All the ways you wish you could be, that's me. I look like you wanna look, I **** like you wanna ****, I am smart, capable, and most importantly, I am free in all the ways that you are not.
An All Versus Forum is certainly able to be pulled off but it will take a little discipline. Standard rules will apply of course, no 1v1v1 fights, must be a cross between two mediums(or from a medium that doesn't have a versus thread), no No-Limits Fallacies, etc.
It will be bloated at first because a lot of people will want to see how their personal favorites fair up against others. All well and fun so long as A) No obvious spite and B) People learn to act mature.
Oh and since this thread already exists, no reason to let it get made. Along with any other cross medium threads that are particularly notorious for causing a lot of commotion.
Eh, they aren't allowed in the quite a few of the forums. So I figured it would be par for the course. 1v1v1 would get a little annoying I'd think. For example:
OoT Link(VG) vs Spider-Man(Movies) vs Sasuke Uchiha(Anime/Manga)
Link has little of a discernible personality so I don't know how he'd proceed here or who he'd consider to be the first to attack. Spider-Man in the movies would probably attack the one that looks most dangerous but neither really do. And Sasuke is insane so who knows who he'd attack first?
You get the point though of course. 2v2 means there would be some semblance of teamwork. Usually anyway, which is what makes it easier to guess how things will play out.
I strongly disagree with the 1v1v1 matches. It can and does work. We could quickly bring things in line if rules are enforced properly. Members will quickly learn what is acceptable and what is not.
Also, no limit fallacies are going to happen. Limit fallacies, which is the exact opposite of the no limits fallacy, are also going to happen. These are actually impossible to avoid ESPECIALLY when no upper limit has been named, or an unlimited statement has been made. I can go into great detail but suffice it to this:
Susano'o's mirror shield (something that popped into my mind, recently, as I was reading the Naruto thread): it can reflect any attack. Is that really true? Surely there's a limit? Maybe the "any attack" applies only to the relatively weak attacks of the Naruto-verse. A solar-system busting attack is certainly well beyond anything the characters in Naruto can fathom or have been exposed to...so possibly that's the limit? But wait...that's a limits fallacy. It very well could be infinite since it is not a "physical shield": it could very well reflect any energetic attack, no matter how large, simply because it's mystical. Placing any limit on it would be a fallacy that I LOVE to call the limits fallacy.
And thus is the case for no limits/limits fallacy being inevitable. You cannot simply ban any character or power simply because it will end up in an inevitable limits fallacy.
What needs to happen?
Solution: if it is discovered that a character or ability ends up in the hole of no limits/limits fallacies, the thread starter WITH the ruling of a mod, will need to amend the Opening Post's thread conditions. Time into the thread should not matter. It is impossible for a single individual to think of every possible angle in a versus match-up. I would like to see the ruling mod actually amend the OP so that people who have been gone from the AVF, after a while, can read the OP and be exactly up to date. I always feel sorry for those people that read the first 2 or 3 pages of a thread and are out of the loop when they finally make a decisions ONLY to find out that there are changes to the thread direction that makes their post stupid/irrelevant/wrong.
What this does not mean: the thread starter cannot change the thread conditions simply to keep his or her thread open, turn the favor in a matchup, or to spite other individuals. This WOULD require mods to be actively participating in order to make an informed decision on the thread. That's part of the reason so many mods are/were getting headaches over the suggestion.
Maturity will never be reached, ever, in any type of versus thread matchup. Ever.
Finally, there are literally DOZENS of different Superman vs. Goku threads that could be made since there are DOZENS (hundreds?) of versions of each character. That's what's so beautiful about an AVF: it has an almost infinite number of combination for matchups.
__________________
Last edited by dadudemon on Jul 4th, 2011 at 11:27 AM
I was talking more along the lines of fallacies that say something like:
"Ganondorf can only be killed by the Master Sword."
Which then leads to threads where even if the other person is certainly at Ganondorfs level, they can't be beaten.
Or whenever someone says Voldemort can't be killed because of them there Horcruxes.
Essentially any fallacy that makes you look like someone trying to make a thread look like spite when it technically isn't. Making a thread where a character is technically invincible to whatever the opponents can do is rather boring.
Cleared up?
If not, here ya go. Rule 12 explains it for me. And I just used flippant language. Granted, No-Limits fallacies still suck as an argument.
Edit: Also, just because you can technically have more than one thread of Goku vs Superman doesn't mean you might want to. It is a rather hot topic after all and one that might just lead to more headaches than anything else.
Awesome, yeah. We are on the EXACT same page. So much so that it's disturbing.
That's NOT supposed to happen.
I think all of that "crap" can be resolved in the OP as long as it isn't what people in the MVF call "gimping."
But that's essentially what it is.
I certainly do agree. I was just playing devil's advocate because I don't like to stifle conversation at the cost of pragmatism: let the posters have fun with an almost futile/ended debate.
Well depends on the situation. Just take out whatever rules say such and such can't be killed by anything except this macguffin so that opponents can fight. Not so much gimping as evening the playing field.
Gender: Male Location: In Luna's mane, chasing STAAARS!
I just realized that if an All Versus Forum is made, someone will someday make a Kain vs. Alucard thread and when that happens, Burning thought and FinalAnswer will unleash armageddon in there.
In other news, I don't know why but I want to make a Master Chief vs. Wolverine thread. John could have a chance if given the right weapons.
Well technically that can work but I prefer the method of saying Ganondorf can be defeated without it. Someone not used to fighting with a sword, say Goku, is not likely to realize he needs to use it. It's sort of limiting his opponents to having to do something they wouldn't do.
Let me ask you a question, do games have a place in an all versus forum? I mean would feats be difficult to prove?
__________________
All the ways you wish you could be, that's me. I look like you wanna look, I **** like you wanna ****, I am smart, capable, and most importantly, I am free in all the ways that you are not.
What about characters who aren't trained to use a sword? Hell, what about characters who can't even hold a sword properly? Do you not think that would be equally gimping them when their only viable form of attack is something they're either crap at using or literally cannot use?
So I guess the thread starter specifies, if using Dante Sparda, for example, if he is as he was at the beginning of DMC1? Or at the end? Or as he was in 2, or all? That's what's confusing me.
__________________
All the ways you wish you could be, that's me. I look like you wanna look, I **** like you wanna ****, I am smart, capable, and most importantly, I am free in all the ways that you are not.
KMC Community Forums
Jul 3rd, 2011 09:09 PM
