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
Cetra
I Live Here
Posts: 3856
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 3:01 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by Cetra » Sun Nov 04, 2018 8:35 am

I wanted to make a list for Yami Goku. Then I realized I pretty much started writing out GT. So I stick to my "the whole GT" answer.

Super has one scene that is almost better than anything else for me and that is Zamasu becoming Gyiyg. As an absolute RPG freak Zamasu is the saving grace of Super for me (anime Zamasu) but there is one so powerful emotional moment in GT right before the moment - that moment will never be surpassed in the entire franchise for me. I mentioned it a few times already. Pan turning around, shedding a tear and saying "Ojii-chan ..." once she feels Goku is still there, then fying to him, seeing him and saying, he looks like a god ... that scene is just great.
"Citation needed."
"too lazy

feel free to take it with grain of salt or discredit me altogether, I'm not losing any sleep"

User avatar
ekrolo2
Kicks it Old-School
Posts: 7811
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2014 8:27 am
Location: Split, Croatia

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by ekrolo2 » Sun Nov 04, 2018 8:57 am

I don't think Super having tournaments is an inherent criticism, they're just not very good. The U6 arc may be the most forgettable thing made by modern DB and the Tournament of Power is far more entertaining when we're not in the tournament itself. Never mind the fact it goes on for about 15 episodes longer than it needs to when the ToP itself happens.
When someone tells you, "Don't present your opinion as fact," what they're actually saying is, "Don't present your opinion with any conviction. Because I don't like your opinion, and I want to be able to dismiss it as easily as possible." Don't fall for it.

How the Black Arc Should End (by Lightbing!):

User avatar
Lord Beerus
Namekian Warrior
Posts: 20496
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2014 5:20 pm
Location: A temple on a giant tree
Contact:

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by Lord Beerus » Sun Nov 04, 2018 9:55 am

ekrolo2 wrote:I don't think Super having tournaments is an inherent criticism, they're just not very good. The U6 arc may be the most forgettable thing made by modern DB and the Tournament of Power is far more entertaining when we're not in the tournament itself. Never mind the fact it goes on for about 15 episodes longer than it needs to when the ToP itself happens.
I think the U6/Champa arc gets a bad rap. I think it oozes a lot of charm, even if the fights aren't the most spectacular things to witness. It served its purposes at being a window into the wacky and wonderful features that just a fraction of the Dragon Ball multiverse can provide, and lays the foundation for significant character and story beats for the Future Trunks arc and the Universal Survival arc. It may seem superfluous at face value, but it has some artistic integrity going for it.

The Universal Survival arc was fireworks displays that juggled character beats with fanservice extremely well, in my opinion. It was bit long in the tooth looking back, and it suffers from the same storytelling issues that the battle against the Ginyu Force and climatic battle against Freeza do, in that while what we're getting is entertaining at face, when look back on how the arc progressed you realise how much of that content was time wasting and stalling. Not to say that was bad, or that it even lacked any artistic or superficial value, but it just felt like fluff. Fun fluff, but fluff nonetheless.

User avatar
ekrolo2
Kicks it Old-School
Posts: 7811
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2014 8:27 am
Location: Split, Croatia

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by ekrolo2 » Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:20 am

Lord Beerus wrote:
ekrolo2 wrote:I don't think Super having tournaments is an inherent criticism, they're just not very good. The U6 arc may be the most forgettable thing made by modern DB and the Tournament of Power is far more entertaining when we're not in the tournament itself. Never mind the fact it goes on for about 15 episodes longer than it needs to when the ToP itself happens.
I think the U6/Champa arc gets a bad rap. I think it oozes a lot of charm, even if the fights aren't the most spectacular things to witness. It served its purposes at being a window into the wacky and wonderful features that just a fraction of the Dragon Ball multiverse can provide, and lays the foundation for significant character and story beats for the Future Trunks arc and the Universal Survival arc. It may seem superfluous at face value, but it has some artistic integrity going for it.

The Universal Survival arc was fireworks displays that juggled character beats with fanservice extremely well, in my opinion. It was bit long in the tooth looking back, and it suffers from the same storytelling issues that the battle against the Ginyu Force and climatic battle against Freeza do, in that while what we're getting is entertaining at face, when look back on how the arc progressed you realise how much of that content was time wasting and stalling. Not to say that was bad, or that it even lacked any artistic or superficial value, but it just felt like fluff. Fun fluff, but fluff nonetheless.
I didn't find most of it charming except Vegeta's more comedic fight with Magetta in the manga. It's just kind of a bog standard, boring tournament story set in DB with adversaries who are mostly wasted or forgettable. Like I said, I also didn't find the vast, vast majority of it any fun.

I agree on the ToP, its there for the action-obsessed imbecilia of the DB fandom to salivate over and for them, it's a good time. For me? It gave me a pretty good idea of what people back in the 90s must've felt when Namek dragged ass like a dying snail.
When someone tells you, "Don't present your opinion as fact," what they're actually saying is, "Don't present your opinion with any conviction. Because I don't like your opinion, and I want to be able to dismiss it as easily as possible." Don't fall for it.

How the Black Arc Should End (by Lightbing!):

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 » Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:44 am

ekrolo2 wrote:
Lord Beerus wrote:
ekrolo2 wrote:I don't think Super having tournaments is an inherent criticism, they're just not very good. The U6 arc may be the most forgettable thing made by modern DB and the Tournament of Power is far more entertaining when we're not in the tournament itself. Never mind the fact it goes on for about 15 episodes longer than it needs to when the ToP itself happens.
I think the U6/Champa arc gets a bad rap. I think it oozes a lot of charm, even if the fights aren't the most spectacular things to witness. It served its purposes at being a window into the wacky and wonderful features that just a fraction of the Dragon Ball multiverse can provide, and lays the foundation for significant character and story beats for the Future Trunks arc and the Universal Survival arc. It may seem superfluous at face value, but it has some artistic integrity going for it.

The Universal Survival arc was fireworks displays that juggled character beats with fanservice extremely well, in my opinion. It was bit long in the tooth looking back, and it suffers from the same storytelling issues that the battle against the Ginyu Force and climatic battle against Freeza do, in that while what we're getting is entertaining at face, when look back on how the arc progressed you realise how much of that content was time wasting and stalling. Not to say that was bad, or that it even lacked any artistic or superficial value, but it just felt like fluff. Fun fluff, but fluff nonetheless.
I didn't find most of it charming except Vegeta's more comedic fight with Magetta in the manga. It's just kind of a bog standard, boring tournament story set in DB with adversaries who are mostly wasted or forgettable. Like I said, I also didn't find the vast, vast majority of it any fun.

I agree on the ToP, its there for the action-obsessed imbecilia of the DB fandom to salivate over and for them, it's a good time. For me? It gave me a pretty good idea of what people back in the 90s must've felt when Namek dragged ass like a dying snail.
It wasn't even just fighting. We had an abundance of really cool character moments too.

User avatar
ekrolo2
Kicks it Old-School
Posts: 7811
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2014 8:27 am
Location: Split, Croatia

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by ekrolo2 » Sun Nov 04, 2018 11:03 am

PFM18 wrote:
ekrolo2 wrote:
Lord Beerus wrote: I think the U6/Champa arc gets a bad rap. I think it oozes a lot of charm, even if the fights aren't the most spectacular things to witness. It served its purposes at being a window into the wacky and wonderful features that just a fraction of the Dragon Ball multiverse can provide, and lays the foundation for significant character and story beats for the Future Trunks arc and the Universal Survival arc. It may seem superfluous at face value, but it has some artistic integrity going for it.

The Universal Survival arc was fireworks displays that juggled character beats with fanservice extremely well, in my opinion. It was bit long in the tooth looking back, and it suffers from the same storytelling issues that the battle against the Ginyu Force and climatic battle against Freeza do, in that while what we're getting is entertaining at face, when look back on how the arc progressed you realise how much of that content was time wasting and stalling. Not to say that was bad, or that it even lacked any artistic or superficial value, but it just felt like fluff. Fun fluff, but fluff nonetheless.
I didn't find most of it charming except Vegeta's more comedic fight with Magetta in the manga. It's just kind of a bog standard, boring tournament story set in DB with adversaries who are mostly wasted or forgettable. Like I said, I also didn't find the vast, vast majority of it any fun.

I agree on the ToP, its there for the action-obsessed imbecilia of the DB fandom to salivate over and for them, it's a good time. For me? It gave me a pretty good idea of what people back in the 90s must've felt when Namek dragged ass like a dying snail.
It wasn't even just fighting. We had an abundance of really cool character moments too.
Moments which majoritively failed to leave a mark on me and are a poor reprieve from dozens of episodes of people I don't care about fighting in what is possibly the most boring environment in Dragon Ball history. I was PRAYING for a cutaway episode or two to Goten, Trunks or Yamcha doing something on Earth, that's how fucking bored I was.
When someone tells you, "Don't present your opinion as fact," what they're actually saying is, "Don't present your opinion with any conviction. Because I don't like your opinion, and I want to be able to dismiss it as easily as possible." Don't fall for it.

How the Black Arc Should End (by Lightbing!):

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 » Sun Nov 04, 2018 11:13 am

ekrolo2 wrote:
PFM18 wrote:
ekrolo2 wrote: I didn't find most of it charming except Vegeta's more comedic fight with Magetta in the manga. It's just kind of a bog standard, boring tournament story set in DB with adversaries who are mostly wasted or forgettable. Like I said, I also didn't find the vast, vast majority of it any fun.

I agree on the ToP, its there for the action-obsessed imbecilia of the DB fandom to salivate over and for them, it's a good time. For me? It gave me a pretty good idea of what people back in the 90s must've felt when Namek dragged ass like a dying snail.
It wasn't even just fighting. We had an abundance of really cool character moments too.
Moments which majoritively failed to leave a mark on me and are a poor reprieve from dozens of episodes of people I don't care about fighting in what is possibly the most boring environment in Dragon Ball history. I was PRAYING for a cutaway episode or two to Goten, Trunks or Yamcha doing something on Earth, that's how fucking bored I was.
Eh, they may not have left a mark on you, but I enjoyed it and the tournament as a whole. How well Freeza's character was executed and how he was used in being strategic and having a completely different approach from what we have seen from him ever before, alone makes it better than any GT arc. Add in the development by Beerus, Kale, Vegeta,(including his relationship with Roshi) and you have an arc that completely blows anything "Goku's time" ever did out of the water. Goku kicking everyone's ass while everyone sits their dumbfounded is not entertaining.

User avatar
ekrolo2
Kicks it Old-School
Posts: 7811
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2014 8:27 am
Location: Split, Croatia

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by ekrolo2 » Sun Nov 04, 2018 11:16 am

PFM18 wrote:
ekrolo2 wrote:
PFM18 wrote:
It wasn't even just fighting. We had an abundance of really cool character moments too.
Moments which majoritively failed to leave a mark on me and are a poor reprieve from dozens of episodes of people I don't care about fighting in what is possibly the most boring environment in Dragon Ball history. I was PRAYING for a cutaway episode or two to Goten, Trunks or Yamcha doing something on Earth, that's how fucking bored I was.
Eh, they may not have left a mark on you, but I enjoyed it and the tournament as a whole. How well Freeza's character was executed and how he was used in being strategic and having a completely different approach from what we have seen from him ever before, alone makes it better than any GT arc. Add in the development by Beerus, Kale, Vegeta,(including his relationship with Roshi) and you have an arc that completely blows anything "Goku's time" ever did out of the water. Goku kicking everyone's ass while everyone sits their dumbfounded is not entertaining.
I only agree with Freeza being done well, he's basically the only reason you should ever watch the ToP as far as I'm concerned though it REALLY annoys me that Freeza's character gets handled way better development-wise as part of an ensemble piece and not the recent arc where he's the bad guy in. Kale is one of the most idiotic things to come out of the ToP, I never bought a single thing about her and Vegeta just shouts terrible, generic Shonen platitudes for several episodes in a row by the end. His team up with Roshi is cool but its nowhere near enough to justify the existence of this POS.

I will say it again: Battle of Gods the movie is all we should've gotten and needed really. Nothing afterwards feels like it needs to exist.
When someone tells you, "Don't present your opinion as fact," what they're actually saying is, "Don't present your opinion with any conviction. Because I don't like your opinion, and I want to be able to dismiss it as easily as possible." Don't fall for it.

How the Black Arc Should End (by Lightbing!):

User avatar
YamiGoku
Beyond Newbie
Posts: 129
Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2017 7:41 pm

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by YamiGoku » Sun Nov 04, 2018 11:18 am

sunsetshimmer wrote: Are you blaming him for GT having memorable scenes that are not fighting scenes?
The only memorable non-fighting scene in Super was episode where Trunks visits Gohan. Funny how this was also best DBS episode out of all of them or one of the best at least.
GT actually has some classic scenes like shaving moustache, Goku eating dragon ball or farewell scenes. And that's in series that is twice as short and doesn't even have any episodes between action packed arcs except for single episode tournament after Baby saga. Super has a lot of filler episodes or such that let you rest from fighting, yet those are somehow not memorable at all. When talking about "memorable scenes" from Super people only bring fighting scenes and transformation. Basically what you did lol.


I think saiying that Vegeta shaving and Goku eating the 4 star Ball are truly memorable moments is a streech, but i respect your opinion. I just mentioned the moments i actually truly rewatched often, but if you want me to mention non-fighting ones then:


*Vegeta fulfilling the promise he did to Trunks on Z

*The SSG ritual

*Kid Trunks Motivates His Future Self

*Trunks visits Gohan

*Bulma finding the old time machine

*The Goodbye to to Future Trunks and Mai

*The Vegeta moment when he holds Bra for the first time

*Master Roshi speach to Goku and Krilling on the TOP

*Universe 2 and 6 eliminations

*The universes Coming back and Jiren and Toppo talk

*The ending of The TOP

etc, I think there are more but i can't remember.
sunsetshimmer wrote: Am i supposed to laugh at this? Cause i'm not sure if it's a joke or real argument.
Quality >> Quantity
always
DBZ having 15 movies doesn't make series better than DB because it had 4 movies.
The point i was trying to make is that Super succeeded at keeping the franchise alive and GT did not, GT didnt spawn anything new after it ended.

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 » Sun Nov 04, 2018 11:20 am

ekrolo2 wrote:Nothing afterwards feels like it needs to exist.
and GT did feel like it needed to exist?

User avatar
ekrolo2
Kicks it Old-School
Posts: 7811
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2014 8:27 am
Location: Split, Croatia

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by ekrolo2 » Sun Nov 04, 2018 11:24 am

PFM18 wrote:
ekrolo2 wrote:Nothing afterwards feels like it needs to exist.
and GT did feel like it needed to exist?
Most of post-Namek Dragon Ball doesn't need to exist IMO. GTs just less offensive to me than Super, I'll take a mostly average with some highs and lows anime continuation over another that's basically a culmination of everything wrong & broken about later era DB taken to the nth degree.
When someone tells you, "Don't present your opinion as fact," what they're actually saying is, "Don't present your opinion with any conviction. Because I don't like your opinion, and I want to be able to dismiss it as easily as possible." Don't fall for it.

How the Black Arc Should End (by Lightbing!):

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 » Sun Nov 04, 2018 11:31 am

ekrolo2 wrote: Most of post-Namek Dragon Ball doesn't need to exist IMO..
I see this all the time, and I don't really understand it. To me, the more Dragon Ball the better, assuming that it isn't terrible/bad. Even GT was really bad, but the Baby arc alone justifies it's existence. SSJ4 is iconic at this point and the Baby arc could be much better but it is a genuinely good story at it's core. Even though the rest is trash, I'm happy that GT exists. In Super, I don't see anything about it being offensively bad like GT, except maybe the animation in the firt two arcs.

User avatar
ekrolo2
Kicks it Old-School
Posts: 7811
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2014 8:27 am
Location: Split, Croatia

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by ekrolo2 » Sun Nov 04, 2018 11:35 am

PFM18 wrote:
ekrolo2 wrote: Most of post-Namek Dragon Ball doesn't need to exist IMO..
I see this all the time, and I don't really understand it. To me, the more Dragon Ball the better, assuming that it isn't terrible/bad. Even GT was really bad, but the Baby arc alone justifies it's existence. SSJ4 is iconic at this point and the Baby arc could be much better but it is a genuinely good story at it's core. Even though the rest is trash, I'm happy that GT exists. In Super, I don't see anything about it being offensively bad like GT, except maybe the animation in the firt two arcs.
I'm of the opinion things can and absolutely should end when they start going downhill quality wise. Dragon Ball started that with the Android arc and barring a couple of things like BoG the movie and the Trunks anime special, it never really recovered, it just keeps oscillating between trash to vaguely entertaining mediocrity.

I'll gladly take say 5 years of good DB content that ends on a high note over it persistently chugging along ad Infinitum like a shitty western comic book series.
When someone tells you, "Don't present your opinion as fact," what they're actually saying is, "Don't present your opinion with any conviction. Because I don't like your opinion, and I want to be able to dismiss it as easily as possible." Don't fall for it.

How the Black Arc Should End (by Lightbing!):

User avatar
Darkseid
Newbie
Posts: 22
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2018 2:50 pm

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by Darkseid » Sun Nov 04, 2018 11:52 am

YamiGoku wrote: The point i was trying to make is that Super succeeded at keeping the franchise alive and GT did not, GT didnt spawn anything new after it ended.
Isnt really an argument since both series aired under completely different circumstances. If we take Super as it is now and have it change places with Gt it wouldnt have been any different. Dragonball was gonna end, after Z and the manga had finished they´re respective runs, one way or another. Both Toriyama and the fandom were simply too burned out, after over 10 years of Dragonball content, for it to continue much longer.

User avatar
ekrolo2
Kicks it Old-School
Posts: 7811
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2014 8:27 am
Location: Split, Croatia

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by ekrolo2 » Sun Nov 04, 2018 11:56 am

Darkseid wrote:
YamiGoku wrote: The point i was trying to make is that Super succeeded at keeping the franchise alive and GT did not, GT didnt spawn anything new after it ended.
Isnt really an argument since both series aired under completely different circumstances. If we take Super as it is now and have it change places with Gt it wouldnt have been any different. Dragonball was gonna end, after Z and the manga had finished they´re respective runs, one way or another.
Correct, Dragon Ball was losing steam all over the place once the manga finished. The Z anime ratings were progressively declining, revenue from the films was also dropping sharply and a lot of the people working & watching the show were frankly burned out after a decade of this.
When someone tells you, "Don't present your opinion as fact," what they're actually saying is, "Don't present your opinion with any conviction. Because I don't like your opinion, and I want to be able to dismiss it as easily as possible." Don't fall for it.

How the Black Arc Should End (by Lightbing!):

User avatar
sunsetshimmer
Advanced Regular
Posts: 1396
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2017 4:34 pm
Location: Poland/Equestria

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by sunsetshimmer » Sun Nov 04, 2018 12:05 pm

YamiGoku wrote: The point i was trying to make is that Super succeeded at keeping the franchise alive and GT did not, GT didnt spawn anything new after it ended.
People lost interest on DB even before GT. People got bored after watching DB for so many years and since manga ended anime had even harder time.
DBS aired over 15 years after GT, people were hyped about new series no matter what.
Ask yourself, would DBS keep franchise alive if it was aired after Z instead of GT? With two first arcs being retellings of movies? With blue Goku fighting gold Frieza?
You think it would be more popular than Buu saga? I don't think so. I highly doubt DBS would make it to 131 episodes. It would probably end at U6 tournament or Zamasu at best.
Rarity is the best pony
Pan-chan is the best saiya-jin

User avatar
Mister_Popo
Regular
Posts: 556
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2017 2:12 pm
Location: Belgium

Re: Which did it better, GT or Super?

Post by Mister_Popo » Sun Nov 04, 2018 12:23 pm

Super establishes more 'content' (Gods, multiverse ...) but actually makes some interesting stories from this, like BOG, FT and TOP. Intresting characters like Beerus, Whis, Zamasu ... are introduced.
I am missing those characters within GT.
If i am watching GT, with all respect for the people that think it's good, and they are fully entitled to have their opinion, i can't help the feeling 'this is just establishing more content without purpose, please let it end...'
The same feeling some people have with Super, i recognize when watching GT. It felt like an artificial ending after an ending that was already well deserved and established in its own right.
Nontheless i enjoyed a number of moments / concepts of it and i still think ssj4 is a pretty badass transformation.

One does not need to like GT OR Super. It's perfectly fine to enjoy both, even if they can't co-exist within the same continuation.

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 » Sun Nov 04, 2018 1:01 pm

I pretty much agree with everything you said in your post.
Mister_Popo wrote:i enjoyed a number of moments / concepts of it and i still think ssj4 is a pretty badass transformation.
Yeah, exactly. SSJ4 alone justifies GT's existence. To me, it is the only truly aesthetically creative transformation in the entire franchise for our main characters. The way it was used sometimes I definitely feel like "badass" fits it very well. With that being said, I have a really hard time enjoying watching GT. I have been rewatching everything and I had an easy time rewatching all 291 episodes of Z, all 153 of DB, but rewatching GT I have tried but I can't for the life of me get through the Super 17 Arc.(And it's a very short arc to) It's just so boring and dumb.

Post Reply