Board Thread:Questions and Answers/@comment-7424710-20160613220722/@comment-12846745-20160614023429

Nkstjoa wrote: I can't enforce the matter anymore, so I'll just give my reasons for the rule back then and my thoughts on the matter even today.

For starters, it comes down to it mostly personal preference and bias whether one of these characters wins or loses. One person likes AVGN, they have him win. Someone else hates him, they have him lose. Both are wrong for the same reason. Fictional characters at least can attempt to be measured...

Speaking of, even if they have anything close to resembling battles or abilities on their respected shows... 99 times out of 100, it's for a joke and doesn't have any actual measurements whatsoever. Nostalgia Critic causing an explosion in his Quest for Camelot review isn't something to be measured or "an ability" they possess: it's just a joke for how frustrated he was with the movie that he literally "blew up" in anger. Likewise, for AVGN, him fighting his show's iteration of Bugs Bunny isn't actuallly supposed to be a measurable feat of his fighting prowess, strength, or durability: it's just him having that to entertain alongside the game review.

And I know I'm mostly going off of reviewers, but my final point I'd have is that these internet celebrities never intended their personas to be in fictional battles nor did they intend to showcase actual physical limitations. Their personas' "abilities" are done for entertainment purely, not to be consistent or measured. That point alone is why I've always wanted these types of characters to be blog-only. Otherwise we have statements like "Nostalgia Critic defeats [insert fictional character] because he can cause an explosion that levels a town with his anger" or "AVGN loses to [insert fictional character] because he died to a stick of dynamite". Alot of companies made that aren't Youtube shows didn't intend their characters for fictional battles either.