- 1,092
- 919
Before getting started, I'd like to stress two things:
1. This refers solely to the "all of fiction" definition of Omniverse.
2. This is merely putting things in perspective in an unbaised manner. I'm not arguing that we should use the term.
Omniverse, in this community the very term might cause someone to cringe. Even I disliked it to a strong degree. However, is it really a nonsense term as everyone keeps calling it? How about looking at it from an analytical point of view.
What is the Omniverse? Most people will tell you it's "all of fiction", this is why most consider it nonsense. I'm here to bear you the horrible truth that it is not entirely nonsense. Other people will stress that the Omniverse is a collection of infinite "megaverses" (which is a collection of infinite multiverses"). That is the sole nonsense definition of Omniverse as it is just plain illogical. Forget that definition, let's focus purely on "all-of-fiction".
It is indeed nonsense to consider every fiction has being part of the same cosmology in relation to their copyright however it is not nonsense to consider other non-related fictions exists within a given verse, including our world, in relation to it's own fictional setting and does not affect the setting of the primary source that is, apparently, part of that verse. For example, in Umineko, Lambdadelta mentioned Ghosts in a Shell as a fragment. Last time I checked, that's a manga not written or owned by Ryukishi07 or 7th Expansion. In Archie Comics, Sonic is introduced to multiple screen monitors which show different zones in the multiverse, all showing alternate universe counterparts of Sonic, and one of them is a Spider-Man version of Sonic. Any multiverse can use the "omniverse" concept.
Infinite universes = infinite possibilities. Don't let the term fool you, Omniverse is an infinite Multiverse. The mere notion of all-possibility. I don't see why that shouldn't be at least acknowledged on the Omniverse page instead of outright dismissing the term. Make no mistake, the term has various definitions and should not be used by any means, I am interesting in the concept itself. It's not copyright infringement, it's not claiming to "own your verse", it's their fictional interpretation of your verse within their cosmology as a form of homage, spoof, or reference. Obviously the REAL Ghosts in a Shell is not part of the When They Cry cosmology in any way. Obviously, Sonic is not listed as one if the many incarnations of Spider-Man within Marvel. If they get...why don't we? Because we're too caught up in debating "who's stronger" so we have people literally believe one fictional deity created all fictional universes literally? Certainly not.
Growing up in Tokyo in the mid-late 1990s, I was introduced to comics as well as manga, and I was never bothered Marvel's concept of "Omniverse" until I was exposed to vs debating years later. The Omniverse concept is not Marvel exclusive, nor is it valid. It is simply a trope that goes in alignment with all-possibility/infinite possibilities. It should not be compared to the Suggsverse, that's for certain. I'm pretty sure no one Marvel literally believed they could own all of fiction, not even then. The Omniverse merely was some form of pseudo-explanation on how Marvel characters can cross-over with DC or Capcom, SNK, etc..
In conclusion, treat the Omniverse as a MUGEN game. Your MUGEN can have whatever characters you want, from all over fiction. Yet, it does not impact or directly influence someone else's MUGEN game, even if they have the exact same characters. Different MUGEN, different creators, different computers, different worlds/experience. It's that simple.
1. This refers solely to the "all of fiction" definition of Omniverse.
2. This is merely putting things in perspective in an unbaised manner. I'm not arguing that we should use the term.
Omniverse, in this community the very term might cause someone to cringe. Even I disliked it to a strong degree. However, is it really a nonsense term as everyone keeps calling it? How about looking at it from an analytical point of view.
What is the Omniverse? Most people will tell you it's "all of fiction", this is why most consider it nonsense. I'm here to bear you the horrible truth that it is not entirely nonsense. Other people will stress that the Omniverse is a collection of infinite "megaverses" (which is a collection of infinite multiverses"). That is the sole nonsense definition of Omniverse as it is just plain illogical. Forget that definition, let's focus purely on "all-of-fiction".
It is indeed nonsense to consider every fiction has being part of the same cosmology in relation to their copyright however it is not nonsense to consider other non-related fictions exists within a given verse, including our world, in relation to it's own fictional setting and does not affect the setting of the primary source that is, apparently, part of that verse. For example, in Umineko, Lambdadelta mentioned Ghosts in a Shell as a fragment. Last time I checked, that's a manga not written or owned by Ryukishi07 or 7th Expansion. In Archie Comics, Sonic is introduced to multiple screen monitors which show different zones in the multiverse, all showing alternate universe counterparts of Sonic, and one of them is a Spider-Man version of Sonic. Any multiverse can use the "omniverse" concept.
Infinite universes = infinite possibilities. Don't let the term fool you, Omniverse is an infinite Multiverse. The mere notion of all-possibility. I don't see why that shouldn't be at least acknowledged on the Omniverse page instead of outright dismissing the term. Make no mistake, the term has various definitions and should not be used by any means, I am interesting in the concept itself. It's not copyright infringement, it's not claiming to "own your verse", it's their fictional interpretation of your verse within their cosmology as a form of homage, spoof, or reference. Obviously the REAL Ghosts in a Shell is not part of the When They Cry cosmology in any way. Obviously, Sonic is not listed as one if the many incarnations of Spider-Man within Marvel. If they get...why don't we? Because we're too caught up in debating "who's stronger" so we have people literally believe one fictional deity created all fictional universes literally? Certainly not.
Growing up in Tokyo in the mid-late 1990s, I was introduced to comics as well as manga, and I was never bothered Marvel's concept of "Omniverse" until I was exposed to vs debating years later. The Omniverse concept is not Marvel exclusive, nor is it valid. It is simply a trope that goes in alignment with all-possibility/infinite possibilities. It should not be compared to the Suggsverse, that's for certain. I'm pretty sure no one Marvel literally believed they could own all of fiction, not even then. The Omniverse merely was some form of pseudo-explanation on how Marvel characters can cross-over with DC or Capcom, SNK, etc..
In conclusion, treat the Omniverse as a MUGEN game. Your MUGEN can have whatever characters you want, from all over fiction. Yet, it does not impact or directly influence someone else's MUGEN game, even if they have the exact same characters. Different MUGEN, different creators, different computers, different worlds/experience. It's that simple.
