• 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.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I am too overworked to read the arguments here in-depth. My apologies.
 
Dino mostly attacked the supportive/weak points without paying attention to the main/strong such as "another world" "our world" etc
The kanji 世界 means either world or universe (even the word world itself can mean either planet or universe depends on the context) but it cannot refer to planet since there is stars and sun.
Espacially since it was compared to Mario's world (our, real world and painting worlds, another world)
Claiming it only specifically reflects mario's solar system is weird as heck (and the other side needs proof for their claims)
And here comes the supportive arguments: we have two Infinite size scans from two different levels, worldwide/globally and a different flow of time (the latter doesn't always mean universe by default but we use it as support)
Okay. I hope that other staff members will evaluate this then.
 
I still do not see how "Another" is identical to the world parallel. "Parallel" means existing next to each other or rivals it in scope where as another just means a second or more of something but nothing to do with equality. If I already have an English Mastiff, then later got a Miniature Pinscher; that Miniature Pinscher would qualify as "Another dog" despite them both being vastly different in size. Painting Realms being called "Another world/dimension" isn't really proof of being the same size; it just means ones a body of space and the other is also a body of space.

But anyway, I think the current "At least 4-A, likely Low 2-C is fine for the main cast.
 
If I already have an English Mastiff, then later got a Miniature Pinscher; that Miniature Pinscher would qualify as "Another dog"
And when i already have an English mastiff and later got a second one who has the same size and look, the latter would also qualify as "another dog"

Painting Realms being called "Another world/dimension" isn't really proof of being the same size; it just means ones a body of space and the other is also a body of space.
It can be a proof, espacially when the word sekai can mean universe and since there is stars, sun, two levels described with the word Infinite, different flow of time.it should be clear
 
I still do not see how "Another" is identical to the world parallel. "Parallel" means existing next to each other or rivals it in scope where as another just means a second or more of something but nothing to do with equality. If I already have an English Mastiff, then later got a Miniature Pinscher; that Miniature Pinscher would qualify as "Another dog" despite them both being vastly different in size. Painting Realms being called "Another world/dimension" isn't really proof of being the same size; it just means ones a body of space and the other is also a body of space.

But anyway, I think the current "At least 4-A, likely Low 2-C is fine for the main cast.
Prove that they aren't the same size. If one of the "worlds" is a universe then it's only fair to imply that they all are universes. Just like how that one universal+ sized dream in Mario party determines the size of all of them. If there's two apples then it would take more assumptions to say one is smaller. Duplicates of one thing usually mean that they are the same size. Your dog analogy doesn't work because you already know what the dogs are, you know their sizes. You don't know the maximum size of the painting worlds.

Furthermore, the fact that Bowser can extend the painting world across all of reality is clear evidence of universal size. I made an entire response to this and you didn't even respond :/

Also, if you agree that all of the worlds are all 4-A and parallel, then wouldn't that mean the real world is parallel to it which completely debunks the whole idea of 4-A? Why would all of the painting worlds be parallel and not the real world when they all use the same terminology?
 
Last edited:
Some of you are kind of asking me to prove a negative here, it's saying they are equal that require more evidence than saying they're not equal.
 
The difference is that a lot of them actually have all those worlds described as "Universes" and/or their are showings and or statements about the worlds/universes being parallel. Or even just being called "Alternate Realities" and verses where "As many worlds as their are possibilities" metaphorically refer to multiverse stuff.

But when someone teleports you to some outer space and says "Welcome to my world", we do not default to assuming that's an alternate universe. Or even "Another dimension/world" without further context does not mean alternate universe by default.
 
The difference is that a lot of them actually have all those worlds described as "Universes" and/or their are showings and or statements about the worlds/universes being parallel. Or even just being called "Alternate Realities" and verses where "As many worlds as their are possibilities" metaphorically refer to multiverse stuff.
Not all of them. Mario's dream depot for example just needed one direct statement of one of the dreams being universes. It didn't need to prove that every other dream was parallel or the same size. Sonic's special stages are considered different universes. There's plenty more examples I can pull up.

But when someone teleports you to some outer space and says "Welcome to my world", we do not default to assuming that's an alternate universe. Or even "Another dimension/world" without further context does not mean alternate universe by default.
Yes, without further context. We have context, the game compares all of reality to the painting worlds. And even says Bowser will extend them across all reality, indicating the size is universal.
 
Actually, the the Dream Depot's case, they actually are physically shown to be parallel or exist next to each other in the form of them all being bubbles. And evidence that at least one of them is universal in size combined with a bunch of them always being born is evidence.

But here, I do not see anything beyond "Another World" and that they have starry skies in them. Bowser saying he will extend across all reality means he will rule over all reality over time and statement alone has nothing to do with Painting realm sizes.
 
Actually, the the Dream Depot's case, they actually are physically shown to be parallel or exist next to each other in the form of them all being bubbles. And evidence that at least one of them is universal in size combined with a bunch of them always being born is evidence.
Bubble universes can still be pocket universes. That really doesn't mean anything. They're all assumed universes because traversing through them is considered "traveling through time and space" and that one of them being universes would mean that every other dream is similar.
But here, I do not see anything beyond "Another World" and that they have starry skies in them. Bowser saying he will extend across all reality means he will rule over all reality over time and statement alone has nothing to do with Painting realm sizes.
- "A competing theory suggests that Bowser will simply extend his painting worlds so that they encompass all of reality." He extends his painting worlds so that they encompass all reality. He is ruling reality via the paintings. Yes they are related.
 
Okay, let's back up a bit since I can see people don't fully get the whole picture (haha get it).

So the main argument is NOT just "another world" = parallel universe, it's the additional context we're given is what makes this comparison stronger.

So, anytime they use the term world in this guide, they're referring to only two things. Mario's world, and Bowser's painting worlds. Let's take a relook at the terms they'll use for Mario's world. The real world, which the site rules consider to be universal. And all of reality, which is self explanatory. So the term world for Mario's world would be referring to universe in this context. And because of the term worlds being interchangeable between Mario's world and Bowser's, this would mean whatever context they refer to world for their world would apply to Bowser too.

This is why the term "another world" would help, since the only other context we have for worlds in this game is Mario's. Hope this makes it a bit easier to understand.
 
I did not attack anyone whatsoever. You merely felt offended by the fact I pointed out the implications of this thread are simply not all that you say or hope they are. It's just like DDM and Maverick said, the meaning is entirely different. Much like the other adjectives and determiners I pointed out earlier, the words "real" and "another" used in completely different context when compared to "mirror" or "parallel". When it comes to comparisons and descriptions in fiction, the words "parallel" and "mirror" are often used to compare two subjects that are either equivalents or shares near similar or identical properties. "Another" is simply use to show an alternate exists but in a very general sense and "real", more specifically, "real world" is usually used to describe the normal setting of the verse. Not matter how you see it, the context of these scans are relatively weak and don't suggest anything universal. All this thread is doing is reaching. It tries to fabricate a feat for what it's not by using words that loosely synonymous does not qualify for a Low 2-C . If Nintendo wants to imply they are parallel universes, they would have flat-out said it as they did in the one we visited in Paper Mario Color Splash, among other straightforward examples throughout the franchise's history. As of now, all these scans have only proven they are different realms and no context beyond this. Period.
 
Last edited:
So, DRB. Did you know there were more than just that as an argument? Also, using games like Color Splash, a game made 10 years after 64, is a really bad comparison. Like, a REALLY bad one. You'd much prefer to use a comparison that's actually closer in-date or even related.

Regardless, yet again you didn't cover the whole argument and only a portion of it. Please actually read what we argued.
 
Okay, let's back up a bit since I can see people don't fully get the whole picture (haha get it).

So the main argument is NOT just "another world" = parallel universe, it's the additional context we're given is what makes this comparison stronger.

So, anytime they use the term world in this guide, they're referring to only two things. Mario's world, and Bowser's painting worlds. Let's take a relook at the terms they'll use for Mario's world. The real world, which the site rules consider to be universal. And all of reality, which is self explanatory. So the term world for Mario's world would be referring to universe in this context. And because of the term worlds being interchangeable between Mario's world and Bowser's, this would mean whatever context they refer to world for their world would apply to Bowser too.

This is why the term "another world" would help, since the only other context we have for worlds in this game is Mario's. Hope this makes it a bit easier to understand.
Take a look at this.
 
I did not attack anyone whatsoever. You merely felt offended by the fact I pointed out the implications of this thread are simply not all that you say or hope they are. It's just like DDM and Maverick said, the meaning is entirely different. Much like the other adjectives and determiners I pointed out earlier, the words "real" and "another" used in completely different context when compared to "mirror" or "parallel". When it comes to comparisons and descriptions in fiction, the words "parallel" and "mirror" are often used to compare two subjects that are either equivalents or shares near similar or identical properties. "Another" is simply use to show an alternate exists but in a very general sense and "real", more specifically, "real world" is usually used to describe the normal setting of the verse. Not matter how you see it, the context of these scans are relatively weak and don't suggest anything universal. All this thread is doing is reaching. It tries to fabricate a feat for what it's not by using words that loosely synonymous does not qualify for a Low 2-C . If Nintendo wants to imply they are parallel universes, they would have flat-out said it as they did in the one we visited in Paper Mario Color Splash, among other straightforward examples throughout the franchise's history. As of now, all these scans have only proven they are different realms and no context beyond this. Period.
I don't think anyone said you did. If you payed attention, he said you attacked the weak points of the argument. So now you're just being rude for absolutely no reason and (again) taking things out of context to create a false narrative. You did just not give out any good counterarguments and just said "denied", and you are basically ignoring the current topic at hand (again). So I'll put you up to date.


- "Bowser stole the Power Stars that protected the castle and hid them away in magical painting worlds."

- "It is assumed that Bowser, with the power of the Stars at his disposal, intends to extend his reach over the real world."

- "One school of thought believes that Bowser will turn Peach and her entourage into a sort of zombie army, then let them lose on our world."
- "A competing theory suggests that Bowser will simply extend his painting worlds so that they encompass all of reality."

All of these terms refer to world as a synonym, not something different. They are all classified to be the same thing, and this is legit according to the standards here if they mirror the real world. But I want to go into more detail.
You're implying these realms are just 4-A starry skies, and that isn't a bad assumption, it's just that there's multiple things that contradict this.

  • If the realms are implied as the same term "world" just like the real world, then wouldn't that mean Mario's universe is just 4-A if the painting worlds are 4-A?
  • If the word "sekai" is used to describe the worlds in Japanese, which can both mean planet and universe. Then wouldn't it be a better assumption to just say it means universe, because the extent of them is 4-A and thus already reaches out into space?
And lastly, "A competing theory suggests that Bowser will simply extend his painting worlds so that they encompass all of reality."

The sentence straight up compares world to reality. Reality is the specified term of how far Bowser will extend his reach in the real world, and the real world was already compared to the painting worlds. This means that the game specifies that the real world does indeed mean universe, not world. And the fact that the paintings use the the term "world" as synonyms, then that means they would be similar.

- "A competing theory suggests that Bowser will simply extend his painting worlds so that they encompass all of reality." He extends his painting worlds so that they encompass all reality. He is ruling reality via the paintings. Yes they are related.
The last statement implies that the painting worlds are that large enough to encompass all of reality. Please address these points.
 
Last edited:
It is related. You are merely ignoring the main point that we had showcases in the franchise's other games where other dimensions the characters travel to actually are universes, whether it is through dialogue or lore established in the series while this is merely reaching. Simply saying "real" or "another" world isn't enough and Mario's world being a definitive universe does not mean we have to blindly believe every other dimension he travels to is a full fledge one as well. Especially one create by an artifact that's basically inferior to an object in Galaxy series that actually is Universal.
 
Last edited:
It does when the stronger artifact in question has very straightforward descriptions and an actual feat to back its tier while the weaker artifact does not.
 
I don’t mean to butt in but, aren’t the Luma’s comparable to the Power Stars?, it would be kinda odd they’d call upon so many Luma’s to deal with 1 universe black hole made from the Leftover Grand Star Energy (Since it was removed before the explosion happened but I don’t know if that matters much)

i don’t want to anger anyone since this seems like a tense thread, that’s just what I was wondering
 
It does when the stronger artifact in question has very straightforward descriptions and an actual feat to back its tier while the weaker artifact does not.
So creating painting worlds that can encompass all of reality doesn't imply universal? What???? Can you address all of the stuff above at least please?
 
I don’t mean to butt in but, aren’t the Luma’s comparable to the Power Stars?, it would be kinda odd they’d call upon so many Luma’s to deal with 1 universe black hole made from the Leftover Grand Star Energy (Since it was removed before the explosion happened but I don’t know if that matters much)

i don’t want to anger anyone since this seems like a tense thread, that’s just what I was wondering
Grand Stars are way more powerful than Power Stars. But it would still be Low 2-C for both, just one is like 50x into the tier.
 
It is related. You are merely ignoring the main point that we had showcases in the franchise's other games where other dimensions the characters travel to actually are universes, whether it is through dialogue or lore established in the series while this is merely reaching. Simply saying "real" or "another" world isn't enough and Mario's world being a definitive universe does not mean we have to blindly believe every other dimension he travels to is a full fledge one as well. Especially one create by an artifact that's basically inferior to an object in Galaxy series that actually is Universal.
Dino... what are you trying to argue? I'm saying that in this specific game, me NOT using FUTURE GAMES as examples, that they refer to world, real world, and all of reality as the same thing. If they're going to say these things for Mario's world, and then call something else in that same game a world, why can't they exactly mean the same thing? They make no mentions in different sizes at that either, so I'm not exactly following on why this is an issue to begin with.

If you want to play like that and use future games as evidence, then so can I. In Super Mario Galaxy, once beating the game and collecting the 120 stars, you get Super Luigi Galaxy. Which much like 64, is stated to be another world. But this would actually mean another universe, since Super Luigi Galaxy is the exact same world, only difference is Luigi is your protagonist. So using your own arguments, they can use the term "another world" equal to "another universe", in a mainline game no less.
unknown.png
 
Simple, they aren't. You simply are trying to vouch for feats beyond what the actual sources imply. Nintendo have showcased awareness that the worlds are created by Bowser but no other info was given beyond that. You guys keep mentioning the wiki rules but everything you mention does not justify the Low 2-C for the stars at all. Yes, we seen the words "another" and "real" but it just shows the awareness of their existence, not context of worlds being identical to Mario's actual universe.

Finally, that scan is a poor example because once again we were given enough context of the franchise to know what the developers means whenever the word "world" is used which are levels. This is done since the very first SMB.
 
Last edited:
Also also, Dino, I can use your own evidence against you. You wanna use Color Splash as proof? So will I.

Here, they call it a parallel universe.
unknown.png


And in that same context, they'll ALSO call it parallel world.

unknown.png

unknown.png


And finally, they'll refer to the universes as "our world".
unknown.png


And you know what else used this term? Mario 64. So using your own logic, yes, it can in-context mean universe.

Simple, they aren't. You simply are trying to vouch for feats beyond what the actual sources imply. Nintendo have showcased awareness that the worlds are created by Bowser but no other info was given beyond that. You guys keep mentioning the wiki rules but everything you mention does not justify the Low 2-C for the stars at all. Yes, we seen the words "another" and "real" but it just shows the awareness of their existence, not context of worlds being identical to Mario's actual universe. Encompassing all of reality does not make sense as we or imply anything and it's conflicted with Galaxy 1's ending considering it took millions of Lumas to try to stop ONE Grand Star.

Finally, that scan is a poor example because once again we were given enough context of the franchise to know what the developers means whenever the word "world" is used which are levels. This is done since the very first SMB.
Says who? You're still not getting that my entire argument as of now stems they use the term "world" "the real world" (which is considered universal), and "all of reality" are all used within the same context of each other and are used as synonyms. Are you ignoring this specific part where they talk about what they mean when they say world? Because you're only attacking the "another world" part, but not the part where they'll say world and all of reality in the same page. Not only did I not argue encompassing all of reality wasn't the Low 2-C feat, I said it was a supporting ranged feat, and how yet again they'll use all of reality as an equivalent to the term world in this game.

For one, millions of Lumas is an extreme exaggeration, there's not even close to being that many. For two, a Luma's power is far inferior to that of a Power Star, as Lumas are literal babies when compared to a Power Star. So even if I took your argument at face value, guess what, that's still Low 2-C. Lumas would in that case need to be infinitely weaker, otherwise they can't do anything.

Er, no. In this context, Rosalina wasn't talking about some bonus level in the game. She was literally talking about another universe. Completing the game after collecting all stars takes you to another universe, as its completely parallel to what you just played. Not just a single level. Sounds like you didn't get all 120 stars with Mario. Also SMB and SMB2 don't use the term world for just a level, they'll use to describe parallel universes you travel to as post game.
 
Simple, they aren't. You simply are trying to vouch for feats beyond what the actual sources imply. Nintendo have showcased awareness that the worlds are created by Bowser but no other info was given beyond that. You guys keep mentioning the wiki rules but everything you mention does not justify the Low 2-C for the stars at all. Yes, we seen the words "another" and "real" but it just shows the awareness of their existence, not context of worlds being identical to Mario's actual universe.
This is what I don’t understand.

If the painting worlds are only 4-A, then why can they encompass an entire reality?

Doesn’t that completely debunk the notion that it’s 4-A because bowser can extend the reach of the painting worlds so that they cover up Mario’s entire reality?

Doesn’t this cause so many loopholes with the idea that these worlds are only small pocket dimensions after their size can cover up an entire universe?

I can’t help but feel like the opposition is flat out ignoring this crucial statement. We know Bowser reaches the real world but the guide goes as far to claim he will use the paintings to cover all of reality. And DDM has been twisting this into “well it just means Bowser will take over the world overtime” but that’s not even the point. The point is that if they were 4-A sizes, they wouldn’t be able to encompass all of reality.


Keeping it 4-A causes way too many contradictions at this point.
 
Even disregarding this size debate wouldn't the Lumas still be Low 2-C via this site's logic? They contributed to the Low 2-C feat. Regardless of numbers (which the game doesn't show), you can't take a small portion of infinite energy and not have it remain infinite, and thus, still Low 2-C. Isn't this a thing?

Well Power Stars are what Lumas can become.

No one has really made a good counter to this as far as I'm aware.
 
Dino makes sense to me.

For further information about our standards, see here:

 
Dino makes sense to me
Sorry ant but You seem to only read his message but not blaze or lilu's messages, espacially since they refuted him and used proof, while dino didn't refute all the messages and makes claims with lacking scans so the burden of proof is on him now
 
Given the context of the word “worlds” in the game (previous thread even seemed to act like there are only 2 options given the kanji used, planet or universe, and it’s definitely not the former), the painting worlds becoming big enough to encompass all of reality if Bowser so wills it and the Luma argument (albeit team efforts can sometimes give better results than individual ones stacked together), I am inclined to agree with Low 2-C here. However in this scan they mention the worlds are 3-dimensional, which could give a problem.
 
Given the context of the word “worlds” in the game (previous thread even seemed to act like there are only 2 options given the kanji used, planet or universe, and it’s definitely not the former), the painting worlds becoming big enough to encompass all of reality if Bowser so wills it and the Luma argument (albeit team efforts can sometimes give better results than individual ones stacked together), I am inclined to agree with Low 2-C here. However in this scan they mention the worlds are 3-dimensional, which could give a problem.
The 3D statement is just a reference to how the game plays. I don't think it's completely literal.
 
Dino makes sense to me.

For further information about our standards, see here:

We've proven time and time again that these things can create universes. We are already aware of the rules and none of them have addressed our points at all. Why would a 4-A pocket reality cover all of reality somehow? Now the tier makes even less sense.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top