Naruto Hangout Thread v.12

[M3J]

Why would Itachi force Sasuke to kill his best friend, then?

[Rikudou King]

Why would Itachi force Sasuke to kill his best friend, then?

Well killing Naruto would have also taken the Kyuubi off the field, delaying Akatsuki's plan longer. Anyway, Naruto could have been Itachi's original plan, but when Sasuke refused to kill him, Itachi could have realized his own importance and changed it to him.

[M3J]

But Itachi didn't know who Sasuke's best friend was or would be. He may have guessed when Itachi and Kisame were sent to capture Naruto, but he didn't know before. From what it looks like, trauma would be needed to unlock Mangekyo, not necessarily killing. Sasuke never killed Itachi, and he learned that Itachi died from a disease.

[benelori]

Sorry for interrupting the convo! m(_ _)m

But the voting stage of the MH Manga Awards has started, and if you would like Naruto to grab some votes, then go ahead and help out! Of course if you like sth else more, then you'll have at least 4 other nominees to choose from!

Enjoy!!!

[Rikudou King]

But Itachi didn't know who Sasuke's best friend was or would be. He may have guessed when Itachi and Kisame were sent to capture Naruto, but he didn't know before. From what it looks like, trauma would be needed to unlock Mangekyo, not necessarily killing. Sasuke never killed Itachi, and he learned that Itachi died from a disease.

True, though to be fair much of these "genius" plans hold those sort of flaws. The emotional response from "avenging" the clan and Itachi revealing his true character at the end probably would have been enough.

[Uchiha_Blood]

How Itachi could have known while back, when Sasuke was a kid, that his brother would have befriended Naruto?
And having known that, its not like he could've said to him when he saw him again " ehi bro, don't kill naruto if he is your best friend, ya know?"
Itachi cared for his brother above all else, so its not like that he cared more for his best friend than for the chance for Sasuke to survive.

Having said that, we don't know if his Mangekyo was awakened after Tobi's speech or before, right after Itachi died, and that is exactly what Itachi wanted, be "killed" and thus unlocking the Mangekyo. I don't think a trauma is enough, since it is said many times that to unlock the eyes you have to kill your friend. Maybe not the actual killing, but the guilt, or the emotion or whatever that makes him think that he is the cause of death. And that is likely how Kakashi awakened his own Mangekyo, since he pretty much feels responsible for Obito's death

[Sabot RND]

I, for one, would not work for you. Saying you have a "right" to demand high quality whether or not you are paying is actually kind of insulting.
Kishimoto actually does have millions of customers, if you think about it. You and I and many forum members here are included.

Think about this: Do customers actually get to complain if they're getting something for free that they otherwise would and should be paying for? It's one thing to criticize (constructively); this is a forum meant for discussion. It's another to claim that someone has a right to criticize whether they paid for it or not.

Of course, since Kishimoto is the provider of a product, he should produce high quality work. But NOT BECAUSE freeloading "noobs" like us demand it. It's because HE ENJOYS PRODUCING THE WORK HE PRODUCES, firstly, and because people want to read it.

Anyway....my thoughts on the chapter:

It was great. Naruto's come a long way.

ahh now i didn't say to 'demand' per se, but to express ourselves regarding the manga. (i couldn't tell kishi what to write for love nor money)

let's be happy we are getting a chapter and move on

I for one do not debate how well or how bad the chapter was for one reason, I didn't pay for it

so Naruto2011 should not say anything about what he liked or not...no criticizing at all? I personally enjoy the overall naruto manga, i think its one of the best out there. Somewhere out there, is my opposite, someone who absolutely hates naruto and kishi. i would like to know why so we can discuss.

Do customers actually get to complain if they're getting something for free that they otherwise would and should be paying for?

Maybe, probably not. Doesn't mean they have to like it and not talk about it, does it? Or the flip side, do the customers get to thank anyone? They should damn well do.
Look, the context of my argument was that we should be able criticize, praise and discuss kishi's work here without the prejudice of being labelled a thieving so and so.

But for professionals in general I believe they must be pushed to give the max to produce quality and its a given that they should be enjoying their profession, be in good health etc (it goes without saying), which causes a knock on effect of people wanting to read it. I may decide to purchase a manga and until i do are you saying i'm not allowed to demand the high quality that kishi usually delivers? What I demand is that they continue to produce work professionally until a time when they are not able to. Being no professional myself i can't tell kishi how to write but i've read enough to expect a high standard.

[Invader]

Saying you have a "right" to demand high quality whether or not you are paying is actually kind of insulting.

I do not say this in any way that is insulting, but your statement above is patently absurd. Every single one of us - every day - uses dozens of goods, services, companies, products, or other items that we are not paying for - and yet to imply that because we are not 'paying' for them we have no 'right' for them to be high quality is preposterous.

Television. When you flip on your TV to watch "Big Bang Theory" or some other show, have you paid for it? Of course not. And yet if the show is awful, or in poor taste, or bad then you complain about it either directly (affiliate, network, advertisers, or producers) or indirectly (friends, online boards, whatever). You aren't paying one thin dime for it, and yet if the show was absolute garbage you as a viewer certainly have a right to express you opinion about it because you expect your viewing time to be high quality.

Sports on TV. Do you pay for them? No? Of course you don't. You watch your favorite teams for free on TV, and yet you also probably complain vociferously about the performance of the team, the quality of the broadcast, etc... Etc... In fact, if your broadcast get cut off, or pre-empted, then you will scream bloody murder about it. You expect quality broadcasts of the event, but don't pay for it - and you don't think it is 'insulting' to do so.

Radio. You don't pay for that radio you are listening to. But if your station was all static, or constantly had dead air, or had DJs who were just the worst DJs you ever heard then you'd complain about it.

The list goes on and on. Did you pay for the car your friend drove you in? No? Would you have a right to complain about the car if the seat belt was defective - even though you didn't PAY for it? Are you paying for the free internet you are streaming by Wi-Fi at the local cafe? No? Would you complain about it if suddenly cut you off in a middle of a chat with a hot babe you want to score with? Are you paying for that Skype transmission? How about your online chat? Heck - are you PAYING for using this website? No - you aren't paying for any of these things - but to imply that it is 'insulting' of you to expect them to be of decent quality is nothing short of negligence on your part.

Of course you have an obligation to say what you think about the goods and services you use - whether you 'pay' for them or not. Whether you believe it or not, the people that provide these goods/services are making money off you despite the fact that you aren't paying. More viewers/users/followers/fans/users/popularity means more advertising money they get to charge. That's cash in their pocket off of you, even if it is 'free' for you. So don't feel bad in any way for Kishimoto just because you think some folks are freeloading off his manga. Uh uh. The fact that he's got the #2 (or whatever it is) manga being published means he is making bank. Advertising deals, marketing, media buys, games, movies, toys, music, posters, trading cards, the whole magilla. The popularity of the manga drives all this.

You think that if they wanted to they couldn't shut down all these 'free translations' of the manga? Of course they could. But they don't do it, because it increases the popularity of the series - which allows them to make lucrative deals. Think of the manga almost as the loss-leader for a far more profitable enterprise. You don't make money on the free chips at the restaurant - but you sure rake it in on the drinks. A popular manga is worth money not because of the manga itself necessarily, but for the media empire it drives.

I pick up english versions of Naruto at Borders when it suits me. I also buy the anime DVDs when they come out (though I wish they'd switch to Blu-Rays). So even though I don't routinely pay for the manga - that doesn't mean that I have no right to complain about it if I think it is poor quality. You need to get over this rather simplistic opinion that "if I don't pay for it that means I have no right to complain about it". Uh uh. That is a totally wrong-headed approach.

[Sabot RND]

Well this conversation didn't actually start from being allowed to criticize or not...there are bad chapters around, and this chapter had it's bad parts as well...but the convo started from criticizing the work ethic of Kishimoto...who actually gives his best and doesn't take breaks, etc...

i guess it turned into an argument where because some of us are not paying for it directly, we are immoral evildoers and shouldn't criticize kishi or his work ethic pfft.

anyways... Perhaps he needs more breaks after the whole Raikage phantom arm incident

[Googlez_kun]

I do not say this in any way that is insulting, but your statement above is patently absurd. Every single one of us - every day - uses dozens of goods, services, companies, products, or other items that we are not paying for - and yet to imply that because we are not 'paying' for them we have no 'right' for them to be high quality is preposterous.

Television. When you flip on your TV to watch "Big Bang Theory" or some other show, have you paid for it? Of course not. And yet if the show is awful, or in poor taste, or bad then you complain about it either directly (affiliate, network, advertisers, or producers) or indirectly (friends, online boards, whatever). You aren't paying one thin dime for it, and yet if the show was absolute garbage you as a viewer certainly have a right to express you opinion about it because you expect your viewing time to be high quality.

Sports on TV. Do you pay for them? No? Of course you don't. You watch your favorite teams for free on TV, and yet you also probably complain vociferously about the performance of the team, the quality of the broadcast, etc... Etc... In fact, if your broadcast get cut off, or pre-empted, then you will scream bloody murder about it. You expect quality broadcasts of the event, but don't pay for it - and you don't think it is 'insulting' to do so.

Radio. You don't pay for that radio you are listening to. But if your station was all static, or constantly had dead air, or had DJs who were just the worst DJs you ever heard then you'd complain about it.

The list goes on and on. Did you pay for the car your friend drove you in? No? Would you have a right to complain about the car if the seat belt was defective - even though you didn't PAY for it? Are you paying for the free internet you are streaming by Wi-Fi at the local cafe? No? Would you complain about it if suddenly cut you off in a middle of a chat with a hot babe you want to score with? Are you paying for that Skype transmission? How about your online chat? Heck - are you PAYING for using this website? No - you aren't paying for any of these things - but to imply that it is 'insulting' of you to expect them to be of decent quality is nothing short of negligence on your part.

Of course you have an obligation to say what you think about the goods and services you use - whether you 'pay' for them or not. Whether you believe it or not, the people that provide these goods/services are making money off you despite the fact that you aren't paying. More viewers/users/followers/fans/users/popularity means more advertising money they get to charge. That's cash in their pocket off of you, even if it is 'free' for you. So don't feel bad in any way for Kishimoto just because you think some folks are freeloading off his manga. Uh uh. The fact that he's got the #2 (or whatever it is) manga being published means he is making bank. Advertising deals, marketing, media buys, games, movies, toys, music, posters, trading cards, the whole magilla. The popularity of the manga drives all this.

You think that if they wanted to they couldn't shut down all these 'free translations' of the manga? Of course they could. But they don't do it, because it increases the popularity of the series - which allows them to make lucrative deals. Think of the manga almost as the loss-leader for a far more profitable enterprise. You don't make money on the free chips at the restaurant - but you sure rake it in on the drinks. A popular manga is worth money not because of the manga itself necessarily, but for the media empire it drives.

I pick up english versions of Naruto at Borders when it suits me. I also buy the anime DVDs when they come out (though I wish they'd switch to Blu-Rays). So even though I don't routinely pay for the manga - that doesn't mean that I have no right to complain about it if I think it is poor quality. You need to get over this rather simplistic opinion that "if I don't pay for it that means I have no right to complain about it". Uh uh. That is a totally wrong-headed approach.

Not that I would entirely disagree with your opinion,but you're using bad examples,dude.Of course you don't pay for watching sport on TV or listening to the radio,however,those people and companies behind it still get money because of ads and commercials.So in the end,they use you in order to get money.If they try that using a crappy show,of course you obtain the right to complain.

Furthermore,even if scanlations increase sales in the western world,it's not like JUMP would give a crap about it.Their primary goal is the Japanese audience and raws that are published online decrease the amount of readers and do not increase the popularity of the series or the size of the readership for that matter,which is why they are strictly against scans on the internet.

[Exodi]

I do not say this in any way that is insulting, but your statement above is patently absurd. Every single one of us - every day - uses dozens of goods, services, companies, products, or other items that we are not paying for - and yet to imply that because we are not 'paying' for them we have no 'right' for them to be high quality is preposterous.

Television. When you flip on your TV to watch "Big Bang Theory" or some other show, have you paid for it? Of course not. And yet if the show is awful, or in poor taste, or bad then you complain about it either directly (affiliate, network, advertisers, or producers) or indirectly (friends, online boards, whatever). You aren't paying one thin dime for it, and yet if the show was absolute garbage you as a viewer certainly have a right to express you opinion about it because you expect your viewing time to be high quality.

Sports on TV. Do you pay for them? No? Of course you don't. You watch your favorite teams for free on TV, and yet you also probably complain vociferously about the performance of the team, the quality of the broadcast, etc... Etc... In fact, if your broadcast get cut off, or pre-empted, then you will scream bloody murder about it. You expect quality broadcasts of the event, but don't pay for it - and you don't think it is 'insulting' to do so.

Radio. You don't pay for that radio you are listening to. But if your station was all static, or constantly had dead air, or had DJs who were just the worst DJs you ever heard then you'd complain about it.

The list goes on and on. Did you pay for the car your friend drove you in? No? Would you have a right to complain about the car if the seat belt was defective - even though you didn't PAY for it? Are you paying for the free internet you are streaming by Wi-Fi at the local cafe? No? Would you complain about it if suddenly cut you off in a middle of a chat with a hot babe you want to score with? Are you paying for that Skype transmission? How about your online chat? Heck - are you PAYING for using this website? No - you aren't paying for any of these things - but to imply that it is 'insulting' of you to expect them to be of decent quality is nothing short of negligence on your part.

Of course you have an obligation to say what you think about the goods and services you use - whether you 'pay' for them or not. Whether you believe it or not, the people that provide these goods/services are making money off you despite the fact that you aren't paying. More viewers/users/followers/fans/users/popularity means more advertising money they get to charge. That's cash in their pocket off of you, even if it is 'free' for you. So don't feel bad in any way for Kishimoto just because you think some folks are freeloading off his manga. Uh uh. The fact that he's got the #2 (or whatever it is) manga being published means he is making bank. Advertising deals, marketing, media buys, games, movies, toys, music, posters, trading cards, the whole magilla. The popularity of the manga drives all this.

You think that if they wanted to they couldn't shut down all these 'free translations' of the manga? Of course they could. But they don't do it, because it increases the popularity of the series - which allows them to make lucrative deals. Think of the manga almost as the loss-leader for a far more profitable enterprise. You don't make money on the free chips at the restaurant - but you sure rake it in on the drinks. A popular manga is worth money not because of the manga itself necessarily, but for the media empire it drives.

I pick up english versions of Naruto at Borders when it suits me. I also buy the anime DVDs when they come out (though I wish they'd switch to Blu-Rays). So even though I don't routinely pay for the manga - that doesn't mean that I have no right to complain about it if I think it is poor quality. You need to get over this rather simplistic opinion that "if I don't pay for it that means I have no right to complain about it". Uh uh. That is a totally wrong-headed approach.

I think about this from an artist's point of view:

I am creating a work for a client. Since the client is paying for it, he/she can tell me how they want the overall work to look.
If, however, I decided that I want to give one of my paintings away, the recipient really has no place to tell me what color paint I should have used, especially if they accept and take the work.

And let me clarify: OF COURSE you have the right to complain. But that isn't the exact terminology I would use.
We have the right to express our opinions in a constructive manner.

E.g: "I think Naruto's jumpsuit should be blue and black instead of orange, since orange reminds me of the fruit, and oranges killed my family."
INSTEAD OF
"Naruto's orange jumpsuit is so stupid. Kishimoto is an idiot. He should make it green."

[Invader]

Not that I would entirely disagree with your opinion,but you're using bad examples,dude.

Oh - lordy - please not another wisenheimer "I don't disagree, but bad examples" exercise in desultory internet minutae. I'm either right or wrong. In this case, I'm right. The exhausting specifics of how your personal interpretations and perspective were not satisfied by the the examples I used are irrelevant. Endlessly desconstructing examples under the ephemeral, ever-shifting, nebulous nature of the electron microscope everyone's personal opinions is a fallow endeavor. Don't like the examples? Then insert whatever hypothetical perfect example that your perspective, 20/20 hindsight, and Google searching can conjure up. The point is that consumers use tons of things for 'free' and yet there is absolutely nothing wrong with them compaining about the bad service, quality, or whatever else they want to complain about in regards to these supposedly 'free' things.

Of course you don't pay for watching sport on TV or listening to the radio

You see - If was was wanting to play the game of, "Oo! Oo! I'm the smartest guy in teh Internets!" I could go ahead and say, "Bad example, dude. You pay for cable fees, satellite, hardware, electricity, blah blah blah..." But - as above - such a thing would entirely miss the point. Jump Shonen may not be making money on scanlations but they sure as heck are making money on the Jump video DVDs, trading cards, et al, etc... that are all part of the Naruto media empire. No one in the USA would be buying jack-squat if the manga wasn't popular - and the manga wouldn't be popular in the US if someone wasn't doing scanlations. Therefore these supposedly 'free' scanlations are driving a huge market of other merch.

If, however, I decided that I want to give one of my paintings away, the recipient really has no place to tell me what color paint I should have used, especially if they accept and take the work.

So - let's say that you borow (to create another 'bad example') a book from your friend. You read the book. You like most of the book, but there is a really boring chapter in it that you thought was awful. You are saying that you - as a reader - have NO RIGHT to tell your friend, "Book wasn't bad - but the author wrote a really bad chapter."

Bollocks. Whether or not you paid for the book doesn't abrogate (A) the fact that the book had a really lousy chapter in it or (B) the fact that you as a reader were able to discern the lousiness of that chapter or (C) the fact that you can tell anyone and everyone you meet (including the AUTHOR) how lousy it was.

[Sabot RND]

Not that I would entirely disagree with your opinion,but you're using bad examples,dude.Of course you don't pay for watching sport on TV or listening to the radio,however,those people and companies behind it still get money because of ads and commercials.So in the end,they use you in order to get money.If they try that using a crappy show,of course you obtain the right to complain.

Furthermore,even if scanlations increase sales in the western world,it's not like JUMP would give a crap about it.Their primary goal is the Japanese audience and raws that are published online decrease the amount of readers and do not increase the popularity of the series or the size of the readership for that matter,which is why they are strictly against scans on the internet.

while raws and scanlations may decrease the readership in places, it offers a 'free' vehicle on which to carry the brand name to deepest corners of the world after which they can exploit other markets i.e. merchandise etc. Which inturn makes the series more attractive in new environments. A point invader made clearly, its not just a manga is it? there is a mother load of stuff that carries the Naruto brand name that can be sold in places where scans/raws have reached first or followed after, stirring the proverbial hornets nest.

---------- Post added at 07:24 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:44 PM ----------

I think about this from an artist's point of view:

I am creating a work for a client. Since the client is paying for it, he/she can tell me how they want the overall work to look.
If, however, I decided that I want to give one of my paintings away, the recipient really has no place to tell me what color paint I should have used, especially if they accept and take the work.

And let me clarify: OF COURSE you have the right to complain. But that isn't the exact terminology I would use.
We have the right to express our opinions in a constructive manner.

E.g: "I think Naruto's jumpsuit should be blue and black instead of orange, since orange reminds me of the fruit, and oranges killed my family."
INSTEAD OF
"Naruto's orange jumpsuit is so stupid. Kishimoto is an idiot. He should make it green."

Can the recipient of the free painting say you can do better next time? or would that count as being too demanding, would he need to sugar coat his words more if the said free painting was indeed bad? Of course he could refuse it altogether without a word.

its like saying "i'm allowed to suck sometimes and no one can say anything about it."

people give their opinion on how they see things, some right some wrong, some constructive some deconstructively raw.

[Rikudou King]

How Itachi could have known while back, when Sasuke was a kid, that his brother would have befriended Naruto?
And having known that, its not like he could've said to him when he saw him again " ehi bro, don't kill naruto if he is your best friend, ya know?"
Itachi cared for his brother above all else, so its not like that he cared more for his best friend than for the chance for Sasuke to survive.

Well to be fair, Itachi wouldn't have needed to know that they'll become friends, only that they would be real close. But it is an issue. Maybe Itachi just played the odds.

Having said that, we don't know if his Mangekyo was awakened after Tobi's speech or before, right after Itachi died, and that is exactly what Itachi wanted, be "killed" and thus unlocking the Mangekyo. I don't think a trauma is enough, since it is said many times that to unlock the eyes you have to kill your friend. Maybe not the actual killing, but the guilt, or the emotion or whatever that makes him think that he is the cause of death. And that is likely how Kakashi awakened his own Mangekyo, since he pretty much feels responsible for Obito's death

The thing is, the only person we know of to kill someone was Itachi and even then, Shisui purposely died. Madara and Izuna were each others closest persons and they gained MS just through training against each other. Itachi was apparently Shisui's closest person, but he still manage to have MS without doing anything towards Itachi. And Kakashi has been feeling guilt for Obito since his death, but seemingly didn't gain MS until a short while before Part Two. We know Itachi's plan was for Sasuke to have MS upon his death and that he never intended Sasuke to know the truth, so it's likely that Sasuke would have gained it even without Tobi telling his what had happen.

[Uchiha_Blood]

The thing is, the only person we know of to kill someone was Itachi and even then, Shisui purposely died. Madara and Izuna were each others closest persons and they gained MS just through training against each other. Itachi was apparently Shisui's closest person, but he still manage to have MS without doing anything towards Itachi. And Kakashi has been feeling guilt for Obito since his death, but seemingly didn't gain MS until a short while before Part Two. We know Itachi's plan was for Sasuke to have MS upon his death and that he never intended Sasuke to know the truth, so it's likely that Sasuke would have gained it even without Tobi telling his what had happen.

You're also right. Mmh... The problem is Kishi is pretty vague with MS, since the four guys that had it didn't actually physically killed their best friend, or closest person:
Shisui certanly didn't kill Itachi, Itachi didn't kill Shisui either, Kakashi didn't kill Obito and Sasuke didn't kill Itachi. Add that to what you said, and it seems that MS is unlocked like any other Sharingan stage, after a trauma, or a near death experience, as we seen with Sasuke:
he awoke the first tomoe when Itachi slaughtered his clan, he awoke the second when Haku was killing him, and he awoke the third against Naruto, all of them were dangerous and drammatic situation.
Maybe killing the closest person isn't actually the way to do it, but the safer and quicker?
I mean, killing your best friend is a pretty big trauma, and in both ROOT and Kiri was used as a way to kill all emotions in a ninja. Still it would be kinda cheap imho if you could unlock MS any other way