@Purple:
The thing is that Nen isn't about the crazy things but that it really builds off of its fundamental design. It's a very simple, well defined system that builds to unique ideas.
Toriko on the other hand feels most of the time like seeing paint being thrown at a wall and seeing what sticks. Ideas are thrown around and discarded very rapidly, and in some cases there's a lot devoted to explain some concepts, but in some cases it negates a previous threat that was introduced or goes into detail about something that shouldn't be applied to that situation. Kinda like JoJo in some cases.
Honestly, I disagree. Nothing that they learned was useless or was discarded. Everything was incorporated into their strength and how they work. They still spend calories in their attacks, they still use food honor, they still use instinct, they still use ultimate routine incorporated into intimidation, etc. Nothing was forgotten, everything was built upon everything else.
Limitations that they had were complemented by new stuff that they learned (spending of calories massively improved by Food Honor, speed reaction massively improved by ambu, intimidation and effectiveness massively improved by ultimate routine, control of hair massively improved by instinct, etc) but nothing they learned ceased to exist and is still referenced from time to time, like Sunny talking about instinct when he was learning Ambu.
Frankly, I quite like this because it feels like they actually have an arsenal of techniques that improved them at their disposal and vast experience besides their own fighting style.
As for the power system of nen, I continue to not see that big of a fundamental difference compared to the pseudo-science of the gourmet cells. Nen is simply better explained in why the characters develop different abilities, but as a power system, its job for the series is essentially the same as the gourmet cells in Toriko.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
@TLC:
Notice the key difference between the two. One never explains anything because it doesn't have to while the other HAS to explain itself because otherwise, it wouldn't be science!
That's not true. Fantasy explains its own rules. The rules that govern its world. They are unrealistic because they are fantasy/magic rules.
And soft science fiction also explains its own rules. The rules that governs its world. They are also unrealistic because they are pseudo-science or non-accurate science.
In both cases, they are meant as a means to pull the reader more into its world and to add substance to the world, and they are not trying to be realistic.
When engineers in Star Trek took some time to babble about pseudo-science, it was not supposed to look scientifically accurate, it was supposed to give the watcher a impression that their world had depth, detail, pulling the watcher into their world. And it was the same with Harry Potter when they babbled about magic that wasn't even plot relevant.
Yeah, that's not my argument. I've seen plenty of sci-fi films with wonky science that I've liked. It depends on tone and execution. Because see, the tone of Toriko is goofy and light-hearted enough when it's not doing stupid conspiracy drama bullshit that I can buy a lot. But the execution, woof. Toriko's science isn't pseudo-science, it's bullshit science.
Don't see much of a difference between pseudo-science and bullshit science but ok. Too bad you don't like its execution.
Soft Science Fiction is a brand of Science Fiction that explores social concepts like anthropology or sociology opposed to Hard Science Fiction that goes into hardcore physics. It's not a special term for Science Fiction that can be nonsense. You keep throwing around the word "pseudo" like it's okay that the science is bullshit because it's not really science. Yet Shima keeps treating it like hardcore science when he goes into chapters of nonsensical explanations treating it like real science. When he could just not explain it and keep it vague and no foul done but he goes out of his way to shoot himself in the foot.
Actually, soft science fiction can either mean the exploration of social concepts, or it can mean that its not scientifically accurate (or a mix of both): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soft_science_fiction
Obviously, I was referring to the non-accurate aspect.
And actually, the author is just adding some depth and detail to his world, not trying to be realistic. You just prefer it to be vague because you have this notion in your head that everything based on scientific notions has to be extremely accurate to real science. Shows like Star Trek apparently didn't know that and so they had their fair share of pseudo-science regarding the technical aspects of their ship and technology and whatnot to, precisely, add some depth and detail to the world, but that doesn't work for Toriko, according to you.
Clearly I should have used smaller words because you still don't get it. Either that or your pride won't let you admit it. Either way, I'm done with you.
Sure, because I have a different opinion from you, I'm obviously in need of even smaller letters. Oh, you are done? After being incredibly rude, condescending and downright insulting just because I have another opinion? Well, that's a shame, I'm certainly sad about it. Hope you had fun behaving that way at least.