"Dragon Ball Super (Manga)" Official Discussion Thread

[Jinzoningen MULE]

I turned it into a "competition" because, again, you were acting like Toyotaro was some sort of victim in this situation. I don't think anyone holds it to an unrealistic standard, everyone knows it's just a promotional manga. We can understand the situation and circumstances that he's in, but that doesn't mean that we can't criticize it.

I don't know in what kind of communities you are, but everywhere I go, everyone loves Toyotaro's work and vastly prefers it to the anime. Detractors only really began to show up with the recent chapters, with the ones who have been present from the start only now beginning to speak loudly.

Let me tell you something about my personal philosophy, I don't believe in victims. I couldn't care less about Toyotaro as a writer and artist. I'm only talking about this particular product. If I ever said I thought Toyotaro was a victim for whatever reason, I retract that here. I acknowledge that you can still make criticisms, no matter what kind of product. However, if you're ideal is unattainable to begin with, of course you're going to have a negative view, and that's exactly what's went on here following the last couple of chapter releases. You can know that it's only promotional and yet not integrate that into your criticism itself.

In regards to people who flatly prefer the manga to the anime, where are they? I think that Toyotaro's Super is good for a promotional manga, and Toei's Super bad for an anime. However, their relation is still that of main product and promotional product, and the flat qualitative relationship is pretty much what you'd expect out of that relationship. Of course the anime is better, it's not even a contest. Maybe you're referencing some subgroup of the community that I haven't encountered yet.

However, I do hold far more interest in the manga, since, like it or not, it's a product with an actual soul.

[Doctor.]

Let me tell you something about my personal philosophy, I don't believe in victims. I couldn't care less about Toyotaro as a writer and artist. I'm only talking about this particular product. If I ever said I thought Toyotaro was a victim for whatever reason, I retract that here. I acknowledge that you can still make criticisms, no matter what kind of product. However, if you're ideal is unattainable to begin with, of course you're going to have a negative view, and that's exactly what's went on here following the last couple of chapter releases. You can know that it's only promotional and yet not integrate that into your criticism itself.

I'm aware I may be sounding intentionally confrontational, but that's not the case, so forgive me for hammering in this point once again, but this particular sentence in that post of yours:

That's worth something, and it irks me to see the work get verbally stomped on by people who wouldn't know how to do a better job if you gave them an entire lifetime.

Really does sound to me like you're being unnecessarily defensive in Toyotaro's place and not defending Toyotaro's manga, but Toyotaro himself. It really does sound to me like a "Leave Toyotaro alone!" kind of comment, acting like he's some sort of victim in this situation. Again, not being confrontational on purpose, just calling it like I see it.

In regards to people who flatly prefer the manga to the anime, where are they? I think that Toyotaro's Super is good for a promotional manga, and Toei's Super bad for an anime. However, their relation is still that of main product and promotional product, and the flat qualitative relationship is pretty much what you'd expect out of that relationship. Of course the anime is better, it's not even a contest. Maybe you're referencing some subgroup of the community that I haven't encountered yet.

I'm sorry, but you must have seen it at least on this forum, surely. Look at this thread, a thread dedicated to bashing Super, in which the original poster and quite a few of other people who were bashing the anime have claimed the manga is great. Make a thread asking what version people think is the best and the majority of responses will be that the manga is the best version. If you do make a thread and we see the opposite, then I'll eat my words and admit I was wrong, but I don't see that happening because there's a much higher degree of respect towards the manga then there is towards the anime.

However, I do hold far more interest in the manga, since, like it or not, it's a product with an actual soul.

It's just as soulless, probably even more-so considering the manga has no purpose and it's an even bigger cashgrab. Sometimes Toyotaro's very few original ideas can shine through, and you could class that as a "soul", but I could make the same argument in regards to the very rare brilliant animation displayed in the anime.

[HeroR]

I turned it into a "competition" because, again, you were acting like Toyotaro was some sort of victim in this situation. I don't think anyone holds it to an unrealistic standard, everyone knows it's just a promotional manga. We can understand the situation and circumstances that he's in, but that doesn't mean that we can't criticize it.

I don't know in what kind of communities you are, but everywhere I go, everyone loves Toyotaro's work and vastly prefers it to the anime. Detractors only really began to show up with the recent chapters, with the ones who have been present from the start only now beginning to speak loudly.

From my experience, Toyotaro was considered superior to the anime in every way among the online community, until Chapter 13. Before then, it was popular to bash the anime into the ground and hold Toyotaro's manga as the 'true canon' of Super and Toriyama's work. You couldn't even say you prefer the anime without people thinking you had no taste. You even had fans that only read the Super manga because they refused to look at the inferior anime.

After Chapter 13, you had a divide, but fans still said that Toyotaro's version was superior, while the Kaioken is a non-canon Toei mess. It's not until the Future Trunks Saga that you see fans turning on Toyotaro. Either fans think the anime version of the Future Trunks Saga was so good that the manga version butchered it or they think the manga version is the worst version of a mediocre saga because of its pacing, contrived plot points, and wonky power scaling. It is only on this site and parts of Reddit that I have seen the manga still widely praised over the anime. If anything, people now hate both for various reasons.

In either case, Toyotaro was not a broken base since day 1. The manga was extremely well-liked until Chapter 13-onward.

[Jinzoningen MULE]

I'm aware I may be sounding intentionally confrontational, but that's not the case, so forgive me for hammering in this point once again, but this particular sentence in that post of yours:

That's worth something, and it irks me to see the work get verbally stomped on by people who wouldn't know how to do a better job if you gave them an entire lifetime.

Really does sound to me like you're being unnecessarily defensive in Toyotaro's place and not defending Toyotaro's manga, but Toyotaro himself. It really does sound to me like a "Leave Toyotaro alone!" kind of comment, acting like he's some sort of victim in this situation. Again, not being confrontational on purpose, just calling it like I see it.

I think you're looking too much into it. It's hyperbole, if I said exactly what I mean down to the gnat's ass, I'd bore everyone to death.

As for the rest, fair points. Toyotaro definitely has his problems with his artwork, copying, as well as an instance or two of roundabout storytelling. I gave my detailed thoughts on that a few weeks ago, so it's out there, I'm well-aware of it. However, I stand by my position on Toyotaro's integrity. Toyotaro interprets the story from the perspective of someone who cares about the series, and it shows. I also hold talented animators in high regard for the soul of their work, but I don't think I need to explain how and why DBS is an irredeemably ugly show, it's a moot point. Even if the intent behind the manga is cheap and meaningless, Toyo saves it for me.

[TheMikado]

I'm aware I may be sounding intentionally confrontational, but that's not the case, so forgive me for hammering in this point once again, but this particular sentence in that post of yours:

That's worth something, and it irks me to see the work get verbally stomped on by people who wouldn't know how to do a better job if you gave them an entire lifetime.

Really does sound to me like you're being unnecessarily defensive in Toyotaro's place and not defending Toyotaro's manga, but Toyotaro himself. It really does sound to me like a "Leave Toyotaro alone!" kind of comment, acting like he's some sort of victim in this situation. Again, not being confrontational on purpose, just calling it like I see it.

I think you're looking too much into it. It's hyperbole, if I said exactly what I mean down to the gnat's ass, I'd bore everyone to death.

As for the rest, fair points. Toyotaro definitely has his problems with his artwork, copying, as well as an instance or two of roundabout storytelling. I gave my detailed thoughts on that a few weeks ago, so it's out there, I'm well-aware of it. However, I stand by my position on Toyotaro's integrity. Toyotaro interprets the story from the perspective of someone who cares about the series, and it shows. I also hold talented animators in high regard for the soul of their work, but I don't think I need to explain how and why DBS is an irredeemably ugly show, it's a moot point. Even if the intent behind the manga is cheap and meaningless, Toyo saves it for me.

I'm not even sure what the argument here is, if this is all subjective as Doctor wants to use the Picasso example, then its fair to say we should be ripping artwork off the walls throwing them straight in the trash. If there is no true measure of quality and it is all subjective then why is this even a debate or argument. Its just as fair for anyone to completely trash the anime as complete pipping hot garbage as it is for others to praise the manga.

[Doctor.]

Its just as fair for anyone to completely trash the anime as complete pipping hot garbage as it is for others to praise the manga.

It is, that's right. But it doesn't mean we can't have a debate about it.

What you were saying though, and what ticked me off, was basically "No, the manga IS good, and you're all wrong if you think it's shit."

[Jinzoningen MULE]

What you were saying though, and what ticked me off, was basically "No, the manga IS good, and you're all wrong if you think it's shit."

I assume your talking about me, but I never said, or even alluded to that. I think that might have been a misinterpretation on your part, because that's not my position. I'm on record saying that I don't think Toyo's manga is good in any objective sense, only that's it's decent contextually.

[Doctor.]

What you were saying though, and what ticked me off, was basically "No, the manga IS good, and you're all wrong if you think it's shit."

I assume your talking about me, but I never said, or even alluded to that. I think that might have been a misinterpretation on your part, because that's not my position. I'm on record saying that I don't think Toyo's manga is good in any objective sense, only that's it's decent contextually.

I quoted TheMikado, not you.

The problem is that Toyotaro's work isn't technically bad at all by any standards. People are confusing preference with quality. The equivalent of calling Picasso a horrible artist because you don't like his style of art. That's why it's so infuriating because it simply comes off as immensely ignorant. There are certainly legitimate critiques, but calling the work as a whole trash is beyond a stretch.

This is what he had said.

[Jinzoningen MULE]

I quoted TheMikado, not you.

I just got confused because I missed his comment. Carry on, I wasn't here.

[GodKaio-Ken]

Personally i find the manga to be lacking any logical progression. Something that has nearly 0 impact on the story might last 2-3 pages while something highly important gets a panel or not even included(like ROF) which contained important lessons for Goku.

That isnt to say certain parts arent "good" or "enjoyable" it just means as a whole i find the project underwhelming. Sone of that may be due to circumstance.

I've noticed the people huge into animation seem to prefer the manga due to the issues Super has had. It seems that way anyway.

Those of us who dont care about that as much tend to prefer the anime. Just my 2 cents.

[TheMikado]

What you were saying though, and what ticked me off, was basically "No, the manga IS good, and you're all wrong if you think it's shit."

I assume your talking about me, but I never said, or even alluded to that. I think that might have been a misinterpretation on your part, because that's not my position. I'm on record saying that I don't think Toyo's manga is good in any objective sense, only that's it's decent contextually.

I quoted TheMikado, not you.

The problem is that Toyotaro's work isn't technically bad at all by any standards. People are confusing preference with quality. The equivalent of calling Picasso a horrible artist because you don't like his style of art. That's why it's so infuriating because it simply comes off as immensely ignorant. There are certainly legitimate critiques, but calling the work as a whole trash is beyond a stretch.

This is what he had said.

I don't see anything wrong with what I said either. I pretty clearly state that there is an objective preference, but on pure technical aspects it is NOT bad. I never state it as "good". There are technical measures even in objective media such as art. Style is separate from the technical aspects and failure to understand or acknowledge that IS IGNORANT.

[Doctor.]

I don't see anything wrong with what I said either. I pretty clearly state that there is an objective preference, but on pure technical aspects it is NOT bad. I never state it as "good". There are technical measures even in objective media such as art. Style is separate from the technical aspects and failure to understand or acknowledge that IS IGNORANT.

I already explained what's wrong with what you said. You're dismissing any and all opinions that go against what you think because, in your opinion, there's nothing "technically bad" about the manga. That irks me, obviously. You're the one who isn't understanding here, I completely understand the difference. I'm saying that I STILL think that the Super manga IS "technically bad" and I explained why before.

[HeroR]

Personally i find the manga to be lacking any logical progression. Something that has nearly 0 impact on the story might last 2-3 pages while something highly important gets a panel or not even included(like ROF) which contained important lessons for Goku.

That isnt to say certain parts arent "good" or "enjoyable" it just means as a whole i find the project underwhelming. Sone of that may be due to circumstance.

I've noticed the people huge into animation seem to prefer the manga due to the issues Super has had. It seems that way anyway.

Those of us who dont care about that as much tend to prefer the anime. Just my 2 cents.

I know that many say that the prefer the fights in the manga compared to the anime, specifically during the Champa Saga. The only fights I personally found superior were the Goku vs. Botamo and the first half of Goku vs. Frost. Everything else has been even or I prefer the anime.

Although, I noticed that even this sentiment has died down since the Future Trunks Saga's fights have been mostly praised, with the biggest criticism being that they're too short or feel rush.

So far, the people who prefer the manga over the anime in the Future Trunks Saga, from my observation, are those who didn't like the stable time loop, how Black got stronger, and the multiple time trips.

[TheMikado]

I don't see anything wrong with what I said either. I pretty clearly state that there is an objective preference, but on pure technical aspects it is NOT bad. I never state it as "good". There are technical measures even in objective media such as art. Style is separate from the technical aspects and failure to understand or acknowledge that IS IGNORANT.

I already explained what's wrong with what you said. You're dismissing any and all opinions that go against what you think because, in your opinion, there's nothing "technically bad" about the manga. That irks me, obviously. You're the one who isn't understanding here, I completely understand the difference. I'm saying that I STILL think that the Super manga IS "technically bad" and I explained why before.

What parts of the manga as a whole are "technically bad" which ARE NOT objective? I'm curious, and I'm not talking about a bad panel, or a specific bad chapter, but what technical aspects of the work as a whole are bad?

My gripes stem from the fact that his writing as a whole is terrible. His characters, mainly the villains, have no personality, aren't interesting and don't develop. His comedy is lackluster. His art lacks the same dynamism as Toriyama's and is a clear downgrade even compared to Toriyama's current work, the choreography is littered with homages to Toriyama's work (which get tiresome incredibly fast) and repeated punches and kicks contained in single panels, only a small percentage of it is actually interesting stuff. The pacing is terrible as well, it's too fast. I know most of these issues stem from the fact that it's a monthly promotional manga meant to hype up the anime. Yes, I get that, I understand that, that does not mean that the work is excused from criticism.

Just so you know these items do NOT make it technically bad, short of your assessment of the villains which is debatable. Each of these are opinions and are objective and not of technical relevance.

You can't say things are entirely objective, turn around and state that on a technical level something is bad, and then use objective examples.

[Jinzoningen MULE]

So far, the people who prefer the manga over the anime in the Future Trunks Saga, from my observation, are those who didn't like the stable time loop, how Black got stronger, and the multiple time trips.

That's definitely part of it for me. The anime has so much padded bullshit to make it seem like it's enough of a story for a weekly series. It drives me insane!

What parts of the manga as a whole are "technically bad" which ARE NOT objective? I'm curious, and I'm not talking about a bad panel, or a specific bad chapter, but what technical aspects of the work as a whole are bad?

Okay, I get you, but what difference does that make? The only precedent it sets is whether or not positive opinions are justified. Not much to do with what he's talking about.

[GodKaio-Ken]

Personally i find the manga to be lacking any logical progression. Something that has nearly 0 impact on the story might last 2-3 pages while something highly important gets a panel or not even included(like ROF) which contained important lessons for Goku.

That isnt to say certain parts arent "good" or "enjoyable" it just means as a whole i find the project underwhelming. Sone of that may be due to circumstance.

I've noticed the people huge into animation seem to prefer the manga due to the issues Super has had. It seems that way anyway.

Those of us who dont care about that as much tend to prefer the anime. Just my 2 cents.

I know that many say that the prefer the fights in the manga compared to the anime, specifically during the Champa Saga. The only fights I personally found superior were the Goku vs. Botamo and the first half of Goku vs. Frost. Everything else has been even or I prefer the anime.

Although, I noticed that even this sentiment has died down since the Future Trunks Saga's fights have been mostly praised, with the biggest criticism being that they're too short or feel rush.

So far, the people who prefer the manga over the anime in the Future Trunks Saga, from my observation, are those who didn't like the stable time loop, how Black got stronger, and the multiple time trips.

On that last paragraph: Good call as that is definitely part of it.

Also before anyone trips out I'm not here to bash the manga. I do find parts of it enjoyable and I've kept up with it. It provides some information and ideas i couldmt get from the anime alone. I'm glad both exist.

[TheMikado]

So far, the people who prefer the manga over the anime in the Future Trunks Saga, from my observation, are those who didn't like the stable time loop, how Black got stronger, and the multiple time trips.

That's definitely part of it for me. The anime has so much padded bullshit to make it seem like it's enough of a story for a weekly series. It drives me insane!

What parts of the manga as a whole are "technically bad" which ARE NOT objective? I'm curious, and I'm not talking about a bad panel, or a specific bad chapter, but what technical aspects of the work as a whole are bad?

Okay, I get you, but what difference does that make? The only precedent it sets is whether or not positive opinions are justified. Not much to do with what he's talking about.

He's stating something as being technically bad, when its not a matter of technicals at all. Its just a preference. Making a preference some kind of technical benchmark is ridiculous and not how artistic criticism works. Yes you always have some level of bias but I would never think an art critic to deduct points on the technical aspects of a work of art because he personally doesn't like color blue. I'm just not understanding what the case is for stating it is "bad" from a technical perspective. I didn't make the claim so the onus isn't on me to prove its "good" or "bad". I just stated its not "bad" on pure technical measures.

[Doctor.]

What parts of the manga as a whole are "technically bad" which ARE NOT objective? I'm curious, and I'm not talking about a bad panel, or a specific bad chapter, but what technical aspects of the work as a whole are bad?

Almost nothing we can judge Toyotaro's work for is objective. I don't know where you're getting this notion from.

For instance, we can't even judge Toyotaro's art objectively, because some people will think the art style doesn't fit the series, they may think the art is static and the angles are boring, they may think that panelling isn't fluid, that choreography isn't entertaining, so on and so forth. Subjectivity will always come into play.

Just so you know these items do NOT make it technically bad, short of your assessment of the villains which is debatable. Each of this are opinions and are objective and not of technical relevance.

Don't you mean subjective? Because everything I said is subjective (with the exception of his fight scenes having homages to Toriyama's work), not objective.

You can't say things are entirely objective, turn around and state that on a technical level something is bad, and then use objective examples.

Again, I assume you mean subjective, because otherwise this makes no sense.

That's the point. YOU'RE the one who said that Toyotaro's manga WASN'T technically bad in any aspect and anyone saying otherwise was ignorant, even saying that people couldn't possibly think Picasso was bad. And then I replied saying that no, everyone is entitled to their opinions and they could very well think that Picasso was indeed horrible as long as they recognized his cultural impact and influence.

This seems to me just like an argument to ignore negativity and criticism and parade needless positivity.

[GodKaio-Ken]

What parts of the manga as a whole are "technically bad" which ARE NOT objective? I'm curious, and I'm not talking about a bad panel, or a specific bad chapter, but what technical aspects of the work as a whole are bad?

Almost nothing we can judge Toyotaro's work for is objective. I don't know where you're getting this notion from.

For instance, we can't even judge Toyotaro's art objectively, because some people will think the art style doesn't fit the series, they may think the art is static and the angles are boring, they may think that panelling isn't fluid, that choreography isn't entertaining, so on and so forth. Subjectivity will always come into play.

Just so you know these items do NOT make it technically bad, short of your assessment of the villains which is debatable. Each of this are opinions and are objective and not of technical relevance.

Don't you mean subjective? Because everything I said is subjective (with the exception of his fight scenes having homages to Toriyama's work), not objective.

You can't say things are entirely objective, turn around and state that on a technical level something is bad, and then use objective examples.

Again, I assume you mean subjective, because otherwise this makes no sense.

That's the point. YOU'RE the one who said that Toyotaro's manga WASN'T technically bad in any aspect and anyone saying otherwise was ignorant, even saying that people couldn't possibly think Picasso was bad. And then I replied saying that no, everyone is entitled to their opinions and they could very well think that Picasso was indeed horrible as long as they recognized his cultural impact and influence.

This seems to me just like an argument to ignore negativity and criticism and parade needless positivity.

There is no such thing as objectively good or bad art. Even something ultra realistic can be considered as bad. To say otherwise would imply human thought shapes the universe. There can only be what we feel about something. Even if every human thinks something is bad its still just opinion.

So i sort of get where youre coming from.

[TheMikado]

^ Well no, I can certainly agree with recognizing the art for what it is, and that the value can certainly be allocated by the individual.
But the example Doctor uses with Picasso is the acknowledgement of that art and its contributions.

The problem is, some won't do that about the Super manga.

It's just as soulless, probably even more-so considering the manga has no purpose and it's an even bigger cashgrab. Sometimes Toyotaro's very few original ideas can shine through, and you could class that as a "soul", but I could make the same argument in regards to the very rare brilliant animation displayed in the anime.

You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but lets not act as if you are respecting the art or artist in a similar fashion to how we would other divisive artists.