• 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.

Kirby Cosmology Upgrade Part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
I find very reasonable the idea of not needing to wait because this are all things that can be explained away.
 
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.
 
I find very reasonable the idea of not needing to wait because this are all things that can be explained away.
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.
 
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?
 
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.
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 about
 
I'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.
Instead of substantiating it, you choose to have me look for your proof instead of proving it yourself
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.
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)
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.
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.
 
Anyways I'mma step away from this thread for a bit. I'll definitely be back soon enough and will continue to debate this topic but this is getting tiring
 
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.
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.
 
I supported them before, but I think that the remake can help clarify things.

And watch your tone.
watch-yo-tone-fnaf.gif
 
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.
I mean, true, it was unprofessional for Efi to accuse people like that. However, I can get where he's coming from.
 
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.

Some of this could be spoilers, but anyway:

I'm quite sure there will be 5+ worlds (or dimensions anyway) with the first one being named Aerogree Dimension and all the worlds should culminate up to 20+ stages (most of this info is from WiKirby wiki) What I'm hoping for is that in typical KRTDL fashion, we get a world map jumping between dimensions. It'd help greatly with getting a scale of Another Dimension.
 
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.
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.

Edit: Additionally, they think that because Another Dimension is only accessible through dimensional rifts, which isn't even true, there is a degree of inaccessibility that Another Dimension has in the context of it being 5D. In actuality, this is just how dimensional rifts work. If characters don't have the ability of dimensional travel alone, that's just their limitation, and has nothing to do with Another Dimension's state of existence.
 
Last edited:
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.
 
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.
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.
 
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.
 
I still think the best option is waiting for the full Deluxe game to give us more info on Another Dimension, but as it currently stands I'm in favor of Low 1-C, and "possibly Low 1-C" at the very least.
 
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.
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.
 
Oh, and clarification of my last post; I meant people's support to the idea of Another Dimension being tier Low 1-C is only evidence of being tier 2-C. Their actual leading evidence is still its own thing, that I don't think it reliable for different reasons that I explained when the discussion was about that. Right now I'm only referring to people claiming that Another Dimension is already accepted as structured in a way that makes it 5D.
 
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.)
 
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.)
1. Thank you, great explanation.

2. Deluxe will literally involve Magolor exploring it to reclaim his powers. So there's a good chance of us learning more about if from the game itself or whatever extra material is released alongside the game to complement it.
 
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?
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.
(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.)
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.
 
It was neither unprofessional nor an accusation, it was a question if he was doing something wrong because his stated position led to that being a valid, reasonable question to be asked. In a certain future scenario from when I wrote that, maybe he did only support the idea of Low 1-C Kirby and hearing the question was something helpful to realize that. In another, if he answers that this is not the case then that's it about it, the matter ends there. You guys overreacted and derailed based on that, 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.
 
At this point this is like preference agaisnt preferences, the fact you guys sometimes bring up other qualifications of 5D or higher dimensionality mumbo jumbo it feels stupid. Am going neutral now.
 
Last edited:
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
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.
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.
 
Last edited:
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.
Well I know better than to get into a shouting match with a mod especially if it's pointless and off-topic.
But the more important thing is that this has been going on for like 2 years and reached 10 pages even though it seems that it could have just been remade or reached a verdict considerably earlier, but I'm not gonna interfere.
 
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.
honestly fully reading this made me understand you a bit more and see why you are a mod somewhat.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top