He means that Batman deals with people from those areas and has the ability to put them all down. He'll Batman could easily take out the entire JLA if he wanted to, just on gadgets alone.
That was my impression: that Batman has incorporated some of these types of tech into his Bat-arsenal. Though if that is the case, you'd think Batman would be a helluva lot more formidable in his baseline form (just costume with utility belt).
On the other hand, doesn't Iron Man have access to things like Asgardian tech/enchantments, which he has incorporated into his armor (eg, Thorbuster)?
If this is so, then it's a matter of who has the most powerful tech upgrades.
IMO, that's who wins.
__________________
Shinier than a speeding bullet.
To be fair, a pissed off Thor would shred just about anyone including Batman, regardless of what gadgets he has.
Think about the approaches both characters use: Tony designs custom suits to take down the Hulk/Thor/Magneto etc in case they ever go rogue.
Batman relies on kryptonite to stop superman in case the same thing happens.
Batman has the oddball gadget from Krypton, what have you but in general, Tony creates more complex tech than batman does, and is used to taking down more difficult opponents on the strength of his tech alone.
I wasn't saying "Tony's creations suck because Thor ripped through it!" I was simply stating that Thor ripped through it, so that particular creation no longer existed.
As far as your argument in the second half goes, you're basically missing the point.
Let's say that I bought out MI6. I got all the James Bond stuff(yeah, I'm rich). I got invisible cars, laser watches, jet packs hidden in tux jackets, and even a pair of pants that shoot a rocket out the ass if I fart the wrong way.
You build a rubber band gun.
Now, is your gadget somehow better than mine just because it was personally manufactured rather than bought/received/stolen/whatever?
Nope.
As far as quality goes, method of procurement is irrelevant.
yes, THAT particular suit no longer exists, but there are numerous other suits of similar strength literally laying around to be used whenever Tony decides to break it out of storage.
The original Hulkbuster from a decade ago was in the 175+ Ton range, and is still very much in one piece, for example.
Your MI:6 analogy isn't valid. The pinnacle of Batman's tech is one or two special items (phantom zone projector, etc) gained from outside sources. He can't create more, and his supply is limited, and he's unable to modify them at will. What if he needed a projector that could hit a target from space? Or one moving at super speeds? He's out of luck.
Iron man, on the other hand has whipped up numerous advanced suits from scratch and has a VERY thorough understanding of every gadget in his arsenal. He's even modified existing suits to be controlled remotely, or to operate better in space, in deep sea conditions, etc.
In terms of complexity, versatility, and overall VOLUME of existing tech, Iron man has every advantage over batman. There's no comparison here.
KMC Community Forums
Feb 20th, 2007 05:29 AM
this is batman and IM
