(see my earlier post above)
I love the extremes you guys keep jumping too, assuming that IG would get MLP and other stuff in. Extremes are not a way to prove your point.
Its not an extreme its as plausible as Rash in KI because if he fits, they all do, just because
Lolno. Your logic is fatally flawed bro
No it isnât, you are saying a Toad from another dimension fits in KI, I say He-Man does too, or Leonardo from TMNT, who is to say otherwise, just because portals. Doesnât make that an extreme but as sound as a Battletoad from another dimension. The only thing tying these 2 together is the origin of Rare originally creating them. That doesnât give it a strong argument in regards to it fitting, as I said earlier, Viva Pinata is also originated from Rare so why not Horstacio in the game as well, he can have explosive attacks, confetti attacks and what not, a portal opens up and lets him into the KI world from the garden of another galaxy.
Battletoads are a TMNT parody to start with, so that couldnât work, for starters. Tusk is a He-Man paridy, so, again that couldnât work. Also, Iâm not saying another dimension. Thatâs you. Iâm saying another arm of the galaxy, assuming that KIs galaxy is a pinwheel like ours is. There is no proof that Battletoads and KI arenât in the same universe. They are both dark, gritty, but have a parodical sense of humor.
I get what you are saying but Rash is coming through a portal, you clearly see it and that opens the door to anything as I said for an excuse. I donât see a huge toad with shades, big smile, cartoony look and moves fitting in with the rest. It is way off course. Pure and simple
Youâre talking about the looks of his retro. Remember that. We still havenât seen his updated âmodernâ costume. I guarantee it will fit better than the cartoonist throwback that is his retro.
Yes Iâve heard but I doubt they will change the cartoon attacks. It gives me some comfort that it is his retro but I still prefer him as a hidden character
I was not aware of this. Is it confirmed?
If this is true, it could potentially make all the difference if his updated look brings him in line with the rest of the cast.
They would indeed have to get rid of the exaggerated attacks, but there could yet be hope if you speak the truthâŠ
Yes, this has already been confirmed.
The questions seem to be who can be excluded and who canât and why. You and Kixmix keep trying to answer those questions with your opinion and the rules that govern your opinion on whatâs okay and whatâs not. Rash can be excluded because heâs a guest, but Sadiraâs not a guest, so she canât be excluded. So your distinction is guest versus lore.
But thatâs your opinion of the correct distinction. Regardless of the point of the thread, thatâs the argument and thatâs the reasoning that governs it.
Frodoâs argument (to me) seems to be that any time characters are excluded, itâs due to a distinction thatâs arbitrary. Itâs you deciding to separate some characters from others for reasons specifically determined to be logical and right by you. Frodoâs question (I believe), which neither of you have answered very well, is why is your method of separating the characters valid, but his is not?
You can talk about âloreâ all you want. But lore is an arbitrary argument. Itâs the rules youâve selected as unbreakable. By that logic, I could say that I want to separate Sadira, Shadow Jago, Kan Ra, Aganos, Omen, Hisako and Aria from the rest of the cast because Iâm a âtrueâ KI fan and I only want to use âtrueâ KI characters. KI1 and KI2. Thatâs my lore.
Now to that, you might say âno, those are true KI characters because theyâre in the current Killer Instinct lore,â but why should I care what your opinion of the lore is when my separation point dictates that I want to be able to fight classic KI characters because those are the only ârealâ KI characters to me? FYI, yes, that argument was brought up by people when Sadira was announced because she looked like such an MK character.
So yeah⊠I donât care which game these new characters are a part of or the fact that theyâre in the current game thatâs still ongoing. This is my preference. Why should they obey your preference but not mine? Why is your âloreâ logic more sound than my âtrue classic loreâ logic? Why is one rule correct and the other faulty?
Letâs take it a step further (away from lore). I hate the way Aganos pulls the screen back. I have bad eye sight and have a hard time seeing the game as it is. When heâs on screen, I can barely tell whatâs going on. Should I be allowed to exclude Aganos because of this medical condition? Is my medical condition less valid than your preference for not seeing guests?
For the record, I donât have bad eyesight and I love all of the new characters, including Aganos. Iâm just trying to make the point here that everyone has preferences. Thatâs the point I believe Frodo was getting at with Sadira.
Why is your preference for no guests more valid than someone elseâs when their preferences could have next to nothing to do with the gameâs lore or which characters are in KI and which arenât? Lore might be your deciding factor, but why does that have to be the deciding factor for someone else?
I saw more than a few posts during season 2 from people saying âI just want to play season 1, I donât want to have anything to do with season 2. Can I just get classic, unadjusted season 1 and not have to play with or against season 2 characters online?â Again, why is your preference for no guests valid but other peopleâs preference for season 1 not?
So what if theyâre all KI characters. That fact was never in question because thatâs not what some season 1 fans used as the argument against having season 2 rebalance and characters forced on them.
I donât see how you can justify your own separation of characters while denying others. The âloreâ argument doesnât work as a reason because, again, most peopleâs preferences have almost nothing to do with the lore. You canât use a determining factor like lore and expect other people to have to obey that determining factor just because you obey it.
Also, if Rash is written in to KIâs story, then technically, heâs part of KIâs lore starting with season 3 regardless of whether his appearance might break Battletoads lore (which it might not, but even if it does, weâre talking about KI anyways, so why does breaking Battletoadâs lore matter?)
Iâm sorry. I respectfully disagree with you guys. Putting in a way to not fight characters that you donât want to fight, regardless of the reason or the arbitrary rules governing that reason means that anyone could want the same for any reason, guided by any rules they want to follow and thereâs no logic that Iâve seen from either of you that refutes that argument.
If a characterâs in the game, then theyâre part of the game. Even if theyâre from a different season, even if theyâre tall, even if theyâre not from original KI games, and even if theyâre a one off guest. I understand your impulse here. If Banjoâs the next guest character, I wouldnât be happy about it. But I wouldnât expect special treatment or for the devs to acquiesce to my specific preference.
3 Likes
understood, just like you wouldnât like Banjo, neither would I as I donât like Rash in KI . They are still guest characters and not characters like the rest. It is as you say then they can just do whatever and it becomes lore so in that case if they have an agreement or the rights to whatever character, it is fair game to include it into KI with no backlash and we all have to accept it. Get the rights from Mattel, add He-Man, She-Ra, GI Joes, etc., get the rights from Disney, add a Jedi, Mickey Mouse etc. We have to accept it as KI fans because if it can be done it must be the right thing to do? It will encompass other franchises and bring others to KI? No guarantee, I donât think so.
See, again, youâre rushing down the slippery slope. If one Rare character makes it in, you seem to think that weâll get this hoard of guests that look horribly out of place in KI when thereâs absolutely zero indication that something like this will happen and you have to know that deep down.
Of course thereâs no guarantee this wonât happen, but you have to trust the developers to SOME extent that Banjo and Mickey and Bart Simpson and Yu Gi Oh and a Corvette from Forza wonât make it in, donât you? If Banjoâs in the game, then Iâll eat my words. I will. But I really donât think we have to worry about it.
You donât like Rash. Fine. You donât think he fits KI. Fair enough. But again, why does your opinion of what fits KI matter when Frodoâs opinion of Sadira not fitting KI doesnât? If I recall correctly, he was on that train of thought with other people back on the DH forums saying that she looked like Mortal Kombat character. So why do you think itâs okay to exclude your character, but Frodo canât exclude his? To take that down the slippery slope, whatâ stop anyone from saying they want to be able to exclude any character for any reason if people arenât governed by the lore the way you are?
But to your pointâŠ
This is still an arbitrary distinction. Hereâs an example. You know whoâs not like the rest? Monster characters. If I prefer human characters because they look more realistic to me and I want a more realistic looking game, then why canât I w e e d out all of the monsters? (didnât mean it like marijuana, but thanks UC.com lol)
As for Rash, Iâm not going to dispute your opinion for not wanting him in the game because thatâs your opinion and youâre certainly entitled to it, but while I know itâs been asked several times, why is a mutant frog such a crazy, outlandish character that couldnât possibly fit KI, but a robotic dinosaur is? Forget the lore. Forget who was already in the game and who wasnât. Tell me why, to you, one fits and one doesnât.
1 Like
Iâve answered that question many times already, tone. I know the classic costumes have pom poms, cheerleader outfits but that is the only goofy side to KI that is extra accessories for people to mess around with, with the classic costumes I get that. But as a substancial character in KI lore a Battletoad with a big cartoon smile, shades, adolescent humor/talk and cartoony moves like horns with sheep âBaaaâ soundbytes, huge boot with cleets is a little too much Iâd say, its crossing the line of beyond absurd.
Apologies for making you answer it again. To me, youâre splitting hairs here. Youâre compartmentalizing that which is okay and that which is not based on your own personal preference. Riptor having a cheerleader outfit is okay because thatâs KIâs goofy side, but having a character thatâs more light-hearted in general? Thatâs crossing the line and itâs beyond absurd.
Iâm not sure how you reconcile that and separate the tone from one and the tone from the other. Again, using lore as your reasoning doesnât change the reality that a dinosaur can be in a cheerleader outfit in the same game with a talking frog.
So where is this line and why do you get to decide where itâs at and others donât? If Frodo decides that Sadira looking like a Mortal Kombat character is absurd to him, then why should he have to fight against Sadira? If someone thinks that Season 2 plays too much like a Mahvel game, or that all the stuff Cinder has in the game is absurd, why should they have to fight any of the season 2 characters?
Look, I get that his tone is a bit off from the rest of KI and I respect that this rubs you and some others the wrong way, but if you look at the rest of the game and take it as a whole, youâll see that thereâs a fairly substantial range in terms of tone in the game.
In addition to those classic outfits that youâre kinda putting in a box and separating from the rest of the game⊠How about Aganos putting a little flower on the rubble on top of his opponent? Isnât that a little tongue in cheek? How about Omenâs goofy looking masks? Orchidâs alt outfits? Sabrewulfâs steam punk accessories? Kan Ra getting Lo Panâs outfit from Big Trouble in Little China as an alt?
How about the fact that a werewolf can fight a rock golem or a dinosaur or a ghost? I mean⊠Just look at it from a macro perspective. The tone is all over the place in this game. Thatâs why so many types of characters can fit under one umbrella. Youâre looking at one thing and saying âthat has to be seriousâ while letting all this other stuff go, all in the name of having something be a certain way when the game allows for a lot more than you seem to think it does.
Either way, I still donât see why thinking Rash is absurd should allow people to exclude him while others canât exclude characters that they think are absurd. I feel like Iâve already established the argument that lore as reasoning is shaky ground at best given how arbitrary itâs value is, what people determine to be lore, and how much anyone can value or devalue lore when making an argument for excluding characters, so Iâm not quite sure what your reasoning could be otherwise.
Same goes for the idea that allowing one light-hearted character in the game will set us on a slippery slope that somehow opens the floodgates on a wide range of goofy characters in the game. Itâs simply not going to happen. If Banjoâs in the next game, Iâll gladly eat my words. But I tend to doubt that weâll be going down that kind of a road with future guests.
1 Like
Yeah, I meant to address the whole âabsurd character in game loreâ aspect as well. Look at every other fighting game out there. Are there these sort of absurd âoutlierâ characters in every game?
Street fighter has Blanka, whoâs this green, mutated monster in the midst of a game with human characters. Say itâs explained by the lore all you want, heâs still an outlier.
How about Goro on the original Mortal Kombat? Again, all human characters except for this dude with four arms. Then in the next game we learn that thereâs lizard men, dudes with swords on their arms and a whole new ârealmâ where characters can be thousands of years old. Doesnât any of that, even within the lore, stretch the boundaries of absurdity given the look and tone of the first game?
Tekken⊠Good lord. Weâve got a dude with sword in a hand to hand fighting game. But thatâs okay because two of the characters can sprout wings and shoot lasers from their eyes. Weâve got a robot in JACK, a robot in Alisha Boskonovich, whatever the heck Ogre and True Ogre are, a fighting bear, a fighting panda⊠All within this completely serious story.
Now, you might say âbut Iâm talking about KI.â My point is that having outlier characters like Rash in fighting games is not unheard of by any stretch of the imagination. You might not like them. I might not like some of them. But they do fill a role within the game. They do play to a part of the fanbase both within the game, and in Rashâs case, outside of the game as well. Even if you donât think that their absurdity fits within the gameâs lore, it still fits KI specifically (due to KIâs tone being all over the place) and other games as well.
1 Like
The argument of Riptor and Sabrewulf doesnât hold any weight because they werenât introduced with pom poms, cheerleader outfits, reindeer antlers etc. If that was going to be how they were introduced and presented can you imagine the uproar after seeing the trailers to those characters even before we play as them? The thing is there is their fitting presentation and the extra stuff gets goofy for original costumes. Not the other way around
@Iago407 is enunciation my point much better than I was able to, thanks.
@Kixmix Youâre forgetting that we only have Rashâs retro costume in right now. If youâre OK with Riptors retro being goofy AF, why canât you be OK with Rashâs retro being goofy AF?
1 Like
No Iâm not forgetting because his moveset is still cartoony, that will also cross-over and isnât tied to the Retro, just like every other character in the game.
Rash may be different from the other characters BUT the existing character are different from each other. KI look at characters individually not collectively. We donât know rather or not Rash is apart of the lore. Considering that heâs stems from another IP heâd still be referred to as a guest regardless of him being a permanent addition(if he is).
The main question here is: âshould people who donât like/want something get special treatment?â