- 2,363
- 1,523
Did you guys still wanna use this scan I provided, or is it pretty much useless?
-
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.
Super Mario CRT: Galaxy? I Think Not!
- Thread starter Foxthefox1000
- Start date
- Status
- 31,442
- 34,274
I agree with Gyro 100%, and if all it took was a few star bits to form Grand Stars, wouldn't all Mario need to do to fuel the Observatory is just load it with not so many star bits? And then the game could have been over much sooner? And yeah, Toads have superhuman lifting strength, so unless star bits are that heavy individually; the assumption that "They can only carry one at a time" sounds really iffy.
- 1,082
- 285
Seeing as the wiki doesn't want to use the guide book for Mario and the possibility that it's possibly hyperbolic, I don't think it's going to be used.
Mephistus
Username Only- 1,029
- 789
As someone that brought that up long ago, its treated as hyperbole.
- 2,363
- 1,523
Yeah, I guess not; I should've read the Hyperbole page on the wiki before providing the scan.
- 3,714
- 2,718
- Thread starter
- #326
Again, you guys are using nothing but speculation. You aren't relying on what is shown at all. You act like Mario doesn't have inconsistencies galore. This is the same as "why didn't Bowser just use Lumas to create a galaxy then?"
And idk if you guys missed the point but it doesn't matter. I was arguing for Power Stars not scaling to 3-C. Are there any arguments against this? Because we literally see them get formed during a planet's creation as well as galaxy creation meaning they take less energy to create than a galaxy at least.
Last edited:
- 3,714
- 2,718
- Thread starter
- #327
Where does it say "countless" in the original Japanese? You're relying on the English. The Japanese text keeps it vague and just says "a lot"
The Japanese text is what even explicitly tells us Star Bits are Stardust which is what the Toads used. We shouldn't keep a rating based upon vague interpretation. Just say "Bowser would've used the Grand Star to allegedly create his own galaxy" as the justification for the tier. That's all we need. But for Power Stars they don't scale at all.
Last edited:
- 12,562
- 2,517
Why would a luma make a galaxy for Bowser? This doesn't address any of our points whatsoever.
I use the English version because I don't speak Japanese. If you want to be uber specific about it then you can put in a translation request or something, but it seems like the Japanese version basically says stuff to the same effect as the English - a large/countless amount of Star Bits was used to form the Grand Star, and therefore this can't be used to put Lumas above Grand Stars. Plus all the other comparisons I've given which to my knowledge are still largely unaddressed.
- 3,714
- 2,718
- Thread starter
- #329
What other comparisons?
And I was saying that Bowser could use a Luma to create a galaxy instead of the Grand Star taking the whole game is another major plot hole if we subscribe to the idea Mario could just feed the Observatory Star Bits as a counter. Bowser, to create a galaxy instantly, could've just used a single or multiple Lumas, unless Lumas are now less than 3-C as a whole. If they didn't remake the universe and you subscribe to the idea they just remade the galaxy then this would be the case, which Mario supports as well as the Japanese version as it mentions the center of the galaxy only if we wanna go there.
And again, I was just saying Power Stars simply do not scale for any of the reasons on the profile at all. We have proof they require less energy. And we can't scale them past Galaxy, the game that proves they're inferior and don't scale, because that game comes later on and is more recent. Hell, they don't even amp Mario in Galaxy so we have no distinct proof they can scale to Tier 3 at all beyond maybe powering some bosses at best. But then we reach the issue of, if Power Star power bosses enough to be comparable or on par with Grand Star powered enemies, it doesn't make sense given the canonical fact Grand Star are superior.
And I was saying that Bowser could use a Luma to create a galaxy instead of the Grand Star taking the whole game is another major plot hole if we subscribe to the idea Mario could just feed the Observatory Star Bits as a counter. Bowser, to create a galaxy instantly, could've just used a single or multiple Lumas, unless Lumas are now less than 3-C as a whole. If they didn't remake the universe and you subscribe to the idea they just remade the galaxy then this would be the case, which Mario supports as well as the Japanese version as it mentions the center of the galaxy only if we wanna go there.
And again, I was just saying Power Stars simply do not scale for any of the reasons on the profile at all. We have proof they require less energy. And we can't scale them past Galaxy, the game that proves they're inferior and don't scale, because that game comes later on and is more recent. Hell, they don't even amp Mario in Galaxy so we have no distinct proof they can scale to Tier 3 at all beyond maybe powering some bosses at best. But then we reach the issue of, if Power Star power bosses enough to be comparable or on par with Grand Star powered enemies, it doesn't make sense given the canonical fact Grand Star are superior.
- 3,714
- 2,718
- Thread starter
- #330
Actually yeah. Let me word a better response.
No matter the version, Mario says in full English "Welcome! Welcome New Galaxy!" at the end of the game after the reset. We can also see stars still in the background during the reset feat, showing the entire universe was not pulled in. So from that context alone, only the Milky Way was effected.
This is further supported by Rosalina and the main plot of the Japanese game stating Mario needs to head to the center of the galaxy where Bowser took Peach. Bowser in the beginning of the game doesn't make mentions of the center of the universe in the Japanese either. So via contextual evidence and plot differences in the original Japanese version, we can support the idea that only one galaxy was effected and the other galaxies Lumas create aren't galaxies just like the Milky Way, but indeed smaller to fit within the confines of the plot of Japanese Galaxy taking place solely within the Milky Way.
No matter the version, Mario says in full English "Welcome! Welcome New Galaxy!" at the end of the game after the reset. We can also see stars still in the background during the reset feat, showing the entire universe was not pulled in. So from that context alone, only the Milky Way was effected.
This is further supported by Rosalina and the main plot of the Japanese game stating Mario needs to head to the center of the galaxy where Bowser took Peach. Bowser in the beginning of the game doesn't make mentions of the center of the universe in the Japanese either. So via contextual evidence and plot differences in the original Japanese version, we can support the idea that only one galaxy was effected and the other galaxies Lumas create aren't galaxies just like the Milky Way, but indeed smaller to fit within the confines of the plot of Japanese Galaxy taking place solely within the Milky Way.
- 12,562
- 2,517
The ones prior comparing Lumas to Star Power
Again, why would a Luma create a galaxy for Bowser? They spend the whole game trying to stop him. And no matter how you look at it, the Power Stars and Grand Stars are treated as superior to Star Bits.
You can't. The white streaks of light come way too close to Mario and Rosalina to be stars, and look nothing like how stars are typically portrayed in Mario Galaxy. Mario welcoming a new galaxy is also not a proof of anything other than the fact that the reset was at least 3-C in scope. This would also mean that Bowser's whole plan would've been to make another galaxy... inside his original galaxy, which wouldn't make sense.
Prove it. Prove that the scope of both versions is as fundamentally different as you claim.
- 3,714
- 2,718
- Thread starter
- #333
I still think Power Star shouldn't scale. I believe I've provided good reasons to support that. Grand Star may have proof of being superior but Power Stars don't and you can't claim that at all, Gyro. That's literally not proven anywhere. We even have in-game evidence Power Stars require less energy or have you conveniently ignored that? And if we go solely by the Japanese version then Lumas being 3-C wouldn't make sense even contextually as Bowser could've used Lumas to create a galaxy instantly, but he didn't. This is contextual proof they're not as massive as we think and the fact the game takes place within the Milky Way only solidifies that fact to me. The Trial Galaxies at the Edges of the Universe are treated as a special case as the Green Lumas are stated to hold a special power by Rosalina. Their special thing is the ability to open the "gateway" to the Trial Galaxies. So the fact Mario may have traveled outside of the Galaxy to reach them isn't a counterargument if people wanna argue that.
So yeah, Grand Stars are baseline 3-C as it took practically all of their life force to power the Reactors which could only perform a 3-C feat at best. Lumas would be downgraded to 4-A maybe if we're generous? Cause they could still technically be galaxies but just the smaller ones which would be 4-A. This would also make sense, as multiple star systems being formed would make a full on galaxy and would match the galaxy being sucked in and destroyed.
Power Stars don't scale to any of that though for reasons I've already provided and stand by. They will be maybe Tier 4 via the black hole thing and MAYBE the Mario Party 4 thing. We can focus on whether those are legit some other time.
I'm pretty certain of these arguments and I will stick to them unless a really convincing argument is made. But I doubt there's anything to say beyond using the English version and the guide to support the current ratings.
So yeah, Grand Stars are baseline 3-C as it took practically all of their life force to power the Reactors which could only perform a 3-C feat at best. Lumas would be downgraded to 4-A maybe if we're generous? Cause they could still technically be galaxies but just the smaller ones which would be 4-A. This would also make sense, as multiple star systems being formed would make a full on galaxy and would match the galaxy being sucked in and destroyed.
Power Stars don't scale to any of that though for reasons I've already provided and stand by. They will be maybe Tier 4 via the black hole thing and MAYBE the Mario Party 4 thing. We can focus on whether those are legit some other time.
I'm pretty certain of these arguments and I will stick to them unless a really convincing argument is made. But I doubt there's anything to say beyond using the English version and the guide to support the current ratings.
Last edited:
- 3,714
- 2,718
- Thread starter
- #334
Center of the galaxy
That enough proof or should I grab every single instance where they replaced universe with galaxy?
That enough proof or should I grab every single instance where they replaced universe with galaxy?
- 3,714
- 2,718
- Thread starter
- #336
I will say it again in a more condensed post so maybe people won't skim and will actually read. I'll even bold it.
Power Stars are made in both a Hungry Luma's galaxy creation as well as planet creation. Knowing this fact, Power Stars CANNOT scale to galaxy at all as we would be assuming the Luma outputted energy levels equating to the GBE of the Milky Way just to create a planet because it also created a Power Star. Planet creation also requires a pitiful amount of Star Bits, too, which would cap Power Stars off at a low number, much less than the required Star Bits for a galaxy. There is no significant evidence or proof to even imply they would scale.
Power Stars are made in both a Hungry Luma's galaxy creation as well as planet creation. Knowing this fact, Power Stars CANNOT scale to galaxy at all as we would be assuming the Luma outputted energy levels equating to the GBE of the Milky Way just to create a planet because it also created a Power Star. Planet creation also requires a pitiful amount of Star Bits, too, which would cap Power Stars off at a low number, much less than the required Star Bits for a galaxy. There is no significant evidence or proof to even imply they would scale.
Lou_change
He/Him- 10,145
- 5,391
It could be argued star bits are not needed to fuel the transformation power stars are easy for them to transform into like launch and pull stars but that seems unlikely however grand stars are not the greatest thing a luma can transform into the beacon is you see it has enough energy to subsume a grand star.
- 12,562
- 2,517
None of this first paragraph actually counters my points or bring up anything new regarding those points. Also, the Green Lumas specifically need the power of the green stars for Mario to travel to the edges of the universe. But yeah, apart from this everything else is a repetition of what's already been said.
Grab every instance of the Japanese version where it would say/imply universe in the English version, collate them together in an imgur post or something along those lines so they can be officially translated.
- 31,442
- 34,274
No offense, but there's a lot of Kanji words that are used interchangeably that can mean galaxy or Universe. I forgot if it was "Ginga" or "Uchuu", but the word in question more so means "Cosmos" or "Outerspace" but is often used interchangeably to mean galaxy or Universe. Besides, "Center of the galaxy" literally makes 0 sense within the context of the rest of the game. Because center of what galaxy exactly? Especially since Mario has been hopping to many other galaxies throughout his journey. Why would the center of the Milky Way Galaxy be so much farther away than all those other galaxies let alone the edge of the universe? Earth is also closer to the center of the galaxy than it is the edge of the galaxy, so regardless of attempting to retranslate it, that one specifically is like the ultimate loophole and expresses 2+2 =/= 4 levels of inaccuracy.
Not to mention, I'm getting really tired of how Foxthefox's attitude whenever he links a alleged translation. Because he keeps acting like his translated text is the most objectively accurate translation; when there are a lot of translators who argue otherwise. There's no such thing as an objectively accurate translation, and that's why English localizations are honestly being downplayed. The plot of Mario's games have always been relatively simple stories, and trying to make all these Japanese translation contradictions and trying to force the mindset that your own is the most accurate by far is just overcomplicating issues that aren't meant to be complicated at all. While I'm not agreeing 100% with Dino's decision to only use English localizations, I definitely do not agree with the opposite extreme to never use English localizations either. If words and phrases are too interchangeable to get proper words, such as words with flexible meanings and definitions. Then English localizations appears to be the translations that knows what it wants to say for English audiences. Because using Google+ to objectively say Hoshi means star is one thing, but if you look up Hoshi in a Japanese dictionary, the definition refers to celestial bodies in outer space in general, not just the sun or various stars; meaning meteors, planets and moons are often called stars by Japanese people.
In other words, I have to believe GyroNuts here.
Not to mention, I'm getting really tired of how Foxthefox's attitude whenever he links a alleged translation. Because he keeps acting like his translated text is the most objectively accurate translation; when there are a lot of translators who argue otherwise. There's no such thing as an objectively accurate translation, and that's why English localizations are honestly being downplayed. The plot of Mario's games have always been relatively simple stories, and trying to make all these Japanese translation contradictions and trying to force the mindset that your own is the most accurate by far is just overcomplicating issues that aren't meant to be complicated at all. While I'm not agreeing 100% with Dino's decision to only use English localizations, I definitely do not agree with the opposite extreme to never use English localizations either. If words and phrases are too interchangeable to get proper words, such as words with flexible meanings and definitions. Then English localizations appears to be the translations that knows what it wants to say for English audiences. Because using Google+ to objectively say Hoshi means star is one thing, but if you look up Hoshi in a Japanese dictionary, the definition refers to celestial bodies in outer space in general, not just the sun or various stars; meaning meteors, planets and moons are often called stars by Japanese people.
In other words, I have to believe GyroNuts here.
- 11,135
- 14,120
I am not sure if Ginga and Uchuu can ever be used to refer to the same thing. As far as my experience goes, the language is pretty clear on what to use for galaxy and what to use for universe. Confusion can arise when they are referring to one galaxy or multiple, though. And hoshi is also pretty much always used for either star or planet.
The thing here is that using one version as per need might seem like cherrypicking. I've myself encountered many instances where the english dub is greatly inaccurate when compared to the original Japanese. Though it is also correct that we cannot turn a blind eye to the official translation as well. We could do what we did in the other thread, gather relevant scans where there is confusion related to translations and get them translated by TheNinthHour to see what makes more sense and what is more consistent.
The thing here is that using one version as per need might seem like cherrypicking. I've myself encountered many instances where the english dub is greatly inaccurate when compared to the original Japanese. Though it is also correct that we cannot turn a blind eye to the official translation as well. We could do what we did in the other thread, gather relevant scans where there is confusion related to translations and get them translated by TheNinthHour to see what makes more sense and what is more consistent.
- 167,823
- 76,436
That seems like a good idea.
- 3,714
- 2,718
- Thread starter
- #342
I doubt Star Bits are irrelevant. We have full confirmation they can form a Grand Star.
As for the beacon, I guess?
Anyways, I personally believe that it's quite clear Power Stars don't scale. I used actual lore and evidence rather than just saying they scale for no reason.
I also provided the proof that the Japanese only refers to the center of the galaxy as the main goal of the game you work towards.
Using that, I believe we can only prove 3-C for the Grand Stars and Lumas when working together, but otherwise would be 4-A so they can still technically be galaxies and for everything to make sense. Going by our current ratings, Grand Stars were drained to almost death and it took a well-executed plan to get them to produce 3-C levels of energy. They aren't casually 3-C at all and the games do not imply this whatsoever. They would maybe be very, very slightly above baseline Galaxy with their entire life energy due to not actually dying but being on the brink of it. However, with Lumas, we say that they're an easy 3-C in that they form galaxies instantly and easily.
Am I the only one that sees the counterintuitive nature of that? It makes no sense for Grand Stars, this supposedly far superior form of Lumas, to have a weaker showing requiring it almost die no less than one of the most casual showings of a Luma, and there's nothing to imply Bowser's galaxy would've been something really huge at all so we can only assume baseline. I know there's things like upscaling but narratively and contextually does my interpretation not make more sense? Clearly the Lumas are inferior but don't actually make 3-C levels of energy and just create smaller galaxies. This doesn't seem problematic nor controversial at all as it wouldn't leave any questions about the scaling nor the game, as creating new star systems (that technically count as galaxies) within the galaxy is totally believable, and I personally don't get what's so hard to believe Bowser could create a galaxy over top of the preexisting one. The only issue people would have with this is by going off of the English version and the Prima Guide.
So what are the counters? "I say they scale so they scale?" Despite clear showings from the game saying otherwise; "Well the English says?" Even though we all know the Japanese takes precedence if it conflicts with the English; "Well the Grand Star upscales from the Lumas and would create a bigger galaxy?" Even though this same argument can be used in my argument to support the Lumas creating smaller galaxies to begin with, the only difference being we'd assume the Lumas are creating entire Milky Ways, which as I explained before doesn't make sense with the game taking place within the local galaxy; "Rosalina and the game states that the Observatory projects images of the galaxies across space and you constantly travel to these other galaxies?" This can be explained if each cluster of star systems are considered galaxies as they technically can be, and even if they are separate galaxies the fact remains only the main galaxy was affected.
And the main reason why only the galaxy being affected would make 3-C Lumas make no sense is because we'd then be saying that it took dozens, hundreds, pretty much a crap ton of Lumas to counter an event that only performed a baseline 3-C feat, while calling each one of these Lumas easily 3-C. It makes no sense.
Lou_change
He/Him- 10,145
- 5,391
Fair on the first part I don't think it is a good argument I just like playing devil's advocate.
Also the idea that they were effective using dead body to power their ships seems wrong, like Nintendo wouldn't just do that. right?
- 3,714
- 2,718
- Thread starter
- #344
It wasn't their dead bodies. Grand Stars willingly convert into energy to fuel the beacon. We can assume they were like that before the force sucked the power from the ship so Grand Stars can switch back to their physical forms, too. Odyssey also implies Power Moons/Stars (which would apply to Grand Stars as well) are just solidified energy in the shape of something.
- 3,714
- 2,718
- Thread starter
- #345
Updated the OP with my new arguments and proposals for any potential new people who join to be caught up
- 11,135
- 14,120
This thread is lacking in participation for a while so I'll go ahead and ping some more people.
@SamanPatou @Dino_Ranger_Black @Armorchompy @Maverick_Zero_X
What do you think?
- 167,823
- 76,436
So, is somebody willing to help out with this?
- 15,435
- 22,430
Foxthefox seems to make sense. I’ll see what I can do about gathering translations in a blog post.
- 3,714
- 2,718
- Thread starter
- #350
Yeah, those would be helpful. If it's okay, there is a certain statement that hasn't made sense to me that I would like a translation for.
It's another Rosalina statement
It's another Rosalina statement
- 167,823
- 76,436
@Foxthefox1000
I posted a message on your wall about your edits. They were extremely sloppily applied, I did not notice any good justifications for the 3-C and "At least 3-C" statistics that you inserted, the tier categories were not updated, the statistics were incoherent, and I am not sure that you were even allowed to apply most of these changes. I thought that you were only going to remove all scaling from Bowser supposedly creating painting worlds. All of this strongly needs to be addressed and likely corrected.
vsbattles.fandom.com
I posted a message on your wall about your edits. They were extremely sloppily applied, I did not notice any good justifications for the 3-C and "At least 3-C" statistics that you inserted, the tier categories were not updated, the statistics were incoherent, and I am not sure that you were even allowed to apply most of these changes. I thought that you were only going to remove all scaling from Bowser supposedly creating painting worlds. All of this strongly needs to be addressed and likely corrected.
Foxthefox1000
vsbattles.fandom.com
- 15,435
- 22,430
What changes were accepted? I’ve got some experience editing so I can apply them.
- 1,082
- 285
I think just yeeting Bowser making the painting worlds so far
- 3,714
- 2,718
- Thread starter
- #354
I explained that would make everyone only have scaling to 3-C left which is why i did that. I explained this exact thing to AKM and they said I could do it after posting that message so I thought it was fine. But apparently not
I made sure to link specifically to Grand Star too. The profiles without links or justifications never had them to begin with when I edited and I changed some wordings that were incorrect, like "his" for Kamella and DK still having pre-stellar
I made sure to link specifically to Grand Star too. The profiles without links or justifications never had them to begin with when I edited and I changed some wordings that were incorrect, like "his" for Kamella and DK still having pre-stellar
- 167,823
- 76,436
Thank you for helping out. Here are his recent contributions. I tried to clean up the structure for a part of the affected pages, but do not know if I succeeded well. You can inspect them and comment here regarding what needs to be further adjusted if you wish.
User contributions for Foxthefox1000 | VS Battles Wiki | Fandom
vsbattles.fandom.com
- 167,823
- 76,436
However, it is probably better if we continue this discussion in the thread below instead:
- 12,562
- 2,517
Basically this. Fox's argument relies solely on the Japanese version having a completely different plot to the English one. If this argument is to be used, then every statement that refers to the scope of the game being the universe (or more than one Galaxy) needs to be properly translated, with context + related english version provided so we can decipher the meaning correctly.
@TMaakkonen @AKM sama @Maverick_Zero_X @Antvasima what part of Fox's arguments do you actually agree with? The translations so far are insufficient and I've debunked anything game logic based in my previous posts. This needs to be addressed, as so far Fox's debunked arguments seem to be being posted ad-nauseam.
- 2,363
- 1,523
So, does this mean we won't give Mario and the others a 3-B key, even if we use multipliers?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
