FANDOM


  • I love how they are adding Manhunter, I really do. But they should consider adding Ma'alefa'ak as well!

      Loading editor
    • The Real Slim Kiiny wrote:
      I love how they are adding Manhunter, I really do. But they should consider adding Ma'alefa'ak as well!

      Who is that character?

        Loading editor
    • Sonic23350 wrote:
      The Real Slim Kiiny wrote:
      I love how they are adding Manhunter, I really do. But they should consider adding Ma'alefa'ak as well!
      Who is that character?

      Ma'lefa'ak or Malefic is J'onn's twin brother and arguably his archnemesis.

        Loading editor
    • I think they should or at least any villain, or else the amount of heroes and villains will be uneven.

        Loading editor
    • I think Ma'alefa'ak would be better as a skin for Manhunter.

        Loading editor
    • Okay, for those of you who think the roster will be unbalanced, then I have something to tell you. Scorpion is a "villain" and is most likely only on the hero side for now to make the roster look balanced on either side. If you remember back when Lobo was released, he was also on the hero side of the roster but later got moved when Batgirl was added. Therefore when MM is released, there will be 2 heroes and 3 villains for DLC. I am personally hoping for Red Hood or Black Manta as the villain and then Black Canary and Zatanna as the heroes, balancing out the roster.

        Loading editor
    • Great theory I 100% agree with you :-D

        Loading editor
    • SkyrimFan29 wrote:
      Okay, for those of you who think the roster will be unbalanced, then I have something to tell you. Scorpion is a "villain" and is most likely only on the hero side for now to make the roster look balanced on either side. If you remember back when Lobo was released, he was also on the hero side of the roster but later got moved when Batgirl was added. Therefore when MM is released, there will be 2 heroes and 3 villains for DLC. I am personally hoping for Red Hood or Black Manta as the villain and then Black Canary and Zatanna as the heroes, balancing out the roster.


      Hate to burst your bubble but... Scorpion isn't a villain though. It has been stated time and time again on the MK wiki that he's completely neutral. His clash quotes evident this.

        Loading editor
    • I suppose that's why he put air quotes around the word villain. Much like Red Hood (who can also be considered neutral) he will most likely be put on the villain side when the hero side runs out of space.

        Loading editor
    • Honestly, when it comes to moral alignment: people just automatically throw one guy into either Hero or Villain even when they've seen the layer in between before--

      --Straight in full action in works like Batman, The Punisher, Spiderman, even Brainiac 5 from Legion of Superheroes is an Anti-hero.

        Loading editor
    • Scorpion`s alignment is much like Akuma`s they are both deadly and brutal fighters that fight to the death but they are not evil because they do not pose a threat to the weak and helpless they only ilduge in combat with those who are worthy or are professional fighters

        Loading editor
    • and they both have a code of honor

        Loading editor
    • That's not exactly a reason to call him a villain though. Besides, Scorpion is not exactly evil because he's path is merely driven by his vengeance, to avenge his deceased family and clan and that's not a reason to call him evil either.

        Loading editor
    • More importantly than him being 'good' or 'bad', I think the idea here is 'where to put them on the screen'. So if you claim they're neutral, what then, put them right in the middle of the screen? (sarcasm) I agree with putting Scorpion on the villain side and Red Hood as well if he is to be added to the roster. If it troubles you because you think antiheroes shouldn't be classified as villains then just think of the 'villain' side as characters who aren't full heroes.

        Loading editor
    • Batman isn't full hero either, does that mean he should be on the villain side too?

        Loading editor
    • HOW IS BATMAN NOT FULL HERO???!??!

        Loading editor
    • Any comic book veteran would tell you that Batman is also an Anti-hero. Mainly because of his brutal fighting, dark motif, and his quest for revenge. You can easily see this in many of his movies: from live-action to animation. Even in the cartoons, he is a gritty lone wolf vigilante. This is all because he had been based on the series of pulp magazine characters back at the 1930s such as The Spider, The Shadow, and etc.

        Loading editor
    • Well as dark as Batman may be the fact that he doesn't kill actually made him more of a hero than some other hero who's willing to kill under specific conditions but still does not take the cost of human lives lightly(ie. someone who's not willing to let the Joker live after seeing him killing someone for the 100th time) like Aquaman.

      Being in the dark for a long time and acting all creepy doesn't actually factor into how much of a hero someone is.

        Loading editor
    • The proper definition of an anti-hero: a protagonist who lacks heroic qualities. Batman, unlike Superman, lacks many heroic qualities: such as his ghoulish outlook, his use of fear as a tactic for crime fighting, the fact that he has no powers. Superman brings out the charasmatic patriot that often talks about freedom and american way; Batman is all about vengeance hence "I am the night." 

      It has nothing to do with a willing to kill or not.

      A Hero's origin is nice and clean; an anti-hero's origin is always tragic.

        Loading editor
    • I supposed the destruction of Krypton is 'nice and clean' to you then?

      And then by your logic I supposed the Hulk would be an antihero too because of his big scary looks?

      And since you wanted to fight nitpicking with nitpicking, I'll give nitpicking to you.

      A protagonist and a hero are NOT the same thing, the protagonist is the character which represents the audience the events of the story through their perspective. A protagonist DOESN'T even has to be the center character of the story, takes Final Fantasy XII for example, the protagonist there is barely involved with the plot happening around him at all, but he is nevertheless a protagonist. The word hero, on the other hand, does NOT have an absolute definition, a hero primarily is a figure who garners admiration from someone, which can be either the characters in the story as the hero himself or the audiences like us.

      With that vague definition of 'admiration' itself, it makes everything much more unclear. Stephen Hawking is my hero even though he doesn't have to be able to punch anyone. Mao Zedong is a hero to many Chinese people even though his kill count is more than Hitler and Stalin's combined. Hercules is a hero to many kids because people didn't know how much of an actual brutal fighter he is along with the very dark tone of his original myth and so they're only familiar with the sugarcoated Disney version.

      Harvey Dent is the hero of Gotham in the movies because people didn't know about Two Face (The Hero Gotham Needs) but Commissioner Gordon knows the truth and thinks of Batman as the hero (The Hero Gotham Deserves) WHILE Bruce Wayne himself thinks of Commissioner Gordon as his hero (A Hero can be Anyone.) Conclusion: All three of them are heroes, only to different people under different circumstances, Checkmate BAM.

      Again, being the guy in black cloak doesn't instantly makes you less of a hero, and if you're going to say how he fights brutally, I'll ask again, how is punching and throwing nonlethal toys any more brutal than some guy who's perfectly willing to shove a trident up your nostrils? Which would begs us to another question, why is ANYONE who's willing to use violence on daily basis as a mean to stop other people from using violence be considered a hero at all?

        Loading editor
    • Also like to point out how you factor in 'not having superpowers' as being 'nonheroic' but not 'unwillingness to kill unconditionally'. I don't think I have to explain how wrong that argument is, do I?

        Loading editor
      • Thumbs up*
        Loading editor
    • woah! you guys got in to one lol,

      my view on Batman is he's a good guy, but he is a vigilante which is illegal, would a true hero break the law?

      as for Scorpion I always saw Subzero as the good one but both of them have worked for Shao Kahn, can you see Batman working for Darkseid or Zod?

        Loading editor
    • BATMAN IS ACUALLY nice Check out Batman: Gotham Adventures issue 3 and see a fan of Batman ACUALLY defeat the Scarecrow and BATMAN ACCUALY SAYS THESE WORDS "Thanks, I Wouldn't have done it without you" and its revealed in that issue that batman save the same kid in a robbery SO BATMAN IS A NICE GUY

        Loading editor
    • And yet in the Dark Knight Bale Batman still beats up his supporter fans who wanted to help him fight crime. Caring for their safety or not that's definitely not a nice way to do it.

        Loading editor
    • Batman is still an anti-hero nevertheless. He is a vigilante, and he has been given the "Hate" just as much as the "Love" within his storylines.

      Look here.

        Loading editor
    • You DO know TVTropes, while an enjoyable reading source(I had spent months reading tons of pages there), still has many, many, many loopholes in their info due to inconsistent editors and in many cases, worse monitoring of factual accuracy in comparison to Wikipedia. Now talking about inconsistencies, I actually won't call Batman a 100% hero or a 100% antihero either because of the common inconsistencies in western comic media in general, with writers changing hands for the story like almost every year. This resulted in some blatant inconsistencies in characters and plots like how one writer's Superman might struggle to even hold up a falling plane while another writer's version of Superman might be able to push the sun with just his little finger. That's why with the amount of medias he appear in, Batman can be anywhere from being a clean cut hero who just happens to like hanging in the dark in one story while being a grim antihero in another. If you insist on saying that Batman is a 100% antihero, tell me how Adam West Batman is an antihero, I dare you. Another thing I like to point out is how people simply insist on anyone who's not perfectly idealistic and hope-inspiring like Superman to be 'antiheroic' just because 'darker is cooler'. I call BS on that and oh don't deny it, people these days like their superheroes darker and grittier, that's why we have Nolan films and that's why Loki is the most popular character in the Avengers among the girls, because darker, or eviler, is sexier. I could go on, I can give you tons of more checkmates if you want.

        Loading editor
    • You apparently have no clue about this debate.

      1st: While the information on TV tropes is pretty comedic; it is indeed a lot more accurate compared to other sites like wikipedia. Especially when it comes down to anti-heroism, it is so accurate that it explains alot more about the subject in question. That's why I use it as a resource for information.

      2nd: We were discussing about anti-heroes and their neutrality (pointing at Scorpion). While Batman is mostly part of heroes' side, he is still considered under the gray area, whether Adam Westing or Michael Keatoning; he is classically and more traditionally known for his brutality along with his dark and brooding nature.

      Why are people even bitching about that last part? We've known this since Batman's first appearence in Detective Comics #27

        Loading editor
    • 1st Wikipedia monitors changes made by any, ANYONE within 24 hours and if some BS info is pulled out, the change will be nullified and the page will be reset to how it was prior to that change, TV Tropes doesn't do that and therefore is vulnerable. 

      2nd Assigning tropes to fiction can be VERY subjective, like whether or not you want to call GoW's Kratos or AC's Ezio as antiheroes, or saying whether or not the motive of some villain is justified. That is another gaping hole in TV Trope's system because figuring out whether or not specific trope applies to their given piece of fiction can result in an unending debate. This is one of the part where TV Trope just COULD NOT pull out a definitive answer, because there is none.

      3rd You insist on calling Batman brutal and yet you still haven't answered me on that regard. How is something Batman do, punching and throwing toys specifically designed to NOT be lethal at villains any more Brutal than heroes who regularly use weapons that can be lethal like Aquaman's trident?

      I think this argument on brutality of yours is already discredited since you labeled not having a superpower as being nonheroic and tries to claim that killing intent doesn't matter. I repeat, wearing black does not make you instantly more evil, darker, or more brutal.

      4th If you didn't understand what I meant by inconsistencies let's use Injustice as an example, here Batman is portrayed as the absolute incorruptible good while Superman was the good who was corrupted into evil, this is one version of where character alignment can be nullified from their standard form due to a new setting and a story written by a different writer. If you insist on otherwise, give me an antiheroic quality Injustice Batman has in comparison to Regime Superman. For a character who had thousands and thousands of appearances on different places and have been written by over a thousand people, Batman's character, his image, personality and ALIGNMENT is NEVER definite.

      If anything, EVERY different version of Batman should be considered different characters due to how they act and think. Adam West Batman is NOT an antihero by any means while Christian Bale Batman IS an antihero, don't try to put up the argument of "all versions of Batman are antiheroic, period" because it just gives up more loopholes in your own argument. You're just putting in more and more bullets for me to use in my debate gun.

      5th While we're on the argument of grayness of each character, just admit it already that Scorpion and Red Hood are on the darker scale of the grayness because of their willingness to kill without much provocation. Otherwise give me a location where we could put their character selection icon on the screen. Remember that you brought up the topic on Batman on yourself, I was only talking about Scorpion.

        Loading editor
    • 1. @ ADMIRALBLOOD, Batman has worked with Lex Luthor in the past. One example is the Red Son comic.

      2. Batman is a member of the Justice League and fights "super-villains". Therefore he is classified as a "super-hero".

        Loading editor
    • agreed Lex looked wrong as soon as I hit enter my bad, I should have put Darkseid instead,

      and yes I know he is clased as a hero, but a lot of this discussion has been about the "full-hero"  to "antihero" ratio 

        Loading editor
    • 171.7.140.195 wrote:
      1st Wikipedia monitors changes made by any, ANYONE within 24 hours and if some BS info is pulled out, the change will be nullified and the page will be reset to how it was prior to that change, TV Tropes doesn't do that and therefore is vulnerable. 

      2nd Assigning tropes to fiction can be VERY subjective, like whether or not you want to call GoW's Kratos or AC's Ezio as antiheroes, or saying whether or not the motive of some villain is justified. That is another gaping hole in TV Trope's system because figuring out whether or not specific trope applies to their given piece of fiction can result in an unending debate. This is one of the part where TV Trope just COULD NOT pull out a definitive answer, because there is none.

      3rd You insist on calling Batman brutal and yet you still haven't answered me on that regard. How is something Batman do, punching and throwing toys specifically designed to NOT be lethal at villains any more Brutal than heroes who regularly use weapons that can be lethal like Aquaman's trident?

      I think this argument on brutality of yours is already discredited since you labeled not having a superpower as being nonheroic and tries to claim that killing intent doesn't matter. I repeat, wearing black does not make you instantly more evil, darker, or more brutal.

      4th If you didn't understand what I meant by inconsistencies let's use Injustice as an example, here Batman is portrayed as the absolute incorruptible good while Superman was the good who was corrupted into evil, this is one version of where character alignment can be nullified from their standard form due to a new setting and a story written by a different writer. If you insist on otherwise, give me an antiheroic quality Injustice Batman has in comparison to Regime Superman. For a character who had thousands and thousands of appearances on different places and have been written by over a thousand people, Batman's character, his image, personality and ALIGNMENT is NEVER definite.

      If anything, EVERY different version of Batman should be considered different characters due to how they act and think. Adam West Batman is NOT an antihero by any means while Christian Bale Batman IS an antihero, don't try to put up the argument of "all versions of Batman are antiheroic, period" because it just gives up more loopholes in your own argument. You're just putting in more and more bullets for me to use in my debate gun.

      5th While we're on the argument of grayness of each character, just admit it already that Scorpion and Red Hood are on the darker scale of the grayness because of their willingness to kill without much provocation. Otherwise give me a location where we could put their character selection icon on the screen. Remember that you brought up the topic on Batman on yourself, I was only talking about Scorpion.

      You're asking about how Batman is brutal? Apparently, this anon punk doesn't read the comics. Anti-hero

      Further more, Red Hood is as much an anti-hero to the DC Universe as The Punisher is to Marvel. While I may often say that, it's true. Red Hood and The Punisher are similar in their anti-heroism, because they both kill bad people.

      Lastly, Scorpion is still neutral, stated by not just the MK wiki but the developers as well. Check out his BioKard for proof. Scorpion has been a good guy on occasion, while Scorpion has been a bad guy just as much.


        Loading editor
    • Demon Killer
      Demon Killer removed this reply because:
      I've had enough
      06:12, July 18, 2013
      This reply has been removed
    • I've studied scorpion his actions his paterns and i have to say he may be classified as neutral. But when it comes down to it he is a villain. HE HAS never performed a act of decentcy. Sure he may not always directly antagonize people but usually he is either acting as quan chi's enforcer or doing things to further his own selfish goals. When has scorpion ever done something "good"

        Loading editor
    • We need to also think of Scorpion in Injustice. In his ending, he defeats Trigon and takes over his army. He then makes plans to take over the entire world.

      Definitely a Villan.

        Loading editor
    • good point! I think the reason he comes up as being neutral is because he is a mercenary, of sorts, look at Deathstroke he is a mercenary/assasssin but he's on the side of good in Injustice, and Lobo is a bounty hunter does that really make him a villan? 

        Loading editor
    • yeah. He kills innnocent people.

        Loading editor
    • Mr. Xemnas wrote:
      I've studied scorpion his actions his paterns and i have to say he may be classified as neutral. But when it comes down to it he is a villain. HE HAS never performed a act of decentcy. Sure he may not always directly antagonize people but usually he is either acting as quan chi's enforcer or doing things to further his own selfish goals. When has scorpion ever done something "good"


        Loading editor
    • UMK3, when Scorpion found out that Sub-Zero was on Earthrealm's side, he turned on Shao Kahn in order to protect him.

        Loading editor
    • UMK3 can be considered non-canon. And he turned on Kahn because he felt that since he killed sub-zero's brother that he was debted to him. But again this is widely considered to be non-canon. In the very next game scorpion attempts to kill sub zero again.

        Loading editor
    • Why is everyone saying I hope they add red hood? He is already in it as an alternate skin for the Joker?

        Loading editor
    • Were talking about Jason Todd red hood

        Loading editor
    • Oh, well he is not a villain anymore, I doubt they would make him a villain.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.