They couldve still gave Trunks healing powers but not to the point he is reduced to just being a healer, Ikari couldve been explained that he unlocked it due to the Kaioshin ritual. If in the anime, Saga Future Trunks had the same explanations of the manga for things,the same Power Scale,had things like SSG for Vegeta (in the anime practically nothing new for him), among others, I'm sure the Saga would be much better.īlack / Zamasu's ideal was good, but after a while he only knew how to repeat the same things, when he merged even worse,Making it annoying,without exploring their motivations Even if we may feel like people will bend over backwards for certain views. Maybe I'm wrong but that's how those statements come off to me.Īnd even if the opposing side is wrong, it doesn't do anybody any good by treating them like they're speaking nonsense and making "excuses" especially before they've even gotten a chance to speak. But I feel that when someone says something like " watch someone defend the opposite side with flimsy or whacky excuses" that it doesn't really invite any type of discussion and that people are wrong to even try. If someone isn't interested in listening then it's probably best to ignore whoever that is. Not that I'm speaking about any particular instance, just speaking generally.īut even so, it doesn't hurt to listen as to why someone feels the way that they do. Not good when one denies a problem but it's not good when the other also comes up with problems that aren't there. Like I just said, nothing is perfect, everything has faults, and to pretend otherwise is simply deluding yourself. But when people make excuses for such problems or deny their existence, then there's no point to even having a discussion when one side absolutely refuses to admit that the arc has any faults. Whether you like the arc or not is purely up to opinion and debate and discussion of course, but factually speaking the arc still has problems just like any other arc or show or any other piece of media really, nothing's perfect. But they are wrong for pretending its faults don't exist. No one is wrong for liking or disliking the arc. If so, nothing of what I'm saying applies to you (or someone else)Īnd as a precaution, I'm sure someone will try and take my words and spin them into me saying "My opinion is right, your opinion is wrong", but that's not what I'm trying to say. And you (or someone else) might say "But I don't think the arc is perfect!" and that's great as long as you understand what the problems are. You can't have a discussion when one of the parties involved is in denial. It gets tiring when you have the same discussions over and over again and hear the same flimsy excuses over and over again. It's just about treating the people you're speaking with, with respect. Which cant happen if one side is brushing everything the other side is saying off as the whacky ramblings of a mad man,if they happen to not see things that way. Regardless about how you feel about certain "excuses", the point is that a discussion takes two parties having a conversation about their point of views. Well when you can skip half of the Black Goku arc without missing anything there's something wrong there (I see this all the time people trying to deny Pilaf was in like half of the Black Goku arc whenever someone complains about it). Claiming the unnecessary padding/stretching out of episodes never happened, and acting like the episode actually had a meaning. DBZ was worse in some way, so any amount of bs inconsistency in DBS is acceptableģ. The episode was poor and nothing of consequence happened, but 'built character' just because a random character was in it, even though we didn't actually learn anything about said character, so it's okayĢ. Well, the arguments defending super in general are very poor and are more like excuses than actual arguments, usually comes to one of these bs reasoning:ġ.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |