• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

Crossover Rules

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm suggesting many variations of documenting the information. If you don't like that one, what about blogs, or literally ANYTHING else. I just want the information to be on here in some shape or form, because I don't know everything about every crossover's scaling, and there's no where else to look. If this is an indexing site, wouldn't the best place be here? Especially given the issues you already have with people wanting the crossover info to be present on the wiki. So why not find an easy way to provide that information, whatever it is?
 
The point isn't about a character being stronger or weaker tier-wise, it's about the character existing.

If there is a non-canon character which exists and is different from their canon version [Battle-Wise] (Being Weaker or Stronger/possesing different abilities). Why, as an indexing site and not a VS debating community, shouldn't we have profiles/notes for those characters?

Really, since we aren't a narrative discussing website or something like that, story or plot shouldn't matter either. What should matter is battle statistics (The stuff that we are indexing here).

[Note: I'm mearly questioning some of the reasoning presented here, I don't actually agree with mixing non-canon and crossovers with canon, or really having it at all....I'm mostly on the fence at the moment.]

The most logical argument I can see from the other side is that it's simply too bothersome, but honestly even that seems to be mostly speculation. Redundancy = personal opinions.
 
Let's get on the same page, I want to make sure I hear you loud and clear. Okay. So, you want info like "In Tekken 7, Noctis shows some degree of martial arts, but this is non-canon to his FFXV incarnation" to be listed somewhere on this site? Why do we have to tell people that something non-canon is not reliable to a file that is about the canon?

That's like telling some one 3 + 3 = 6 and telling people "btw, that means 3 x 2 = 6. But that's not addition, it's multiplication".
 
Let's see, we can have something similar to a verse page that covers all the scaling so we don't have to worry about multiple pages, or it going on pages where it isn't relevant even thought that's the most efficient place to put it, seeing as no one should have to scower the wiki to find something that small about a character who's profile they're already on.

Or do we not care about any of the information given, big or small?
 
I want that information somewhere, it doesn't need to be on a profile per se. it could be on a blog, a simple sentence on a verse page, something as small as possible if you like, but unless your premise is that "unimportant" information isn't supposed to be listed on the site in any form, then I would suggest finding a way to put these issues to bed.
 
Power-scaling is irrelevant in crossovers. That's the first and foremost rule of a crossover. Do you really think Luffy scales to Buu saga Goku in any reality? He doesn't. The crossover was just fanservice. And we won't acknowledge it on-site just to allow people to make "Luffy using DB x OP x Toriko scaling vs Goku".
 
Yeah, crossover scaling is far too all over the place to be taken seriously; and that holds true regardless of whether or not it's canon or non-canon.
 
In the reality in which the crossover exists, yes. They do. Because they have to in order to swap hands. That sounds like an argument against crossover profiles of any kind, regardless of story relevancy, because Dante being in SMT is fanservice too, but he gets a profile.

And nothing stops them from doing it now in a F&G thread, especially if the battles are for fun here anyway.

I'd like to know if there's a version of Negi Springfield that scales to Goku in some obscure crossover. I don't see why an indexing wiki should deliberately omit information like that when it' purpose is to inform people of things even less famous than something like that.
 
Amexim said:
because Dante being in SMT is fanservice too, but he gets a profile.
Click to expand...
That's not even remotely close to a good example when SMT Dante is part of the story. Anyways let's back on topic, does anyone agree with the proposal to the crossover rules?
 
The crossover is not cano. Dante in SMT is canon to SMT.

Are you suggesting we consider crossovers to be their own verses/continuties? Because they are objectively not their own continuity. And for the last time, please, please stop mixing guest appearances (like Dante) and alternate canons (like GT) with crossovers like Smash.
 
This information is relevant to someone, and this has purpose in being documented. Crossover or not. You don't think it should be documented at all?
 
My point was, that canon or not, crossovers exist for fanservice, so the argument you presented was bs Sera.

And no. I don't agree with the proposal rules, because I believe there's a better solution than just omitting information because of redundanc. Which is why I said what I said. What are you acting like i'm derailing for when i'm proposing my own solution to this problem? Would it be better if I just left out all the other issues it could solve simultaneously so we don't have to have the same solution be brought up in 5 different threads??
 
I'm suggesting this simple thing.

Characters that appear in crossovers, even with a small difference like tiering, or a new ability, should have information on them documented for the public to consume, so people don't have to do their own research to dig through the scaling of the videogame their favorite guest character appeared in. Like the purpose of the wiki is.

I do not give a shit how, I just think as much info as possible should be here. I gave my solutions.
 
You do know that mentioning everything about a character, no matter how trivial or irrelevant would take a ton of time especially on a verse basis? That's what specific wikia's which are focused on the verse are for
 
It... Kinda does. Because, as you said yourself— if not you, someone else—, canon depends on the continuity involved. Dragon Ball Super is it's own Canon, as is GT, but they're published by the same people and are a part of the Dragon Ball Canon as a whole, if i'm Paraphrasing you correctly. Something being canon to one continuity has no bearing on it being canon to another, so complaining about it being "over all canon" or something is meaningless.
 
Everything relevant to power scaling and versus battles or whatever these profiles are used for is relevant information.

And what does it matter if it's canon or not, because i'm Not the only one interested in this. We wouldn't have this discussion or need to clarify any rules if there wasn't a group of people who wanted this kind of information.
 
Like I said, so? It still exists. Why make everyone who already uses the cite for a quick rundown resource have to do a bunch of work to figure out how many or which crossovers with characters anywhere happened and then find out how strong they are in that context? When you can put just a SINGLE sentence on a page far separated from the profiles with canon on them to get the info out there. It's rather weird to not include that.
 
I'm not asking for profiles, or anything big necessarily. Just documentation that's easily accessible. I figured a note at the bottom of the page would be simple fix and shut anyone who wants this info up, because they have it.
 
Everything relevant to power scaling and versus battles or whatever these profiles are used for is relevant information.

Yes. Non-canon stuff is however, irrelevant.

And what does it matter if it's canon or not,

This matters. It's also fundamental to powerscaling that we don't use non-canon material.
 
From all the places I have been you are the first one who thinks that canon doesn't matter when scaling a character.

I agree with Sera and she has covered everything so I think we should move on.
 
Dragon Ball GT is part of the Extended Dragon Ball Universe, which is still canon to a continuity branched from the Canonicity of the Anime adaptation, but simply not part of the primary canon. DB/OP/Toriko is completely non-canon to all continuities and not even branched from any.
 
"Non-canon" as in what? Because you just used canon in the same sentence to mean 2 different things— being a part of a franchise "canon" and being part of a "continuity" canon.

I'm saying the former doesn't matter, especially with separate profiles or versions of a character separate from their mainline continuity.
 
Sera EX said:
No it was not. The argument is based on our standards. Canonciity is still part of our standards.
Canonical fanservice counts. Non-canonical fanservice doesn't. I can't believe this has to be spelled out. We literally have a page called Cano.
Click to expand...
Indeed, it also part of Editing Rules:

Well, the rule is:

  • The VS Battles Wiki is, first and foremost, a fictional character indexing site. All featured characters in our profiles should originate within actual stories, from notable or popular works. A story includes a plot, a fictional setting, and having a defined canon. At the very least, the setting should be entirely fictional in nature, with no true bearing over the real world.
 
So we shouldn't list details about a character's battle statistics simply because of canonicity, despite the fact that we are an indexing website which researches and lists battle statistics for fictional characters?

Why stress so much about canonicity, and in the prossess, purposefully omit battle statistics and abilities for certain characters?

It's based on a completely arbitrary standard. (From a non-staff member's perspective)


[Honestly though, the way we handle things now isn't so bad. If so many staff members are willing to shoot non-canon abilities and tiers in the face; I suppose it's better to just leave it how it is now.]
 
Kirby's Smash profile doesn't have anything to do with Mainline Kirby continuity, or anything connected to the franchise, but it's just fine as it is, because who the **** knew Kirby (in the vacuum) of smash bros, is like, way weaker than normal by feats. That's relevant information that I would want other people to at least have access to.
 
That Kirby is gonna have the profile removed. Saikou said it himself when this is all done
 
If so many staff members don't care about indexing, then I would at least ask them to change their rhetoric when arguing with each other, otherwise their views are inconsistent.

It makes no sense to refuse a profile of a character just because the proposed version isn't a part of the main franchise. Because that's the word you should be using Sera. "Franchise". Because "canonicity makes things part of a canon" is...
 
Because it's irrelevant to the the profile, how many times does this need to be repeated? Naruto having an unholy death sword in the Ninja Storm games has no bearing on the actual canon profile
 
Shouldn't Mortal Kombat Jason stay though, since he has a whole entire story seperate from Friday the 13th canon in Mortal Kombat (Kinda like GT Goku)?
 
I agree with the rle suggestion. Just a thing to do for this part:

Profiles for crossover versions of characters from crossover games, and plot-irrelevant guest characters should NOT be allowed.

Examples: Mario (Smash Bros.), Thor (Marvel vs. Capcom), Jason Voorhees (Mortal Kombat), and Noctis (Tekken 7) As an extension of above, UNLESS their crossover version is basically defined by the crossover.

I believe Mario (Smash Bros.), Thor (Marvel vs. Capcom), Jason Voorhees (Mortal Kombat) should be removed from this example still appear in their story lines and can have their ending in the game. I am unsure about Noctus.
 
So, when I lurk here, I hope I don't read people making appeals to this site's alleged role of being a hub of information "It's an indexing site!" When the bar for entry isn't something sensible like "no commercials, or non-published content" but "no materials outside of the franchise" allowed. An arbitrary distinction that is the enemy of informing the public, which omits things that would otherwise be more acceptable in inclusion than "commercial characters and mascots" who actually belong on Joke Wiki.
 
@Elizhaa

I said a million times that in a crossover game, of course they will be part of the story.

Guest characters" have to be in the story to be considered eligible as canon to that verse.
 
If it has no bearing on the canon profile, put it somewhere else. Just PUT IT SOMEWHERE. I didn't know Naruto had a ******* unholy ninja death sword in any of the storm games, and I would like for tystbti be documented.
 
Jason and Noctis aren't crossover characters, they are guest characters. A crossover character would be Mario (Smash), Hyde (BBTag), Ryu (MVC)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

SamanPatou
Something about Polygon Man and PSASBR characters
Replies
6
Views
857
SamanPatou
SamanPatou
Deidalius
Smash Bracket & Crossover Colosseum Discussion Thread
2
Replies
69
Views
6K
Ednaxel2
Ednaxel2
Theglassman12
  • Locked
Fighting game standards
Replies
29
Views
3K
Theglassman12
Theglassman12
CurrySenpai
Fortnite | The Strongest Verse of Today (EXTREMELY IMPORTANT /srs)
3 4 5
Replies
198
Views
20K
Antvasima
Antvasima
StrymULTRA
  • Locked
The 2-B Super Smash Bros. CRT
2 3 4
Replies
127
Views
9K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Back
Top