Lich King runs the Popular VG Gauntlet Part 2

1) I think you need to read it again, she probably flinched because she thought she was gonna take massive damage... remember she had just gotten the varia suit like 5 seconds ago and didn't know it's full capabilities.

2) it's heavily implied to be magic.

3) Maybe in the first battle, but in the second battle Gorea becomes more powerful and is impervious to everything but the Omega Canon.
(note that Samus seems to be able to absorb many many technologies and convert them for use for herself)

4) water freezes at 32F, absolute zero is −459.67F, that's kind of a large difference

5) "Taking into account the advice given to him long ago by the Chozo, the special Mogenars were built using both the ancient magics of old and the highest technology of new; these War Golems had advantages over the purely mechanical Mogenars built by the other Science Lords."

"uses a form of immaterial projection of its hands"

"I, the last Lord of Science, worked tirelessly to protect myself and this world. I crafted magics and machines to bring life back to the wastelands"

6) "This proscribed weapon of mass destruction was called an abomination by the ALIMBIC ELDERS because of the harm it could inflict on anyone desperate enough to use it."

However Samus was unharmed by it

7) I don't think you can prove he didn't attempt to use certain powers on Samus, just like I can't prove he did. It still seems logical that Gorea would use every available ability he had especially being in his second form he was actually drawing more power from what had once been his prison.

She can be harmed by the Omega Cannon if the player is not careful enough with it though.

"Gorea mimicked our cellular structure and replicated itself in solid form."

"We have seen Gorea alter its atomic structure from a vapor to a solid. Our scientists believe Gorea may also possess other shape-changing abilities."

He didn't mimic Samus's cellular structure or use shape-changing abilities against her; The Alimbics have telekinesis and psychic powers, and even while he did mimic a giant three-legged Alimbic, it never used any telekinetic/psychic powers against Samus or mind-raped her.

Originally posted by Ridley_Prime
She can be harmed by the Omega Cannon if the player is not careful enough with it though.

"Gorea mimicked our cellular structure and replicated itself in solid form."

"We have seen Gorea alter its atomic structure from a vapor to a solid. Our scientists believe Gorea may also possess other shape-changing abilities."

He didn't mimic Samus's cellular structure or use shape-changing abilities against her; The Alimbics have telekinesis and psychic powers, and even while he did mimic a giant three-legged Alimbic, it never used any telekinetic/psychic powers against Samus or mind-raped her.

After he mimic'd the alimbic shape... he didn't change into anything else while fighting them... guess he just didn't care.

He didn't use the telekinetic power against Samus... because he couldn't. Power Suit is too pro 🪩

Originally posted by Ridley_Prime
She can be harmed by the Omega Cannon if the player is not careful enough with it though.

"Gorea mimicked our cellular structure and replicated itself in solid form."

"We have seen Gorea alter its atomic structure from a vapor to a solid. Our scientists believe Gorea may also possess other shape-changing abilities."

He didn't mimic Samus's cellular structure or use shape-changing abilities against her; The Alimbics have telekinesis and psychic powers, and even while he did mimic a giant three-legged Alimbic, it never used any telekinetic/psychic powers against Samus or mind-raped her.

Why would he do what Metroid Prime is doing?

Originally posted by Cyner
After he mimic'd the alimbic shape... he didn't change into anything else while fighting them... guess he just didn't care.

He didn't use the telekinetic power against Samus... because he couldn't. Power Suit is too pro 🪩

In the first logbook scan I quoted, Gorea was also said to be able to replicate itself in solid form, yet he didn't make copies of himself when he fought against Samus. Guess she would've been overwhelmed if he had, but all and all, plenty of Gorea's mentioned powers were written out of the boss fight so Samus/the player could win.

Auto-loss for dying in the last thread.

These 5<the last 5.

Edit: v thought it was regular Sonic.

Super Sonic could have soloed the last team.

At one point in the Gorea boss fight, Samus' ship intercepts a telepathic message and transcribes it for her. I just assume the ship wouldn't give her an attack.

Why is this topic turning into a LK vs. Samus topic, instead of LK vs. the six characters stated in the topic? I already stated “After overcoming difficult odds…” implying that the LK has a slim chance of winning the first gauntlet, but overcame that slim probability and won. The Lich King is a character known for necromancy and for turning his fallen victims into his undead minions. Therefore, if the LK were to run a hypothetical video game characters gauntlet, one would expect the LK to use his necromancy on his fallen foes. From the previous posts it, it seems posters cannot stomach seeing their favorite video game character(s) turn into another character’s minion. Instead they discard the stated details, go into a state of denial, and provide reasons why such a scenario cannot occur.

First of all everyone has to remember that all battles posted on these VS forums are hypothetical battles. None of these battles can occur unless the VG companies who hold the intellectual property rights of these characters come to an agreement to have them fight, or if one company buys out another company then gets these two or more characters to fight “officially”. Therefore, hypothetical battles involve lots of assumptions especially when considering can X power affect the opponent, vice versa. Since hypothetical battles are filled with assumptions, your assumptions will affect how you conceptualize the battle and ultimately outcome of the battle. Assumptions modify the context and provide characters with the slightest chances in winning a scenario in which they can win against a much more powerful opponent. Therefore, I am a much bigger fan of the “more likely to win,” “most likely to win”, “wins X/Y times” system instead of the “character A” always wins, “character B has no chance of winning”. Explaining why such a scenario leading up to a hypothetical battle cannot occur shows denial and stubbornness; you mind as well just say “the laws of the characters’ universes prevent them from interacting with each other, thus the battle cannot occur and neither character can harm each other.” for every single battle.

As for gameplay mechanics as evidence of a character’s feats, powers, skills, abilities, etc. I believe gameplay mechanics should be taken into consideration with a grain of salt, meaning gameplay shows you what a character is potentially capable and not capable off. Fundamentally gameplay mechanics tells you that most VG characters are not invincible, put down your controller long enough and take enough damage you will see a “Game Over”/”You Lose”, etc screen. Gameplay mechanics also tell you how does a character defeat his/her enemies; it basically tells you: does the character have one-hit KO moves, does the character rely on projectiles to win, does the character rely on scoring combos to win, does the character depend on teamwork to defeat difficult enemies, etc.

As for cutscenes, comic scans, etc. I think they can be useful in showing off a character’s potential but are often exaggerated beyond its context. The flaw with this method is that cutscenes are “scripted” in manner to fore fill a specific outcome written by the narrator/director of the videogame. In other words, we see this happening in the cutscene because the author wants us to see it this way. Extrapolating what we observe in these cutscenes is problematic because we are now saying “for every instance, this character can replicate this feat”. However, in a hypothetical battle we do no know whether or not this cutscene/comic scenario will repeat itself.

IMO, a comparison and analysis of a character’s static powers and abilities (ex: super strength, flight, super speed, stealth, regeneration, etc) are a much better method for analyzing hypothetical battles because it minimizes plot-intended-bias.

Now can this topic finally return to the original LK vs Chris Redfield, Lara Croft, Master Chief, Mario, Super Sonic, Kratos with the stipulation that LK can summon Snake, Ryu, Link, Cloud, Samus, Dante as backup for two rounds?

I did not read a word you just said.

It's okay, he's still operating on the idea that Lich King had a slight chance to win the last thread.

I tried to read it, and I did get most of it. I just am not sure I can agree with anything he said. Except thread result ratios.

And I think consensus still is that even with all the other characters, Lich King could not pass Super Sonic.

Originally posted by I_Cheat_U_LOSE
Why is this topic turning into a LK vs. Samus topic, instead of LK vs. the six characters stated in the topic? I already stated “After overcoming difficult odds…” implying that the LK has a slim chance of winning the first gauntlet, but overcame that slim probability and won. The Lich King is a character known for necromancy and for turning his fallen victims into his undead minions. Therefore, if the LK were to run a hypothetical video game characters gauntlet, one would expect the LK to use his necromancy on his fallen foes. From the previous posts it, it seems posters cannot stomach seeing their favorite video game character(s) turn into another character’s minion. Instead they discard the stated details, go into a state of denial, and provide reasons why such a scenario cannot occur.

First of all everyone has to remember that all battles posted on these VS forums are hypothetical battles. None of these battles can occur unless the VG companies who hold the intellectual property rights of these characters come to an agreement to have them fight, or if one company buys out another company then gets these two or more characters to fight “officially”. Therefore, hypothetical battles involve lots of assumptions especially when considering can X power affect the opponent, vice versa. Since hypothetical battles are filled with assumptions, your assumptions will affect how you conceptualize the battle and ultimately outcome of the battle. Assumptions modify the context and provide characters with the slightest chances in winning a scenario in which they can win against a much more powerful opponent. Therefore, I am a much bigger fan of the “more likely to win,” “most likely to win”, “wins X/Y times” system instead of the “character A” always wins, “character B has no chance of winning”. Explaining why such a scenario leading up to a hypothetical battle cannot occur shows denial and stubbornness; you mind as well just say “the laws of the characters’ universes prevent them from interacting with each other, thus the battle cannot occur and neither character can harm each other.” for every single battle.

As for gameplay mechanics as evidence of a character’s feats, powers, skills, abilities, etc. I believe gameplay mechanics should be taken into consideration with a grain of salt, meaning gameplay shows you what a character is potentially capable and not capable off. Fundamentally gameplay mechanics tells you that most VG characters are not invincible, put down your controller long enough and take enough damage you will see a “Game Over”/”You Lose”, etc screen. Gameplay mechanics also tell you how does a character defeat his/her enemies; it basically tells you: does the character have one-hit KO moves, does the character rely on projectiles to win, does the character rely on scoring combos to win, does the character depend on teamwork to defeat difficult enemies, etc.

As for cutscenes, comic scans, etc. I think they can be useful in showing off a character’s potential but are often exaggerated beyond its context. The flaw with this method is that cutscenes are “scripted” in manner to fore fill a specific outcome written by the narrator/director of the videogame. In other words, we see this happening in the cutscene because the author wants us to see it this way. Extrapolating what we observe in these cutscenes is problematic because we are now saying “for every instance, this character can replicate this feat”. However, in a hypothetical battle we do no know whether or not this cutscene/comic scenario will repeat itself.

IMO, a comparison and analysis of a character’s static powers and abilities (ex: super strength, flight, super speed, stealth, regeneration, etc) are a much better method for analyzing hypothetical battles because it minimizes plot-intended-bias.

Now can this topic finally return to the original LK vs Chris Redfield, Lara Croft, Master Chief, Mario, Super Sonic, Kratos with the stipulation that LK can summon Snake, Ryu, Link, Cloud, Samus, Dante as backup for two rounds?

We've pretty much come to the conclusion that he's not getting past Super Sonic. So he's not completing this gauntlet.
If by chance you make a Lich King runs the Popular VG Gauntlet Part 3, and state that "after overcoming difficult odds" again...

As for Part 1 of the Lich King gauntlet, there are still some kinks to be ironed out.

Originally posted by I_Cheat_U_LOSE
Why is this topic turning into a LK vs. Samus topic, instead of LK vs. the six characters stated in the topic? I already stated “After overcoming difficult odds…” implying that the LK has a slim chance of winning the first gauntlet, but overcame that slim probability and won. The Lich King is a character known for necromancy and for turning his fallen victims into his undead minions. Therefore, if the LK were to run a hypothetical video game characters gauntlet, one would expect the LK to use his necromancy on his fallen foes. From the previous posts it, it seems posters cannot stomach seeing their favorite video game character(s) turn into another character’s minion. Instead they discard the stated details, go into a state of denial, and provide reasons why such a scenario cannot occur.

First of all everyone has to remember that all battles posted on these VS forums are hypothetical battles. None of these battles can occur unless the VG companies who hold the intellectual property rights of these characters come to an agreement to have them fight, or if one company buys out another company then gets these two or more characters to fight “officially”. Therefore, hypothetical battles involve lots of assumptions especially when considering can X power affect the opponent, vice versa. Since hypothetical battles are filled with assumptions, your assumptions will affect how you conceptualize the battle and ultimately outcome of the battle. Assumptions modify the context and provide characters with the slightest chances in winning a scenario in which they can win against a much more powerful opponent. Therefore, I am a much bigger fan of the “more likely to win,” “most likely to win”, “wins X/Y times” system instead of the “character A” always wins, “character B has no chance of winning”. Explaining why such a scenario leading up to a hypothetical battle cannot occur shows denial and stubbornness; you mind as well just say “the laws of the characters’ universes prevent them from interacting with each other, thus the battle cannot occur and neither character can harm each other.” for every single battle.

As for gameplay mechanics as evidence of a character’s feats, powers, skills, abilities, etc. I believe gameplay mechanics should be taken into consideration with a grain of salt, meaning gameplay shows you what a character is potentially capable and not capable off. Fundamentally gameplay mechanics tells you that most VG characters are not invincible, put down your controller long enough and take enough damage you will see a “Game Over”/”You Lose”, etc screen. Gameplay mechanics also tell you how does a character defeat his/her enemies; it basically tells you: does the character have one-hit KO moves, does the character rely on projectiles to win, does the character rely on scoring combos to win, does the character depend on teamwork to defeat difficult enemies, etc.

As for cutscenes, comic scans, etc. I think they can be useful in showing off a character’s potential but are often exaggerated beyond its context. The flaw with this method is that cutscenes are “scripted” in manner to fore fill a specific outcome written by the narrator/director of the videogame. In other words, we see this happening in the cutscene because the author wants us to see it this way. Extrapolating what we observe in these cutscenes is problematic because we are now saying “for every instance, this character can replicate this feat”. However, in a hypothetical battle we do no know whether or not this cutscene/comic scenario will repeat itself.

IMO, a comparison and analysis of a character’s static powers and abilities (ex: super strength, flight, super speed, stealth, regeneration, etc) are a much better method for analyzing hypothetical battles because it minimizes plot-intended-bias.

Now can this topic finally return to the original LK vs Chris Redfield, Lara Croft, Master Chief, Mario, Super Sonic, Kratos with the stipulation that LK can summon Snake, Ryu, Link, Cloud, Samus, Dante as backup for two rounds?

I think LK stops at Mario if it's OmniMario.