Pannaliciour wrote:So why retelling BOG in the manga if there is a movie?
To refer to a point I'd made earlier in the thread, though not within this quote chain: the manga's version of Battle of Gods isn't really Battle of Gods. Remember, a lot of people bemoan it for being too short. I think that's sort of the point. Toyotaro uses the pretense of a short retelling of some of the already-explored events to build up to the new and upcoming Champa arc material. We see the Kaioshin interacting with him, we see Beerus interacting with him, and ultimately we see him destroy some of Freeza's forces, which demonstrably prompts Sorbet's resolve to revive Freeza. It's just an extended prologue to the Champa material, showing an abridged version of the first film while showing us what Champa was doing during the film.
fexus wrote:A wholly good and logical assumption that the anime haven't subverted yet.
What we know is that every GoD of destruction have that hakai technique or so we thought. We can be slightly sure of that fact because Sidra used the same kind of technique as Beerus does. I think Champa might have tried to do it too or he did but I don't remember. But that's still an assumption because not everyone used the technique. Also with the manga we can also for sure say that this technique can also be learn by normal people. So, doing this not only we just downgrade the hakai technique to a normal technique but we made it not special in anyway to the GoD.
But the way the anime is going, it still is with the assumption that only a GoD can have the hakai technique. When the dog used the hakai, they can instantly tell that was from a GoD.
Sure subversion could be fun but this clearly shows that this call was all from Toyo not Toriyama and it clearly shows. It isn't a good subversion. It's just a subversion. The only thing that can make this a little bit better is if in the plot outline, Toriyama wrote down that Goku becomes a GoD somewhere. Or you know, he kill Zeno sama and take his power so he can learn the all delete technique. Should be fun.
Well, according to the anime, we know that two of them know it. It's a logical assumption that all of them can use it, but it's not yet a matter of
knowledge. As you acknowledge, that's still an assumption.
I don't think "anyone could theoretically learn it" devalues the technique at all. Even though anyone could theoretically learn the move, there are still necessary conditions for learning it. We don't yet know the criteria for learning it, and we never have, since it's hardly ever been given any exposition, via either actual dialog, interviews, or guidebook information. If this is the hill you must die on, I'd suggest waiting to settle on your thoughts until Super's done and some guidebooks explicitly elucidate some in-universe truths, before we start writing off new plot developments as "plot holes". But the point is: there are hardly any people who will attract the gaze of a God of Destruction and their attendant/master, and as such the technique needn't be thought of as being free for anyone to casually just pick up off the ground.
I agree that not all subversion is good subversion. But near as I can tell, your only reason for disliking this plot development is that it
is a subversion. These aren't inherently bad, so you need to establish more than that mere fact in order to justify to anyone else a negative subjective evaluation. I really don't see what the concept's originator has to do with its merit in execution. Doesn't matter if it's Toriyama's idea or Toyotaro's idea, if it sucks it sucks, and if it's cool it's cool.
FortuneSSJ wrote:Zephyr wrote:
I think they would have been fine. The same way literally every single fan in existence who didn't start with episode/chapter one of Dragon Ball is fine.
It would still be a half-assed experience, just like it is for the people that started with DBZ/Kai. You don't start reading a book by the middle.
The deaths of Goku and the others in Saiyan arc are much more impactful for people that watched DB and got attached to those characters, than to a newcomer that doesn't know anything about them.
No, you don't start a book in the middle. You also don't start it on page 15. You start it at the beginning. Dragon Ball, however, is a serialized work. It's continuously ongoing. Most people are going to jump in at an infinite number of potential different spots in the story besides the beginning.
I agree with you, that starting at the beginning is preferable. But unless you
are just looking the series up on the internet to watch it from the beginning (and thus also have the freedom and resources to look up what to watch in what order), then you're not actually going to do that. You can say all you want that it was necessary for people to see retellings of Battle of Gods and Revival of F, but unless every single person this action was supposedly catered toward started from episode 1 of these retellings, then the entire endeavor is rendered moot. If someone was knowledgeable enough to know that the series was starting on X day, and thus intentionally started with it when it began airing, then chances are that they're probably already invested enough to have seen the films. I'm sure there are exceptions, but that's all they are: exceptions.
If a series is good, it will perpetually be able to hook people. Think for a moment just how substantially dense the slice of the fandom is who did not start with Dragon Ball, who started with Z. Hell, what about people who started partway through the Saiyan arc (while Nappa is fighting), or people who started during something as late as the Cell arc? All of these people got hooked. As such, the fandom is enormous.
However, that doesn't mean that we need to retell everything. When Z started, should they have retold Dragon Ball up to that point under the Z label, as movies, so that people who didn't watch DB could catch up first? Imagine how ridiculous that would be.
"You know, Battle of Gods would have done a much better job of informing me if it retold all 42 volumes first." The salient point is that history says otherwise, regarding the supposed necessity to know
everything in order to jump in for the first time. I wouldn't be here right now if that were true. I know several people who likewise wouldn't be.
You know what the hook to the Champa arc is? Some super powered martial artists are fighting in a tournament against their twin universe. Each universe is captained by a purple cat, who serve as gods of destruction for their respective universes. Flaring auras, energy blast volleys, beam struggles, close quarters hand-to-hand combat, etc, all ultimately played out in a very whimsical style. If none of this shit, in-universe context be damned, doesn't grab you, then I don't know what you're even doing here.
Nero<>Akira wrote:I don't want to hear anything about "well maybe he was shown the technique". No. There is nothing suggesting this is even the case and is grade a speculation and damage control.
How is there nothing to suggest that this is the case? Goku's literally using the technique, and he personally knows and is close friends with a user, and said user's master. There's no other way he could know about it or how to use it. It's obviously the case. It's clearly implied. This is how suggestion and implication work. You connect the dots. You identify that which
must be true in order for however many other things to simultaneously true (this is what we call a
Necessary Condition, in formal logic). There is only cause for concern when there are two things which
must be true that contradict one another, such as "the Dragon Balls take a full year to recharge" and "the Dragon Balls recharged in only 8 months". I've yet to see any reason to believe this kind of thing is what we're currently discussing.
Nero<>Akira wrote:Spirit Bomb sword was not as bad as the hakai. Know why? Cause it served a certain narrative purpose within the arc in the anime.
How are you critiquing the broad narrative functions of a still not-officially-translated chapter of a still incomplete story arc? You seem to be jumping the gun there just a little bit. We haven't fully seen what does and does not receive a satisfying narrative payoff.
mute_proxy wrote:Cipher wrote:I'm also a bit confused about the outrage surrounding Goku (a user of god ki) using the "Hakai" technique.
Has Goku ever been one to witness a martial-arts/ki technique and not want to figure out how it's done? Trying to replicate Beerus' skills, interest in becoming a god of destruction or not, is perfectly in character for him.
The problem is he never saw Beerus use hakai, Beerus used it only in front of Kaioshin in the manga.
Yes, the problem is identical to the one where we just don't know
where the hell Trunks came from. Vegeta and Bulma were never shown or stated to have had sex, so there's just no way to know.
HeroR wrote:We never seen him witness it in the manga, that is the primary problem here. All we have is the assumption he did.
All we have is a
logical assumption, yes. But I thought logical assumptions were sacred or something. I thought that since it was
logically assumed that only a God of Destruction could use the technique, that this was a sacred belief that cannot be contradicted.
You can't just claim that
this logical assumption is sacred, while simultaneously claiming that the logical assumption that "Goku saw Beerus do it off-screen" isn't. Logical assumptions are logical assumptions, man, and you've yet to give any qualifiers that set one apart from the others. If logical speculation is not allowed to be questioned or dis-proven, then there is no reason to have gripes with the logical assumption that Goku could have maybe once before seen this attack that is able to be used by this person who he spent
at least several months living with.
(End in Chapter 26)
