Nah I'm sorry but neither of you are correct on this matter. Doesn't matter what he's referring to himself as when he literally has the authority to determine the canonicity of this stuff. I wouldn't consider this a good argument at all
That doesn't matter. It's still completely within his right to canonize them to the manga. Also, calling himself an audience member is unironically just him being humble to the scriptwriters, since they do most of the work. He still has actual involvement, he's not even a typical audience member. Though that's irrelevant to the main point here.
Damage is not correct, like @SSJGeminiJJ said, he is an audience member in reference to his actual involvement with the writing of the story, you can't just completely blow over that, he straight up says they are alternate worlds, and would this not line up with GT being mentioned in slump which is canon to DB? Hard disagree.
Not that the "side stories" take place in the same fictional universe? In this case, Toriyama clearly refers to those side stories as parallel worlds.
Yep if literally everything needs to be stated this community has no reason for existence. This hobby lives and dies on interpretation of statements and requiring specific evidence just kills it. It's not even about DB even though I'm a supporter on it. In another thread a glass panel in a heavily guarded place needed specific examples to be ballistic despite being pretty evidently one. There comes a point where nothing except the simplest most obvious statements are accepted and by then what do we do except just cataloguing them.
There isn't evidence, because everything we've been provided would still be true if they didn't have a shared cosmology.
YES
It is purely an assumption that these side stories are under a shared cosmology rather than separate cosmologies. Nothing you've quoted has indicated that.
Toriyama IS the evidence, he is the author, and that is how he treats them, plain and simple, what more evidence do you need? Does toriyama need to personally hand mail you letter a that says they are in a different dimension? In the context of his interview, that is clearly how he wants to treat these "side stories". And what evidence is there that the cosmologies are different? Even in a guide book, the suguroku space is also mentioned, which is something that was introduced in GT.
Nothing Toriyama said indicates a shared cosmology. All he said is that they're side stories or stories from another dimension.
The very purpose for arguing for a shared cosmology is to include statements from non canon works to upgrade the cosmology beyond what can be achieved just from canon works. Those discrepancies are de facto evidence against them being the same, but I don't really need to prove they're different, you need actual evidence and so far we have assumptions and nothing else.
occam's razor yadiyadiyada about how it's more likely that they share the same cosmology than that they don't
Oh wow color me convinced. I disagree with the OP now.
Of course they would have similarities since in the end it's dragon ball and sticks to the same core idea.... Being a side story doesn't really mean much for a shared cosmology as anything from a non-canon spin off is a side story.
Ok but you literally agree that as something from Dragon Ball it'd have similarities. So once again I ask, what is the argument against it being the same cosmology?
even in the toriyama comment, he says that GT is a grand side story to the original Dragon Ball. It points to sharing the same cosmology.
But it's still treated as an alternate timeline, and nothing contradicts them having the same cosmology.
It should be the same regardless, since any Anime original content is already officially said to be done with an understanding of the DB world in mind, and made to be in coherence with it as though they could've happened in the manga.
I never agreed GT/Toei anime was a parallel world.
whats the evidence they aren't? Is it, "toriyama is headcanon"?
Sticking true to dragon balls roots is not proof for a shared cosmology this is just them explaining on how they made filler that would fit into the dragon ball story.It should be the same regardless, since any Anime original content is already officially said to be done with an understanding of the DB world in mind, and made to be in coherence with it as though they could've happened in the manga.
Ok that's fair. I'll remove that from my post. Can you answer my question though?
Toriyama said the movies were a different dimension to the manga but even then the way he phrased it made it an uncertainty.
vsbattles.fandom.com
Still waiting for a response to this from anyone, Idrc who.
Uncertainty? Mf he straight up said it, theres no "possibly" its just a fact. This is supported by dr slump which is, you guessed it, written by TORIYAMA.Toriyama said the movies were a different dimension to the manga but even then the way he phrased it made it an uncertainty.
Editing Rules
The VS Battles Wiki presently consists of 35,645 pages, most of them listing the statistics of characters across different fictional franchises. However, there is a tremendous amount of work involved in maintaining the accuracy of statistics and upholding a high quality for the profiles. In...
The argument is that it hinges on it being called a "side story" which is the equivalent of saying it's a spin off or derivative (which doesn't automatically make something in same cosmology) and a literal one off reference with little to no elaboration on any cosmology (argument for the cosmology which points I addressed)
Similarities =/= identical cosmology. The very concept of them being non canon means they contradict the main series. There's no reason to assume that cosmology is an exception to those contradictions.
That doesn't answer my question. I'm not looking for you to disprove the argument FOR it being the same cosmology. I'm looking for you to prove the argument AGAINST it being the same.
The events, not the cosmology. What are you talking about?
Sinec the author describes non canon work (GT/movies) as parallel worlds, and we learn that these parallel worlds exist in Super and follow the many worlds interpretation, there is no reason for a composite cosmology to not exist and so I disagree with the OP.
