igordennis
Member
Come on veelk where is that morbid curiosity humans are so known for? 
I read fairy tail for 2 chapters before it gave me an aneurysm.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
One Piece Manga |OT2| Four Emperors, One King, All Blue
- Thread starter Cloud Strife
- Start date
- Status
There's like 3 right?
I actually read a number of chapters, but I stopped. But this was back when I was 12-15. I had more tolerance for stuff then
I did read tenge tenjo by the same person. I remember liking it, but I don't see myself ever rereading it. That was text heavy as shit. And sooooo much porn. I wouldn't even call it fanservice, it was just literally porn.
What made this chapter even more awkward is that I'm pretty sure it inadvertently revealed everyone that have had sex or masturbated before.
Lightning_Roller
Banned
Air Gear had a major plot point where Obama gets mindswapped into the body of a teenage girl.
.......no words. I read air gear but stopped after it became wars and stuff.
As much as I love MHA, I really and honestly feel it's a bit overrated. I think people give the series too much praise for things that even stuff like Naruto already does, despite claims of being so much better than Naruto. I still think it's a great series but I think citing it as this shining beacon of shonen writing is very misguided. It isn't that good.
Overrated is only ever a criticism of the fans, rather than the series itself.
I don't disagree that it's very much like Naruto and find myself frequently comparing the two series, but I see that as a good thing. It does everything I liked about Naruto, does it better, and avoids nearly every problem it eventually succumbed to.
I've heard it argued that it doesn't do anything truly unique and...well putting aside the varying definitions of what constitutes unique, even if I agreed, it does old things so well that it's more than enough to satisfy. It makes the characters extremely believable, which is the most important thing a story can do.
For me, it's FMA tier thus far, which is my favorite shonen manga of all time. I don't read enough shonen to tell you if that's the beacon of shonen writing or whatever, but that's what high quality writing is to me.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
Eh, must have had a substantial jump in after in quality after villains arc because what I read was nothing remotely close to FMA like not even slightly since FMA was a shounen that posed the reader moral quandries and thought experiments beyond the usual this a a young kid and this is his goal watch him have great fights and make friends. It was more of a seinem in that it didn't assume the reader was a teenager and base the story around the usual cliches.
Even what I've heard of the story past that point seems nothing like that. Seems like you usual standard tournament training more tournaments and more training. I'm having substantial trouble believing this. I would read myself but what I saw from the villains arc didn't leave with the impression the antagonists were compelling thus I dropped it and nothing I've read has caused me to think otherwise.
I mean, you're presuming that what you value in FMA is the same thing that I value in it. We can't know that until you and I have a discussion on it. You shouldn't assume we're speaking the same language just because we're talking about the same thing, it leads to many surprising disagreements. Like, I liked the moral quandries too (though I don't really remember many thought experiments...), but that's not the immediate praise that jumps to my head when I think of FMA.
Second, I didn't say that MHA was similar to FMA in nature, but similar in quality. There are few ways in which I can say that MHA and FMA are similar in terms of content, but they elicit the same kind of investment in the character that few other series have done by humanizing the characters the way it has. It's a series that feels extremely personal in the same way FMA was. That's what I mean when I say it's FMA tier, nothing regarding moral quandries and thought experiments.
MHA is a series based on the relatable characters and social commentary. It has very little plot that's not related to the characters, and virtually no political commentary. You can kind of call it the inverse of One Piece in that respect, haha.
So reading a summary of what happens isn't going to get across what it's about.
So reading a summary of what happens isn't going to get across what it's about.
You know, that's probably how I should really sell the series to people. "It's the opposite of One Piece"
Principate
Saint Titanfall
That sounds exactly like hinomaru zumou. I guess I have a higher freshold for that when it's about a sports manga where the tournament's and training cycle makes more sense than that of a fantasy adventure story (which personally always seemed like a waste).
I wouldn't call MHA a fantasy adventure story at all. They don't really go on adventures, they go to school where they learn shit and grow up. It's a coming of age story.
But that helps prove my point about not presuming that we're speaking the same language just because we're talking about the same thing.
Are you calling it the worst manga in history?
Principate
Saint Titanfall
It's an action super hero story, that's exactly what it is by default. That's the genre it inhabits especially being a battle shounen. It's no assassination classroom where the smaller scale is built into the story. There's nothing stopping The author from doing exactly that. The fact they don't do that is what I mean by wasted opportunity since there's not tangible story actually stopping them. They're training to be heroes that fight bad guys.
I personally just feel if I want to read truly aware winning coming of age stories I'd read 20th centuary boys or whatever. I personally woukdn't read a story that involves all these magical powers and villains while also having a main plot involving stopping villains and just plain not do much much with it. I mean I can understand how it would be appealing to some but I just get the feeling such a manga isn't fully ultilizing it's potential as a fantasy manga that involves in depth fighting and villains.
Am I calling MHA the best manga in history?
That's not what really undertakes an adventure. I mean, it's not like there is a specific definition, but to me, an adventure implies going to new areas that you've never been to, and going for some greater purpose. It also implies some kind of undertaking of a risk. There is risk to the story and they go to technically new places, but they're mainly going to school to just learn normal stuff. Usually, it's safe because the school wants to train them, not want them to die. Typically, the villains have to intrude on them.
You can easily say their training to take on an adventure...an uncertain world of superhero bad guys that may take them to new places. But for all of the story, they're just in school and, like you said, they're training, they're not going anywhere and they're learning. The adventure element, the villains, come to them. So, it's hard to argue that their on an adventure now. The only time they actually took the initiative away from the teachers on their own will is when
Bakugou got kidnapped and they went to rescue him when they were told to stay home
Frankly, it sounds like you read a summary and are making assumptions about what it must be like based on that.
Give it to about Chapter 40.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
Nah I read the manga up till the end of the villain arc where I dropped it because I didn't find it compelling. It dropped at that point because if the story wsn't appealing to me after a the first major battle with an antagonist it was never going to be.
Trust me I woukdn't be talking about this if I hadn't.
Well, okay.
It just kind of seems weird to be criticizing the manga for all this when you've read a tiny part of it, like most of it is just assumptions of what the story is like
Like criticizing the manga for not exploring in-depth fighting and villains, when it's known for doing exactly that. The arc you're criticizing is a really small arc for the series!
It just kind of seems weird to be criticizing the manga for all this when you've read a tiny part of it, like most of it is just assumptions of what the story is like
Like criticizing the manga for not exploring in-depth fighting and villains, when it's known for doing exactly that. The arc you're criticizing is a really small arc for the series!
Principate
Saint Titanfall
I didn't pretend to be critising the quality of the manga. I criticised like I like mentioned the slice I had read and what I've consistently heard about the story being the standard training tournament cycles. I mentioned my general dislike for that cycle used in manga that are fantastical in nature. Not talking purely about BNHA but manga that rely on that in general.
It's just a trope I don't particular care for in more stadard battle shounens. it works well in sports because that's the while point and progression with a sports manga. With something more fantasy based your not forced to use that sort of plot structure. Which while I prefer they at least Mic it if they do plan on using it.
Other way around, since One Piece is the best manga in history you are calling MHA the worst
Please dont do that, I like MHA
Well, I am sure as hell not saying that One Piece is the best manga in history, so that can't be it.
Calling them kind-of-opposites really isn't a bad description, haha. MHA does a lot of things opposite to the way One Piece does them, though I don't mean that in a negative way towards either. (...well, depending on your preferences.)
Probably better to go into more detail in the MHA thread.
Probably better to go into more detail in the MHA thread.
One Piece has social commentary too, actually. Tackling racism is pretty ballsy in a culture that doesn't even really understand what it is afterall. You won't find many manga tackling that. One Piece has a ways to go in depicting women, but to say My Hero Academia does depiction of women better is being completely dishonest.
I don't really disagree with anything Veelk is saying, I just think My Hero Academia is a series that feels like it hasnt' found it's indentity yet. While it is very character-driven, it's sole benefactor is really it's main character. His rival is a cunt and the side characters are fun but nothing amazing. Imo the most interesting thing about Bakugou is his relationship with his mom, but otherwise he's an insufferable bully.
Fishman Island was much better than people apparently gave it credit for in large part due to its commentary on racism imo.
As for the women, uhh, regardless of whether or not MHA depicts women better (Certainly does in terms of their bodies...), you saying that it's completely dishonest to say that it does do it better makes me feel like you think it does a terrible job at it or something.
Speaking of which, one of the highlights in MHA was definitely Bakugou vs. Urakaka.
As far social commentary goes, it's hard to take racial commentary from a series that depicts more or less one ethnicity through it's vast world seriously. Like, I think I can only think of one black character. Any time the series uses other cultural markers, they never put the people to whom that culture belongs to in there. I can take or leave the commentary of "We can't forget the abuse of the past but must bare it and move past it anyway", but it was never especially striking to me without people of color in there. And I'm not sure I even agree with it.
In comparison, MHA makes smaller statements, but something like Uraraka's fight and how the social perceptions of treating them with a double standard comes off as more authentic when they have female character living that. So, as a more or less honest person, I would say that MHA is miles and miles ahead of OP in depicting women, just for that. I mean, I can allow that OP gives women it's own character arc and place in the story, but that's something all stories do if they're in any way competent, and the amount it sexually objectifies and limits their roles hurts what little good having a basic character arc does for them. So...yeah, I would say MHA is many, many, many times better at depicting it's characters. It's not perfect, but fuck, I never asked for perfection, I ask for a measure of reasonableness to it.
But if I'm really being honest, I don't really care about series making any kind of social commentary. I've always been of the opinion that if you have something to say about society, you should say it, not disguise it in a story. I recommend MHA on the basis of how it depicts it's characters. Which I definitely disagree about not having found their identity. I mean, one major theme is imitation vs emulation that virtually all the characters go through, not just Midoriya but Uraraka, Iida, Todoroki, etc. I do agree that we haven't spent enough time with all of them, but that's less because there hasn't been much to say and more because we didn't have time with so many characters with the pace being what it is.
I think One Piece is worse in that regard (depicting women), but let's not forget the very first chapter of My Hero Academia had Mt. Lady intentionally posing with her butt sticking out. Then there's all the costumes showing cleavage unnecessarily as well. MHA is not really innocent in the slightest when it comes to sexualizing women. In comparison, while One Piece does provide clear fanservice targetted at males, in the very least in terms of merchandising there's plenty of stuff targeting towards females as well (body calendars and loads of figures).Fishman Island was much better than people apparently gave it credit for in large part due to its commentary on racism imo.
As for the women, uhh, regardless of whether or not MHA depicts women better (Certainly does in terms of their bodies...), you saying that it's completely dishonest to say that it does do it better makes me feel like you think it does a terrible job at it or something.
I agree the lack of dark-skin folk is noticeable, though there is a couple of them sprinkled in there (Daz Bones is one major one). However the strange thing about One Piece is that while all the humans things are generally light-skinned, pretty much every facial feature and hair style in the human race has been represented in some form or another. There isn't really this idea of "Black people are supposed to look like this, white people are supposed to look like this, and Latino people are supposed to look like THIS!" that a lot of series out there when they create designs based around diversity. Characters like Usopp, Brook (human), and Aokiji are prime examples of characters that have features associated with Africans in cartoons. But would it really be any better if those characters were black for convention's sake? Probably not. in fact people would just argue those characters are typical and/or racist depictions of black people.
I really do not think Ochako is a great example here. She has still yet to have a truly defining moment in the series, and her entire character arc is how much she likes Deku basically. I do not think that's a very solid example of positive depiction of women to be honest with you. She struggles, but she only struggles in the story because she's weaker than the other characters, not because she's a women.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
The whole point of a social commentary in a story is to make it a relatable thought experiment. Simply saying humans are fundamentally savage beasts doesn't always work at getting a point across as say a work like Lord of the flies where showing the break down of democracy the effects of fear and descent into madness leaves the reader with a far more poignant take away.
This is why parables exist and why fables exist. Fact of matter is simply stating a social commentary is worthless to the vast majority population a lot of the time. Not everyone cares to ponder about these sorts of things. People do however remember fables like the boy who cried wolf or works like to kill a mocking bird . Frankly I consider a story without a message an entirely worthless endeavour. Nothing is being passed over it's just an entertaining time waster. Stories that actually convey a concept or a message well, I consider to have literary merit and not simply the litterary equilvalent of junk food.
I didn't say it was completely innocent, just that it does it far better than OP.
Blackleg-sanji1
Banned
One piece manga|Ot3| My hero academia
These shonen aren't the best at depicting women so when I see people compare the depiction between the two I laugh it's like saying my bottle of coke is in a better glass than yours you're still drinking disgusting coke
We do pretty good without the anime comparisons in this thread be a shame to start. It's why I'm not in that MHA thread to begin with Because That's all I saw when I was there
These shonen aren't the best at depicting women so when I see people compare the depiction between the two I laugh it's like saying my bottle of coke is in a better glass than yours you're still drinking disgusting coke
We do pretty good without the anime comparisons in this thread be a shame to start. It's why I'm not in that MHA thread to begin with Because That's all I saw when I was there
I can't address all that without getting into too much detail about the series in a thread not about it, but on that bit about fanservice: Sure, there's fanservice and fanservice-y characters, but if you actually look at the paneling and framing, the series avoids playing it up. The camera doesn't "leer" at people, and the author knows when to hold back. ...Some of the designs are kind of dumb, though.
More importantly, the fanservice isn't used to make anybody less of a character. Even Mount Lady is a character with depth. I absolutely can't say anything like that about One Piece, just the opposite, and it's genuinely baffling to me to even say that they're anywhere near the same level.
...anyway, yeah, I'm going to olly-out. This wasn't the conversation I wanted to get into in this thread, that's for sure. They don't go well.
More importantly, the fanservice isn't used to make anybody less of a character. Even Mount Lady is a character with depth. I absolutely can't say anything like that about One Piece, just the opposite, and it's genuinely baffling to me to even say that they're anywhere near the same level.
...anyway, yeah, I'm going to olly-out. This wasn't the conversation I wanted to get into in this thread, that's for sure. They don't go well.
You have to understand that the problem here is less 'sexual objectification is always bad' and more that it's goddamn fucking nonstop with One Piece. You can barely get a female character who doesn't go through this in OP. That is NOT the case with MHA. Nor does it have the same intensity.
I mean, here's the thing about sexual objectification: It's kinda a part of society. Every culture has it. If I'm going to condemn every series that has it, I condemn almost all art. In fact, when Maria Carey was having her lip sync moment on new years, I was wondering how she kept warm in waht she was wearing.
So while it's notable and your example is definitely "male gaze-y", it's really not about any singular example, but how the series depicts women as a whole. And in comparison, MHA has way, WAY less of that. I mean, even that example, yeah, it's showing off her butt....but given that it's just her butt, and that we later learn that she is herself doing it for the celebrity, and that she is ultimately a minor character, and she has scenes where she isn't sexually objectified....there has been work done to mitigate the effects of that. It definitely is sexual objectification, but I can live with it if I can find an out with other scenes and other female characters.
That's why OP doesn't allow. It's ALWAYS sexually objectifying, or nearly so, with very little reason. MHA does it very infrequently. And in fact, it does it far more innocently. Like, I remember the time after the first tournament where a character tricked them into wearing cheerleader outfits and....they looked like normal cheerleader outfits. Like, skirts were long, they weren't overly tight. It's literally what you'd see girls wearing at a real school sporting event. It's fanservice to some extent, sure, but it's innocent too. Far more so than what OP would do in the same situation atleast.
Uh.....look, I'm sure you didn't intend this, but you seem to be trying to set it up that the choice is between stereotyping and cultural appropriation. And you just have to know that's a false dichotomy.
And even so, the argument really doens't work since there doesn't seem to be any kind of cultural unity between how people look and where they come from. So having curly hair seems to be less an ethnicity thing and more just a randomly generated result of whatever Oda thinks looks best. So, different ethnicities FEATURES are in OP, but not different ethnicities themselves. And yeah, I see that as kind of a problem. Like, there's no relation between Brook and Usopp both having curly black hair, they just...do.
Second, it doesn't help that in addition to every feature known to man, there are features that are just inhuman looking. OP has exaggerated propotions that don't translate to real life. So with that in mind, it feels less like "Oh, oda may not have any black people, but atleast he has their other facial features" and more like "there's nothing Oda will not use in his characters design, including features NO ONE has."
You mention Daz Bones. No one seems to have a problem with stereotypes about him. Just make more Daz Bones like characters.
Not quite. Ochako's character is that she wants to be a great hero, but she percieves it differently from her peers, specifically Iida and Midoriya. She doesn't just like Midoriya, she wants to be Midoriya. She tries to immitate him a lot of the time, whenever she's in a jam, she wonders "WHat would Deku do". But she only really succeeds when she thinks on her own terms. For example, when they had that test against the teacher's, Ochako does what she learned from her tutor for when she went on the internship thing, and wins that way.
She does have an identity established, though it's one of a self that's still emerging. MHA is much more lowkey and subtle about it than OP, which has to have entire arcs and flashbacks to find out basic character information. Ochako wants to make her parents proud. She feels the need to succeed as a hero because, instead of just continuing her parents family business which would ensure financial security, they encourated her to follow her dreams (that too is a feminist writing, btw). As a result, she feels pressured to be the best hero, so she kind of panics when she does things like become friends with Midoriya, while other characters view him as competition. Her journey is to become the hero she wants to be...and right now, it's kind of related to how she views Deku. She now imagines him to be a kind of ideal to strive for, but that relationship is morphing into something else because she only succeeds when she doesn't follow what Deku would do and is now coming around to the idea of viewing him as a romantic partner, which is a relationship of equals and cannot work is he is looking at him as her superior.
As for this line: "She's weaker than the other characters, not because she's a women." No, no, no, that's EXACTLY why it's great. She's being treated as a person first. Her relationship with Deku obviously has obvious signs of romance, but the story treats her not as Deku's GF, but as a hero in the making. She fights her own fights. She is learning her own style. She is becoming her own person. That she has a romantic interest is not a detraction from that.
I'm not saying good social commentary via stories doesn't exist. I just don't pay it much credence as opposed to straightforwardly saying something.
Like, to use your example, I don't love Lord of the Flies because it's a good depiction of how societies break down, I love it because, in and of itself, it is a good story of those boy's society breaking down. Really, the social commentary, to me, is just a reflection of how real and authentic those characters feel. Same with To Kill A Mocking Bird. It's not good because it tells the tale of what real society does. It's good because it tells the tale of real feeling characters....and when I see society doing what it depicts, it reaffirms the realness of those characters.
Which is what I find the problem of One Piece to be. It's characters very rarely feel authentic. The social commentary it's making, as a result, doesn't feel especially poignant as a result. Especially when the form the commentary comes in is not really a reflection of how people act, and more "This is how black people should handle the years of oppression they suffered"
Principate
Saint Titanfall
Eh you can hardly say Nami and Robin aren't characters and they're the two major sources of fanservice in One Piece. You can say they're poorly ultilised. But as far depictions in battle shounen they're still better than the vast majority (which says a lot about battle shounen). They have rheir oen goals personalities and aren't linked by the hip to any male characters. They were perfectly fine as self contained characters and can carry story arcs by themselves. Teriary one arc female side characters are where the main issues come from and that's largely something that happened after the timeskip but one piece isn't that obtuse with it, as in it isn't gratuiously focussed on at the expense of the plot.
The biggest problem is that female characters simply don't get the focus everyone does. Namely that Robin despite being stronger than the majority of the crew conceptually doesn't have many get many fights. Which makes little sense regardless of how you look at it. I feel time skip was where all this really jumped shark. You had plenty of characters like Perona that weren't sexualised with the odd some that were. But it wasn't as ridiculous as it is currently.
SERIOUSLY????? What depth has she ever show that is so superior to any One Piece women?
Evil Monkey DTT
Banned
Finished water 7s crew fight. I now know why it's called water 7, my eyes have been crying for 7 hours.
That's true. At the end of the day, I see MHA as being worthy of being read, so having more people get into it is never a bad thing. It's just that while OP is my favorite series, like Veelk says, it has a lot of annoying stuff like the exaggerated bodies and breasts that you basically have to tune out. Whereas MHA, it's also a quality read, but in great part because you don't have to worry about stuff like that remotely as much.
But yea, I don't want to get all into some big comparison between the two; just figured I'd talk about it briefly since we're just waiting for a new chapter lol
Good.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
Breh you haven't even started.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
That's the entire freaking point. The message resonates with you because you care about those characters. It's not some separate thing. That's why it's used as a social commentary. Because be honest now how many sociology papers have you read this week? How many stories have you read this week? The average persion does not read sociology papers. They don't even read the massively watered down version in the form of newspaper or online articles. It's effective because it gets people like you to read their stuff that you may not otherwise do so and not just that, but conveys it in a way you understand and care about.
That is why it is such a major part of literary analysis.
Well, the first thing you should know is Sociology papers mostly try to be science oriented, they don't really make judgement calls in regards to social justice, which is what social commentary is usually about. I mean, it's a science field, soft as it may be. It doesn't say that you shouldn't discriminate against black people, that's ethics. Sociology just says that black people are discriminated against based on findings.
Second, I understand why people make social commentary driven stories. That's not what I'm saying.
What I'm saying is that social commentary usually works best when it's a result of the characters feeling real and authentic, rather than merely being a means of just delivering said message. You can do it otherwise, but it's what I've found for myself personally, when people put the story first over the message. When it's the other way around, then I don't care about the social message....which I should remind you is different from disagreeing with it....and the whole purpose of the exercise is defeated. So if you're just interested in delivering a message, just say it. Otherwise, make sure the characters aren't just talking heads.
Cloud Strife
Member
I don't think anyone in MHA can compare to Nami and Robin in regards to character development and plot importance. You'd be hard pressed to find any female Shounen heroes that can compare.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
I know what sociology papers involve, I've read and continue to read several of them from different journals. It's not as black and white as your implying (ot's not remotely like what your implying really). Unlike far more hard sciences you'll find numerous vague papers that'll try to explain social systems, macro-level view of historical events, surface level economics and whole bunch of other stuff. What your saying is simply that you prefer social commentary done in a believable manner which contradicts what you said before. Social commentary done well can be a great assest to a piece of fiction and it's evocative nature. I still find it extremely weird how some that enjoys analysing stories so much does like having it in pieces of fiction..
Uh....really? I mean plot importance, maybe, but character development?
Nami's character development went from "I should try to swindle these pirates" to "I should try to swindle other pirates" and Robin went from "I trust no one" to "I trust the strawhats."
One Piece is a extremely empty of character development, especially in the OP crew. The personalities, beliefs, associations, and alignment of all the characters are extremely static.
I'm not even arguing in favor of MHA here, because Ochako is still a work in progress and everything, but I mean, there's got to be SOMETHING better out there. Like, there's got to be, because OP is pathetic in terms of developing it's characters.
Nami's character development went from "I should try to swindle these pirates" to "I should try to swindle other pirates" and Robin went from "I trust no one" to "I trust the strawhats."
One Piece is a extremely empty of character development, especially in the OP crew. The personalities, beliefs, associations, and alignment of all the characters are extremely static.
I'm not even arguing in favor of MHA here, because Ochako is still a work in progress and everything, but I mean, there's got to be SOMETHING better out there. Like, there's got to be, because OP is pathetic in terms of developing it's characters.
The fanservice is *mostly* just in the design, the deliberate objectifying moments are few and far between (last i can think of was Robin's first encounter with the dwarves).
A lot of the subtle sexism in OP has a lot of plausible deniability attached to it, like how Nami's not really a front-line fighter and how Robin is difficult to write good enemies for (either she beats them instantly or she can't do a thing to them, hard to come up with a good fight for her).
Not that it still isn't troubling, but it doesn't stick in your face all the time because it's better-integrated into the narrative.
Baby 5 was probably the worst instance of it in Dressrosa, despite all the complaints about Rebecca. The gag of a woman who's pathologically unable to say no has terrible unfortunate implications.
Edit: I'd argue there's a fair bit of character development amongst the core crew, but it happens so slowly that it's hard to pinpoint. There are obvious moments like Nami pre and post Arlong Arc, or Usopp and Robin pre and post Enies Lobby, but others have had slow changes over time.
A lot of the subtle sexism in OP has a lot of plausible deniability attached to it, like how Nami's not really a front-line fighter and how Robin is difficult to write good enemies for (either she beats them instantly or she can't do a thing to them, hard to come up with a good fight for her).
Not that it still isn't troubling, but it doesn't stick in your face all the time because it's better-integrated into the narrative.
Baby 5 was probably the worst instance of it in Dressrosa, despite all the complaints about Rebecca. The gag of a woman who's pathologically unable to say no has terrible unfortunate implications.
Edit: I'd argue there's a fair bit of character development amongst the core crew, but it happens so slowly that it's hard to pinpoint. There are obvious moments like Nami pre and post Arlong Arc, or Usopp and Robin pre and post Enies Lobby, but others have had slow changes over time.
- Status