The Instigator
AlbertWekser
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
LDPOFODebATeR0328
Con (against)
Winning
15 Points

Albert Wesker Vs

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 4 votes the winner is...
LDPOFODebATeR0328
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/27/2014 Category: Funny
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 685 times Debate No: 58256
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (4)

 

AlbertWekser

Pro

First round acceptance and no fowl language and your person must have anything u want beside these the ability to have magic the . The person must have the ability to die he can't be immortelle and he can't fly in anyway .
LDPOFODebATeR0328

Con

Challenge Accepted!

Albert Wesker vs. Chris Redfield.
Debate Round No. 1
AlbertWekser

Pro

https://m.youtube.com......
In this video you clearly see that he is running so fast that he seems to be tell spotting . You can also see that he is clearly able to fight to armed men and still unarmed able to beat them while dodging bullets aimed at him .
https://m.youtube.com......
In this video you can clearly see wesker dodging bullets at point blank range and the ability to backflip while he still doges them .
https://m.youtube.com......
As you clearly see after Albert Wesker is injected by the serum 1 time he still has super human abilities which is shown y when he hits a metal wall and it is seen clearly bending and after 2 injections you can clearly see he is till stringer then an an average human quite stronger even in he's weaker forms . You can also clearly see that Wesker was stabbed by a knife with no affect to him once ever and that is in his weaker form and still after the 2 injection he is still string enough to brake metal when he tries to stop Chris and misses he is shown braking the metal . While yes he might be weaker by the first injection you can clearly see that he is still able to doge bullets without effort .
https://m.youtube.com......
In this video you can clearly see that Albert Wesler has the ability to pierce a human being with agin little effort .
While I must say Albert Wesker only has one true weakness I see one weakness in Bruce lee that all humans they get tired eventually which is not the case in Albert Wesker .
Report this Argument
LDPOFODebATeR0328

Con

Thanks for your wonderful speech.

First, I'd to explain why Chris Redfield would defeat Albert Wesker. (I'm going to keep it short.)

C1: Chris Redfield already killed Wesker during Resident Evil 5.

Although Wesker might seem overpowered, Chris had already defeated him during Resident Evil 5 (Game). Resident Evil 5 made it so that Chris would eventually kill the antagonist of this game: Albert Wesker. According to Resident Evil Wiki (This wikipage was created by the creators of Resident Evil), "However, Chris fired a pair of RPG-7 rockets at him as he SCREAMED IN RAGE AND PAIN, DESTROYING HIM COMPLETELY." This was how Alex Wesker died. He was killed by Chris Redfield.

C2: Albert Wesker is already dead.

Like I mentioned, Wesker was killed by Chris. Even IF he resurrects from the dead, Chris would once again defeat him because the main character never dies. :) Additionally, the game creators made it so that Chris would kill Wesker.

Moving on to my refutations.

I'd like to first point out that his "sources" are invalid.

When I attempted to press the links that he provided, this popped up:

https://www.youtube.com...

The home page of Youtube.

He tries to relate his arguments with his "source." Unfortunately, his sources are invalid because we don't know what video he is talking about.

Additionally, throughout his whole speech, he basically talks about how overpowered Albert Wesker is.
The resolution isn't about who is more physically powerful. The resolution is actually about who would win in a fight, Alex Wesker or Chris Redfield. (According to Oxford Dictionaries, Versus is defined as against.)

Because I have successfully proven to you (the judges) how Chris would beat Wesker in a fight, you ought to vote for the Negative.

Thank you.

Sources:

http://residentevil.wikia.com...

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com...
Debate Round No. 2
AlbertWekser

Pro

Okay here's the links that I hate so mcuh those last ones https://m.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com/watch?v=MztXNdpLjg0
Okay hers a simple reason Chris killed Albert Weskeer he hates Chris and wanted to make him suffer . He could have killed Chris so many times yet he chose to make him suffer and torment him .
Also if you are brining Chris Redfeild I must add something
to this debate that they never new each other in the past and that they nerve were team mates so try to make Chris win when. He is put up to a foe he knows nothing about
LDPOFODebATeR0328

Con

Thanks for the response.

Now, I'd to refute against your arguments.

1.) "Okay here's the links that I hate so mcuh (much) those last ones
https://m.youtube.com...;

Thanks for the correct link. Unfortunately, this doesn't show how Albert Wesker would directly defeat and kill Chris Redfield. Thus, this video is invalid. Chris Redfield already defeated and killed Wesker.

2.) "Okay hers a simple reason Chris killed Albert Weskeer he hates Chris and wanted to make him suffer ."

First of all, this sentence doesn't make sense grammaratically. Here, I made some changes: "Okay. Here's a simple reason why Chris killed Albert Wesker. He hates Chris and wanted to make him suffer."

Second, this explaination just doesn't make sense: Albert Wesker was killed by Chris because he wanted to make Chris suffer? Wesker was actually killed by Chris in a fair match. Because Chris already defeated Wesker, an abnormal, overpowered monster (human), with a rocket launcer (RPG-7), Chris won the battle. Period.

3.) "He could have killed Chris so many times yet he chose to make him suffer and torment him."

Hmm... Is that how Wesker was killed by Chris? (*Sarcasm*) :)

4.) "Also if you are brining Chris Redfeild I must add something to this debate that they never new each other in the past and that they nerve were team mates so try to make Chris win when. He is put up to a foe he knows nothing about"

You cannot add anything new to this debate. The resolution is still Albert Wesker Vs. Chris Redfield. Chris already won the battle. Thus, I win.

Conclusion:

Judge, my opponent dropped all of my arguments, which means that he agrees with me. For all these reasons, please vote for the negative side of this debate. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 3
AlbertWekser

Pro

We'll i. Sorry for my lack of using a sentence opponent now let me specify why Chris Killed Wesker . Albert Wesker hates Chris for delaying his plans . While he could have killed him so many times you see in that video that Wesker had multiple chances to kill him but choses not to . You clearly see him pointing a gun at him in the dead but yet he clergy just keeps gloating and that gives him the time he needs to escape . He wants to make Chris suffer and see how he failed to save anyone . Let's say that to make this debate fair we ignore that they met before in the past that they never new each other that the only reason they fight is to stop one of each other's plan . Well with that Wesker has no emotional attachment to Chris he will not win because wesker would see him as a threat to his goals . So wesker would goi at him full strength and not even give his opponent a chance to even see it coming he will die before Chris has any chance to fight back by a simple jab to the heart killing him or breaking his neck . So I wish that my opponent can remove the history to make this debate fair and so that Chris no wesker know who the other is .
LDPOFODebATeR0328

Con

1.) "We'll i. Sorry for my lack of using a sentence opponent"

There is no need of apologizing. :)

2.) "now let me specify why Chris Killed Wesker . Albert Wesker hates Chris for delaying his plans . While he could have killed him so many times you see in that video that Wesker had multiple chances to kill him but choses not to . You clearly see him pointing a gun at him in the dead but yet he clergy just keeps gloating and that gives him the time he needs to escape . He wants to make Chris suffer and see how he failed to save anyone . Let's say that to make this debate fair we ignore that they met before in the past that they never new each other that the only reason they fight is to stop one of each other's plan . Well with that Wesker has no emotional attachment to Chris he will not win because wesker would see him as a threat to his goals . So wesker would goi at him full strength and not even give his opponent a chance to even see it coming he will die before Chris has any chance to fight back by a simple jab to the heart killing him or breaking his neck . So I wish that my opponent can remove the history to make this debate fair and so that Chris no wesker know who the other is ."

Unfortunately, the resolution cannot be changed. You should have specified, during your first speech. Because you didn't speify during your first speech, we must proceed with the same resolution. The resolution is still "Albert Wesker vs Chris Redfield."

Albert Wesker might seem overpowered, but Chris already him in a battle. Chris is SUPPOSED to kill Wesker.

Additionally, even if Chris didn't know Wesker, in the first place, Chris would still win. Since you, as my opponent, didn't specify the resolution, I assume that Chris can have any weapon he wants to have. With RPG-7, Chris can easily demolish Wesker, like what he did during Resident 5.

Once again, my oppenent dropped all my arguments. For all these reasons, please vote for the negative side of this debate. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 4
AlbertWekser

Pro

AlbertWekser forfeited this round.
LDPOFODebATeR0328

Con

My opponent forfeited, so extended all my arguments. Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by FuzzyCatPotato 2 years ago
FuzzyCatPotato
AlbertWekserLDPOFODebATeR0328Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: FF.
Vote Placed by DarthKirones 2 years ago
DarthKirones
AlbertWekserLDPOFODebATeR0328Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
AlbertWekserLDPOFODebATeR0328Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by Themba 2 years ago
Themba
AlbertWekserLDPOFODebATeR0328Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: FF.