Yes, I intentionally overexagerated my storyline example. It is a common debate tactic to take what someone is doing/saying and extend it to an almost ridiculous point to show the flaw in the process. But, since you didn't like that, let's back it down a bit. Sticking with the Paramount example, lets take another look at this by considering Star Trek. Paramount owns Star Trek. The are, however, wise enough to make multiple shows, instead of one that jumps back and forth all over space and time. Currently they have Discovery, Strange New Worlds, and Lower Decks, and while they have all had crossovers (yes, the Lower Decks cartoons were on an episove of SNW) they are not one show.
I currently have plans for 17 AVN's. I will probably have to turn those over to a child one day though, because I am not going to try and put them all in one game. (Actually I hope to build a studio that employees up to 4 teams of 3 and do 4 games at once. but that's beside the point.)
To be continued... have to take my kid to school.
Reductio ad absurdum often leads to fallacious arguments if you're not careful. Whilst there is a thing such as proof/refutation by contradiction in mathematics and propositional logic, you need to be able to logically derive falsehood for it to work. Put simply, if a proposition and its negation can both be derived from a premise, it proves the premise false.
My proposition is that immersive fictional worlds are built from many story lines. Rather than disproving it, your argument actually supports my proposition. You can take any of the Star Trek shows you mentioned, and you'll find a multitude of story lines in each of them. The fictional world of Star Trek is made immersive by having all these story lines, both within and across these various shows.
Let's say in the world of WVM, the creator wanted to make the world more immersive so he decided to create a spin-off. Split the story lines, like you want him to. Would that spin-off be about the same character, in the same time-span as the original? You can't extract just the basketball into one series and the charity in another, and the fights in another. All these events are related to each other, so they wouldn't feel right being separated. Each of those series would skip considerable parts of the story. But if he made a Damian spin-off that shows what happens to Damian after the events in the main series, or a prequel about how the MC got to where he is, that would be a spin-off just like we see in television.
As for "The reason that we are able to discuss, critique, and make comments and suggestions here is because BD never comes to F95."... That's utterly illogical to me. If he has said he will never come here again (probably because he got sick of people doing exactly what you're doing...), then regardless of what word you use, all you're really doing is complaining to feel better about your own frustration. It's ultimately a huge waste of your time, like shouting into the void.
And finally I wanted to say something about your art institute teachers. It exemplifies what I hate about art school. Who is the teacher to say something should be red instead of blue? Or whether something needs to be re-done? My creative development wasn't quite so limiting as the academic process. Art is in the eye of the beholder, which is why ultimately an artist should be selfish. You can't make something that everyone enjoys. An artist makes what THEY enjoy making, and they hope that other people can appreciate what they've made. An artist that cares too much about what other people think paralyzes their own creative process. Art school centers way too much on the consumer, because it's about creating "marketable" art.
My mother went to art school long long ago (she's in her 70s now). It was still a vocational school, but teachers taught techniques and skills, and didn't impose artistic focus to the degree modern schools do. I've seen her create all kinds of art in my lifetime. From wood-working to paintings, to little ceramic figures. Furniture, metal solding, the inside walls of our house, the list goes on and on. She always used to say "You will never finish if you're too perfectionistic. What feels like a flaw now can turn out to be a beautiful detail in the finished work.". I've got a talent for writing, English lit teachers always spoke very highly of me, but I write solely for myself. I just like to create stories and imagine places that don't exist. Even if I were to try to get something published, I would never write something for the sole purpose of being published. I write for me, if other people like it, good for them. If not, nobody's forcing them to read it.
I'm not going to respond to the self-plug you insert into the discussion. It makes it sound like you're more motivated by jealousy of his success than anything else. I've thus far held myself back from downloading your games and grading the writing to see if you live in a glass house. But I won't, because as I've made clear, that's not what artistic expression is about. I'm not here to judge your creativity. As long as you like what you've made, that's enough for me not to disparage it. Because it's an expression of you, and to disparage it would be to disparage you. I wonder what kind of games you would create if you let your imagination run free.