Fanmanga - DB Multiverse

[BlazingBarrrager]

See kids? This is why we can't have nice things. :b

No:

Chapter: 510 (DBZ 316), P13.1-6
Vegeta: “Don’t hesitate for my sake, and finish him off! With that Super Saiyan 3, you should be able to completely wipe out Boo with your ki once you gather it with all your might…!”
Goku: “Ye…yeah…I’ve been thinking of doing that as well since awhile back, but…I haven’t gotten the chance.”
Vegeta: “Eh?”
Goku: “If I want to wipe him out, I gotta gather ki for about one minute.”
Vegeta: “One minute?!”
Goku: “Dammnit~~~If it was with the Potara, I could have done it in one blast. …..Cheh~~~I guess I went and showed off too much. But I thought things would go a little better than this…!”
Vegeta: “…S …So you weren’t thinking of me…”

Oh. I didn't remember that part. Thanks for correcting me.

[Gyt Kaliba]

Sorry, but I'm still not really seeing the difference between why simple for Super Saiyan was okay, but suddenly simple is just 'lazy and clearly a palette swap and nothing more' now when it comes to things like Golden Freeza and SSB. What it comes down to in the end of course is each person's individual opinion, so of course that's all fine and dandy, but it just boggles my mind that so many people are clinging to this argument that doesn't even make any sense to me.

[HeroR]

Seeing the design of King Cold, that thing is hideous and not in a good way. I can't help but wonder, 'what the heck is that!?' and 'what were they thinking!?'. I personally like Toriyama's smaller is compact and more powerful idea more then the bigger is better design.

As for for the argument about Golden Freeza, I am not the biggest fan of he design itself. I don't hate it, but I don't exactly love it either. But, what I love is the thought behind it. It's basically a mockery of the Super Saiyan, which Freeza himself chose, saying he chose the color so Goku can easily understand. It's a basic, 'I'm going to beat your butt with the form you used to humiliated me'. I love it. I love the irony, and it fits with Freeza so well. There is also the color scheme which is gold and purple, which is also the color of royalty. Freeza is all but proclaiming that he's reclaiming his spot as the empire of the universe. And Toriyama says that the gold is based on gold medals, which I find hilarious, because I got a mental image of Freeza thinking, 'I'm a champion, dammit!'.

With this King Cold, I don't see any of that cleverness. It's like, 'let's take Cooler's transformation and make it bigger and add more spike and extra arms'. I mean, it's big and messy without any reason behind it, at least that is my impression. I do agree with someone who says that it's very 90s design. Dark Age of Comic kind of 90s design. If they were going for a WTF reaction, they more than succeeded.

[Sora Saiyan]

Sorry, but I'm still not really seeing the difference between why simple for Super Saiyan was okay, but suddenly simple is just 'lazy and clearly a palette swap and nothing more' now when it comes to things like Golden Freeza and SSB. What it comes down to in the end of course is each person's individual opinion, so of course that's all fine and dandy, but it just boggles my mind that so many people are clinging to this argument that doesn't even make any sense to me.

The thing is Golden Freeza actually has slight differences. Golden Freeza is more like the difference between SSJ2 and SSJ, infact there are even more differences in Golden Freezas design compared to SSJ2 on paper, yet people love SSJ2. To be honest I'm not a fan of Golden Freeza, but the hate the form gets is a bit over the top.

[HeroR]

Sorry, but I'm still not really seeing the difference between why simple for Super Saiyan was okay, but suddenly simple is just 'lazy and clearly a palette swap and nothing more' now when it comes to things like Golden Freeza and SSB. What it comes down to in the end of course is each person's individual opinion, so of course that's all fine and dandy, but it just boggles my mind that so many people are clinging to this argument that doesn't even make any sense to me.

The thing is Golden Freeza actually has slight differences. Golden Freeza is more like the difference between SSJ2 and SSJ, infact there are even more differences in Golden Freezas design compared to SSJ2 on paper, yet people love SSJ2. To be honest I'm not a fan of Golden Freeza, but the hate the form gets is a bit over the top.

I can probably answer this.

People love Super Saiyan 1 and 2, despite how simple they are, because of the emotional value behind them. The first Super Saiyan form was revealed after Krillin was brutally murdered and Goku just snaps. Then he just transform. No explanation, no foreshadowing, just boom. We didn't even know it was a Super Saiyan until the next chapter or next episode. So when people think of the Super Saiyan, they think of 'that' moment and it become ingrained into you. It was the same with Super Saiyan 2. Goku and the others are being tortured by the Cell Jrs, Android 16 is killed by Cell stomping on him, and Gohan snaps. Once again, no explanation, no foreshadowing, boom. The anime raised this with the music used exclusively for that scene. So when people think Super Saiyan 2, they think of 'that' moment and the emotional weight behind it.

Naturally, this isn't talking about everyone, but this is the vast majority of the reasons I have seen why people loved these forms despite Goku and Gohan hair just changing colors, raising up, and add some extra spiky hair and lightning. The transformations were a moment and people carried that with them.

[Sora Saiyan]

Yeah, I can get what you are saying HeroR, I love SSJ and SSJ2 I love the design of both of those forms even though on paper they are simple. I don't really like the look of Golden Freeza, but It's not because Golden Freeza is simple, it's because it's just ugly IMO. Maybe people don't like it because they were expecting more, but I just don't think it looks good even though it has more differences on paper than SSJ to SSJ2. A perfect example of my view is SSJB, it's my favourite SSJ form overtaking the original SSJ and that is genuinely just a palette swap, but I think it looks great because of the blue.

[rereboy]

Well, yes, I'm aware, and that's why I think it makes for a (very) minimalist design alteration, which I like. Not quite clear on what you're wanting to point out here.

The point is the same exact thing that you praise is what can be easily be criticized.

Sorry, but I'm still not really seeing the difference between why simple for Super Saiyan was okay, but suddenly simple is just 'lazy and clearly a palette swap and nothing more' now when it comes to things like Golden Freeza and SSB. What it comes down to in the end of course is each person's individual opinion, so of course that's all fine and dandy, but it just boggles my mind that so many people are clinging to this argument that doesn't even make any sense to me.

I'll try to explain with an example. It's like when a student studies for 2 hours for a test and gets an A+. In that case, his minimalistic approach is quite impressive because it barely changed anything regarding his time/life but was very effective and therefore there was no need for a more intensive approach, and a more intensive approach could even hurt his results since they already were optimal. But what if he only got a D? In that case, his minimalistic approach is not impressive at all, and just seems lazy, bad, etc.

In similar fashion, if Toriyama uses a minimalistic approach to create SSJ and in your opinion the design looks great and you give it an A+, the fact that it what achieved with minimal changes is impressive and thus being simple actually becomes something positive.

But if Toriyama uses a minimalistic approach regarding another design (for example Golden Freeza) but you don't like how it ended up and you give it a D, those minimal changes are actually something negative because in this case the fact that there's minimal changes doesn't seem impressive, it just seems lazy, unimaginative, etc.

In short, yeah, it boils down to opinion, but it's easy to understand that a certain approach can be considered positive or negative depending on its results, on how effective it is.

[Skar]

Sorry, but I'm still not really seeing the difference between why simple for Super Saiyan was okay, but suddenly simple is just 'lazy and clearly a palette swap and nothing more' now when it comes to things like Golden Freeza and SSB. What it comes down to in the end of course is each person's individual opinion, so of course that's all fine and dandy, but it just boggles my mind that so many people are clinging to this argument that doesn't even make any sense to me.

SSJ was a simple design and SSJ Blue was...SSJ with blue hair. The reason it's called lazy and a palette swap is because that's been the reaction to every piece of fanart that did the same thing. I don't know what your opinion is on them but if you do feel that the various recolored SSJ forms from old fan art were good then I could understand why you would also like SSJ Blue. There would clearly be some bias though if you believe Toriyama's SSJ with blue hair is a step above every other fan SSJ form that also changed the hair color only.

I'm also by no means claiming RF is Neko-Majin-style parody out and out, but I do think it's in the same vein of comedic touches in situations that are otherwise tonally severe as, say, SS3's absurd head of hair, or the galaxy's overseer and (at the time) supreme martial arts teacher turning out to be a stout, bloated catfish dude who spins bad puns.

The Buu saga was sorta a self-parody and Neko Majin was one so I really wouldn't be surprised if the RoF transformations were meant to be parodies. It's been 20 years so I'm sure Toriyama has stumbled upon some fan art within that time. When a fan recolors a SSJ form, they sometimes give it an extravagant name to make it sound more badass. Toriyama may have decided to parody that and give it the simplest name possible by just calling it the new color. That's my way of coping with these new forms anyway.

[Hellspawn28]

Because here AT is considered god and even if he's turned into a lazy sack of shit there will always be someone who finds evidence of his "simplistic genius" in something.

Well he is the creator of the series. People like the newer stuff because he does known on how to write humor and fun stories. The older DBZ movies where always mixed because they normally just rehash stuff from the past or currently going on in the main storyline in the anime & manga. The villains like Tullece, Lord Slug, Coola, Broli, Super #13 and Bojack are consider to be generic villains with nothing much special to offer if you ask me. At least Beerus had a lot of personality to his character and added new stuff to the Dragon Ball universe

[Faustus]

The point is the same exact thing that you praise is what can be easily be criticized.

Also well aware -- thanks -- because, believe it or not, you're not the first I've seen to hold that opinion.

I struggle with this mindset which you appear to share with saiyanvegetable -- according to whom "the facts speak for themselves" (apparently) -- that the facts raw and in the nude are somehow on their own sufficient to make a statement of your own personal stance or evaluation of them. This is categorically not the case. There is nothing about the pair of statements "Of course it preserves it. The only thing that changed was the color scheme." that in-itself constitutes a criticism of anything. It's a relatively straightforward statement of fact; I have eyes; I can see that. You happen not to like that the only significant change was the color, I get it. But again, that is precisely what I like about it in this specific context.

Regardless, to your "point", I fail to see how the ease of a censure is in any way legitimizing of that censure, so the whole argument above's moot anyway.

[rereboy]

The point is the same exact thing that you praise is what can be easily be criticized.

Also well aware -- thanks -- because, believe it or not, you're not the first I've seen to hold that opinion.

I struggle with this mindset which you appear to share with saiyanvegetable -- according to whom "the facts speak for themselves" (apparently) -- that the facts raw and in the nude are somehow on their own sufficient to make a statement of your own personal stance or evaluation of them. This is categorically not the case. There is nothing about the pair of statements "Of course it preserves it. The only thing that changed was the color scheme." that in-itself constitutes a criticism of anything. It's a relatively straightforward statement of fact; I have eyes; I can see that. You happen not to like that the only significant change was the color, I get it. But again, that is precisely what I like about it in this specific context.

Regardless, to your "point", I fail to see how the ease of a censure is in any way legitimizing of that censure, so the whole argument above's moot anyway.

Facts? No, it's exactly the opposite. The point is how the same thing can be viewed as positive or negative according to perspective because it's completely subjective. My point was to make clear how easily the same thing can be viewed as negative if the viewpoint is different.

You think that being minimalistic is great, at least in that case. Some other guy might disagree and point out to you that the virtues that you are enumerating (like preserving the positives of the previous design) are just the natural result of the laziness of the new design, making it basically a recolor of the previous design.

In short, the virtues that you see in the design exist because you like the design overall. If you didn't like the design overall, those same virtues would basically be negatives and signs of what is not working in the design.

In other words, you basically argued that those aspects were what made you like the design, but I believe that you, like everyone else in such a situation, are able to view those aspects in a positive light because you liked the design overall first. If you didn't, if you thought it just didn't look good, it it didn't appeal to you, you wouldn't see them in a positive light.

I, for example, have nothing agaisnt minimalistic approach. When the design really works and looks good I think it's great, that it was absolutely the right approach for that design, that it's very impressive to achieve that result with the approach. If it doesn't, then the minimalistic approach is no longer great and is a negative.

[Faustus]

Excuse me, but I don't see what you're getting at in the slightest. Yes, I will deem certain facets of the design virtues which others to whom the overall design does not appeal will deem flaws. Why are you all of a sudden in the business of unpacking why it is different folks can look at one and the same thing and come out with differing views? I don't believe any of what you're saying is actually news to anyone here. It borders on truism.

Not to beat this here horse-corpse into the ground and all the way through to China, but permit me to unwind the clock a little bit to make explicit the point of my confusion here regarding your replies. Quick chronology of events:
1. I express why Golden Freeza appeals to me personally, including that because it is more or less a palette swap it retains the trademark slim fourth form figure which I like.
2. So then you come at me with ""Of course it preserves it. The only thing that changed was the color scheme." Okay. But I know this. I talked about it in the very post to which you were replying. That's part of what I claimed to like about it -- that the "only thing that changed was the color scheme", so that consequently it was not too radical a departure from what'd preceded it.
3. Pressed for clarification, you rejoin that this was just to show that "the same exact thing that you praise is what can be easily be criticized".

But that's what gets me: your reply to me was not, in fact, an affirmation of any such criticism or any opinion antithetical to my own. "The only thing that changed was the color scheme" isn't criticism in and of itself. It isn't presenting the contrary viewpoint. All it does is make a statement of fact about the design change (that it was nothing more than a palette swap, which I grant as true in the context of this exchange for argument and simplicity's sake) -- the very same fact about which you happen to think one thing and I another.

It'd be like if you were to say you liked, say, the design for Super Saiyan 3 partly because it carried the concept of "Super Saiyan" to its absurd extreme (implicitly, because it's got absurdly long hair) -- only for someone else who does not like the form for exactly that same reason to then jump in with, "Of course it's absurd. It's got absurdly long hair" -- as though that were meant to stand on its own as a "criticism" of it. Huh? All that does is restate, descriptively, the common basis for both the positive and the negative opinion (the common basis being, in each case: "SS3 has absurdly long hair" and "Golden Freeza is a palette swap") and ultimately does nothing to articulate why the second person believes that actually works against it.

[jjgp1112]

Super Saiyan is literally a Kaioken palette swap that Toriyama himself said he designed in order to give his inking assistant a lighter workload.

[HeroR]

Super Saiyan is literally a Kaioken palette swap that Toriyama himself said he designed in order to give his inking assistant a lighter workload.

I guess you can call Super Saiyan the original lazy design. I even remember Toriyama saying that he regret drawing Cell so detailed since he kept forgetting to draw his spots.

[Fionordequester]

MOVIE REFERENCE!



So who's "Dumb and dumber" in this context; the saiyans, or the guys who keep trying to stop the saiyans ?

[TonyTheTiger]

Well, since the Saiyans attack with the purpose of total extermination you don't have anything to lose by fighting at that point.

[The Monkey King]

Cold's current transformation looks like it's the equivalent of his race's SSJ3 transformation. It's design evokes a feeling of it being an unnatural mutation of his body forced to transform one again to handle the immense ki, This is seen in the SSJ3 transformation through Goku's Neanderthal brow, and long hair while in Cold's case it can be seen through the multitude of spikes on his body.

I wonder if it will share the same stamina problems.

[rereboy]

Excuse me, but I don't see what you're getting at in the slightest. Yes, I will deem certain facets of the design virtues which others to whom the overall design does not appeal will deem flaws. Why are you all of a sudden in the business of unpacking why it is different folks can look at one and the same thing and come out with differing views? I don't believe any of what you're saying is actually news to anyone here. It borders on truism.

Not to beat this here horse-corpse into the ground and all the way through to China, but permit me to unwind the clock a little bit to make explicit the point of my confusion here regarding your replies. Quick chronology of events:
1. I express why Golden Freeza appeals to me personally, including that because it is more or less a palette swap it retains the trademark slim fourth form figure which I like.
2. So then you come at me with ""Of course it preserves it. The only thing that changed was the color scheme." Okay. But I know this. I talked about it in the very post to which you were replying. That's part of what I claimed to like about it -- that the "only thing that changed was the color scheme", so that consequently it was not too radical a departure from what'd preceded it.
3. Pressed for clarification, you rejoin that this was just to show that "the same exact thing that you praise is what can be easily be criticized".

But that's what gets me: your reply to me was not, in fact, an affirmation of any such criticism or any opinion antithetical to my own. "The only thing that changed was the color scheme" isn't criticism in and of itself. It isn't presenting the contrary viewpoint. All it does is make a statement of fact about the design change (that it was nothing more than a palette swap, which I grant as true in the context of this exchange for argument and simplicity's sake) -- the very same fact about which you happen to think one thing and I another.

It'd be like if you were to say you liked, say, the design for Super Saiyan 3 partly because it carried the concept of "Super Saiyan" to its absurd extreme (implicitly, because it's got absurdly long hair) -- only for someone else who does not like the form for exactly that same reason to then jump in with, "Of course it's absurd. It's got absurdly long hair" -- as though that were meant to stand on its own as a "criticism" of it. Huh? All that does is restate, descriptively, the common basis for both the positive and the negative opinion (the common basis being, in each case: "SS3 has absurdly long hair" and "Golden Freeza is a palette swap") and ultimately does nothing to articulate why the second person believes that actually works against it.

You either like the design overall or you don't. It either appeals to you or it doesn't. And liking it is not simply crossing a check list of aspects that are present in the design that tell you that it's good. Pretty much always the same specific aspects of the design will be either positive or negative depending on how you feel about the design overall.

You tried to justify in your post why you like the design by enumerating and explaining those aspects but even to you those aspects probably wouldn't be positive if you didn't like the design overall.

Therefore, my point was to demonstrate different viewpoints on those aspects because the most important thing is how we immediately feel about the design overall. Those specific aspects will almost surely change from positive to negative and from negative to positive according to that.

I wasn't criticizing you or your opinion, I was just adding "food for thought" and my take to the discussion. And I can't explain my point any better than I've already have.

[Faustus]

Frankly still at a loss as to how your initial reply to me is meant to accomplish any of that, but I get your meaning now so whatever.

You say that "the same specific aspects of the design will be either positive or negative depending on how you feel about the design overall", when I make clear that the reverse is the case with me. At no point in my initial experience of the design did I go from responding positively on a visceral level to its look "overall", as you say, to "Oh and hey, there's all these other little nifty meta-things about it that I like!". To put it simply, it's the other way around: my love of the concept in itself of a Golden Freeza and all of the meta-play attendant is what only later prompted and gave growth to my appreciation of its actual visual look -- which, as I've mentioned before, is still only secondary among the reasons of why I like it.

Ok, so admittedly it is probably (trivially) true to say, as you do, that I wouldn't be laying out these exact same lists of virtues or even be open to recognizing them as virtues in the first place if I had downright viscerally taken a strong aversion to purely the look of the form right out of the gate. But, as it stands, I still find myself hard-pressed to try and divorce the specific reasons I was enumerating from my "overall" liking of the design, as you're doing. They're one and the same. The reasons I emphasized are the sorts of things that directly, on a conscious level, contributed to my liking the design "overall" immediately upon hearing of / seeing it for the first time. In an imaginary world where all of what I laid out two posts ago in terms of all the meta-effects I appreciate about the design was nonexistent or not available to me for some reason, I can actually imagine feeling about as ambivalent about the design of Golden Freeza as I currently do Super Saiyan Blue. I may even have come to dislike it, somewhat -- who knows.

[apex_pretador]

man, I hate these long waits and specials between them squeezed which have already been covered in 2-3 chapters already.
If this special would've been about the freeza vs U13 battle, on the other hand, then .