Is Dragon Ball Super Made With Flash?

Thursday, August 13th, 2015

Share this page

We are proudly a Play-Asia Partner

SUPPORT OPRAINFALL BY TURNING OFF ADBLOCK

Ads support the website by covering server and domain costs. We're just a group of gamers here, like you, doing what we love to do: playing video games and bringing y'all niche goodness. So, if you like what we do and want to help us out, make an exception by turning off AdBlock for our website. In return, we promise to keep intrusive ads, such as pop-ups, off oprainfall. Thanks, everyone!

By


DragonBallSuper-Episode5-23

Fans of the new Dragon Ball series titled, Dragon Ball Super, are now questioning Toei’s art direction. When the newest episode showed off a battle between Goku and Beerus some frames of animation don’t quite look right. This has made some fans, including myself, very upset about the future of this series.

Here are the questionable frames:

Are you keeping up with the series? Should Toei redo these frames? Let us know in the comments!

DragonBallSuper-Episode5-Animation-Quality-4




  • Grant Chamberlain

    Woah, those look horrible.

  • Rich

    The same problem hit Sailor Moon Crystal TV episodes. It is now, sadly, a common practice for Toei to cut cornes as much as they can for the tv broadcast and then fix it for the home release edition.
    For the Crystal TV and BD comparisons, check out http://sailormooncrystalfailures.tumblr.com/tagged/compbr

    • Seri Niconico

      And those BluRay fixes aren’t really much better 🙁

  • JTShiro

    The first half of that episode was such an embarrassment visually I had to question whether or not I was watching the real thing or a bad fan video on YouTube. I’d go so far as to say it was the worst visuals I’ve seen in an anime in my life

  • CHRIS KEE

    Everything about this anime screams pure laziness. Everything down to the recycled storyline ripped straight from the movie to the horrible animations that would give the Pain fight from Naruto a run for it’s money.

  • illucio

    The sad part of this, is that they are redoing most of the story told in Battle of the Gods, and in this scene in particular was in Battle of the Gods almost exactly. They could had just re-used the better animation from Battle of the Gods in this scene and called it a day.

    • Gemnist

      OR they could’ve just done the episodes that don’t readapt any content from etiher of the two movies, went straight to the Sixth Universe Arc, and by the time they wrap up the other arcs, still have the ability to deem everything in Dragon Ball (even GT, though we don’t want to admit it) completely and utterly canon.

    • ZigTheHunter

      i highly doubt GT will ever be recognized as canon, unless you mean as one of the 11 alternate universes.

    • Gemnist

      1. There are 12 universes, the canon one being the 7th.
      2. It could be canon since it doesn’t contradict anything as of yet. Just because Toriyama didn’t work on it doesn’t mean it can’t be canon. That’d be like saying Star Wars Episodes VII-IX aren’t canon just because George Lucas didn’t write them.

  • Dai10zin

    That can’t be real, can it?

  • /|/|ichael

    The outlining on characters is super inconsistent. Sometimes it’s really thick and it’s jarring when you see it.

  • Speed12345

    Toei were good in the past. Now this studio sucks.

  • TrueWiiMaster

    Considering how valuable Dragon Ball is, they should have gone all out here. From the looks of those pictures, this isn’t even up to the quality of a small-time anime.

    • Ry

      Capitalism. Fuck quality. Make money.

    • TrueWiiMaster

      Making money is the goal, but by making a low quality “product” they’re going to make less, and in this case they’re going to hurt perhaps the most valuable IP in anime, as well as their own reputation.

    • Ry

      Yeah that’s the double edged sword that is capitalism. You skimp too much people call you out on it.. How about just making a quality product? Nah.. make money. This is why people should hate capitalism, it usually rewards people for taking advantage of it.. Overworked & underpaid animators, how about we look at the real problem, a shit economic system designed to feed the 1% And this is what we get fed… outrageous.

    • TrueWiiMaster

      The great thing about capitalism is how that balances out. If someone tries to sell junk, consumers won’t buy it. If consumers do buy junk products, they’re the ones rewarding the company, not capitalism itself. Capitalism actually drives quality through competition. One of the biggest reasons technology has advanced so quickly is because companies are competing to have the better tech, for example. If Apple was still the only smartphone company out there, I doubt smartphones would be nearly as advanced as they are now.

    • Ry

      Yeah but we don’t need to advance at the rate we are, and there’s no guarantee of true competition. Too often people play the system and we see it time and time again, people rewarding themselves and not the market.. and that’s exactly what we’re seeing here.

      People will still innovate because there’s generally a need and a desire to improve.. you can still reward that, just not at the outrageous levels we do today. Personally I think a happy people providing quality products and services is better than stressed out people trying to make as much from as little as they can. A better system would deliver much better quality animation, perhaps less of it but still.. quality and learning would be improved with a more social system.

      Anyone watch any Trek? That’s the way to go forward.

    • TrueWiiMaster

      Who gets rewarded is up to the market, i.e., the consumers. People only make money if they make something other people want.

      That’s partially true, but major innovation and advancement isn’t free. New technology, medicine, software, etc often costs millions to make. Major investment demands opportunity for major reward, or it’s not worth making. That’s why little to nothing has come from socialized societies in the last hundred years, while capitalist societies have invented pretty much all of the technology we use today.

      That comment about stress seems out of place. In a capitalist society, you can choose to stress over making a fortune, or just make a living, and sometimes people get lucky and make a fortune without much stress. Stress isn’t inherent to capitalism, nor is it required to be capitalist. Socialism, on the other hand, removes your freedom to work towards greater and greater success, regardless of what you want to do.

      Actually, quality wouldn’t increase with socialism. It would average or decrease. Instead of low, medium, and high, there would be medium to low. Whatever was easiest to make would be made. There would be no reason to put in more work to make something nicer, because you wouldn’t earn better rewards for doing so. In a capitalist society, you can go out and buy junk, or pay more for something good, or pay even more for something great, or, if you really want to spend money, you can spend a ton and get something awesome. You get what you pay for.

    • Ry

      And you can still reward for making something people want, it’s just not determined by people buying it, it’s determined by the society and it’s demand for it.. you don’t need to drive innovation by making profit through selling things to people.

      Not really, I know people that work and are stressed buy do it anyway, stress shouldn’t even be a thing..

      Working less because you create success is stupid. You made something successful? Great.. make another. In no way should that ever mean you could sit on your ass and do nothing the rest of your life because you made something good, shit someday someone would’ve made it anyway, you just got there first.. big deal. I’m not giving you a 50 room house because you made a game, that’s just insane, what a waste of resources.

      Actually quality would increase in many areas because people would work together and learn together.. you need to imagine something better than this system we already have, because it’s actually quite bad and it’s pretty easy to see a brighter future when we topple this terrible system where people need to pay to learn and work over fourty hour weeks to get by..

      No reason to put in more effort? See you’re imagining something negative here.. you don’t ever want to make your computer or car faster? Look nicer? Change something for the better? Shit man, this is human desire 101.. it’s what we do, we’re always about improving
      things. We don’t need this system.. it’s just bad and I see the effects of it EVERY day and like I said.. this is the exact reason why this happened. If you’re going to make something do it the best you can, not for as little time and effort (money) as you can.

    • TrueWiiMaster

      That’s pretty much the exact same thing. If society wants it, people will buy it. If people buy it, society wanted it.

      Generally, that’s still optional. Except for people with medical bills, expenses can fall anywhere in a wide range. If you want more, and need more money to get it, then you can stress about getting more money. If you don’t want much, you can live pretty frugally, with much less stress. I don’t know if you’ve heard of it, but that’s what the Tiny House movement is all about. Also, stress would always exist. Money isn’t the only source of stress, though it might be the one people have the most control over.

      Most people do make another anyway, but it wouldn’t be at all stupid for them to make millions, or even billions, off one major hit if it was popular enough. After all, each dollar of those millions came from people buying what they made. No one but the creator has any right to even a penny of that money (aside from reasonable taxes, of course), and no one has the right to have the creator’s creation without paying. Therefore, the money would logically and rightfully go to the creator, and the more sales he gets, the more money he gets.

      Your logic is especially awkward concerning media like games, music, and anime, because if one person didn’t create each individiual one, they probably wouldn’t ever be created. The whole “someone else would’ve made it” thing doesn’t apply.

      I seriously doubt there would be much of any increase of quality anywhere, unless mandated by the government. If you take away competition and take away reward, there’s no real reason to invest more time, money, and effort into making better quality products. In the end you’d be no better off than someone who did a mediocre job and went home early. In fact, you’d be worse off, because you’d be more tired and worn out, and have less time at home.

      As for paid education, socialized education is both dangerous and foolish. While I agree that going to college in America is far too expensive, I also understand that the government should not be paying for education. Not only would that give government power over education, but it would, at best, result in an averaging of education, meaning there would be no good or bad schools, just average schools. Actually, because there’d be no reason to do a better job, it’s likely that quality would be below average.

      Those comparisons don’t apply, because they refer to myself and my living conditions, not my work. I’ve never had anyone else want to invest their money, time, and energy into making my computer better without earning something, and that’s more in line with what we’re talking about. And ironically, the cars and computers we have today are both direct results of capitalism. The reason I can make my computer stronger is because competition between companies drove them to invest tons of resources to improve their products, resources they wouldn’t have had if not for the capitalist reward system.

      “If you’re going to make something do it the best you can, not for as little time and effort (money) as you can.”
      And yet socialism encourages making things with as little time, effort, and money as possible, while capitalism rewards greater investment with greater return…