Gill vs. Charlie.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

thebluedragongales said:

Games don't tell us what's canon or not, because games are not the authority on story. The people who made the game are, problem is that unless you can get a conformation from them on whats canon. . .how do you decide whats canon and non-canon without confirmation from the company???

I know people have had problem with the use of Tiamats Faq, but until I see a better source that is properly sourced. I'm always going to use it, and if people don't want to debate because of it, that's fine.

-The Azure Dragon of Gales

I should be more explicit. What's canon is what matters, be it game or not. The only thing is that they are game characters which make games the primary source. As long as THAT source is canon. If it comes from the company and it is considered canon, it's canon. But saying games can't be used is a bit absurd.

It's like the KMC comic section saying that comics can't be used. Of course they can, but I also like to use stats, and other canon sources simply because showings are very inconsistent with some characters (like Wolverine).

And most debators will (and have a right to) question a source that is fan made, that is totally reasonable to me. If the game is canon, then that makes it canon. However in alot of cases (like SF), it's really hard to find good feats because of the lack of depth shown in things like films and endings, and I've had to use other sources (that were either canon or consistent with that power level).

[JACK-2]

admin said:

I should be more explicit. What's canon is what matters, be it game or not. The only thing is that they are game characters which make games the primary source. As long as THAT source is canon. If it comes from the company and it is considered canon, it's canon. But saying games can't be used is a bit absurd.

It's like the KMC comic section saying that comics can't be used. Of course they can, but I also like to use stats, and other canon sources simply because showings are very inconsistent with some characters (like Wolverine).

And most debators will (and have a right to) question a source that is fan made, that is totally reasonable to me. If the game is canon, then that makes it canon. However in alot of cases (like SF), it's really hard to find good feats because of the lack of depth shown in things like films and endings, and I've had to use other sources (that were either canon or consistent with that power level).

Well, I was never trying to exclude games from the source, that would be stupid. What I was saying was that games don't make up the canon themselves, and certainly do not tell us what's canon or not within them. Companies do that, and if someone wants to confirm something being canon, I believe they should get a source indicating what's canon or not. I don't really have a problem now a days with people disagreeing with a fanmade FAQ, but at least come with a counter source to argue it. Or, better yet, agree to disagree.

-The Azure Dragon of Gales

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

thebluedragongales said:

admin said:

I should be more explicit. What's canon is what matters, be it game or not. The only thing is that they are game characters which make games the primary source. As long as THAT source is canon. If it comes from the company and it is considered canon, it's canon. But saying games can't be used is a bit absurd.

It's like the KMC comic section saying that comics can't be used. Of course they can, but I also like to use stats, and other canon sources simply because showings are very inconsistent with some characters (like Wolverine).

And most debators will (and have a right to) question a source that is fan made, that is totally reasonable to me. If the game is canon, then that makes it canon. However in alot of cases (like SF), it's really hard to find good feats because of the lack of depth shown in things like films and endings, and I've had to use other sources (that were either canon or consistent with that power level).

Well, I was never trying to exclude games from the source, that would be stupid. What I was saying was that games don't make up the canon themselves, and certainly do not tell us what's canon or not within them. Companies do that, and if someone wants to confirm something being canon, I believe they should get a source indicating what's canon or not. I don't really have a problem now a days with people disagreeing with a fanmade FAQ, but at least come with a counter source to argue it. Or, better yet, agree to disagree.

-The Azure Dragon of Gales

I feel that is a very reasonable point of view.

[Darkstorm Zero]

I don't mind a compromise, however, even when I was using SF Eternal 2005 edition (The latest one made). nSado threw it out because he beleived it was made by Capcom of America, despite me quoting it's actual source including serial number...

It was at that point that I became very irritated, and started tearing into the validity of Tiamat's FAQ as a canon source.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

darkstorm said:

I don't mind a compromise, however, even when I was using SF Eternal 2005 edition (The latest one made). nSado threw it out because he beleived it was made by Capcom of America, despite me quoting it's actual source including serial number...

It was at that point that I became very irritated, and started tearing into the validity of Tiamat's FAQ as a canon source.

I don't believe that is particularly fair.

[brainchild81]

Gill wins

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

brainchild81 said:

Gill wins

Yep.

[JACK-2]

Aug 20, 2007 20:45:10 GMT -5 The Big Daddy C-Master said:

So you see them equal in that regard?

P.S I must say it is nice to talk without any fanboyism and trolling around.

I see Nash below Ryu and slightly higher than Ken.

[warmunger]

Charlie VS Gill? Seriously?