|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kamon
Robot Master
Posts: 641
|
 |
« Reply #89 on: 30 December 2007, 16:36:47 » |
|
Alright then.
Bass is too arrogent and cocky, which is the main reason why he'd lose. He's overconfident in his abilities and prideful, he fights for himself and himself alone while Megaman fights for others and uses that to motivate himself to succeed.
Zero would lose for a couple of reasons. Since X4 he's been primarily a melee character, and his Buster has become much weaker, so that gives X a range advantage. Second, as Rez and others have pointed out, X's limitless potential allows him to exceed Zero's power and ability by an infinate amount. Zero doesn't grow stronger while X does, and does so within a very short space of time.
Protoman.exe loses because, as Nova pointed out, Chaud and Protoman doesn't use any Battle Chips. They relies solely on their ability, and while that's not actually a bad thing in some cases it's a serious disadvantage against Megaman and Lan.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
MMM's pet Tachikoma.
|
|
|
Aych
Metall
Posts: 88
|
|
« Reply #90 on: 30 December 2007, 17:07:05 » |
|
I agree with you on Rock VS. Bass and Lan VS. Chaud. Bass losing is almost a given, they have that typical Goku-Vegeta relationship.
I won't agree on Zero, though. Of course, whenever someone takes to Zero's defense, they get the SOWARD FANBOI finger pointed at them. Xearez's mind numbing tripe aside, though, Zero and X are invariably shown to be equals throughout the series. The very concept of picking one of two characters to play with heavily implies this.
Now, your argument is that since X has infinite potential, Zero cannot defeat him. It's true X has infinite potential. However, I have not seen proof that Zero doesn't have infinite potential. It seems the community has just presumed this and taken it to be fact because X is expressly stated to have infinite potential, while Zero isn't, which is of course a poor, postulated conclusion to come to. The only thing I know to have mentioned Zero's "potential" was X3's ending credits, which shows both X and Zero's power to be wild cards.
Long story short, proof must be provided to substantiate that Zero is NOT capable of surpassing his own limits, that only X is. Otherwise, you can't conclude X is stronger than Zero. Given that they both may have unlimited potential, I'd say the fight leans in Zero's favor, if only due to his killing instinct and apathetic attitude, especially in his "true" state...but IF X were to fight all out against Zero, I really see no clear victor.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aych
Metall
Posts: 88
|
|
« Reply #92 on: 30 December 2007, 17:50:41 » |
|
It has been mentioned before that their names are a hint at their potential. X, as Dr Light stated, represents limitless potential and limitless danger due to it being unknown. Zero, if taken as the number 0, is a constant by nature and not a variable like 'x'. Unless someone can cite a source, this is inapplicable. Truthfully, I remember something like that, but I don't believe that was the meaning behind the name Zero. Zero is a constant, but think about it...why would X be named for limitless aptitude, and Zero named for...just being the same, all the time? That makes him sound like the series' anticlimax, which he isn't. The naming scheme is either irrelevant, or we're missing the point in his name. Zero hasn't shown the same growth that X has during the series, if anything he seems to have gotten weaker in some areas (eg. Buster strength and use.) The only growth X has experienced is emotional. His cause to fight is what affects his fighting capability, something Zero rarely struggles with or thinks about in the way X does, so of course X "grows" more than him, but not really in strength. As far as Zero's buster is concerned, it's never actually gotten weaker. The Z-Buster was only gimped in X5 and X6 to keep Zero from being totally unbalanced with both superior melee and equal long-range combat prospects, while still allowing for some more variety (as opposed to X4 Zero, who never used his Z-Buster). The weakened Z-Buster is purely a game mechanic and non-canonical, as you can still see it's power demonstrated in [spoiler]how Zero blew away Sigma at the end of X5, even in the state of ruin he was.[/spoiler] Zero's attitude is perhaps is only edge over X, but if X went all out then I honestly see Zero losing in the end under a constant barrage of long range attacks and cleaver defences like using Frost Tower as a shield. X is more flexible in game than Zero, since he can adapt the powers to the situation more easily than Zero can adapt the techniques he has. Eh, I don't really see any concrete reasoning in that argumentation. Like I already explained, Zero is in truth equally able as X when it comes to long-range. Going into the logistics of battle with the techniques and DNA powers is just splitting hairs and wild speculation. There's no real difference in their ability to adapt, and besides, Zero not only acquires powers just like X from certain Mavericks, but he also has a plethora of other moves never shown outside of the X VS. Zero fight, same goes for X. As I said though, best to not rely on the detailed specifics of special techniques and powers as it's mostly all rooted in gameplay and not canon ability. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aych
Metall
Posts: 88
|
|
« Reply #96 on: 30 December 2007, 19:13:12 » |
|
No, you don't. They keep all abilities because they canonically fight and defeat the Mavericks, X earning weapons or Zero learning kenjutsu techniques. What I'm saying is all the logistics and attributes typically involved with any abilities don't carry over in a "real" fight, and can change vastly.
I'll use one of your own examples as mine, Frost Tower. Let's say X charges Frost Tower and unleashes it on Zero. Now in gameplay, none of your enemies can destroy the icicle, nor do any even take the prerogative to do so. In a real battle, though, Zero could retaliate with Ryuenjin, cutting up through the Frost Tower and probably melting it too, or at least shattering it. See, this isn't typical of a gameplay situation, but more like what you'd expect to happen in a cutscene.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aych
Metall
Posts: 88
|
|
« Reply #99 on: 30 December 2007, 19:45:47 » |
|
I'd expect a cutscene to remain faithful to gameplay abilities and limits, not just throw out random stuff for the sake of looking cool.
...Er, well they don't remain "faithful". They never really have, don't now, and probably never will. That's just how cutscenes flow, and there's thousands of direct examples. Besides, there's no rationale in holding that against cinematics like it's a bad thing. Isn't it the gameplay that's being ridiculous in that, again, it won't let me chop through an ice block with a burning sword? It's NOT ridiculous, you're supposed to just accept it, but if you're gonna split hairs, technically the gameplay is the one being unfaithful. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Author
