Deleting/Completely Rewriting the Reality-Fiction Interactions page

[Bobsican]

Well, the line to draw between a character watching a cartoon and a character being a "deity" in relation to the cartoon is quite arbitrary, this reminds me of how we used to keep tier 0 for supreme "omnipotent" entities above the rest of their setting, so personally I'm not a fan of this approach, at least as it currently is.

Do you mean qualitative superiority? If so, I think it'd be better to specify more into that direction for clarity's sake into the page, otherwise refer to the first point here.

Okay, I suppose.

Anyways, I've edited my previous post to also provide a more extreme case if we were to specifically abide on plot relevancy, which is kinda obsolete in the current discussion anyways as it's clear now that's not the only aspect evaluated to determine if something's tier 1 or not in normal circumstances. But either way, a example of a feat compromised out of not being treated notably by the plot/author is the tier 3 Spongebob feat, as much as the negative continuity and non-seriousness of the characters render it seemingly irrelevant even long-term.

 

[Reiner04]

Bobsican makes sense

 

[Jinsye]

Well, the line to draw between a character watching a cartoon and a character being a "deity" in relation to the cartoon is quite arbitrary, this reminds me of how we used to keep tier 0 for supreme "omnipotent" entities above the rest of their setting, so personally I'm not a fan of this approach, at least as it currently is.

The general rule of thumb would be if the tier 1's interaction with the lower world the primary aspect of their character, so for example most Player entities would qualify as it is their primary interaction with the lower world (them playing a game).

Kingdom Hearts would not.

 

[Reiner04]

The general rule of thumb would be if the tier 1's interaction with the lower world the primary aspect of their character, so for example most Player entities would qualify as it is their primary interaction with the lower world (them playing a game).

Kingdom Hearts would not.

Are you by any chance saying that if there a world exists, for instance 3d, that we can view that world as game inherently means we are R>F and so 4D?

 

[Reiner04]

• The Player (Imscared) sees the game of Imscared as fiction and is demonstrably superior to it. Due to the game being a full reality, viewing it as just a game would be grounds for an R>F Transcendence.

This example from your draft is controversial as one crt was still going over it and our staff members and many members were seems to disagree with it.

The draft was meant to set standards for what should qualify for R>F not self deciding over that this character is R>F and hence standard should be as per, Let's not include example that are controversial but rather clear which there are abundance of.

 

[Roachman40]

This example from your draft is controversial as one crt was still going over it and our staff members and many members were seems to disagree with it.

The draft was meant to set standards for what should qualify for R>F not self deciding over that this character is R>F and hence standard should be as per, Let's not include example that are controversial but rather clear which there are abundance of.

which CRT?

 

[Reiner04]

which CRT?

This one, undertale crt.

 

[Roachman40]

The Undertale player and the Imscared player are quite different.

The problems with the UT player was the fact that its transcendence over the world was incredibly ambiguous, the transcendence the imscared player has over the world, however, is rather blatant.

 

[Reiner04]

the transcendence the imscared player has over the world, however, is rather blatant.

Because?

 

[Roachman40]

The game clearly notices the existence of the player multiple times, and not just the protagonist, but an actually entity playing the game. White Face is clearly talking to you throughout the game, evidently trying to appease you, and begs you for mercy whenever you try to delete its heart.txt file. Another thing worthy to note, is that the player themselves has canonically much more control over the entire game than even white face, with the Readmeplease.txt file blatantly stating that white face would be unable to stop you if you change important files in the game, showing how superior the player is in the grand scheme of things.

As shown above, the game clearly knows its a game, which also solidifies the existence of a literal player, so to speak. The player themselves clearly sees IMSCARED as nothing more than a piece of fiction and canonically exists independently from it, and due to the game being a full reality/baseline reality, viewing it as just a game would qualify for R>F Transcendence, I would think.

edit: theres a blog for the verse on the verse page, so I suppose you can look there, if you want more info on it.

 

[Reiner04]

The player themselves clearly sees IMSCARED as nothing more than a piece of fiction and canonically exists independently from it, and due to the game being a full reality, viewing it as just a game would be grounds for R>F Transcendence.

Nah, it's not R>F but the reality that is seprated from us we view as game or fiction and control it through game.
For instance, let's say our entire universe is nothing but just a result of computer simulation or code, if we can access that computer by some means we can access the control over the entire universe, that doesn't give us superiority over the universe anyhow. There is literal no proof of transcendence.

 

[Jinsye]

Are you by any chance saying that if there a world exists, for instance 3d, that we can view that world as game inherently means we are R>F and so 4D?

Can you like explain this. Remember that dimensional jumps and R>F differences are not the same, by the way. A world can seem 3-D but still be 11-A in terms of R>F.

 

[Reiner04]

Can you like explain this. Remember that dimensional jumps and R>F differences are not the same, by the way. A world can seem 3-D but still be 11-A in terms of R>F.

I remember that and so will quote over what I said once again, it's not R>F but just a means through which we control the world. Computer simulation is pretty common sci-fi stuff to use in fiction. Controlling a world through games or computer shouldn't be qualified for R>F in the first place.

 

[Roachman40]

Nah, it's not R>F but the reality that is seprated from us we view as game or fiction and control it through game.
For instance, let's say our entire universe is nothing but just a result of computer simulation or code, if we can access that computer by some means we can access the control over the entire universe, that doesn't give us superiority over the universe anyhow. There is literal no proof of transcendence.

The imscared world is a world contained within the player entities computer, merely a game to the player as said. it isn't some alt-universe that you can access via your computer, and I feel its kind of a stretch to come to that conclusion when nothing in the game implies that, either.

 

[Jinsye]

I remember that and so will quote over what I said once again, it's not R>F but just a means through which we control the world. Computer simulation is pretty common sci-fi stuff to use in fiction. Controlling a world through games or computer shouldn't be qualified for R>F in the first place.

Was waiting for this argument.

Computers/video games/simulations are perfectly valid for R>F, there's no reason why they shouldn't be. There's absolutely no difference between the information contained in a painting and the information contained in a video game. They both absolutely prove qualitative superiority.

If you see an infinite 4-D thing as a finite 3-D painting, then it would be considered an R>F difference because no quantity of difference can describe it. If you see an infinite 4-D thing as finite 3-D data in a computer, it's the same thing. There is no difference.

The only case where this is valid is if there is nothing beyond the simulated world.

 

[Reiner04]

The imscared world is a world contained within the player entities computer, merely a game to the player as said. it isn't some equally real alt-universe that you can access via your computer, and I feel its kind of a stretch to come to that conclusion when nothing in the game implies that, either.

It is real or we wouldn't be scaling it, it exists canonically independent making it quite obvious to be a seprate world and assigning a player R>F just because he can control a world through game, I don't find anything related to transcendence or superior but just a way to control that said world.

canonically exists independently from it,

Computers/video games/simulations are perfectly valid for R>F, there's no reason why they shouldn't be. There's absolutely no difference between the information contained in a painting and the information contained in a video game. They both absolutely prove qualitative superiority

Congratulations they are not, and yeah information contained in painting and information contained in game, there is no difference between them but why does it matters?

 

[Reiner04]

If you see an infinite 4-D thing as a finite 3-D painting, then it would be considered an R>F difference because no quantity of difference can describe it. If you see an infinite 4-D thing as finite 3-D data in a computer, it's the same thing. There is no difference.

I see it everyday on my tv actually

 

[Bobsican]

The general rule of thumb would be if the tier 1's interaction with the lower world the primary aspect of their character, so for example most Player entities would qualify as it is their primary interaction with the lower world (them playing a game).

Kingdom Hearts would not.

Eh, that wasn't the issue in regards of KH's case qualifying for tier 1 or not as far I've talked with Ant and Ultima, it had more to do over a setting being the "baseline 3D" one regardless of context, and out of that such setting seeing something as fiction, even if the ones in the main setting can manipulate it subconsciously, would just render the "fictional" one as tier 11.

That bit in particular is what I disagree with as it's inappropiate to say the least to dismiss any case of a main setting seeing a "lower one" as fictional to tier 11, while rendering impossible to rate the main setting as tier 1 (and just 3D to the fictional one as said before) regardless of any context given.

I'm not saying that any case of a show within a show or the like means that a main setting is tier 1, but rather that there should be some allowance on arguments for a main setting to be tier 1 and the lower one being 3D if the portrayal leans there.

 

[Jinsye]

I see it everyday on my tv actually

You do not see timelines on your TV.

Congratulations they are not, and yeah information contained in painting and information contained in game, there is no difference between them but why does it matters?

It matters because then we can't just cut off a more modern form of conveying stories and information just because you don't want to. You need an actual reason because they're practically the same thing.

 

[Reiner04]

Also I am on my way to give ben Tennyson tier 1 scaling because inside his omnitrix exist a pocket dimension created through computer simulation that he can control through his mind.

 

[Jinsye]

That bit in particular is what I disagree with as it's inappropiate to say the least to dismiss any case of a main setting seeing a "lower one" as fictional to tier 11, yet be impossible to rate the main setting as tier 1 (and just 3D to the fictional one as said before) regardless of any context given.

I'm not saying that any case of a show within a show or the like means that a main setting is tier 1, but rather that there should be some allowance on arguments for a main setting to be tier 1 and the lower one being 3D if the portrayal leans there.

You could, yes. But that would require a lot of explicit evidence as it's far harder to argue than with a transcendent being that exists outside of the baseline reality. You'd probably need something as explicit as Umineko for that.

 

[Reiner04]

You do not see timelines on your TV

I do?

It matters because then we can't just cut off a more modern form of conveying stories and information just because you don't want to. You need an actual reason because they're practically the same thing

I did said they are same thing, I am asking why would a world made up of computer simulation and seeing it as fiction through some random screen and controlling it through that computer would be R>F?

If our world is a Result of computer simulation and we can somehow get access to it then we can control the world but will not be transcendent to it. I did remember watching even movie of such kind and i guess same applies for any kind of artifact that can control and shape the reality as we wish, they won't qualify for tier 1.

 

[Reiner04]

Also I am on my way to give ben Tennyson tier 1 scaling because inside his omnitrix exist a pocket dimension created through computer simulation that he can control through his mind.

Not to mention this case is literally what we are discussing now.

 

[Roachman40]

It is real or we wouldn't be scaling it, it exists canonically independent making it quite obvious to be a seprate world and assigning a player R>F just because he can control a world through game, I don't find anything related to transcendence or superior but just a way to control that said world.

Perhaps poor wording from me, the player existing independently from it was to show it was not bined to the game like white face was. The characters in the game world blatantly know there in a game and say so frequently, if the game world isnt in your computer and somehow a seperate alt. universe, why would they be saying this? white face here is stated to just be data on the players computer. Files on your computer make up the game world and manipulating/destroying the files destroy the game world in return. It would make more sense that the game world is literally contained within the computer, instead of some entirely separate alt. universe, especially since, as said, there is nothing in the game to imply that this is some alt. universe, but instead merely a game on the computer of the player entity.

 

[Jinsye]

I do?

You objectively do not. Stop trolling. It's basic comprehension that there is no little people in your television with their own little universe. Stop this line of questioning.

I did said they are same thing, I am asking why would a world made up of computer simulation and seeing it as fiction through some random screen and controlling it through that computer would be R>F?

If our world is a Result of computer simulation and we can somehow get access to it then we can control the world but will not be transcendent to it. I did remember watching even movie of such kind and i guess same applies for any kind of artifact that can control and shape the reality as we wish, they won't qualify for tier 1.

You're ignoring the point of R>F entirely.

There is a difference between having an artifact that can control reality because the reality is made of data, and literally seeing an entire cosmology as a video game. If you still participate within the video game, you will not qualify for R>F at all.

If you exist OUTSIDE of the video game, and see it as nothing more than such. You have qualitative superiority over it, just like with a book. This is because the 4-D world that exists inside the video game is embedded in your world as a finite object, and no amount of multiplying by any number will make that world reach your level.

Pocket dimensions shouldn't count for obvious reasons so your Ben Tennyson example is fruitless.

Since you're misinterpreting the standards in a quite frankly ridiculous matter, I don't see a point in responding to this line anymore unless you bring up a new, valid point.

 

[Reiner04]

Perhaps poor wording from me, the player existing independently from it was to show it was not bined to the game like white face was. The characters in the game world blatantly know there in a game and say so frequently, if the game world isnt in your computer and somehow a seperate alt. universe, why would they be saying this? white face here is stated to just be data on the players computer. Files on your computer make up the game world and manipulating/destroying the files destroy the game world in return. It would make more sense that the game world is literally contained within the computer, instead of some entirely separate alt. universe, especially since, as said, there is nothing in the game to imply that this is some alt. universe, but instead merely a game on the computer of the player entity.

Okay then, that world exists Inside the computer, That leaves the question over the type of world that game is, considering it's just a data, it could be of any dimensionality or non at all as data themselves doesn't need dimensionality in the first place. Also in Ben 10 inside a omnitrix itself exist a pocket dimension that is nothing but just a computer simulation but ben wouldn't scale from them.

Not to mention that regardless if they are tier 1 or not is after math but I disagree with viewing world as game or so and having control over it is R>F.

 

[Reiner04]

You objectively do not. Stop trolling. It's basic comprehension that there is no little people in your television with their own little universe. Stop this line of questioning.

As I said, if you're as saying that all those ppls exist in a telivision is one thing and viewing ppls through television is another as in later they might not exist in the tv, your point was later so I replied as per.

There is a difference between having an artifact that can control reality because the reality is made of data, and literally seeing an entire cosmology as a video game. If you still participate within the video game, you will not qualify for R>F at all.

Will say again, seeing something as fiction has nothing to do with R>F regardless if you're part of that world portrayed as fiction or not.

 

[Reiner04]

Also rather than making it a crt of players I would rather suggest to explain why computer simulation or viewing a world as game or what not will qualify for R>F.

Players are derailment here, I suggested to not pick controversial one's not that it matters as they're assigned for tier 1 so it'll take crt to remove them, so it doesn't matter.

 

[Antvasima]

So can somebody write an easy to understand explanation post regarding what currently needs to be evaluated here, so I can ask for staff help in that regard, please?

 

[Jinsye]

This is a rough draft.

It may be a little bit clunky, so input on how to improve it would be much appreciated

The draft should be evaluated.

Bob's points are on if the baseline reality could be treated as tier 1 depending on the context. Which is yes.

Reiner seems to be pulling a nonsense point about video games not being a qualifier for R>F. I'd like to debate that at least.

 

[Antvasima]

So can somebody write an easy to understand explanation post regarding what currently needs to be evaluated here, so I can ask for staff help in that regard, please?

This is a rough draft.

It may be a little bit clunky, so input on how to improve it would be much appreciated.

The draft should be evaluated.

Bob's points are on if the baseline reality could be treated as tier 1 depending on the context. Which is yes.

Reiner seems to be pulling a nonsense point about video games not being a qualifier for R>F. I'd like to debate that at least.

@AKM sama @DontTalkDT @DarkDragonMedeus @SomebodyData @Celestial_Pegasus @Wokistan @Andytrenom @Ultima_Reality @Mr._Bambu @Elizhaa @Qawsedf234 @ByAsura @Sir_Ovens @Damage3245 @Starter_Pack @Abstractions @LordGriffin1000 @Colonel_Krukov @SamanPatou @GyroNutz

Would you be willing to help out here please?

 

[Eficiente]

There is a lot I wanted to go over in this topic, you sent me to have a private talk with DontTalkDT about it, that was on a pause and now this thread happens. That's ok but I fear everything's going to be very messy. Let's take this with patience and no derailment.

 

[Reiner04]

Reiner seems to be pulling a nonsense point about video games not being a qualifier for R>F. I'd like to debate that at least.

Ad hominem
Viewing a world as fiction or comic is no different than viewing that world as game, as I said before a world can simply be a result of computer simulation or codes, and having that code or computer through which we can control the world doesn't grant R>F, a device shouldn't grant R>F. Example Ben's omnitrix dimension that is just a computer simulation which ben can control through his mind but it doesn't grant R>F. Video games itself can simply be a pocket dimension, it doesn't mean anything.

 

[Jinsye]

Viewing a world as fiction or comic is no different than viewing that world as game

This is true. That's why both should be viewed equally. If viewing something as a comic/book isn't Low 1-C, then viewing something as data should. Nobody has provided any reasonable justification as to why one qualifies but not the other.

as I said before a world can simply be a result of computer simulation or codes, and having that code or computer through which we can control the world doesn't grant R>F, a device shouldn't grant R>F. Example Ben's omnitrix dimension that is just a computer simulation which ben can control through his mind but it doesn't grant R>F. Video games itself can simply be a pocket dimension, it doesn't mean anything.

Your device isn't what's granting you R>F, it's your state of existence. You can use this exact same argument for a book. The book is the 'device' in which they control the world. You have to stop making these random arbitrary differences between simulations and other media. Absolutely everything you've said can be applied to any other media.

Which is why we have the demonstration of superiority criteria, and thus your Ben 10 example is moot.

 

[Reiner04]

Your device isn't what's granting you R>F, it's your state of existence.

My point since start of the thread.

 

[Reiner04]

Rather than following the idea of being author or having control over said fiction (as I have seen both cases w/o the author transcending that said fiction), being qualitative superior to said "world/setting" that has been viewed as fiction such that vandalising the "that entire world/setting" to nothing or "existentially inferior" Seems more appropriate.

^

 

[Jinsye]

Okay? So nothing is wrong then?

Data should qualify for R>F if there's a demonstrably superiority. Like all other things.

The Imscared Player's state of existence is what grants them superiority, simply. They are the equivalent to an IRL player that has a whole reality as finite data inside their computer. This is the most textbook an R>F interaction can get. You would have R>F over any idea demonstrated in your computer.

It's not an alternate universe that can be accessed in the computer, it's not a pocket dimension, it is demonstrated to be a more 'real' player playing the 'fictional' game. That's what differentiates it from Ben Tennyson. A pocket reality made through simulation is not enough. The interaction must be characterized by the metafiction/R>F. If it is treated as less 'real', then it qualifies. That is simple.

 

[Reiner04]

Computers/video games/simulations are perfectly valid for R>F, there's no reason why they shouldn't be. There's absolutely no difference between the information contained in a painting and the information contained in a video game. They both absolutely prove qualitative superiority.

Here with I disagreed

A pocket reality made through simulation is not enough.

I agree with.

So yeah, everything is fine now.

 

[Qawsedf234]

They are the equivalent to an IRL player that has a whole reality as finite data inside their computer

Data isn't fictional though. Its just data, which isn't a dimensionality lower or anything. Rewriting code is just a specific interaction with that world. The IRL player is just a 3-Dimensional human with no indication that they have god-like power or anything.

 

[Reiner04]

This is confusing from what I see, the world itself that has been portrayed as fiction matters not that how one interacts with fiction or games itself matters unless there is nothing cleary known or stated about the game world. Also is it necessary to have R>F Transcendence as tier 1 necessarily? Lower world itself can be just 2d or 1d R>F shouldn't be tier 1 in that case.