Originally posted by Nephthys
Its left purposefully ambiguous so they can always justify him surviving.
Originally posted by RevanSpoilers
Beefington has no reason to lie and is one of the most respected debaters here. He's pretty much tdtd's heir, imho and he and Janus both say that you're wrong. Prove up or shut up buddy!
Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
You're confusing him. He's too busy being objective!
I do not have to prove that Revan is not alive. I do not have to prove a negative. You have to prove that he is alive. There is no authority on this board RS. We are all debating our opinions here, the only authority on these matters are GL and Lucasarts officials.
You all claim to be debating but we are not?
Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda
I do not have to prove that Revan is not alive. I do not have to prove a negative. You have to prove that he is alive. There is no authority on this board RS. We are all debating our opinions here, the only authority on these matters are GL and Lucasarts officials.
You all claim to be debating but we are not?
Poor child. You have to prove that Revan is dead, despite how terribly you tried to word that as if we were asking you to prove a negative. Nothing suggests he's dead so even if we entertain your weak non canon beta 3 builds ago argument, the onus is on you. Otherwise, you lose.
Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda
I do not have to prove that Revan is not alive. I do not have to prove a negative. You have to prove that he is alive. There is no authority on this board RS. We are all debating our opinions here, the only authority on these matters are GL and Lucasarts officials.
You all claim to be debating but we are not?
1. You made the claim that Revan died as a direct result of the battle. Considering his body vanishes in a huge flash of light, it's not clear whether or not he's dead because Bioware/Lucasarts officials haven't made any official claim either way.
2. Also, if all you intend to do is regurgitate GL/Lucasarts "official quotes" and standards, why DEBATE? Isn't the purpose of DEBATING to compare and contrast ideas to find out which is MOST LIKELY TO BE THE CASE? If all you intend to do is post immutable and unassailable facts, click on EU Forums and bug them.
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
2. Also, if all you intend to do is regurgitate GL/Lucasarts "official quotes" and standards, why DEBATE? Isn't the purpose of DEBATING to compare and contrast ideas to find out which is MOST LIKELY TO BE THE CASE? If all you intend to do is post immutable and unassailable facts, click on EU Forums and bug them.
I thought it was to win at any cost and to revel in the lamentations of your slain. shrug
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
1. You made the claim that Revan died as a direct result of the battle. Considering his body vanishes in a huge flash of light, it's not clear whether or not he's dead because Bioware/Lucasarts officials haven't made any official claim either way.2. Also, if all you intend to do is regurgitate GL/Lucasarts "official quotes" and standards, why DEBATE? Isn't the purpose of DEBATING to compare and contrast ideas to find out which is MOST LIKELY TO BE THE CASE? If all you intend to do is post immutable and unassailable facts, click on EU Forums and bug them.
So let's say that Revan did survive. Does not change the fact that he still lost and was forced to retreat. He's still weaker than the people who fought him in the flashpoint.
2. There are certain things that are up for debate that are not blantantly stated in canon. Things like Sidious being the most powerful Sith Lord and Yoda the most powerful Jedi up to the PT ARE NOT UP FOR DEBATE. Why? They've already been blatantly stated in canon.
Now if you make a fight like Dooku vs. Maul or Dooku vs. Vader Those can all be debated because GL or any source of canon has never said anything about that.
Originally posted by Mizukage Yoda
So let's say that Revan did survive. Does not change the fact that he still lost and was forced to retreat. He's still weaker than the people who fought him in the flashpoint.
The problem with this kind of reasoning is that you cannot canonically prove how strong the members of said Flashpoint really are in reference to anyone else. They are at this point unknowns, but hardly weaklings. The Sith Inquisitor storyline even at low levels is well above the norm in power. You wholesale slaughter acolytes and fellow inquisitors, defeat Khem and make him your servant, and defeat a Sith Lord singlehandedly. And presumably, this flashpoint (IF it's even canon, mind you. Like KotOR, TOR has a multitude of different dialogue choices, plot devices and such that can be easily retconned or in some cases not happen at all) may have up to what? Potentially up to Four prodigies. Remember, Bioware and Devs have confirmed that the heroes you portray in TOR aren't just "Random Trooper/Sith/Agent X"; they're the best of the best, literally.
2. There are certain things that are up for debate that are not blantantly stated in canon. Things like Sidious being the most powerful Sith Lord and Yoda the most powerful Jedi up to the PT ARE NOT UP FOR DEBATE. Why? They've already been blatantly stated in canon.
Okay, let's play it your way for a second.
Sidious is the most powerful Sith Lord evah, according to GL, who is specifically focused only on his movies. He's stated about EU "it's not my world" and basically that he doesn't regulate it heavily if at all, limiting his interaction to "Fates of movie characters" and "names that can't be used because they're in a book I have of names". This is the same guy who states that Obi-Wan is too old to put up an impressive display against Vader, but Dooku who is 20-30 years older is doing flips and combating pretty much every Jedi of note multiple times. But really, let's accept your position as ABSOLUTE, because that's your agenda here really.
Mace beats Sidious.
Mace > All Sith.
Mace solos everything.
Is that absolute enough for you?
Now if you make a fight like Dooku vs. Maul or Dooku vs. Vader Those can all be debated because GL or any source of canon has never said anything about that.
So basically, if GL said something, you cannot argue against it, even if the context isn't provided in EU, only in the "movies only" sub-canon which Leeland Chee and GL have both stated is entirely separate.
Again, EU is built on the movie canon, but the movie canon itself can be considered self-containing, and GL as the creator of that canon has absolute control... within that canon. GL didn't create Revan, Vitiate, Satele Shan, or even T3. He's not an expert on how powerful they can or cannot be mainly because he is entirely divorced from their creation and he's uninterested for the most part.
Let's try another example: Marka Effin' Ragnos. Once stated by narration to be THE most powerful of the most powerful Sith. GL personally reviewed Golden Age of the Sith comics, did you know that? You know what his sole concern was throughout? Not that Marka Ragnos could rival or best Sidious. No, not that. It was the fact that Ragnos' tomb looked too much like an Egyptian tomb, and some aesthetics were changed. That's it.
So if I take your absolute stance, I can conclude that GL approves of Ragnos being THE most powerful of the most powerful by his omission of any contrary argument at the time of creation. Therefore, Ragnos solos everyone except Mace Windu, who he must discriminate against in order to succeed.
Fair enough?