Issue with qualitative superiority in God of War (downgrade)

[Georredannea15]

I recall someone mentioning the prior upgrade thread to me before. I was suspicious, but I didn't look into it any deeper at the time. Looking at this topic now, I am hesitant to say Athena got infinitely more powerful from her ascension. I will wait for more input at this time.

First of all, 5-D higher existence has been accepted by some tier 1 experts after long and extensive discussion, through evidence and contexts, that it was 5-D in the previous 2 revisions.

The infinitely more powerful Athena is in fact a higher plane of existence that encompasses and transcends all pantheons, so that the higher plane of existence is 5-dimensional and is a spatial dimension of "universal" size, containing within it more than one infinite structure

As additional proof, 4-dimensional beings and forces affecting infinite(size) 4D universes structures cannot harm Athena, touch her or even feel her.

Barlog states in an interview that when Athena evolved into higher existence, that is, into 5-dimensional space, she completely transcends the power of every being in the Greek and lower plane of existence, thus rising a "transcending" level of existence and power that they could never reach or interact with.

In short, Athena scales to a (higher) 5-dimensional plane of existence that encompasses and completely transcends all of the realms, and is supported by the feat and a few extra emotes in the game because of UES.

Also let me explain.

A character that scales to a 5-D universal sized spatial dimension is always, by default, qualitatively i.e. infinitely stronger than a 4-D power. The important point here is also related to where the higher dimensionality of the realm comes from and how it is attained.

Anyway guys, thanks to Planck for letting me and please don't delete my comment again pls

 

[Planck69]

Been asked to bump this.

 

[KLOL506]

There seems to have been a forum outage and Tanin_Iver has lost all his progress on the rebuttal. Please give him some time as he types it back up again.

 

[Deagonx]

No rush.

 

[KLOL506]

Aite.

 

[Antvasima]

@Qawsedf234 @Sir_Ovens @ByAsura @Elizhaa @Planck69 @Everything12

What do you think about this?

 

[Antvasima]

Also, Dread can comment here if she wishes to.

Should Tanin and Georr also be allowed to do so?

 

[KLOL506]

Also, Dread can comment here if she wishes to.

Should Tanin and Georr also be allowed to do so?

I guess so. As long as no back-and-forth is involved between them.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. That should probably be fine then. Just make sure to stay on topic and not spam or your rights to comment here will be removed again.

 

[Antvasima]

However, I think that we have another thread concerning this topic which has been handled better, so should we close this thread due to being redundant, and continue via the link below instead?

https://vsbattles.com/threads/god-of-war-possible-low-1-c-upgrade-staff-only.155385/

 

[KLOL506]

However, I think that we have another thread concerning this topic which has been handled better, so should we close this thread due to being redundant, and continue via the link below instead?

https://vsbattles.com/threads/god-of-war-possible-low-1-c-upgrade-staff-only.155385/

No, they are two completely different threads. Neither should intermingle with the other.

 

[ImmortalDread]

This is for a different character in the same verse.

 

[LephyrTheRevanchist]

Can someone summarize the arguments for me? Thread kinda difficult to read with all the deletions, edits and stuff.

If it's possible to be pointed to the specific comment with main argument for each side, even better.

 

[KLOL506]

Can someone summarize the arguments for me? Thread kinda difficult to read with all the deletions, edits and stuff.

If it's possible to be pointed to the specific comment with main argument for each side, even better.

We are currently waiting for Tanin to finish his rebuttal to the OP, after which we will summarize arguments from both sides and tag all the relevant staff needed for the vote to complete this.

 

[ImmortalDread]

If it's possible to be pointed to the specific comment with main argument for each side, even better.

• My comment addressing each available evidence that is presented in OP and in the justification
• Georr's comment addressing back; however he added new information but never presented any references (the Egyptian one? And many others)

 

[KLOL506]

• Georr's comment addressing back; however he added new information but never presented any references (the Egyptian one? And many others)

The Egyptian one is in GoW Fallen God Issues 2 and 4, where Athena appears in that state in front of Kratos to tell him his work is not yet done and that he must return home.

What other references are you talking about?

 

[ImmortalDread]

This does not help a bit. If you can simply send scans, then I may get the context and can evaluate it myself.

What other references are you talking about?

as well as transcending infinite 4D universes

No evidence or no reference.

And when Athena ascended into this realm, her spiritual, mental, and physical existence, in short, her entire dimensional existence, was elevated to the same level as this higher dimensional plane/realm.

This has never been mentioned or referenced.

I guess you don't know, but everything you've said has been discussed over at least 2 or 3 revisions, and people knowledgeable about Tier 1 have confirmed the existence of higher existence and Athena.

Never referenced or linked.

And Athena, after ascending to this realm, transcended all beings in the lower plane and infinite 4-D worlds like "higher existence", and ascended to the plane of existence that they cannot reach and reason with, and her power has accordingly increased both from the higher dimensional realm and because of her existence. Because of UES bullshit.

Never proved that if there are any indication of transcending all beings. No evidence, no reference.

The statement "power and existence that transcends all beings in the Greek realm" and "higher existence" were not distinguished by Cory Barlog,

I never occurred with this statement, and he did not link the video or reference it.

 

[KLOL506]

This does not help a bit. If you can simply send scans, then I may get the context and can evaluate it myself.

I literally gave you the Comic Issues and Numbers to read for yourself to justify, that's as good as it gets. It's fundamentally better that way because then you get to read those two specific issues and learn the full context for yourself.

And when Athena ascended into this realm, her spiritual, mental, and physical existence, in short, her entire dimensional existence, was elevated to the same level as this higher dimensional plane/realm.

Already addressed in the prior arguments regarding the whole "appearance" argument.

I guess you don't know, but everything you've said has been discussed over at least 2 or 3 revisions, and people knowledgeable about Tier 1 have confirmed the existence of higher existence and Athena.

The previous upgrade thread.

And Athena, after ascending to this realm, transcended all beings in the lower plane and infinite 4-D worlds like "higher existence", and ascended to the plane of existence that they cannot reach and reason with, and her power has accordingly increased both from the higher dimensional realm and because of her existence. Because of UES bullshit.

The interviews, the underlying context of Kratos being unable to sense or detect Athena or being able to even interact with her without the Power of Hope, these are all arguments that Georre, Planck and I went in great detail in the previous upgrade thread.

The statement "power and existence that transcends all beings in the Greek realm" and "higher existence" were not distinguished by Cory Barlog

All of this is in those two interviews. Again, we've discussed this in great detail and henceforth I do not wish to engage in any back-and-forth and I'd strongly recommend refraining from doing so.

 

[ImmortalDread]

This is still not a “reference” or "link to the reference" or "an evidence within the verse/statement".

All of this is in those two interviews. Again, we've discussed this in great detail and henceforth I do not wish to engage in any back-and-forth

Can you show me the timestamp?

The previous upgrade thread.

The link?

The interviews, the underlying context of Kratos being unable to sense or detect Athena or being able to even interact with her without the Power of Hope, these are all arguments that Georre, Planck and I went in great detail in the previous upgrade thread.

And when Athena ascended into this realm, her spiritual, mental, and physical existence, in short, her entire dimensional existence, was elevated to the same level as this higher dimensional plane/realm.

This is insufficient to imply that they transcend the reality, but I will take it that there is no evidence or reference, rather own interpretation. Noted

I literally gave you the Comic Issues and Numbers to read for yourself to justify, that's as good as it gets. It's fundamentally better that way because then you get to read those two specific issues and learn the full context for yourself.

Sure; but you would also mind giving a method on how to access them. If you don't mind either here or in my wall. Also, ; why is it an issue for not creating an imgur album for this comic issue and address it if it was highly relevant to low 1-C justification.

 

[KLOL506]

This is still not a “reference” or "link to the reference" or "an evidence within the verse/statement".

Can you show me the timestamp?

The link?

Bruh. You can't be serious. Link is literally in OP, or just search "Ascended Athena Upgrade" and read the thread and its comments.

This is insufficient to imply that they transcend the reality, but I will take it that there is no evidence or reference, rather own interpretation. Noted

Already explained why that isn't correct but whatever. We're not gonna convince each other here so let's agree to disagree.

Sure; but you would also mind giving a method on how to access them. If you don't mind either here or in my wall.

You know the methods. A certain comic online site will show you the way.

Also, ; why is it an issue for not creating an imgur album for this comic issue and address it if it was highly relevant to low 1-C justification.

Because reading the comic online is... faster?

 

[Antvasima]

Is the problem with linking here that our forum automatically censors full links to illegal comic book reading sites?

 

[KLOL506]

Is the problem with linking here that our forum automatically censors full links to illegal comic book reading sites?

Possibly. I could always space out the links to make it less inconspicuous but why bother when I can just hint towards the name of the site?

 

[ImmortalDread]

Possibly. I could always space out the links to make it less inconspicuous but why bother when I can just hint towards the name of the site?

Since I am on no position to prove his claim to be accurate. He is the responsible to link his sources.

KLOL, this became a bit of unproductive approach of you. You should be aware, that if someone made a claim, and thus the claim is trying to hint an existence of said context or statements that are relevant to low 1-C justification, he is obligated to cite it and reference it properly and not tell others "see it yourself" (which you did not outright state it, but this is the feeling I took)

Now, @LephyrTheRevanchist @Deagonx and anyone else who is thread moderator, how would they benefit from this information?

Is the problem with linking here that our forum automatically censors full links to illegal comic book reading sites?

I don't think so; but I prefer if supporters simply link their evidences properly, so we can evaluate it carefully.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, since it concerns a revision, you are allowed to write the link like this in this case if you wish:

read comic online. li

However, before anybody visits this site, please make sure to use the Brave or DuckDuckGo Internet browser, preferably combined with the Bitdefender antivirus program and a VPN service.

 

[KLOL506]

Since I am on no position to prove his claim to be accurate. He is the responsible to link his sources.

KLOL, this became a bit of unproductive approach of you. You should be aware, that if someone made a claim, and thus the claim is trying to hint an existence of said context or statements that are relevant to low 1-C justification, he is obligated to cite it and reference it properly and not tell others "see it yourself" (which you did not outright state it, but this is the feeling I took)

Now, @LephyrTheRevanchist @Deagonx and anyone else who is thread moderator, how would they benefit from this information?

I am sorry if that is the feeling you took, but considering that we've been discussing the same arguments ad nauseam with plenty of staff even repeating those links, on this very thread, I think you could at least be a tiny bit competent at actually knowing where to look since you were yourself active in the previous upgrade thread. I'm not here to hold your hand or spoonfeed you information.

Also, for the comic side of things, I literally gave you the issue number, God of War Fallen God Issue 2 and Issue 4. If you can't be bothered to do a simple google search of a online free comic site, then I honestly can't be bothered or obligated to fill you out on this information further.

 

[Antvasima]

There is no need to be hostile. Dread is just trying to be helpful.

 

[KLOL506]

There is no need to be hostile. Dread is just trying to be helpful.

Her way of expressing it doesn't show that to me TBF.

 

[KLOL506]

In any case, here is the previous upgrade thread, where I implore you to read every single argument if possible. If you need any further info, you can ask @Planck69 or @Georredannea15 for further help. I will be outside for a while.

 

[ImmortalDread]

then I honestly can't be bothered or obligated to fill you out on this information further.

There is a miscommunication here;

The one who made a positive claim is required to post scans for the claim to prove it. This is how we usually do in a regular life.
Someone made a claim, that someone needs to back it up.

I will be waiting, but this should be self-evident. If that context was also relevant to low 1-C justification, why none has linked it or made a blog? Why should opponents figure them out?

 

[Planck69]

There is a miscommunication here;

The one who made a positive claim is required to post scans for the claim to prove it. This is how we usually do in a regular life.
Someone made a claim, that someone needs to back it up.

I will be waiting, but this should be self-evident. If that context was also relevant to low 1-C justification, why none has linked it or made a blog? Why should opponents figure them out?

As per the rules, it is entirely within reason to just supply a reference. I personally prefer scans but he's not doing anything wrong here.

 

[ImmortalDread]

Alright fair.

But I have an alternative solution (which I always do when someone else asked me to do it, if the context is larger than the available presented evidences in the profile)
If supporters could write a totality of the context in a blog and present each scan/reference to it, then it makes it easier for us to evaluate.

Otherwise, simply claiming there is a greater context, and we simply should accept it based on “arguments” is a bit unproductive to continue.

 

[KLOL506]

Alright fair.

But I have an alternative solution (which I always do when someone else asked me to do it, if the context is larger than the available presented evidences in the profile)
If supporters could write a totality of the context in a blog and present each scan/reference to it, then it makes it easier for us to evaluate.

Honestly when we made the upgrade thread we didn't think a blog would be entirely necessary, but it's not like we can't make one regardless after the summaries and voting is done if accepted.

 

[KLOL506]

All of it are simply arguments and interpretations (which is not entirely our discussion right now).

Like I said, seems like we're not gonna budge, so let's just agree to disagree and wait for Tanin's comment. After that, we will summarize the arguments from OP, those in favor of OP and those against OP, and I will tag all the staff involved here so far and let them vote based on which proposition they prefer best.

 

[ImmortalDread]

To clarify, do you mean that only the evidence provided in the OP is considered relevant after this extensive discussion? It's important to confirm this definitively.
If not, I believe it would be better to create a blog where we can discuss each presented scan or context transparently (since there are many here claims referring to “this depends on the context", but never present this context) and preferably present all evidences there.

Transparency is essential in this matter.

I don't object to Tanin's rebuttal being presented; however, I hope they offer entirely new source material compared to what was provided in the OP. If not, then the only solution is to challenge each interpretation on those three available contextual evidences without relying on assumptions.

Also, ; I do like to remind of this rule:

For verse-specific threads, if the only opposing party does not reply for over 2 weeks without any notice or known/suspected extenuating circumstances, then the moderators should try to get the thread to completion without them, assuming that they'd probably not reply.

 

[KLOL506]

To clarify, do you mean that only the evidence provided in the OP is considered relevant after this extensive discussion?

No. The evidence in the OP is only part of the conversation. There is also the underlying context and the rest of the other stuff involved in the Pantheons that help a long way.

It's important to confirm this definitively.
If not, I believe it would be better to create a blog where we can discuss each presented scan or context transparently (since there are many here claims referring to “this depends on the context", but never present this context) and preferably present all evidences there.

@Planck69 can make a blog if he gets the time.

I don't object to Tanin's rebuttal being presented; however, I hope they offer entirely new source material compared to what was provided in the OP. If not, then the only solution is to challenge each interpretation on those three available contextual evidences without relying on assumptions.

I don't get this hyperfixation on needing new source material when all the relevant details are within already-released source material.

I also don't get the idea of repeating the same thing about these being "interpretations relying on assumptions" when all it takes is to just piece them together and figure out an end result without overcomplicating things.

But as we can see, neither of us are going to agree to this matter so we should just stop discussing it any further and let the staff decide after all sides of the argument are presented and summarized.

Also, ; I do like to remind of this rule:

I know of the rule. That being said, this is a highly controversial topic where all sides of the voice must be heard.

 

[Planck69]

There's very little point in fixating on the material. As far as I'm aware, we have everything that's relevant already posted. All we can really do now is post the main argument posts and leave it up to the staff.

 

[KLOL506]

If not, then the only solution is to challenge each interpretation on those three available contextual evidences without relying on assumptions.

I should also further elaborate that his whole thing about "challenging each interpretation" is just a repeat of the back-and-forth of the same arguments discussed here and on the previous upgrade thread, and it is painfully clear that neither side is going to concede on this, so I disagree, this is no solution at all.

 

[KLOL506]

There's very little point in fixating on the material. As far as I'm aware, we have everything that's relevant already posted. All we can really do now is post the main argument posts and leave it up to the staff.

I agree with this sentiment.

 

[ImmortalDread]

No. The evidence in the OP is only part of the conversation. There is also the underlying context and the rest of the other stuff involved in the Pantheons that help a long way.

I don't get this hyperfixation on needing new source material when all the relevant details are within already-released source material.

There's very little point in fixating on the material. As far as I'm aware, we have everything that's relevant already posted. All we can really do now is post the main argument posts and leave it up to the staff.

This is where our miscommunication occurs, and I countlessly many times trying to get this point straight in a respectful, patient way:

---

You claim it is part of a huge totality of context.

We ask you (supporters) to present them, and none actually presented in any proper evidence. There is sandbox, there is imgur album, there are screenshots, there are endless ways to gather this context to public and make this “context” a crystal clear.

You send a whole thread (original upgrade thread), I searched through each post for this “underlying context”, and I all see are arguments and interpretations from those three available evidences in this OP.

And a huge issue of this miscommunication is trying to equate “an argument” to “context" which is flawed and inaccurate.

This is my last comment in this particular topic.

@LephyrTheRevanchist @KLOL506 @Deagonx @Antvasima

 

[Georredannea15]

Since I am on no position to prove his claim to be accurate. He is the responsible to link his sources.

KLOL, this became a bit of unproductive approach of you. You should be aware, that if someone made a claim, and thus the claim is trying to hint an existence of said context or statements that are relevant to low 1-C justification, he is obligated to cite it and reference it properly and not tell others "see it yourself" (which you did not outright state it, but this is the feeling I took)

Now, @LephyrTheRevanchist @Deagonx and anyone else who is thread moderator, how would they benefit from this information?

I don't think so; but I prefer if supporters simply link their evidences properly, so we can evaluate it carefully.

Mehhh KLOL has already explained it, but I know that for things like 5-D higher dimensional existence and Low 1-C Athena, Planck and KLOL's many staffs have been discussing this issue with the same scanning and arguments all the time, and they have made upgrades after consensus.

Also, my only request is that we don't spam and write messages all the time just because we have permission. @ImmortalDread