• 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.

Uncompositing the Dragon Ball Cosmology

Status
Not open for further replies.
LuffyRuffy46307 said:


These are all important people who voted

Agree: @Damage3245,@Deagonx, @Maverick_Zero_X

Disagree: @DarkDragonMedeus ,@CloverDragon03 ,@Executor_N0 ,@Lonkitt ,@LordGriffin1000 ,@KLOL506 ,@The_real_cal_howard ,@ImmortalDread

Neutral:
Click to expand...

Deagonx said:
In terms of users with voting rights, its:

Agree: Damage3245, Deagonx, Maverick_Zero_X
Disagree: DDM, Lonkitt, LordGriffin1000
Click to expand...

i am making a summary right now, so it would be better if both sides stoped arguing for now until i finish said summary and we can have a final re evaluation and new evaluation from staff to get this topic done
 
I mean sure but it's more because they are trustworthy well regarded members of the community rather than they have the say of how well a crt goes like the members with voting power. So to avoid further confusion you can have two lists between people with voting power well voting and people who are knowledgeable voting.
 
Viethhai, while I am opposed to the thread, there are clear guidelines in this situation, it is beyond me or any staff members to decide which one should be counted. So instead of discussing which staff member's vote should be counted, wait for the person to summarize each side's argument and let further staff members who are independent of the verse's context to decide it with careful consideration.
 
Vietthai96 said:
to be fair here, @CloverDragon03 and @KLOL506 while do not have voting right, they still are staff, and knowledge member of DB, which is important on it own and their vote are still considered highly, @Executor_N0 also still a staff, and he is highly trusted member by @Antvasima thus his vote also be considered highly
Click to expand...
No evaluation rights. It is what it is.
 
LuffyRuffy46307 said:


These are all important people who voted

Agree: @Damage3245,@Deagonx, @Maverick_Zero_X

Disagree: @DarkDragonMedeus ,@CloverDragon03 ,@Executor_N0 ,@Lonkitt ,@LordGriffin1000 ,@KLOL506 ,@The_real_cal_howard ,@ImmortalDread

Neutral:
Click to expand...

Technically, me, Lonkitt, and Griffon are the only ones with evaluation rights; Dread isn't staff and Cal is retired. The rest are calc group members and/or translators. Though, given this is a thread where translations seem important, I suppose Executor could count given he is honorary translator. But either way, he tends to be the most knowledgeable with these types of topics and I overall consider his judgement sufficient.
 
DarkDragonMedeus said:
Technically, me, Lonkitt, and Griffon are the only ones with evaluation rights; Dread isn't staff and Cal is retired. The rest are calc group members and/or translators. Though, given this is a thread where translations seem important, I suppose Executor could count given he is honorary translator. But either way, he tends to be the most knowledgeable with these types of topics and I overall consider his judgement sufficient.
Click to expand...
thank you very much for answering this
 
update on the summary, i finish the raw writing of the summary, but right now i am going to revise it to see if i can make it better worded and clear, since to admit, i can be a little to wordful with my words, i also still need to talk to the individual people of both sides if i summarize the points correctly, i thank all of you for your patience, it is getting close to being posted, i just ask for a little more of patience of you all
 
omegabronic said:
update on the summary, i finish the raw writing of the summary, but right now i am going to revise it to see if i can make it better worded and clear, since to admit, i can be a little to wordful with my words, i also still need to talk to the individual people of both sides if i summarize the points correctly, i thank all of you for your patience, it is getting close to being posted, i just ask for a little more of patience of you all
Click to expand...
Thank you for your work.
 
DarkDragonMedeus said:
Technically, me, Lonkitt, and Griffon are the only ones with evaluation rights; Dread isn't staff and Cal is retired. The rest are calc group members and/or translators. Though, given this is a thread where translations seem important, I suppose Executor could count given he is honorary translator. But either way, he tends to be the most knowledgeable with these types of topics and I overall consider his judgement sufficient.
Click to expand...
Don't mean to clogg the thread, but I think his opinion in this topic as a Japanese translator should matter to some extent
 
as i promised, here is the summary, hopefully we can get this done now. A big thanks to @ShakeResounding for helping me with the text formatting

It is good to note before we begin that all arguments using the Shueisha panel of the story of Dragon Ball with GT and Super in it is not considered usable, decided in this thread. As such, arguments arguing for it will not be included in this summary
one last thing, "Supporters" = People who agree with the thread, Opponents = People who Disagree with the thread, with all of this out of the way, let us begin

These are the scans that are in the verse page about why we currently consider all Toei stuff in the same multiverse/cosmology as the main canon/manga continuity. It's good to note that most, if not all, of the scans and arguments below are being argued by the "Supporters" side as being nothing but wording of how they are separate continuities and not actual in-verse alternate timelines at all.


First scan, second, and fourth scans (the third is farther below): The first is talking about a movie that is said to be "from a different history then the original work and the TV series", the second about Toriyama saying that GT is a "Grand side-story" to the original work/the manga, and the fourth about how the movies are a side story as well. There are two sides to this.

Supporters = The OP says that both of these are not talking talking about "a different history" in a lore, in verse timeline sense, but that this is in a meta contextual sense a different story to the original manga, aka, just saying that they are separated works and not that they are separated timelines in verse

Opponents = A counter argument presented is that terms such as "different history" in the first scan is talking about a different timeline and not a different canon, saying how it is in continuity with the Z Anime's continuity, with terms such as "side stories/story" being in reference in how it exists in parallel alongside the main canon/story in verse as well


Third scan: This is best separated from the rest; this is the scan showing the avatars of the authors of Dr.Slump commenting on GT, showing that they are aware of GT's existence would imply that it is in the same multiverse/verse as DBGT, since Dr.Slump is canon to DBS, this would mean that DBGT exists in the multiverse/verse as DBS.

Supporters = The OP is arguing that since there is no explanation to why GT appeared and is mentioned, that this could be nothing more than just a gag 4th wall break since Dr.Slump is full of nonsensical moments that are acknowledged in the verse as nonsensical since they are gag characters, thus not having any strong in lore implications, but being nothing more than a 4th wall break reference to GT than anything else


Fifth, Sixth and Seventh scans: The scans saying how the movies are different dimensions and paralel worlds to the original story, and thus fitting in the cosmology of the main canon.

Supporters = The OP is arguing that since these movies are said to be alternate dimensions in relation to the manga, that they shouldn't be considered alternate timelines for the Toei continuity. They should instead be considered for the manga, as that is what they are said to be a separated dimension from (since it is is said that the movies take place in a different dimension than those of the main story of the comics).
Part 2.1
A point about the movies being alternate timelines being invalid was brought by @Nullflowerblush here in relation to how Toriyama sees himself in the perspective of the movies there are basically two points here.

"Personal stance": This point is basically showing his statement falls under our WoG rules that statement in this part:
"Regarding direct information from the author/creator of a character: We do not use statements from them that are phrased in an uncertain, uncaring, and/or unspecific manner, such as "Could be", "Maybe", "Probably", "Possibly" etcetera." which "personal stance" could fall under

Opponents = A counter argument for it was that the word used in the original japanese was "平行世界的な出来事といえる" which is "can be said it's events of a parallel world." with the phrase "といえる" meaning moreso "can be said" in the sense of being able to do so

Supporters = The counter of the counter is that "it can be said" is as vague as the original translation, thus falling in the same problem of uncertain WoG statements per our rules

"I'm entirely just an audience member for them.": This point is pretty clear cut in what it is arguing; that since Akira has no involvement story wise for the movies, and that he considers himself as nothing more than an audience member, his word in relation to the movies has little to no weight or validity. Since, by his own word, he has as much say in them as an audience member.

Opponents = The counter argument presented for that is that him saying that he is just an audience member to the movies was purely at a writing standpoint, and that his authority as the creator of the franchise gives him the right to canonize anything he wants nonetheless.

Part 2.2
An argument for both sharing a verse is in @LuffyRuffy46307 argument here of a statement made about how DBS happens happens between DBZ and GT, making GT canon to DBS

Supporters = The counter argument presented for it is that the statement was for the BoG movie, since DBS didn't even exist back when the statement was made and, as such, doesn't have any weight for saying that GT is in the same verse or connected to DBS. Aside from the fact that GT being the future of DBS is an idea full of contradictions and plot holes to begin with.

Part 2.3
An argument brought also by @LuffyRuffy46307 is this one, saying that since Toriyama gave minor work in GT, alongside how they need his permission as the author to make things of Dragon Ball, that GT can be used for DBS.

Supporters = The counter argument presented was that the license for dragon ball is not solely of Toriyama, but of Shueisha, so his involvement is not really solid proof of a connection at all.

Part 2.4
An argument brought by @pineappleman was about how since we have confirmation of alternate timelines/alternate worlds in DBS, and since GT/Movies are said to be just that, then that must mean they are retroactively part of the main canon's alternate timelines, due to the worlds used being the same to describe both, and that since the verse seens to follow the Many Worlds Interpretation all parallel worlds such as GT would be canon no matter what.

Supporters = The counter-argument presented is that the simple use of "parallel world" is not enough to say that both are in reference to the same thing, and that they could simply be non-canon parallel worlds just like how any non-canon material would be. And since we have no official information if the parallel worlds talked about in Super are in reference to DBGT or the Movies, it ends up being merely an open-ended possibility.
Basically saying that even if they aren't or are canon is irrelevant since the statements about "side story" and "Parallel worlds" would be true either way, thus making it a moot point

Part 2.5
Another point given was from @TiltedFN, where he shows that guide books show GT-only stuff like the sugoroku space, which means that both GT and Super are connected in some way and is used as a way to enforce the point about the statements being in reference to parallel worlds in-verse.

Supporters = The counter-argument to this is that it's just another example of these type of spaces being described in the section of the guide, and doesn't have to necessarily imply that both are in the same canon/multiverse in relation to one another.

Part 2.6
Another point given was from @ProfectusInfinity; since they are called parallel worlds, and since DBS seems to follow MWI (Many-Worlds Interpretation), then the two must have similar cosmologies to one-another.

Supporters = The counter-argument is that they are not canon alternative timelines/worlds, and as such the argument of scaling cosmologies wouldn't apply.

Part 2.7
Another point shown was another one from @pineappleman where the Backstory of Trunks was said to be a "side story" and it is canon, so all the other "side story" remarks must be canon as well

Supporters = The counter-argument was that it's two different contexts; one is a manga written by Akira Toriyama which takes place in Trunks future timeline and is published in the Dragon Ball manga, taking place in the same continuity/story as the manga. While the others like the movies and GT do not take place in the same continuity/story, thus being a different case and context.

Part 2.8
Another point was brought by......well, me, about how hell/the afterlife (part of the cosmology) is shown to work differently in the Toei/GT continuity. When a person goes to hell they merely stand around there in the wastelands of it, while DBS shows us that an individual goes to their own hell, going as far as to imply that there is a hell specific for each planet. Which is simply not true for the Toei/GT continuity, since guys like the Ginyu special forces (who died on Namek) were sent to the same hell as the likes of Cell (who died on Earth). Thus showing that the rules of their cosmology working is shown to be different, thus the assumption "they are equals until shown otherwise since they referred to similarly in guides" could not hold much weight.

Opponents = The counter-argument for it was that while the inner workings of the cosmology are different, the mechanics of dying and being evil making you go to hell either way even if the specifics of both are different, and thus the cosmology itself is still similar enough to cross-scale.
Part 3.1
Another talk started by @DarkDragonMedeus was that even if they aren't canon to one another, the statements in guides covering both and the consistent similar portrayals of the universes between anime and manga would make it so that both cosmologies would be reasonable to be the same/similar to cross scale. People also used Occam's Razor for this argument later on in the thread.

Supporters = The counter-argument is that even if they are said to be side stories with similar core concepts, it still doesn't mean that the cosmology is shared since in many franchises non-canon material could be considered a "side story" even with their different aspects and lore.

Part 3.2
A point brought about this was this one by @SSJGeminiJJ about how the anime original content was created with the DB world and its lore in mind, thus elements from one would apply to the other as it is something that "could have happened" in the original work.

Supporters = The counter-argument for it was that the statement was saying nothing more than that they were sticking to Dragon Ball's roots, trying to make something feels like Dragon Ball rather than something lore-important like the cosmology. That Toei had to understand DB to do the anime original-content as a franchise, and not any cosmology or important lore implications.

Part 3.3
Another point brought was by @RedReaper; that since the anime and movies are based on the original material/manga, then it should be reasonable to composite the cosmology, sans the Super-only aspects like the 12 universes.
This one i feel like it is extremely important to this topic about whether or not GT is canon to Super as an alternate timeline or not; here, here, and here, provided by @The_Yellow_Topaz

This one is in 3 messages and goes a little longer than the others, so I will cover what it is saying.

The first saying how the translation for GT's description on its official site says "The story of the original work was depicted in the anime through "Dragon Ball" and "Dragon Ball Z". And the aftermath of the original work was developed as the anime original in "Dragon Ball GT"! A new adventure story of Son Goku, different from the comic, awaits!", implying that both GT and the manga are completely separate entities.

The second and third are saying more about how the term "other world" and "side story" does not intrinsically mean that it is a world in-verse of the original story, with the marketing for the DBS: Broly movie stating clearly that Gogeta and Broly were not part of the "official story" of Dragon Ball and clarifying that the term used is "正史 (seishi)". From which the closest translation is "canon", aka blatantly stating that Broly (Movies) and Gogeta (Both GT and Movies, since the one movie he appears in during Z is considered canon to GT here on the site) were not part of the canon of the Manga/Super/Main canon until they appeared in the DBS: Broly movie. Thus apparently settling down both of those as not being in the same canon/verse as the OG manga and DBS

So for the final count vote there will be two tallies. One for agreeing with GT/Movies to being canon alternate timelines, and another for them sharing cosmology, since an argument for them sharing even without being canon has been presented in the thread.

Option 1: GT/Movies being canon as alternate timelines:
Agree:

Disagree: @Deagonx @KingTempest @Damage3245 @Maverick_Zero_X

Neutral: @LordGriffin1000 (said that he "doesn't mind it") @LephyrTheRevanchist

Option 2: Composite cosmology independent of them being canon-alternate timeline:
Agree: @LordGriffin1000 @Elizhaa

Disagree: @KingTempest @Damage3245 @Maverick_Zero_X

Neutral: @Deagonx (Disagrees in parts, thinks that stuff directly made by Akira to GT/Toei/Movies could be reasonably be composited into the Main canon) @LephyrTheRevanchist (Same as Deagonx)

For this i feel like it is important to not only to tag the staff in the knowledgeable members list of the verse page, but also re-evaluation from the staff that already commented here, such as @Damage3245 @Maverick_Zero_X @Deagonx @DarkDragonMedeus @Lonkitt and @LordGriffin1000 , as the summarized points could show not yet seen points by them due to how this thread went
 
Last edited:
omegabronic said:
as i promised, here is the summary, hopefully we can get this done now

It is good to note before we begin that all arguments using the Shueisha panel of the story of Dragon Ball with GT and Super in it is not considered usable, decided in this thread. As such, arguments arguing for it will not be included in this summary
one last thing, "Supporters" = People who agree with the thread, Opponents = People who Disagree with the thread, with all of this out of the way, let us begin

These are the scans that are in the verse page about why we currently consider all Toei stuff in the same multiverse/cosmology as the main canon/manga continuity. It's good to note that most, if not all, of the scans and arguments below are being argued by the "Supporters" side as being nothing but wording of how they are separate continuities and not actual in-verse alternate timelines at all.


First scan, second, and fourth scans (the third is farther below): The first is talking about a movie that is said to be "from a different history then the original work and the TV series", the second about Toriyama saying that GT is a "Grand side-story" to the original work/the manga, and the fourth about how the movies are a side story as well. There are two sides to this.

Supporters = The OP says that both of these are not talking talking about "a different history" in a lore, in verse timeline sense, but that this is in a meta contextual sense a different story to the original manga, aka, just saying that they are separated works and not that they are separated timelines in verse

Opponents = A counter argument presented is that terms such as "different history" in the first scan is talking about a different timeline and not a different canon, saying how it is in continuity with the Z Anime's continuity, with terms such as "side stories/story" being in reference in how it exists in parallel alongside the main canon/story in verse as well


Third scan: This is best separated from the rest; this is the scan showing the avatars of the authors of Dr.Slump commenting on GT, showing that they are aware of GT's existence would imply that it is in the same multiverse/verse as DBGT, since Dr.Slump is canon to DBS, this would mean that DBGT exists in the multiverse/verse as DBS.

Supporters = The OP is arguing that since there is no explanation to why GT appeared and is mentioned, that this could be nothing more than just a gag 4th wall break since Dr.Slump is full of nonsensical moments that are acknowledged in the verse as nonsensical since they are gag characters, thus not having any strong in lore implications, but being nothing more than a 4th wall break reference to GT than anything else


Fifth, Sixth and Seventh scans: The scans saying how the movies are different dimensions and paralel worlds to the original story, and thus fitting in the cosmology of the main canon.

Supporters = The OP is arguing that since these movies are said to be alternate dimensions in relation to the manga, that they shouldn't be considered alternate timelines for the Toei continuity. They should instead be considered for the manga, as that is what they are said to be a separated dimension from (since it is is said that the movies take place in a different dimension than those of the main story of the comics).
Part 2.1
A point about the movies being alternate timelines being invalid was brought by @Nullflowerblush here in relation to how Toriyama sees himself in the perspective of the movies there are basically two points here.

"Personal stance": This point is basically showing his statement falls under our WoG rules that statement in this part:
"Regarding direct information from the author/creator of a character: We do not use statements from them that are phrased in an uncertain, uncaring, and/or unspecific manner, such as "Could be", "Maybe", "Probably", "Possibly" etcetera." which "personal stance" could fall under

Opponents = A counter argument for it was that the word used in the original japanese was "平行世界的な出来事といえる" which is "can be said it's events of a parallel world." with the phrase "といえる" meaning moreso "can be said" in the sense of being able to do so

Supporters = The counter of the counter is that "it can be said" is as vague as the original translation, thus falling in the same problem of uncertain WoG statements per our rules

"I'm entirely just an audience member for them.": This point is pretty clear cut in what it is arguing; that since Akira has no involvement story wise for the movies, and that he considers himself as nothing more than an audience member, his word in relation to the movies has little to no weight or validity. Since, by his own word, he has as much say in them as an audience member.

Opponents = The counter argument presented for that is that him saying that he is just an audience member to the movies was purely at a writing standpoint, and that his authority as the creator of the franchise gives him the right to canonize anything he wants nonetheless.

Part 2.2
An argument for both sharing a verse is in @LuffyRuffy46307 argument here of a statement made about how DBS happens happens between DBZ and GT, making GT canon to DBS

Supporters = The counter argument presented for it is that the statement was for the BoG movie, since DBS didn't even exist back when the statement was made and, as such, doesn't have any weight for saying that GT is in the same verse or connected to DBS. Aside from the fact that GT being the future of DBS is an idea full of contradictions and plot holes to begin with.

Part 2.3
An argument brought also by @LuffyRuffy46307 is this one, saying that since Toriyama gave minor work in GT, alongside how they need his permission as the author to make things of Dragon Ball, that GT can be used for DBS.

Supporters = The counter argument presented was that the license for dragon ball is not solely of Toriyama, but of Shueisha, so his involvement is not really solid proof of a connection at all.

Part 2.4
An argument brought by @pineappleman was about how since we have confirmation of alternate timelines/alternate worlds in DBS, and since GT/Movies are said to be just that, then that must mean they are retroactively part of the main canon's alternate timelines, due to the worlds used being the same to describe both, and that since the verse seens to follow the Many Worlds Interpretation all parallel worlds such as GT would be canon no matter what.

Supporters = The counter-argument presented is that the simple use of "parallel world" is not enough to say that both are in reference to the same thing, and that they could simply be non-canon parallel worlds just like how any non-canon material would be. And since we have no official information if the parallel worlds talked about in Super are in reference to DBGT or the Movies, it ends up being merely an open-ended possibility.
Basically saying that even if they aren't or are canon is irrelevant since the statements about "side story" and "Parallel worlds" would be true either way, thus making it a moot point

Part 2.5
Another point given was from @TiltedFN, where he shows that guide books show GT-only stuff like the sugoroku space, which means that both GT and Super are connected in some way and is used as a way to enforce the point about the statements being in reference to parallel worlds in-verse.

Supporters = The counter-argument to this is that it's just another example of these type of spaces being described in the section of the guide, and doesn't have to necessarily imply that both are in the same canon/multiverse in relation to one another.

Part 2.6
Another point given was from @ProfectusInfinity; since they are called parallel worlds, and since DBS seems to follow MWI (Many-Worlds Interpretation), then the two must have similar cosmologies to one-another.

Supporters = The counter-argument is that they are not canon alternative timelines/worlds, and as such the argument of scaling cosmologies wouldn't apply.

Part 2.7
Another point shown was another one from @pineappleman where the Backstory of Trunks was said to be a "side story" and it is canon, so all the other "side story" remarks must be canon as well

Supporters = The counter-argument was that it's two different contexts; one is a manga written by Akira Toriyama which takes place in Trunks future timeline and is published in the Dragon Ball manga, taking place in the same continuity/story as the manga. While the others like the movies and GT do not take place in the same continuity/story, thus being a different case and context.

Part 2.8
Another point was brought by......well, me, about how hell/the afterlife (part of the cosmology) is shown to work differently in the Toei/GT continuity. When a person goes to hell they merely stand around there in the wastelands of it, while DBS shows us that an individual goes to their own hell, going as far as to imply that there is a hell specific for each planet. Which is simply not true for the Toei/GT continuity, since guys like the Ginyu special forces (who died on Namek) were sent to the same hell as the likes of Cell (who died on Earth). Thus showing that the rules of their cosmology working is shown to be different, thus the assumption "they are equals until shown otherwise since they referred to similarly in guides" could not hold much weight.

Opponents = The counter-argument for it was that while the inner workings of the cosmology are different, the mechanics of dying and being evil making you go to hell either way even if the specifics of both are different, and thus the cosmology itself is still similar enough to cross-scale.
Part 3.1
Another talk started by @DarkDragonMedeus was that even if they aren't canon to one another, the statements in guides covering both and the consistent similar portrayals of the universes between anime and manga would make it so that both cosmologies would be reasonable to be the same/similar to cross scale. People also used Occam's Razor for this argument later on in the thread.

Supporters = The counter-argument is that even if they are said to be side stories with similar core concepts, it still doesn't mean that the cosmology is shared since in many franchises non-canon material could be considered a "side story" even with their different aspects and lore.

Part 3.2
A point brought about this was this one by @SSJGeminiJJ about how the anime original content was created with the DB world and its lore in mind, thus elements from one would apply to the other as it is something that "could have happened" in the original work.

Supporters = The counter-argument for it was that the statement was saying nothing more than that they were sticking to Dragon Ball's roots, trying to make something feels like Dragon Ball rather than something lore-important like the cosmology. That Toei had to understand DB to do the anime original-content as a franchise, and not any cosmology or important lore implications.

Part 3.3
Another point brought was by @RedReaper; that since the anime and movies are based on the original material/manga, then it should be reasonable to composite the cosmology, sans the Super-only aspects like the 12 universes.
This one i feel like it is extremely important to this topic about whether or not GT is canon to Super as an alternate timeline or not; here, here, and here, provided by @The_Yellow_Topaz

This one is in 3 messages and goes a little longer than the others, so I will cover what it is saying.

The first saying how the translation for GT's description on its official site says "The story of the original work was depicted in the anime through "Dragon Ball" and "Dragon Ball Z". And the aftermath of the original work was developed as the anime original in "Dragon Ball GT"! A new adventure story of Son Goku, different from the comic, awaits!", implying that both GT and the manga are completely separate entities.

The second and third are saying more about how the term "other world" and "side story" does not intrinsically mean that it is a world in-verse of the original story, with the marketing for the DBS: Broly movie stating clearly that Gogeta and Broly were not part of the "official story" of Dragon Ball and clarifying that the term used is "正史 (seishi)". From which the closest translation is "canon", aka blatantly stating that Broly (Movies) and Gogeta (Both GT and Movies, since the one movie he appears in during Z is considered canon to GT here on the site) were not part of the canon of the Manga/Super/Main canon until they appeared in the DBS: Broly movie. Thus apparently settling down both of those as not being in the same canon/verse as the OG manga and DBS

So for the final count vote there will be two tallies. One for agreeing with GT/Movies to being canon alternate timelines, and another for them sharing cosmology, since an argument for them sharing even without being canon has been presented in the thread.

Option 1: GT/Movies being canon as alternate timelines:
Agree:

Disagree:

Neutral:

Option 2: Composite cosmology independent of them being canon-alternate timeline:
Agree:

Disagree:

Neutral:

For this i feel like it is important to not only to tag the staff in the knowledgeable members list of the verse page, but also re-evaluation from the staff that already commented here, such as @Damage3245 @Maverick_Zero_X @Deagonx @DarkDragonMedeus @Lonkitt and @LordGriffin1000 , as the summarized points could show not yet seen points by them due to how this thread went
Click to expand...
Did you include God of Ice’s argument? I cant see it here
 
MeiouHades said:
Did you include God of Ice’s argument? I cant see it here
Click to expand...
i did, it is just that his argument is kind of already talked in other points across the thread, so it felt no need to highlight's his specifically, since other people talked about the same points as he did
 
LuffyRuffy46307 said:
It doesn't seem to have done it, there are many that are missing, for example the argument of @Executor_N0 and among others.
Click to expand...
his argument was already brought up by other people earlier in the thread, so just as Ice's argument i felt no need to highlight him specifically since it would just be repetitive, his argument is included in there, i just didn't highlighted his name specifically
 
I went through the summary, and my thoughts remain the same. We need information that discriminates between alternate worlds that don't share an identical cosmology and alternate worlds that do. Currently, we don't have any such information. We keep being provided information that would be true in either case and being assured that it tells us they share a cosmology when it doesn't.

For instance, the fact that Toriyama called it a "side story." What use is this information to us? What does it tell us about whether or not the cosmologies are identical? Nothing about the phrase "side story" necessitates that the cosmologies are identical. It being called a "different history" doesn't accomplish this either.

The whole premise of these works being non-canon is the contradictions between them and the primary continuity. I see nothing in the information provided that supports the assertion that cosmology differences are uniquely excluded from such contradictions, such that we could assume any cosmological information provided in a non-canon work is true for a canon work also. There doesn't appear to be any information to suggest that.
 
omegabronic said:
his argument was already brought up by other people earlier in the thread, so just as Ice's argument i felt no need to highlight him specifically since it would just be repetitive, his argument is included in there, i just didn't highlighted his name specifically
Click to expand...
That's not true, Omega, there were several counterarguments and you only put a few, only the ones that benefit you on your side.
 
LuffyRuffy46307 said:
That's not true, Omega, there were several counterarguments and you only put a few, only the ones that benefit you on your side.
Click to expand...
first off, i have no side here, i am a neutral in relation to this thread, second off i did put the counter arguments from both sides, hence why there is "Oponents" counters in there as well, i re read all of the thread, and i saw that some points were simply not offered counters through the thread, from both sides mind you, but the ones that did i put it in there
 
Not gonna lie, disagreeing with it and agreeing w/ Deagonx

I see nothing solid tying them to the same cosmology, or even being different timelines other than "parallel worlds" which just means (in this series) different series.

Especially with the logic of the time rings too and there only being as many time rings in the series are there are in canon timelines outside of the alternate series
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

LuffyRuffy46307
  • Locked
Dragon Ball Cosmology Canon
5 6 7
Replies
262
Views
13K
Damage3245
Damage3245
ProudLearner
Quick Ability Replacement | Son Goku (DB, Toei, DBGT, and Xeno)
Replies
12
Views
2K
SwordLegendz01
SwordLegendz01
ProudLearner
  • Locked
The Great Lee|Dragon Ball Manga CRT
Replies
14
Views
1K
DarkDragonMedeus
DarkDragonMedeus
The_Yellow_Topaz
  • Locked
Dragon Ball Z: Kakarot - The canon and the non-canon
2 3
Replies
99
Views
7K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Killerdrone123
"Smurfing through time" A Dragon Ball Super upgrade
2 3
Replies
98
Views
5K
Faridw
Back
Top