• 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.

Worlds, Dimensions and Universes

Status
Not open for further replies.
8,373
3,043
Well, this should have been tackled a lot of time ago, but I guess now is a good time to do it.

Worlds and Dimensions are words generally used to describe places outside of the main universe, and universe is, well, an universe.

My problem comes from the lack of standards for size for the former two. We sometimes consider worlds to mean universe without much more context, like with JoJo's cosmology which is 2-A for having "Infinite Worlds", but not once it is stated that there are "infinite universes". Something similar happens with Pokémon. Currently they scale to several countless dimensions * 300 millions. The problem, once again, is that many of those aren't explicitly stated to be universes, like Bronzong's dimensions, Ultra Space etc.

Still, many series like Castlevania or Zelda scale their 4-A or High 4-C from the creation, respectively, of worlds in Dracula's castle or from Demise's Demon World.

Now, before continuing, I want to make something clear. I'm NOT trying to upgrade nor downgrade any of the series presented above. Rather, I'm merely analyzing them in order to create a definite standard that we can use to evaluate other verses.

Obviously the difference between the first example and the second one is that we consider worlds or dimensions that are created alongside the original universe, especially if they're created by an already confirmed Tier 2, to be universal in size, whereas worlds or dimensions created later on by a character need proof. Also, as we partially see from DMC, parallel dimensions of an established universe are also generally considered universes.

Conclusions
We should write a standard, something like this:

"Worlds or Dimensions that are created alongside the main universe, especially if it's done by an established Tier 2 or higher and/or are parallel dimensions of an established universe should be considered universal in size. Instead, dimensions or worlds that are created later on, especially if they're created by a character in the setting of the story, are to be considered pocket dimensions and, as such, fall under the already established standards for them"

I've merely analyzed what most verses in the wiki do, and created a standard for the evaluation of other verses. Obviously this doesn't apply for worlds and dimensions that are stated to be smaller than universal.
 
Where should we mention such a standard?
 
I think the standard, if documented, should explicitely mention that all the various context that could have been to this feats has to be considered.
 
Should we just go with the standard that's in the OP or should we discuss here a bit what cases should prompt skepticism about a world being universe sized and which cases shouldn't?
 
This one, in my opinion, will be a bit harder as different Authors use different meaning for those terms some use Worlds, some use Universe, some use Dimensions, some use Cosmos, some use Space-Time, some use Starry Sky, some use Reality and for one World may mean the Planet, the Galaxy, the Universe, the Dimension or maybe even higher and so on. For one verse it means something while for another it's something else.
 
DontTalkDT said:
I think the standard, if documented, should explicitely mention that all the various context that could have been to this feats has to be considered.
That's something we already do for literally everything, so yes.
 
Zaratthustra said:
This one, in my opinion, will be a bit harder as different Authors use different meaning for those terms some use Worlds, some use Universe, some use Dimensions, some use Cosmos, some use Space-Time, some use Starry Sky, some use Reality and for one World may mean the Planet, the Galaxy, the Universe, the Dimension or maybe even higher and so on. For one verse it means something while for another it's something else.
Which is exactly why I'm trying to make standards for it.
 
One of the cases that I think is relevant here is when there isn't any kind of central "world" as opposed to when the setting of the verse consists of one main universe and one or more worlds that exist outside of it and which cannot easily be claimed to have the same stature as that main universe

One of the verses I know is set across multiple different worlds with each world consisting of common trends such as being ruled by one God and one Devil and containing most of the same races. One of the characters when learning about the worlds even exclaims "other worlds? Those really exist?" implying this was a commonly known concept of multiple worlds being utilized here. This always felt like the worlds are blatantly parallel universes but because of the strict standards here, I never got my doubts out of the way about the verse's ratings.
 
I agree with the first part of the rule proposal. The second half of the rule proposal:

  • "Instead, dimensions or worlds that are created later on, especially if they're created by a character in the setting of the story, are to be considered pocket dimensions and, as such, fall under the already established standards for them""
I disagree.

World or dimensions created can still be Tier 2 if characters can create or create an worldwehich is in context universe mid-story ot end of a story, also. Such characters in this wiki are like Rimuru Tempest (Web Novel) among others.

So, I think the part of rule should mention world can mean universe or pocket realm and as such should be judge on a case by case basis.
 
@Elizhaa

Our Pocket Reality Manipulation page already acknowledges this.

"If the pocket reality is of comparable size to a universe, and has its own timeline, this would simply be a Low 2-C feat according to the tiering system."

I'm saying that if a case doesn't follow the first part, This should be used to evaluate it instead. It can still very well be an universe if it follows those standards.
 
This is just a stealth attempt to push for a universal wiki standard to make Zelda Tier 2.

I vehemently disagree because I see no logic whatsoever in the proposal and it in fact uses erroneous examples in the OP.

If is absurd and a complete ignoration and reversal of the very concept of burden of proof to automatically assume that s dimension is Universal in size simply because it was created alongside the main universe.

Apparently every Heaven and Hell in fiction is now a universe if it was created by a God alongside the main universe? That is demonstrably incorrect.

As always we need proof not assumptions.
 
Matthew Schroeder said:
This is just a stealth attempt to push for a universal wiki standard to make Zelda Tier 2.

I vehemently disagree because I see no logic whatsoever in the proposal and it in fact uses erroneous examples in the OP.

If is absurd and a complete ignoration and reversal of the very concept of burden of proof to automatically assume that s dimension is Universal in size simply because it was created alongside the main universe.

Apparently every Heaven and Hell in fiction is now a universe if it was created by a God alongside the main universe? That is demonstrably incorrect.

As always we need proof not assumptions.
"If you need to resort to petty personal attacks, instead of actually showing logic and argumentative skills, then I find it inane that you are taken seriously in any way."

Do what you preach my dear. Also, Tier 2? Lol, I wish

And yet, that's what we do. You're also explicitly ignoring the fact that 99% of the time heaven and hell are inside the same universe. Dante's inferno, Greek's afterlife etc.
 
It's not what we do and if we do it's stupid. We need proof that a dimension or world is universal in size. Not automatically assume it is because "it feels right". Proof is everything in a debate, all else is secondary.

And considering you just made a blog post arguing about why some dimensions in Zelda should be considered full on universes... Yeah I have my doubts about the honesty of this thread.
 
Matthew Schroeder said:
Apparently every Heaven and Hell in fiction is now a universe if it was created by a God alongside the main universe? That is demonstrably incorrect.
Welp, technically, in the conventional sense, the afterlife is not a conventional dimension, is more a plane of existance, a metaphysical place.

So, if I understand good, any additional creation that appeared alongside the creation would be considered infinite by default if this rule is accepted, am I right?
 
No you didn't. Pokemon and JoJo are visibly talking about alternate realities / universes in their examples.

The reason they are accepted as universes isn't because "some Tier 2 made them" it's because of context. You are twisting the facts to support your argument.

I also pointed out direct contradictions with the argument before with series where heaven and hell are less than universal in size. Which is most of them.
 
Matthew Schroeder said:
This is just a stealth attempt to push for a universal wiki standard to make Zelda Tier 2.
I vehemently disagree because I see no logic whatsoever in the proposal and it in fact uses erroneous examples in the OP.

If is absurd and a complete ignoration and reversal of the very concept of burden of proof to automatically assume that s dimension is Universal in size simply because it was created alongside the main universe.

Apparently every Heaven and Hell in fiction is now a universe if it was created by a God alongside the main universe? That is demonstrably incorrect.

As always we need proof not assumptions.
The first part I disagreed with becauseI think it would be an Appeal to motive Fallacy.

The other are great points that I can agree with. I recommend the case by case basis for the jugments now with as a solution.
 
Well before this turns into another member-vs-member flame war I'd like to state I somewhat agree, not that it matters. Implications can be enough in the face of a certain lack of evidence, we've followed this for some time. However, outright saying a world created by a universe-creating entity is inherently a universe also doesn't make very much sense.

So, as per the usual, another thread will devolve into "Ah yes, case by case, a neutral standpoint, very good". In most cases I see it becoming universal but obviously we can't have an open-and-cut rule that allows a lot of sloppy mistakes in.
 
Yeah obviously this should be case by case. It's rather obvious. Context and evidence should be examined on an individual series level. Not through a global umbrella standard that allows for innacuracies to slip in.
 
Matthew Schroeder said:
No you didn't. Pokemon and JoJo are visibly talking about alternate realities / universes in their examples.

The reason they are accepted as universes isn't because "some Tier 2 made them" it's because of context. You are twisting the facts to support your argument.

I also pointed out direct contradictions with the argument before with series where heaven and hell are less than universal in size. Which is most of them.
And then I ask you: "What's this contest?" What is what makes those universes?

Your "contradiction" is nonexistent because what you're referring to is about places that are inside the universe.
 
I've desired to keep quiet on this so far, but this really, really seems like something that should be handled on a case-by-case basis. We don't need to have an entire section of regulations on it alone.

How "worlds", "dimensions" and "universes" are related to each-other in any given story are subject to extreme variety, and what they mean and what they don't should preferably be left up to interpret and be debated by knowledgeable members.

Tl;dr, does this even need to be a thing?
 
TriforcePower1 said:
And then I ask you: "What's this contest?" What is what makes those universes?

Your "contradiction" is nonexistent because what you're referring to is about places that are inside the universe.
To prevent a user war, Tri, you know exactly what that context is. Why are you asking for it again when it was specifically explained to you elsewhere?
 
@Crab Ultimately Case by Case means nothing without at least some basic guidelines to refer to. Without those it just opens the door for inconsistent handling of statistics.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top