Things that grind your gears

[Bebi Hatchiyack]

Ithat's saddened me when I do two seemingly interesting post discussion and nobody seems interested to talk about those.

People want to waste time discussing canonicity in a franchise that does not have and nitpick about animation these days. Either you do the same or you will find yourself in the same position as me, I can't actually have a nice conversation because no one seem to care about other things.

I love talk about canonicity but I love also talk about others thing if ever that interest people look those two post:
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=42978
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=42881

[Mister_Popo]

Negativity does not buy you anything in life, but surely Dragon Ball should be a fun topic to talk about.
As fans we have the right to criticize stuff of the franchise we don't like, it may even be our duty to do that, but some people keep on repeating and rattling about the same inconcistencies over and over and over again till it gets absurd (= irrational negativity).
It hits me how bitterly negative some people are, and i often think 'what do you buy with it at the end, guys?'
But does it really grind my gears? Neih. I take it as 'their problem, not mine'.

[Neo-Makaiōshin]

Fans inability to grasp the concept of being as strong as the plot demands.

Fans inability to accept that the franchise was always (and has always been) a children/young kids series.

Purist fans inability to accept that the manga has been a cash grab since the second it went beyond its first story arc.

[ABED]

Fans inability to grasp the concept of being as strong as the plot demands.

Purist fans inability to accept that the manga has been a cash grab since the second it went beyond its first story arc.

It's not inability to grasp it, it's about disliking inorganic storytelling.

While Toriyama hasn't been shy about saying he created the manga to make money, it's asinine to claim everything beyond the first arc is a cash grab. It can grind your gears that people don't agree with you on this point, but that doesn't make you correct.

[zarmack]

Fans inability to grasp the concept of being as strong as the plot demands.

Fans inability to accept that the franchise was always (and has always been) a children/young kids series.

Purist fans inability to accept that the manga has been a cash grab since the second it went beyond its first story arc.

This. Toriyama have even flat out stated that reason he got into the manga industry was for the money. So everything he has ever written is a cash grab lol.

However, being a kids series is no excuse for low quality, as numerous other shonen/shojo series have demonstrated, and well as kids series of other mediums and genres.

[zarmack]

One thing that grinds my gears is how many fans complain about the series' often poor quality, yet are the same people who enforce low standards on it, never realizing that they are part of the problem.

Another is how many fans who criticize (rightfully or not) many of the things in Super and/or GT, yet hypocritically make excuses and double-standards when the same things happened in Z and Early DB.

[Mister_Popo]

Fans inability to grasp the concept of being as strong as the plot demands.

Purist fans inability to accept that the manga has been a cash grab since the second it went beyond its first story arc.

It's not inability to grasp it, it's about disliking inorganic storytelling.

While Toriyama hasn't been shy about saying he created the manga to make money, it's asinine to claim everything beyond the first arc is a cash grab. It can grind your gears that people don't agree with you on this point, but that doesn't make you correct.

Some people use it as a fallacy-argument, constantly, DB is currently being milked as a cash cow and that's the reason why the content is 'bad' ('we have to suffer because of kapitalism?'). That's not a valable argument to make a disctinction between current DB- and original DB-content. That process was already going on during the original manga-run, Toriyama was completely burned-out, milked to the bottom after it. So that does not justify why new DB-content would be good or bad.

[ABED]

Another is how many fans who criticize (rightfully or not) many of the things in Super and/or GT, yet hypocritically make excuses and double-standards when the same things happened in Z and Early DB.

This is a perfectly valid criticism. For instance, Goku transforming for the first time was unexpected and impactful. The next couple transformations lose their luster.

It bugs me when people claim a dark Goku is fanservice or comes off as bad fan fiction (is there any other type). A villain being the dark reflection of the hero is a trope that existed long before fanfiction was a thing.

[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'.

[ABED]

There are people arguing the arcs aren't long enough? The arcs Toriyama created during the latter portion were if anything too long.

[Mister_Popo]

There are people arguing the arcs aren't long enough? The arcs Toriyama created during the latter portion were if anything too long.

We had only one really long arc during Super. I can understand why some would have liked the Zamasu-arc for instance to have been a little bit longer.
That's one of the things i can somehow understand.
But for me shorter stories don't have to be negative as such.
It's the quality that matters at the end. If it's a movie and it's good content and animation, no problem.

[ekrolo2]

The movie retellings are already too long, especially when they went out of their way to remove story content in the process, the BoG one is especially guilty of this. Who the hell would want those to get even longer? Or U6, the least interesting, most toothless tournament in DB history despite two homicidal crazy people being in-charge of it.

[ABED]

There are people arguing the arcs aren't long enough? The arcs Toriyama created during the latter portion were if anything too long.

We had only one really long arc during Super. I can understand why some would have liked the Zamasu-arc for instance to have been a little bit longer.
That's one of the things i can somehow understand.
But for me shorter stories don't have to be negative as such.
It's the quality that matters at the end. If it's a movie and it's good content and animation, no problem.

It depends on what you consider short. DB went from 13 episode arcs to nearly 100 episode arcs. Granted, much of that is filler, but even with filler cut out, those arcs could fill at least one full US network TV season.

[Ripper 30]

Fans making a big deal out of cell arc as if it's as fucked up as black goku arc and exaggerating the "bad writing" and totally ignoring the character development, themes or the overall story behind it.

[The Patrolman]

When people downplay Z when comparing it to Dragon Ball. Saying stuff like Z had no depth or character development, ruined all of the human characters in place for the Saiyans and had hardly any martial arts. Something I don't believe at all.

[zarmack]

When people downplay Z when comparing it to Dragon Ball. Saying stuff like Z had no depth or character development, ruined all of the human characters in place for the Saiyans and had hardly any martial arts. Something I don't believe at all.

I also hate when people do this. Its always only Western fans who spew that crap.

[zarmack]

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'.

This. You basically hit the nail on the head

[Skar]

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.

[Forte224]

Great post Skar. Similar to what I was going to type once I had a chance to. Specifically I'm focused on the "even more ridiculous levels" aspect. Yes, both have similar flaws. But from many fans' viewpoints (mine included) Super not only repeats those flaws, but often takes them to whole new levels. Unfortunately this is the go-to defense for Super now days, and it's getting pretty tiresome.

[Alruneia]

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.