You didn't demonstrate anything, and considering they abandoned the Autobots because they took the risk of helping them and got hurt, the episode couldn't have happened if they were not hurt.
Speaking of which, that's another episode where Grimlock disposes of the Decepticon's leader in one swift motion.
Tell me how many firefights Galvatron has been in with the Autobots, then tell me how many times he has either fleed, been overwhelmed or damaged. Then tell me how many times he's used this planet-destroying blast, seeing as he could more or less win any fight if it was meant to be a regular ability and not a plot device.
I'm the one correcting you.
I have a task for you, here is Bruticus' profile:
"The team's combined form of Bruticus is a successful merging of the minds of the Combaticons. He isn't slow and awkward like some other combiners, and will follow commands instantly and without question, with terrifying efficiency and awesome strength. The only problem is that without someone to tell him what to do, Bruticus will do nothing.".
Tell me how quickly you would cite that in a discussion. Am I to understand that, being an official profile, you would and have accepted it simply because it's official?
Of course they aren't AS guilty. My point was, if you're going to discuss battles, discuss the comics which actually had stories and were created with the purpose of telling them. The toons were commercials for the toys, essentially. Enjoyable ones, but nonetheless commercials.
Grimlock, in the comics, is much smarter and stronger than the cartoon.
A) Amped/Boosted, same thing.
B) What do you base that on? Either way they were both clearly invulnerable for a time, and Galvatron lost.
C) Since then, Hot Rod and Galvatron have both been visibly injured.
I'm not saying they should be THROWN OUT, I'm saying discussing battles in general, given the nature of the cartoons (Which you can only discuss.), is rather fruitless as it comes down to who we prefer, not who is actually better.
You do need to learn to detect sarcasm, or in the event you actually believed I wasn't aware it catered to kids, you need a lot more.
And you are the one who dares to tell me "Hey man, it's just a kids show.". You are reading WAY too much into it for the sake of your own argument, without any proof.
Stick or not, sharp or not, it proves my point. Megatron's cannon is more powerful than any of the weapons used to kill Prime, and Prime has taken that cannon on many occassions, proving that it's just plot device.
And one can clearly see about a million and one animation errors elsewhere. You can't pick and choose what you take as canon and what you don't.
What you fail to see is where he hits him isn't of any consequence, what matters is how it contradicts what came before. The ship hijacking? Yeah. Despite the Autobots standing up to worse assaults, they met their end in this scene, not because of any specific power or whatever, but because it was a plot/marketing device.
Yeah, exactly. You can lay claim to any number of bs things that you've pulled out of your ass and cannot prove, due to reading far too much into it than anyone really should, but that'd also prove that you ARE just making claims for the sake of it.
I'm not making excuses, you're failing to see the issue here.
Regardless of how he shot him, where, why or anything, he shot him and he damaged him, badly. Prime suffered massive onslaughts in the series and didn't gain a scratch. You are just refusing to accept that it's all a means to make something else happen, and can't be held as concrete.
Your brilliant deduction disreguards the Dinobots usual distatste for the Autobots.
Congratulations, you've hereby been the title of Most ignorant.
Do you understand the physics of planet busting shots? do you realise that even though it makes him a certified Planet Killer, that both times he either had to strike an unstable point (Thrull being a planet of violent volcanic plasma) and Webworld had to be coreshot.
And dude, your now taking the power he has out of context entirely (Why oh why doesnt he use his planet killing shot to end earth and cybertroen?!?!), your talking about a show catered for kids back in the 80's, get a grip, no matter what you say, Galvatron is "STILL" a certified planet killer.
Your not correcting anything...
Depends on weather or not I'm talking about the Cartoon or comic.
Remember, I only ever cited the profiles when you said that comics are the only things we should use...
Your then playing favourites with mediums, can't have that.
and it's not up to you, unless your the thread starter.
A Don't play scemantics...
B Err... Galvatron firing an entire volley at Rodimus, and every shot bounced off harmlessly until one landed ON the Matrix...
C You pointed out that the actual amplification Rodimus received in the movie is limited... and Unicron was dead, therefore Galvatron's invulnerability and the greater majority of his power went with him.
No... I don't prefer Galvatron over Grimlock... the fact is, Galvatron has better demonstrated FEATS in the toons...
Then why argue?
Are you daffed? Whats more of a plot device? Prime surviving the cannon unscathed? or the more realistic "Person A throws sharp metal shard at Person B, Person B gets stabbed by sharp metal shard."
You cannot take out events of one occasion just because it so happens that he survived it before... that fact is, it still took a sustained assault to down Prime, and we simply don't know the properties of that Sword Megs used, or the gun he used in the movie... unless you have specs I'm unaware of.
#1: I didn't. I used the thing as an undivided whole, pick one instance of any of the feats I mentioned that can be atributed to Animation Errors. Go on.
#2: You don't have the right to choose that, nor do you have the right to throw anything away based on vague extrapolation or a shitty excuse... I made my points, I proved them, you cannot refute them with the excuse of "Shitty animation".
It makes far more sense than your "Shitty animation from the movie" argument.
First, Hasbro forbade the deaths of characters until the movie...
2nd, alot of Prime's surviving without a scratch can be reasonably explained.
You have not ever provided one shred of ANYTHING to back your cause.
You've won the "Hypocrititcal Fool" Award as well, thank you for playing.
They don't dislike the Autobots, they dislike authority which leaves them, sometimes, at odds with the autobots. They are Autobots after all.
You do realise the hypocricy in saying it's just an 80s kid show, yet applying physics of how Galvatron blew up a planet, right? Let me just clarify that first.
So in both cases, it wasn't Galvatron's power in the first place was it? It was a very powerful blast coupled with (and thanks to.) many other contributing factors, and nothing is suggesting a powerful blast from anyone else couldn't have done the same. You are proving the point of it being in context, a.k.a a plot device, but then using that to push the idea of how he'd win a one on one battle, despite knowing he wouldn't/hasn't/couldn't.
Either, just answer the question. Would you agree with that profile simply because it's official?
And you aren't?
Furthermore, the toons were far less focused on story, attributes and building characters as the comics were. The comics were not a commercial for the toys, they would be the preferable medium to discuss fighting, if any at all, and Galvatron isn't exactly weak.
I shall PM and ask.
Then stop playing "I'll use words and specifics that really do not need to be delved into, because it's Transformers and we should only go by what we see and what it is.". Though amped/boosted = same thing.
Yes, and? The same could be said for Galvatron, he was invulnerable too, in your books, right? It was Rodimus' "moment", he wasn't going to get shot in the face was he?
Let's remember what Unicron said to Megatron; "I will provide you with a new body, and new troops to command.", "And?", "And NOTHING.".
Wherein do you deduce he was invulnerable in the first place, and not just stronger? New body doesn't equal invulnerable, oh...you're just assuming Galvatron could only be hurt by Unicron cos he was the only one who hurt Galvatron in the movie. Despite the fact that Galvatron didn't even fight anyone to BE hurt, really.
Furthermore, as I said, they've been hurt since then.
For reasons stated, never have we seen proof that he could actually use it in combat, or that he would. In fact, there has been many a firefight where he has just held continuous fire on Autobots, without killing them, despite being able to destroy planets (Which wasn't even him SOLELY.).
He can "destroy planets.", but...he couldn't just destroy Unicron? If you really want to get into such things as claiming bs like "Megatron used low powered blasts.", then why didn't Galvatron kill Unicron? Because it was all plot and everything surrounding it happened for a reason, like every episode. It's too flimsy to judge.
Besides blowing up a planet, which wasn't even his own power, name feats he has done in the toons that surpass Grimlock.
Daffed? Huh? What the hell is "daffed"? Why are you saying such silly things as "We don't know the properties of the sword or gun used."? They didn't think "Hmm, what model shall we make this gun?", it's not Star Wars. You are taking it far too seriously, and the reason I am "arguing" is because I am illustrating to you that it wasn't meant to be picked apart as you are doing.
It was obviously just a standard gun that somebody had dropped or lost wasn't it? OR are we going so far into bs mode that we (You.) are suggesting "Just because they didn't say any specs, doesn't mean there aren't any."?
A) You missed the point. The animators and directors etc didn't care enough to erase those things, why do you make the assumption that they would have spent time discussing what model of blaster it was? Or anything that specific?
B) You don't have the right to place possibility where, in the cartoon, there quite clearly is no explanation beyond "It is what it is.". You proved what? That you are the one taking a cartoon way more specifically than it was intended to be taken? That you paid attention to where he shot him? Ok, good. So what? That doesn't disprove the fact that he has endured sustained assaults and not suffered a scratch. You think Megatron just happened to discover a discarded gun that was more powerful than his own FUSION CANNON and all the other Decepticon guns that Prime was bombarded with on Dinobot Island? Ironhide and Ratchet got killed by being shot through their windscreens, yet on Dinobot Island Ironhide is right there with Prime being blasted to hell and recovers minutes later.
It's all device, none of it can be taken seriously enough to judge who would win any kind of fight.
If you had an ounce of brain power you'd realise the point was that if they don't care enough to iron out THOSE creases, what makes you think they're going to give Megatron a specific blaster and concentrate on making Megatron shoot him in specific spots? It's obvious the writers and animators were not too picky on being neat or specific.
Precisely, why? Because they planned to just kill them all off to make way for new toys. Why? Because it was essentially just a commercial. So all in all, why is it stupid to judge fights on such flimsy things? Because...they are such frivolous and flimsy things.
Yeah, like....Hasbro not wanting to kill any toys/characters off until the movie. Simple as.
I haven't sat here and thought up bs such as claiming Megatron used a specific kind of blaster, no, because it simply doesn't need to be discussed.
The fact of the matter is; everything in the toons happened for reasons that did not relate to the personal power or lack thereof, of the characters. Durability was given or taken according to storyline or marketing plan, it wasn't anything serious.
You just stole that and the previous award from me, but it's ok, you deserve them more than I do. This forum is apparantly full of posers. Oh well, it happens I guess. A movie comes out and everyone's a fan.
No not plot device, a plot device requires Galvatron to ACTUALLY be more powerful than normal. the two planet busting shots can be attributed to circumstance, but is directly caused by his own normal power... since there was no explanation for the destruction of the planet Goo with nothing byt 3 arm cannon blasts. Thank you
Read my answer in the previous post, Cartoons I argue without profiles because they are not relevant to the toon, but when argung Comics, then yes, I use the profiles because they are THE source.
No, I'm not, I told you, I debate the Toons separately, I don't debate the old comics cause I don't know them, I can however debate the Dreamwave and IDW ones.
You do that.
Why don't they need to be delved into? You want to debate who wins, then lets figure out why they win or lose, instead of just saying "Grinlock wins cause he's bigger..."
Your smoking something illegal Alpha, I'd swear to it in court.........
Where did I say Galvatron was invulnerable during the movie?
I said specifically that Galvatron's invulnerability was ONLY covered in the Comics, and even then ONLY while Unicron was whole and alive.
Unicron was ONLY vulnerable to the Matrix for starters... so no, Galvatron couldn't kill Unicron with his VERY BEST shot, neither can any other Transformer.
And Galvatron, and Megatron for starters have been credited for taking on and defeating Devastator and the triplechangers solo, credited for taking out Prime solo, credited or planet killing, credited for singlehandedly subjugating the entire Decepticon forces,
Every weapon has specs... it may have been just a standard blaster weapon... my point is, you have no proof, of either A: it was a shitstick, or B: Megatron didn't hit him where I said he did, despite the fact that onscreen, he clearly does... Now tell me this Alpha, what happens when you've, #1: Been stabbed by a flying peice of metal weackage that you've yanked out immediately afterwards then #2: then copped a horizontal slice right into that same open wound, this causes you to faulter and step away. #3: A few moments later, you've copped not 1, not 2, but 3 direct hits into the same open wound, followed by one to your gun arm, and one to the face, knocking you to the floor?
I can easily tell you what happens, Your going to die in horrible pain, if your not dead already.
Your refferning episodes to the movie for starters, mistake #1.
You don't want to take a more logical explanation because it's cutting into your debate, mistake #2.
Specifically, that blaster was using the same sound effect as Megs Fusion Cannon, meaning it could very well be a better model than a standard pistol, therefore your incorrect in your assessment anyways, mistake #3.
Your searching for excuses, why wouldn't they? Animation mistakes happen all the time, most notably when episodes get shipped to Corea to be colored and animated there, you'll find more than 95% of the mistakes happen there, and pleas epoint out any heavy mistakes in the movie that disputes my claims... come on braniac.
.......... Even if the toons where made to sell the toys, they STILL follow the story and give respect to the characters, you arn't going to be the judge of what is right and wrong for ME to use or debate with.
It means they don't dislike the Autobots, which you claimed.
Of course a plot device doesn't actually require him to be more powerful, do you know what a plot device is?
Also, there's no explanation so, disregarding everything we know about how flimsy the show is, you adopt the belief that the explanation is one you wish to believe?
Answer the question for either then. Would you agree or disagree with his profile?
Based on what? What actually happens, or what the short profiles say? A lot more happens in the comics than is referenced in the profiles you know.
I didn't actually say that, first off. Second, they don't need to be delved into because we're all debating based on preference, essentially. There isn't enough concrete material in the toons (Your favourable medium.) to suggest a win for either, so it comes down to who we want to win.
We can discuss why we think either will win or lose loosely, but when the material you are basing it on suggests many things as being possible, half of which contradict each other, how possible or necessary is it to discuss?
Fair play, I misread your post. Apologies.
Precisely, so to that end, what have we learned about plot devices? That a transformer's ability is given or taken by what the writers want to be depicted, even if it's not necessarily going to happen again or accurate.
We all know how Megatron "took out" Prime, don't we? Megatron's power over the Decepticons was always going to shine through because he's the leader. They weren't going to let Devestator win, were they?
For crying out loud, I'm not denying where he's being hit, I'm saying it's irrelevant because it's in direct contradiction to what he has endured before or since, and was there to serve as a means to kill him.
I don't need proof, you were the first one to insinuate that it might not have been a simple blaster, you have the burden of proof. Although in this case it's just a matter of Ockham's razor, and that amount is clear to anyone with a feel of the Transformers and how it was written.
Point being what? You don't seem to grasp the fact that this was all there to make it the final, epic battle between the two. He had endured a ton of shit before hand and never got so much as a scratch, I'm not even saying it had to kill him. All this and we still know that the only reason it happened was because of marketing, not one being stronger than another.
Why is that a problem for you? Same writers. Same continuity.
You being overly analytical because YOU don't want to admit that the simplest explanation is, in this case, the correct one, is what's ruining YOUR debate, not mine.
And Thundercracker once had Starscream's voice, Vortex once has Onslaught's, there were tons of audio errors also. What's to say it wasn't one of those? I'm not going to take your route, though, because you are just clutching at straws. You are the one who raised the issue of "Maybe it's a better model of blaster.". Not only is that completely desperate and unfounded, but it's ridiculous. Why would it be? It's just there. It has Megatron's cannon sound, big deal, it doesn't necessarily mean anything. Why are we then to assume it's MORE powerful if it sounds EXACTLY like his cannon? You're getting into areas that needn't be discussed because you know it just comes down to whatever the writers feel like doing.
Do you have trouble distinguishing my points? I'm not denying where he was shot, I'm suggesting that you putting so much emphasis on it is pointless. If they didn't care enough to do a shitload of things in the series and movie, why would the writers be so specific as to where he was shot? Ockham's Razor once again, simplest explanation is the best, and the simplest explanation is mine. Hence why you are spiralling into endless "What if? What if? Maybe it was...".
I'm not telling you what to debate with, but you also don't have the right to disregard something all fans clearly acknowledge; that most of the shit that happens can contradict other things, and you are ignoring most of these by way of making excuses for them.
The simple point is; Megatron found a gun and shot Prime, Prime was easily wounded because they wanted to kill him off, not because of any specific shots or power. Simple. Proof? He gets killed easily and quickly in Takara: Headmasters when they also decide he isn't needed, as does Ultra Magnus.
How is that a copout? My entire point is that everything is contradictory, everything is subject to plot and this is all down to the writers, precisely why it's silly to judge fights on it.
I never introduced the notion of him conveniently finding a mega powered blaster that contained more force than his own cannon, you did. You have the burden of proof. Do you have any reasoning beyond "It had the exact same sound so it might have been MORE powerful." that backs you up?
You are a poser. You know nothing about the toons, you've watched them, that's about it. You are obviously oblivious to how things work in the universe of TF and the writers' minds.
This "Galvatron destroying planets under his own cannon's steam", I can't and don't go for.
But he still was so insane and totally hard that in the "Time Wars" run it actually took a rip in Space/time to destroy him for the 1st time. (Stripping him down to the skeleton)
Grimlock has been and would be done by less.
Also, read "Target:2006".
Then you'll see the lengths that Galvatron thought it neccesary to go to destroy Unicron.
True that Galvatron couldn't even so much of think of attacking Unicron (Unicron would either torture him before he got the chance, or when when Galvatron was wailing away on Unicron with everything he had while Unicron was in robot mode, Unicron simply grabbed him and ate him like some sort of tic-tac.)
This is why Galvatron would have to time travel back to 1986 to before Unicron was near and the meeting with Megatron post battle in the movie. He'd then be free to prepare and build towards usurping his master in the future - without being able to be remote-tortured.
As far as the comics went. Whenever they met, Galvatron'd invariably whip Grimlock's ass.
Sunbow's cartoon was 70% contradictary to the canonistic Comic.
There was some unification after the movie, but anything before that...? You'd be blown away by the diffrence.
Plus the cartoon, while being challenging back then, by network cartoon standards was much less dark than the comic got.
EG: The target masters were nebulan (humans, basically.) and Cyclonus was a target master too, paired with Nightstick.
Megatron winds up killing Cyclonus in 2007/2008 by decapitation, but not before grabbing the transformed nebulan out of Cyclonus' hands and crushes him with his bare hands right in front of a horrified Cyclonus.
People get killed, injured, paralysed.... All kinds of stuff.
When did the cartoon ever get that gruesome...?
(Ok, Daniel was paralysed by a decep in S4...)
It was definitely more kiddy-fied and had way less actual continuity.
Still theres plenty of scans about and theres no reason not to experience the read for yourself, should you deceide to catch up on what was a great run. "Carwash of doom" aside, of course.
"Van Zan is the Pinocchio of feces." - Lestov16
Last edited by Sadako of Girth on Aug 6th, 2007 at 12:54 PM
Huh? I could have sworn that Grimlock has said numerous times that he doesn't like the "Weak" Autobots...
There is a difference bitween the terms 'Plot Device', and 'Plot Induced Stupidity'.
In reguards to the toon? No I would not use them. If used for the Comics, then yes.
I use both.
Thats when we either scale up or down to an acceptable middle ground, which I have no problem doing...
Even so, scaling back from planet busting power is still a hell of a feat.
The comics can suffer the exact same tragedy, and in marvels case frequently does.
Like I said, it is well within the realm of possability.
Dude, you obviously don't know the toons as well as you claim, Brime has been in dire straights during the pre movie seasons more than once.
Then middle ground it.
Dude, the toons have had as many as 25 different writers, each doing different episodes.
Wrong, I anylise because thats what you do in debates. not throw in the simplest explanation and stick with it.
........... Now your cluching at straws......... The movie had very little errors, and the reason for the sound is so the gun actually sounds powerful (Taken from the interviews on Disk 2 of the DVD)
And if you read what YOU yourself just said, you quoted me as saying "Maybe", it's called offering up an explanation... your thesis of someone making a mistake, the same mistake 4 times in less than 5 seconds worth of film is ludicrous.
Am I not allowed to present alternative theories in a debate?
Go home Alpha, your not going to tell me how to debate to suit yourself.
You havn't answered my question yet, Why wouldn't they, if it was a movie destined for the big screen, they would have done all they could to get the details right, because Adults would also be watching it then.
Unfortunately, all that proves is that only some of the capabilities are subject to plot, but not everything was.
I already said the TF series was filled with inconsistency, this is not limited to the Toons either, so if you want to toss one medium, you have to toss all, exept for the very dry stats on the back of the toys. If you want to debate with that, be my guest, me I'm going to debate something with a bit more substance.
As for the Pistol thing, you've no evidence on anything you've claimed, While I have hoardes of onscreen evidence and logical reasoning... this always trumps your "Excuses" in debates my friend.
Excuse me........... Where did I claim that the pistol was more powerul than Megs Fusion Cannon? Quote me in big bold letters.
I said that the pistol was more powerful than the standard blaster, but not than that of the Fusion Cannon...
I already offered an explanation of the Dinobot Island Incident, and besides, there are other occasions where Prime was actually damaged badly by the Fusion Cannon.
Assumption is a debaters worst enemy Alpha, I own ALL the G1 toons and movie on DVD, and just because I present alternative theories does not mean that I don't aknowlege that the toons are filled to the brim with Animation Errors... You think I'm stupid, and thats your choice... I don't throw away material based on half assed assumptions and try to FORCE everyone to debate any particular medium, you do.
Do people in here have reading dyslexia? I swear nobody reads what I'm saying, and make shit up...
I NEVER Said that the Marvel Run was not canon....
However, if you want to become specific, only the Toys box story was canon... Shall we debate only the Toys then?
Alrighty... Let me point out one very simple fact, and that is that no medium was specified in this thread, I debated the medium where my expertise lies... and Alpha tried to destroy my right to debate the toons ever in favour of the Comics exclusively.
I have one thing to say Alpha, Go to the Comic vs Forum for that kind of stuff.
Well in short, I don't think there's any point in continuing the debate of "Maybe Megatron had a more powerful blaster." or anything. I, and many others, recognise that there were many contradictions and you just seek farfetched explanations for them, I suppose it has to be an agree-to-disagree stalemate.
The best thing to do now would be for the thread starter to specify the medium.
"Do people in here have reading dyslexia? I swear nobody reads what I'm saying, and make shit up..."
If that was aimed at me, then I would have to pose the same question..!
For that tone was needless.
And by the way, the "what was more canon: Cartoon vs Comic" debate was raging while I posted, so sue me.
Marvel continuity totally owns Sunbow. And just because you were hardcore on the cartoon and you feel hurt by the slating of it canonically, that doesn't mean that the comics have to defer to the toyboxs.. as the toybox profiles were written by Bob Budianski....
Who was the man behind the comic characters too.
So no, the boxes are no more canonical than the comics as they were from the same hand..
But they were a guideline to the character and not events. (Which define characters in our minds way more than a few words on a toybox..)
If anything, this now puts canon in this order:
Dont think im being hostile here, you are a fan too and thats all good....
"Van Zan is the Pinocchio of feces." - Lestov16
Last edited by Sadako of Girth on Aug 7th, 2007 at 11:48 AM