Vegeta's character and popularity

[dbgtFO]

If Krillin had participated in the battle, everyone would have died.

[Gaffer Tape]

What? How? Why would Kuririn's involvement...? Oh, are you talking about the senzu? Well... possibly. I'm not entirely convinced of that. Even if they were mortally wounded, they'd still probably have time to down a bean. But as for your statement that we don't get to see the Artificial Humans after they've accomplished their goal... well, you're right. We never see them after they accomplish their goal, because they never do. Considering that they voluntarily choose to give up on killing Goku, and, for the next seventeen years that the series continues, they never attempt to kill anybody or go on any rampage, I'd say that's pretty definitive proof that they weren't the same psychopathic murderers that their alternate counterparts are, and that they wouldn't have randomly gone crazy even if they had killed Goku.

And no, I did not say Kuririn was responsible for the truck driver's death. Don't put words in my mouth. I have no problem with disagreement, but do not put words in my mouth.

I'm sorry, but you really need to stop being so sensitive in discussions. No one's attempting to put words in your mouth. You were the one who brought up that Kuririn's wish prevented anyone from cleaning up yet another one of Vegeta's messes, and this was said in the context of Vegeta's responsibility/moral compass/what have you. If you weren't implying that Kuririn shouldered some of the burden of responsibility for that, then why did you bring it up in the first place? I'm truly sorry if I misinterpreted your motive for talking about that, but I honestly don't see what other point there could possibly be.

[roidrage]

What? How? Why would Kuririn's involvement...? Oh, are you talking about the senzu? Well... possibly. I'm not entirely convinced of that. Even if they were mortally wounded, they'd still probably have time to down a bean. But as for your statement that we don't get to see the Artificial Humans after they've accomplished their goal... well, you're right. We never see them after they accomplish their goal, because they never do. Considering that they voluntarily choose to give up on killing Goku, and, for the next seventeen years that the series continues, they never attempt to kill anybody or go on any rampage, I'd say that's pretty definitive proof that they weren't the same psychopathic murderers that their alternate counterparts are, and that they wouldn't have randomly gone crazy even if they had killed Goku.

And no, I did not say Kuririn was responsible for the truck driver's death. Don't put words in my mouth. I have no problem with disagreement, but do not put words in my mouth.

I'm sorry, but you really need to stop being so sensitive in discussions. No one's attempting to put words in your mouth. You were the one who brought up that Kuririn's wish prevented anyone from cleaning up yet another one of Vegeta's messes, and this was said in the context of Vegeta's responsibility/moral compass/what have you. If you weren't implying that Kuririn shouldered some of the burden of responsibility for that, then why did you bring it up in the first place? I'm truly sorry if I misinterpreted your motive for talking about that, but I honestly don't see what other point there could possibly be.

Kuririn does shoulder some responsibility. The responsibility for keeping him dead when he could have been brought back to life. As I said, they both have blood on their hands. The thing about me is, as I've said already, I don't care one bit about the civilians in Dragon Ball. They're one-dimensional fools who are so ignorant in comparison to the reader they appear brain-dead. And that's just where you and me differ. I don't count it as a strike against Vegeta's moral character because I don't care about them any more than he does. I also maintain my position that if you see a glowing figure who's clearly not human, you probably shouldn't yell at it. It's sort of like the anime Darwin Awards.

I'm not trying to be sensitive, I'm simply asking you not to put words in my mouth, like "Vegeta is morally superior to the androids," or "Kuririn bears responsibility for his killings," because nowhere did I say that. You assumed that. What I meant was that Android 18 was in no way above Vegeta, as Michsi said, just because he killed someone and she didn't. She, initially at least, viewed people as insects who were to be mostly ignored and occasionally toyed with. To say that makes her better than Vegeta, is, in my blunt opinion, plain bullshit. They're equally despicable.

You also seem to be operating under the assumption that I'm an unbendable Vegeta fan, and that's not really true. I'll gladly concede there's little to like about him, and that fans do tend to go overboard in their praise of him. What I won't concede is that I should care about any of the people he kills, because they're stupid, or that his actions in the Buu saga need to be held against him, because he tried to rectify them the only way he could.

I think the Androids were scared straight by Cell, honestly. Up until that moment, they had done nothing to prove themselves any different than their future counterparts, and it's lucky for Kami his "waiting" didn't blow up in his face with them actually killing Goku and terrorizing Earth for their own enjoyment. The only things Trunks said was "different" about them was their power and the manner in which they had appeared.

[Gaffer Tape]

As I've said before, we actually don't differ in that regard. I couldn't give a rat's ass about any of the random civilians either. In fact, it's nice on the rare occasion where not everyone does get wished back to life because, in a series where you have wish granting orbs that can erase all serious consequences, having a villain kill people off carries much more weight than when it simply doesn't matter. Where we differ is how we see cold-blooded murder as a determining factor in whether a person is good or evil. Apparently, your point of view (and you have used these exact words) is if the person being murdered is someone you don't have a personal attachment to, it "doesn't count" as murder. The way I see it is that I don't have to care personally about the person being slaughtered to think of that person's murder as a heinous act. To move things into a real world perspective for a moment, I did not personally know anybody who died on 9/11. I wouldn't normally have the slightest amount of concern or feeling or care for any of those people. And to a certain extent, I still don't, because I have no personal connection to them. But did I think those responsible were terrible, evil murderers? Of course I did! My not knowing the victims of a murder does not just allow me to give the murderer a free pass. It doesn't matter if Vegeta slits Goku's throat in his sleep, puts his hand through Yamucha's (my favorite character's) gut, or blows away random, nameless truck driver in a ballcap. Any one of those things makes him just as much a murderer as any of the others, and any one of those things makes him just as much worthy of contempt as any of the others.

The other point you make during these discussions is that the murder doesn't count, and the murderer is absolved from any wrong-doing, if someone else happens to come along and undo the damage (via Dragon Balls). Obviously this is a bit of a stickier subject since we have no real-world precedent. Well, again, maybe we do. Going back to my doctor analogy, let's say he's just an amazing MD and manages to save the shooting victim's life. Well, yes, you're right. The person who fired the gun can no longer be tried for murder. Through sheer luck of someone else's interference, he is no longer technically a murderer. But that, of course, is why courts have a charge known as "attempted murder" because you can't absolve all responsibility just because the murder didn't work out quite the way you planned. You still planned to murder someone. You still carried out an attempt to do so. Had it not been due to someone else's interference, that person would be dead because of you. You still go to jail. Also, you're predicating your argument on foreknowledge of the future, which is something of a logical fallacy to be arguing. Do you honestly believe Vegeta, before any of his murder sprees, be in on Namek to the innocent villagers, to truck driver, or to the hundreds of people he murdered at the Tenkaichi Budoukai, stopped to think that, "Phew. It's a good thing we have those Dragon Ball things to wish people back to life, otherwise I wouldn't be doing this kind of stuff at all"? Or maybe that he just knew that, when those people returned to life, they'd have a greater appreciation of life and live each moment to the fullest because they knew what death was like? An unintended positive outcome also does not a defense for murder create. To get back into the real world one more time, I could say now that I came from an alternate timeline wherein Pol Pot didn't execute all those Cambodians, and it's hell, because the next Hitler was born out of one of those victims that should have died, or because there was a population explosion that caused the world to run out of food or anything. Well, whoopde freakin do. It doesn't make Pol Pot any less of an evil murderer. He certainly had no idea he was actually saving the world by murdering innocent people. He was just murdering innocent people. If some good happened to come out of it, then that's great, but it doesn't absolve him.

And as for Kuririn... was he even present when Vegeta killed that truck driver? I don't think he was. I don't think it would cause him to be responsible either way (I mean, it's like saying that the social worker who has saved hundreds of lives is responsible for the one person he wasn't able to save), but he really has to shoulder some of Vegeta's responsibility for a murder he didn't even know happened?

[roidrage]

As I've said before, we actually don't differ in that regard. I couldn't give a rat's ass about any of the random civilians either. In fact, it's nice on the rare occasion where not everyone does get wished back to life because, in a series where you have wish granting orbs that can erase all serious consequences, having a villain kill people off carries much more weight than when it simply doesn't matter. Where we differ is how we see cold-blooded murder as a determining factor in whether a person is good or evil. Apparently, your point of view (and you have used these exact words) is if the person being murdered is someone you don't have a personal attachment to, it "doesn't count" as murder. The way I see it is that I don't have to care personally about the person being slaughtered to think of that person's murder as a heinous act. To move things into a real world perspective for a moment, I did not personally know anybody who died on 9/11. I wouldn't normally have the slightest amount of concern or feeling or care for any of those people. And to a certain extent, I still don't, because I have no personal connection to them. But did I think those responsible were terrible, evil murderers? Of course I did! My not knowing the victims of a murder does not just allow me to give the murderer a free pass. It doesn't matter if Vegeta slits Goku's throat in his sleep, puts his hand through Yamucha's (my favorite character's) gut, or blows away random, nameless truck driver in a ballcap. Any one of those things makes him just as much a murderer as any of the others, and any one of those things makes him just as much worthy of contempt as any of the others.

The other point you make during these discussions is that the murder doesn't count, and the murderer is absolved from any wrong-doing, if someone else happens to come along and undo the damage (via Dragon Balls). Obviously this is a bit of a stickier subject since we have no real-world precedent. Well, again, maybe we do. Going back to my doctor analogy, let's say he's just an amazing MD and manages to save the shooting victim's life. Well, yes, you're right. The person who fired the gun can no longer be tried for murder. Through sheer luck of someone else's interference, he is no longer technically a murderer. But that, of course, is why courts have a charge known as "attempted murder" because you can't absolve all responsibility just because the murder didn't work out quite the way you planned. You still planned to murder someone. You still carried out an attempt to do so. Had it not been due to someone else's interference, that person would be dead because of you. You still go to jail. Also, you're predicating your argument on foreknowledge of the future, which is something of a logical fallacy to be arguing. Do you honestly believe Vegeta, before any of his murder sprees, be in on Namek to the innocent villagers, to truck driver, or to the hundreds of people he murdered at the Tenkaichi Budoukai, stopped to think that, "Phew. It's a good thing we have those Dragon Ball things to wish people back to life, otherwise I wouldn't be doing this kind of stuff at all"? Or maybe that he just knew that, when those people returned to life, they'd have a greater appreciation of life and live each moment to the fullest because they knew what death was like? An unintended positive outcome also does not a defense for murder create. To get back into the real world one more time, I could say now that I came from an alternate timeline wherein Pol Pot didn't execute all those Cambodians, and it's hell, because the next Hitler was born out of one of those victims that should have died, or because there was a population explosion that caused the world to run out of food or anything. Well, whoopde freakin do. It doesn't make Pol Pot any less of an evil murderer. He certainly had no idea he was actually saving the world by murdering innocent people. He was just murdering innocent people. If some good happened to come out of it, then that's great, but it doesn't absolve him.

And as for Kuririn... was he even present when Vegeta killed that truck driver? I don't think he was. I don't think it would cause him to be responsible either way (I mean, it's like saying that the social worker who has saved hundreds of lives is responsible for the one person he wasn't able to save), but he really has to shoulder some of Vegeta's responsibility for a murder he didn't even know happened?

Well, for one thing, you have to look at killing random people from Vegeta's perspective. He doesn't care one way or the other when they get back to life, or have any apparent remorse for what he's done, but he doesn't jerk off to their deaths, as he probably would Goku's, because they're not significant. They are objects who are in the way and need to be removed or used; typical psychopathic behavior. His attitudes towards killing nameless figures are pretty similar to those of the criminals from Reservior Dogs; "One way or the other, he's getting out of my way. Stupid motherfucker." He does relish in the destruction that he causes, and the power he feels and the fear he inspires, but he doesn't take a disproportionate amount of pleasure in every individual death unless the individual in question has severely angered him.

Again, this is classic psychopathic behavior; but it's tempered with a change of heart that's clearly fantastic. Real-life psychopaths never change. They can do a world-class job of pretending that they have, but they haven't. As such, Pol Pot, Hitler, and Stalin could never really reform themselves. Only in the world of Dragon Ball can Vegeta grow to love a wife and son, when in real life he would be evil until the day he died. As it's a fictional work, I can forgive Vegeta, since he changed, and for real, whereas I doubt anyone could ever forgive Pol Pot, even if he did have a sincere turnaround.

What makes it very easy for me (and other Vegeta fans) to put this behind is that the other characters are shown to forgive him as well. If they don't care or dwell on it, why should us fans?

No, Kuririn wasn't present when Vegeta killed the truck driver, but he was definitely there when Androids 19 and 20 reduced South City to rubble. And he passed up the chance to revive them by saying "Revive everyone killed since the Androids arrived," by making a wish for his crush. He might have to word the wish specifically to include the truck driver, which might let him off in that regard, but he definitely passed up the chance to reverse the deaths of the South City civilians, ones that Vegeta didn't have anything to do with.

[Gaffer Tape]

Well, for one thing, you have to look at killing random people from Vegeta's perspective. He doesn't care one way or the other when they get back to life, or have any apparent remorse for what he's done, but he doesn't jerk off to their deaths, as he probably would Goku's, because they're not significant. They are objects who are in the way and need to be removed or used; typical psychopathic behavior. His attitudes towards killing nameless figures are pretty similar to those of the criminals from Reservior Dogs; "One way or the other, he's getting out of my way. Stupid motherfucker." He does relish in the destruction that he causes, and the power he feels and the fear he inspires, but he doesn't take a disproportionate amount of pleasure in every individual death unless the individual in question has severely angered him.

I'm... having a hard time seeing this as a defense for Vegeta. If I didn't know any better, I'd honestly say you were validating my opinion.

Again, this is classic psychopathic behavior; but it's tempered with a change of heart that's clearly fantastic. Real-life psychopaths never change. They can do a world-class job of pretending that they have, but they haven't. As such, Pol Pot, Hitler, and Stalin could never really reform themselves. Only in the world of Dragon Ball can Vegeta grow to love a wife and son, when in real life he would be evil until the day he died. As it's a fictional work, I can forgive Vegeta, since he changed, and for real, whereas I doubt anyone could ever forgive Pol Pot, even if he did have a sincere turnaround.

Are you honestly saying that Pol Pot, Hitler, and Stalin were incapable of loving anybody? That they didn't have families, lovers, pets even that they cared about? Learning to love two people who love you isn't very hard to do. Considering that Vegeta was at his most callous, sadistic, and evil murdering streak WHILE he was raising that happy family, I'd say that that makes him very much like those dictators.

What makes it very easy for me (and other Vegeta fans) to put this behind is that the other characters are shown to forgive him as well. If they don't care or dwell on it, why should us fans?

Well, I have to say that, for me, that's something that makes me even angrier: that the characters don't lock him up or seal him away or shoot him into the sun like he deserves. As I've said in my arguments before, Vegeta is much more dangerous and causes much more havoc than most of the villains they're fighting against, yet the other characters just shrug and move on. It's just one more thing about Vegeta's character post-Freeza arc that doesn't make any sense, that seems shoehorned, that simply can't be acknowledged because it would completely unravel any justification for Vegeta's presence in the story.

No, Kuririn wasn't present when Vegeta killed the truck driver, but he was definitely there when Androids 19 and 20 reduced South City to rubble. And he passed up the chance to revive them by saying "Revive everyone killed since the Androids arrived," by making a wish for his crush. He might have to word the wish specifically to include the truck driver, which might let him off in that regard, but he definitely passed up the chance to reverse the deaths of the South City civilians, ones that Vegeta didn't have anything to do with.

Maybe so, but, again, these are people who selflessly and constantly wish people back to life with the Dragon Balls they gathered when they could have been using them to wish for immortality or untold for wealth for themselves. That they can't manage to save every single person, at least they're trying to do good. Besides, it took someone of Yamucha's awesome intelligence years to finally come up with the kind of proper wording that could salvage REALLY widespread death like that. However, I will agree that at least some of them shoulder responsibility for the deaths of those island civilians, but not because of the Dragon Balls. Because they knew the Artificial Humans were going to appear on that day at that place and took absolutely no preventative measures. They never even travelled to the island once in that three year period to find out if it was inhabited or not. I will concede, and have done so before, that while Vegeta was indeed taking stupid pills from the moment Freeza died until he came back to life the final time, the rest of the cast was also hooked on stupid pills at the beginning of the Cell arc. But AT LEAST they weren't actively murdering people.

[Michsi]

No, Kuririn wasn't present when Vegeta killed the truck driver, but he was definitely there when Androids 19 and 20 reduced South City to rubble. And he passed up the chance to revive them by saying "Revive everyone killed since the Androids arrived," by making a wish for his crush. He might have to word the wish specifically to include the truck driver, which might let him off in that regard, but he definitely passed up the chance to reverse the deaths of the South City civilians, ones that Vegeta didn't have anything to do with.

They, including Krillin, wished everyone back to life that had been killed by Cell. Forwhatever reason they omitted the ones killed by the Androids, either they/Toriyama just forgot, but the point is that bringing the innocent people back to life had been their main concern and their first wish. Krillin only asked for that wish for 18 when nobody else knew what else to ask for.

This has always been a plothole becuae YAMCHA could have just added killed by Cell and the androids . But ever since I've learned about Toriyama's tendency to forget I simply assumed that it was supposed to be implied that everybody got wished back.

If Krillin had participated in the battle, everyone would have died.

How? Senzu Beans or not, they let them live. 18 was prepared to let Vegeta go if he left her alone? What other villans did that?

[Gaffer Tape]

I wouldn't really call it a plothole (since it doesn't actually contradict anything in the story) rather than just a missed opportunity. Still, I'll take heroes who can't manage to properly word things right to save every single person over someone who kills random people just because.

As for the truck driver, this is a minor thing, but, in regards to roidrage, what does his yelling at them for being in the road have to do with anything? Vegeta didn't kill the guy because he yelled at him. He just happened to be there at the moment that Vegeta decided to fire a blast at #18. Aside from the fact that his alleged stupidity doesn't necessarily deserve death, he would have been blown away regardless of whether he was a stupid truck driver or the next Einstein, so I really don't see what that has to do with anything.

[Geisha]

Have you guys seen this? I think they did a good job of summing up some of Vegeta's internal turmoil.
I think he's such a complex character it's be impossible to discern why he did or didn't so something.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CIlQVOzGq8

I think he's a character capable of loving and caring for other people, even "weaklings". But I think even we can agree that feelings can make a person vulnerable. I think Vegeta recognized this and magnified it x10.
If he barely cared for his own family, why would he show any concern for people he doesn't even know? I don't think he's 'planning' on killing everything and everyone who might be at a close proximity [at least not during this arc] but it's more of a "too bad for you, I'm fighting here so it's your own fault" kind of indifference.

[Michsi]

I wouldn't really call it a plothole (since it doesn't actually contradict anything in the story) rather than just a missed opportunity. Still, I'll take heroes who can't manage to properly word things right to save every single person over someone who kills random people just because.

I kinda see it as a plothole since they obviously planed to bring back all those who died yet somehow forgot about the androids victims. The same as with those who died when Cell blew up the islands. Technically the should have drowned since there were no more islands, but again I don't think that it actually happened like that...

Nevertheless, the point is, Krillin didn't selfishly take away someones chance with that wish he made, he only came up with it when they didn't know what else to wish for. And that still doesn't have anything to do with Vegeta.

[dbgtFO]

If Krillin had participated in the battle, everyone would have died.

How? Senzu Beans or not, they let them live. 18 was prepared to let Vegeta go if he left her alone? What other villans did that?

What? How? Why would Kuririn's involvement...? Oh, are you talking about the senzu? Well... possibly. I'm not entirely convinced of that. Even if they were mortally wounded, they'd still probably have time to down a bean.

#17 said they would all die, if they weren't fed a senzu, so it wouldn't matter, if it was #17 & #18's intention to kill them at all, Vegeta and Co. would still have been killed by them.

But as for your statement that we don't get to see the Artificial Humans after they've accomplished their goal... well, you're right. We never see them after they accomplish their goal, because they never do. Considering that they voluntarily choose to give up on killing Goku, and, for the next seventeen years that the series continues, they never attempt to kill anybody or go on any rampage, I'd say that's pretty definitive proof that they weren't the same psychopathic murderers that their alternate counterparts are, and that they wouldn't have randomly gone crazy even if they had killed Goku.

I disagree, simply because in the main timeline things transpired differently ie. Cell happened, everyone got much stronger than the twins, giving them less motivation for world destruction, when there are guys who can one shot you, and they were shown compassion, something the future ones weren't, giving them an entirely different outlook on the world.

If all that stuff hadn't happened then things would transpire in the same way as it did in the future timeline IMO.

[Michsi]

#17 said they would all die, if they weren't fed a senzu, so it wouldn't matter, if it was #17 & #18's intention to kill them at all, Vegeta and Co. would still have been killed by them.

Either, I don't remember or it's not in my version. Nevertheless, my argument still counts for the simple fact that they didn't kill them when they could. They are still supposed to be the enemies, it stands to reason that they were a bit on the cruel side when dealing with the people who wanted to pick a fight with them. Who knows, maybe they would have been even nicer had they NOT known about the senzus. If the Vegeta and co. were stronger and proved to be a threat to them maybe they would have killed them then out of a sense of self preservation. First they give them the chance to leave, second they spare them. Future 18 and 17 don't spare anyone, that's much is clear. They were down right sadistic. See how 18 behaves in the current timeline and how she acts in Trunks timeline.

This and having several characters comfirm it makes it pretty obvious IMO.

[Michsi]

#17 said they would all die, if they weren't fed a senzu, so it wouldn't matter, if it was #17 & #18's intention to kill them at all, Vegeta and Co. would still have been killed by them.

Either, I don't remember or it's not in my version. Nevertheless, my argument still counts for the simple fact that they didn't kill them when they could. They are still supposed to be the enemies, it stands to reason that they were a bit on the cruel side when dealing with the people who wanted to pick a fight with them. Who knows, maybe they would have been even nicer had they NOT known about the senzus. If Vegeta and co. were stronger and proved to be a threat to them maybe they would have killed them then out of a sense of self preservation. First they give them the chance to leave, second they spare them. Future 18 and 17 don't spare anyone, that's much is clear. They were down right sadistic. See how 18 behaves in the current timeline and how she acts in Trunks timeline.

This and having several characters comfirm it makes it pretty obvious IMO.

[dbgtFO]

Future 18 and 17 don't spare anyone, that's much is clear. They were down right sadistic. See how 18 behaves in the current timeline and how she acts in Trunks timeline.

This and having several characters comfirm it makes it pretty obvious IMO.

My point is that the androids are the same between timelines(not in power though), the personalities of the future ones are the way they are, because of what transpired in their timeline. If the same had happened in the main timeline, then the present ones would have eventually done the exact same thing. Since it didn't, it's often theorised that the present ones simply were nicer all along, which I do not agree with.

[Michsi]

I got that but I just don't see WHAT could have made them change since they show mercy from the very beginning. The way I see it, it's simple: they killed the warriors in the future timeline, they didn't here and they wouldn't have. In Trunks timeline the fact that Piccolo and the others engaged them was probably because they started wrecking havoc on earth. Basically the difference is there from the start and since Trunks pretty much grew up in that world it's heavily implied that they were cruel and sadistic from the get go.

[roidrage]

Are you honestly saying that Pol Pot, Hitler, and Stalin were incapable of loving anybody? That they didn't have families, lovers, pets even that they cared about? Learning to love two people who love you isn't very hard to do. Considering that Vegeta was at his most callous, sadistic, and evil murdering streak WHILE he was raising that happy family, I'd say that that makes him very much like those dictators

Those dictators never loved their families, or anybody; the only exceptions I'll consider are Adolf Hitler and his mother, or Hitler and dogs. I emphatically deny that those dictators ever loved anyone, and that's what makes them different from Vegeta.

What I don't understand why you just can't get over Vegeta's past when he so clearly loves his wife and son, and feels bad for betraying them. You're kind of beating a dead horse with that point, and I'm not buying it. Now, I'm not offended by the points you make or that you disagree with me, and I'm not saying you can't have your own opinion, but the fact of the matter is, I'm never going to agree with you. You get upset about things that the characters don't, whereas I accept it at face value. That's what makes us different. I'm not going to debate this any more, not because I'm angry or because I dislike you, but because we're not getting anywhere.

I got that but I just don't see WHAT could have made them change since they show mercy from the very beginning. The way I see it, it's simple: they killed the warriors in the future timeline, they didn't here and they wouldn't have. In Trunks timeline the fact that Piccolo and the others engaged them was probably because they started wrecking havoc on earth. Basically the difference is there from the start and since Trunks pretty much grew up in that world it's heavily implied that they were cruel and sadistic from the get go.

The only reason they didn't kill them is in case they needed them later for games. It's the same reasoning as when the future androids beat the crap out of Trunks, but let him live because they still needed a toy. There's nothing you can point to that indicates they were any more compassionate or kinder than their future counterparts up until they were absorbed by Cell other than that they didn't kill anyone. Them not killing anyone is not proof of their goodness. Kami took Trunks' statement out of context (he was referring to power and the manner in which they appeared, not their personalities), and Kuririn has a crush on one of them, so of course he's going to say they're not that bad.

[Godo]

Vegeta is not a "complex" character, and never will be no matter how you try to interpret his character.

He has the following drives:
- Fighting (his only hobby apart from training).
- His self-image as the mightiest warrior of the mightiest warrior race (being spoonfed Saibaimen and being spoiled his whole childhood).
- Indulging himself into whatever he wants without looking back (killing people, took VDs from Bulma, lived at Capsule Corp without helping out).
- His arrogance which leads to his hate relationship with Goku (It was YOU who came to Earth to KILL Goku, remember? First you're like "yah, they can change their powerlevels" and then you act shocked when you get your ass handed to you, stupid fuck).

The following changes to his personality followed:

- He got a family and got a taste of the Earth morals. He became a normal man more or less, and got someone to love.
- He found out how arrogant and stupid he was.
- He found out that he has another purpose in life than to just kill people.
- The bullshit he was fed during his childhood probably wasn't right...took him long enough.

Vegeta is just as "deep" as Derek Zoolander is when he finds out that maybe he wants to do more than being "ridiculously good looking", which took him some events.

Vegeta is nothing but the Yamcha of the Saiya-jins plus some arrogance.

[Gaffer Tape]

Those dictators never loved their families, or anybody; the only exceptions I'll consider are Adolf Hitler and his mother, or Hitler and dogs. I emphatically deny that those dictators ever loved anyone, and that's what makes them different from Vegeta.

Really? You knew those people enough to speak authoritatively on what their innermost thoughts were? Or are you just saying that in order to make sure Vegeta looks better than them? Remember that you have an insight into Vegeta (being that he's a simplistic fictional character with which we are given an inside look at) that you just can't get on real human beings. But human beings are pretty damned complex. They can easily love certain people with all their hearts while still murdering other people.

What I don't understand why you just can't get over Vegeta's past when he so clearly loves his wife and son, and feels bad for betraying them. You're kind of beating a dead horse with that point, and I'm not buying it. Now, I'm not offended by the points you make or that you disagree with me, and I'm not saying you can't have your own opinion, but the fact of the matter is, I'm never going to agree with you. You get upset about things that the characters don't, whereas I accept it at face value. That's what makes us different. I'm not going to debate this any more, not because I'm angry or because I dislike you, but because we're not getting anywhere.

I can't get over it because he KEEPS DOING IT CONSTANTLY! He never shows remorse for those Namekian villagers he slaughtered (elderly and CHILDREN, may I remind you) or the truck driver or the hundreds of Budoukai spectators. I don't give a crap if he loves his family because that has nothing to do with whether or not he's a frequent murderer. The reason I brought up those dictators is because, yes, I'm sure they loved their families too. It does not make them good people. Vegeta loving his family does not suddenly make his callous murdering alright. It just makes him a callous murderer who happens to have one soft spot. I'm not buying it. I'm not sure where I can see you accepting anything at face value, I have to say, though. I'm weighing Vegeta's actions very objectively. I'd argue that it's you who are seeing Vegeta through rose-tinted glasses, or at least Toriyama-tinted glasses. And he spent years trying to convince us that Vegeta is somehow deep or adequately tormented or just misunderstood (but hell, even Toriyama has characters constantly state in the Cell arc that Vegeta is evil through and through, and in the Buu arc that he's going to die and go to hell... because he's evil... not sure how much more authoritative you can get than that... so maybe it's just the fanbase that's been trying to convince everyone that Vegeta is sympathetic). And for years, up until the last few months, I bought it. But he's not. He's a one-note murderer who never shows remorse for those he kills. Ever. He never changes in that regard. The only concession he ever makes is that Goku is better than him. Sorry, doesn't make Vegeta a good person, but at least he finally stops murdering people (as far as we know) after that, which is at least some progress, but considering it happens within the last ten chapters, it's too little, too late, as far as I'm concerned.

But you are right. We're not going to see eye to eye on this. And that's fine. We are about to start going into circles, although I don't think we're entirely there yet. It's possible we'll have some new content in this regard to discuss at some point, but I'm certainly fine right now for leaving it as it is.

[roidrage]

Those dictators never loved their families, or anybody; the only exceptions I'll consider are Adolf Hitler and his mother, or Hitler and dogs. I emphatically deny that those dictators ever loved anyone, and that's what makes them different from Vegeta.

Really? You knew those people enough to speak authoritatively on what their innermost thoughts were? Or are you just saying that in order to make sure Vegeta looks better than them? Remember that you have an insight into Vegeta (being that he's a simplistic fictional character with which we are given an inside look at) that you just can't get on real human beings. But human beings are pretty damned complex. They can easily love certain people with all their hearts while still murdering other people.

You'd be very surprised. I can't claim to have ever known those figures, but psychopaths are truly about as complex and deep as puddles. It's simple; they're 100% bad. That's hard to fathom, but it's the truth. Once you've read on the subject, like I have, you'll see there's not much to understand about them. That doesn't make them any less frightening, or me any less vulnerable to manipulation by one (they're very good actors), but if your average psychopath were a movie character, they would be criticized for being "one-dimensional". You've seen one deep down, you've seen them all. Their methods, attitudes, and approach may vary, but they're all pieces of shit.

I also don't entirely think you're being objective, either. If you were, you'd consider that Bulma and Trunks actually love Vegeta, and mercilessly killing him, as you advocate, would hurt them. But the bottom line is; most of what you've said is indeed true, but you haven't given me a reason to care. Nobody in the series cares, and I don't either.

[Kingdom Heartless]

Vegeta is just as "deep" as Derek Zoolander is when he finds out that maybe he wants to do more than being "ridiculously good looking", which took him some events.

I've never heard it put like that before.