Akuma vs. Shao Kahn

LOL at Gouki's destruction of Goukuentou "not consistent with his character" XD XD XD XD XD

THAT's the ultimate proof that you don't know anything of the SF universe and you're just a SF hater and a troll.

C'mon: the standard Gouki's ending is "do a truly impressive feat".

SF Alpha 2 ending: Destroying Goukentou island with 1 strike

SF 3 2nd impact endind: Turning Uluru from "Ayers Rock" to "Ayers pebbles"

SF 3 3rd strike ending: destroying the huge sunken ship with one strike

SSF 4 ending: wiping a forest with just the recoil of a ki-based attack.

What's next? Using an ice-based attack "not consistent" with Sub Zero? 😛

People like what they want to.

Originally posted by Meioh_Hades
LOL at Gouki's destruction of Goukuentou "not consistent with his character" XD XD XD XD XD

THAT's the ultimate proof that you don't know anything of the SF universe and you're just a SF hater and a troll.

C'mon: the standard Gouki's ending is "do a truly impressive feat".

SF Alpha 2 ending: Destroying Goukentou island with 1 strike

SF 3 2nd impact endind: Turning Uluru from "Ayers Rock" to "Ayers pebbles"

SF 3 3rd strike ending: destroying the huge sunken ship with one strike

SSF 4 ending: wiping a forest with just the recoil of a ki-based attack.

What's next? Using an ice-based attack "not consistent" with Sub Zero? 😛

Originally posted by Meioh_Hades

C'mon: the standard Gouki's ending is "do a truly impressive feat".

👆 👆

Every time I finish any game with him I go all "Ok lets see what crazy shit this mofo got in store this time"

Originally posted by quanchi112
LOL at you grasping at straws here. You haven't proven these endings are canon I mean I can use many different endings consistent with Shao kahn's power. I have already covered this and the fact it's been rammed home he doesn't use all his power in a versus fight anyways. So even if Akuma can destroy an island he'd never use that type of force on a human opponent which destroys the argument that made no sense that street fighter bodies were more durable than islands.

The difference is "Chain of Events" Quan. This combined with "Precedent" of having just one ending being legit and all the others non conflicting means that Akuma has a massive battery of feats.

He doesn't use full power in his matches? Your right about that, he doesn't, not in gameplay anyway, but in these vs threads here at KMC, the fighters are always at their very best unless otherwise stated.

Now, name me one Kahn ending besides Armageddon that is official and did happen please.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
The difference is "Chain of Events" Quan. This combined with "Precedent" of having just one ending being legit and all the others non conflicting means that Akuma has a massive battery of feats.

He doesn't use full power in his matches? Your right about that, he doesn't, not in gameplay anyway, but in these vs threads here at KMC, the fighters are always at their very best unless otherwise stated.

Now, name me one Kahn ending besides Armageddon that is official and did happen please.

They also fight in character at their best. Since when is it a powerset debate eliminating the character of Akuma.

You haven't proven any akuma ending is canon so I didn't feel I had to.

Originally posted by NemeBro
1. Well it being mentioned later in the series for one. Akuma's endings do not clash with any other ending, they are stand-alone, and are representative of the character's abilities.

Don't mind me. Just popped in to say hello.

Originally posted by quanchi112
You haven't proven any of them are canon yet.

You being convinced of canon policy is not a requirement to stating fact Quan, the moment you realise this the better. The endings have been proven canon countless times in the 7 years I've been here, I'm not jumping through hoops for you when you fail to do basic research. Plus, you've proven not a thing, or even offered a counterclaim. ergo, since the endings are there, and are required for the story to proceed, the burden of proof now lies with you.

Originally posted by quanchi112
They also fight in character at their best. Since when is it a powerset debate eliminating the character of Akuma.

When was this stated Quan? These vs threads are all theoretical debates of characters at their best, with no holding back. And since you never stated in the OP that you must have them "In-Character", the default VS rules apply.

See, this is what I'm getting REALLY pissed off with, VERY few people EVER actually put detail into their OPs, and then get pissy when they arn't getting the debate they envisioned. It's nobody elses fault but your own.

Originally posted by quanchi112
You haven't proven any akuma ending is canon so I didn't feel I had to.

So... You thought it was a good idea to DEMAND proof of well established line of plot for Street Fighter, and yet you didn't feel obliged to do the same for the character you are supporting?

GREAT Debating strategy there Quan. Except you fail the most basic rule, do NOT demand evidence without providing any yourself to establish your character as superior to his/her opponent, it make you look like a total foolish jerk and a dumbass to boot.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
You being convinced of canon policy is not a requirement to stating fact Quan, the moment you realise this the better. The endings have been proven canon countless times in the 7 years I've been here, I'm not jumping through hoops for you when you fail to do basic research. Plus, you've proven not a thing, or even offered a counterclaim. ergo, since the endings are there, and are required for the story to proceed, the burden of proof now lies with you.

When was this stated Quan? These vs threads are all theoretical debates of characters at their best, with no holding back. And since you never stated in the OP that you must have them "In-Character", the default VS rules apply.

See, this is what I'm getting REALLY pissed off with, VERY few people EVER actually put detail into their OPs, and then get pissy when they arn't getting the debate they envisioned. It's nobody elses fault but your own.

So... You thought it was a good idea to DEMAND proof of well established line of plot for Street Fighter, and yet you didn't feel obliged to do the same for the character you are supporting?

GREAT Debating strategy there Quan. Except you fail the most basic rule, do NOT demand evidence without providing any yourself to establish your character as superior to his/her opponent, it make you look like a total foolish jerk and a dumbass to boot.

I come from the comic vs. section so I assumed the rules were similar. I can't help if if you don't believe in Akuma's character just his best powerfeats eliminating what makes him him in the first place.

It's the same logic the only reason I brought it up is because you did. I don't think either endings are canon but every single character is capable of their endings based off of their abilities but if they don't occur they aren't canon. It's mindnumbingly simple.

I simply used your own tactic against you and watched as you pissed and moaned. Quit getting so worked up over my opinion. Opinions vary seek to control yourself in the future for your own sake.

Originally posted by quanchi112
I don't care if you accept it's canon you can't prove it so I remain unconvinced as speculation isn't proof.

It's not that I accept it as canon Quan, the difference is it IS canon, it's Ryu's ending, and it is required to move the ENTIRE plot forward. and as I said, you being convinced is not a requirement for fact to be true.

Originally posted by quanchi112
I come from the comic vs. section so I assumed the rules were similar. I can't help if if you don't believe in Akuma's character just his best powerfeats eliminating what makes him him in the first place.

I don't give a crap if you came from Comic vs or a political debating arena or from the courts of law. If you don't do your research, especially about the rules of a particular forum, then you get everything you deserve. And no, Akuma has ALWAYS been prtrayed in story as the single most powerful fighter, they made him stronger than Bison in his Debut, they gave him his Shin form as an excuse to bolster his power even more, and retroatively made him hold back in base form, and now we have Oni who is even beyond Shin. You pissfarting around with the rules, demanding proof, for all kinds of bullshit, and then going on to say you thought you didn't need to provide any yourself is a masterstroke of pure idiocy. And now you trying to DEFEND that stance compounds it.

Originally posted by quanchi112
It's the same logic the only reason I brought it up is because you did. I don't think either endings are canon but every single character is capable of their endings based off of their abilities but if they don't occur they aren't canon. It's mindnumbingly simple.

It's that kind of assumption that leads to non-canon endings gaining some sort of credibility in a VS debate Quan. Should I bring up the Meteor feat for Shin Akuma then? or hows about Ryu SOLOING Galactus? No? I didn't think you would.

Originally posted by quanchi112
I simply used your own tactic against you and watched as you pissed and moaned. Quit getting so worked up over my opinion. Opinions vary seek to control yourself in the future for your own sake.

My own tactics?

Look again Quan. I used NONE of the above mentioned debating stratagems you employed, plus I provided backup for any claim I made. I daresay what I said is fact, and not oppinion like your own, and that makes ALL the difference.

If you had any facts to back up your absurd claims, and had NOT relied on the so-called "Prove it" crutch as a delaying tactic over and over, I'm sure we would have seen them by now, except as I said earlier, you thought it was a great idea to demand proof, but not provide any yourself... Now your trying to throw it back on me as a "used your own tricks against you" claim that is not only false, but is merely trolling.

So, this will be my only warning to you Quan, debate properly, or be reported for trolling and spamming. And remember, this is the ONLY warning I intend to give.

Originally posted by Zack Fair
👆 👆

Every time I finish any game with him I go all "Ok lets see what crazy shit this mofo got in store this time"

Don't be surprised if his Oni Akuma ending has him on DBZ level. 😂

Originally posted by Bro SMASH
Don't be surprised if his Oni Akuma ending has him on DBZ level. 😂

Eh, not quite.

After googling it, I found it. It shows Oni activating a volcano from the inside, and then ride out in lava...

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
It's not that I accept it as canon Quan, the difference is it IS canon, it's Ryu's ending, and it is required to move the ENTIRE plot forward. and as I said, you being convinced is not a requirement for fact to be true.

I don't give a crap if you came from Comic vs or a political debating arena or from the courts of law. If you don't do your research, especially about the rules of a particular forum, then you get everything you deserve. And no, Akuma has ALWAYS been prtrayed in story as the single most powerful fighter, they made him stronger than Bison in his Debut, they gave him his Shin form as an excuse to bolster his power even more, and retroatively made him hold back in base form, and now we have Oni who is even beyond Shin. You pissfarting around with the rules, demanding proof, for all kinds of bullshit, and then going on to say you thought you didn't need to provide any yourself is a masterstroke of pure idiocy. And now you trying to DEFEND that stance compounds it.

It's that kind of assumption that leads to non-canon endings gaining some sort of credibility in a VS debate Quan. Should I bring up the Meteor feat for Shin Akuma then? or hows about Ryu SOLOING Galactus? No? I didn't think you would.

My own tactics?

Look again Quan. I used NONE of the above mentioned debating stratagems you employed, plus I provided backup for any claim I made. I daresay what I said is fact, and not oppinion like your own, and that makes ALL the difference.

If you had any facts to back up your absurd claims, and had NOT relied on the so-called "Prove it" crutch as a delaying tactic over and over, I'm sure we would have seen them by now, except as I said earlier, you thought it was a great idea to demand proof, but not provide any yourself... Now your trying to throw it back on me as a "used your own tricks against you" claim that is not only false, but is merely trolling.

So, this will be my only warning to you Quan, debate properly, or be reported for trolling and spamming. And remember, this is the ONLY warning I intend to give.

Then you aren't arguing for Akuma just his powerset based off of a few feats that haven't been proven as canon. The ironic thing is you call me an idiot without a shred of proof just speculation.

The game Galactus isn't anywhere near as formidable as his comic counterpart and aren't even canon to their own series. Why would you bring up a feat for shin akuma when this is just akuma ?

I have provided proof of Shao Kahn taking a soul. I never used other endings as proof I just stated it's the same tactic you used since you can't prove akuma's endings are canon ie. have happened.

LOL at your wrnings when all you do is bash and get angry. Don' tbe a hypocrite. Shao Kahn has shown tremendous power and that he's on the highest level of mk there is in one on one combat. He has easily stolen souls, rocked various mk fighters with his hammer, has shown the strength to rip through mk fighters with his bare hands, and shown he is on Raiden's level who can self destruct and still exist.

Shao Kahn is on another level he invades worlds and conquers them. Akuma is just fighting in an elite tournament not one where gods, shokan, sorcerers, and other worldly elite fighters all take place in.

So, try to use your single brain cell to do something other than trolling.

If all of Gouki's feats of powers are not canon, and Gouki truly has not the power to perform that, why Capcom continues to do such endings for Gouki?

You remind me of Mr.Satan in the Cell game, with his "it's a trick" when the Z warriors do superhuman feats.

So for you Gouki's feats are just "tricks"? He used some bombs and made them explode, to trick us into believing that he's that strong?

Originally posted by Meioh_Hades
So, try to use your single brain cell to do something other than trolling.

If all of Gouki's feats of powers are not canon, and Gouki truly has not the power to perform that, why Capcom continues to do such endings for Gouki?

You remind me of Mr.Satan in the Cell game, with his "it's a trick" when the Z warriors do superhuman feats.

So for you Gouki's feats are just "tricks"? He used some bombs and made them explode, to trick us into believing that he's that strong?

Even if it's within his power he doesn't fight opponents like this he holds back.

So I assume that you've a Scouter like DBZ chars, and know perfectly that when Gouki does a feat he's always using his full power.

You've explained with your attitude and your "proof?" "proof?" that you're just a troll that won't listen to any reason...

Don't cry 'cause even if you prefer MK to Street Fighter, SFvesre has stronger chars.

For example, I prefer Fist of the North Star to Dragon Ball Z, but I've to problem admitting that DBZvesre has stronger chars.

Originally posted by Meioh_Hades
So I assume that you've a Scouter like DBZ chars, and know perfectly that when Gouki does a feat he's always using his full power.

You've explained with your attitude and your "proof?" "proof?" that you're just a troll that won't listen to any reason...

Don't cry 'cause even if you prefer MK to Street Fighter, SFvesre has stronger chars.

For example, I prefer Fist of the North Star to Dragon Ball Z, but I've to problem admitting that DBZvesre has stronger chars.

I'd like it to be closer but I don't see them anywhere near as formidable as the mk verse.

Originally posted by quanchi112
You are suggesting it's canon when has street fighter stated this ending is canon.

If you won't do your research as the OP, then you have no right to be demanding anything.

That said, try looking up SFEC or AAC, 2 sourcebooks that tell you the chain of events, which include the aformentioned island bust.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Then you aren't arguing for Akuma just his powerset based off of a few feats that haven't been proven as canon. The ironic thing is you call me an idiot without a shred of proof just speculation.

*Sigh* and around and around in circles we go....

Quan, IT IS NOT SPECULATION! Do you know know the meaning of that word?! You not accepting canon does not make it so. and it has been proven, COUNTLESS TIMES in many many threads across 7 years, you as the OPer should have done your research.

Originally posted by quanchi112
The game Galactus isn't anywhere near as formidable as his comic counterpart and aren't even canon to their own series. Why would you bring up a feat for shin akuma when this is just akuma ?

Because you want to bring in speculative crap for Shao Kahn and use his non-canon endings, meanwhile not offering a single SHRED of evidence for any of it, and at the same time you want to shoot down the credibility of a well known canon fact for Akuma makes you a hypocrite of the highest order.

Originally posted by quanchi112
I have provided proof of Shao Kahn taking a soul. I never used other endings as proof I just stated it's the same tactic you used since you can't prove akuma's endings are canon ie. have happened.

You have provided proof of nothing except your hypocricy. And no, it's not my tactic, it's me adhering to the forum rules and rejecting your constant delaying stratagem and trolling. And I already DID prove Ryu's ending as canon, your just chosing to ignore chain of events in favour of "No links? no proof" self-policy which is also sniping.

Originally posted by quanchi112
LOL at your wrnings when all you do is bash and get angry. Don' tbe a hypocrite. Shao Kahn has shown tremendous power and that he's on the highest level of mk there is in one on one combat. He has easily stolen souls, rocked various mk fighters with his hammer, has shown the strength to rip through mk fighters with his bare hands, and shown he is on Raiden's level who can self destruct and still exist.

I bashed? I called you an idiot for railroading evidence to suit yourself against forum rules.

No, you have provided not a thing Quan, by your own admission, and none of that proves Kahn can actually tank a multi-meganton PSI level physical hit.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Shao Kahn is on another level he invades worlds and conquers them. Akuma is just fighting in an elite tournament not one where gods, shokan, sorcerers, and other worldly elite fighters all take place in.

Except that titles and such are useless since they don't actually show what a character is capable of. Shouting out "but they are 'GODS' and 'Sorcerers' and other such titles do NOTHING to demonstrate their capabilities.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
If you won't do your research as the OP, then you have no right to be demanding anything.

That said, try looking up SFEC or AAC, 2 sourcebooks that tell you the chain of events, which include the aformentioned island bust.

*Sigh* and around and around in circles we go....

Quan, [B]IT IS NOT SPECULATION! Do you know know the meaning of that word?! You not accepting canon does not make it so. and it has been proven, COUNTLESS TIMES in many many threads across 7 years, you as the OPer should have done your research.

Because you want to bring in speculative crap for Shao Kahn and use his non-canon endings, meanwhile not offering a single SHRED of evidence for any of it, and at the same time you want to shoot down the credibility of a well known canon fact for Akuma makes you a hypocrite of the highest order.

You have provided proof of nothing except your hypocricy. And no, it's not my tactic, it's me adhering to the forum rules and rejecting your constant delaying stratagem and trolling. And I already DID prove Ryu's ending as canon, your just chosing to ignore chain of events in favour of "No links? no proof" self-policy which is also sniping.

I bashed? I called you an idiot for railroading evidence to suit yourself against forum rules.

No, you have provided not a thing Quan, by your own admission, and none of that proves Kahn can actually tank a multi-meganton PSI level physical hit.

Except that titles and such are useless since they don't actually show what a character is capable of. Shouting out "but they are 'GODS' and 'Sorcerers' and other such titles do NOTHING to demonstrate their capabilities. [/B]

Then it's easy to back up here which you haven't done. Just concede already.

I used canon story mode material for shao Kahn with multiple instances. Not my fault you want to disregard it.

When did you prove Ryu's ending is canon ? Honestly.

When has Akuma ever hit someone with a multilevel psi attack ?

Raiden has already shown he can hang with Shang Tsung and Quan Chi for a limited time, killed Motaro, killed Liu Kang, and come back from a self destructive attack.

The sorcery of mk has enthralled earth before so i'd say it more than speaks for itself.

Originally posted by Bro SMASH
Don't be surprised if his Oni Akuma ending has him on DBZ level. 😂

And MK being protrayed as more powerful than SF? You kidding me? 😆

Raiden and Shao Kahn are the only ones who show any higher end power and they get their asses kicked by the likes of Liu Lame and Johnny Cage. Akuma would thrash them hard.