Mario vs Master Chief

cant jump ten times his own height by himself 99% of the time.

castles are only a few times his own weight.

throwing big koopas < flipping tanks

fireballs which dont move even a quarter as fast as bullets do, something the Chief sees in slow motions.

cant fly through space unaided.

also intresting to note that not one of these have to do with mario even managing to hit someone who has bullet reflexes and can run kilometer in seconds with a sprained ankle.

The castle was that size on the overworld map, but the overworld map shows Mario far larger in relation to the land aroudn him than he actually is, as shown whenever you move over a castle and enter it. Flipping a tank? Lol, Mario could stack them like pancakes.

stack them like pancakes?

lol. Mario cant even toss Bowser more then like thirty or fourty feet. he can barely lift a single tank. He can't, much less an entire castle. his feats contradict themselves too much.

Talk to Nintendo. And recently Mario sent a massive Bowser spinning around entire [mini] planets just by spinning in a circle. Mario's no slouch.

Tanks are hollow, if I remember right the book put the tank at 60 tons? And MC didn't lift it over his head, he flipped it. How much do you think a castle weighs? Mario lifted one over his head.

around planets? as in in space where there's no weight? lol.

tanks are hollow... wtf. Have you seen the Scorpion?

and as noted already Mario used to lift castles, small ones, and now he can barely toss Bowser. so your point is still wrong.

I'm just sayin', the last time I checked Scorpions weigh 60 tons.

And small castles? Like I said, overland map scaling =/= actual size. Those castles contain entire levels. And No, there was gravity, otherwise it'd be hard to stand on the damn things without floating off, but you're actually right, gravity would be weak on a planet that size. o-O

Anyway, the OP stated already that SMW counts for this, which means the castle counts, and Mario might be inconsistant but according to Nintendo he IS strong enough to lift a castle, so, hey. Sucks they don't care about vs threads, right?

And like I said that feat is outdated, regardless of what the thread starter says canon is canon and canon changes over time. Using the feats from the old games and ignoring the feats from the new ones are against the rules. Otherwise I'll just take note of the fact that even if he can lift castles he move slow as hell in the old games and can be killed by walking into a mushroom, thus the Chief will just kill him by speed blitzing him before he can throw a single punch. I could do that going by what happens in SMW.

As for Nintendo, unless they have stated specifically that he can lift tanks, all we have are feats which can be interpreted differently.

So feel free to give me the link in which Nintendo says he's strong enough to lift castles.

So you're implying that a video game character can't do something that they did in their video game? 😐 How can you interpret lifting a castle other than lifting a castle? I mean, someone thick might not realise what the pixels represent... But No one on here's thick, right?

And no, different versions of many characters exist in vs threads. God Kratos/Normal Kratos, being a good example. For purposes of this debate, it looks like Moo's using 16bit Mario.

No, I'm stating that a video game character's feats are drawn from their most recent showings when there's a contradiction.

If the Chief can leap 10 feet in the air and is unable to lift a tank Halo 1, and Halo 2 has just come out and in that he can jump 5 feet but he is strong enough to lift a tank, then the standard is that the Chief can lift a tank and can only jump 5 feet, because Halo 2 is newer. If when Halo 3 comes out he's shown to be able to leaf ten feet again but he is no longer able to lift a tank again, then we assume that he can only jump 10 feet and isn't strong enough to lift tanks, because Halo 3 is the newest and thus most reliable form of canon. That's how it works.

Okay.

One of WMV's feats is that he dies by running into Goomba's and doesn't move very fast, pretty much average running speed.

Thus the Chief uses his superior speed to kill Mario in one shot.

That's what happens when you use purely 16bit Mario feats. Happy now? Or do you want to have your cake and eat it, with Mario having the strength feats from 16bit Mario but the durability from 64 and Galaxy? I wouldn't be surprised if you do.

Ah, but you seem to assume I didn't come into this duel of wit with my guns loaded?

Lifting a castle is a form of durability feat. :] Imagine the pressure he was under.

16bit ftw.

which is undermined by the fact that he still dies by running into koopas and getting hit by birds.

you're firing blanks.

I'd like to point out that a Goomba won the Goomba vs Kratos thread thanks to it's instant kill properties. It was a joke thread, but still.

And MC's suit's durability is undermined by gunfire hurting him.

Gameplay in early Mario games gives no real thought to consistency, and largely resembles a very bad drug trip. They're just really crazy platformers, the gameplay itself makes use of little to no logic, however, we do have a cutscene in which he lifts a castle. Cutscenes>Gameplay.

P.S. They're not blanks, I'm pretty sure I just got your mind pregnant.

Bungie has stated officially, in the novels which are canon, that his suit is impervious to ballistic weapons fire.

moving on...

him dying in that way where he jumps into the air then falls through the level is also a cutscene, going by 16bit standards. so that doesnt change anything.

im pretty sure youre wrong.

You missed the point, gameplay undermining cutscenes means squat. Thanks for helping me prove it in the case of Halo. It also applies to Mario. Lifting a castle? The PSI applied over the entirety of his body would be beyond retarded. o_O Mario's both durable and strong. :]

Edit; Are you aborting my intellectual child? :[

except the gameplay isnt undermining any "cinematic" in this case. and prove the castle thing is a cinematic but marios death when running into animals isnt. they both look the same. there is no transition between cutscene and gameplay.

One's an animation that occurs as a result of gameplay, the other takes place between gameplay sections as an interlude and cutscene.

Sort of like how MC has a death animation in Halo... See the difference?

Sorry, but both franchises have the same rules applied to them. No double standards.

just because it takes place between two segments of a level doesnt mean its a cutscene. In Half-Life there are no cutscenes but there are still pauses between levels in which story progresses.

try again.

Try again? You're arguing semantics. Trying to convince me a death animation is a cutscene? Every video game character has a cutscene. EDIT; Every videogame character has a death animation**

If the story's progressing it's canon. :] EDIT; And Halflife isn't Mario.

Try again.

Originally posted by ScreamPaste
Try again? You're arguing semantics. Trying to convince me a death animation is a cutscene?

At least I'm arguing logically. You're grasping for straws.

Every video game character has a cutscene.

Try again.

That's supposed to say every video game character has a death anaimation, typoes ftw.

And I am arguing logicly, I conceded that gravity on small planets is weaker.

HOWEVER; Moo stated earlier he's using SMW Mario. SMW Mario lifted a castle, that's not a straw I'm grasping at. Castles are heavy, this makes him strong and durable, not hard to understand.

I highlighted that gameplay undermining cutscenes means squat, and you helped prove my point.

What straws am I grasping at?

16 bit Mario vs MC. Not a hard debate to have, and it seems like you're trying to nitpick Mario's abilities based on your dislike for the franchise or something, tbh.

Oh, and try again.