Do you still think Gohan should've been the main character?

[ABED]

But are those options as engaging as the character we've invested a decade plus into?

[Tai Lung]

But are those options as engaging as the character we've invested a decade plus into?

probably not, for that the spectators would have to know them better starting little by little like the gohan case.
but the personality of some similar to the one of goku can help to take better the plot and the fights. there would be a risk yeah ..

[ABED]

But are those options as engaging as the character we've invested a decade plus into?

probably not, for that the spectators would have to know them better starting little by little like the gohan case.
but the personality of some similar to the one of goku can help to take better the plot and the fights. there would be a risk yeah ..

Giving them screen time doesn't require them taking the role of the main character.

[Shaddy]

I think Gohan should have been the main character of the Buu arc, Videl, Goten and Trunks (maybe Piccolo, Krillin and 18) with him.

I don't think we need to stick to always one or always the other. By all means, Gohan and Krillin were the main characters of the Freeza arc, they were the ones involved in the story, they were the ones fighting. I would say Trunks and Vegeta (along with a little Piccolo and Krillin) were the biggest players in the Cell arc, with Goku really only doing much at the beginning and part of the end. And that's okay.

I think if Dragon Ball established this revolving cast for different arcs, even if Goku and Vegeta were still present, it would work wonders for the series not feeling so janky all the time. Have an arc where Krillin, 17, and 18 are involved. Then, do one where Gohan, Piccolo and...someone else are a big part of things. Then, I dunno, something with Trunks and Goten so they don't feel so useless. Even if Goku and Vegeta are still around, just having more active members at a given time is all you really need (I mean, besides fixing the power mechanics so they can also actually be relevant).

[ABED]

But the Freeza arc is still building to the inevitable battle between Goku and Freeza. Gohan was never the main character. He was important but not the central character. I liked that Toriyama experimented with structure and different ways of telling his story, including how much he focused on each character, but at the center should always be Goku otherwise if feels like a completely different story.

[Shaddy]

Basically nothing in the Cell arc had anything to do with specifically Gohan, but Toriyama still made the final battle all about him regardless of it making sense.

Also, I don't think it "needs" to always be Goku. By all means, I want it to feel like a different story, because it's been this story for thirty years and it's starting to smell.

[ABED]

Basically nothing in the Cell arc had anything to do with specifically Gohan, but Toriyama still made the final battle all about him regardless of it making sense.

Also, I don't think it "needs" to always be Goku. By all means, I want it to feel like a different story, because it's been this story for thirty years and it's starting to smell.

But watching it feels less like Gohan vs. Cell and more like Goku vs. Cell with Gohan acting as Goku's proxy. It doesn't smell because they aren't changing the main character. It smells because they can't let go of the past and move forward. You see that in such things as fixating on Freeza or keeping the story set before the end of DBZ. Putting Pan in the driver seat wouldn't solve the issue. It just diminishes whatever "emotional equity" the audience has in the story. If DB is the story of Goku's journey of self improvement, you're effectively starting over by changing the main character.

[Shaddy]

They've already tried to "solve" this issue while still keeping Goku as the main character, and all it leads to is people complaining that "the power scaling doesn't make sense", or dumb decisions like turning him back into a child in GT. By all means the biggest mistake that series made in trying to reduce the scale was still involving Goku and not making Pan the main character. JoJo changes the protagonist every single arc but it still felt like a journey because of the generational aspect, and Dragon Ball totally could have that too. The only time it felt like an actual regression was when Part 7 moved to a different continuity and very literally left the entire story behind, and even that made up for it by being the best-written part of them all. I'm not bored of the series because of Frieza, I'm bored because Goku has only gotten less interesting and the plot is struggling so hard to make something good for him to do that with how much less enjoyable the character has become that it may as well just not bother and move to someone new. Why is "Goku's journey of self-improvement" the only thing Dragon Ball is allowed to be about? The Bardock special is a tragedy with none of the main characters and people fellate that thing like it's something something big dick pornstar joke goes here.

[ABED]

They've already tried to "solve" this issue while still keeping Goku as the main character, and all it leads to is people complaining that "the power scaling doesn't make sense", or dumb decisions like turning him back into a child in GT. By all means the biggest mistake that series made in trying to reduce the scale was still involving Goku and not making Pan the main character. JoJo changes the protagonist every single arc but it still felt like a journey because of the generational aspect, and Dragon Ball totally could have that too. The only time it felt like an actual regression was when Part 7 moved to a different continuity and very literally left the entire story behind, and even that made up for it by being the best-written part of them all. I'm not bored of the series because of Frieza, I'm bored because Goku has only gotten less interesting and the plot is struggling so hard to make something good for him to do that with how much less enjoyable the character has become that it may as well just not bother and move to someone new. Why is "Goku's journey of self-improvement" the only thing Dragon Ball is allowed to be about? The Bardock special is a tragedy with none of the main characters and people fellate that thing like it's something something big dick pornstar joke goes here.

JoJo changes it every arc from the outset. It didn't do it after nearly a decade. Your question about why is the main character's story the only thing the story allowed to be about makes zero sense to me. When did I say it was the only thing it could be about? Also, Batman comics are still about Batman after 80 years, yet who is calling for them to be about another character?

Bardock is a one off TV special - a radically different prospect than long-form storytelling.

How many stories can you think of that change main characters after years with the same one? And how many of them are good?

[Shaddy]

I don't think "sunken cost fallacy" is a worthwhile defense when the series has this much resources to throw around. We shouldn't have to stick with something that's gotten dull just because "well it's the way it's always been". Dragon Ball was over for like twenty years, if they'd started a new spinoff instead of Super would that make any difference? Not really.

[ABED]

I don't think "sunken cost fallacy" is a worthwhile defense when the series has this much resources to throw around. We shouldn't have to stick with something that's gotten dull just because "well it's the way it's always been". Dragon Ball was over for like twenty years, if they'd started a new spinoff instead of Super would that make any difference? Not really.

How was my point an example of sunk cost? I was never arguing "because it's always been that way". DB has gotten dull but Goku isn't the reason and switching him out for someone else wouldn't fix the fundamental issue. Hell, the answer could easily be that the best thing they could do is end it.

A spin-off is a completely different issue. It's not the same story. It's a different story set in the same world. For instance, Frasier was not anything like Cheers but if Frasier Crane took the lead of the story.

[Shaddy]

DB has gotten dull but Goku isn't the reason and switching him out for someone else wouldn't fix the fundamental issue. Hell, the answer could easily be that the best thing they could do is end it.

He is though. If the entire story really only revolves around Goku, and Goku is no longer interesting, that almost assuredly is the biggest problem. That's why Z was always trying to stave off having him involved for most of it's story. Goku needs to either change or give it up to someone like Goku but better.

A spin-off is a completely different issue. It's not the same story. It's a different story set in the same world. For instance, Frasier was not anything like Cheers but if Frasier Crane took the lead of the story.

And? What do you want then? If they change the name and say "Goku's story is over" that makes it okay to just change whatver? That's bordering on semantics.

[Tai Lung]

But are those options as engaging as the character we've invested a decade plus into?

probably not, for that the spectators would have to know them better starting little by little like the gohan case.
but the personality of some similar to the one of goku can help to take better the plot and the fights. there would be a risk yeah ..

Giving them screen time doesn't require them taking the role of the main character.

not necessarily, but the author can make a change without Goku not let form part of the story.

[ABED]

DB has gotten dull but Goku isn't the reason and switching him out for someone else wouldn't fix the fundamental issue. Hell, the answer could easily be that the best thing they could do is end it.

He is though. If the entire story really only revolves around Goku, and Goku is no longer interesting, that almost assuredly is the biggest problem. That's why Z was always trying to stave off having him involved for most of it's story. Goku needs to either change or give it up to someone like Goku but better.

A spin-off is a completely different issue. It's not the same story. It's a different story set in the same world. For instance, Frasier was not anything like Cheers but if Frasier Crane took the lead of the story.

And? What do you want then? If they change the name and say "Goku's story is over" that makes it okay to just change whatver? That's bordering on semantics.

It's not semantics. Spin-offs have their own characters and their own feel. You aren't talking about a spin-off or even a series like JoJo, you're talking about The Office without Michael Scott, The X-Files without Fox Mulder, or That 70s Show without Eric Forman.

The biggest problem with Super is that it's continuing a story that was already long and keeps it going. Stories need proper endings. The story is becoming an never ending comic book. There is no character better suited for the role of the main character than Son Goku. He is not the biggest issue, not at all. Your assessment about why Z took Goku out of action early in the arcs is not only reductive, it's pure conjecture.