Which did it better, GT or Super?

Discussion specifically regarding the "Dragon Ball Super" TV series premiering July 2015 in Japan, including individual threads for each episode.

Moderators: Kanzenshuu Staff, General Help

User avatar
SingleFringe&Sparks
I'm pretty cozy, here...
Posts: 1642
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:55 pm
Location: Mt. Paozu/East District

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by SingleFringe&Sparks » Mon Mar 26, 2018 6:23 pm

Cetra wrote:I don't know what you mean with the 17 thing. The Hellfighter 17 was a machine mutant. Two super geniuses form a copy of 17, just that this one is a machine mutant. Sounds as farfetch'd as everything else.

Also GT had a reliable person for a script for a long time with Matsui-san. Apparently at some point she could no longer be there.
I know. GT's concepts to me are more diversed and fit more of a continuation of Z's unacknowledged lore points better than Super's does. Super's plots aren't really grounded in anything related to Goku or the Saiyans personally enough, where as GT, it was all centered around his & Bulma's. Its why super lacks the substance in it for me to care about it's addition to the lore.

Though the Hellfighter 17 thing was unnecessarily contrived to me. There was no reason to release hell and have all the villains come back for a concept like that, just to power up 17. It already fit better with Fusion Reborn, thus the whole thing was farfetched by the misuse of something that ironically I would say should have been simple. They already did it with Android 13. However I do think its a bit of a deadhorse to use that arc to discredit GT everytime something in Super is disliked or questioned. Super is more disappointing because it just doesn't have a real story. It was made more so with marketing as their goal and Toriyama not really caring enough, but not wanting Toei to stray too far from what his ideas. (Jiren & Goku)
Zephyr wrote:The fandom's collective fetishizing of "moments" is also ridiculous to me. No, not everyone needs a fucking "shine" moment. If that's all you want, then all you want is fanservice, rather than an actual coherent story. And of course those aren't mutually exclusive; you could have a coherent story with "shine" moments! But if a story is perfectly coherent (and I'm really not seeing any compelling arguments that this one is anything but, despite constantly recurring, really poorly reasoned, attempts to argue otherwise), and you're bemoaning the lack of "shine" moments as a reason for the story's poor quality, then you're letting your thirst for "shine" moments obfuscate your ability to detect basic storytelling when it's right in front of you.

User avatar
Basaku
I'm pretty cozy, here...
Posts: 1775
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2014 3:00 pm
Location: Planet of the Apes

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by Basaku » Mon Mar 26, 2018 6:31 pm

sintzu wrote:
Cetra wrote:
RedHeat wrote:The fact that people here feel the need to compare GT to Super is mind-boggling to me. There's a reason why GT was shitcanned at 64 episodes and Super ended with a whopping 131 and a direct movie sequel and was directly responsible for the this new Dragon Ball renaissance.
Yeah and this reason is called Internet Hype.
The reason Super is a success is because of internet hype ? you cannot be serious. The franchise's yearly sales have been above everyone's expectations since it started which is something no amount of internet hype can do. Super is a success because people like it, despite its many issues.
Super does have years-long content drought and nostalgia generation factor on its side though while GT came at the end of the original decade+ run and audience fatigue kicking in. That being said, Super at least avoided some key errors GT did so bigger success was granted anyway IMO

User avatar
perucho1990
I Live Here
Posts: 2347
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2011 5:04 pm

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by perucho1990 » Mon Mar 26, 2018 6:33 pm

I will GT the edge in openings,endings and art.

DBS had more memorable moments, better use of characters, better fights, better antagonists.

Freeza and 17 treatment is a proper example why DBS is better than GT.

User avatar
gofishus
Beyond-the-Beyond Newbie
Posts: 344
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2016 2:59 pm
Contact:

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by gofishus » Mon Mar 26, 2018 7:07 pm

Professor Freeza wrote:
Cetra wrote:
Professor Freeza wrote:
I realize that some beliefs like GT is better is like some idiots saying earth is flat. Just because its your opinion doenst make it right.

I will just ignore the people here.
Wow.

You have won the internet with that comparison. Comparing a scientific fact with something opinion-based.

In case you still do not understand it: It is not a scientific fact that Super is better than GT. One can set certain standards to compare and then evaluate the shows thus come to the conclusion "in this light Super is better". But those are no universal laws of nature that under all circumstances have to be followed to one absolute and ultimate truth that results in "Super is better".

And probably you are not ignoring anyone so please promise that only if you intend to make it true.

"Just because it is your opinion doesn't make it right" Someone has a great understanding of self irony, I hope. Otherwise that would be really sad.
Its not irony if I'm objectively right. And you want proof?


GT was CANCELLED. Super went 131 episodes AND a short hiatus.
GT didnt have Toriyama anywhere besides the Art. Super has Toriyama even in the direct story.
GT bombed in TV. Super ALWAYS stayed in top 10.
There was NO GT movie. A SUPER canon movie is coming Right up.
GT had NO manga coverage. Super has one [even though I'm dont like it at all]

GT didnt come top 5 in money making for Toei. It didnt move Merch.
The great Z rehash Kai didnt move merch and got cancelled.
SUPER obliterates every other TOEI franchise.

Add to the fact that it had awful characters bar goku, awful powerscaling, awful storytelling execution and pretty much is know as Goku time...


If Super haters are still gonna be blind on how awful GT is, they are as dumb as Flat earthers.
Wow. This is a public forum where people are allowed to voice their opinions, last time I checked. And this thread alone contains a lot of people who happen to prefer GT. There is no 'objectively right'. Who are you to dictate what other people should and shouldn't like?

Timetraveller
Beyond Newbie
Posts: 224
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2017 3:53 am

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by Timetraveller » Mon Mar 26, 2018 10:51 pm

Professor Freeza wrote:
Cetra wrote:
Professor Freeza wrote:
I realize that some beliefs like GT is better is like some idiots saying earth is flat. Just because its your opinion doenst make it right.

I will just ignore the people here.
Wow.

You have won the internet with that comparison. Comparing a scientific fact with something opinion-based.

In case you still do not understand it: It is not a scientific fact that Super is better than GT. One can set certain standards to compare and then evaluate the shows thus come to the conclusion "in this light Super is better". But those are no universal laws of nature that under all circumstances have to be followed to one absolute and ultimate truth that results in "Super is better".

And probably you are not ignoring anyone so please promise that only if you intend to make it true.

"Just because it is your opinion doesn't make it right" Someone has a great understanding of self irony, I hope. Otherwise that would be really sad.
Its not irony if I'm objectively right. And you want proof?


GT was CANCELLED. Super went 131 episodes AND a short hiatus.
GT didnt have Toriyama anywhere besides the Art. Super has Toriyama even in the direct story.
GT bombed in TV. Super ALWAYS stayed in top 10.
There was NO GT movie. A SUPER canon movie is coming Right up.
GT had NO manga coverage. Super has one [even though I'm dont like it at all]

GT didnt come top 5 in money making for Toei. It didnt move Merch.
The great Z rehash Kai didnt move merch and got cancelled.
SUPER obliterates every other TOEI franchise.

Add to the fact that it had awful characters bar goku, awful powerscaling, awful storytelling execution and pretty much is know as Goku time...
Popularity =/= quality. Toriyama writing =/= quality. Manga existence =/= quality. DBS is Toei's cash cow and Toei would be stupid to not milk it until its dry.

Literally, everything you're nitpicking about GT was also present in Super from the awful powerscaling to the awful story telling. Outside of the Zamasu arc, can anyone honestly say the other 90 episodes had great story telling? The power scaling in the show has always been inconsistent but Super took it to a whole new level mostly because of fan service (you only have to look at the countless threads on here to see that many people had issues with it).
Professor Freeza wrote:
Cetra wrote:
Professor Freeza wrote:If Super haters are still gonna be blind on how awful GT is, they are as dumb as Flat earthers.
This is dumb. Calling people who objectively judge both shows "Super haters" if they don't blindly put Super on a pedestal. The immaturity here is quite telling. Unless you're a 9 year old kid, you should be intelligent enough to find the strengths and flaws of both shows instead of making blanket statements like "GT is trash".

User avatar
Forte224
Advanced Regular
Posts: 1376
Joined: Sat Jun 20, 2015 11:56 pm

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by Forte224 » Mon Mar 26, 2018 10:54 pm

Super by a mile. It had some really aggravating moments, as well as extremely lackluster finales to its arcs (minus this latest one), but it still had a lot of great moments that made the cast not seem static since they defeated Boo. Vegeta in particular changed a lot, but it never felt too out of place. Even the "save Cabba" stuff wasn't as annoying to me as I reflected on it more and more.

User avatar
Saturnine
Advanced Regular
Posts: 1468
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 8:45 am

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by Saturnine » Tue Mar 27, 2018 2:38 am

That's a good point. Both GT and many fan doujins fall into the trap of having the cast seem static post long timeskips. Trunks and Goten could have been given Ssj2 at least, after so many years. Quite a bit of squandered potential there too.

Timetraveller
Beyond Newbie
Posts: 224
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2017 3:53 am

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by Timetraveller » Tue Mar 27, 2018 3:24 am

Saturnine wrote:That's a good point. Both GT and many fan doujins fall into the trap of having the cast seem static post long timeskips. Trunks and Goten could have been given Ssj2 at least, after so many years. Quite a bit of squandered potential there too.
Agreed, they should've all gotten undeserved, fanservice-y powerups out of nowhere like a few of the characters did in Super and in Toyotaro's fanfiction (which I greatly enjoyed). It's kind of interesting how a fanfiction writer ended up being the official writer for the manga. A lot of Super's ideas are taken straight out of Toyotaro's previous works
Last edited by Timetraveller on Tue Mar 27, 2018 3:47 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
omaro34
I'm pretty cozy, here...
Posts: 1778
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2015 7:27 pm
Location: Western Canada

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by omaro34 » Tue Mar 27, 2018 3:26 am

Professor Freeza wrote:The Highest of highs of Super are better than the Highs of Z. think about that.

ToP is the second greatest arc next to Namek
The ToP could have been handled better. In my opinion it would have been better if the tournament itself introduced something even bigger (like a new villain). It would have made the story that much more interesting. Remember the universe 9 Angel smirking after his universe was wiped out?

Super already gave us a tournament and the ToP was such a basic story of fighting for survival that week upon week it was just action after action with no real story behind any of the fighting except "survival of the fittest". And in the end everyone got revived anyway so what did all of this accomplish? A show for Zeno? That's it? Sure, we got to see new characters and new abilities but at the end of the day Zeno simply wanted to be entertained.

I still think the Saiyan arc and Android arc are better. Hell even the 22nd Budokai/King Piccolo makes a run for its money. Goku black arc rivals it too. At least those arcs had story and lore.

I'm not saying it's terrible, just my opinion.

Super far exceeds GT too.
"Kami is the Morgan Freeman of Dragonball Z"

Check out my Piccolo page: https://www.facebook.com/PiccoloTheSuperNamek/?ref=hl

User avatar
Professor Freeza
Temporarily Banned
Posts: 448
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2017 3:21 am

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by Professor Freeza » Tue Mar 27, 2018 8:55 am

omaro34 wrote:
Professor Freeza wrote:The Highest of highs of Super are better than the Highs of Z. think about that.

ToP is the second greatest arc next to Namek
The ToP could have been handled better. In my opinion it would have been better if the tournament itself introduced something even bigger (like a new villain). It would have made the story that much more interesting. Remember the universe 9 Angel smirking after his universe was wiped out?

Super already gave us a tournament and the ToP was such a basic story of fighting for survival that week upon week it was just action after action with no real story behind any of the fighting except "survival of the fittest". And in the end everyone got revived anyway so what did all of this accomplish? A show for Zeno? That's it? Sure, we got to see new characters and new abilities but at the end of the day Zeno simply wanted to be entertained.

I still think the Saiyan arc and Android arc are better. Hell even the 22nd Budokai/King Piccolo makes a run for its money. Goku black arc rivals it too. At least those arcs had story and lore.

I'm not saying it's terrible, just my opinion.

Super far exceeds GT too.
No i rated ToP second because it was a spectacle to watch. The story was not as great as maybe King piccolo or Black [Saiyan arc is a toss up, i hate the android arc.], but as a spectacle only Namek pulls ahead of ToP.

User avatar
PFM18
Banned Alternate Account
Posts: 3701
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2018 2:23 pm

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by PFM18 » Tue Mar 27, 2018 7:28 pm

The Tournament of Power was centered around fights and it wasn't neccessarily supposed to be this extremely complex story with several different plot points. It was a series of fights that were generally very good but they were amplified by having actual differences in motives/ideologies between characters. It became more than just a physical fight it was a battle between what people believed in and what they drew their strength from. For example:

17 vs Ribrianne
Toppo vs Vegeta
Goku vs Jiren

All displayed these battles of emotions and ideologies that motivated people to acquire their power and gave them the power itself. Along with the idea that Zeno is ultimately testing the ethics of the mortal beings and they are manipulating the mortals for their own entertainment there creates this unspoken between them. Put this together and it has a sneaky good plot behind just the fighting. Not that the fighting needed any help, being that it has some of the best fights in the history of the franchise. Jiren vs Goku is to me by far the most epic,intense, fight in the history of the franchise. As Super has been coming to a close I have been re-watching the previous portions of Dragon Ball and honestly none of them even come close to this fight animation wise, stakes wise, spectacle wise, and in terms of the difference in ideologies in the fight.

Timetraveller
Beyond Newbie
Posts: 224
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2017 3:53 am

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by Timetraveller » Wed Mar 28, 2018 7:31 am

PFM18 wrote:The Tournament of Power was centered around fights and it wasn't neccessarily supposed to be this extremely complex story with several different plot points. It was a series of fights that were generally very good but they were amplified by having actual differences in motives/ideologies between characters. It became more than just a physical fight it was a battle between what people believed in and what they drew their strength from. For example:

17 vs Ribrianne
Toppo vs Vegeta
Goku vs Jiren

All displayed these battles of emotions and ideologies that motivated people to acquire their power and gave them the power itself. Along with the idea that Zeno is ultimately testing the ethics of the mortal beings and they are manipulating the mortals for their own entertainment there creates this unspoken between them. Put this together and it has a sneaky good plot behind just the fighting. Not that the fighting needed any help, being that it has some of the best fights in the history of the franchise. Jiren vs Goku is to me by far the most epic,intense, fight in the history of the franchise. As Super has been coming to a close I have been re-watching the previous portions of Dragon Ball and honestly none of them even come close to this fight animation wise, stakes wise, spectacle wise, and in terms of the difference in ideologies in the fight.
Ribrianne was purposely created to be one of the most one-dimensional characters in the whole show. It was Toei's attempt at parodying the Sailor Moon genre. Out of the 80 fighters from the other universes, only 4 or 5 were given significant screen time. Most of the characters (and their ideologies) ended up being complete stereotypes/tropes from other shows. Jiren was the loner who needed to be convinced of the power of friendship, Ribrianne the Sailor Moon "beauty is all" character and Toppo the overly obsessed Justice superhero. No one else got any meaningful characterization. It didn't help that Jiren's generic motivations were rushed and left too late to properly explore.

My biggest criticism of the arc was that there was too much time wasted on all the fodder characters. Until the last few fights, every character was lollygagging or just playing around which really undermined the seriousness of the whole tournament even if we found out later on it was all for Zeno's entertainment. They could've easily condensed the tournament into 5-10 episodes without losing anything. The final fights were spectacular in animation and voice acting (probably the best in the series) but overall the arc was a bit generic and predictable imo.

User avatar
PFM18
Banned Alternate Account
Posts: 3701
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2018 2:23 pm

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by PFM18 » Wed Mar 28, 2018 9:37 am

Timetraveller wrote:
PFM18 wrote:The Tournament of Power was centered around fights and it wasn't neccessarily supposed to be this extremely complex story with several different plot points. It was a series of fights that were generally very good but they were amplified by having actual differences in motives/ideologies between characters. It became more than just a physical fight it was a battle between what people believed in and what they drew their strength from. For example:

17 vs Ribrianne
Toppo vs Vegeta
Goku vs Jiren

All displayed these battles of emotions and ideologies that motivated people to acquire their power and gave them the power itself. Along with the idea that Zeno is ultimately testing the ethics of the mortal beings and they are manipulating the mortals for their own entertainment there creates this unspoken between them. Put this together and it has a sneaky good plot behind just the fighting. Not that the fighting needed any help, being that it has some of the best fights in the history of the franchise. Jiren vs Goku is to me by far the most epic,intense, fight in the history of the franchise. As Super has been coming to a close I have been re-watching the previous portions of Dragon Ball and honestly none of them even come close to this fight animation wise, stakes wise, spectacle wise, and in terms of the difference in ideologies in the fight.
Ribrianne was purposely created to be one of the most one-dimensional characters in the whole show. It was Toei's attempt at parodying the Sailor Moon genre. Out of the 80 fighters from the other universes, only 4 or 5 were given significant screen time. Most of the characters (and their ideologies) ended up being complete stereotypes/tropes from other shows. Jiren was the loner who needed to be convinced of the power of friendship, Ribrianne the Sailor Moon "beauty is all" character and Toppo the overly obsessed Justice superhero. No one else got any meaningful characterization. It didn't help that Jiren's generic motivations were rushed and left too late to properly explore.

My biggest criticism of the arc was that there was too much time wasted on all the fodder characters. Until the last few fights, every character was lollygagging or just playing around which really undermined the seriousness of the whole tournament even if we found out later on it was all for Zeno's entertainment. They could've easily condensed the tournament into 5-10 episodes without losing anything. The final fights were spectacular in animation and voice acting (probably the best in the series) but overall the arc was a bit generic and predictable imo.
I mean as far as predictable goes It was anything but. Nobody predicted Goku and freeza would work together and leave Android 17 as the winner. Everybody thought Goku would get the new form and KO jiren ans that would be that. The only predictable portion in the entire tournament was that the universes would be wished back. Again Toppo vs Vegeta and Jiren vs goku were nattles of emotion and ideologies that had nevwr been seen previously in the series. (Vegeta never did anything significant in the series prior to this so that was new for him)

User avatar
Kaboom
Moderator
Posts: 14129
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 6:07 pm
Location: Funky Town
Contact:

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by Kaboom » Wed Mar 28, 2018 10:25 pm

I'm a little late in addressing it, but let's all please try to remember to keep things friendly and civil. There's no reason for disagreement to necessitate hostility and condescension.
deviantART
FanFic: DragonBall GT Revised
[thread]
Powar Levuls: Main Series | Movies and Specials | GT
Nintendo/PSN/Steam: KaboomKrusader
3DS FC: 1504 - 5800 - 6358


We Gotta Power >>>>> Cha-La Head Cha-La. Fight me.

A handy video guide to Kanzenshuu-level grammar quality!

User avatar
shadowmaria
OMG CRAZY REG
Posts: 753
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2015 5:35 pm

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by shadowmaria » Wed Mar 28, 2018 11:07 pm

Super told a story more people will appreciate more widely than GT did, so Super has that going for it

However, GT's ending montage (100 years later, Dan Dan, etc.) shat all over everything Super tried to do with it's ending montage.

User avatar
SingleFringe&Sparks
I'm pretty cozy, here...
Posts: 1642
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:55 pm
Location: Mt. Paozu/East District

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by SingleFringe&Sparks » Thu Mar 29, 2018 2:18 am

Timetraveller wrote:Ribrianne was purposely created to be one of the most one-dimensional characters in the whole show. It was Toei's attempt at parodying the Sailor Moon genre. Out of the 80 fighters from the other universes, only 4 or 5 were given significant screen time. Most of the characters (and their ideologies) ended up being complete stereotypes/tropes from other shows. Jiren was the loner who needed to be convinced of the power of friendship, Ribrianne the Sailor Moon "beauty is all" character and Toppo the overly obsessed Justice superhero. No one else got any meaningful characterization. It didn't help that Jiren's generic motivations were rushed and left too late to properly explore.
Thats actually why I disliked the newer characters, none of them were portrayed with any originality. Too much of them was just straw-parodies of tropes taken from other anime or shounen cliches. I just never liked the idea of DB parodying things from other anime in it's own. Toriyama just had expies of premises or subtle references. The characters just don't seem like anything but that. Toppo really made me hate Anime characters that utter the word "justice" by how many times he said it. I still think the Ribrianne hate is a bit exaggerated though, she just seemed to fit as a One Punch Man character to me.
PFM18 wrote: Along with the idea that Zeno is ultimately testing the ethics of the mortal beings and they are manipulating the mortals for their own entertainment there creates this unspoken between them. Put this together and it has a sneaky good plot behind just the fighting.

No.That sounds more like what was interpreted, none of that was actually hinted to be intentional. Even if it was, it doesn't really make sense to test them just by fighting or to then tell them, if they didn't make that one wish, that they'd die anyway. The only universe that was criticized was U9, and yet they were brought back anyway with no real issue known to them to change nor were the other universes actually tested to change specifically on this and none of the other universes were stated to have the same issues and U7's wasn't confirmed at all. It wasn't a real plot twist.
Forte224 wrote:Super by a mile. It had some really aggravating moments, as well as extremely lackluster finales to its arcs (minus this latest one), but it still had a lot of great moments that made the cast not seem static since they defeated Boo. Vegeta in particular changed a lot, but it never felt too out of place. Even the "save Cabba" stuff wasn't as annoying to me as I reflected on it more and more.
Sounds like a personalized overview there, but this doesn't really rate the quality of writing for Super to establish these things, it seems to just force the audience to interpret the vague things how they want and then they judge the quality of Super based on what makes sense to them, which I think is bad writing. Not to mention the only character that really did anything even semi-significant besides Goku & Vegeta was Gohan. One character. I cant say that Super is that far better than GT, it seems just like basic rounded writing if they consider actually using other underused characters for a situation the way Toriyama used to; rather than focusing just on marketing Goku as their status quo.
Zephyr wrote:The fandom's collective fetishizing of "moments" is also ridiculous to me. No, not everyone needs a fucking "shine" moment. If that's all you want, then all you want is fanservice, rather than an actual coherent story. And of course those aren't mutually exclusive; you could have a coherent story with "shine" moments! But if a story is perfectly coherent (and I'm really not seeing any compelling arguments that this one is anything but, despite constantly recurring, really poorly reasoned, attempts to argue otherwise), and you're bemoaning the lack of "shine" moments as a reason for the story's poor quality, then you're letting your thirst for "shine" moments obfuscate your ability to detect basic storytelling when it's right in front of you.

Timetraveller
Beyond Newbie
Posts: 224
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2017 3:53 am

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by Timetraveller » Thu Mar 29, 2018 9:32 am

PFM18 wrote:
Timetraveller wrote:
PFM18 wrote:The Tournament of Power was centered around fights and it wasn't neccessarily supposed to be this extremely complex story with several different plot points. It was a series of fights that were generally very good but they were amplified by having actual differences in motives/ideologies between characters. It became more than just a physical fight it was a battle between what people believed in and what they drew their strength from. For example:

17 vs Ribrianne
Toppo vs Vegeta
Goku vs Jiren

All displayed these battles of emotions and ideologies that motivated people to acquire their power and gave them the power itself. Along with the idea that Zeno is ultimately testing the ethics of the mortal beings and they are manipulating the mortals for their own entertainment there creates this unspoken between them. Put this together and it has a sneaky good plot behind just the fighting. Not that the fighting needed any help, being that it has some of the best fights in the history of the franchise. Jiren vs Goku is to me by far the most epic,intense, fight in the history of the franchise. As Super has been coming to a close I have been re-watching the previous portions of Dragon Ball and honestly none of them even come close to this fight animation wise, stakes wise, spectacle wise, and in terms of the difference in ideologies in the fight.
Ribrianne was purposely created to be one of the most one-dimensional characters in the whole show. It was Toei's attempt at parodying the Sailor Moon genre. Out of the 80 fighters from the other universes, only 4 or 5 were given significant screen time. Most of the characters (and their ideologies) ended up being complete stereotypes/tropes from other shows. Jiren was the loner who needed to be convinced of the power of friendship, Ribrianne the Sailor Moon "beauty is all" character and Toppo the overly obsessed Justice superhero. No one else got any meaningful characterization. It didn't help that Jiren's generic motivations were rushed and left too late to properly explore.

My biggest criticism of the arc was that there was too much time wasted on all the fodder characters. Until the last few fights, every character was lollygagging or just playing around which really undermined the seriousness of the whole tournament even if we found out later on it was all for Zeno's entertainment. They could've easily condensed the tournament into 5-10 episodes without losing anything. The final fights were spectacular in animation and voice acting (probably the best in the series) but overall the arc was a bit generic and predictable imo.
I mean as far as predictable goes It was anything but. Nobody predicted Goku and freeza would work together and leave Android 17 as the winner. Everybody thought Goku would get the new form and KO jiren ans that would be that. The only predictable portion in the entire tournament was that the universes would be wished back. Again Toppo vs Vegeta and Jiren vs goku were nattles of emotion and ideologies that had nevwr been seen previously in the series. (Vegeta never did anything significant in the series prior to this so that was new for him)
Predictability isn't about being able to predict what the match ups are. Every single matchup in Dragonball was far from predictable if we go by your definition. No one predicted at the start of the Frieza arc that Gohan, Krillin and Vegeta were going to team up for eg. It's more about how predictable the plot was and in the ToP, that was as straight a line as it gets. It became an everyone vs U7 fight, U7 eliminated 95% of the tournament and ended up winning. It really didn't matter who was going to win because every arc has ended with someone (17 or someone else from universe 7) wishing everyone back. Toei didn't have the balls to try something new.

Hard for anyone to feel invested in this "battle of emotion and ideologies" for a cliched batman ripoff whose generic backstory was revealed with 3 minutes left in the tournament. Vegeta's done many more meaningful things in the show prior to this. His sacrifice vs buu was far more meaningful than when he did the same thing vs Toppo

User avatar
PFM18
Banned Alternate Account
Posts: 3701
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2018 2:23 pm

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by PFM18 » Thu Mar 29, 2018 9:36 am

Timetraveller wrote:
PFM18 wrote:
Timetraveller wrote:
Ribrianne was purposely created to be one of the most one-dimensional characters in the whole show. It was Toei's attempt at parodying the Sailor Moon genre. Out of the 80 fighters from the other universes, only 4 or 5 were given significant screen time. Most of the characters (and their ideologies) ended up being complete stereotypes/tropes from other shows. Jiren was the loner who needed to be convinced of the power of friendship, Ribrianne the Sailor Moon "beauty is all" character and Toppo the overly obsessed Justice superhero. No one else got any meaningful characterization. It didn't help that Jiren's generic motivations were rushed and left too late to properly explore.

My biggest criticism of the arc was that there was too much time wasted on all the fodder characters. Until the last few fights, every character was lollygagging or just playing around which really undermined the seriousness of the whole tournament even if we found out later on it was all for Zeno's entertainment. They could've easily condensed the tournament into 5-10 episodes without losing anything. The final fights were spectacular in animation and voice acting (probably the best in the series) but overall the arc was a bit generic and predictable imo.
I mean as far as predictable goes It was anything but. Nobody predicted Goku and freeza would work together and leave Android 17 as the winner. Everybody thought Goku would get the new form and KO jiren ans that would be that. The only predictable portion in the entire tournament was that the universes would be wished back. Again Toppo vs Vegeta and Jiren vs goku were nattles of emotion and ideologies that had nevwr been seen previously in the series. (Vegeta never did anything significant in the series prior to this so that was new for him)
Predictability isn't about being able to predict what the match ups are. Every single matchup in Dragonball was far from predictable if we go by your definition. No one predicted at the start of the Frieza arc that Gohan, Krillin and Vegeta were going to team up for eg. It's more about how predictable the plot was and in the ToP, that was as straight a line as it gets. It became an everyone vs U7 fight, U7 eliminated 95% of the tournament and ended up winning. It really didn't matter who was going to win because every arc has ended with someone (17 or someone else from universe 7) wishing everyone back. Toei didn't have the balls to try something new.

Hard for anyone to feel invested in this "battle of emotion and ideologies" for a cliched batman ripoff whose generic backstory was revealed with 3 minutes left in the tournament. Vegeta's done many more meaningful things in the show prior to this. His sacrifice vs buu was far more meaningful than when he did the same thing vs Toppo
What Vegeta did may have been more meaningful against Buu but it felt less natural because he had literally just got done murdering half the tournament audience and talking about having a family made him weak. And I have no idea how you figure Jiren to be a batman ripoff and I wasnt just referring to that I was also referring to Toppo vs Vegeta and 17 vs Ribrianne

SaintEvolution
OMG CRAZY REG
Posts: 782
Joined: Tue May 26, 2015 2:56 pm

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by SaintEvolution » Thu Mar 29, 2018 10:01 am

Timetraveller wrote:
Professor Freeza wrote:
Cetra wrote:
Wow.

You have won the internet with that comparison. Comparing a scientific fact with something opinion-based.

In case you still do not understand it: It is not a scientific fact that Super is better than GT. One can set certain standards to compare and then evaluate the shows thus come to the conclusion "in this light Super is better". But those are no universal laws of nature that under all circumstances have to be followed to one absolute and ultimate truth that results in "Super is better".

And probably you are not ignoring anyone so please promise that only if you intend to make it true.

"Just because it is your opinion doesn't make it right" Someone has a great understanding of self irony, I hope. Otherwise that would be really sad.
Its not irony if I'm objectively right. And you want proof?


GT was CANCELLED. Super went 131 episodes AND a short hiatus.
GT didnt have Toriyama anywhere besides the Art. Super has Toriyama even in the direct story.
GT bombed in TV. Super ALWAYS stayed in top 10.
There was NO GT movie. A SUPER canon movie is coming Right up.
GT had NO manga coverage. Super has one [even though I'm dont like it at all]

GT didnt come top 5 in money making for Toei. It didnt move Merch.
The great Z rehash Kai didnt move merch and got cancelled.
SUPER obliterates every other TOEI franchise.

Add to the fact that it had awful characters bar goku, awful powerscaling, awful storytelling execution and pretty much is know as Goku time...
Popularity =/= quality. Toriyama writing =/= quality. Manga existence =/= quality. DBS is Toei's cash cow and Toei would be stupid to not milk it until its dry.

Literally, everything you're nitpicking about GT was also present in Super from the awful powerscaling to the awful story telling. Outside of the Zamasu arc, can anyone honestly say the other 90 episodes had great story telling? The power scaling in the show has always been inconsistent but Super took it to a whole new level mostly because of fan service (you only have to look at the countless threads on here to see that many people had issues with it).
Professor Freeza wrote:
Cetra wrote:
This is dumb. Calling people who objectively judge both shows "Super haters" if they don't blindly put Super on a pedestal. The immaturity here is quite telling. Unless you're a 9 year old kid, you should be intelligent enough to find the strengths and flaws of both shows instead of making blanket statements like "GT is trash".
Actually, excepting for the Golden Frieza arc, Super is not so wrong in powerscaling as GT was. The God Ki is the reason for everything.

And if you are gonna talk, for example, about Goku's fights with Kuririn or the possessed Roshi, he was obviously controling himself.

About storytelling, both Tournment arcs in Super were okay, with exception of Piccolo's participation on them.

User avatar
majinwarman
I'm pretty cozy, here...
Posts: 1697
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2016 11:50 pm
Location: Freeza Planet 1

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by majinwarman » Fri Mar 30, 2018 7:58 pm

shadowmaria wrote:Super told a story more people will appreciate more widely than GT did, so Super has that going for it

However, GT's ending montage (100 years later, Dan Dan, etc.) shat all over everything Super tried to do with it's ending montage.
To me, Super's ending felt like a season finale which is what I think they want us to feel.
Majinwarman
So I'm 'evil', huh? Interesting."
A world without Dragon Ball is just meh.

Post Reply