Gravity Rush Downgrades

[Chariot190]

DBZ movies aren't made entirely by Toriyama. Not even close to it. This book is made by the game staff.

He's helped design, but cool. Eyes of heaven, supervised and co-developed with author, can fit in due to timeline fuckery, also 100% not canon.

Or the ten fucktillion Metroid and Zelda stuff. Link's mother a tree? Blood of the Chozo? Both officially developed and drawn comics, that got retconned.

Point is, it fits into canon well, which you wanted to know.

Youre dodging the questions. That also isnt what i wanted to know. i dont care if it can fit, i want to know if it actually is.

They do mention it, though? It says the illustrations are made by the team and the team mentions the book and how "I hope that our passion comes through in the concept art we made to create the world that is Gravity Rush."

Wait? That's your argument? That's what you meant? ignoring the fact it's an ARTBOOK, so yeah, they had a hand in that.

That says NOTHING about that comic's canonicity at this point in time. Hell they could've made it, hell they did make it, that doesn't tell us if it's outdated or not.

It's also the interview made for the occassion of the book being published, in my understanding.

So?

The interview also mentions both games, which should really answer your question about it being from before the game.

No? Them shoving every piece of official art they've done in a book, doesnt mean all of it is canon still. Every game artbook does that, and every game artbook features outdated art by proxy, whether it's the Metroid Prime artbook having old retconned concept art, Hyrule Historia having a tie-in comic that features the MS, before the MS even existed... And more.

Youre not giving me reason to believe why this comic of dubious canonicity, holds up after launch based on the discrepancies im seeing.

I did.

You literally didnt and have still failed to do so.

No.

Then why am i seeing several?

It doesn't predate the games. Artbook is from March 21st 2017, GR2 was released on the 18th of January 2017.

"Gravity Days is one of the two comic series that was used in the promotion of Gravity Rush, the other being Gravity Daydream. It was a four part special each containing two comic pages, showing Kat's every day life in Hekseville. A special comic with four pages was released in the Special Fan Book of Gravity Rush, detailing an interaction between Kat, Raven, Gade and Yunica.

The Gravity Daze Series Official Art Book also included all of issues in the comic, but it is written in Japanese."

You basically just lied to me.

The comic predates them, it's just archived and compiled in a recent book, that's beyond dishonest. Extremely actually, do it again and I'm reporting, a bureaucrat like you shouldn't be dodging questions and pulling this shit.

Nothing has been retconned.

Then why the discrepancy?

Yes.

Why lie? This, at the very least, i know 100% is false, im seeing inconsistencies by just skimming?

There is no newer stuff.

The game?

It does.

You didnt even comment on the example? **** up with that?

Not a good sign.

Funny that you say that. The guidebook is from the 24th of Feburary 2017. So it's actually the older source of information. The newest source of information is the artbook.

Yeah, funny how youre lying about when the comic actually came out and the context in which it's in the artbook.

A fact you know by the way because Dale's mentioned it directly.

So again, please ask these questions about the guidebook, not the artbook. The guidebook has less evidence for being canon.

Also not how it works, supplementary material, also needs to be corroborated by the source material.

 

[Chariot190]

As a fyi, im gonna need to see explicit proof now. So kat and Gade(?) recognized Raven immediately due to the prior encounter? Link that. What about the Lumino fight? How's that make sense if old man is actual fodder?
Why never mention it?

Actual proof for all your shit now please.

 

[DontTalkDT]

I don't really see the point in this argument considering both are relative to each other's release and while the comic you're mentioning was imported into the art book upon its release that doesn't change the fact that it specifically predates the first game as a promotional comic, the art book itself can be up to date with that comic being outdated these aren't mutually exclusive but regardless I've addressed the point in my argument anyways. Any who I'm finding this kind of argument to be entirely disingenuous when the official guidebooks for both of the games are officially licensed products from playstation.

If it weren't canonical they wouldn't have included it in the artbook at that point.
But yeah, personally I agree that both should be considered canon. It's Chariot that is insistent on pursuing this argument.

He's helped design, but cool. Eyes of heaven, supervised and co-deveped with author, can fit in due to timeline fuckery, as 100% not canon.

Things created by the official staff are considered canon by default.

Or the ten fucktillion Metroid and Zelda stuff. Link's mother a tree? Blood of the Chozo? Both officially developed and drawn comics, that go retconned.

Due to featuring things that can not be reconciled with canon, I assume, which we don't have here.

Youre dodging the questions. That also isnt what i wanted to know. i dont care if it can fit, i want to know if it actually is.

There's no difference between the two?

Wait? That's your argument? That's what you meant? ignoring the fact it's an ARTBOOK, so yeah, they had a hand in that.

That says NOTHING about that comic's canonicity at this point in time. Hell they could've made it, hell they did make it, that doesn't tell us if it's outdated or not.

If you want to consider a work by the original creators as outdated, you need evidence that it is. Burden of proof is on you.

No? Them shoving every piece of official art they've done in a book, doesnt mean all of it is canon still. Every game artbook does that, and every game artbook features outdated art by proxy, whether it's the Metroid Prime artbook having old retconned concept art, Hyrule Historia having a tie-in comic that features the MS, before the MS even existed... And more.

Youre not giving me reason to believe why this comic of dubious canonicity, holds up after launch based on the discrepancies im seeing.

There are no discrepancies.
And no, if they considered it outdated they wouldn't feature the story.

Then why am i seeing several?

Because your view of things don't align with the facts?

"Gravity Days is one of the two comic series that was used in the promotion of Gravity Rush, the other being Gravity Daydream. It was a four part special each containing two comic pages, showing Kat's every day life in Hekseville. A special comic with four pages was released in the Special Fan Book of Gravity Rush, detailing an interaction between Kat, Raven, Gade and Yunica.

The Gravity Daze Series Official Art Book also included all of issues in the comic, but it is written in Japanese."

You basically just lied to me.

The comic predates them, it's just archived and compiled in a recent book, that's beyond dishonest. Extremely actually, do it again and I'm reporting, a bureaucrat like you shouldn't be dodging questions and pulling this shit.

You're assuming I knew that, which I didn't. But again, they wouldn't have included it if they considered it non-canon at this point.

Then why the discrepancy?

No discrepancy exists if you accept that Creator powers can't be wielded against relevant people, which is my point.

Why lie? This, at the very least, i know 100% is false, im seeing inconsistencies by just skimming?

I see no inconsistencies.

You didnt even comment on the example? **** up with that?

Ehm, I thought it's obvious but I guess it isn't. This comic in-universe timeline wise is not preceeding the events of GR1. It's happening somewhere in the middle of it. I guess you assumed it is due to the publishing date of the comic?
I didn't comment because I figured you were just making a strange shot in the dark for what could be a contradiction.

A fact you know by the way because Dale's mentioned it directly.

I hadn't read all of his summary at the time of commenting, as I was procedually working my way through it while writing my own.

Also not how it works, supplementary material, also needs to be corroborated by the source material.

Funny you say that. In that case I suppose you have problems with the scan saying the Darkness is destroying Jigra Para Lhao since IIRC nothing in canon indicates that?

 

[DontTalkDT]

Anyway, I will focus on the summary for now. No further replies on that issue for the time being.

 

[Chariot190]

If it weren't canonical they wouldn't have included it in the artbook at that point.

Except they aren't? Do you not know what art books are for? For art, would be dumb if they didn't include art they had archived because nerds on the internet might use it on a battle-boarding forum.

Like, i have a JoJo artbook, and it has ****** Baoh in it
And a SF one that has Darkstalkers
Pokemon one that has Pikachu in a Mario outfit

You get the point, art books feature art, new, old, outdated, never before seen, etc, the mere fact, art is in an arbook, is not evidence of it being canon.

But yeah, personally I agree that both should be considered canon. It's Chariot that is insistent on pursuing this argument.

Of course, it needs to check out. That goes for everything.

Things created by the official staff are considered canon by default.

That, isn't true? if shigeru miyamoto drew a pic of mario benching the planet and it was in a artbook or something, that wouldn't be canon to what's actually being indexed. Or hell, newhalf Samus anyone?

Due to featuring things that can not be reconciled with canon, I assume, which we don't have here.

And yet, that's precisely what im seeing. You keep saying it checks out, prove it? When does it even happen? Why never mention it?

There's no difference between the two?

Yes there is, what? Broly can fit neatly into DBZ's canon, just because it can, doesn't mean it is.

If you want to consider a work by the original creators as outdated, you need evidence that it is. Burden of proof is on you.

Uh yeah, how about the actual contradictions to it? The moment a contradiction shows up, that's on you now.

There are no discrepancies.

What are you talking about?

And no, if they considered it outdated they wouldn't feature the story.

Yes they would? it's an artbook archiving all official art. They'd include everything, because it's art, in a artbook?

Because your view of things don't align with the facts?

What facts? Youve shown or said nothing beyond "nuh uh it checks out", hell some of what you said has been objectively wrong?

You're assuming I knew that, which I didn't. But again, they wouldn't have included it if they considered it non-canon at this point.

You did?

Edit: nevermind it seems that's from the Gravity Days promotional fan comic but idk how valid that'd be considered its events are never referenced in the games or the official guide books

And then you said
"It's from the first official artbook. I see no reason it would be less official than the guidebook you use as evidence, given that both are official books."

You were TOLD what it was from, replied to it, and just went "nuh uh actually". Nothing new was said, you knew, you were told.

And again, it's an artbook, why are you treating it as some lore book? it isn't, it's an artbook. Hell the fact it has outdated concept art is proof alone, is it not? Should we use outdated or retconned designs and ideas because they are included so they must be canon?

No discrepancy exists if you accept that Creator powers can't be wielded against relevant people, which is my point.

"There's no discrepency if you ignore this one here (among others)"

Not a good argument, your point, is self-fulfilling, yeah if you ignore what makes your point not hold up, it'd hold up.

I see no inconsistencies.

Ok, let's look at a basic one, not even plot, just power wise one.

Why does Kat, being amped by a creator's power, enable her to mog dudes, that she can't do anything against explicitly under her own power, yet even her base form is apparently so far above the creators that she can casually ohko them as did raven?

What should we take? The actual game, or the dubious comic? Dont reply to that, that was rhetorical.

Ehm, I thought it's obvious but I guess it isn't. This comic in-universe timeline wise is not preceeding the events of GR1. It's happening somewhere in the middle of it.

That's understandable, ok.
When exactly tho? Show me where it happens in game.

I guess you assumed it is due to the publishing date of the comic?
I didn't comment because I figured you were just making a strange shot in the dark for what could be a contradiction.

So, even worse. A comic, that happens in the middle of a game, we play through but this event is never shown, seen, talked about, or referenced?

So if I look through the game, and Kat goes "damn last time i seen raven -", she'd be talking about this event and not the events we see in game? When did Kat even have time to do this?

I hadn't read all of his summary at the time of commenting, as I was procedually working my way through it while writing my own.

Yeah, don't do that? Actually read what people say before typing up an argument

Funny you say that. In that case I suppose you have problems with the scan saying the Darkness is destroying Jigra Para Lhao since IIRC nothing in canon indicates that?

Of course, I don't. They state it, but nothing contradicts it. it's fine.
Not the same as a comic that came out before the game was even finished, apparently having an interaction never talked about or shown, that just so happens to happen in the middle of the game, involving the character we play as getting stomped? Yet she never acknowledges it when she sees raven again?

As said, all im seeing, is a pre-launch comic, of dubious canonicity, that doesn't really fit and has contradictions to later established facts, being used, because it was featured in a book featuring all the verse's art?