Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
But there's a not-insignificant chance that, with Deluxe's added content, including a side story all about Magolor exploring Another Dimension to get his powers back, we may get crucial additional information about Another Dimension that can help conclude this thread.I find very reasonable the idea of not needing to wait because this are all things that can be explained away.
I supported them before, but I think that the remake can help clarify things.Did you support Low 1-C Kirby as in the arguments made for it before the remake or just the idea of wanting Low 1-C Kirby to be a thing?
This is kinda what has me confused too. The dimensions in AD are universes, your blog says as much, so I'm genuinely unsure what he's arguing aboutI pretty sure James Plays 4 Games knows the dimensions in AD are universes and he argues something else, but idk what that is as idk why were they talking about it.
I mean, Efi has a point tho. Most discussions relating to Kirby tend to get out of hand, in general.And watch your tone.
Instead of substantiating it, you choose to have me look for your proof instead of proving it yourselfI'm writing it as true because it is. If you think it's not true then you need to check out how the Tiering System works.
This is such a gross misrepresentation of my argument that I really can't tell if it's intentional or not. It does contain universes in it (Eficiente has literally said this himself a few posts ago) and they're all just a small part of it. Combined with the inaccessibility, which again is a supplement rather than the crux of my argument, and this definitely something that qualifies as Low 1-C (combined with early statements of space-time transcendence, which can be put into this context for a rather solid case for Low 1-C)This means your argument can alternatively be described as "Another Dimension is a multiverse, therefore it's tier Low 1-C", which doesn't make any sense. There needs to be actual evidence that the multiverse is tier Low 1-C, or else it's only tier 2-C, since that's the minimum for being a multiverse on the VS Battles Wiki, which is why it is currently tier 2-C.
Well let me put it this way: the numbered dimensions are universes. That much has (again...) been proven by Eficiente's blog and Eficiente himself has made note of this. Another Dimension encompasses all of them. That's what my drawing represents. This is not just about "being accurate to those who agree," I am taking what we know about Another Dimension as objective fact and making a drawing based on that.Whether it's accurate or not, it still doesn't tell me what scale the image is on. About its accuracy; it's only accurate to the perception of whoever agrees with it. We've never seen an official cosmology map of Another Dimension, so that drawing is based on what someone imagines, which may or may not conflict with what is accepted. There's not much of a point in showing the drawing.
I think Eseseso means how he's being accused of supporting the upgrade just because it's an upgradeI mean, Efi has a point tho. Most discussions relating to Kirby tend to get out of hand, in general.
I think Eseseso means how he's being accused of supporting the upgrade just because it's an upgrade
Which... yeah that was pretty unnecessary.
I supported them before, but I think that the remake can help clarify things.
And watch your tone.
I mean, true, it was unprofessional for Efi to accuse people like that. However, I can get where he's coming from.Only Mitch and Clover and Kingtempest can accuse me of that.
But yeah, hurling an accusation like that just because I proposed that we wait until Deluxe comes out was unprofessional and uncalled for.
In a major debate like this, a thread mod should know and act better.I mean, true, it was unprofessional for Efi to accuse people like that. However, I can get where he's coming from.
Yes, he should. I can see that Efi can be rude sometimes. Still, I just want to say that I can understand the position he's in.In a major debate like this, a thread mod should know and act better.
Especially when the opposition is bringing up a legitimate point.
But there's a not-insignificant chance that, with Deluxe's added content, including a side story all about Magolor exploring Another Dimension to get his powers back, we may get crucial additional information about Another Dimension that can help conclude this thread.
I'm not arguing that they're not universes. People are claiming that your Cosmology blog post describes Another Dimension as being a giant universe that trivializes many universes within it, making it 5D and tier Low 1-C, when in fact it's just a normal tier 2-C multiverse unless proven to be a higher tier, which no one has properly done. They think that Another Dimension being tier 2-C is a mistake that was a result of people misreading your blog post, when Another Dimension is actually tier 2-C in accordance to your blog post.I pretty sure James Plays 4 Games knows the dimensions in AD are universes and he argues something else, but idk what that is as idk why were they talking about it.
The "describes Another Dimension as containing universes within it" is nowhere near evidence of it being 5D. If a thing, has universes in it, it is a multiverse, and baseline multiverse is tier 2-C, unless it has evidence of being more. If it's tier Low 1-C, then it needs to be infinitely superior to infinite of those universes, which is how the Tiering System works. It does not have evidence of even being an infinite multiverse.Not quite. I believe what's going on is that Eficiente's blog describes Another Dimension as containing universes within it, which everyone is fine with, but people disagree with the other part of the blog that concludes it's a normal 2-C multiverse. It's not about misreading the blog post, it's about disagreeing with it.
I understand your perspective but that is the golden mean fallacy, even though you're not trying to do it. The people who "have presented what they consider to be evidence in that direction" are presenting evidence of Another Dimension being tier 2-C without realizing that it's only tier 2-C and not tier Low 1-C. We shouldn't officially regard Another Dimension as "possibly" tier Low 1-C based on evidence for it being tier 2-C. That doesn't follow the Tiering System. You're proposing a solution at the cost of officially validating a misinterpretation of the Tiering System, which might spread to fans of other fictional works trying to make a tier 1 upgrade with insufficient evidence. A less costly solution is to make an explanation blog post about why Another Dimension isn't 5D, or to hope that the people who disagree finally understand at some point. I plan on doing the former; making a blog post compilation of my most notable and updated points against the 5D upgrade. I decided that because this thread's discussion has gradually decreased in quality over the months and I'm not very interested in continuing it here. I already know exactly what the problem is, so I'm not going to get any more insight by disagreeing with the same old points. Disagreement can be enjoyable when it means enhancing one's own ability to explain their perspective, but that's not happening anymore. I have other plans on the VS Battles Wiki and off of it though, so this isn't an urgent priority to me.That is the core disagreement, yes -- whether there is evidence of it being more. I and Arceus0x and Clover clearly believe there is and have presented what they consider to be evidence in that direction -- you think it is insufficient. IMO, it could at least be mentioned as a possibility, especially considering the accepted arguments presented for other 5D upgrades like Arceus0x mentions.
I am not going for a golden mean fallacy as you have mentioned in a previous post. I am saying it is definitely one or the other, but which one it is could either be determined within this thread, or we can settle for saying that which one it is is undetermined.
1. Thank you, great explanation.Ah. Yeah, I don't think anyone is saying it's currently accepted as structured that way -- that's the whole point of this thread lmao
We're just saying we do agree with the current point that it is in fact a structure containing multiple universes, but the nature of that structure beyond that simple fact is what's being disagreed with, and whether the evidence supports 2-C (as you, Eficiente, and the currently accepted cosmology suggests) or Low 1-C (as this thread proposes). We're not going to get anywhere unless we interrogate that core question -- does the evidence presented in this thread contradict the currently accepted cosmology such that an upgrade is justified?
(For the record, by the way, I do agree with Eseseso that Deluxe would be worth examining once it comes out. I would be rather surprised if the whole "realm between dimensions" thing didn't affect how things stand.)
Other people aren't analyzing it as rationally as you are. Throughout this discussion, I don't remember a single counter-argument to my points that wasn't either claiming that I'm not looking at the evidence properly or claiming that I'm going against an accepted interpretation, even though both are untrue. I think if I make a blog post about my answers, it can be visible in a more organized way. If I were to answer you in full right now, I would need to bring back points from a long while ago about why the statements about Another Dimension aren't clear enough to prove what tier Low 1-C actually is, and I don't know how other people are going to react to that, nor how much they remember. The most active people are the ones in favor of this upgrade, so contributing to this thread isn't simple for me.Ah. Yeah, I don't think anyone is saying it's currently accepted as structured that way -- that's the whole point of this thread lmao
We're just saying we do agree with the current point that it is in fact a structure containing multiple universes, but the nature of that structure beyond that simple fact is what's being disagreed with, and whether the evidence supports 2-C (as you, Eficiente, and the currently accepted cosmology suggests) or Low 1-C (as this thread proposes). We're not going to get anywhere unless we interrogate that core question -- does the evidence presented in this thread contradict the currently accepted cosmology such that an upgrade is justified?
It's worth examining but I don't think we should wait until it comes out, since it's probably not going to change the whole discussion. It's just something to keep in mind once it's available.(For the record, by the way, I do agree with Eseseso that Deluxe would be worth examining once it comes out. I would be rather surprised if the whole "realm between dimensions" thing didn't affect how things stand.)
excited about rtdl DX?Same.
Yeahexcited about rtdl DX?
nice, me tooYeah
Same.nice, me too
okay we can stop now, this thread might get de-railedSame.
Magolor's boss fight is still one of the best boss fights I've ever seen, and the music is so good.
When I wrote "either take the matter elsewhere from here on if it really is that you care or I will delete any further derailment about it here", it says right there that you, any of you, is free to keep on digging into the matter more if you feel like it, just elsewhere from the thread. "deleting comments that disagree with what you are saying", is complete BS in its portrayal because I would have deleted any kind of comment here while allowing any kind of comment with the topic taken elsewhere, even if they disagree with me.I do not think deleting comments that disagree with what you are saying gives you a good image.
The whole point of this forum is to debate and show why you think others are wrong and this can especially include the matter of whether or not a member is being rude.
I get if you want to move on and are tired of it but that was not the best way to put it.
Well I know better than to get into a shouting match with a mod especially if it's pointless and off-topic.As said before, I will delete the comments that kept on going on the topic, all 6 of them. You guys can delete on your own comments that delail on their own, if the people who made them feels like it.
And to clarify something that made a very inaccurate portrayal of things
When I wrote "either take the matter elsewhere from here on if it really is that you care or I will delete any further derailment about it here", it says right there that you, any of you, is free to keep on digging into the matter more if you feel like it, just elsewhere from the thread. "deleting comments that disagree with what you are saying", is complete BS in its portrayal because I would have deleted any kind of comment here while allowing any kind of comment with the topic taken elsewhere, even if they disagree with me.
This is a minor personal thing, whereas the CRT is about an upgrate because the wiki is about indexing characters & stuff, my job as a staff is to drive away things like this that are derailment, "The whole point of this forum is to debate and show why you think others are wrong and this can especially include the matter of whether or not a member is being rude." is BS, it shows a lack of understanding on the wiki and the people who problematically engage into personal things in threads. Per the nature of talking due to their feelings, they're not going to talk with the best of logic, even if they did, they also know that they can't talk too much as to not derail, and sometimes they don't give a f*ck to actually have a fair debate about it, being just obsessed with wanting to make a public statement of how they view the matter so that stays to whoever buys it, that being coping rather than what a reasonable person would think it's the civilized way to act.
honestly fully reading this made me understand you a bit more and see why you are a mod somewhat.As said before, I will delete the comments that kept on going on the topic, all 5 of them. You guys can delete on your own comments that delail on their own, if the people who made them feels like it.
And to clarify something that made a very inaccurate portrayal of things
When I wrote "either take the matter elsewhere from here on if it really is that you care or I will delete any further derailment about it here", it says right there that you, any of you, is free to keep on digging into the matter more if you feel like it, just elsewhere from the thread. "deleting comments that disagree with what you are saying", is complete BS in its portrayal because I would have deleted any kind of comment here while allowing any kind of comment with the topic taken elsewhere, even if they disagree with me.
This is a minor personal thing, whereas the CRT is about an upgrate because the wiki is about indexing characters & stuff, my job as a staff is to drive away things like this that are derailment, "The whole point of this forum is to debate and show why you think others are wrong and this can especially include the matter of whether or not a member is being rude." is BS, it shows a lack of understanding on the wiki and the people who problematically engage into personal things in threads. Per the nature of talking due to their feelings, they're not going to talk with the best of logic, even if they did, they also know that they can't talk too much as to not derail, and sometimes they don't give a f*ck to actually have a fair debate about it, being just obsessed with wanting to make a public statement of how they view the matter so that stays to whoever buys it, that being coping rather than what a reasonable person would think it's the civilized way to act.