Your ideal Dragon Ball sequel.

[ABED]

And yet for years despite increasing automation and better technology, unemployment remained steady. These myths aren't based on facts. Yes, the markets for older methods and tech will take a dip but that frees up capital to invest in better tech and methods which means more jobs. It is absolutely a myth. This is basic econ.

People can care for a new cast of characters if there are written well enough. And that itself requires time. Much like how it took years for the original Dragon Ball to build and develop its core cast.

Dragon Ball centred itself around what a handful martial artists get up to. Dragon Ball is basically Wuxia. That may sound too broad for some people, but that's because Dragon Ball's premise is not complicated or unique. It's an incredibly simple premise that was just executed in a very satisfying manner. Taking that concept and applying it to a new cast of characters doesn't make it any less of what Dragon Ball represents: high fantasy martial arts adventures.

Dragon ball is absolutely wuxia. That's the genre it belongs to. I know it's premise isn't unique hence why it makes sense to just start something new instead of using the DB brand. Yes taking the broad ideas and applying them to other characters makes it something other than DB because DB isn't the broad ideas. It's Toriyama's quirkiness and characters otherwise it's just another wuxia series. What separates DB from other Wuxia stories? And I'll keep saying this but it's not just about the quality of the writing. It's lightning in a bottle.

[WittyUsername]

I will say that while I’d be fine with a next generation type of series, I wouldn’t necessarily want it to be so far removed from current Dragon Ball that none of the characters we know would show up. I’d be fine with a show that focuses on characters like Oob, Pan, Goten, and Trunks. I think that would qualify well enough as a next generation story.

[JulieYBM]

I wanna see a series set around Gokuu after all his friends and family are dead. He's just 560 years old and meeting new people and fighting new foes, like a soft reboot.

[Lord Beerus]

Dragon ball is absolutely wuxia. That's the genre it belongs to. I know it's premise isn't unique hence why it makes sense to just start something new instead of using the DB brand. Yes taking the broad ideas and applying them to other characters makes it something other than DB because DB isn't the broad ideas. It's Toriyama's quirkiness and characters otherwise it's just another wuxia series. What separates DB from other Wuxia stories? And I'll keep saying this but it's not just about the quality of the writing. It's lightning in a bottle.

But by staring a new series set in the same world and yet not calling itself Dragon Ball is incredibly disingenuous, especially if the core concept the show focuses on high fantasy martial arts adventures, much like what original Dragon Ball built its story around.

If this was the case of a predominately slice-of-life series, with much less emphasis on the Wuxia narrative tropes that the series constantly used, then more of argument can be made to calling that new series something other than Dragon Ball. I'm not taking anything away from how unique Dragon Ball charm and whimsy was, or how wonderfully quirky it's characters were, but at the end of the day the strong focus on high fantasy martial arts adventures are what make Dragon Ball what it is. And that story concept doesn't need die within Dragon Ball along with Goku.

I mean, Toriyama has gone on record to say that Dragon Ball is nothing but fighting:

For me personally, the work Dragon Ball is nothing but fighting, which to be perfectly frank, isn’t something I like all that much (laughs), but for some reason, it’s this really fun, mysterious work that gets me excited when I’m coming up with a story.

[LoganForkHands73]

I wanna see a series set around Gokuu after all his friends and family are dead. He's just 560 years old and meeting new people and fighting new foes, like a soft reboot.

That would be cool actually. Morbid, but cool. Dragon Ball Online insinuates that Goku and Vegeta were shagging around like mechanical diggers for hundreds of years after their first wives died, producing a whole race of Saiyan-Earthlings. I don't really like that idea so much because it was just to facilitate a game mechanic, I won't lie that a far future trajectory of Goku's life does intrigue me, more than anything else that came out of DBO's storyline. So outside of Super and non-DB branded spin-offs, this would be ideal for me.

I think this does kind of validate ABED's overall point that the series really wouldn't have much of a leg to stand on without the original characters. While some of the concepts that spawned off of DBO's setting and became popular like the Time Patrol, the one piece of info that most people care about is what happened to Goku, Vegeta and the other characters, and none of it has really been explored since. Similarly, the only bit of GT: A Hero's Legacy that people unanimously like is when the real, original Goku appears at the end. He'll always be our special boy. It's that simple.

I get Lord Beerus's point that if they're still intent on producing stories, why not do it with new characters, but I don't think creating these hypothetical new characters would magically improve the writing if you're of the opinion that the writing is already stagnant. Even as someone who has enjoyed the Super era for the most part, it's not really being created with the intention of telling new stories, just milking a cash cow. But hey, I'm a weirdo who likes drinking cow's milk straight from the glass. Unpasteurised. LIKE A MAN.

[JulieYBM]

Dragon Ball is the story of Gokuu, so why not show us a Gokuu who has lived for so long he is outliving his companions, almost like a Doctor Who Gokuu?

[LoganForkHands73]

Dragon Ball is the story of Gokuu, so why not show us a Gokuu who has lived for so long he is outliving his companions, almost like a Doctor Who Gokuu?

Love Doctor Who (mechanical digger line cheekily stolen from Steven Moffat), so right up my alley. I'd love if a future Goku was introduced like the Ninth Doctor in the first episode of the 2005 revival, a little manic and enigmatic but still an inherently optimistic, chilled person. I'd imagine a future Goku wouldn't dwell too much on the past unlike the Doctor, he'd probably be a little sad and weary at times when remembering all his old friends but nothing too major. Dragon Ball has never really shown the angsty implications of immortality anyway, I mean Shin is like 5 million years old but he certainly doesn't act like it.

EDIT: Which, if any, old characters could return in this far future setting in your opinion? The only ones that could are probably Vegeta, Piccolo (retaining his father's eternal youth), the Gods and maybe the Androids. And Turtle.

[ABED]

Dragon ball is absolutely wuxia. That's the genre it belongs to. I know it's premise isn't unique hence why it makes sense to just start something new instead of using the DB brand. Yes taking the broad ideas and applying them to other characters makes it something other than DB because DB isn't the broad ideas. It's Toriyama's quirkiness and characters otherwise it's just another wuxia series. What separates DB from other Wuxia stories? And I'll keep saying this but it's not just about the quality of the writing. It's lightning in a bottle.

But by staring a new series set in the same world and yet not calling itself Dragon Ball is incredibly disingenuous, especially if the core concept the show focuses on high fantasy martial arts adventures, much like what original Dragon Ball built its story around.

If this was the case of a predominately slice-of-life series, with much less emphasis on the Wuxia narrative tropes that the series constantly used, then more of argument can be made to calling that new series something other than Dragon Ball. I'm not taking anything away from how unique Dragon Ball charm and whimsy was, or how wonderfully quirky it's characters were, but at the end of the day the strong focus on high fantasy martial arts adventures are what make Dragon Ball what it is. And that story concept doesn't need die within Dragon Ball along with Goku.

I mean, Toriyama has gone on record to say that Dragon Ball is nothing but fighting:

For me personally, the work Dragon Ball is nothing but fighting, which to be perfectly frank, isn’t something I like all that much (laughs), but for some reason, it’s this really fun, mysterious work that gets me excited when I’m coming up with a story.

I know the quote wasn't that clear but I wasn't talking about starting a new DB series. I'm saying to just make a completely different series. There's no reason to set anything else in the DB world beyond the safety net of the brand name and even that isn't 100 percent safe.

There's an ENTIRE genre about high fantasy martial arts. The story behind DB is Goku's life.

Toriyama's quote may certainly be true, but without Goku it's JUST fighting and there's nothing separating it from a boat load of other shows. It's the characters, Toriyama's skill as an artist, and his idiosyncrasies that make the difference.

My ideal in this hypothetical scenario is a 50+/- episode series that wraps things up finally.

[Lord Beerus]

I know the quote wasn't that clear but I wasn't talking about starting a new DB series. I'm saying to just make a completely different series. There's no reason to set anything else in the DB world beyond the safety net of the brand name and even that isn't 100 percent safe.

There's an ENTIRE genre about high fantasy martial arts. The story behind DB is Goku's life.

Toriyama's quote may certainly be true, but without Goku it's JUST fighting and there's nothing separating it from a boat load of other shows. It's the characters, Toriyama's skill as an artist, and his idiosyncrasies that make the difference.

My ideal in this hypothetical scenario is a 50+/- episode series that wraps things up finally.

I find the idea that you can't have a sequel to Dragon Ball set in the same world as Dragon Ball to be incredibly reductionist. The world of Dragon Ball shouldn't be locked out from other characters, should future works take place with a new cast. That's absurd. There's no need for that kind of gatekeeping.

And saying the story behind Dragon Ball is just Goku's life is beyond vague considering there are other characters who have been in the series as long as Goku has, and how their live develop are just as important as Goku's. And Goku's life is basically a continues series of high fantasy martial arts battles, and that's where all of Goku's characterisation and development stem from.

And that hypothetical scenario you talked about, yeah, that's basically GT.

[ABED]

I know the quote wasn't that clear but I wasn't talking about starting a new DB series. I'm saying to just make a completely different series. There's no reason to set anything else in the DB world beyond the safety net of the brand name and even that isn't 100 percent safe.

There's an ENTIRE genre about high fantasy martial arts. The story behind DB is Goku's life.

Toriyama's quote may certainly be true, but without Goku it's JUST fighting and there's nothing separating it from a boat load of other shows. It's the characters, Toriyama's skill as an artist, and his idiosyncrasies that make the difference.

My ideal in this hypothetical scenario is a 50+/- episode series that wraps things up finally.

I find the idea that you can't have a sequel to Dragon Ball set in the same world as Dragon Ball to be incredibly reductionist. The world of Dragon Ball shouldn't be locked out from other characters, should future works take place with a new cast. That's absurd. There's no need for that kind of gatekeeping.

And saying the story behind Dragon Ball is just Goku's life is beyond vague considering there are other characters who have been in the series as long as Goku has, and how their live develop are just as important as Goku's. And Goku's life is basically a continues series of high fantasy martial arts battles, and that's where all of Goku's characterisation and development stem from.

And that hypothetical scenario you talked about, yeah, that's basically GT.

And I find your POV rooted in the desire to not let things go. It's not absurd to think the characters in a story are what matters, not the world. Saying the story of DB is Goku's life is the opposite of vague. Other characters doesn't take away the fact that it's Goku's story that we're following. The other characters are important but not as important as his. Even Bulma leaves the story for long stretches and unfortunately often isn't that important to the outcome. She's a vital character in his story but it's still his story. I find it truly baffling that you believe a story centered around a main characters would somehow preclude other characters from being important. Vegeta has probably the longest character arc in the entire series and it's centered on letting go of his insecurities about the main character.

The heart and soul of a story is the characters. That's what the audience emotionally invests in. What makes DB what it is? What are the elements that your hypothetical spin off is keeping?

I'm well aware that GT falls in the vein of what I'm talking about but execution matters.

[Lord Beerus]

And I find your POV rooted in the desire to not let things go. It's not absurd to think the characters in a story are what matters, not the world. Saying the story of DB is Goku's life is the opposite of vague. Other characters doesn't take away the fact that it's Goku's story that we're following. The other characters are important but not as important as his. Even Bulma leaves the story for long stretches and unfortunately often isn't that important to the outcome. She's a vital character in his story but it's still his story. I find it truly baffling that you believe a story centered around a main characters would somehow preclude other characters from being important. Vegeta has probably the longest character arc in the entire series and it's centered on letting go of his insecurities about the main character.

The heart and soul of a story is the characters. That's what the audience emotionally invests in. What makes DB what it is? What are the elements that your hypothetical spin off is keeping?

I'm well aware that GT falls in the vein of what I'm talking about but execution matters.

I've spent the last few pages talking about how the current cast having nothing let to offer the narrative in terms of personal growth or character development, and that the ideal sequel for Dragon Ball would be have an entire new cast of character so that there are far less limitation on character development and unique personal dynamics -- the aspects of Dragon Ball storytelling that have been completely lost with the current string of stories that have been told -- and your response have been basically that in a hypothetical situation where there is a sequel to Dragon Ball, the focus should still remain on characters who have nothing left to in terms organic growth. Your ideal sequel to Dragon Ball is basically a series that stays dead in tracks and remain creatively limited because of nostalgia. And I'm who has a desire to not let things go? Seriously?

And why must I continuously stress that I am aware of how important Goku's story is to Dragon Ball and how much people are invested in it? I know this. There just so happens to be stories of other martial artists in Dragon Ball that people find just as engaging. Hell, there are some fans who find the stories of other characters in Dragon Ball more interesting than Goku's. The ambitions of Goku aren't the only aspect that drive the story. Especially since there several arcs in the story that begin without Goku being the catalyst for it and how practically every arc after the Saiyan arc has Goku not being significantly involved in it for a sizeable portion of its runtime.

Please also stop saying conflating the terms "spin-off" and "sequel". They are not the same thing, and you know that.

[ABED]

What to you is the difference between a spin off and a sequel series? If it has none of the characters we care about, in this case it would be a spin off. A sequel follows the characters at some point in the future.

That's fine and great that people find other characters just as if not more engaging than Goku's but that's irrelevant as to whether it's HIS story. Where is this line of thought coming from? Who people find more engaging doesn't matter to the question of whose story is the center of the DB or any story for that matter. Goku is almost always front and center in some aspect of the story, even if the characters are just buying time for him to arrive. Even in the Cell arc, Dr. Gero creates the artificial humans to get revenge. In the Freeza arc, Goku's friends are more involved in the plot, but they are still waiting for him to arrive (twice) and ultimately it's Goku who is able to defeat Freeza, and it is his idea how to use the remaining wishes for the DB's. If Gohan had successfully taken over as the protagonist, then the story would've been about the Son family, but that's not what happened.

And I'm who has a desire to not let things go? Seriously?

Yes, for one, in my hypothetical scenario, things would end. And two no matter how much you like to think your made up story is about growth, it's not. It would be replaying the same sort of beets as the previous generation. If it's a story of personal growth as a martial artist, then it's telling the same story but instead of telling it with the same characters, it's starting over again. That's not new. That's a paint job. It's giving the appearance of new without actually doing something new.

[Lord Beerus]

What to you is the difference between a spin off and a sequel series? If it has none of the characters we care about, in this case it would be a spin off. A sequel follows the characters at some point in the future.

A spin-off has a narrative that focuses on a supporting character from the original show, or has a major retooling of the how the universe works, usually accompanied with a completely different name to signify that drastic change in tone, theme and setting. (e.g. Legend Of Korra and Batman Beyond)

Sequels have more variation.

You can have a Legacy sequel which follows the continuity of the original work(s), but takes place further along the timeline, often focusing on new characters with the original ones still present in the plot. (e.g. Disney Star Wars movies and Creed)

A Standalone sequel that a set in the same universe, yet has very little if any narrative connection to its predecessor, and can stand on its own without a thorough understanding of the series, the work can be referred to as a standalone sequel. (e.g. Mad Max Fury Road)

Or just the basic Direct sequel. A story that takes place directly after another with an extended a time skip.

I suppose I should have been more specific in what kind of sequel I wanted. I basically want a standalone sequel. This mentality is rooted in the fact that there is nothing left to get out of Goku's journey, or anyone else of the main cast for that matter, in terms of personal growth. And the charm of Dragon Ball was knowing that while high stakes battles were going on, the cast were evolving physically and mentally. You take that aspect of of growth out of Dragon Ball -- one of its unique narrative attributes -- and it just becomes another shonen manga/anime that is frozen in time to comfort the audience that has fireworks display with no soul or real meaning. Part of what makes any confrontation interesting is having an idea of how much it may change personality of the character(s) involved.

As long as the sequel to the manga has a focus on high fantasy martial arts, then its just as much as Dragon Ball as the stories that were told before it.

That's fine and great that people find other characters just as if not more engaging than Goku's but that's irrelevant as to whether it's HIS story. Where is this line of thought coming from? Who people find more engaging doesn't matter to the question of whose story is the center of the DB or any story for that matter. Goku is almost always front and center in some aspect of the story, even if the characters are just buying time for him to arrive. Even in the Cell arc, Dr. Gero creates the artificial humans to get revenge. In the Freeza arc, Goku's friends are more involved in the plot, but they are still waiting for him to arrive (twice) and ultimately it's Goku who is able to defeat Freeza, and it is his idea how to use the remaining wishes for the DB's. If Gohan had successfully taken over as the protagonist, then the story would've been about the Son family, but that's not what happened.

I know Dragon Ball is spends most of time focusing on Goku's growth as a character and it's the significant aspect of the narrative. I'm just saying that Dragon Ball didn't just doesn't focus solely on what Goku does. Other character have journeys that may not have given as much prominence as Goku's, but can be just as rich in quality.

Yes, for one, in my hypothetical scenario, things would end. And two no matter how much you like to think your made up story is about growth, it's not. It would be replaying the same sort of beets as the previous generation. If it's a story of personal growth as a martial artist, then it's telling the same story but instead of telling it with the same characters, it's starting over again. That's not new. That's a paint job. It's giving the appearance of new without actually doing something new.

You're hypothetical scenario doesn't involve ending the story. You're just interested the prolongation of a narrative for a character that has literally no room left to explore beyond who he gets to fight next, and who's journey already came to an end. Besides, part of what Goku's next battle all the more interesting was how he approached it based on how his character evolved in his setting. Now that Goku's character development has come full circle, any kind of adventure would either feel repetitive in character beats or just (un)intentionally feel like a retread of previous arc with none of storytelling nuances to make it stand out. A trap that GT and Super both fell into at various points.

Having a new cast gives you limitless freedom to cultivate different characters, which would aid in creating new dynamics within the cast and provide battles with a fresh sense of personal development. Not every new character in Dragon Ball has to be Son Goku 2.0 or Vegeta 2.0. That seems to be what you angling at. And I find that thinking to be unnecessarily limiting. I'm not interested in Dragon Ball - The Greatest Hits: Vol. 2™ as much as you are. The point of thread was to talk about a sequel, not an epilogue.

I mean, if you want to be extremely pedantic about -- which is the angle you seem to be going for -- then yes, a lot of martial arts stories share many similarities in them in terms of general narrative structure. It all comes to how you write the characters. And a completely new cast being given time to develop as unique characters is a concept that has yet to be tried in Dragon Ball. Give it chance.

[ABED]

Fury Road still has Max in it. You want a story set in the same world with NONE of the same players. Also a spin off doesn't have to be about an established supporting character. That isn't a requirement of a spin off. Empty Nest was a spin off of The Golden Girls and yet the characters never appeared on an episode until the backdoor pilot. Creed is a spin off. Rocky plays a supporting role. It's odd that you consider Batman Beyond a spin off but Creed a "legacy sequel" even though they do the same exact thing.

You take that aspect of of growth out of Dragon Ball -- one of its unique narrative attributes -- and it just becomes another shonen manga/anime that is frozen in time to comfort the audience that has fireworks display with no soul or real meaning. Part of what makes any confrontation interesting is having an idea of how much it may change personality of the character(s) involved.

You take Goku out of the series and it also is just another shonen martial arts cartoon. What you are talking about doesn't give us growth. It gives the appearance of growth.

I know Dragon Ball is spends most of time focusing on Goku's growth as a character and it's the significant aspect of the narrative. I'm just saying that Dragon Ball didn't just doesn't focus solely on what Goku does. Other character have journeys that may not have given as much prominence as Goku's, but can be just as rich in quality.

All true, but also not a requirement for it to be about the main character.

In my hypothetical scenario where they tell a story that ends it all you're telling me that it doesn't involve an ending. I love growth as well, and the best place to end a story is when a character has reached the natural conclusion to their story. That's why you end stories. Keeping the franchise going but with a different cast of characters isn't growth, it's same song different verse.

Having a new cast gives you limitless freedom to cultivate different characters,

No it doesn't. They would still be limited by the comparison to what Goku and company did. It's boring, it's lifeless and because it's set in the same world, it's going to draw comparisons to the previous cast and have the audience/reader thinking about them. Instead of starting a completely different story where the world is in fact limitless, a creator is kneecapping themselves by hitching it's wagon to DB where it has to follow DB's rules and its tone. It's a lifeless cash in. That's what happened with Scrubs: Season 9. There was some promise there and the actors/characters were beginning to gel but it felt hollow because it was still "Scrubs" but without all the characters we knew and loved. What in your scenario makes it Dragon Ball? You still haven't answered that.

As long as the sequel to the manga has a focus on high fantasy martial arts, then its just as much as Dragon Ball as the stories that were told before it.

Without Goku it's just another wuxia tale. DB has a few things that separate it from the rest - Toriyama's skill as an artist, his off beat sense of humor, and its characters. It's the same as the appeal of 24. The real time gimmick created a lot of tension and it was novel, but people fell in love with the characters. Take Jack Bauer or even Chloe out of the equation and it's not 24 anymore; it's just another action/adventure show, and 24 in name only, just as this DB spin off would be Dragon Ball in name only.

[Lord Beerus]

Fury Road still has Max in it. You want a story set in the same world with NONE of the same players. Also a spin off doesn't have to be about an established supporting character. That isn't a requirement of a spin off. Empty Nest was a spin off of The Golden Girls and yet the characters never appeared on an episode until the backdoor pilot. Creed is a spin off. Rocky plays a supporting role. It's odd that you consider Batman Beyond a spin off but Creed a "legacy sequel" even though they do the same exact thing.

The film still takes place after Thunderdome, but Tom Hardy's Max Rockatansky isn't the same character as Mel Gibson's Max Rockatansky. His character is completely rewritten. Fury Road was basically a continuity reboot, but it still tried to play it off as standalone sequel. It's a bit complicated I won't lie. Creed is not a spin-off. It introduces new characters, but it still takes place in the same work as Rocky and even has Rocky go through some character development as well going transitioning fully from boxer to trainer and dealing with his illness and old age. And yeah, Batman Beyond is a spinoff in the fact that there was a significant shift in the themes and setting for Batman Beyond when compared to BTAS.

You take Goku out of the series and it also is just another shonen martial arts cartoon. What you are talking about doesn't give us growth. It gives the appearance of growth.

If you take Goku out of the series, and replace him with another, or several, compellingly written characters then Dragon Ball isn't another shonen martial arts cartoon. It a high fantasy martial arts story with a unique cast who approach to confrontation make the narrative stand out compared to other martial arts manga/anime. Which is just how Dragon Ball was originally written attained its fame for. Writing an interesting and unique character for a martial arts story may be difficult, but it's not impossible.

All true, but also not a requirement for it to be about the main character.

In my hypothetical scenario where they tell a story that ends it all you're telling me that it doesn't involve an ending. I love growth as well, and the best place to end a story is when a character has reached the natural conclusion to their story. That's why you end stories. Keeping the franchise going but with a different cast of characters isn't growth, it's same song different verse.

You're hypothetical scenario isn't even a sequel to begin with. It's a glorified epilogue. And even in that sense, it's pretty bewildering for you to want that to exist given that the stories for all the characters have finished, making the entire idea pointless. Let's sleeping does lie if that's the case. If you're not committing to the idea of sequel that doesn't involve any kind of character development of personal growth for those significant involved, they you really aren't interested in a sequel to begin with.

No it doesn't. They would still be limited by the comparison to what Goku and company did. It's boring, it's lifeless and because it's set in the same world, it's going to draw comparisons to the previous cast and have the audience/reader thinking about them. Instead of starting a completely different story where the world is in fact limitless, a creator is kneecapping themselves by hitching it's wagon to DB where it has to follow DB's rules and its tone. It's a lifeless cash in. That's what happened with Scrubs: Season 9. There was some promise there and the actors/characters were beginning to gel but it felt hollow because it was still "Scrubs" but without all the characters we knew and loved. What in your scenario makes it Dragon Ball? You still haven't answered that.

The world of Dragon Ball doesn't need to stay frozen in time. New threats can emerge, new enemies can be created and how the world operates can subtly change while still retaining Dragon Ball's charm. The only person putting the limit on Dragon Ball's creativity is you. No to mention writing different character gives new avenues to the dynamics of battles and confrontation.

Without Goku it's just another wuxia tale. DB has a few things that separate it from the rest - Toriyama's skill as an artist, his off beat sense of humor, and its characters. It's the same as the appeal of 24. The real time gimmick created a lot of tension and it was novel, but people fell in love with the characters. Take Jack Bauer or even Chloe out of the equation and it's not 24 anymore; it's just another action/adventure show, and 24 in name only, just as this DB spin off would be Dragon Ball in name only.

And fans can fall in love with other characters in the same world if they are well written. The spirit of Dragon Ball doesn't rest with Goku. It resides in the high fantasy martial arts confrontations that have characters go through subtle with and without the involvement of the main character, while seven wishing granting ball reside in the background to have a significant effect on the progression or ending of any given arc. We haven't seen anyone officially take a crack a writing a full blown Dragon Ball sequel, so down shut it down as something that can't work or won't "feel" like Dragon Ball.

[ABED]

I noticed you passed over the Empty Nest point I made. Regardless of how messy the continuity is, Fury Road is still a sequel, and his personality isn't COMPLETELY rewritten. He's still a reluctant hero looking to survive, which is his defining trait. Creed is absolutely a spin off. He's the center of the story, Rocky plays an important supporting role, ergo a spin off. His development doesn't preclude Creed from being a spin off. It functions as both, but still fits the definition of a spinoff better because the POV the story is told from is Adonis's. It's why it's called Creed, not Rocky VII (Adrian's Revenge). Every new Bond has a different take but their films are still sequels. You keep bringing up these irrelevant details. Spin offs take place in the same continuities as the parent series. That's what makes them spin offs. A spin off just has to change the narrative view point.

If you take Goku out of the series, and replace him with another, or several, compellingly written characters then Dragon Ball isn't another shonen martial arts cartoon. It a high fantasy martial arts story with a unique cast who approach to confrontation make the narrative stand out compared to other martial arts manga/anime. Which is just how Dragon Ball was originally written attained its fame for. Writing an interesting and unique character for a martial arts story may be difficult, but it's not impossible.

It is another martial arts cartoon. It may be good, but it won't be DB anymore. Yes, DB has a unique cast and that's what makes the story what it is. DB attained its fame because of the quirkiness and likeability of its characters.

It's a glorified epilogue. And even in that sense, it's pretty bewildering for you to want that to exist given that the stories for all the characters have finished, making the entire idea pointless. Let's sleeping does lie if that's the case. If you're not committing to the idea of sequel that doesn't involve any kind of character development of personal growth for those significant involved, they you really aren't interested in a sequel to begin with.

I don't want it to exist, but if I am getting a continuation, I'd rather it end with the characters I care about instead of being DB in name only. And there's no rule that sequels have to involve growth. Most sequels don't. They're just further adventures of the characters we care about. Regardless you keep talking about "if it's well written" as if some writer couldn't take the characters in a fresh direction while offering permanent closure. I love growth but your scenario is NOT growth. It's holding on.

The only person putting the limit on Dragon Ball's creativity is you.

DB put a limit on itself by going this long. Starting over with new characters is the opposite of creativity. It's resetting to keep the gravy train going. The narrative of DB which is the story of Son Goku is over. DB isn't about the world, it's about it's characters. You can't plug other characters, even well written ones in and have it retain its spirit.

You and the others harping on about "if it's well written" as if that isn't just the most vague statement or even what it's about. It's not really about the quality of the writing which is all a matter of opinion anyway. DB didn't obtain its fanbase because of the quality of its writing. There are far better written stories. It does what it does well and created a unique protagonist and it was the right time and right place. Lighting in a bottle has a shelf life. The wishing orbs are McGuffins, that's it. They aren't the draw, and not what make the story what it is. They play a part in many of the plots, though not all of them, but they aren't the point of the story. Plenty of stories have methods of granting wishes. Even Toriyama couldn't make a new protagonist work and that was Gohan. It doesn't work, it's time to move on. It's not about the martial arts fantasy. There are plenty of other wuxia stories out there to enjoy if anyone wants that itch scratched. If DB fans can fall in love with new characters set in the same world why not do it in a completely new one? What's the benefit of doing it in an existing universe other than brand recognition?

[Lord Beerus]

I noticed you passed over the Empty Nest point I made. Regardless of how messy the continuity is, Fury Road is still a sequel. Creed is absolutely a spin off. He's the center of the story, Rocky plays an important supporting role, ergo a spin off. His development doesn't preclude Creed from being a spin off. It functions as both, but still fits the definition of a spinoff better because the POV the story is told from is Adonis's. It's why it's called Creed, not Rocky VII (Adrian's Revenge). Every new Bond has a different take but their films are still sequels. You have no clue what a spin off is. You keep bringing up these irrelevant details. Spin offs take place in the same continuities as the parent series. That's what makes them spin offs. A spin off just has to change the narrative view point.

I've never watched Empty Nest nor Golden Girl, so I can't comment on that. Either way, the only thing connecting Fury Road with the previous film is name of the main character. And with how the character is completely rewritten and and entirely new cast of characters is introduced, its less of a sequel and more complete reboot of the film series. Creed is a legacy sequel. Yes, Creed is the central character, but Rocky, the central character of the previous series of films, still plays a significant role in the narrative. That's what a legacy sequel is. One character's story beginning, while a previously established story continues in the same world.

James Bond is a terrible example to bring up. 007 is moniker. Anyone can can be 007. It's just like Dr Who. Anyone can be The Doctor.

You're getting the terms spin-off and sequel mixed up with one another or trying to mesh them up into one. Spin-off do more than just take right turn and focus on new character. They explore new themes that weren't present in the original story by either retooling how the world work in subtle way and/or radically change the aspect of how events take place. A sequel can to work can still be sequel even if has very little narrative connection to its predecessor. That's where the term "standalone sequel" come from.

It is another martial arts cartoon. It may be good, but it won't be DB anymore. Yes, DB has a unique cast and that's what makes the story what it is. DB attained its fame because of the quirkiness and likeability of its characters.

Is there a strong focus high fantasy martial arts? Then it's Dragon Ball. Because that's the DNA of the show. How you write a cast of characters around that aspect is a completely different issue to tack all together. The minute Dragon Ball becomes a slice-of-life seires, then yeah, it's stops being Dragon Ball.

I don't want it to exist, but if I am getting a continuation, I'd rather it end with the characters I care about instead of being DB in name only. And there's no rule that sequels have to involve growth. Most sequels don't. They're just further adventures of the characters we care about. Regardless you keep talking about "if it's well written" as if some writer couldn't take the characters in a fresh direction while offering permanent closure. I love growth but your scenario is NOT growth. It's holding on.

Goku and the gang's story has already ended. Any further adventures after that point would be just have diminishing returns. And yes, sequels do need to have some kind personality growth and/or character development. This is why a lot sequel suck. Because the development of the characters stays frozen. Having no character development is not good storytelling. I can't believe you can't realise that. I want Dragon Ball to move the fuck from cow that has been very much milked dry. You don't.

DB put a limit on itself by going this long. Starting over with new characters is the opposite of creativity. It's resetting to keep the gravy train going. The narrative of DB which is the story of Son Goku is over. DB isn't about the world, it's about it's characters. You can't plug other characters, even well written ones in and have it retain its spirit.

You and the others harping on about "if it's well written" as if that isn't just the most vague statement or even what it's about. It's not really about the quality of the writing which is all a matter of opinion anyway. DB didn't obtain its fanbase because of the quality of its writing. There are far better written stories. It does what it does well and created a unique protagonist and it was the right time and right place. Lighting in a bottle has a shelf life. The wishing orbs are McGuffins, that's it. They aren't the draw, and not what make the story what it is. Plenty of stories have methods of granting wishes. Even Toriyama couldn't make a new protagonist work and that was Gohan. It doesn't work, it's time to move on. It's not about the martial arts fantasy. There are plenty of other wuxia stories out there to enjoy if anyone wants that itch scratched. If DB fans can fall in love with new characters set in the same world why not do it in a completely new one? What's the benefit of doing it in an existing universe other than brand recognition?

Who made up this rule that you can't have a new cast of character and still have the charm? No one has. You just seem unnecessarily frightened by an unproven concept. You have a hell of a lot more to work with when it comes to creating a new character than you would with ring out development from a character who hasn't any to offer. Resurrection F ran on nothing but nostalgia and the charm of the cast and it was still a horribly written movie with no character development and no reason to exist. Those are the kind of continuations I don't from Dragon Ball because there's nothing of value to get out of it.

I keep on harping on about "if it's well written" because it not been done yet. And saying that Dragon Ball didn't obtain it fanbase because of the quality of its writing is one of the most bewildering things I've ever heard. You know why Dragon Ball does what it does well or why Goku is such an interesting protagonist? It's because of how well he, and Dragon Ball as a whole, is written. Which comes down to, you guessed it, the quality of the writer. I'm flabbergasted at your attempt to disconnect Dragon Ball as a form of media from the amount of effort that went into writing and drawing the damn thing in the first place.

And yes, the Dragon Ball are more than just MacGuffins. Saying they are MacGuffins would imply that they are insignificant, unimportant, or irrelevant in itself. And that is not true at all. They kick start the plot and are especially integral to how the narrative develops especially later on the series. And this isn't me projecting that, the story itself talks about how important the Dragon Balls are. That's why the story is called Dragon Ball and not Son Goku.

Goku's story is certainly the most significant, but it's only story that matters in the grand scheme of the plot. There are other characters who contribute immensely to making Dragon Ball a fun read.

[WittyUsername]

If I recall, George Miller has stated that he thinks of the Mad Max franchise as basically being a series of stories that are told by other people within that universe. Basically, Max is something of a fabled hero in the post-apocalyptic world of Mad Max, and as a result, people in that world have their own stories to tell about him, which would help explain away any continuity problems that may arise.

Anyway, regarding the importance of the Dragon Balls, they definitely are more important than your average MacGuffin. They serve as the entire catalyst for why Goku meets Bulma. The very first arc of the manga revolves entirely around a colorful group of characters who are trying to find the Dragon Balls for their own ends.

[ABED]

If I recall, George Miller has stated that he thinks of the Mad Max franchise as basically being a series of stories that are told by other people within that universe. Basically, Max is something of a fabled hero in the post-apocalyptic world of Mad Max, and as a result, people in that world have their own stories to tell about him, which would help explain away any continuity problems that may arise.

Anyway, regarding the importance of the Dragon Balls, they definitely are more important than your average MacGuffin. They serve as the entire catalyst for why Goku meets Bulma. The very first arc of the manga revolves entirely around a colorful group of characters who are trying to find the Dragon Balls for their own ends.

That's what a McGuffin is. They are the impetus for the plot. So yes, they are responsible for bringing the protagonists together, but they're still just plot devices. The scene at the end of DB where Roshi talks about how they brought Goku and his friends together is a wonderful scene but that doesn't change the fundamental nature of the DB's. They're plot devices. They get the plot moving and help resolve the plot. The one case where that arguably isn't true is the 4 Star ball because it's an heirloom.

Beerus, this is not going anywhere because not only are you using terms you seemed to get from a wikipedia page like they're gospel you have no clue what you're talking about. 007 is his number but it's always been Bond's number and despite this weird idea going around, Bond is a person not a moniker. It's the same character with the same backstory and motivations, just a different interpretation by the actor. Same with Max. Both versions are haunted by loss and are loners who want to just survive but end up helping people in need. The two takes aren't that different. That you somehow think that Hardy's grunting take is completely different from Gibson's more reserved take is baffling.

The definition you've chosen of "spin off" isn't true. They only have to do with the narrative viewpoint. Naturally they will deal with different themes if the characters are different. In the case of Creed, the new theme is legacy.

You may not have seen Golden Girls but you can use wikipedia to look up Empty Nest and see that it was a spin off that didn't take existing characters and build a show around them. Bottom line, you're understanding of the concept is incomplete.

That's where the term "standalone sequel" come from.

No the term came from wherever the wikipedia entry got it

Is there a strong focus high fantasy martial arts? Then it's Dragon Ball.

No you've just described the wuxia genre.

Any further adventures after that point would be just have diminishing returns. And yes, sequels do need to have some kind personality growth and/or character development. This is why a lot sequel suck. Because the development of the characters stays frozen. Having no character development is not good storytelling. I can't believe you can't realise that. I want Dragon Ball to move the fuck from cow that has been very much milked dry. You don't.

Any further adventures of DB regardless of who's the lead will have diminishing returns. And there are lots of sequels that don't have some kind of personality growth. Most of the James Bond movies fall into that category. And while I'm not a fan of Fury Road, Max doesn't grow at all in that movie. There is no rule that says no character development is bad storytelling. It's simply untrue. Goku is a static character. You clearly don't understand my point if you think I don't want DB to move on. I want it to end. Your hypothetical is Weekend at Bernie's

You know why Dragon Ball does what it does well or why Goku is such an interesting protagonist? It's because of how well he, and Dragon Ball as a whole, is written. Which comes down to, you guessed it, the quality of the writer. I'm flabbergasted at your attempt to disconnect Dragon Ball as a form of media from the amount of effort that went into writing and drawing the damn thing in the first place.

Maybe because this isn't an issue of the amount of effort. Toriyama put a shit ton of effort into the manga, but in terms of his writing, it's simple and effective at points but he is not a great writer. His designs are memorable, his action is dynamic but easy to digest. However, his characters are by and large not deep, characters are kept around long after they've developed and served their purpose, he settled into a formula about 1/3 of the way through the original run. He sometimes has characters act out of character for the sake of the plot, the Buu arc is a mess. The DB's became easy outs for resolving the plot thereby removing consequences. Those are just off the top of my head. I didn't say anything about Goku being interesting, I was talking about popularity. Lots of stuff is popular in spite of the writing. Power Rangers is proof of that.

I think I've now said all I can on this subject.

[emperior]

My ideal sequel would start off exactly from where the original manga ended, while considering the events of Super too.

If it is a sequel, it’s only natural it picks off from the ending and goes on beyond it.
And if it’s Dragon Ball, then it would be mandatory for Toriyama to be involved.

Ideally I would want it to focus a lot on Goku training Uub, and the training would reinforce again the core themes of Dragon Ball which are self improvement and that there’s always someone stronger out there.

I don’t know about the rest. I wouldn’t want it to go on forever, so it would have an ending.
Maybe they could end DB for once with a final movie about the final Goku vs Vegeta fight which was mentioned in DB Online. But I am not sure if that would work as an ending.

The fact is that Battle of Gods’ ending is actually perfect. I have no idea how they could ever top it. The original manga’s ending is still very good so I wouldn’t be surprised if Super just keeps being the midquel until eventually it ends for good. Heck, even Super’s episode 131 is a great way to end things but it leaves too many loose ends.

I would want an ending which is both satisfactory and true to Dragon Ball.
My own take would be that after a series of events, Goku becomes the absolute number 1 strongest fighter in existence. And when asked “what’s next?” he replies “Next what? I go back to training”.

Basically I would like the idea that Goku’s first thought, even after being recognized as the absolute number 1 in all existence, would be to go back to training to improve furthermore.
I think it would be fully satisfactory, because we would have seen everything, and it would be true to Dragon Ball’s themes and imply there will be more fighting in Goku’s life.