• 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.

DMC Downgrade/Adjustment

Status
Not open for further replies.
WeeklyBattles

WeeklyBattles

VS Battles
Retired
Messages
61,177
Reaction score
14,747
As you all may or may not know, Devil May Cry recently received a pretty big upgrade due to a statement from the creator of the series, Hideki Kamiya, claiming that Mundus created a universe in DMC 1. However, some time after this was asked, another user asked if Mundus was actually capable of creating a universe and Kamiya responded with nothing but "Could be", completely contradicting himself by stating that his previous statement may or may not have actually happened. And again, a user asked Hideki, this time if Mundus was capable of destroying the Human World/Universe, with his response again being "Could be". If Mundus can create a universe under his own power, he would absolutely be capable of destroying one, yet Kamiya states that this is only a possibility, that he may or may not actually be capable of this. I believe these two statements call into question the validity of the original statement. Thoughts?
 
Personally I think we should only go off what is said/shown in the games. WOG statements are fine but they have to be completely consistent with each other. One can't be a definitve statement confirming a character can accomplish a certain feat with two others only implying (at best) that he might be able to achieve said feat.
 
I don't think that we should be taking "Could be" statements from Hideki (or WoG in general) seriously anymore, seeing as they are shown to be written without much commitment and thought either. They have also been denied use for Mundus for the Possibly Low 2-C ranking. We should stick with Hideki's previous statement seeing that it was written with the intention of clarifying the scene within the game + correcting my viewpoint that only a Solar System has been created. Also asking WoG the same questions repeatedly (especially Hideki Kamiya) will never really result in anything concrete in the end as they may just be wrting things for the sake of it. Perhaps we should have a rule for where WoG should only be used if it clearly answers the question and leaves little to no room for ambiguity?

An another note you're assuming Hideki is aware of our system in where creation of a Universe means you can destroy it, it would be akin to downgrading Flash due to authors saying they doubt him as SOL despite performing feats which by our system rank as MFTL+
 
Before I give my interpretation, I would like to state a few things:

First, these questions clearly came after the first question AMM asked and were a direct response. They also seem to be "leading," that is, they were trying to get a specific answer out of him. I don't quite like the precedent that sets on here. To me, it seems as if someone who was unsatisfied with Dante vs Bayonetta saw the responses and attempted to elicit a different response from him based on different ways of asking the question. Whether or not that is acceptable is up to this wiki to decide I guess.

Second, one of the accounts appears to be a throwaway account, probably created yesterday or the day before. It's only tweet is to Hideki to ask that question and it has no profile picture or presence outside of that. As people know, throwaway accounts are meant to hide something. So what exactly are you trying to hide? I don't like that either.

Thirdly, "Human World" was a term used in the first DMC thread that got rejected and comes from the manga I believe. IMO it is a rather strange question to pose, except if you were a participant in that thread or happened to read through it in its entirety. So, again, the question is strange and I don't like the feelings I am getting from it.


That said, here is my opinion:

I was fine with the "probably 3-A" for Bayonetta. In this case, I am fine if you feel Dante deserves "probably 3-A" as well. However, if you look at the tweets, you will notice that there is one main difference between AMM's and others and that is whether or not the question is directly being asked.

In the question regarding the power of Aesir without the eyes; the question about the power of Mundus (and also Dante, since the question took 4 tweets in its entirety); and the question about the Human World (read: probably universe), they all ask if the character has the power to "destroy" it. In AMM's question. he doesn't ask about "destroying" but instead creating and never implies universe in his statement.

It seems to me that Hideki holds a different opinion about creation/destruction than us. Is that relevant? Perhaps. Perhaps if you asked him if Aesir could CREATE a universe without the eyes, the answer would be different. But that's sort of irrelevant and I don't really want us bothering him much more if at all.

So my opinion is: No, I do not think Dante should be downgraded, unless you mean to "probably"

Also, "could be" =/= "can't"
 
I agree with Alaka.
 
Just gonna bring something up.

WoG directly stated that Rick with prep could destroy an infinite multiverse, but since it is a tweet and we have not yet seen the best he can do in the show or comics, we still made it "possibly 2-A" with his lower showings included.

I still don't think any of the leading quotes + vague "shrugs" from Hideki are enough for Bayonetta, but if we do keep 3-A Dante, Sparda, and Mundus, they should probably have their old ratings with the added "possibly 3-A" with a link to the tweet.
 
Azathoth the Abyssal Idiot said:
I still don't think any of the leading quotes + vague "shrugs" from Hideki are enough for Bayonetta, but if we do keep 3-A Dante, Sparda, and Mundus, they should probably have their old ratings with the added "possibly 3-A" with a link to the tweet.
Click to expand...
This seems reasonable, too.
 
Azathoth the Abyssal Idiot said:
Just gonna bring something up.
WoG directly stated that Rick with prep could destroy an infinite multiverse, but since it is a tweet and we have not yet seen the best he can do in the show or comics, we still made it "possibly 2-A" with his lower showings included.

I still don't think any of the leading quotes + vague "shrugs" from Hideki are enough for Bayonetta, but if we do keep 3-A Dante, Sparda, and Mundus, they should probably have their old ratings with the added "possibly 3-A" with a link to the tweet.
Click to expand...
Well, I am inclined to disagree on Bayonetta but this thread isn't about that.

So that is reasonable.
 
Azathoth the Abyssal Idiot said:
Just gonna bring something up.
WoG directly stated that Rick with prep could destroy an infinite multiverse, but since it is a tweet and we have not yet seen the best he can do in the show or comics, we still made it "possibly 2-A" with his lower showings included.

I still don't think any of the leading quotes + vague "shrugs" from Hideki are enough for Bayonetta, but if we do keep 3-A Dante, Sparda, and Mundus, they should probably have their old ratings with the added "possibly 3-A" with a link to the tweet.
Click to expand...
Ah since Rick was treated with the "possibly" fashion, I suppose it would be reasonable for Mundus/others to be treated similarly.

I find it reasonable.
 
I mostly agree with everything said here. As Savage had said in order for a character to get a buff from a WoG it's better to be accurate and for the feat to be consistent with other hi level feats and for it not to come out as an outlier. That way it can be consistent with their stats.

Personally I think with the feats Rick has shown multiple times it's understandable why he got a Possibly 3-A since he casually causes that and has dwelved in the multiverse theory and has more concrete feats unlike Mundus and Dante who's feats are based on the ambigious response of twitter and a battle that could've been a teleportation or a creation of just a small area, with illussions of stars.. So yeah I disagree with keeping them because they still come off as outliers either way.
 
I agree with Alakabamm about that "Could be" tweets are not to be taken as a serious committment, but as throwaway lack of confirmation.

In comparison, the "Universe" statement was very specific, but I agree that we might have to add a "Possibly" before "3-A" for the DMC characters.

As AMM suggested above, perhaps we should have a rule about that only very specific responses from writers/game creators should be considered when evaluating statistics?
 
Edit: I agree with Azathoth. Their old ratings combined with "Possibly 3-A" seems most appropriate.
 
Hm, Word of god should always be taken with a grain of salt, but completely disregarding it entirely is probably a great mistake, as it can aid us in detecting outliers.

Nonetheless, I'm leaning more to Alakabamm's suggestion than Azathoth's. Him being contradictory on this topic means we probably shouldn't place any worth onto this statement.

Edit: Azathoth's suggestion seems more appropriate for this occasion, yes.
 
Ah yes, thank you for not making it a lengthy explanation, AMM.

Well from looking at Azathoth's comment and seeing that you (AMM) is fine with Possibly 3-A, i'm up for that as well then.
 
If we're going for making a rule for making a "Word of God" phrase legit or not, here are some guidelines I think we can use:

-We do not use statements that are phrased in a way that sounds like the author/creator is unsure with him/herself or sounds uncaring e.g. Could be, Maybe, Probably, Possibly etc.

-The statement in question needs to be consistent with the showings of the character or series the author made. Anything beyond that would be considered Inconsistency or an Outlier. e.g. An author stating a Planet Level character is Multiversal+
 
@MarvelFanatic119 I am mostly fine with your suggestion. What do the rest of the staff think?
 
@MarvelFanatic119 Sounds good. Also, i agree with the changes Azathoth suggested
 
So everyone is prteey much in agreement yes? Place them at their previous levels and add "Possibly 3-A" where it applies?
 
Okay. Who wants to perform the changes?
 
Okay. Thanks.
 
What do you think about the new editing rule suggestion?
 
By the way, I finished the edits, but the Dante page had its keys restructured during the universal update, so I was unsure of how exactly to apply the old stats. If anyone would like to spruce it up if something is slightly off, feel free to do so.
 
Should Dante and Mundus be bumped up to 3-A now due to these tweets from Kamiya that I have yet to see on the Vs Battle Wiki.

Here is Kamiya's first tweet that we're all Familiar with saying the dimension was a universe:twitter.com/pg_kamiya/status/745496116272103424?lang=e And another copy of the same tweet just in case: I.gyazo.com/4c2ef3b364267dfdfc8a8e95bda8bc4d.png Here is Kamiya's second statement saying the dimension was a universe: twitter.com/PG_kamiya/status/747284467794874368 Here is Kamiya being asked AGAIN if it was universe and providing a link to the original tweet once again confirming it WAS a universe: twitter.com/PG_kamiya/status/790364348610850822 And here is that same person asking again if Mundus created a universe and Kamiya telling him to read the original answer again: twitter.com/PG_kamiya/status/790396253087469568 This is Kamiya acknowledging it as a universe: vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/vsbattles/images/1/1a/Stc.png/revision/latest?cb=20160622133519 Here is Dante flying past distant stars: static.comicvine.com/uploads/scale_super/11124/111241753/4819805-2847873042-FesWu.gif Here is Kamiya NOT dismissing Dante flying to the edge of the universe: twitter.com/pg_kamiya/status/756308723404906496 Here's Kamiya's attitude towards questions and why he wouldn't be subtle if he wanted to troll people: media1.gameinformer.com/filestorage/CommunityServer.Components.SiteFiles/imagefeed/featured/platinum-games/Kamiya/RulesofLife.jpg
 
I thought that we already rated Mundus as 3-A?
 
We do, not sure why this thread is still open it was concluded nearly a year ago
 
@Antvasima He's "At least 5-B, possibly 3-A" whereas I believe Spartacus11315 is proposing to make him full on 3-A.

I am neutral to how DMC is rated, especially due to the shitstorms it's caused, but personally I believe Kamiya now on multiple occasions referring to this feat that happens as universe creation gives it a bit more credence than it might have used to. But regardless I am still fine either way.
 
Okay. I am also neutral regarding the issue of whether or not we should make him into a straight 3-A. However, it would be better to start a new content revision thread, than to revive an extremely old one.
 
For convenience sake, I'd like to settle this issue regarding Mundus here permanently. Try to make no room for other possible interpretations.

No, we won't accept any statements which are vague such as "maybe, maybe not". We have a rule on this @Spartacus

Regarding the 5-B stuff, that was implemented back in a time where dimension-creating feats were subjected to unreasonable standards e.g dimension creating feats in Kirby where one would assume the stars present are illusionary without any relevant evidence. With that out the way, there appears to be nothing which indicates the stars present in Mundus' dimension are illusionary. So if one wants to rank Mundus exclusively based on what we see a solid 4-A would be alright with me.

However, we have an alternative; arguably, more reasonable choice. We can use the statement Hideki gave to bump the 4-A to a 3-A; it's a situation where the totality of the dimension is unknown unless an authority clarifies on its true size. Think of it like this picture, you can view the animal present as a duck. But unless I or the artist told you it was actually a rabbit, you would be stuck thinking otherwise. For a more relevant explanation, harken back to the Men In Black script which revealed the "galaxies" were universes.

Hopefully, this message will clear this whole thing up.
 
It is probably still best to create a new content revision thread though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Ningenron
DMC: A Rather Controversial Revision
2 3 4
Replies
136
Views
8K
Ningenron
Ningenron
Pluto might be an alias used by Mundus
Replies
10
Views
2K
GilverFortuna
Ningenron
Dante's Immeasurable justifications
7 8 9
Replies
338
Views
24K
Huesito88
Huesito88
Lightning_XXI
DMC New Profiles and a Minor Addition
Replies
25
Views
3K
ShionAH
ShionAH
SuperSonicTL
2A (Possibly L1C) Devil May Cry - A relevant closer to a CRT
5 6 7
Replies
257
Views
19K
Ryu-Strongest-Fighter-in-Universe
Ryu-Strongest-Fighter-in-Universe
Back
Top