB were never intended to be especially dramatic so whoever says that doesn't actually understand what's happening, and Ultra Instinct fits that description perfectly.

That specific post was already replied to by Skar and partially by myself in that same thread. I'm not repeating it here. The main point is, that DOES NOT mean those flaws were executed equally as poorly in both series. Getting shot by a nerf gun and getting shot by a shotgun are, on the surface, the same thing. Both are getting shot by a gun. But one hurts WAY worse. Just because Super and the original series share flaws, that does not make those flaws equal definitively.

To say they aren't executed as well is something completely and totally different. Criticizing Super for doing something that the original series also did to the same extent while not criticizing the original series for the same is the problem. Saying "The original series executed X better" is an entirely different conversation. Also, discussing the execution of it becomes different because it automatically transforms the conversation into something completely arbitrary. You can objectively say Super had more transformations or less transformations or more tournaments, or less tournaments, but execution is extremely subjective and a function of each person's personal interpretation. It just becomes entirely arbitrary when you start bringing execution into the equation and that isn't even something that I'm addressing in the first place.

[ABED]

It is ALWAYS about execution and the number of times something happens is part of execution.

[Grimlock]

Yeah. That's what it is.

Of course, we reached a point where we can say that an unfinished work is just lore and world building (which is still better than a certain finished work, I must add) with no good story and no fleshed out characters. That's 21st century, year 2018 for you.

[Lord Beerus]

Yeah. That's what it is.

Of course, we reached a point where we can say that an unfinished work is just lore and world building (which is still better than a certain finished work, I must add) with no good story and no fleshed out characters. That's 21st century, year 2018 for you.

There's no narrative in Dragon Ball Online. That's not me being hyperbolic. There is literally no story. No characterisation. No resolution of conflict. The best we get from Dragon Ball Online is all the events that take place from end of the Majin Boo arc to when the game takes place.

[Forte224]

So who are you complaining about? Several of this forum's most consistent posters like (apologies for name dropping but at least it's in a good way) ABED, Robo4900, Kunzait83, Gaffer Tape, etc. etc. all go into incredible detail with their posts. Who are these people that are dropping these complaints you speak of? I don't see them anywhere.

Execution matters 100%. You can't objectively say which is executed better, that goes without saying, but you CAN have a rational discussion about which show executed things better. But you don't seem to want to have that discussion. You just want to be as shallow as possible and say "Well Super may have had these 2 things but DB had these 3 things so you can't complain". That's a shallow, boring, rigid discussion.

And how in the WORLD can you say people give the original series a pass? The original series gets TORN. TO. SHREDS. on this forum. I have seen people (on a regular basis) go into incredible detail on the slow pacing (specifically of Z), I've seen people call the Red Ribbon, Cell, Boo, and sometimes even the Freeza arcs utter trash, I've seen people tear apart the awful filler episodes. Where are you finding these people that seem to look at the original's flaws and go "Meh, they're bad but I don't care"? I just don't see them. All I see are people that go into great detail on the flaws of the original, yet still love it due to the things it does right, and yet hate Super because they feel it executes its flaws even worse. Which is fine. The opposite is fine too. Anything in-between is also fine. But being shallow and not wanting to have any discussion and basically closing your ears off to any and all criticism, and boiling things down to a rigid, technical judgement of each series based on the number of times they do things is the exact opposite of what this site is about. You have plenty of other options if that's what you want.

[ABED]

So who are you complaining about? Several of this forum's most consistent posters like (apologies for name dropping but at least it's in a good way) ABED, Robo4900, Kunzait83, Gaffer Tape, etc. etc. all go into incredible detail with their posts. Who are these people that are dropping these complaints you speak of? I don't see them anywhere.

Execution matters 100%. You can't objectively say which is executed better, that goes without saying, but you CAN have a rational discussion about which show executed things better. But you don't seem to want to have that discussion. You just want to be as shallow as possible and say "Well Super may have had these 2 things but DB had these 3 things so you can't complain". That's a shallow, boring, rigid discussion.

And how in the WORLD can you say people give the original series a pass? The original series gets TORN. TO. SHREDS. on this forum. I have seen people (on a regular basis) go into incredible detail on the slow pacing (specifically of Z), I've seen people call the Red Ribbon, Cell, Boo, and sometimes even the Freeza arcs utter trash, I've seen people tear apart the awful filler episodes. Where are you finding these people that seem to look at the original's flaws and go "Meh, they're bad but I don't care"? I just don't see them. All I see are people that go into great detail on the flaws of the original, yet still love it due to the things it does right, and yet hate Super even more. Which is fine. The opposite is fine too. But being shallow and not wanting to have any discussion and basically closing your ears off to any and all criticism, and boiling things down to a rigid, technical judgement of each series based on the number of times they do things is the exact opposite of what this site is about. You have plenty of other options if that's what you want.

Agreed. DB has never gotten a free pass before or after Super, nor should it. No story is above criticism. Things like pacing has always been an issue as long as I've been a fan of the show. Anyone claiming it wasn't a common complaint is lying or naïve.

[Grimlock]

There's no narrative in Dragon Ball Online. That's not me being hyperbolic. There is literally no story. No characterisation. No resolution of conflict. The best we get from Dragon Ball Online is all the events that take place from end of the Majin Boo arc to when the game takes place.

"216 years after Goku takes Uub to train, the world is now threatened by the evil Time Breakers, led by Mira and Towa, who threat timeline itself. To counter them, a deity known as Kaioshin of Time creates the Time Patrol and their job is to maintain order and correct any alteration in history. Trunks, who have traveled in time before, became a Time Patroller to compensate for that act, as it was not supposed for mere mortal to perform, even if they meant good".

But you are right, there is no story at all in Dragon Ball Online. But hey, surely we can say that Dragon Ball Minus, Movie 15 and Dragon Ball Super have one, correct?

Again, you are saying there is no characterisation and resolution in an unfinished work, Dragon Ball Online was a MMORPG and as such, things happen slowly, but that doesn't matter right? Because we can say that there is characterisation in the very first episode of each series, and in the very first page of each chapter. And we see things being solved quickly.