I find Goku to be the worst character in this show

[ekrolo2]

These replies are getting long-winded, but to sum up a reply to everything you said, I feel as if you're not looking at it from a "story" perspective, and more like a "well X character can do this so why didn't he???" perspective. Things only happen when the plot calls for it. Saying "Goku could have KKx20 and snapped Freeza's neck in a second" would never happen in the story, because that would make for a boring story. Trunks telling a whole long horrifying story of everyone dying to Androids, only for Bulma to say "ok lets just kill Gero now!" and everyone going "OK!" and destroying the entire lab, thereby skipping the entire android and cell sagas, would never happen in the story.

Sometimes things need to happen because they're convenient to the plot. Almost every anime is a victim of this. "Why didn't X just Y?" is a good question, except for the fact if X did Y, there wouldn't be a story. Sometimes Goku and co's decisions are made purely just to advance the plot. Goku isn't the only character victim to this. You could even say "Why didn't Gohan just Kamehameha Super Buu the second he showed up, and one shot him?" Again, boring story.

For the record though I still very much doubt that Goku could have surprised Freeza and snapped his neck. Freeza probably could have gone from pre-50% to well over 50% in a mere instant if he knew he was in any kind of serious danger.

Also I don't really understand how you think Krillin got killed due to Goku dicking around. Freeza was slaughtering Goku the entire time, there was nothing he could do. He could barely even stand after firing the spirit bomb. How the hell was it his fault that Krillin got killed?

Goku's official stance as to why he did not use SSJ3 during their fight comes right before Goku begs Vegeta to fuse with him.

Vegeta: When you fought me - you hid your true strength!! Were you manipulating me - or mocking me?! I saw it all in the afterlife! "Super Saiyan 3"!!? You turn my stomach!! You think I want to be one with you?!

Goku: ...I-I'm sorry. There was a limit to how long I could transform...I had to save it for later, just in case...

Goku would have sacrificed the Earth if it meant training Goten and Trunks, because he knew he wouldn't be around forever. If he killed Buu then and there (aside from being anti-climactic) then it would teach nothing to the next generation. He would rather sacrifice and revive those people if it meant that he could be sure of the peaceful future they would have once he was gone. It's a complicated situation that isn't as black and white as it appears. The time limit he was given changed everything he would be able to do and he had to decide how best to spend his time while assuring the future would be safe in hands that weren't his own.

The fact the plot is so easily solvable serves as a good indication that maybe it should end or maybe, and steel yourself because I'm about to introduce a novel concept for DB: make it less easily avoidable!

You know how we can avoid the issue of everyone knowing about Gero? Cut out the time travel shit and rework the story to work without and it boom! Problem is solved, suddenly the cast doesn't have the entire solution gift wrapped for them and you might have an antagonist who's hopes, dreams, home address, favorite variations of porn and secret racist opinions aren't spelled out by Future Trunks before the proper arc can even kick off.

Also, Freeza wasn't slaughtering Goku the entire time, they dick around. They're even for most of him using Pre-50%, going so far as to play a short game where Freeza uses no hands to make things more interesting. Plus, Freeza can't sense ki, and a slight difference in power is all the difference you need to kill someone. Hell, if freaking Piccolo can take Freeza off guard, Goku taking him off guard AND being stronger then him is an easy victory. But Goku doesn't do this, why? Because he wants to fight, and what happens as a result of this? Krillin dies, Piccolo almost dies again (making the ENTIRE fucking point of coming to Namek moot), Namek itself gets destroyed and Goku, through sheer dumb luck proves Vegeta right by becoming a Super Saiyan.

Hell, in the manga Freeza intentionally fires on Piccolo first just to screw with Goku, if he blasted Goku himself through the chest, it's all over, everybody would die.

And Goku's official stance on what he intends to do to Vegeta is as I stated in the picture: kick his ass quickly to prevent Boo from showing up. Toriyama can try and retcon this all he wants but it makes no sense in-universe for a pragmatic sounding Goku to not do the pragmatic thing.

And I don't care about the Fat Boo thing, I already said I didn't count it as him being selfish, the Kid Boo thing is. Hell, if Goku wanted to let the future generation win, why not let them actually do so by having them kill Kid Boo when they get revived? Don't tell me Goku thinks they can't do it because even Gotenks and Gohan aren't so incomepetent as to lose to a guy they can finger flick to death, especially since they'd know not to mess around after suffering his absoprtion.

[Asura]

These replies are getting long-winded, but to sum up a reply to everything you said, I feel as if you're not looking at it from a "story" perspective, and more like a "well X character can do this so why didn't he???" perspective. Things only happen when the plot calls for it. Saying "Goku could have KKx20 and snapped Freeza's neck in a second" would never happen in the story, because that would make for a boring story. Trunks telling a whole long horrifying story of everyone dying to Androids, only for Bulma to say "ok lets just kill Gero now!" and everyone going "OK!" and destroying the entire lab, thereby skipping the entire android and cell sagas, would never happen in the story.

Sometimes things need to happen because they're convenient to the plot. Almost every anime is a victim of this. "Why didn't X just Y?" is a good question, except for the fact if X did Y, there wouldn't be a story. Sometimes Goku and co's decisions are made purely just to advance the plot. Goku isn't the only character victim to this. You could even say "Why didn't Gohan just Kamehameha Super Buu the second he showed up, and one shot him?" Again, boring story.

You're looking from an out-of-universe perspective, which is pretty much useless in the context of this argument. Yes, it would of been boring if the characters had done x and y, but that doesn;t change the fact that they still did it. That action is a part of their character. They still did it. By your logic Goku shouldn't be judged for his actions in this arc because ''It'd be a boring arc if Goku didn't do X''

I wouldn't say it's a useless argument at all. The question that was being asked isn't so much "why did they do X?" but rather "why didn't they do Y?" and the reason that they didn't do Y is because you wouldn't have a plot otherwise. You know how many different arguments there are of "why didnt Goku just do this" or "why didn't Cell just do this instantly" or "why are they punching and wasting time when they could be one-shotting the villain?"

Yes of course, even when it's for plot convenience, the character is still at fault for his or her actions. But it's important to note when something is for plot convenience, and when it isn't. Without Goku being selfish and wanting to fight the androids, we would literally have no plot. You can't compare that situation to this one. Goku starting the tournament turned out to be a good thing, but the fact that he's still being selfish and shows zero remorse at all for the other universes (especially when they're all yelling at him and blaming him for spelling out their doom) just does not make sense to me. It's not a decision based off of advancing the plot. It's purely a character decision (most likely intentional on the part of TOEI, for good reason I hope) that doesn't line up with the rest of the selfish things Goku has done.

Goku has done some selfish shit, for convenience of plot or otherwise, but never anything on this scale. That's what I think people are missing, is the scale. It's not the same situation, it's not the same stakes, it's different. Goku at least has his excuses for why he won't go destroy Gero, even if they're poor excuses. Goku doesn't even have any excuse or explanation here, he just looks and sounds evil as fuck, and that's obviously the direction Toei wants to take with him. It's become so incredibly obvious since last episode that not only is this a change in character, but it's an intentional change in character, and for all those that deny the fact that the Goku here and the Goku in Z are two different characters, all you need to do is watch the latest episode since it literally spells it out for you that this Goku seems a lot more "villainous" than before.

[TheMikado]

How could they kill a man who was innocent?

He built androids for the murderous Red Ribbon Army. He was anything but innocent.

You didn't have to kill him anyway. Ask Shenlong for the location of his hideout and destroy his research. Goku had no backup plan, he wanted to fight the androids. He was completely reckless and even admits it at the end of the arc.

Gokus only plan was to prepare for the androids. Further they know nothing of Dr Gero or his circumstances only that he built robots for the red ribbon army. Presuming he is guilt and executing him based on that is why the concept of innocent until proven guilty exists in civilized society.

It wasn't even Gokus plan, everyone else wanted to straight up take him out and Goku simple said that's not really cool because he hasn't done anything. It wasn't Gokus responsibility to come up with some grand plan to locate and stop Dr Gero. He's not a hero. He simply showed his morality by not wanted to take out a person who they know nothing about and didn't technically do the thing he was supposedly going to do sometime in the future. And in typical Goku fashion he will deal with the issue when it's brought to the door, at no point to he go making sure Dr Gero remembered to build his robots so he could fight them.

[Baggie_Saiyan]

I still find it rather funny that people are drawing the line for Goku here but are perfectly fine with him not finishing Freeza off without a guarantee he would survive Namek. He jeopardised the entire universe on the risk that he would too survive, so please tell me how is this Goku not the "Goku you grew up watching on TV!" or whatever. For once Toei aren't concerned with beating around the bush and in turn we have something interesting going on, yet fans what the boring BS I am hope Goku... bah!

[TheMikado]

I still find it rather funny that people are drawing the line for Goku here but are perfectly fine with him not finishing Freeza off without a guarantee he would survive Namek. He jeopardised the entire universe on the risk that he would too survive, so please tell me how is this Goku not the "Goku you grew up watching on TV!" or whatever. For once Toei aren't concerned with beating around the bush and in turn we have something interesting going on, yet fans what the boring BS I am hope Goku... bah!

Toei is VERY clearly by design framing Goku proper as a villain in this arc. That has NEVER been done in the history of the franchise. Seeing a protagonist become a villain is always going to be polarizing. Not everyone is going to like it. The strange thing is the justifying Goku as villain by saying he was always like this. No Goku was not portrayed as a villain.

What I don't understand is how people can say they are doing something different with Goku and the character while at the same time saying he's ALWAYS been exactly the same. Which is it? Is he portrayal as the villain his different than he's traditionally portrayed or not. Or are we trying to tell everyone that Goku was always a villain in which case people may retroactively dislike him as a character. Not everyone necessarily likes or enjoys villainous characters.

[Asura]

I still find it rather funny that people are drawing the line for Goku here but are perfectly fine with him not finishing Freeza off without a guarantee he would survive Namek. He jeopardised the entire universe on the risk that he would too survive, so please tell me how is this Goku not the "Goku you grew up watching on TV!" or whatever. For once Toei aren't concerned with beating around the bush and in turn we have something interesting going on, yet fans what the boring BS I am hope Goku... bah!

But Goku did finish Freeza off, or at least he thought he did. I think originally Goku was going to let him live because he almost felt bad for him, groveling there and begging for mercy while cut in half. To go any further while his enemy is down like that just wouldn't be in Goku's character.

Buuuuut Freeza had to fuck that up for himself and Goku "YOU FOOOOOOOOOLLL"ed him into a hundred pieces. I'm pretty sure Goku thought he was dead after that. Hell I bet Trunks thought he was dead too after what he did. Can't keep that fucker down though, he just keeps coming back.

Toei is VERY clearly by design framing Goku proper as a villain in this arc. That has NEVER been done in the history of the franchise. Seeing a protagonist become a villain is always going to be polarizing. Not everyone is going to like it. The strange thing is the justifying Goku as villain by saying he was always like this. No Goku was not portrayed as a villain.

What I don't understand is how people can say they are doing something different with Goku and the character while at the same time saying he's ALWAYS been exactly the same. Which is it? Is he portrayal as the villain his different than he's traditionally portrayed or not. Or are we trying to tell everyone that Goku was always a villain in which case people may retroactively dislike him as a character. Not everyone necessarily likes or enjoys villainous characters.

So much this. It's incredibly obvious that Toei is doing this on purpose. Goku was not always like this, and Toei is specifically making a statement in pointing that out. It's foreshadowing to the max and I guarantee that it will be a plot point that goes somewhere, and not just a "Goku was always this way, now we're just making it more obvious for you! See? See?!"

[Boo Machine]

Toei is VERY clearly by design framing Goku proper as a villain in this arc. That has NEVER been done in the history of the franchise. Seeing a protagonist become a villain is always going to be polarizing. Not everyone is going to like it. The strange thing is the justifying Goku as villain by saying he was always like this. No Goku was not portrayed as a villain.

What I don't understand is how people can say they are doing something different with Goku and the character while at the same time saying he's ALWAYS been exactly the same. Which is it? Is he portrayal as the villain his different than he's traditionally portrayed or not. Or are we trying to tell everyone that Goku was always a villain in which case people may retroactively dislike him as a character. Not everyone necessarily likes or enjoys villainous characters.

I obviously can't speak for everyone, but I think what most people are trying to get at is that Gokus actions and intentions remain the same throughout the franchise but Toei is doing something different by putting those actions and intentions in a negative light and have other characters presume Goku to be the villain because of it.

[Asura]

Toei is VERY clearly by design framing Goku proper as a villain in this arc. That has NEVER been done in the history of the franchise. Seeing a protagonist become a villain is always going to be polarizing. Not everyone is going to like it. The strange thing is the justifying Goku as villain by saying he was always like this. No Goku was not portrayed as a villain.

What I don't understand is how people can say they are doing something different with Goku and the character while at the same time saying he's ALWAYS been exactly the same. Which is it? Is he portrayal as the villain his different than he's traditionally portrayed or not. Or are we trying to tell everyone that Goku was always a villain in which case people may retroactively dislike him as a character. Not everyone necessarily likes or enjoys villainous characters.

I obviously can't speak for everyone, but I think what most people are trying to get at is that Gokus actions and intentions remain the same throughout the franchise but Toei is doing something different by putting those actions and intentions in a negative light and have other characters presume Goku to be the villain because of it.

But to what end? What is the point in doing something like that? This is a shonen series for young kids and I highly doubt Toei would just go "Hey look! The main character you know and love is actually an villainous asshole!"

There's no pay-off in something like that if we (the fans) are pitted against the main character who is in full control of his actions. It just wouldn't make much sense. I guarantee that Goku is intentionally being made to look villainous, not in a "look, he was always villainous!" way, but in a "what's wrong with Goku that is making him act like this?" way. It's going to be an important subplot in the arc, and I guarantee that the explanation won't just be "Yep, he was like this all along! Most of us just never noticed..."

[Boo Machine]

But to what end? What is the point in doing something like that? This is a shonen series for young kids and I highly doubt Toei would just go "Hey look! The main character you know and love is actually an villainous asshole!"

There's no pay-off in something like that if we (the fans) are pitted against the main character who is in full control of his actions. It just wouldn't make much sense. I guarantee that Goku is intentionally being made to look villainous, not in a "look, he was always villainous!" way, but in a "what's wrong with Goku that is making him act like this?" way. It's going to be an important subplot in the arc, and I guarantee that the explanation won't just be "Yep, he was like this all along! Most of us just never noticed..."

I can't see the future so I can't tell you "To what end" or what the pay off is going to be to what ever is happening. For now this is just going to be one of those things where we have to wait and see.

And when people say "He was always like this" it isn't to say Goku was always evil. It's to say Goku has made reckless decisions based off his desire for a good fight before and this situation is no different aside from the body count and Goku not showing enough remorse for some people. I don't think many people here have an interest in painting Goku to have been evil all along. Just that he has always had a bit of a tendency to be a jerk when it suits him.

[TheMikado]

Toei is VERY clearly by design framing Goku proper as a villain in this arc. That has NEVER been done in the history of the franchise. Seeing a protagonist become a villain is always going to be polarizing. Not everyone is going to like it. The strange thing is the justifying Goku as villain by saying he was always like this. No Goku was not portrayed as a villain.

What I don't understand is how people can say they are doing something different with Goku and the character while at the same time saying he's ALWAYS been exactly the same. Which is it? Is he portrayal as the villain his different than he's traditionally portrayed or not. Or are we trying to tell everyone that Goku was always a villain in which case people may retroactively dislike him as a character. Not everyone necessarily likes or enjoys villainous characters.

I obviously can't speak for everyone, but I think what most people are trying to get at is that Gokus actions and intentions remain the same throughout the franchise but Toei is doing something different by putting those actions and intentions in a negative light and have other characters presume Goku to be the villain because of it.

The problem is they start reinventing his reasons, for instance I've seen people say they the only reason Goku wanted to stay dead after the Cell games was that he wanted to train in other world, rather than him rather infamously stating that he attracts trouble and no longer wants to endanger earth, or how people are saying Goku didn't mean what he said about not killing Gero and just wanted an excuse to fight the androids. It's ridiculous that people are literally throwing out the words of the protagonist himself just to make it align with how his actions are in Super. Goku has shown multiple times in multiple scenarios through various means of self sacrifice that he thinks of more than a good fight and believe h shouldn't tempt fate too much. It's not the same at all and the scenarios are definitely different there's no alternative excuse to use for his actions here, it's not subtle or gray and that's by design.

[Boo Machine]

The problem is they start reinventing his reasons, for instance I've seen people say they the only reason Goku wanted to stay dead after the Cell games was that he wanted to train in other world, rather than him rather infamously stating that he attracts trouble and no longer wants to endanger earth, or how people are saying Goku didn't mean what he said about not killing Gero and just wanted an excuse to fight the androids. It's ridiculous that people are literally throwing out the words of the protagonist himself just to make it align with how his actions are in Super. Goku has shown multiple times in multiple scenarios through various means of self sacrifice that he thinks of more than a good fight and believe h shouldn't tempt fate too much. It's not the same at all and the scenarios are definitely different there's no alternative excuse to use for his actions here, it's not subtle or gray and that's by design.

Agreed that it's done on purpose for this arc. At least I agree for now, let's see how it plays out. But that's not to say that Goku hasn't made reckless decisions that put people at risk in the past and that's what people want to get across and we really shouldn't ignore that either.

I've seen just as many people reinventing reasons for his actions that portray Goku as a righteouss hero. Like letting Vegeta go out of mercy as opposed to his actual reason of "I want another crack at him."

I think both sides of this argument would do well to find a middle ground.

[Cipher]

In 77 though those consequences hadn't yet come to light, and ever since he's found out animation and scripts together have been heroically consistent in portraying him as thoughtless and cavalier to the point of callousness.

That's exactly what I was trying to get at.

Many people here are bringing up Goku's other most selfish, reckless moments in the series, and it's a consistent part of his character that he behaves thoughtlessly until confronted with immediate consequences. The way he kickstarted the arc in 77 in spite of Beerus and Whis' earnings in 77 was in line with that; the way he's been acting in the face of immediate, obvious repercussions is not.

Or is it possible that everyone at Toei's so fundamentally (and therefore consistently) misunderstood the character and Toriyama's intentions in this way? Perhaps an intention to have Goku contrasted/pitted against a team of righteous superheroes is being woefully misconstrued, taken too far? In any case I'll be eager to see Toyotaro's take.

I suspect that's exactly what's happening. Toriyama turned in an outline that finally incorporated some of Goku's major character flaws, and the show's writers have only been able to highlight those elements with as little subtlety as they've treated the character-writing in any previous arcs. In the case of side characters (Beerus' reprimanding of Goku in 77 to his "Damn! He's trying to make him look like a villain" this week), with as little consistency too.

I'm sort of blown away how in the face of all the accusations of "bad writing" this fanbase loves to throw at the smallest power-related or logical inconsistencies, when we actually get bad writing, in the most classic, this-should-have-been-workshopped-more, I-can't-track-or-justify-these-characters'-motivations-in-this-scene way, so many people back off.

This isn't nitpicking; this is the most important, basic way in which we're invited to interact with the show. It's so, so much more important than pedantic in-universe world-building logic.

The frustrating thing is conceptually this is still an interesting arc. If the scripts had the ability to land anywhere between 0 and 100 when having to convey plots based on characters' flaws and motivations, which had been sorely missing in Super, I think I'd really be enjoying it.

[TekTheNinja]

If you can't handle the comparatively tame selfishness of Goku, I dread to think how these people would react to James Delaney or John Constantine or Elric.

None of those characters have ever caused the destruction of several universes and said, "Meh, whatever." Your argument makes no sense.

[Lord Beerus]

The concept of being a hero and a villain is alien to Goku. It doesn't matter to him what people perceive his actions to be. He reacts on instinct. Call Goku a hero, Goku won't give a shit. Call Goku a villain, he won't give a shit.

Come on guys, quit dumbing Goku down. He absolutely knows what a villain is, he's fought them numerous times. Goku knows what "bad" people are.
Goku knows right from wrong. He's no hero but the counter argument is taking it too far.

Goku didn't think Dr Gero was worth chasing down even though he knows he's responsible for the apocalypse in the future.

[TheMikado]

The concept of being a hero and a villain is alien to Goku. It doesn't matter to him what people perceive his actions to be. He reacts on instinct. Call Goku a hero, Goku won't give a shit. Call Goku a villain, he won't give a shit.

Come on guys, quit dumbing Goku down. He absolutely knows what a villain is, he's fought them numerous times. Goku knows what "bad" people are.
Goku knows right from wrong. He's no hero but the counter argument is taking it too far.

Goku didn't think Dr Gero was worth chasing down even though he knows he responsible for the apocalypse in the future.

No idea if this is allows here or not, but everyone else wanted to fight them. Vegeta specifically threatened to kill anyone that tried.
Goku is the only one out of all of them that gives a good moral answer. I don't understand why you attribute this to being a Goku problem when the others have even less moral reasoning for this.
http://www.mangareader.net/dragon-ball/336/7

Goku at least tries to have an additional justification absent from the others.

[Boo Machine]

Come on guys, quit dumbing Goku down. He absolutely knows what a villain is, he's fought them numerous times. Goku knows what "bad" people are.
Goku knows right from wrong. He's no hero but the counter argument is taking it too far.

Goku didn't think Dr Gero was worth chasing down even though he knows he responsible for the apocalypse in the future.

No idea if this is allows here or not, but everyone else wanted to fight them. Vegeta specifically threatened to kill anyone that tried.
Goku is the only one out of all of them that gives a good moral answer. I don't understand why you attribute this to being a Goku problem when the others have even less moral reasoning for this.
http://www.mangareader.net/dragon-ball/336/7

Goku at least tries to have an additional justification absent from the others.

Just because Goku has a justification for it doesn't make it a good one. Nor does others wanting to fight as well make the overall decision any less reckless.

[Lord Beerus]

Goku didn't think Dr Gero was worth chasing down even though he knows he responsible for the apocalypse in the future.

No idea if this is allows here or not, but everyone else wanted to fight them. Vegeta specifically threatened to kill anyone that tried.
Goku is the only one out of all of them that gives a good moral answer. I don't understand why you attribute this to being a Goku problem when the others have even less moral reasoning for this.
http://www.mangareader.net/dragon-ball/336/7

Goku at least tries to have an additional justification absent from the others.

Just because Goku has a justification for it doesn't make it a good one. Nor does others wanting to fight as well make the overall decision any less reckless.

Exactly. This isn't some sort of moral issue that needs justification. Dr Gero brings about the end of the world as they know it. Besides, he worked the Red Ribbon Army. The army that Goku fought against and tried to take over the world. He was no saint to begin with anyway. They had every right to go after Gero. And Vegeta's threat means nothing because Goku, and most likely Piccolo at that time, could kick his ass.

[Dragon Ball Gus]

I can't believe I'm about to say this.... *gulps*
I'd rather have Goku turn back into a kid after this arc than to ever see this side of him ever again!

[TheMikado]

No idea if this is allows here or not, but everyone else wanted to fight them. Vegeta specifically threatened to kill anyone that tried.
Goku is the only one out of all of them that gives a good moral answer. I don't understand why you attribute this to being a Goku problem when the others have even less moral reasoning for this.
http://www.mangareader.net/dragon-ball/336/7

Goku at least tries to have an additional justification absent from the others.

Just because Goku has a justification for it doesn't make it a good one. Nor does others wanting to fight as well make the overall decision any less reckless.

Exactly. This isn't some sort of moral issue that needs justification. Dr Gero brings about the end of the world as they know it. Besides, he worked the Red Ribbon Army. The army that Goku fought against and tried to take over the world. He was no saint to begin with anyway. They had every right to go after Gero. And Vegeta's threat means nothing because Goku, and most likely Piccolo at that time, could kick his ass.

Where is this saint complex coming from?? Goku was simply consistently shown to be the most morally upright amoung them. No one is saying Goku is a saint and doesn't make mistakes or has moments of stupidity or selfishness. No, by and large while Gokus no saint he does represent one of the most moral of the lot among them. That's his character. He's no Superman but he does stand as a moral compass among them.

[Boo Machine]

Just because Goku has a justification for it doesn't make it a good one. Nor does others wanting to fight as well make the overall decision any less reckless.

Exactly. This isn't some sort of moral issue that needs justification. Dr Gero brings about the end of the world as they know it. Besides, he worked the Red Ribbon Army. The army that Goku fought against and tried to take over the world. He was no saint to begin with anyway. They had every right to go after Gero. And Vegeta's threat means nothing because Goku, and most likely Piccolo at that time, could kick his ass.

Where is this saint complex coming from?? Goku was simply consistently shown to be the most morally upright amoung them. No one is saying Goku is a saint and doesn't make mistakes or has moments of stupidity or selfishness. No, by and large while Gokus no saint he does represent one of the most moral of the lot among them. That's his character. He's no Superman but he does stand as a moral compass among them.

That would be cool and all if that morality was a main part of the story or focused on for any length of time. But it's one panel and sounds like an excuse more than anything. He even follows it up with "Sorry but I want to fight". I feel like someone who wants to be held up as moral would consider the innocent people than rather than just one mad doctor.

And it's not like they're talking about some random dude in a lab. This guy worked for the RR army and his justification for building death machines is revenge. I don't think finding out the location of the lab and going to see whats up is too unreasonable even if Gero wasn't already evil.

No one is arguing against Goku having good in him. Of course he does. But still, Goku choosing the moral High ground here doesn't make the decision less reckless.