Originally posted by quanchi112
I already addressed the differences. Ganondorf doesn't have super sonic speed. That's laughable and created by the lunatics who champion this shitty franchise.
Here.
http://outskirtsbattledome.wikispaces.com/Character+Profile+-+Ganondorf
People have already done the work for you.
Originally posted by Sacred 117Fanboys who use nerd math to create their own character while ignoring his portrayal.
Here.http://outskirtsbattledome.wikispaces.com/Character+Profile+-+Ganondorf
People have already done the work for you.
Originally posted by quanchi112Mother wasnt at the final fight, nor is a sneaky disarm some 'overpowered in combat', and fleeing has nothing to do with the fight. So the Wand? Big deal, his huge power-up didn't work as well as he wanted. Did you forget about a little thing called the Master Sword? The goddly formed holy weapon required to put him down? Yeah, both had handicaps. One more than another.
His mother sacrificed herself, Voldemort did disarm/beat him in OOTP, he was never the rightful owner of the Elder Wand, Harry fled from him before, etc.Harry was never a matchup for Voldemort. Link straight up wrecks Dorf every adventure. Harry had years of experience as opposed to Link's weeks of adventure. Not comparable at all.
Originally posted by BloodRainHis wand never answered to him. That's why he lost along with losing pieces of his soul amidst the conflict.
Mother wasnt at the final fight, nor is a sneaky disarm some 'overpowered in combat', and fleeing has nothing to do with the fight. So the Wand? Big deal, his huge power-up didn't work as well as he wanted. Did you forget about a little thing called the Master Sword? The goddly formed holy weapon required to put him down? Yeah, both had handicaps. One more than another.
Its a sword Link has to be skilled with to cleave Dorf. He did. Link minus the experience took down Dorf.
Originally posted by quanchi112
He died quickly in Lotr one. That's why this feat was more impressive but personally I see him killing all those men in battle as being more impressive than defeating Gandalf.Jackson doesn't care and threw in all kinds of new scenes for this film. Relax. It isn't the book. The outcome was a stomp. Dalf never had a chance and went down easily.
Why does that somehow not surprise me, but cool to each his own. Sending soldiers flying with a mace is clearly superior to defeating a wizard that sent a entire cave of goblins flying around.
I'm well aware of that, however that doesn't remotely change the fact that the scene was from a extended part of the movie, and isn't a part of the movie, and as such have no barrings on Gandalfs performance in the movie. A stomp would imply that Gandalf went down without a fight, hardly the case imo, had Sauron instantly overwhelmed Gandalf I would agree, but that wasn't quite what happened now was it?
Originally posted by quanchi112
Fanboys who use nerd math to create their own character while ignoring his portrayal.
Of course, you have a fallible excuse to dismiss extensive research and calculation.
I assume y'all have already made a Ganondorf vs. Voldemort thread. Maybe y'all should just revive it now that this is essentially void.
Originally posted by quanchi112
His wand never answered to him. That's why he lost along with losing pieces of his soul amidst the conflict.Its a sword Link has to be skilled with to cleave Dorf. He did. Link minus the experience took down Dorf.
Admitting that you're good with ignoring the power of the blade?
Originally posted by UtrigitaDude, Saruman easily bested Gandalf. The guy isn't that impressive. Sauron is on another level entirely.
Why does that somehow not surprise me, but cool to each his own. Sending soldiers flying with a mace is clearly superior to defeating a wizard that sent a entire cave of goblins flying around.I'm well aware of that, however that doesn't remotely change the fact that the scene was from a extended part of the movie, and isn't a part of the movie. A stomp would imply that Gandalf went down without a fight, hardly the case imo, had Sauron instantly overwhelmed Gandalf I would agree, but that wasn't quite what happened now was it?
Gandalf went down easily. At no point was the outcome even in jeopardy. Gandalf had no chance and you yourself wouldn't say Gandalf could take one out of a one hundred yet you say it isn't a stomp. It was.
Originally posted by Sacred 117It isn't though it is nerd math which isn't based on anything as stated as a fact in the fictional work. The guy gets beaten in a sword fight yet you dare say he's super sonic. Laughable.
Of course, you have a fallible excuse to dismiss extensive research and calculation.I assume y'all have already made a Ganondorf vs. Voldemort thread. Maybe y'all should just revive it now that this is essentially void.
Originally posted by quanchi112
It isn't though it is nerd math which isn't based on anything as stated as a fact in the fictional work. The guy gets beaten in a sword fight yet you dare say he's super sonic. Laughable.
Facing someone of equivalent speed. Am I to deduce that Thor is slow because he fights with a hammer?
Originally posted by BloodRainIt almost broke when he broke the shield. He was never the rightful owner so it was never truly his. This mattered.
It still worked, and still gave him a massive increase in power. The only thing it failed with is the beam lock. Sadly he still failed to do much before that. All that power, no accomplishment.Admitting that you're good with ignoring the power of the blade?
He broke the shield and was by far the most powerful wizard in a world of wizards. Dorf is some idiot divine luck favored after he was chained and executed.
The blade kept him down but links inexperience and skill embedded it into his flesh.
Link straight up beat his ass.
Originally posted by quanchi112
Dude, Saruman easily bested Gandalf. The guy isn't that impressive. Sauron is on another level entirely.Gandalf went down easily. At no point was the outcome even in jeopardy. Gandalf had no chance and you yourself wouldn't say Gandalf could take one out of a one hundred yet you say it isn't a stomp. It was.
Saruman had to steal Gandalfs staff after Gandalf had thown Saruman through a sealed door... Saruman struck Gandalf 5 times with a telekinetic assault, Gandalf struck Saruman 4 times.. back to a definition of what exactly is "easily".
So that was why Gandalf pushes back Sauron two or three times, because the outcome wasn't in doubt? Alternate way of viewing a scene to put it mildly. What does Gandalf not winning have to do with anything? Just because a guy doesn't win, doesn't mean he didn't put up a fight... this must be the most absurd thing I have heard in quite some time. That is like putting Anderson Silva up against Bones Jones and saying that because Anderson Silva lost every fight they had he got owned, disregarding the circumstances around the fights entirely, which is what you are doing in Gandalf against Sauron. Completely disregarding the fight itself and just looking at the outcome.
With that line of logic we can now safely say that Harry Potter owned Voldemort, we don't have to look at the fight itself, it's the outcome that is the deciding factor...
Originally posted by Sacred 117Thor has impressive reaction feats to which it is stated in the comic not nerd math.
Facing someone of equivalent speed. Am I to deduce that Thor is slow because he fights with a hammer?
Link isn't fast either. This is just laughable. Watch how many seconds took place to bfr oafish Ganondorf by the sages. Supersonic gtfo.
Originally posted by UtrigitaSaruman took his staff after he beat him. Saruman disarmed him. He proved to best prone to anger, Gandalf.
Saruman had to steal Gandalfs staff after Gandalf had thown Saruman through a sealed door... Saruman struck Gandalf 5 times with a telekinetic assault, Gandalf struck Saruman 4 times.. back to a definition of what exactly is "easily".So that was why Gandalf pushes back Sauron two or three times, because the outcome wasn't in doubt? Alternate way of viewing a scene to put it mildly. What does Gandalf not winning have to do with anything? Just because a guy doesn't win, doesn't mean he didn't put up a fight... this must be the most absurd thing I have heard in quite some time. That is like putting Anderson Silva up against Bones Jones and saying that because Anderson Silva lost every fight they had he got owned, disregarding the circumstances around the fights entirely, which is what you are doing in Gandalf against Sauron. Completely disregarding the fight itself and just looking at the outcome.
With that line of logic we can now safely say that Harry Potter owned Voldemort, we don't have to look at the fight itself, it's the outcome that is the deciding factor...
If he can't win one out of a 100 it is a stomp. You can pretend it isn't while I laugh.
Voldemort defeated Harry before, Harry fled, and there were other circumstances aiding Harry to survive. I say Voldemort crushes Harry just like Sauron crushes Gandalf. See the difference now.
Originally posted by quanchi112So? It still granted the power, evidently. Still failed to do any good in a duel.
It almost broke when he broke the shield. He was never the rightful owner so it was never truly his. This mattered.He broke the shield and was by far the most powerful wizard in a world of wizards. Dorf is some idiot divine luck favored after he was chained and executed.
The blade kept him down but links inexperience and skill embedded it into his flesh.
Link straight up beat his ass.
So thats a yes to Dorf only being defeating after repeated butchering and impalement by a goddly blade radiant with holy magic?