Board Thread:Naruto Discussions/@comment-3297904-20150406210743

An acquaintance of mine is insinuating this and wanted to discuss it with everyone here.

Not saying which is better villain but would the story be better if we had focus on Oro (who was villain for majority half of part 1) and gave Akatsuki little focus in favor of him?

When this was suggested I frowned.. Quite a bit.

Hell, the words haven't even been invented to described how vexed I am by it.

Yes, part one was good and it knocked our socks off and made us incredibly addicted to Naruto and continue following the story to part 2.

In comparison to to part one, in part two we were mixed by the content.

However, no way no how would I tolerate the negligence of important plot points and elaboration on them in favor of Oro being main villain (who is considerably overrated IMO) :

-What the story of Shukaku is and insight of the whole "priest" sealed in kettle -What the deal with the Uchiha is. What important task Fugaku Uchiha wanted Itachi to be more active towards -Why didn't Uchiha mingle with villagers as much as other clans did in Konoha -How come the Kyuubi attacked Konoha? -How did Naruto come to be an orphan? Further detail on why we see his birth following the kyuubi -Why don't we see any Mokuton users

So generally, my point is would we be able to get to those plot points had Orochimaru been the villain?

In my opinion we would not have gotten anywhere with Oro as main villain because he has little influence on general plot.

He was introduced in Chunnin exam in minor scuffle with team 7 and we find out late in the exam what he wanted with Sasuke.

With Madara in second arc his name is mentioned by Kyuubi and says quite a bit that the Kyuubi (who gave Oro hardest fight in a while and had him wanting to transfer to Sasuke's body soon). 