No I assure you.
Just because people disagree with you, doesn't mean they just skimmed through your post
Just because people disagree with you, doesn't mean they just skimmed through your post
Doubt it.
General & Others Delete this thread
- Thread starter Logiko
- Start date
There should be no opening to disagree with me here beside the little paragram about the crew's abilities. I've stated narrative fact. Those are not up for discussion or "agreement". That's something people have hard time understanding.
Doubt it.
Doubt it.
Can't believe that all we need to understand Oda's 65D Chess Introduction of G5 is (aledged) years of storytelling experience
Oda even admitted it
The concept of G5 is great, it reflects the core message of OP and also Luffy's personality
The writing around it, the built up and usage are shitty in my opinion
[automerge]1691162568[/automerge]
I was so pissed when it got revealed
It felt like cheap writing
Can't believe that all we need to understand Oda's 65D Chess Introduction of G5 is (aledged) years of storytelling experience
I'm not talking about art with this post, I'm talking about technique. Technique is not subjective. This is a skill.
No
Well read my post and try to have an open vision about it. You might understand something you missed.
Also "the most impressive plot twist in storytelling history" is massive cap 
I'm dead serious. If I had knowledge of the deconstruction of such a plot twist when I was a studient, I would have learn things a lot faster.
The concept of Nika, yes. But Nika is just a part of the revelation, its just the "name" of the plot twist.
The real quality of the plot twist relie in the capacities of Luffy. Not the name of his devil fruit.
Absolutely not.
Tbh, I do agree that it was foreshadowed to some extent.
There are lots of evidences regarding it so people who deny this aren't being honest.
But oda executions regarding it is bad.
Let me tell you why
1) Like haki, oda didn't care to explain awakening. Generally author explains power before giving it to MC but here he totally dodged it.
Also, When awakening was first introduced then we came to know that user is able to affect his surroundings.
But nika is totally different.
2)We learnt that awakening happens when one masters it's df.
Sure one can argue Luffy mastered his df evident from G4 versions but nowhere resurrection was mentioned.
We don't know how Luffy after dying resurrects with awakening.
3)World Government knew that Luffy has nika. Sure no one awakened it centuries but just based on their talk it seems they definitely want to take that fruit.
Yet, they didn't do shit about it until Luffy faced kaido and oda was about to drop awakening.
So, it does come across as he definitely had idea about nika but he didn't plan how to execute the idea properly
There are lots of evidences regarding it so people who deny this aren't being honest.
But oda executions regarding it is bad.
Let me tell you why
1) Like haki, oda didn't care to explain awakening. Generally author explains power before giving it to MC but here he totally dodged it.
Also, When awakening was first introduced then we came to know that user is able to affect his surroundings.
But nika is totally different.
2)We learnt that awakening happens when one masters it's df.
Sure one can argue Luffy mastered his df evident from G4 versions but nowhere resurrection was mentioned.
We don't know how Luffy after dying resurrects with awakening.
3)World Government knew that Luffy has nika. Sure no one awakened it centuries but just based on their talk it seems they definitely want to take that fruit.
Yet, they didn't do shit about it until Luffy faced kaido and oda was about to drop awakening.
So, it does come across as he definitely had idea about nika but he didn't plan how to execute the idea properly
As you should mate.
I think you guys are not understanding how great the story really is.
Because its a manga doesn't mean it is a sub version of storytelling. You guys must end this false belief that manga are sub supports.
Do you need an explanation to understand awakening ?
Generally, author of manga are bad writers.
Why should it be mentionned ? This is meant to be a surprise.
Wrong.
I like you.
I think you guys are not understanding how great the story really is.
Because its a manga doesn't mean it is a sub version of storytelling. You guys must end this false belief that manga are sub supports.
Do you need an explanation to understand awakening ?
Generally, author of manga are bad writers.
Why should it be mentionned ? This is meant to be a surprise.
Wrong.
I like Gear 5 Luffy
Yes it's needed to explain awakening because it's based on df whose nature is still not clear. More so, when you are giving awakening of a kind which is totally different from what you have shown so far - that is resurrecting someone from death and that too through awakening.
Even surprises need proper execution which oda didn't live upto.
You can like G5 and argue it was foreshadowed but there is no denying he didn't build it properly
Even surprises need proper execution which oda didn't live upto.
You can like G5 and argue it was foreshadowed but there is no denying he didn't build it properly
