Guesswhoo wrote:snip
To clarify my comment about "unpleasable fanbases", My intention wasn't to say that they don't exist. They actually very much
do exist. Rather, what I meant was that since every sequel/prequel/interquel alienates some portion of the community in some way,
all fanbases are, by technicality, never entirely pleasable. Since no fandom is ever totally satisfied, this makes the label of "unpleasable" kind of redundant. A bit pedantic I suppose, but using the term "unpleasable fanbase" also typically carries demeaning generalizing connotations.
I think a more fair and accurate descriptor would be "divided". There is usually something of a prevailing community consensus regarding whether or not a product is considered "good" or "bad". It's generally very easy to tell what that consensus is and all it usually takes is a cursory look into a few communities dedicated to the subject to make it readily apparent. But if one were to come into any given online Dragon Ball community, they'd find the reception to be very mixed - mostly leaning toward positive, but more mixed than a content community usually is on average. I think that this is the problem you're getting at when you said this:
Guesswhoo wrote:when the fanbase become a broken one and each of the piece gets a non negligible part of support
If I understood your point correctly here, then I think we are in agreement on this - with one caveat. With the community as badly split up as it is, I feel that this is indicative of underlying issues with the series itself rather than fans setting their standards too high. I wouldn't place blame on the fans themselves for having such diametrically opposed opinions on the series. Instead, I feel like the notion of Super not entirely living up to the expectations set up by it's predecessors has weight to it. If it were indeed as faithful to the mechanics of Z as one should expect it to be, I feel like the divisions wouldn't be nearly as stark. There would naturally be the typical amount of people unhappy with it, but the fighting and arguing would be much less pronounced. The community would be a much more calm and pleasant place to be.
Now, if I've discerned your stance on character usage in Super correctly, I believe we're in agreement here as well. Properly utilizing the available cast of characters has been an issue with Dragon Ball in the past. That said, despite many members of the cast losing their prominence over time, they were still occasionally made use of in tertiary roles and most arcs managed to competently juggle a fairly large cast of characters. The problem, as you say, comes from hammering the weaker characters into roles they don't really fit into without ample justification. Inorganically boosting the power of weaker characters to make them viable or having them perform above their weight class causes problems among the community. Many would be perfectly happy to see the other characters return to prominent roles again (if the hype for the Tournament of Power is any indication), The problem comes from not ensuring that the reasons for their inclusion are properly addressed or that their performance abides by the mechanics the series has established. If you can accomplish that, I feel like bringing back characters like Krillin or Tien to fight on the front line again would be more well received.
alakazam^ wrote:Rebel Instinct wrote:Even if the discontent is not a majority, if it is large enough, then there's surely something amiss in one way or another. As the old adage goes, "There's no smoke without fire." The sheer sustained volume of criticism that Dragon Ball Super has received over its run is indicative of some severe underlying issues. Trying to shift the blame onto the fans themselves is disingenuous and gives Super too much leeway as a product.
You said that there's no pleasing everyone and then you say that if a minority is complaining, that should be addressed? This sounds really biased against Super. Super isn't a bad product by default, no matter what people might try to make you believe. It has issues just like everything else (and the past series, of course) but the evidence we have is that the majority is pleased with it, not the contrary.
The "sheer sustained volume of criticism" comes from just some fans, a vocal minority. Why should their
opinion have any weight if most of them show they aren't even critically thinking about what they are complaining? The majority of complaints come from fans being ignorant about how an anime is put together, misunderstandings (from what the show is telling them, synopses, etc), knee-jerk reactions and just poor reasoning all around. So yes, the fans are responsible by how they conduct themselves and it just seems there are many of them complaining because that minority keeps parroting eachother over and over again.
The anime is aimed at children but I didn't think the adult fanbase would play the part so seriously.
What I meant by my statements regarding pleasing people and considering complaints is this: There is no piece of media which can make everyone happy. There will always be disappointed consumers. However, if the amount of backlash is larger than what is typically expected on average, then it's probably worth being taken into consideration. Normally, there isn't enough backlash to significantly splinter a community or cause the amount of community infighting to rise. This isn't coming from a place of bias against Super as a whole, since I actually quite enjoy the manga interpretation of the series. My point is that the effect that Super has had on the Dragon Ball community is no small commotion to be easily dismissed.
Community minorities are not all created equal and minority complaints are often still significant enough to create a meaningful impact. A prime example would be patches in video games. When a gaming community complains about imbalances or glitches that need to be fixed, these complaints almost invariably come from a minority of players. Yet. despite being a vocal minority relative to a silent majority of satisfied customers, that minority's issues are often taken into consideration by the developers if their contingent is significant enough in size. An opinion doesn't have to be shared by the majority in order for it to have legitimacy. Being part of a majority does not mean one's opinions hold more or less weight than those in the minority or signify that the product isn't significantly flawed. That would be considered an Ad Populum fallacy.
You're overly quick to dismiss those unhappy with the writing of Super as being a tiny, insignificant amount of people and go even further to describe these people as also being mostly outright wrong or too ignorant to know what they are talking about. You seem to be under the impression that the majority of complaints are totally invalid or otherwise have no value, but how did you go about accurately quantifying the "validity" of the complainers' opinions and reactions? How did you determine the number of invalid complaints relative to valid complaints? Is it an objective metric or is it based on how you personally felt? There is no doubt that the majority of people are accepting of Super in general - the viewership/sales statistics reflect that. However, that doesn't mean that the relative minority don't have a point when they voice complaints. Even those who are happy with Super still share some of the same complaints The minority shouldn't be swept under the rug simply because the series is popular or successful.
alakazam^ wrote:The anime is aimed at children but I didn't think the adult fanbase would play the part so seriously.
Making intentionally insulting remarks like this accomplishes nothing but stirring up anger and resentment. It's unnecessary and only makes things worse.
The post-Super fandom has ruined my love for Dragon Ball.