Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Who wins ?

Been done to death already across so many crossover threads... I'm not going through that shite again, so I'll just say Ryu wins in a pinch.

I think Ryu can KO Heihachi without much trouble. Killing him, well that's a different story.

Yes, Heihachi seems quite hard to kill.

His feat to stop a bullet with his teeth is quite good, however I think too that Ryu wins this.

Originally posted by Frisky Dingo
I think Ryu can KO Heihachi without much trouble. Killing him, well that's a different story. Based on what ?

Based upon canon feats and storyline.

Ryu can tank fists from a man that can destroy one island with a fist. That's storyline/gameplay segregation. Even Tekkenverse has it: gameplay-wise Tekken chars are not too different from real world athletes, but looking at intro, endings, etc, we can see that Heiachi can block a bullet with his teeth, 4 example.
In Street Fighter (and even moreso in Darkstalkers) char are far more powerful storyline-wise than gameplay wise.

However Heihachi seems resistant like a cockroach (that old man simply don't want to die), so is fair to state that Ryu can KO Heiachi without too much trouble, but he may not able to kill him (even 'cause Ryu doesn't fight to kill people).

Originally posted by Meioh_Hades
Based upon canon feats and storyline.

Ryu can tank fists from a man that can destroy one island with a fist. That's storyline/gameplay segregation. Even Tekkenverse has it: gameplay-wise Tekken chars are not too different from real world athletes, but looking at intro, endings, etc, we can see that Heiachi can block a bullet with his teeth, 4 example.
In Street Fighter (and even moreso in Darkstalkers) char are far more powerful storyline-wise than gameplay wise.

However Heihachi seems resistant like a cockroach (that old man simply don't want to die), so is fair to state that Ryu can KO Heiachi without too much trouble, but he may not able to kill him (even 'cause Ryu doesn't fight to kill people). Heihachi can catch bullets in his mouth and in the upcoming crossover all characters are in same weight class of fighters like I have always maintained.

The island fist punch is greatly exaggerated and hasn't been definitively proven to be canon.

I'd say Heihachi wins. Meaner, bullet catcher, his fists break Ryu's jaw.

"Not definitelvely proven as canon"? Wut? No, seriously, wut?

The fact that Street Fighters plot in A2 was propelled forward by this event, culminating in Ryu losing 2 matches because he questioned his conviction purely based on said event.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
"Not definitelvely proven as canon"? Wut? No, seriously, wut?

The fact that Street Fighters plot in A2 was propelled forward by this event, culminating in Ryu losing 2 matches because he questioned his conviction purely based on said event. Proof ?

Watch Ryu's A2 ending where the event took place.

It was after that event that Ryu lost to Sagat, then Ken as per their endings, which are also official.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
so I'll just say Ryu wins in a pinch.
Why would you say the less obvious of the two outcomes? Normal Ryu has to avoid what Heihachi catches with his teeth. Durability and experience shits on Ryu as well.

Ryu loses cuz Heihachi is an experienced fighter and he's as tough as the diamond. (the explosion he tanked in tekken 5 is the equivalent of the nuclear bomb cuz jack bloodline is made of plutonium).
Ryu can put up a good fight but in the end, he'd get pwned....

That's if your idea of a good fight is seeing Ryu's skull shatter against Heihachi's upon impact, or getting Broken-Toy'd off a cliff he wouldn't survive against.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Proof ?

You always ask "proof" for things that are proved to be canon in SF, and almost everyone with knowledge of a bit of SFverse know that those things happened.

So, since you don't know almost nothing of SF canon powers, how can you truly judge Street Fighters' warriors abilities?

Originally posted by GVSSK
Why would you say the less obvious of the two outcomes? Normal Ryu has to avoid what Heihachi catches with his teeth. Durability and experience shits on Ryu as well.

Bullets bounce off of Ryu.

zIag3-8yhIw&feature=related

IIRC the "bullet dodge" was in the SF Alpha anime (noncanon anime, but Capcom stated that chars have the "right" canon powers in that anime).

So Alpha Ryu can effortessly dodge bullets, while the stronger and wiser Ryu from SF4 simply don't even need to dodge them.

Heiachi has to catch what bounced off Ryu's skin. Durability and experience shits on Heiachi as well :P

ryu is just a student compere to heihachi
even kazuya is stronger

http://images.cheezburger.com/completestore/2010/4/12/129156065197827207.jpg

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
Bullets bounce off of Ryu.

zIag3-8yhIw&feature=related
Someone might want to read posts carefully.

I said normal Ryu. Normal Ryu was bleeding from a couple of street bums with alcohol bottles wasn't he? Is this the Alpha movie Capcom said was an accurate portrayal of the characters? Heihachi didn't bleed from a blast that would have vaporized normal Ryu.

Originally posted by GVSSK
Someone might want to read posts carefully.

I said normal Ryu. Normal Ryu was bleeding from a couple of street bums with alcohol bottles wasn't he? Is this the Alpha movie Capcom said was an accurate portrayal of the characters? Heihachi didn't bleed from a blast that would have vaporized normal Ryu.

There is no possible way to know that.

Heihachi didn't surface again for 3 weeks.

And Kazuya, who is easily on par or superior to Heihachi has been scarred by less, hell, even Hachi himself has got scars.

And, Ryu has been able to tank Gouki's attacks, attacks with the potential to level islands>>>>> Any feat in Tekken by a good 5 orders of magnitude.

Which is why Ryu was bleeding after a bottle was smacked on him. I'm sure he got island-destroying durability in just a few years time. In other words, those weren't Akuma's "island-leveling attacks" he was delivering that time unless you'd like to prove it.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
There is no possible way to know that.

Heihachi didn't surface again for 3 weeks.

And Kazuya, who is easily on par or superior to Heihachi has been scarred by less, hell, even Hachi himself has got scars.

And, Ryu has been able to tank Gouki's attacks, attacks with the potential to level islands>>>>> Any feat in Tekken by a good 5 orders of magnitude. Let's not forget that normal Ryu is stronger than Ryu under the influence of the Satsui No Hado.

Which is why feats heavily say otherwise.

Feats aren't the only thing you look at when gauging a character's abilities.

quanchi112 the thread maker was more or less discussing feats solely, so I guess some are shit out of luck.

He wasn't even discussing that much. He only spoke on gameplay.

Gameplay which is dismissable from any theoretical vs debate.

I had a feeling that GVSSK was a copy account of Wandering Flame.

Not suprising really...

I knew it was him from the start. That's why I never responded to anything he said. I was gonna warn you all but looks like the mods had their coffe this mornin.

The Bulls lost, I am dyin on the inside right now.

hell no ,how can ryu stand alive after getting punched by someone who sinkes islands with 1 punch?
its impossible and exagerated.
and the feat of akuma sinking island is bit overrated too.
akuma cannot do it ,he needs atleast use all of he's power to do it

Originally posted by samirerre
hell no ,how can ryu stand alive after getting punched by someone who sinkes islands with 1 punch?
its impossible and exagerated.
and the feat of akuma sinking island is bit overrated too.
akuma cannot do it ,he needs atleast use all of he's power to do it

He does? He becomes Shin or Oni in that scene? When? And he actually powers up a technique? When?

See, this is the problem, There is no evidence that Gouki actually uses any more power there than what he used to fight Ryu, and with that power he sunk the island with a physical blow.

Now, let me ask you this, why is it impossible for Ryu to survive, when he did? Why is it exagerated. Why is the island sinker overrated? and WTF? He did do it, and th scene shows he did it with less than base form power. Why do you question this?

Originally posted by samirerre
hell no ,how can ryu stand alive after getting punched by someone who sinkes islands with 1 punch?
its impossible and exagerated.
and the feat of akuma sinking island is bit overrated too.
akuma cannot do it ,he needs atleast use all of he's power to do it

Don't worry, i'm pretty sure Ryu can't survive at the nuclear bomb heihachi received.
Akuma rly sunk the island but the power he used at this moment was far from superior against Ryu
Ryu can't win this match, simple as that. Heihachi is tough compared to Ryu. The latter got his ass handed to him by kaz who can't beat his father.

Well, I doubt that Ryu really tanked an island busting punch. In SF4, he got his ass handed by Seth (And he won later with metsu hadouken) and Gouki isn't normal when he punched the island and caused it sink. He was covered with an aura, his breathing is not normal and most likely, he punched the island with all of his power. It's strange if his normal punch is so much stronger than his usual technique like his gou hadouken and tenma gou zankuu.


Back to this topic, Heihachi wins. Like Crimson said, I doubt Ryu could survive if he is blasted by a same explosion Heihachi took. And I even doubt Ryu has a power as powerful as a nuke. He cut a waterfall with hadouken and that's the only feat I know from Ryu.

How can you say that Gouki's punch is stronger than his special moves?

And about the aura, Gouki does it all the times.

It's you that can't just accept the fact that Gouki, even in his "normal mode" has the power to sink an island with one punch, and that Ryu has enough endurance to tank a similar punch.

And about the fact that Ryu had an hard time against Seth, is just 'cause Seth is very powerful. In SSF4 move, we clearly see Juri's feats, and Seth doesn't seem to fear her.

@crimson 2010: if the "Ryu got his ass kicked from Kazuya" is from the SF X Tekken trailer, it does not count: we all know that crossover are not canon, and in those games "Rule of cool > canon".

In Marvel vs Capcom 3 Ryu soloed Galactus, but we all know that Ryu would never beat him in canon.

Originally posted by Meioh_Hades
How can you say that Gouki's punch is stronger than his special moves?

And about the aura, Gouki does it all the times.

It's you that can't just accept the fact that Gouki, even in his "normal mode" has the power to sink an island with one punch, and that Ryu has enough endurance to tank a similar punch.

And about the fact that Ryu had an hard time against Seth, is just 'cause Seth is very powerful. In SSF4 move, we clearly see Juri's feats, and Seth doesn't seem to fear her.


Because his special moves like Tenma Gou Zanku creates nothing but big explosion (Or maybe crater too). His newest move in SF4 wrecked a forest. Even his shakunetsu gou hadouken creates not-so-big explosions which can't be compared to island busting power.


All the time? Check his battle with Ryu in SF4 trailer. He doesn't have such aura when fighting Ryu. He has it but it isn't all time.


Seth is powerful but is he an island buster? And Ken which is on par with Ryu, able to bust an island too? I don't think so. Other than shattered a sand sack, Ken has no other feats.

Originally posted by Meioh_Hades
How can you say that Gouki's punch is stronger than his special moves?

And about the aura, Gouki does it all the times.

It's you that can't just accept the fact that Gouki, even in his "normal mode" has the power to sink an island with one punch, and that Ryu has enough endurance to tank a similar punch.

And about the fact that Ryu had an hard time against Seth, is just 'cause Seth is very powerful. In SSF4 move, we clearly see Juri's feats, and Seth doesn't seem to fear her.

@crimson 2010: if the "Ryu got his ass kicked from Kazuya" is from the SF X Tekken trailer, it does not count: we all know that crossover are not canon, and in those games "Rule of cool > canon".

In Marvel vs Capcom 3 Ryu soloed Galactus, but we all know that Ryu would never beat him in canon.

Yes! An intelligent and sensible man, you are.

It's a proven fact that Gouki's appearance will change, Dependant on how much power he uses. It's also a fact that Ryu under the influence of the Satsui No Hado was equal to normal Gouki in SFA2 . It is also stated fact that Ryu, by the time of SFIII, is even stronger than the version of Ryu that would use the Satsui No Hadou. The current Ryu, SFIII NOT SFIV, should be able to smash more than islands.

^
That.

Akuma used a normal punch. Ryu isn't as powerful as Akuma in most instances, but he can keep up with him and put up a fight. He isn't so far behind he dies from a glance. People just don't like how powerful they have become.

street fighter becomes less street fighter with each year passing
to get hit by a island puncher is like having punch with a force of
hundreds of millions of tonnes
darkstorm-if you think this is not ovareted then something with you is wrong
capcom screwed sf story for good lol

Street Fighter was never said to be "street" why do I have to explain that to people.

Mortal Kombat has immortal characters. SF wasn't the only one that got powerful over time. (Not to mention the feats were 15 years ago with the island). But look at Sonic, he got more powerful. Mario did too, so did DK. We have the technology now to show those kind of effects.

akuma did not used normal punche
im sorry but you cant be sure if he can even do it twice
its obiolsly was show that he focused all of his power to pull it

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
Street Fighter was never said to be "street" why do I have to explain that to people.

Mortal Kombat has immortal characters. SF wasn't the only one that got powerful over time. (Not to mention the feats were 15 years ago with the island). But look at Sonic, he got more powerful. Mario did too, so did DK. We have the technology now to show those kind of effects.

It is truly painful to see you have to explain that characters become more powerful overtime. They don't have to accomplish "feats" just to prove that.

When you're the most successful you will have the most haters.

Originally posted by samirerre
akuma did not used normal punche
im sorry but you cant be sure if he can even do it twice
its obiolsly was show that he focused all of his power to pull it He didn't have the kongou then. It was a normal punch.

Originally posted by samirerre
darkstorm-if you think this is not ovareted then something with you is wrong

Excuse you? Why don't you explain to me your definition of 'Overrated' then?

Fact#1: Akuma did the feat in base form without any powering up.

Fact#2: He did this YEARS before inventing the similar technique called Kongou Kokuretsu Zan, which was not perfected till decades later.

Fact#3: This one act alone is beyond most comparable competition. The only thing detractors like you can say is 'Overrated'?

Seems to me that these 3 facts amount to you lot = http://paganmedia.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/crybaby-truth.jpg

Originally posted by Frisky Dingo


It is truly painful to see you have to explain that characters become more powerful overtime.

Who could ever thought of that?

Warriors like Ryu and Gouki, who devote their life to become greater fighters, become STRONGER in the years O_O !?!?!?!?!?!

That's IMPOSSIBLE!!!

Tell me about it.

Originally posted by Meioh_Hades

It's you that can't just accept the fact that Gouki, even in his "normal mode" has the power to sink an island with one punch, and that Ryu has enough endurance to tank a similar punch.

Except Gouki really didn't punch Ryu with that kind of punch. I don't know why people keep saying this.

lol this kid looks like me ..kidding
from where you take thos info anyway?
sorry but a trainer who couldnt even beat sagat can possibly
stand LITERALLY STAND a chance against 1 akuma island freaking punch ? is it really possible?
darkstoem-akuma himself is overrated

Originally posted by Bro SMASH
Except Gouki really didn't punch Ryu with that kind of punch. I don't know why people keep saying this. So how hard does Gouki hit in fights?

Ryu can tank SFA Akuma's punches since...well, he's better than SFA Akuma.

Game Versus can be a very ridiculous place, sometimes.

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
So how hard does Gouki hit in fights?

Based on what's shown so far (like the SFIV fight), he couldn't have been hitting that hard. Besides, it has already been confirmed that he holds back in fights.

Originally posted by samirerre
lol this kid looks like me ..kidding
from where you take thos info anyway?
sorry but a trainer who couldnt even beat sagat can possibly
stand LITERALLY STAND a chance against 1 akuma island freaking punch ? is it really possible?
darkstoem-akuma himself is overrated

Ryu did beat Sagat tho.

This feat is set AFTER the first battle with Sagat anyway, once again, people becoming strionger over time should not be considered an impossibility. And besides, that should say to you what Sagat is capable of more than anything else.

You fail to answer my question. I asked you to define your use of 'Overrated'. Because it seems to me you plucked the word after seeing other people use it, and have no idea as to it's meaning. And based on that fact alone I can say:
http://fc02.deviantart.net/fs30/f/2009/242/f/4/your_argument_is_invalid_by_Xyga.jpg

You guys screaming "Overrated!" does nothing to invalidate the arguments, especially when you don't offer any counter-evidence.

Originally posted by Meioh_Hades
You always ask "proof" for things that are proved to be canon in SF, and almost everyone with knowledge of a bit of SFverse know that those things happened.

So, since you don't know almost nothing of SF canon powers, how can you truly judge Street Fighters' warriors abilities? I've played enough street fighter games to know the story isn't thought out in detail at all in the games anyways. I mean ken's ending is where he has a kid isn't really an exciting ending or blank meeting up with his mommy.

The point is I want the ending referenced in a later game not just speculation and want you want to be canon.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
Watch Ryu's A2 ending where the event took place.

It was after that event that Ryu lost to Sagat, then Ken as per their endings, which are also official. You're saying this makes sense so without proof you want this to be canon. Just because an ending seems plausible that doesn't mean it followed the continuity from game to game.

Originally posted by Bro SMASH
Based on what's shown so far (like the SFIV fight), he couldn't have been hitting that hard. Besides, it has already been confirmed that he holds back in fights. But it was a draw battle. And he wasn't at full power when he hit the mountain.

And arguing whether it's canon or not is just silly, it is all canon.

Originally posted by samirerre
lol this kid looks like me ..kidding
from where you take thos info anyway?
sorry but a trainer who couldnt even beat sagat can possibly
stand LITERALLY STAND a chance against 1 akuma island freaking punch ? is it really possible?
darkstoem-akuma himself is overrated

From this post, it seems that you're totally understimate Sagat's prowess. He's one of the strongest SF chars.

@ that troll quanchi112. What has to do the fact that Ken's SF3 ending is not exciting, with the fact that endings like Ryu's in SF Alpha 2 IS canon?

Is not necessary to have a direct reference in other games to state one end as canon. You can read something about the story, use your brain to do 2+2=4 and you'll know wich endings are canon and wich endings are not without direct references.

Originally posted by Meioh_Hades
From this post, it seems that you're totally understimate Sagat's prowess. He's one of the strongest SF chars.

@ that troll quanchi112. What has to do the fact that Ken's SF3 ending is not exciting, with the fact that endings like Ryu's in SF Alpha 2 IS canon?

Is not necessary to have a direct reference in other games to state one end as canon. You can read something about the story, use your brain to do 2+2=4 and you'll know wich endings are canon and wich endings are not without direct references. Without direct proof then you don't have anything. If something is canon from a game you need to prove it.


Heihachi's bullet catching feat is canon since it's in the canon story mode.

Originally posted by quanchi112
You're saying this makes sense so without proof you want this to be canon. Just because an ending seems plausible that doesn't mean it followed the continuity from game to game.

No, I am saying that without that event, and the contents of that event, then the story cannot proceed. it can be the most warped nonsensical story in existamce, but without a chain of events it does not happen.

The fact that it is Ryu's ending, and the fact that Akuma has had supporting feats after this one is direct proof that akuma is capable of what is shown.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Without direct proof then you don't have anything. If something is canon from a game you need to prove it.


Heihachi's bullet catching feat is canon since it's in the canon story mode.



Lol you know even the fatass Bob can dodge bullet while reading a newspaper, so dodging bullet in tekkenverse doesn't seem abnormal. But i didn't see someone in Street Fighter doing this feat.
Besides, Heihachi hold his own against someone who whooped Nancy ass and could make Naruto and his Kage Bushin ashamed....

Ryu has no way to win this fight

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
No, I am saying that without that event, and the contents of that event, then the story cannot proceed. it can be the most warped nonsensical story in existamce, but without a chain of events it does not happen.

The fact that it is Ryu's ending, and the fact that Akuma has had supporting feats after this one is direct proof that akuma is capable of what is shown. I never said he wasn't capable of it based off his endings I said it hasn't been proven to be canon nor does Akuma ever use this amount of force in a versus fight making it all irrelevant. Originally posted by crimson_2010
Lol you know even the fatass Bob can dodge bullet while reading a newspaper, so dodging bullet in tekkenverse doesn't seem abnormal. But i didn't see someone in Street Fighter doing this feat.
Besides, Heihachi hold his own against someone who whooped Nancy ass and could make Naruto and his Kage Bushin ashamed....

Ryu has no way to win this fight I agree that Heihachi does win and that tekken characters seems more formidable than street fighter characters.

Originally posted by quanchi112
I never said he wasn't capable of it based off his endings I said it hasn't been proven to be canon nor does Akuma ever use this amount of force in a versus fight making it all irrelevant.

How much proof do you require? This is irrelevant as the evidence has been proven fact countless times here in KMC, and the fact that you don't accept that is irrelevant.

Wrong, just because he doesn't use the capability in-universe, does not mean that he cannot do it if he factually has the ability. I'm assuming then that you have not read VS forum rules, ergo, all combatants are bloodlusted and will not be holding back. Do you not understand what this means? it means that Akuma will NOT be holding off island busting physical attacks.

Originally posted by quanchi112
I agree that Heihachi does win and that tekken characters seems more formidable than street fighter characters.

^ this is your oppinion, and is also quite irrelevant, plus it has no solid foundation on which to stand upon.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
How much proof do you require? This is irrelevant as the evidence has been proven fact countless times here in KMC, and the fact that you don't accept that is irrelevant.

Wrong, just because he doesn't use the capability in-universe, does not mean that he cannot do it if he factually has the ability. I'm assuming then that you have not read VS forum rules, ergo, all combatants are bloodlusted and will not be holding back. Do you not understand what this means? it means that Akuma will NOT be holding off island busting physical attacks.



^ this is your oppinion, and is also quite irrelevant, plus it has no solid foundation on which to stand upon. Essentially then you want to argue an out of character akuma which in the end isn't akuma just his feats at their best which haven't even been definitively proven as canon. All of the characters endings are within their abilities anyways but if an event doesn't take place it isn't canon.

Superior in game feats which are canon but who cares about that.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Essentially then you want to argue an out of character akuma which in the end isn't akuma just his feats at their best which haven't even been definitively proven as canon. All of the characters endings are within their abilities anyways but if an event doesn't take place it isn't canon.

Superior in game feats which are canon but who cares about that.

Essentially I am following the debating rules and you are not. Thats basically what all this amounts to.

The better question is why would Akuma hold back against out of universe opponents in a theoretical debate?

And again, they HAVE been proven canon, the burden of proof now lies with YOU. Besides, as I said, your level of "Proof" does not need to be met to satisfy the burden of proof, because you do not decide hat is and is not cannon.

Besides, the island busting feat was from Ryu's ending, not Akuma's... This one fact alone blows your entire premise out of the bloody water, since Ryu is the main character, and his ending are ALWAYS official unless retconned.

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
But it was a draw battle. And he wasn't at full power when he hit the mountain.

And arguing whether it's canon or not is just silly, it is all canon.

We can't say he wasn't at full power when he hit the mountain but it's highly unlikely he was fighting Ryu at that same amount of power. Gouki even admitted it was a mere test and as I said earlier, he holds back in fights.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
Essentially I am following the debating rules and you are not. Thats basically what all this amounts to.

The better question is why would Akuma hold back against out of universe opponents in a theoretical debate?

And again, they HAVE been proven canon, the burden of proof now lies with YOU. Besides, as I said, your level of "Proof" does not need to be met to satisfy the burden of proof, because you do not decide hat is and is not cannon.

Besides, the island busting feat was from Ryu's ending, not Akuma's... This one fact alone blows your entire premise out of the bloody water, since Ryu is the main character, and his ending are ALWAYS official unless retconned. You keep insisting it's canon so provide the proof ala link or anything. You just keep saying Ryu's endings are canon then the proof should be easy.

The reason he holds back is because he does it's in character for him to do so. But akuma isn't in this debate so kindly drop it.

You keep asking for more "proof", when it is evident that Ryu's SF Alpha 2 ending is canon.

Drop it now... However, you gave us enough "proof" that you're an utter moron... Since Quan Chi is a magnificent bastard and the greatest puppet master of MK series, your nickname is a disgrace to that great char!

Originally posted by Meioh_Hades
You keep asking for more "proof", when it is evident that Ryu's SF Alpha 2 ending is canon.

Drop it now... However, you gave us enough "proof" that you're an utter moron... Since Quan Chi is a magnificient bastard and the greatest puppet master of MK series, your nickname is a disgrace to that great char! You mean magnificent. It's not proven ryu's ending is canon but if it is provide a link. If someone kept saying superman can't fly or provide proof I could do so in a heartbeat.

That's the difference between you and I the things I argue for are gameplay based or canon to my characters not just wishful thinking.

Thinking... something you're not clearly used to.

And seriously... we all know that gameplay abilities aren't reliable when judging the canon power of a char, 'cause gameplay abilities are under the rule of game balance.

Originally posted by Meioh_Hades
Thinking... something you're not clearly used to.

And seriously... we all know that gameplay abilities aren't reliable when judging the canon power of a char, 'cause gameplay abilities are under the rule of game balance. I never said that all characters have the same strength or skill I said they are all capable of injuring each other. That is indisputable. Try understanding what my point actually is before coming in bashing mainly out of insecurity.

Originally posted by quanchi112
gameplay Hahahahahaha what a loser.

Originally posted by NemeBro
Hahahahahaha what a loser. Don't be a hater.

I cannot hate such an enjoyable comedy.

Originally posted by NemeBro
I cannot hate such an enjoyable comedy. Yeah, these other guys are cracking me up as well.

Originally posted by Bro SMASH
We can't say he wasn't at full power when he hit the mountain but it's highly unlikely he was fighting Ryu at that same amount of power. Gouki even admitted it was a mere test and as I said earlier, he holds back in fights. He wasn't Shin or Oni so he was holding back. The punch was a casual punch.

There's absolutely no proof that it was a casual punch.

He just provided some.

He was not Shin or Oni, both being levels of power beyond his base form. Oni being even above Shin.

Leave.

No he didn't. It's just pure assumption, as there is absolutely nothing confirming that he was holding back .

You can't even prove that he hit Ryu with that punch either.

Shin and Oni are Akuma's more powerful forms. Normal Akuma is him holding back. Plain and simple.

But where was it stating that Akuma was holding back at that moment? And where was it stating he hit Ryu with that same amount of strength?

......... Shut up.

Shin Akuma
http://i253.photobucket.com/albums/hh74/dor5ykid/akuma-1.jpg

Oni Akuma
http://i657.photobucket.com/albums/uu297/IVredantares/07_oniartwork.jpg

He looked nothing like that when he punched the island.

Therefore, he was holding back.

Edit: Linked to Oni Akuma pic, was too large.

You still didn't provide any conclusive evidence.

Either prove that it was a casual punch that he just happen to hit Ryu with or just drop it!

If you ask me SF is overrated, then I must say, sometimes. This is one of the example.

Shin Bison is a city buster according to some people and he trashed Ryu possibly without much of a problem. Seth has no feats but he pummeled Ryu. Yes. Seth is strong. No doubt about it. But, can Seth bust an island with a mere punches and kicks? Don't tell me these two people have an island busting feat too.

Originally posted by quanchi112
You keep insisting it's canon so provide the proof ala link or anything. You just keep saying Ryu's endings are canon then the proof should be easy.

Read the other thread.

Do your research.

Follow the chain of events.

Do this and you may debate further.

Originally posted by quanchi112
The reason he holds back is because he does it's in character for him to do so. But akuma isn't in this debate so kindly drop it.

The reason he is brought up is because of his fight with Ryu, which is a legitimate wat to guage his strength against a WELL holding back Gouki, who STILL sunk Gokentou with that level of power.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
Read the other thread.

Do your research.

Follow the chain of events.

Do this and you may debate further.



The reason he is brought up is because of his fight with Ryu, which is a legitimate wat to guage his strength against a WELL holding back Gouki, who STILL sunk Gokentou with that level of power. If you cannot post the proof then you must concede the point.

Akuma isn't ryu so it holds no weight anyways as it hasn't been proven and he only wanted to test Ryu not kill him.

Originally posted by Bro SMASH
You still didn't provide any conclusive evidence.

Either prove that it was a casual punch that he just happen to hit Ryu with or just drop it! Alright, this is gettting ridiculous. We had our wave of MK, Tekken, Namco, etc. fanboys before who couldn't handle the fact that Sf is more powerful.

It isn't our job to prove to stubborn or stupid people that the punches Akuma was doing was held back. Akuma hasn't even had any canon fights going all out. Anybody who knows anything about SF should know this. It isn't our fault that people aren't educated on the material. I hate when people ask for someone to "prove" something just to stall time.

It's like someone saying normal Goku wasn't holding back against Vegeta in the fight where he could go SSj3.Originally posted by Kirikaze Fuuma
If you ask me SF is overrated, then I must say, sometimes. This is one of the example.

Shin Bison is a city buster according to some people and he trashed Ryu possibly without much of a problem. Seth has no feats but he pummeled Ryu. Yes. Seth is strong. No doubt about it. But, can Seth bust an island with a mere punches and kicks? Don't tell me these two people have an island busting feat too.

No, what the opposition is doing is known as feat skewing. No different than saying that if Superman pummels Brainiac and Flash does it, then Flash has a feat of pummeling islands, it's flawed logic and irrelevant due to the powerset. Everything can be overrated sometimes, and MK and Tekken are no exception. I get tired of people coming in here using the "he's a God excuse", and frankly asking the SF side to provide the same evidence over and over and over again for 6 or 7 years is equally annoying as well. Some things are just known knowledge.

But two can play it at that game, I want all of these other feats "proven" for me.

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
Alright, this is gettting ridiculous. We had our wave of MK, Tekken, Namco, etc. fanboys before who couldn't handle the fact that Sf is more powerful.


yes, those people are just able to deny 'til death canon facts or keep saying that SF are overrated, while overrating their favourite chars, like someone that told that Devil Jin power up in Tekken 5 dark resurrection ending (that just cracked some rocks and raised some dust) into "OMG!!! DEVIL JIN HAS THE POWER TO BLOW UP THE ENTIRE EARTH!!!"

I repeat it: I prefer Fist of the North Star to Dragon Ball Z, and I prefer Batman to Superman, but I've no problem to admit that DBZ verse has stronger chars than Fist of the North Star verse, and that Superman is way stronger than Batman.

And I like Duke Nukem more than... wait, Duke is more powerful than anything...

Hail to the King Baby!!! blowup

Originally posted by quanchi112
If you cannot post the proof then you must concede the point.

Akuma isn't ryu so it holds no weight anyways as it hasn't been proven and he only wanted to test Ryu not kill him.

If you cannot accept proof, then you must GTFO.

It's not about Akuma specifically Quan, besides, your using A>B>C logic in both threads anyway, why can't we?

The new and improved Darkstorm, lol.

C-Master called someone stupid.

Huh. Never seen him insult in a thread before.

I'm scared. ._.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
If you cannot accept proof, then you must GTFO.

It's not about Akuma specifically Quan, besides, your using A>B>C logic in both threads anyway, why can't we? You haven't provided proof you have speculated it's proof. If you can't tell the difference between the two I can't help you.

I have used direct showings from Shao Kahn in another thread to showcase how he wins or how powerful he is portrayed. You use noncanon endings. That sums it up.

The ending where Akuma destroys the island is specifically referenced in following games though.

What's it like being an intellectual lightweight compared to everyone you meet Quan?

Originally posted by NemeBro
The ending where Akuma destroys the island is specifically referenced in following games though.

What's it like being an intellectual lightweight compared to everyone you meet Quan? Link ?

I've noticed both here and in the movie versus section you have become emotional. I hope everything is ok with you.

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
Alright, this is gettting ridiculous. We had our wave of MK, Tekken, Namco, etc. fanboys before who couldn't handle the fact that Sf is more powerful.

It isn't our job to prove to stubborn or stupid people that the punches Akuma was doing was held back. Akuma hasn't even had any canon fights going all out. Anybody who knows anything about SF should know this. It isn't our fault that people aren't educated on the material. I hate when people ask for someone to "prove" something just to stall time.

It's like someone saying normal Goku wasn't holding back against Vegeta in the fight where he could go SSj3.


Except SF really isn't more powerful.

You say it's not your job all because you CAN'T prove it. It's just another way for you to overrate Ryu's durability. I can say that Shang Tsung tried to steal Liu Kang's soul during their fight and couldn't, even though there's no proof stating that. That's just like this situation.

Don't try to make a point you can't prove. If you don't have anything stating that Ryu took a casual punch by Akuma that also happened to be "island-destroying", then don't bring it up. You'd only sound like a fanboy if you do.

Originally posted by quanchi112
You haven't provided proof you have speculated it's proof. If you can't tell the difference between the two I can't help you.

Ok kid, this is where I am going to pummel your Quan logic into the damn ground.

First: How the ever living hell can one "Speculate it's proof"? That entire line makes not a bit of sense.

Second: Nothing I have said in either of these two threads have been assumption, speculation, oppinion or any other ill contrived word you could conjure. Established fact is established fact, and you not researching is not my void to fill, since your the damn OP of this thread.

Third: Your hypocritical use of the term "Proof" has been exposed as a horrid delaying tactic. Not only do you shout it out, but you have the most unrealistic expectations of proof, and then try to play the fools game by not providing a single shred of evidence yourself, and then tell ME that I have to do the legwork for you ad in the same breath claim that "It's all ingame". Meanwhile, you have been shown a video of the ending your trying to snipe and have the gall to tell us that "It's not canon" despite the fact that A: it is needed for the chainof events to continue not only in A2, but in every subsequent sequel of SFer.

Conclusion: you are a biased hypocritical trolling fool who's only aim is to say MK>SFer without so much as a single shred of anything resembling either credible or evidence at all.

Originally posted by quanchi112
I have used direct showings from Shao Kahn in another thread to showcase how he wins or how powerful he is portrayed. You use noncanon endings. That sums it up.

REALLY? So tell me, what makes the stuff you show any more canonically valid than ours Quan?

Oh wait, don't tell me, it's Quan Logic at work again right? So because YOU posted it, it must be valid and to hell with everyone elses evidence?

That settles it then, you and both of your threads can F@*k off then.

I see Heihachi as a great fighter and I truly respect him and how many times he's avoided death, he's actually one of my top 3 favorite Tekken characters but on that note I just can't see him taking Ryu :/... Although from reading everything that's been going on I'm surprised someone hasn't been like "Heihachi would just sidestep the HadouCAN'T and punish him..Ryu can only move two ways ;P" x]

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
Ok kid, this is where I am going to pummel your Quan logic into the damn ground.

First: How the ever living hell can one "Speculate it's proof"? That entire line makes not a bit of sense.

Second: Nothing I have said in either of these two threads have been assumption, speculation, oppinion or any other ill contrived word you could conjure. Established fact is established fact, and you not researching is not my void to fill, since your the damn OP of this thread.

Third: Your hypocritical use of the term "Proof" has been exposed as a horrid delaying tactic. Not only do you shout it out, but you have the most unrealistic expectations of proof, and then try to play the fools game by not providing a single shred of evidence yourself, and then tell ME that I have to do the legwork for you ad in the same breath claim that "It's all ingame". Meanwhile, you have been shown a video of the ending your trying to snipe and have the gall to tell us that "It's not canon" despite the fact that A: it is needed for the chainof events to continue not only in A2, but in every subsequent sequel of SFer.

Conclusion: you are a biased hypocritical trolling fool who's only aim is to say MK>SFer without so much as a single shred of anything resembling either credible or evidence at all.



REALLY? So tell me, what makes the stuff you show any more canonically valid than ours Quan?

Oh wait, don't tell me, it's Quan Logic at work again right? So because YOU posted it, it must be valid and to hell with everyone elses evidence?

That settles it then, you and both of your threads can F@*k off then. A characters ending isn't canon unless it's stated in the game as canon. If Liu Kang wins the tournament that doesn't mean his ending from the previous game is accurate. Until we see the next game and get confirmation of how it ended we simply don't know. The events I have used in another thread are in continuity not just in a specific character's ending just like heihachi's actions are in the gameplay's story mode separate from their own individual endings.

It's simple I only use events that have occurred not certain endings I really want to argue for. In both tekken and mk the story mode is canon and that which the game previously establishes as canon.

This isn't hard to understand or so I thought.

Originally posted by quanchi112
A characters ending isn't canon unless it's stated in the game as canon. If Liu Kang wins the tournament that doesn't mean his ending from the previous game is accurate. Until we see the next game and get confirmation of how it ended we simply don't know. The events I have used in another thread are in continuity not just in a specific character's ending just like heihachi's actions are in the gameplay's story mode separate from their own individual endings.

We just got through telling you that SFers chain of events require that event to be canon in order for the story to progress, your simply a raging fool if you cannot understand this.

Originally posted by quanchi112
It's simple I only use events that have occurred not certain endings I really want to argue for. In both tekken and mk the story mode is canon and that which the game previously establishes as canon.

Kinda hard to compare then, since SFer does not HAVE an adventure mode, the entire story is derived from intros and endings. It's not my problem you can't sort whats canon and non-canon, and you simply want to cherrypick what suits your argument.

Originally posted by quanchi112
This isn't hard to understand or so I thought.

Like I said, SFer does not have an adventure mode, conquest mode story mode or any other mode that tells the story except arcade mode. Don;t like it, then don't debate it! Now, that is simple.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
We just got through telling you that SFers chain of events require that event to be canon in order for the story to progress, your simply a raging fool if you cannot understand this.



Kinda hard to compare then, since SFer does not HAVE an adventure mode, the entire story is derived from intros and endings. It's not my problem you can't sort whats canon and non-canon, and you simply want to cherrypick what suits your argument.



Like I said, SFer does not have an adventure mode, conquest mode story mode or any other mode that tells the story except arcade mode. Don;t like it, then don't debate it! Now, that is simple. That isn't proof though if a current street fighter hasn't recongized it just like Liu Kang's endings aren't necessarily canon despite him winning the first 4 tournaments.

I believe the intros are canon but the endings are not because they aren't all beating seth. It is a different sort of game and street fighter from my experience doesn't do a great job of establishing what is canon and what isn't.

I will debate it despite not liking it but this doesn't make all street fighter endings canon and if you want to argue it's based off of their abilities because it's a possible outcome then the same has to be said of all mk or tekken endings as well.

Originally posted by quanchi112
That isn't proof though if a current street fighter hasn't recongized it just like Liu Kang's endings aren't necessarily canon despite him winning the first 4 tournaments.

What the living blue hell are you on about now? Not recognised? That one event sparked off Ryu's journey to discover the truth about Satsui No Hadou within himself, which has been his primary story arc throughout the series, including the current SF4... This one event in A2, his fight with Gouki, thats how he discovered what happened during the fight with Sagat. Gouki's demonstration of the Satsui No Hadou's potential is what caused him to question his path, and lead to him losing later matches in the same game to Ken and Sagat.

Geez, the very fact that I have to BABYSTEP you through this is attrocious Quan.

Originally posted by quanchi112
I believe the intros are canon but the endings are not because they aren't all beating seth. It is a different sort of game and street fighter from my experience doesn't do a great job of establishing what is canon and what isn't.

True, but you picking and choosing what is conveniant despite being told what the actual chain of events are is despicable on your part Quan.

Originally posted by quanchi112
I will debate it despite not liking it but this doesn't make all street fighter endings canon and if you want to argue it's based off of their abilities because it's a possible outcome then the same has to be said of all mk or tekken endings as well.

I never said all endings are canon... Name me ione time I have said as such please.

And while your at it do some goddamn research on Street fighters plot if you EVER plan on debating it. otherwise kindly leave it alone, as ignorance is no excuse for what you did.

Originally posted by NemeBro
C-Master called someone stupid.

Huh. Never seen him insult in a thread before.

I'm scared. ._. Nobody directly.

You must have never read my profile. I used to get into it quite a bit back in the day, ask Darkstorm.Originally posted by Bro SMASH
Except SF really isn't more powerful.

You say it's not your job all because you CAN'T prove it. It's just another way for you to overrate Ryu's durability. I can say that Shang Tsung tried to steal Liu Kang's soul during their fight and couldn't, even though there's no proof stating that. That's just like this situation.

Don't try to make a point you can't prove. If you don't have anything stating that Ryu took a casual punch by Akuma that also happened to be "island-destroying", then don't bring it up. You'd only sound like a fanboy if you do.

Not at all, because there are different types of damage. There's blunt, piercing, slashing, energy, etc.

Ryu has taken hits from all types of damage from high end characters and has been fine. Akuma wasn't in his Shin form but he only fights those who are worthy and he doesn't hit that lightly. They are rivals of sorts after all. It's not like people throw islands at each other in the game. But was the punch Akuma did casual? Yes, and unless you can find something to go against the canon source material (you can't) then you have no point. SF characters are on average more powerful. Don't be a fanboy. What have they done in canon that could surpass regular Akuma? Much less Shin or Oni?

Don't debate characters you're ignorant about.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
What the living blue hell are you on about now? Not recognised? That one event sparked off Ryu's journey to discover the truth about Satsui No Hadou within himself, which has been his primary story arc throughout the series, including the current SF4... This one event in A2, his fight with Gouki, thats how he discovered what happened during the fight with Sagat. Gouki's demonstration of the Satsui No Hadou's potential is what caused him to question his path, and lead to him losing later matches in the same game to Ken and Sagat.

Geez, the very fact that I have to BABYSTEP you through this is attrocious Quan.



True, but you picking and choosing what is conveniant despite being told what the actual chain of events are is despicable on your part Quan.



I never said all endings are canon... Name me ione time I have said as such please.

And while your at it do some goddamn research on Street fighters plot if you EVER plan on debating it. otherwise kindly leave it alone, as ignorance is no excuse for what you did. Then when is it mentioned ? Him having doubts about himself doesn't have to sync up with an ending or that sequence of events. This has been my entire point that despite Liu's victories his endings aren't always canon from the games.

You are just speculating though. You do seem to have a point but I don't see any solid factual data.

I know you didn't say all endings are canon which makes it worse you want to pick and choose which ones count.

I've just simply asked for proof not speculation.

Originally posted by Ban Mido
I see Heihachi as a great fighter and I truly respect him and how many times he's avoided death, he's actually one of my top 3 favorite Tekken characters but on that note I just can't see him taking Ryu :/... Although from reading everything that's been going on I'm surprised someone hasn't been like "Heihachi would just sidestep the HadouCAN'T and punish him..Ryu can only move two ways ;P" x]



Originally posted by Tha C-Master
Nobody directly.

You must have never read my profile. I used to get into it quite a bit back in the day, ask Darkstorm.



To the point where members made illegal threads just to display their hatred for you.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Then when is it mentioned ? Him having doubts about himself doesn't have to sync up with an ending or that sequence of events. This has been my entire point that despite Liu's victories his endings aren't always canon from the games.

HE MENTIONS IT TO KEN AND SAGAT! for ****s sake Quan, GO AND RESEARCH! I am not walking you through the goddamn proccess that you SHOULD HAVE DONE AS THE MAKER OF THESE TWO THREADS!

Originally posted by quanchi112
You are just speculating though. You do seem to have a point but I don't see any solid factual data.

How the hell is it speculation on my part when it's back by in-game evidence and developers word?! See, this is what I'm saying, unrealistic expectation of proof. You have the video, you have the chain of events, you have the proof, I'm not combing the internet to give you a blow-by-blow signed afidavit that is legally binding from Capcom.

Originally posted by quanchi112
I know you didn't say all endings are canon which makes it worse you want to pick and choose which ones count.

*Bangs head on desk repeatedly*

And you wonder why I give you the flame stick.... I DID NOT PICK AND CHOOSE THE ENDING!!! IT IS A CORNERSTONE TO THE CHAN OF EVENTS!!! Apparently you cannot put 2 and 2 together....

Originally posted by quanchi112
I've just simply asked for proof not speculation.

No, you've asked for an unrealistic level of proof because you don;t want to use your brain.

^
It truly seems like you're arguing with a child, DSZ......Or a clown. I really don't understand what he's asking from you.

Originally posted by Frisky Dingo
^
It truly seems like you're arguing with a child, DSZ......Or a clown. I really don't understand what he's asking from you.

I see...mmm

Originally posted by Frisky Dingo




To the point where members made illegal threads just to display their hatred for you. It was suppressed love.

to-dsz
overrated in terms of ,sorry but i dont read shitty fighting games comics,especially capcom ones,but i like the games
and so to see akuma doing stuff like this ,without any logical reasons
i mean cmon, a red head black african skin japanese guy.
im not hates or noob but its very funny

What is this I don't even...

What the hell does that have to do with anything?

Originally posted by samirerre
to-dsz
overrated in terms of ,sorry but i dont read shitty fighting games comics,especially capcom ones,but i like the games
and so to see akuma doing stuff like this ,without any logical reasons
i mean cmon, a red head black african skin japanese guy.
im not hates or noob but its very funny

*Shrugs*

Your oppinion kid, but it does make you a hater, and an uninformed one at that.

If you do not like Street Fighter, then why do you debate in threads involving them?

And you still have not explained what you mean by overrated, if this above is your reason, then it is oppinionated and biased.

People wonder why I say there are racists on this board lol.

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
Not at all, because there are different types of damage. There's blunt, piercing, slashing, energy, etc.

Ryu has taken hits from all types of damage from high end characters and has been fine. Akuma wasn't in his Shin form but he only fights those who are worthy and he doesn't hit that lightly. They are rivals of sorts after all. It's not like people throw islands at each other in the game. But was the punch Akuma did casual? Yes, and unless you can find something to go against the canon source material (you can't) then you have no point. SF characters are on average more powerful. Don't be a fanboy. What have they done in canon that could surpass regular Akuma? Much less Shin or Oni?

Don't debate characters you're ignorant about.

So show me all those types of damage that Ryu has taken?

You keep saying Akuma's punch was casual and still have yet to prove it, just like you did just now. And I know you yourself can't find not one canon source that said that Ryu took an island-destroying punch from Akuma because it's obvious that it doesn't exist. So really, you got no business talking about canon sources.

Just look at the SFIV fight between Ryu and Akuma. Those definitely weren't island-destroying punches he was using against Ryu. So give me one good reason why he would punch like that in one fight against Ryu and not in another one?

What SF4 fight against Ryu?

Originally posted by Bro SMASH
So show me all those types of damage that Ryu has taken?

You keep saying Akuma's punch was casual and still have yet to prove it, just like you did just now. And I know you yourself can't find not one canon source that said that Ryu took an island-destroying punch from Akuma because it's obvious that it doesn't exist. So really, you got no business talking about canon sources.

Just look at the SFIV fight between Ryu and Akuma. Those definitely weren't island-destroying punches he was using against Ryu. So give me one good reason why he would punch like that in one fight against Ryu and not in another one? Yea, I'm not about to prove that Ryu has been cut, punched, sliced, and hit by energy attacks. That's general knowledge.

Because he wasn't at full power. Learn about the character.

Based off of what?

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
HE MENTIONS IT TO KEN AND SAGAT! for ****s sake Quan, GO AND RESEARCH! I am not walking you through the goddamn proccess that you SHOULD HAVE DONE AS THE MAKER OF THESE TWO THREADS!



How the hell is it speculation on my part when it's back by in-game evidence and developers word?! See, this is what I'm saying, unrealistic expectation of proof. You have the video, you have the chain of events, you have the proof, I'm not combing the internet to give you a blow-by-blow signed afidavit that is legally binding from Capcom.



*Bangs head on desk repeatedly*

And you wonder why I give you the flame stick.... I DID NOT PICK AND CHOOSE THE ENDING!!! IT IS A CORNERSTONE TO THE CHAN OF EVENTS!!! Apparently you cannot put 2 and 2 together....



No, you've asked for an unrealistic level of proof because you don;t want to use your brain. When does he mention it to Sagat and Ken ?

You've told me to purchase some kind of canon street fighter books but that's neither here nor there with this particular thread so let's just leave the mk vs. sf debate for the other thread.

I've already explained myself with this a few times over and allowing it to leak into a thread minus a mk fighter isn't helping anyone out.

I just wanted direct confirmation is all. If the end result is 4 there are a lot more ways to 4 then just 2+2.

Originally posted by Zack Fair
What SF4 fight against Ryu?

The anime fight scene.

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
Yea, I'm not about to prove that Ryu has been cut, punched, sliced, and hit by energy attacks. That's general knowledge.

Because he wasn't at full power. Learn about the character.

Based off of what?

These are all rather poor responses.. It's "general knowledge" so you're not gonna prove it? That's a really weak excuse.

Just because he wasn't at full power, doesn't mean it was a casual punch. Besides, it's already said that he doesn't go all out in his FIGHTS.

What do you mean "based off of what"?

??? Which one because I don't recall ever watching them duke it out. All I remember is Ryu laying flat on his ass and Gouken somehow removing the Satsui No Hadou from Ryu and Akuma getting his panties in a bunch.

I don't know what he's talking about off of the top of my head.

Originally posted by Bro SMASH
The anime fight scene.



These are all rather poor responses.. It's "general knowledge" so you're not gonna prove it? That's a really weak excuse.

Just because he wasn't at full power, doesn't mean it was a casual punch. Besides, it's already said that he doesn't go all out in his FIGHTS.

What do you mean "based off of what"? It's not an excuse. When I say casual I mean it didn't take him much effort. He wasn't using a special technique, just a normal punch. Does that make sense?

Originally posted by Zack Fair
??? Which one because I don't recall ever watching them duke it out. All I remember is Ryu laying flat on his ass and Gouken somehow removing the Satsui No Hadou from Ryu and Akuma getting his panties in a bunch.

... I'm talking about this video right here, dude:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfxVKlRUjJg

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
I don't know what he's talking about off of the top of my head.

It's not an excuse. When I say casual I mean it didn't take him much effort. He wasn't using a special technique, just a normal punch. Does that make sense?

So did he hit Ryu with this "normal punch"?

ohhh that video that made me hyped for the SF4 anime only to find out the thing was shit.

Thanks for ruining my day. over

Is that thing even canon? None of those events are ever mentioned in the game as far as I can tell.

People around here like to treat it as such (at least when talking about Akuma's abilities).

Which the abilities that were mentioned are canon, anybody familiar with SF would know that.

Nobody is arguing about whether it's canon or not but saying that Ryu can somehow withstand a mountain-destroying punch is definitely not canon or even implied by any official source.

I agree...but it is not far fetched to think he can withstand those. Satsui No Hadou Ryu being invulnerable to bullets and all of that.

So we are just gonna ignore the fact that SNH Ryu is stated to be around SFA2 Akuma's level and that SFIII Ryu 'surpased' the SNH.
You gotta be f**kin kiddin me. Island smashin Akuma would get f**ked up by SFIII Ryu. This is fact.

I know SFIV is great N' all, but it is a prequel. There were other SF games before it. The SFIV gen makes me liderly ill. They think SF started with II and then went straight to IV. Damn ignorant kids.

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
Alright, this is gettting ridiculous. We had our wave of MK, Tekken, Namco, etc. fanboys before who couldn't handle the fact that Sf is more powerful.


Thank God I aint the only person who sees this insanity. I have gotten to the point where, If I gotta brief you on the damn story, you don't know enogh to hold up your end of the debate. Thus, you will be ignored.

Originally posted by Tha C-Master

No, what the opposition is doing is known as feat skewing. No different than saying that if Superman pummels Brainiac and Flash does it, then Flash has a feat of pummeling islands, it's flawed logic and irrelevant due to the powerset. Everything can be overrated sometimes, and MK and Tekken are no exception. I get tired of people coming in here using the "he's a God excuse", and frankly asking the SF side to provide the same evidence over and over and over again for 6 or 7 years is equally annoying as well. Some things are just known knowledge.

But two can play it at that game, I want all of these other feats "proven" for me.


I see... never knew there's something called feat skewing like this.


Still, I haven't convinced yet about this entire argument about Akuma's normal punch destroyed an island because :

1. His special moves like gou hadouken, tenma gou zankuu doesn't possess a same destructive power. Tenma Gou Zanku created big explosion, Shakunetsu Gou Hadouken created lesser explosion but caused a forest fire, and his newest move only wrecks a forest.

2. Ryu looks surprised when he saw Gouki covered in purple aura and when Gouki smashed the island. The question is, if the island really sink, how could debris fall from the top of island? My guess is Gouki only destroyed the entire cave or destroyed the entire island's foundation. It's still awesome if you ask me.

3. When I say Ryu looks surprised, it means that he never expected Gouki to showed such power like that. That means when he strikes Ryu before, he never showed that kind of power.

Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
*Shrugs*

Your oppinion kid, but it does make you a hater, and an uninformed one at that.

If you do not like Street Fighter, then why do you debate in threads involving them?

And you still have not explained what you mean by overrated, if this above is your reason, then it is oppinionated and biased.

I SAID IM NOT A HATER,i only find it funny
i love sf,
ovarrated - akuma sinked island with 1 punch right RIGHT !
then how come he didnt killed the whole cast? incloding ryu,ken.sagat,bison,gill

random question-how akuma can make a portel to hell and make the demons attack the one he wants to,its little wierd

Originally posted by Bro SMASH
Nobody is arguing about whether it's canon or not but saying that Ryu can somehow withstand a mountain-destroying punch is definitely not canon or even implied by any official source. That is the stupidest thing I've ever heard of. It's called logic and putting the pieces together. If a round from a gun can destroy a tank, and a person takes them just fine, then you put two and two together.

It is not stated that Darkseid can tank planet level punches, or that Raiden can take hits from Shao Kahn, but if you see them do it, then it is common sense. FFS.Originally posted by No End N Site
So we are just gonna ignore the fact that SNH Ryu is stated to be around SFA2 Akuma's level and that SFIII Ryu 'surpased' the SNH.
You gotta be f**kin kiddin me. Island smashin Akuma would get f**ked up by SFIII Ryu. This is fact.

I know SFIV is great N' all, but it is a prequel. There were other SF games before it. The SFIV gen makes me liderly ill. They think SF started with II and then went straight to IV. Damn ignorant kids.



Thank God I aint the only person who sees this insanity. I have gotten to the point where, If I gotta brief you on the damn story, you don't know enogh to hold up your end of the debate. Thus, you will be ignored. People here don't know anything about the story. I don't mine people disagreeing, but at least watch the story. If they did they wouldn't disagree as much.Originally posted by Kirikaze Fuuma
I see... never knew there's something called feat skewing like this.


Still, I haven't convinced yet about this entire argument about Akuma's normal punch destroyed an island because :

1. His special moves like gou hadouken, tenma gou zankuu doesn't possess a same destructive power. Tenma Gou Zanku created big explosion, Shakunetsu Gou Hadouken created lesser explosion but caused a forest fire, and his newest move only wrecks a forest.

2. Ryu looks surprised when he saw Gouki covered in purple aura and when Gouki smashed the island. The question is, if the island really sink, how could debris fall from the top of island? My guess is Gouki only destroyed the entire cave or destroyed the entire island's foundation. It's still awesome if you ask me.

3. When I say Ryu looks surprised, it means that he never expected Gouki to showed such power like that. That means when he strikes Ryu before, he never showed that kind of power.

He didn't expect Gouki to destory the island.

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
That is the stupidest thing I've ever heard of. It's called logic and putting the pieces together. If a round from a gun can destroy a tank, and a person takes them just fine, then you put two and two together.

It is not stated that Darkseid can tank planet level punches, or that Raiden can take hits from Shao Kahn, but if you see them do it, then it is common sense. FFS.

No, it's called overrating a character. Just like you have to prove that someone can actually take a round like that, you have to prove that Ryu took a punch like that from Akuma, in which you haven't. And until you can, it's nothing more than just an assumption.

Originally posted by Bro SMASH
No, it's called overrating a character. Just like you have to prove that someone can actually take a round like that, you have to prove that Ryu took a punch like that from Akuma, in which you haven't. And until you can, it's nothing more than just an assumption. No it's called you being dense. If a character has been hit by a round, then they can take it. If that has been shown then that is that. That is your proof. Until you learn something about the story then your point is moot. No different then you couldn't prove Wolverine or anybody else taking "mountain destroying hits" by narration alone. Get that crap out of here.

That's the point. You didn't show me squat. All you say is "Akuma holds back". We already know that but as for him hitting Ryu with an "island-destroying punch", there's no way you can prove that and you know it. For every post-Tekken 2 fight, you might as well say that Kazuya used his Devil Gene power on everyone he fought. For every Shang Tsung and Shao Kahn fight, you might as well say they tried to steal their opponents' soul and they resisted it.

It's the same thing here and as you can see, there's no proof of any of it. So you might as well drop this unsubstatiated claim because it's not obviously not doing any good.

Originally posted by Bro SMASH
That's the point. You didn't show me squat. All you say is "Akuma holds back". We already know that but as for him hitting Ryu with an "island-destroying punch", there's no way you can prove that and you know it. For every post-Tekken 2 fight, you might as well say that Kazuya used his Devil Gene power on everyone he fought. For every Shang Tsung and Shao Kahn fight, you might as well say they tried to steal their opponents' soul and they resisted it.

It's the same thing here and as you can see, there's no proof of any of it. So you might as well drop this unsubstatiated claim because it's not obviously not doing any good.

The point is you know nothing of the story and the fact that you don't understand anything about logic. This is a theoretical debate, which means we are debating a match that hasn't happened yet. That means we use logic. If Akuma casually destroyed an island without being powered up in his Alpha days, it is logical that he fought Ryu at least causally.

Not to mention the *fact* that current Ryu is far more powerful than Alpha Akuma and past his "evil" form.

So current Ryu is more powerful than Akuma who can generate that force casually and resisted that force.

Learn about the game and learn about logic. And every fight saying Shao Kahn tried to steal a soul is retarded unless it is shown because it is a separate ability. It would be like a person using a gun but never being shown to, vs shooting through a mountain with a gun and then shooting a person with the same gun and it having no effect.

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
The point is you know nothing of the story and the fact that you don't understand anything about logic. This is a theoretical debate, which means we are debating a match that hasn't happened yet. That means we use logic. If Akuma casually destroyed an island without being powered up in his Alpha days, it is logical that he fought Ryu at least causally.

Not to mention the *fact* that current Ryu is far more powerful than Alpha Akuma and past his "evil" form.

So current Ryu is more powerful than Akuma who can generate that force casually and resisted that force.

Learn about the game and learn about logic. And every fight saying Shao Kahn tried to steal a soul is retarded unless it is shown because it is a separate ability. It would be like a person using a gun but never being shown to, vs shooting through a mountain with a gun and then shooting a person with the same gun and it having no effect.

No it's not. If you don't have anything stating that Akuma hit Ryu with that kind of "casual punch", then it shouldn't be used as an argument. It's that simple so don't try to attack my knowledge all because you can't backup what you said.

All we know is that Ryu is more powerful than a holding back Akuma from YEARS ago. That doesn't mean he can withstand that force nor he can dish it out. It just means that he can defeat Akuma on that level (which is not island-destroying level). Don't even try to exaggerate that.

I suggest you take your own advice. My examples were no different from what you're saying about Akuma. Just listen to what you just said; "And every fight saying Shao Kahn tried to steal a soul is retarded unless it is shown because it is a separate ability." That's the exact same point here. If that's "retarded" to you then it's also "retarded" here to say that Akuma hit Ryu with that kind of punch when it's not shown or stated. So quit being so biased and learn how to actually back up what you're saying.

OMG C-Master! Pleez stop! You are wastin your time. I just went back and read this whole thread.

1. They do not know the story

2. They don't make sense.

3. Dude just grabed a small piece of your post, the "unless it is shown" part. Blantantly and intentionally took it out of context and ran with it. They are arguin just for the hell of it, or they don't like Akuma, or they just don't like SF. I think you're being trolled.

I think it is all three. And yes he did run with my post. Some of the posters here are trolls. I don't mind a person disagreeing, I just don't like when people can't comprehend simple points.Originally posted by Bro SMASH
No it's not. If you don't have anything stating that Akuma hit Ryu with that kind of "casual punch", then it shouldn't be used as an argument. It's that simple so don't try to attack my knowledge all because you can't backup what you said.

All we know is that Ryu is more powerful than a holding back Akuma from YEARS ago. That doesn't mean he can withstand that force nor he can dish it out. It just means that he can defeat Akuma on that level (which is not island-destroying level). Don't even try to exaggerate that.

I suggest you take your own advice. My examples were no different from what you're saying about Akuma. Just listen to what you just said; "And every fight saying Shao Kahn tried to steal a soul is retarded unless it is shown because it is a separate ability." That's the exact same point here. If that's "retarded" to you then it's also "retarded" here to say that Akuma hit Ryu with that kind of punch when it's not shown or stated. So quit being so biased and learn how to actually back up what you're saying. Wrong, Ryu is more powerful than Akuma from years ago.

Akuma's punch was a casual punch, not a separate ability like the soul steal. Do you not comprehend simple things?

I learned thousands of years ago the folly in debating Bro SMASH.

I read the old debates years ago with you guys and MK characters. Don't know why I'm bothering. It reminds me of arguing with Smash Bros fanboys like my friends. Just a waste of energy.

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
I think it is all three. And yes he did run with my post. Some of the posters here are trolls. I don't mind a person disagreeing, I just don't like when people can't comprehend simple points. Wrong, Ryu is more powerful than Akuma from years ago.


Yeah dude, that lil bit he did with your words pretty much gave away his agenda. That tactic was sloppily executed. I think even he knows he f**ked up.

Not that he'll admit it... and thus it will continue.

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
I think it is all three. And yes he did run with my post. Some of the posters here are trolls. I don't mind a person disagreeing, I just don't like when people can't comprehend simple points. Wrong, Ryu is more powerful than Akuma from years ago.

Akuma's punch was a casual punch, not a separate ability like the soul steal. Do you not comprehend simple things?

No, I didn't "run" with your post. I merely pointed out what you said or are you gonna admit you were BSing?

Being a "separate ability" has got nothing to do with it. It's still within his ability that he can use whenever he chooses...just like Akuma. But what we really want to know is did he actually do it in a fight? That's something we can't say because it's not shown or stated and until it is, we can't say he did.

I've noticed the typical fanboy tactic of "you don't agree with me? then you don't know the story" crap. If you know so much more, then why don't you show me any kind of evidence to support your claim? You're so darn sure of what you said and yet can't back it up and is resorting to "u dunt no logic or da story". Just a poor excuse for your lack of an argument.

Also No End N Site, instead of just glancing at the argument (because you obviously didn't read the whole thing), why don't you put some effort into your replies? Tell me what was "so wrong" with me pointing about what HE said? Or were you simply trying to divert attention from where he messed up at?

I'm asking to myself... quanchi112 is a clear SF hater, and he gave us PROOF that he cannot accept the fact that SF char are more powerful canon-wise than gameplay-wise.

So, why didn't he simply started a spite thread like "Dan vs Kratos?" or "Sean vs Sephiroth?"

Originally posted by Bro SMASH
No, I didn't "run" with your post. I merely pointed out what you said or are you gonna admit you were BSing?

Being a "separate ability" has got nothing to do with it. It's still within his ability that he can use whenever he chooses...just like Akuma. But what we really want to know is did he actually do it in a fight? That's something we can't say because it's not shown or stated and until it is, we can't say he did.

I've noticed the typical fanboy tactic of "you don't agree with me? then you don't know the story" crap. If you know so much more, then why don't you show me any kind of evidence to support your claim? You're so darn sure of what you said and yet can't back it up and is resorting to "u dunt no logic or da story". Just a poor excuse for your lack of an argument.

Also No End N Site, instead of just glancing at the argument (because you obviously didn't read the whole thing), why don't you put some effort into your replies? Tell me what was "so wrong" with me pointing about what HE said? Or were you simply trying to divert attention from where he messed up at? We're bsing because we're right? I like several games, Tekken, SF, MK, etc. I always notice that there are waves of Smash Bros, MK, Tekken fanboys who peg at SF. It's happened time and time again. You have no argument, all you've done is stupidly troll. Stealing a soul is stealing a soul, if he didn't steal a soul he didn't do it, Akuma throwing a punch at a character, and throwing a punch at something else is the same action. Therefore you're comparing apples to oranges. Your argument is dumb and makes no sense and you clearly don't know how to have a theoretical debate.

I'm waiting for you to prove that Akuma punched him with less force in an actual fight when it is known that Akuma fights only the worthy.

Not to mention Ryu is more powerful than Akuma was at the time he punched the island anyways. You have no facts, no proof, and no canon. You're simply trying to discredit the character like so many haters here before have.

Poor SFers....they can revolutionize 2d fighters....they can resurrect a dead genre and they still get no respect uhuh

Akuma and Ryu are serious business biscuits

Originally posted by Tha C-Master
We're bsing because we're right? I like several games, Tekken, SF, MK, etc. I always notice that there are waves of Smash Bros, MK, Tekken fanboys who peg at SF. It's happened time and time again. You have no argument, all you've done is stupidly troll. Stealing a soul is stealing a soul, if he didn't steal a soul he didn't do it, Akuma throwing a punch at a character, and throwing a punch at something else is the same action. Therefore you're comparing apples to oranges. Your argument is dumb and makes no sense and you clearly don't know how to have a theoretical debate.

I'm waiting for you to prove that Akuma punched him with less force in an actual fight when it is known that Akuma fights only the worthy.

Not to mention Ryu is more powerful than Akuma was at the time he punched the island anyways. You have no facts, no proof, and no canon. You're simply trying to discredit the character like so many haters here before have.

No you're BSing and that's that. I've asked you numerous times to back up your claim and you didn't. And it's painfully obvious that you can't so now you're just resorting to fanboy tactics to cover up your inability to support your claim and you got the nerve to say I'M trolling? Get outta here! You're not fooling anybody. Also, you say Shao Kahn didn't steal a soul during a fight so what makes you so sure that he didn't and what makes you so sure that Akuma hit Ryu with an 'island-destroying" punch, when neither of those things were confirmed to happen in their fights?

If you want to get really logical then answer me this; do you think Sagat was as strong as Akuma during SF1?

Ryu is only stronger than a holding back Akuma. That doesn't in anyway means he can destroy an island with a punch too, nor does it mean he can take it. You obviously can't prove otherwise and to still claim it like it's true just shows how much your overrate the SF characters.

I did, what evidence do you have that he can't withstand the force? You've provided nothing. It must hurt to be so dense. I backed it up, the bottom line is that you just don't like the proof because you are anti SF. You're a fanboy of MK and Smash, and we all know they hate SF with a passion. You have no proof that I'm a fanboy in any way, what threads have I given Ryu or any SF characters the wins in that were outrageous?

Sagat was created before Akuma in SF1 and was the one time before SF4 that Ryu went evil.

You provided absolutely zero proof so stop lying. And you're right now trying to give them the wins, namely with Ryu with you making up how durable he is without any proof.

You also didn't answer my question. Again, was Sagat as strong as Akuma during the SF1 tournament?

Yes I did you lying troll.

Now what proof do you have to the contrary? I know the answer is none, which is why you're dodging my question.

"Dodging"? Dude, you really can't talk, as it's you who has dodged my question for the second time and ANYBODY can see that.

Therefore, I'll take your post as a conception.

"Concession" you mean?

I'm glad you did concede since you can't answer my question. Your trolling was fun but it had to end sooner or later lol.

Well yeah, I obviously meant "concession".

Not hearing your crap, C-Master. You're doing nothing but trolling anyway.