Things that grind your gears

[Skar]

I'm sure this has been brought up a few times by now, but it gets annoying to see fan fiction used as an argument against concepts and ideas. Goku Black being bad just because he's something you'd expect to find in a fanfic, for example.
There's two problems with using this as an argument. First off, there are literally tens of thousands of Dragon Ball fanfics in existence. No matter what the official Dragon Ball story decides to do at this point, it will hit something that at least one fan has already thought of. That's pretty much an inevitability. Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, fanfics are not bound to one specific quality. Fanfics can be horrendous, and that's the stereotype, but they can also be fantastic. Calling something "fanfic-y" could be a compliment just as much as it could be an insult, so it becomes pretty meaningless to try to use it as either.

I don't think it's a problem to come up with an idea that a fan fiction writer has used before. There are only so many ideas out there so it's inevitable. Honestly, a lot of what we've seen in DBS has happened in fanfiction in one form or another. My issue with this is seeing something that has been widely criticized most times it has been used in fan fiction then expected to enjoy it because it's being implemented in the official story with little to no changes. It's different if they take a overused concept and do something interesting with it but that wasn't always the case. I think it's fair to try to hold it to some basic standard and expecting more from professionals than you would amateur fanfic writers.

[Mister_Popo]

So let's see what we have here:

- power scale inconcistencies (present during original run)
- the milking-out like a cashcow-argument (present during original run)
- the content is sometimes childish of nature (it was a children's show too during the 80s and 90s)
- it's too much about Goku and Vegeta (it was very much about Goku and Vegeta during the original run too, they are the main characters)
- too much fighting (why do you expect, it's the successor to the godfather of modern Shounen)
- too much cheesy dialogues (they were definetely there too in the original run)
- the other characters are 'fodder' (they were fodder too in the original run)
- the arcs aren't long enough (what about the TOP, if that's not long enough for you ...)
- ...

Some claim there aren't really much sensible arguments pro new content, but i haven't read an insane lot of sensible or original arguments against it neither.
If they really dislike these features or 'flaws', why were they fans of the original manga or anime in the first place?
The same issues were present then as they are now.
The same vague 'nostalgia-argument' ('it used to be better' or 'we like it because of the good old days') appears to work in both directions.

It often comes down to 'i don't like the new content because xxxxx very subjective reasons, so every fallacy is good to spread my word'.

The problem I have with this sort of argument is that it's propping up a strawman that fans who criticize DBS thought DB/Z was perfect. This basically boils down to "This thing you are criticizing in DBS...something similar happened in the original therefore you should never complain how bad it gets or if it continues indefinitely!". It's not trying to argue in favor of DBS based on its merits but rather tries to excuse its flaws and assume that Toriyama or whoever else is involved is in capable of learning from their mistakes. The majority of fans who complain about something in DBS is because they felt the original took it too far or had enough of it so they don't want to keep seeing it and have it taken to even more ridiculous levels. The basic expectation of a sequel is to try to improve and overcome the flaws of the original. That's why a Hollywood sequel could still get panned by critics/fans and it isn't considered any less bad if the original did something similar. If someone is playing a video game sequel, they don't say "Hmm this has wonky controls and glitches...but since the original also had some of these issues then I don't mind how bad they get here or any sequel moving forward". This sort of logic doesn't make sense in any situation. I'm someone who HAS used this argument in the past and realized it's just made up of excuses so you can lower you expectations and never hope that something could get better.

We knew very well that Super suffered from production problems. They could not be solved immediately. TOEI did everything they could to improve the show, despite the production problems. They even stopped it to work on those problems. So I think they really knew it themselves.

The unnecessary repetition of the same known arguments can even have a contrarian effect.
Now suppose someone from TOEI would take a look what the fans have to say about 'new' feedback. What does he find? An endless repetition of known arguments, which already circulated from the time that DBZ was still running. I would think in his place 'ah, still the same complaints from the past, we have heard that so often, it might not be that bad ...'
In any case, it would not stimulate me to 'improve' more.

What would invite me then?
More constructive feedback, fans who write stories themselves, make positive suggestions of how it should be done. Because that side of the story is often not mentioned. Complaining how things should not be done, but making new suggestions, that often seems like a bridge too far. I would say: 'Write a story yourself and send it to TOEI, no guarantee that they do something with it, but if this is the best fanfiction-story they have ever read and get an idea from it, then you have achieved a lot more then with your current 'tactics'.
Feedback can be useful, but I very rarely see constructive feedback. Endless complaining on a forum only creates a bad atmosphere between fans on a board. You do not achieve anything with that. That can not improve the show. That is what I mean by 'irrational negativity'.

[ABED]

I'm sure this has been brought up a few times by now, but it gets annoying to see fan fiction used as an argument against concepts and ideas. Goku Black being bad just because he's something you'd expect to find in a fanfic, for example.
There's two problems with using this as an argument. First off, there are literally tens of thousands of Dragon Ball fanfics in existence. No matter what the official Dragon Ball story decides to do at this point, it will hit something that at least one fan has already thought of. That's pretty much an inevitability. Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, fanfics are not bound to one specific quality. Fanfics can be horrendous, and that's the stereotype, but they can also be fantastic. Calling something "fanfic-y" could be a compliment just as much as it could be an insult, so it becomes pretty meaningless to try to use it as either.

I don't think it's a problem to come up with an idea that a fan fiction writer has used before. There are only so many ideas out there so it's inevitable. Honestly, a lot of what we've seen in DBS has happened in fanfiction in one form or another. My issue with this is seeing something that has been widely criticized most times it has been used in fan fiction then expected to enjoy it because it's being implemented in the official story with little to no changes. It's different if they take a overused concept and do something interesting with it but that wasn't always the case. I think it's fair to try to hold it to some basic standard and expecting more from professionals than you would amateur fanfic writers.

First, I've literally never read good fanfiction. I don't think it exists. It's either terribly written or so far from the voice of the actual series.

And second, Goku Black isn't a fan fiction idea. The idea of a dark mirror of the protagonist is a fictional trope that's existed for years, way before fan fiction. It bugs me when people make it sound like a dark Goku is a fan fiction level idea.

[Lord Beerus]

I'm sure this has been brought up a few times by now, but it gets annoying to see fan fiction used as an argument against concepts and ideas. Goku Black being bad just because he's something you'd expect to find in a fanfic, for example.
There's two problems with using this as an argument. First off, there are literally tens of thousands of Dragon Ball fanfics in existence. No matter what the official Dragon Ball story decides to do at this point, it will hit something that at least one fan has already thought of. That's pretty much an inevitability. Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, fanfics are not bound to one specific quality. Fanfics can be horrendous, and that's the stereotype, but they can also be fantastic. Calling something "fanfic-y" could be a compliment just as much as it could be an insult, so it becomes pretty meaningless to try to use it as either.

I don't think it's a problem to come up with an idea that a fan fiction writer has used before. There are only so many ideas out there so it's inevitable. Honestly, a lot of what we've seen in DBS has happened in fanfiction in one form or another. My issue with this is seeing something that has been widely criticized most times it has been used in fan fiction then expected to enjoy it because it's being implemented in the official story with little to no changes. It's different if they take a overused concept and do something interesting with it but that wasn't always the case. I think it's fair to try to hold it to some basic standard and expecting more from professionals than you would amateur fanfic writers.

First, I've literally never read good fanfiction. I don't think it exists. It's either terribly written or so far from the voice of the actual series.

And second, Goku Black isn't a fan fiction idea. The idea of a dark mirror of the protagonist is a fictional trope that's existed for years, way before fan fiction. It bugs me when people make it sound like a dark Goku is a fan fiction level idea.

A thousand times yes to this.

It pissess me off to no end that people think that "Evil Goku" is a fanfiction concept. Completely ignoring the fact that original series already dipped its toe into the idea of Goku having a dark mirror character of himself with King Piccolo, Raditz, Vegeta, Cell and Majin Boo. Hell, even some of the movies did this with Tulres and Beerus.

[Skar]

We knew very well that Super suffered from production problems. They could not be solved immediately. TOEI did everything they could to improve the show, despite the production problems. They even stopped it to work on those problems. So I think they really knew it themselves.

The unnecessary repetition of the same known arguments can even have a contrarian effect.
Now suppose someone from TOEI would take a look what the fans have to say about 'new' feedback. What does he find? An endless repetition of known arguments, which already circulated from the time that DBZ was still running. I would think in his place 'ah, still the same complaints from the past, we have heard that so often, it might not be that bad ...'
In any case, it would not stimulate me to 'improve' more.

What would invite me then?
More constructive feedback, fans who write stories themselves, make positive suggestions of how it should be done. Because that side of the story is often not mentioned. Complaining how things should not be done, but making new suggestions, that often seems like a bridge too far. I would say: 'Write a story yourself and send it to TOEI, no guarantee that they do something with it, but if this is the best fanfiction-story they have ever read and get an idea from it, then you have achieved a lot more then with your current 'tactics'.
Feedback can be useful, but I very rarely see constructive feedback. Endless complaining on a forum only creates a bad atmosphere between fans on a board. You do not achieve anything with that. That can not improve the show. That is what I mean by 'irrational negativity'.

I agree there's a difference between constructive criticism and complaining. Your comment was implying that fans should never criticize anything in DBS because something similar has happened before. You weren't taking into consideration that fans thought these issues hurt the original story and don't want to see them keep happening or get worse. You even said "the milking-out like a cashcow-argument (present during original run)" as if fans shouldn't be upset that the franchise is being milked to the ground. If Toei saw these types of comments, they would assume they could get away with anything and there's no incentive to improve because there's always going to be fans who will defend whatever they throw at us. Sure, fans can say that Toriyama was it for the money but he decided to end it after he felt there wasn't anywhere good for the story to go which is completely different than milking it for as long as they can until it stops making money. That alone is worth criticizing because it basically means the studio sees the fanbase as mindless consumers that will enjoy anything as long as there's a few callbacks and fan service.

And second, Goku Black isn't a fan fiction idea. The idea of a dark mirror of the protagonist is a fictional trope that's existed for years, way before fan fiction. It bugs me when people make it sound like a dark Goku is a fan fiction level idea.

I wasn't talking about Goku Black specifically and I agree the concept of a dark version of the protagonist is a common idea. It wasn't even a dark version of Goku (the closest we've got to that was probably Cell).I felt the lengths the story had to go to make it happen was fanfic-y compared to all the other Evil Goku stories I've come across. I meant in general there were some ideas in DBS I've seen in fanfiction that I hoped would never make their way to the official series.

[Mister_Popo]

We knew very well that Super suffered from production problems. They could not be solved immediately. TOEI did everything they could to improve the show, despite the production problems. They even stopped it to work on those problems. So I think they really knew it themselves.

The unnecessary repetition of the same known arguments can even have a contrarian effect.
Now suppose someone from TOEI would take a look what the fans have to say about 'new' feedback. What does he find? An endless repetition of known arguments, which already circulated from the time that DBZ was still running. I would think in his place 'ah, still the same complaints from the past, we have heard that so often, it might not be that bad ...'
In any case, it would not stimulate me to 'improve' more.

What would invite me then?
More constructive feedback, fans who write stories themselves, make positive suggestions of how it should be done. Because that side of the story is often not mentioned. Complaining how things should not be done, but making new suggestions, that often seems like a bridge too far. I would say: 'Write a story yourself and send it to TOEI, no guarantee that they do something with it, but if this is the best fanfiction-story they have ever read and get an idea from it, then you have achieved a lot more then with your current 'tactics'.
Feedback can be useful, but I very rarely see constructive feedback. Endless complaining on a forum only creates a bad atmosphere between fans on a board. You do not achieve anything with that. That can not improve the show. That is what I mean by 'irrational negativity'.

I agree there's a difference between constructive criticism and complaining. Your comment was implying that fans should never criticize anything in DBS because something similar has happened before. You weren't taking into consideration that fans thought these issues hurt the original story and don't want to see them keep happening or get worse. You even said "the milking-out like a cashcow-argument (present during original run)" as if fans shouldn't be upset that the franchise is being milked to the ground. If Toei saw these types of comments, they would assume they could get away with anything and there's no incentive to improve because there's always going to be fans who will defend whatever they throw at us. Sure, fans can say that Toriyama was it for the money but he decided to end it after he felt there wasn't anywhere good for the story to go which is completely different than milking it for as long as they can until it stops making money. That alone is worth criticizing because it basically means the studio sees the fanbase as mindless consumers that will enjoy anything as long as there's a few callbacks and fan service.

I see a strawman running there. I didn't use that argument to claim DBS does not have any issues at all or it shouldn't get any criticism because of the past. Not in the least.
I just think those pet topic are often used in exaggeration (to justify subjective means or hidden agendas?).
And this while endless negative feedback without constructive propositions does not get us anywhere even remotely close to further improving the show.

Those issues were present back then as they are know. Did i state that as a justification to keep standards low? No at all. That's your interpretation.
But apparently those 'flaws' didn't stop anybody to enjoy the series back then. As they don't stop people from enjoying the show now.
So are they really THAT bothersome? Are they reallly rocksolid arguments that tend to prove how horrible DBS truely is, as some might claim?

No. They don't actually prove if new content is better or worse than how it used to be. I agree the show should keep improving over time, and it does.
The animation has improved dramatically in the latest two arcs of Super. They even took the show from air temporarily to further improve other production issues.
I am very much under the impression pretty often there is a substantial degree of 'dramaqueening' involved to further enhance the horrible impact of these 'excruciating flaws'.

[Skar]

I see a strawman running there. I didn't use that argument to claim DBS does not have any issues at all or it shouldn't get any criticism because of the past. Not in the least.
I just think those pet topic are often used in exaggeration (to justify subjective means or hidden agendas?).
And this while endless negative feedback without constructive propositions does not get us anywhere even remotely close to further improving the show.

Those issues were present back then as they are know. Did i state that as a justification to keep standards low? No at all. That's your interpretation.
But apparently those 'flaws' didn't stop anybody to enjoy the series back then. As they don't stop people from enjoying the show now.
So are they really THAT bothersome? Are they reallly rocksolid arguments that tend to prove how horrible DBS truely is, as some might claim?

No. They don't actually prove if new content is better or worse than how it used to be. I agree the show should keep improving over time, and it does.
The animation has improved dramatically in the latest two arcs of Super. They even took the show from air temporarily to further improve other production issues.
I am very much under the impression pretty often there is a substantial degree of 'dramaqueening' involved to further enhance the horrible impact of these 'excruciating flaws'.

What hidden agenda would fans have to criticize DBS? No one here is an employee at a rival anime studio trying to sabotage Toei or give them a bad name. The majority of fans in any fanbase don't bother going online to share their opinions good or bad. If they like a series, they continue watching and if they don't, then they are more easily to give up and move on to something else. The only ones who are going to go out of their way to make an account on a forum to discuss, praise, or criticize a series are the most diehard fans. Yes, the flaws of the original didn't prevent fans from enjoy it but no doubt fans would've enjoyed the series MORE without these issues. That's why they were frequently brought up in reviews about Dragonball/Z well before DBS was a thing. I feel a lot of times defending DBS relies on downplaying it's flaws in an effort to claim they're only as bad as the worse from the original. As I've stated, that itself isn't a good argument.

I think the topics you mentioned were exaggerations themselves because I don't think I've ever seen anymore make those arguments and usually they go into more detail and offer constructive criticism. Fans acknowledge the original had inconsistencies in writing and power scaling but many fans feel it has gotten more frequent and worse in DBS. The fans who argue Goku and Vegeta are getting the most focus is because they've been given God forms and that have widened the gap between them and the rest of the cast far beyond DBZ. Aside from a tournament that required a big cast, it's unlikely we're going to see any Z fighter besides them getting much screentime. Claiming the original was a cashgrab is not the same as a sequel relying heavily on the success of its predecessor and frequently has callbacks to it whenever they can. Many of these are categorizing them as similar issues but not taking into account that it's how far they've been taken is what fans are criticizing. As long as those fans don't try to hinder others enjoyment of the series, there shouldn't be a problem with them voicing their concerns. Whether they're praising or criticizing the series, it's unlikely Toei or Toriyama are going to see their comments or be influenced by them anyway.

[Mister_Popo]

What hidden agenda would fans have to criticize DBS? No one here is an employee at a rival anime studio trying to sabotage Toei or give them a bad name.

I haven't stated every fan that criticizes Super has bad intentions. However TOEI is clearly working on improving the show, there are a number of fans for whom it'll never be good.
They keep attacking the franchise for a number of reasons that aren't neutral. And even if most fans say matters are improving, they'll just keep breaking it down.
What their exact reasons are, i don't know, but the goal of these people is defnitely not to improve the show.

I think the topics you mentioned were exaggerations themselves because I don't think I've ever seen anymore make those arguments and usually they go into more detail and offer constructive criticism. Fans acknowledge the original had inconsistencies in writing and power scaling but many fans feel it has gotten more frequent and worse in DBS.

It's normal to notice these flaws, but if you always keep repeating the same things, that's no longer constructive in my opinion.
If you look at the new movie with a magnifying glass to nitpick, you can always find things to give it a negative review, even if most experts agreed it was a great movie.

Claiming the original was a cashgrab is not the same as a sequel relying heavily on the success of its predecessor and frequently has callbacks to it whenever they can.

That's exact the same thing. Toriyama intented to finish the manga several times in the 80s/90s. But he continued anyway.
I don't blame the man for it.
However the manga is being seen as very authentic, Super is often seen as a product of consumption. That doesn't make much sense.

Many of these are categorizing them as similar issues but not taking into account that it's how far they've been taken is what fans are criticizing. As long as those fans don't try to hinder others enjoyment of the series, there shouldn't be a problem with them voicing their concerns. Whether they're praising or criticizing the series, it's unlikely Toei or Toriyama are going to see their comments or be influenced by them anyway.

You're probably right. They only look at the numbers and bucks at the end. But if any, constructive criticism always works better.
Fans not trying to hinder others enjoyment? I've seen it so many times before on the internet (non-Kanzenshuu specific): sometimes people are actually getting ignored or treated like complete sapheads because they happen to like Super, or being rewarded for not liking Super and breaking the franchise down in the most original ways. That's not an opinion, but straight-out fan-humilation, despotism and manipulation. I'd appreciate boards stay somehow neutral, where fans are allowed to have freedom of speech, as long as it's fair.
And my opinion still stands: i haven't read an awful lot of meaningful criticism why Supers last two arcs would truely be that horrifying bad at the end.

[ABED]

That's exact the same thing. Toriyama intented to finish the manga several times. But he was basically pushed to continue for more profit.

Him continuing after he intended to finish several times doesn't make it a cash grab. People can change their mind. He didn't have to agree to do DB any longer if he didn't want to.

I get your point about constructive criticism, but none of this will find its way into the hands of anyone with the power to do anything. I think the most you can do is give criticisms or praise when you think it's due, and be polite.

[Forte224]

It's normal to notice these flaws, but if you always keep repeating the same things, that's no longer constructive in my opinion.

If people think they're legitimate flaws, they're going to keep stating them. I don't understand the issue here, that's just logic.

[Skar]

That's exact the same thing. Toriyama intented to finish the manga several times in the 80s/90s. But he continued anyway.
I don't blame the man for it.
However the manga is being seen as very authentic, Super is often seen as a product of consumption. That doesn't make much sense.

No, it’s not the same thing. By this logic, literally every recent cashgrab sequel and reboot of an old franchise could be excused by saying that the original was also intended to make money. Everyone in the entertainment industry wants to make a profit but there’s a difference between telling a story and ending it at a good place and bringing a series back after decades mainly due to its popularity. Terminator 2 and Genisys are both sequels but Terminator 2 is seen a legitimate continuation that adds something worthwhile to the series while the other is usually seen as a cheap cashgrab. It doesn't mean fans can't enjoy Genisys but I don't think a Terminator fan would argue that they were both created for the same intentions and effort.

You're probably right. They only look at the numbers and bucks at the end. But if any, constructive criticism always works better.
Fans not trying to hinder others enjoyment? I've seen it so many times before on the internet (non-Kanzenshuu specific): sometimes people are actually getting ignored or treated like complete sapheads because they happen to like Super, or being rewarded for not liking Super and breaking the franchise down in the most original ways. That's not an opinion, but straight-out fan-humilation, despotism and manipulation. I'd appreciate boards stay somehow neutral, where fans are allowed to have freedom of speech, as long as it's fair.
And my opinion still stands: i haven't read an awful lot of meaningful criticism why Supers last two arcs would truely be that horrifying bad at the end.

It goes both ways. I’ve seen it countless times when someone criticizes DBS and the response they get is "you're just blinded by nostalgia because the original also suffered from these issues!" so that their argument could be dismissed ignoring that they likely didn't enjoy it happening the first time around and just don't want it continuing or getting worse. This forum and others have been around for years so you can see older threads with fans criticizing and dissecting DB/Z, GT, the movies, etc well before DBS. I agree with you that fans shouldn't prevent others from enjoying it but both extremes are undesirable. Whether you love the series or think it's worth criticizing, you should be able to express your opinion as long as you're not insulting. I don't think this is as big of a problem as some fans make it out to be at least not on here (but I haven't been to many other forums so I'm not sure). The mods here do a good job making sure everyone follows the rules and I've seen many people getting banned or have their thread closed when they're being too unreasonable or disrespectful. If there are more assholes on other forums that prevent you from sharing your opinion, let them be and just spend more time here .

[Mister_Popo]

Kanzenshuu lies pretty high in my estime intellectually. Debates have a good quality overall and several opinions are listened at when the effort is done to argument.
No, i wasn't referring to this place.
I haven't been convinced yet ever on any board with rocksolid arguments that makes me agree Super is bad amusement. I don't think it's as good as DBZ, but it still gets the job done to keep me entertained and that is what matters to me, not the 'flaws' some might see.

[Neo-Makaiōshin]

Valueing the quality and contribution of a story based only on how much new "lore/information" it throws (aka, how many extra words it can be added to a wiki article) over things like themes & ideas, character development, conflict, pathos, you know, the stuff that makes a story...well a story, my braincells die whenever someone disregards them in favor of BS information. On that same note, the criticism of "there's no story" thrown around to anything that doesn't have (big) in-universe status quo change melts my braincells.

The orginal three tournament arcs from the manga are the most prominent victims (to varying degree) of both things by portion of the fandom.

[Lord Beerus]

Valueing the quality and contribution of a story based only on how much new "lore/information" it throws (aka, how many extra words it can be added to a wiki article) over things like themes & ideas, character development, conflict, pathos, you know, the stuff that makes a story...well a story, my braincells die whenever someone disregards them in favor of BS information. On that same note, the criticism of "there's no story" thrown around to anything that doesn't have (big) in-universe status quo change melts my braincells.

The orginal three tournament arcs from the manga are the most prominent victims (to varying degree) of both things by portion of the fandom.

Oh, this drives me up the goddamn wall, too.

Backstory and lore should never take precedence over characterization, development and overreaching story themes. Like, the Red Ribbon Army arc is Dragon Ball at its apex when it comes to world-building, but I would take the Universal Survival arc, 21st, 22nd and 23rd WMAT over that arc in a heartbeat primarily because I find those arcs stronger focus on character development, internal conflict and narrative themes to be much more satisfactory than how much world building is thrown at me.

Note: For the record, I love the Red Ribbon Army arc.

[ABED]

Valueing the quality and contribution of a story based only on how much new "lore/information" it throws (aka, how many extra words it can be added to a wiki article) over things like themes & ideas, character development, conflict, pathos, you know, the stuff that makes a story...well a story, my braincells die whenever someone disregards them in favor of BS information. On that same note, the criticism of "there's no story" thrown around to anything that doesn't have (big) in-universe status quo change melts my braincells.

The orginal three tournament arcs from the manga are the most prominent victims (to varying degree) of both things by portion of the fandom.

Oh, this drives me up the goddamn wall, too.

Backstory and lore should never take precedence over characterization, development and overreaching story themes. Like, the Red Ribbon Army arc is Dragon Ball at its apex when it comes to world-building, but I would take the Universal Survival arc, 21st, 22nd and 23rd WMAT over that arc in a heartbeat primarily because I find those arcs stronger focus on character development, internal conflict and narrative themes to be much more satisfactory than how much world building is thrown at me.

Note: For the record, I love the Red Ribbon Army arc.

Amen! Both backstory and lore are fine in small doses, but it's mostly exposition. I don't need to know the ins and out of how Freeza's empire functioned. It was an interplanetary empire that committed mass genocide to sell planets to the highest bidder and it was run by an ultra-powerful tyrant. That's it. That's all you need to know.

[Lord Beerus]

Valueing the quality and contribution of a story based only on how much new "lore/information" it throws (aka, how many extra words it can be added to a wiki article) over things like themes & ideas, character development, conflict, pathos, you know, the stuff that makes a story...well a story, my braincells die whenever someone disregards them in favor of BS information. On that same note, the criticism of "there's no story" thrown around to anything that doesn't have (big) in-universe status quo change melts my braincells.

The orginal three tournament arcs from the manga are the most prominent victims (to varying degree) of both things by portion of the fandom.

Oh, this drives me up the goddamn wall, too.

Backstory and lore should never take precedence over characterization, development and overreaching story themes. Like, the Red Ribbon Army arc is Dragon Ball at its apex when it comes to world-building, but I would take the Universal Survival arc, 21st, 22nd and 23rd WMAT over that arc in a heartbeat primarily because I find those arcs stronger focus on character development, internal conflict and narrative themes to be much more satisfactory than how much world building is thrown at me.

Note: For the record, I love the Red Ribbon Army arc.

Amen! Both backstory and lore are fine in small doses, but it's mostly exposition. I don't need to know the ins and out of how Freeza's empire functioned. It was an interplanetary empire that committed mass genocide to sell planets to the highest bidder and it was run by an ultra-powerful tyrant. That's it. That's all you need to know.

Dragon Ball Minus should stand as a prime example of what happens when you put lore and backstory over providing actual narrative with proper characterization... you get nothing worthwhile. Hell, Dragon Ball Online has a lot of great tidbits of lore and world building, but until you actually use that to create a good story with fleshed out characters, that's all it's ever going to be... a lot of great tidbits of lore and world building.

[zarmack]

When people assume that just because an idea is common in fan-fiction that its inherently bad.

[ABED]

When people assume that just because an idea is common in fan-fiction that its inherently bad.

Agreed, it's just the execution in fan fiction that's bad. I'm being slightly facetious. It is in fact about execution, but I don't enjoy fan fiction. I don't think it's ever well done.

[Travis Touchdown]

The only thing that grinds my gears as of late is Super being praised as if it's the best thing ever for all the same reasons GT is hated as if it's the worst thing ever.

[Grimlock]

Hell, Dragon Ball Online has a lot of great tidbits of lore and world building, but until you actually use that to create a good story with fleshed out characters, that's all it's ever going to be... a lot of great tidbits of lore and world building.

You saying Dragon Ball Online is just lore and world building?