OWAW Superman/Doomsday vs WWH Hulk/Sentry

Originally posted by h1a8
Well it's a good thing that Pak doesn't have the authority to fix Superman's power level and abilities. Many writer's have different opinions. So we go on feats and what was shown.

Bottomline, Superman sees WWH as a statue. Superman one shots WWH as he did the probes.

Originally posted by JBL
Writers ARE the ones that gave superman his powers. They don't go by feats where they ALLOW a HERO to win against a stronger and more powerful foe. When asked who beats who, they go by powersets. This avoids crap like Spiderman/firelord. Pak is not the only writer who admitted that hulk would beat superman. Also for the record, the writers of OWAW were full fledged crackheads and heroin users but you accept that story even though they admitted they were lying and trying to increase sales. You could put anything in a comic where the hero's will always win by design, but on a forum battle the writers cut the crap and hero must win goes out the window and in comes abilities that the characters really have. They chose hulk. Guess why? True dynamic strength and not fan made up mental blocks.

So you don't go by comics, but rather interviews?

Originally posted by DarkSaint85
So you don't go by comics, but rather interviews?

Originally posted by JBL
Again, stick with the Subject. WRITERS do not go by comics. They understand that the hero or main character will be ALLOWED to win so they don't go by pre-determined comics(feats) when asked who will really win. Ask the writers, not me.

But what bearing has that on a forum fight where only comic feats are admissible as evidence?

I mean,some writers have gone on the record as ignoring the predetermined comics, and have said that in actual fact,the characters they write about actually exist in real life!!!

Does that mean it's of equal value?

Originally posted by DarkSaint85
But what bearing has that on a forum fight where only comic feats are admissible as evidence?

I mean,some writers have gone on the record as ignoring the predetermined comics, and have said that in actual fact,the characters they write about actually exist in real life!!!

Does that mean it's of equal value?

Originally posted by JBL
What does that have to do with other writers? You are trying to use writers to discredit other writers for the sake of superman. I wonder if you would even be here had Pak said that superman would wipe the floor with any hulk.

He is going in circle with that "argument" even he knows that's totally pointless.

Originally posted by JBL
What does that have to do with other writers? You are trying to use writers to discredit other writers for the sake of superman. I wonder if you would even be here had Pak said that superman would wipe the floor with any hulk.

Because it's a double standard.

Writer A,freed from the confined of telling a story, gives his view.

You accept it.

Writer B, also freed from the confines of a comic, gives his view.

You don't accept it.

You only accept viewpoints from writers when it suits you. And it has nothing to do with Superman, and everything to do with John Constantine.

Originally posted by RealityWarper
He is going in circle with that "argument" even he knows that's totally pointless.

Then give me a consistent argument why we should accept Pak's fanboy view, and not Milligan's fanboy view, or Azarello's fanboy view, or Moore's.

Originally posted by JBL
Writers ARE the ones that gave superman his powers. They don't go by feats where they ALLOW a HERO to win against a stronger and more powerful foe. When asked who beats who, they go by powersets. This avoids crap like Spiderman/firelord. Pak is not the only writer who admitted that hulk would beat superman. Also for the record, the writers of OWAW were full fledged crackheads and heroin users but you accept that story even though they admitted they were lying and trying to increase sales. You could put anything in a comic where the hero's will always win by design, but on a forum battle the writers cut the crap and hero must win goes out the window and in comes abilities that the characters really have. They chose hulk. Guess why? True dynamic strength and not fan made up mental blocks. Because if hidden strength was there due to mental blocks, don't you think the writers themselves would know?? After all, they gave superman his abilities😏

Superman has his limits, right?
So, I started thinking up names�names of characters who, according to this guy or that gal or the hermie over there, could certainly give even
that Superman a defeat (even if I, personally, didn�t think so). And then I asked Casey point blank:
"Who can beat Superman when he goes into that unconscious �Probe-busting mode� as he did in ADVENTURES 594?"
And then I threw out the names, and assumed he�d think I was just being silly:
RC: Juggernaut? Doomsday? Galactus? No one short of Imperiex himself?
* * * * *
And then he laid down the law, simple as that.
* * * * *
JOE CASEY: At that point, Superman is unbeatable. Had he not snapped out of it when Doomsday got fried, he might�ve been able to stop Imperiex right then and there.

http://comicboards.com/joecasey-rc.php

Though I like how you say "crackhead" writers using heroine to degrade the actual stories and show us how one writer has superior word to another.

Does this writer thing only works for marvel characters? I'm eager to hear your impartial views on it. Here are Superman writer and Hulk writer both agreeing Superman would defeat Hulk.

Jurgens actually said Superman would destroy Hulk in seconds.

And Aaron interview said that Thor and Hulk are the most powerful beings in the Universe.

🙂

Does that stack up as well? Let's not even mention Hulk being compared to a being that killed an infinity amount of Celestials.

Originally posted by carver9
And Aaron interview said that Thor and Hulk are the most powerful beings in the Universe.

🙂

Does that stack up as well? Let's not even mention Hulk being compared to a being that killed an infinity amount of Celestials.

That's better than universe methinks.

Exactly.

Writer interviews shouldn't be relied on. Kelly might have a secret dream diary where Superman is faster than light infinity, or Snyder has a chat with his mates where Batman is a class 100....doesn't make it so.

We go by comics. And I can't believe this is the second time this topic has come up today lol.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Superman was said to be among the most powerful beings in the omniverse.

That's better than universe methinks.

Lol...along with Aquaman, lol. It was outright said on panel that Hulk is the most powerful being in existence.

Originally posted by DarkSaint85
Then give me a consistent argument why we should accept Pak's fanboy view, and not Milligan's fanboy view, or Azarello's fanboy view, or Moore's.

Originally posted by abhilegend
But then Joe Casey who wrote OWAW Superman said nothing could stop Superman. Now guess who is EASILY as strong as the Hulk and can fly and has super speed and heat vision also??😉

http://comicboards.com/joecasey-rc.php

Though I like how you say "crackhead" writers using heroine to degrade the actual stories and show us how one writer has superior word to another.

Does this writer thing only works for marvel characters? I'm eager to hear your impartial views on it. Here are Superman writer and Hulk writer both agreeing Superman would defeat Hulk.

Jurgens actually said Superman would destroy Hulk in seconds.

Originally posted by DarkSaint85
Then give me a consistent argument why we should accept Pak's fanboy view, and not Milligan's fanboy view, or Azarello's fanboy view, or Moore's.

The point is that you are using an example where both the writers and the readers knows that John Constantine isn't real.

Pak has written both characters so his point of view on the matter is not an opinion, it's literally an information at that point.

Choice A: You accept to use your critical thinking skills and notice the difference between the two arguments and drop the John Con "argument".

Choice B: You stick with your "opinion" that both are the same and people will just ignore your "opinion" like you aren't even here.

Good luck with that.

We are all too old for that shit and we have passed the point of this kind of childish debates.

Originally posted by carver9
Lol...along with Aquaman, lol. It was outright said on panel that Hulk is the most powerful being in existence.

As Sun God said "maybe in your universe".

Originally posted by JBL
We are talking about head to head. Hand to hand fighting. They all agree that hulk would win in a strength vs strength fight. Not cheap wins due to heat vision and super speed. Superman cannot beat hulk in a fight of strength. Thanks for proving this.👍.... PS not one of those writers mentioned anything about supetmans so-called dynamic mental blocks did they?? Hulk is stronger than superman.

Originally posted by abhilegend
So you agree that Superman wins in a fight with HV and Superspeed? Cheap as it is?

Originally posted by JBL
This has everything to do with superman. The fact is, you don't like what Pak said. We're not talking about John c, we are talking about hulk beating superman in oaks and other writers minds, their answers were in favor of hulk, not superman. That is the problem here, that's not what you want to hear. If they said that superman would win, you would not even be here, you would be poking at carver.

I am flat-out ignoring what Pak said.

I have never once used any writer interviews to support my claim, in a serious fashion. Whether it be to support John, Superman, Hulk, or whatever. Never. I have never used Casey's interview up there, nor Jurgens, nor David or whatever.

Because, to be honest, I don't pay any attention to them. I simply don't know those interviews. I read the comics, and it is what it is.

This is why you have editors - to edit what writers write. Moreover, we specifically have forum rulings against writer interviews, which is another reason why I don't pay much heed to them.

Originally posted by RealityWarper
The point is that you are using an example where both the writers and the readers knows that John Constantine isn't real.

Pak has written both characters so his point of view on the matter is not an opinion, it's literally an information at that point.

Choice A: You accept to use your critical thinking skills and notice the difference between the two arguments and drop the John Con "argument".

Choice B: You stick with your "opinion" that both are the same and people will just ignore your "opinion" like you aren't even here.

Good luck with that.

We are all too old for that shit and we have passed the point of this kind of childish debates.

Him writing both characters, frankly, means diddly. He knows which side his bread is buttered. Your argument last time against using the Constantine interviews, and I quote, was this:

Originally posted by RealityWarper
The initiative of a few writers at promoting a character in a fun way doesn't negate the content of the interviews of other writers.

That's completely flawed.

Having a person X wrong at something doesn't make a person Y wrong at something just because they have the same job.

In French I would qualify your arguments as "N'importe nawak".

Pak was obviously just promoting his Hulk in a fun way. Doesn't negate Moore et al's views.