Board Thread:Questions and Answers/@comment-38810910-20190320155055/@comment-27659575-20190321021041

Meh. If only a character's quality could be guessed solely from wikia articles... But that's not the case.

First of all, you still haven't presented me something proving that Diego is so evil. He's ruthless at most. And the old woman business was hearsay anyway, told second-hand by Gyro. Quite a weak method of "showing" he'd be evil. In fact it shows that he's definitely not a saint, but evil, he isn't either. There can be some degree of sympathy for Diego, but that is NOT despite some evilness from his part.

Secondly, you seem to equate ambivalence and backstory as some sort of quality merely because they exists in a character, which I find stupid and grating. I prefer a character with a simple core with whom the author does a lot rather than a character that the author hasn't developed.

Dio is in fact much more well written than Diego because, as simple as his core personality is, Araki does introduce nuance in his traits over the course of the series by multiplying the way his character manifests whereas Diego's personality is as developed as Araki telling us it is like this once, then occasionally bringing this back up once every ten volumes. Of course, Dio was a major character for a good part of the series, he has this for him. And lastly, we don't need a backstory for Dio since we've followed his story from part 1 to 3, with additions in the subsequent parts. As if a backstory was automatically good, the things you seem to think. Same for character motivations, Araki made so much more with Dio in terms of presence, and so many more powerful scenes.

This is the part where I go off rail.

Ultimately, Araki isn't there to write complex stories and personalities but to use simple plots and characters as reliable foundations for writing powerful stories every week/month to entertain his reader (which I'm sure you somehow think this is bad). Zodazzle, you are completely missing the point of the entire series when you shit on this or that because of "bad plot" or "bad personality" or "inconsistencies". Do you pay attention to the dialogs? the art? the paneling? the character designs? the power designs? the developed interactions between characters? Araki's commitment to his themes of human spirit, fate or the human condition? the simple fact that there is always something new? Whenever I see something you post, it's as if you only had a script in hand to judge, but Jojo is much more than that.

In fact, I'm asking myself how the fuck you even got past PB in that case. Is there anything you like about this series? Even now, the plot of Jojolion is "Jojo needs this magic item, he goes there and fights someone", do you shit on Jojolion because of the plot too?

Truth be told, I find you infuriating Zodazzle. It seems you're only here to post in a RP thread or criticize JJBA because Araki doesn't do this or that like you'd want him to do. You have standards for judging a work, good for you. But learn about this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bias_blind_spot. Your standards are as subjective as anyone else's, and the people you may have taken as models have subjective views too. Whenever you criticize, it seems it's always "That's wrong because it doesn't do this, and this is the right way." Do you ever stop and think what are Araki's objectives, what are his standards? Do you think every "mistake" is because of incompetence? We have an interview archive that contains Araki's thought processes about making his manga, go read it; several times he explains that his priority is emotion over plot structure. That's his objective and he's performed it quite well for decades now. Perhaps that'll change your mind and you'll think twice before opening your goddamn mouth.