Talk:Invoked

This is the talk page for discussing the page, Invoked.
This page is for discussing how to improve the page. For general discussion and comments, use the general discussion forum. To ask about rulings or how cards work, use the ruling queries forum. To get help with building a Deck, use the Deck help forum. Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.	Please try to Be polite Assume good faith Be welcoming

Not Based on Final Fantasy

The links between the Invoked archetype and Final Fantasy are tenuous at best. Especially where the article attempts to link monsters to specific final fantasy characters. It is dishonest to use phrasing here (and on the trivia pages for each monster) that outright say "The "Invoked" designs were mostly based on Final Fantasy Summons" or anything along those lines. The closest you have to a link is that Raidjin shares a name across both franchises, but to think that YGO is being inspired by FF in this case would be completely misunderstanding the actual origin of the word (Raijin being a god of lightning in japanese mythology).

The claim that 'The "Invoked" designs were mostly based on Final Fantasy Summons' is being presented as though it is true. If this fact actually has evidence then you should have no trouble producing a source. Adding the information back in with a "You must be new here"(condescending much)"Konami almost never officially confirms the inspirations of cards and themes" is admittance that the only evidence is the above-mentioned flimsy, tenuous links. Where there is a link, it is actually far more likely that both FF and YGO are referencing an inspiration common to them both, rather than YGO actually referencing FF specifically.

Furthermore, adding the information back in with a comment such as "Untrue based on what?" is frankly mind-boggling - is the suggestion that evidence is required to disprove unverified speculation? I'm asking "True based on what?" and if the answer is that nothing explicitly denies it, then that's not enough proof.

As an example: Norito the Moral Leader bears a striking resemblance to a certain character from Naruto. The name even sounds incredibly similar to the show. This is a far closer connection than any of the Invoked monsters. However that would obviously be forgetting the context - that both are based on the traditional appearance of a Shinto priest. We wouldn't put in the trivia section for that page "Possibly based on a character from Naruto" (well, actually, if this was an Invoked article right now, it would state "This card is definitely based on a character from Naruto" outright) with the reasoning being (a) Konami doesn't usually say but the REFERENCE IS THERE, and (b) you can't prove otherwise.

This is what's going on with Raidjin, and - quite frankly - none of the other monsters. FF certainly didn't come up with the idea of Leviathans, for the water fusion, for example (which of course, possibly being a dragon [hedge your bets, am I right?], must also have been inspired by Bahamut? And not just dragons in general, which Konami loves). The crazy lengths the reasoning goes to is probably best exemplified by Purgatrio supposedly being a genderbent version of the Magus Sisters - why is that? Because there's 3 of them? That would be because of the huge significance of the number 3 in the Divine Comedy, something Konami has shown they were well aware of when they designed and developed the other Purgatorio reference in their game - Burning Abyss.

Where does this stop? This is like going through the Noble Knights and adding to all the Artorigus monsters "Based on a genderbent Saber from Fate/Stay Night". Should we mention how the name for Fairy Tail possibly comes from the anime of the same name, and try drawing a tenuous link between each monster and a character from that show? Since Konami won't ever explicitly confirm or deny it for either, you're going to be hardpressed to produce an answer to "Untrue based on what?" if you disagreed and wanted to remove it. HP2004 (talk • contribs) 02:24, November 24, 2017 (UTC)

There are lots of themes with unconfirmed relations, such as "Super Quantum" with Power Rangers, "Kozmo" with Star Wars/Wizard of Oz, SPYRAL with James Bond and so on. Even though Konami doesnt ever confirm or deny those relations, they are there and obviously there. The comparisions you made with Fairy Tail and Norito are plainly dishonest, as those cards are individual cards/series with no specific support rather than entires themes revolving around those animes. Ironically pointing out that Artorigus would be a genderbent is also a stupid comparision since the whole NK theme is blatantly obvious to be inspired on the Arthurian Legend of the Round Table. I condescendingly said you must be new here because you created this profile yesterday and are deleting those Trivia and references, but you seem to be unaware of how archetypes are designed or how some things work on this Wikia. You dont simply get to remove all those informations from pages without discussion and all admins are in agreement with all those references. Why dont you go and remove all the informations from the archetypes I mentioned? Spoiler: u gonna be banned for vandalism. GustaphMax (talk • contribs) 02:47, November 24, 2017 (UTC)

>There are lots of themes with unconfirmed relations, such as "Super Quantum" with Power Rangers, "Kozmo" with Star Wars/Wizard of Oz, SPYRAL with James Bond and so on

And if people want to make an argument that those archetypes have something other than Power Rangers/Star Wars/SPYRAL being what they're based on, I'd be happy to hear them, and consider them. As it stands though, nobody is disputing them.

>The comparisions you made with Fairy Tail and Norito are plainly dishonest, as those cards are individual cards/series with no specific support rather than entires themes revolving around those animes

I don't see how them being individual cards or not makes any difference to an argument about whether they're a reference. Norito is a particularly apt comparison to the Raijin issue.

>Ironically pointing out that Artorigus would be a genderbent is also a stupid comparision since the whole NK theme is blatantly obvious to be inspired on the Arthurian Legend

Ironically you missed the point, then, since it's another way of showing how a YGO archetype is blatantly referencing an old source material (i.e. Raidjin/japanese thunder god - Artorigus/King Arthur) rather than a modern franchise (i.e. FF - Fate/Stay Night).

>I condescendingly said you must be new here because you created this profile yesterday

Please try to: Be polite Assume good faith Be welcoming

I wasnt being condescending because you're new here. I was being condescending because you're new here AND were deleting those references without previous discussion. GustaphMax (talk • contribs) 14:59, November 24, 2017 (UTC)

Well so long as you can justify it. This is a tangent though so I'll stick with the rest of this discussion that you didn't choose to address. HP2004 (talk • contribs) 18:06, November 24, 2017 (UTC)

> all admins are in agreement with all those references

I would be very interested in seeing then where all admins confirmed that Invoked were indisputably FF references like the many related pages state. HP2004 (talk • contribs) 03:04, November 24, 2017 (UTC)

Something to note is the Japanese name, "Shokanjuu", aka "Summoned beast", which is the terminology used for the summons as a whole in Final Fantasy. Sanokal K-T (talk • contribs) 06:24, November 24, 2017 (UTC)

But that's a generic term - it's hardly like it was coined by Final Fantasy. Just a google of it shows how often it's used throughout japanese media. It would be like saying how using the word "Ritual" to describe ritual spells must be a reference to Harry Dresden since he sometimes uses rituals in his magic. Or, here's a FF example... it would be like saying White Magician Pikeru is a reference to FF White Mages. Both are called Shiro Madoshi, both wear white robes and specialise in healing. But obviously we know it's not, because the concept of white magic predates both YGO and FF. It's the same with the concept of Summoned Beasts. HP2004 (talk • contribs) 18:06, November 24, 2017 (UTC)

I have to agree, I'm not seeing the Final Fantasy paralells either, and I'm an avid fan of the series. Caliga, Raidjin, Cocytus, and Magellanica, all have rather generic designs. Mechaba is a Machine-type and is a knight riding a chariot, and that is Odin? No. I guess I can see the Magus Sisters in Purgatrio but it still seems a stretch.

Further, if these are Final Fantasy references, they bungled a lot of them. Where are Ramuh, Shiva, and Ifrit, the three iconic summons of the series? Why are the Magus Sisters Fire and Raiden Wind, they have no particular attachment to those elements. And why are both Raiden and Odin here, Raiden is an upgrade of Odin. And if they're based on Final Fantasy summons, why are they Fusion monsters and not Ritual?

I just really think this is stretching it. Aside from Purgatrio and maybe Raidjin's electrified sword and Caliga's green hair, I see no real Final Fantasy design influences here. As archetypes like Kozmo and Super Quant and SPYRAL show, when Yugioh wants to reference something else, they'll be blatant in it. DrakeyC (talk • contribs) 12:32, November 25, 2017 (UTC)

Does anyone else have anything to say, because I'm seeing no concensus on the idea and that means to me remove since there is not any significant agreement on it staying. DrakeyC (talk • contribs) 23:45, November 29, 2017 (UTC)

I guess the opinion of 3 or more admins would be required for any permanent change to be considered. GustaphMax (talk • contribs) 02:37, November 30, 2017 (UTC)

You're the one insisting they're based on FF Summons, the burden of proof is on you. If you cannot sustain your proposition then it should be removed. DrakeyC (talk • contribs) 03:56, November 30, 2017 (UTC)

If I were the only one that believes Invoked are based on FF, this information would not be on the page. All data on the pages are kept with the administrators' consent. That guy is the random guy that showed up out of nowhere insisting in removing something that has been accepted for months and you dont get to decide if this will be removed or not. The admins will decide.GustaphMax (talk • contribs) 16:02, November 30, 2017 (UTC)

You keep claiming the administrators support you. Please direct me to these admins and if possible the conversations where you discussed this page with them. DrakeyC (talk • contribs) 16:23, November 30, 2017 (UTC)

smh... Im not saying I discussed that with them, Im saying that admins reject the act of adding information or references that dont make sense, so if the relation with FF is here since the page were created more than 1 year ago, and 2 admins also editted the page (WinterNightmare and ChaosGallade) (you can check that on the page's edit log), it means that they are aware of that reference and support that it remains untouched, even not have being confirmed by Konami. My point is: if the inspiration on FF makes sense or not; if they will be kept or not, the admins will decide it, not us. Otherwise, this will become a pointless edit war with no consensus at all.GustaphMax (talk • contribs) 16:31, November 30, 2017 (UTC)

So what you're saying is - no, you have not actually discussed it with them, and no admin has directly voiced support for your theory. Okey-dokey. :) DrakeyC (talk • contribs) 18:25, November 30, 2017 (UTC)

Exactly!!! Which doesn't mean some random people can appear out of nowhere and remove an information regarding an entire archetype that have been up for over a year without any contestation. It's important to point out that Im not the one who noted the similarities between FF and the Invoked for the first time and stated that on the pages. Im just saying that for that reference to be removed, an admin have to authorize it. Feel free to contact them. What they decide I will abide by; that's how things work here, in the case you guys have missed it. GustaphMax (talk • contribs) 18:43, November 30, 2017 (UTC)

Drake while you bringing up good points, at this point you are getting pretty unprofessional about it and it's embarrassing and disappointing to watch. Please knock it off. The whole point of a talk page is for people to chime in about it, debate about it, etc. It's usually a relatively meaningful discussion but at the end of the day it's just a discussion. Gustaph hasn't done anything wrong so far in playing the devil's advocate. Besides, nobody is ever in 24/7 contact with the admins. Sometimes an admin will involve themselves in a talk page debate, sometimes they won't. Depends on how on the radar this is for them. Usually when something comes up we hope that they involve themselves before things get to something like this particular point, where people start antagonizing one another. But I will not fault them for letting this slide under their notice either, there are many edits per day and they can't look through them all. And usually more people are involved before people decide to get passive aggressive. I'll put the issue up to a couple of their talk pages to see if they will weigh in. Aeron Solo wuz here (If you wanna talk) 19:47, November 30, 2017 (UTC)

I don't think the points user make should be undervalued because they're not admins. If someone has a logical point to make, it shouldn't matter if they're an admin or not. Sure an admin might be needed to enforce a final decision, but that doesn't mean no one else is allowed to discuss. I would not consider leaving the debate to just the admins to be a consensus.

Just because an admin edits a page doesn't mean they endorse all of its contents. As far as I can tell WinterNightmare and ChaosGallade's edits don't even relate to the Final Fantasy claims.

I'll say HP2004 and Drakey have made these points, which have not refuted:

• Some of the commonalities come from the card and Final Fantasy summon having a similar origin e.g. Raidjin and Raiden both inspired by Raijin, the lightning god.
• Some of the comparisons are weak, such as "Invoked Purgatrio" having little in common with the Magus sisters beyond being a trio.
• If they were truly trying to base the cards on the Final Fantasy summons, they would have included some of the more iconic ones and less of the once-off ones.
• Two of the cards represent two forms of the same summon, but the cards don't share such a connection.
• The burden of proof lies in the people making the claim.

So I would be in favour of the removal of the Final Fantasy mentions.

Just because I'm an admin does not mean that has to be the final say. If I've made a mistake, sure someone should be allowed to point it out. -- Deltaneos (talk) 20:01, November 30, 2017 (UTC)

I think the connections should be removed as well. Overall, it just seems that this is a theme of 1 spellcaster Summoning creatures to fight for them, but a lot of these monsters are common in other media, so the Final Fantasy connection can't be strongly supported. --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 21:52, November 30, 2017 (UTC)

Thank you both for weighing in. I do value the opinions of non-admins, but in this particular case I wasn't comfortable acting one way or the other when the discussion reached a certain point. I got nervous and wanted help for a resolution.

That being said, would it be worth leaving the stronger individual cases on their individual trivia pages? I'm talking mainly about "Elysium", because that particular one's resemblance to Eden does seem to hold some water. Aeron Solo wuz here (If you wanna talk) 23:09, November 30, 2017 (UTC)

Elysium I could see staying, it's not a 100% "this is definitely an Eden reference" bit, but it's likely and there is a connection with the names and appearance. DrakeyC (talk • contribs) 20:49, December 1, 2017 (UTC)

So we are going to a consensus that the references have to be removed basically due to the weak comparisions, right? I'm not the one who made that theory, I'm not even a fan of FF and know almost nothing about it, so I'm not particularly in favor of maintaining them, as you guys can see when I said that if an admin would authorize that information to be removed, I would abide by that decision. But as Deltaneos pointed out, that would not be particularly needed. I just intervened because that user appeared out of nowhere deleting that information without previously proposing a discussion like this one. All I did was try to reinforce the need of an admin's opinion on a such peculiar issue.GustaphMax (talk • contribs) 00:36, December 2, 2017 (UTC)

I'm in favor of removing all the references from this page, just for consistency's sake, and then cleaning up each of their individual trivia pages as needed, if at all. Leave trivia points where there's a clear connection outside of same-myth-basis and get rid of the ones where it isn't strong. Sound good? Aeron Solo wuz here (If you wanna talk) 06:47, December 2, 2017 (UTC)

I already did this, lolGustaphMax (talk • contribs) 11:51, December 2, 2017 (UTC)

Didn't check. Sorry. Aeron Solo wuz here (If you wanna talk) 08:30, December 3, 2017 (UTC)