Culex: Back to Low 2-C

[DatOneWeeb]

Is Culex even a villain? Like dude isn’t evil per se so I doubt he’d do the villain boasting.

Also it scales too Boshi who killed him with an Ultima.

No, he's not. He just wants to challenge Mario before leaving to his dimension.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

No, the narrator stating something is still a statement for all logical purposes. Just by a more definitive source. Though the character themselves should also be considered a good source unless you can find an actual contradiction/ prove it was just a boast.

A narrator describing the events that happen are a literal description of events, unless you're talking about unreliable narration. But in my case it's Third Person Impersonal Omniscient so it's literally what happened, it's not a statement.

On the second point you are falling into the pithole of inverting the Burden of Proof, a common Fallacy. Your goal is to prove the positive of a statement, not argue that it is correct because it has no contradictions.

But that is a statment, you are legit not making sense

I am. Have you ever read a book in your life, serious question? Because books are moved along by the flow of the narration, just as a movie progresses as images roll on the screen, and comics flow by the sequence of panels. Something being described as having happened in a book is equivalent to something being shown "on-screen" for a movie, cartoon, or game.

 

[Theuser789]

>moved along by the flow of the narration
So it's a statment, narrating is literally stating things, good to know

 

[Ben_CleverName]

A narrator describing the events that happen are a literal description of events, unless you're talking about unreliable narration. But in my case it's Third Person Impersonal Omniscient so it's literally what happened, it's not a statement.

I literally gave you the definition of the word through Google of all things and you're still denying it despite it matching with the description. Whether something is a literal description or not is irrelevant in determining whether something qualifies as a statement.

I am. Have you ever read a book in your life, serious question?

That might just be one of the most passive-aggressive questions I've ever read.

 

[Ben_CleverName]

And since we're bringing up fallacies you should probably consider dropping the ad hominem.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

I literally gave you the definition of the word through Google of all things and you're still denying it despite it matching with the description. Whether something is a literal description or not is irrelevant in determining whether something qualifies as a statement.

It is absolutely relevant because of the media we are discussing. Books are composed of words on a page, that's it. That's the only way that you can get a story progressing at all in a book, and yet even in Book Verses here on VBW we differentiate between feats and statements, because the former are what is narrated and shown to happen in the actual story and the later is just what a character says.

This can even apply to stuff like actual feats and statements about power. In Science Fiction book series people typically question and debate the wields given for weapons, power sources, supply numbers, etc. specially when compared to what is actually shown on the story because those numbers tend to not align much as a result of writers not knowing math. That's an example of how even narration can be wrong. See also, the Flash's Nuclear Bomb feat.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

And since we're bringing up fallacies you should probably consider dropping the ad hominem.

The Fallacy Fallacy: Why Fallacious Arguments Can Have True Conclusions – Effectiviology

effectiviology.com

 

[Niarobi_(Formerly_Hadou)]

Matt, it's LITERALLY stated by the narrator, not even just Culex.

 

[Theuser789]

"Your fallacy is wrong but MY fallacy is right"!

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

Matt, it's LITERALLY stated by the narrator, not even just Culex.

Read my latest post. Narrators can and have been wrong in stories. SPECIALLY when it comes to power levels, because writers do not know math. This happens most often of all in science fiction stories.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

"Your fallacy is wrong but MY fallacy is right"!

If we are just going to nitpick arguments and point fallacies, yes. I ask you to define why I should trust Culex' own statements and why do they even qualify for Low 2-C in the first place when all of them are vague. So far nobody has done it, they just act as if it's self-evident.

 

[Ben_CleverName]

That's the only way that you can get a story progressing at all in a book, and yet even in Book Verses here on VBW we differentiate between feats and statements, because the former are what is narrated and shown to happen in the actual story and the later is just what a character says.

I would hope we differentiate between them since they're completely different things altogether. Why are you even bringing this up? My point was that certain things can only be portrayed through statements. Whether they're narrative or spoken by a character doesn't change the part about it being a statement altogether. My whole point is that saying statements are worthless is itself worthless because it's plain-and-simple false.

The Fallacy Fallacy: Why Fallacious Arguments Can Have True Conclusions – Effectiviology

effectiviology.com

Cute, but you were the one who first brought up fallacies in the first place.

If we are just going to nitpick arguments and point fallacies, yes.

 

[Theuser789]

Your only arguments is throwing buzzwords like "it's vague" that's somehow you think it's a debunk and then saying staments don't count even though you were refuted by using the site's own wording you just ignored, so at least try to argue instead of just saying "no" and streching it into a paragraph

 

[Amelia_Lonelyheart]

Read my latest post. Narrators can and have been wrong in stories. SPECIALLY when it comes to power levels, because writers do not know math. This happens most often of all in science fiction stories.

C'mon man.

Unreliable narrators are done as a narrative device that are usually done from the perspective of another character or entity. It's been years since I played SMRPG, but I'm like, 99% positive that that isn't the case here. As for the other argument, narration hyperbole is a different thing all together. "Mater of time and space" isn't inherently hyperbole, and I don't really think it is here.

Now, I disagree with Tier 2 Culex; I disagree with giving a character who has such little info a page, much less a tier, and I agree that "master of space and time" is to vague, but the arguments are kind of weak.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

I would hope we differentiate between them since they're completely different things altogether.

The irony of you making this claim when you and the other supporters immediately responded to my criticism about pure reliance on statements with was "But other series do it too!" while completely failing to address the criticism itself.

Why are you even bringing this up? My point was that certain things can only be portrayed through statements.

Because your point is objectively and demonstrably untrue, what you refer to as a statement is in fact not, and if you cannot differenciate the difference between what VBW refers to as a statement, i.e a line meant to refer to something without actually showing it, vs just narration describing what is currently going in the story then I'm afraid your judgement on this thread is in itself questionable and unreliable.

This is basic reading comprehension, something which I struggle to see why you have trouble with.

. My whole point is that saying statements are worthless is itself worthless because it's plain-and-simple false.

Maybe if you are the kind of person who just takes everything told at you at face value. I am not. What is shown should take precedence over what is said when it comes to analysis, concepts such as the Unreliable Narrator, the fact that writers Cannot Do Math, or even a funny little thing called the empyric method all agree with me.

Going by what we can see, observe, testify and demonstrate is the entire basis of the Scientific Method, by which we are both even able to speak with each other through the internet right now. What you are effectively arguing for is to throw it all away and go with blind faith.

So, again, I ask you and others: Why should I believe in Culex's statements?

 

[DatOneWeeb]

Matt, the statement is trustworthy because it wasn't just Culex making the statement, so was the guide backing up what he just said. If it were just him, I guess I can see a point, but the official guide does so as well. Statements. Are. Allowed. How often do you think we see characters visually destroy a universe or a multiverse? Should we now take their word that it actually happened? It's literal cherrypicking that Culex for some specific reason isn't allowed. He inherits time. He has power over creation. He consumes time.

Everyone here is basically repeating themselves, you cannot stay this stubborn just because you say so.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

Unreliable narrators are done as a narrative device that are usually done from the perspective of another character or entity. It's been years since I played SMRPG, but I'm like, 99% positive that that isn't the case here

My argument about Science Fiction is more of a broad demonstration about how statements and even narration can be wrong when it comes to feats, it wasn't specifically referring to Culex himself, it was talking broadly to answer the claim that because a Nintendo Power guide had the same statement about Culex than it made it irrefutably true.

 

[Theuser789]

I haven't seen an actual good counterargument is this entire thread.

 

[DatOneWeeb]

Now, I disagree with Tier 2 Culex; I disagree with giving a character who has such little info a page, much less a tier, and I agree that "master of space and time" is to vague, but the arguments are kind of weak.

The master of time and space was only one statement. His other three were him stating to he able to consume time, inherit all of time, and have power over all of creation.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

Matt, the statement is trustworthy because it wasn't just Culex making the statement, so was the guide backing up what he just said

Already addressed how guides, narration, and authors can be wrong.

The statement being repeated in a guide in itself is meaningless because Culex himself has no feats or indications that direct me to trusting the statements at face value. How is this a difficult concept ot understand?

Furthermore, I believe that it is necessary for a statement to be believed for them to at least be somewhat backed up by demonstrable feats that show the character is actually capable of something. Culex himself is basically featless in this regard, so your assumption that a few statements about him being the "Master of Space Time" meaning that he can casually reality warp on a universal scale is patently absurd.

 

[DatOneWeeb]

Okay, you claim they can be wrong. Prove it's wrong. Prove the narrator and Culex are incorrect. You absolutely have nothing to back up they're wrong. Because we allow statements for tiers. You wanna downgrade Cell and 3-A Dragon Ball or about many many verses that do the same? Be my guest.

 

[Sadistic_Sleuth]

I agree with Ben, Weeb, and Theuser

 

[Theuser789]

Just try prove something instead of just saying "vague", nobody is finding this amusing

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

But for the sake of the argument let's break down the other statements:

He inherits time. He has power over creation. He consumes time

First one: "He inherits time". Firstly, what does that even mean? Seriously, genuine question here. Is he talking about ruling time? Is he saying that time in itself is his inheritance? Is it a metaphor for something else? If so, what? Even if it's literal and it's about "inheriting power over time", what is the extent of it? Dr. N-Tropy from Crash Bandicoot has "power over time" but all that correlates to is having some minor Time Travel abilities that don't even aid him in defeating the titular protagonist. Can Culex control time on a universal scale? Is that what you think this means? If so, why? And how can you demonstrate it.

Second one: "power over creation". This one is even worse, it's just Culex being asserted as being the most powerful dude in creation, with enough power to "rule it". That is utterly unquantifiable and meaningless in its own right, it's just saying he's vaguely strong, stronger than everyone else. Which is not true by the end of the game so why even trust it? Or are you also interpreting this literally to say that Culex also has literal absolute power over the fabric of creation? If so, WHY? Why is that the only conclusion here, and what is your evidence to prove it? Please demonstrate it.

Third one: "consumes time". FINALLY! A statement that actually means something! This is the closest thing to an actual feat we see in this thread but it's still not good. What is the extent of Culex's time-eating power, how does he go about it, what are its consequences, the width and scale of it? There are so many questions, none of which are answered. Is it just a localized hax ability or does he literally eat the concept of time from the universe? Can he just do it or is it a specific ability that doesn't scale to his other offensive capabilities? Again, what does it even mean to you?

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

You wanna downgrade Cell and 3-A Dragon Ball or about many many verses that do the same?

With Solar System level Cell there's actually a discussion to be made. VS Battles Wiki is literally the only website on the face of the planet that more or less universally accepts that statement and that's more due to Dragon Ball Favoritism.

With Universe level Dragon Ball Super there's a literal entire episode dedicated to the feat, we actually see it happens and it is repeated in every source, and with Gods of Destruction their power to destroy universes is literally an important plot point in several moments. I don't understand why you are using it as an argument, if anything it weakens your defense since you just pointed out a series that not only did show Tier 3 / Tier 2 feats visually without ambiguity, but which in one occasion went out of its way to explain it in-depth.

And secondly, why does it matter if this or that series has a character whose tier is decided solely through a statement. You think I'm going to drop this just because of that? No, I'm not. I'll agree that that other series is probably wrong too.

 

[Amelia_Lonelyheart]

But for the sake of the argument let's break down the other statements:

Now that is a good argument against Tier 2 Culex. IMO, there's just not enough information in the statements to get a clear answer. Culex has too little info to warrant a page in my view. That post sums up my thoughts fairly well.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

Thank you, Amelia. I appreciate the support.

 

[Theuser789]

Alot of people agree with Cell's feat

Anyways just saying "this can be SOMETHING" doesn't mean that it HAS to be those, your interpretations are just as valid as Weeb's

 

[Amelia_Lonelyheart]

Alot of people agree with Cell's feat

Anyways just saying "this can be SOMETHING" doesn't mean that it HAS to be those, your interpretations are just as valid as Weeb's

The point is that it goes in inverse to. There's just not enough clear understanding of what's going on that make's Weeb's understanding valid either. It's just to vague to be tiered, and I apologize for using the dreaded V word, but it's true. I'm not saying Culex isn't Tier 2, or that he is, but all the statements don't paint a clear enough picture for either way. He could be a figurehead or monarch with some potent, but limited Time Manip for all we know.

 

[Ben_CleverName]

The irony of you making this claim when you and the other supporters immediately responded to my criticism about pure reliance on statements with was "But other series do it too!" while completely failing to address the criticism itself.

I literally did address the criticism with my original statement. And I'm not a supporter, I'm indifferent to the upgrade. Your arguments are just bad.

Because your point is objectively and demonstrably untrue, what you refer to as a statement is in fact not

I literally showed you the actual definition of the word "statement", and how it corresponds to my use of the word, but you still went around and said that it's wrong. If a narrator were to describe a character's power in a certain way without that character ever showcasing said power, that would itself be different from a feat, but it wouldn't be any less valid for scaling. Whether something is a "statement" doesn't matter.

and if you cannot differenciate the difference between what VBW refers to as a statement, i.e a line meant to refer to something without actually showing it, vs just narration describing what is currently going in the story then I'm afraid your judgement on this thread is in itself questionable and unreliable.

That's literally the incorrect use of the word. You're warping the definition into something that it's not just to make a moot point. The site doesn't even treat statements as worthless anyway, which is the argument I was initially criticizing you for.

This is basic reading comprehension, something which I struggle to see why you have trouble with.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

Also...

Why are we using the Nintendo Power statement and the "I consume time" statement, the former is an American Magazine and the later literally doesn't exist in the Japanese original text.

In VBW we consider the original version to be the most canon version of a story, so we should be prioritizing that, rather than grabbing the translation.

https://legendsoflocalization.com/culex-is-quite-different-in-japanese-super-mario-rpg/

 

[Theuser789]

The point is that it goes in inverse to. There's just not enough clear understanding of what's going on that make's Weeb's understanding valid either. It's just to vague to be tiered, and I apologize for using the dreaded V word, but it's true. I'm not saying Culex isn't Tier 2, or that he is, but all the statements don't paint a clear enough picture for either way. He could be a figurehead or monarch with some potent, but limited Time Manip for all we know.

Saying things are "vague" legit isn't a argument, it's just used as a buzzword, it works if you know nothing about the situation but there's clearly evidence provided that can be led to a logical conclusion, sure it's not blatant nuking, but it's there and thus can be used, the statments very clearly paint a picture of what's is happening and legit want to see why this would be wrong

 

[Eficiente]

This is what happens when we as a wiki allow pointless statements to fill characters' AP, people take them as legit stuff that gives characters their AP in a way just as legit as the real feats/scaling they have.

Matt was wrong when saying that stuff needs to corroborate Culex's statements. The statements don't make Culex Low 2-C, period. Even if we make the guy Low 2-C those statements shouldn't be on his AP because they don't matter.

 

[Ionliosite]

Why are we using the Nintendo Power statement and the "I consume time" statement, the former is an American Magazine and the later literally doesn't exist in the Japanese original text.

In VBW we consider the original version to be the most canon version of a story, so we should be prioritizing that, rather than grabbing the translation.

https://legendsoflocalization.com/culex-is-quite-different-in-japanese-super-mario-rpg/

Ok, so this is literally the same case as that 2-A Arceus quote from Masters, the quote outright doesn't exist. So I fully support Matt now, this isn't Low 2-C because the statement doesn't exist in the Japanese version.

 

[Theuser789]

The wikia uses statments because they are, y'know, valid feats? Why are staff complaining about wikia standards and blaiming it on the people when they are the ones who make it?

 

[GiverOfThePeace]

The wikia uses statments because they are, y'know, valid feats? Why are staff complaining about wikia standards and blaiming it on the people when they are the ones who make it?

I think rn they're talking about the statement being english only and vastly different or whatevs in the japanese version, but no clue.

 

[Kepekley23]

lol. The first paragraph of the CRT links to the Japanese script yet it took a hundred messages for someone to call that out.

Not that it's surprising.

 

[Theuser789]

That just shows how bad the opposition was at arguing, they had that the entire time but only now they use it

 

[DatOneWeeb]

When Culex says he inherits time, it's power over time. It would have to all of it, not just time on a minor scale, due to Culex stating he inherits it from its beginning to end. So it would all of time. It can't be on a lesser scale. Seriously, you are ASKING for visuals when you are well aware these are statements being used for tiering. Knock it off with that. Yes, Culex has power over time.

Power over all of creation =/= "I am the strongest being", where the hell did you get this idea? Power over creation relates to, oh I don't know, creation? Considering how he also says he is part of matter and antimatter, I would say he's related to, you guessed it, creation. Nowhere is it stating Culex is the strongest, none in this world refers to the dimension Culex is in, since you're meeting him from a dimensional rift in the first place. Plus, Culex is stronger than Smithy, the final boss. So Culex is certainly no push-over either. Culex very well has power over space and time, and it would have to be on a Low 2-C scale. As stated in the requirements for Low 2-C, we accept affecting time and space as Low 2-C.

Once again, the extent would have to be all of time as said above. I really like how you absolutely have to nitpick arguments, it's literal reaching. What does "I consume time" mean? Equivalent to destroy time. Similar to Solaris being able to "Eat dimensions for lunch", its very clearly just a statement about being able to destroy time. You make the question overcomplicated for the sake of having more random arguments. No reason why it would be a hax-only thing, hell the cast take hits from his crystals and dark star attack, so they can already survive his physical attacks and ability attacks.

 

[DatOneWeeb]

The point is that it goes in inverse to. There's just not enough clear understanding of what's going on that make's Weeb's understanding valid either. It's just to vague to be tiered, and I apologize for using the dreaded V word, but it's true. I'm not saying Culex isn't Tier 2, or that he is, but all the statements don't paint a clear enough picture for either way. He could be a figurehead or monarch with some potent, but limited Time Manip for all we know.

Amelia, you need more arguments other than "It's all vague". Others seem to understand it, I have debated them about it, they get it. Culex already had a profile and was Low 2-C prior, only to be downgraded from 2-D to 3-D stuff which was all just a reference to old FF anyways.

I would like it if we had more mod input, since it's going in circles and all I hear is "too vague".