The Instigator
GeorgeCarlinWorshipper
Pro (for)
Winning
35 Points
The Contender
Lucky120
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

If Alex Mercer of [Prototype] were to fight Cole MacGrath of inFamous, Alex Mercer would win.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/9/2009 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 6,710 times Debate No: 9907
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (26)
Votes (6)

 

GeorgeCarlinWorshipper

Pro

NOTE: The Alex and Cole in this debate are both from the chronological ends of their games, and the theoretical "Cole" in this debate took the "good karma" path during his story.

Alex Mercer would defeat Cole MacGrath because he is faster, stronger, more durable, and more powerful overall.
I would like to begin by defining Alex Mercer as the Blacklight virus from the chronological end of the video game [Prototype]. His abilities are to consume other living beings (composed of animal cells), enhanced strength, enhanced speed, and shapeshifting. When he consumes another living being, he absorbs all of that being's memories and is able to shapeshift into a completely accurate replica of that person. Theoretically, Alex should be able to shapeshift into somebody without consuming them, but he cannot be certain of completely accurate mimicry unless he consumes them.
When Alex consumes somebody, he compacts their cells into his body, increasing his mass, weight, and density. When Alex is injured, he is able to use the cells he has "stored" to regenerate.
For the purposes of this debate, the theoretical battle will take place in New York City as the city currently exists.
My first argument is that Alex Mercer is more durable than Cole and can outlast him. Cole MacGrath must absorb electricity from other sources to use his abilities; however, Alex is capable of using his strength and shapeshifting abilities without storing cells. Cole's regeneration is limited to the amount of electricity he has stored, and he possesses all of the physical weaknesses and limits of a normal human being. Alex possesses no such weaknesses, as the Blacklight virus' biological functions do not require the presence of a human's internal organs. Alex can also consume the human citizens of New York to replenish his cells if he is damaged.
My second argument is that Cole is not fast enough to hit Alex with damaging enough attacks to cause him serious injury. Alex is capable of outrunning a helicopter, is able to "wallrun", can glide and boost himself through the air, and is proficient in basic Parkour. Cole possesses no such mobility abilities, nor does he possess enhanced reflexes. He possesses limited range that Alex could escape, and is also incapable of accurately hitting moving objects that he cannot see. Given the number of buildings in New York City, Alex need only run to the other side of a skyscraper and hide temporarily if he suffers any damage. If Alex catches Cole in any of his attacks, Cole is effectively doomed, as Alex can consume him if he makes physical contact.
I look forward to the rest of this debate. Good luck to whoever accepts this challenge. May the best man (or virus) win. Also, please correct me if I'm wrong about Cole's powers; I'm not quite the inFamous expert I wish I were.
Lucky120

Con

Okay so what you are saying is Alex would beat Cole. No way. First of all I have to say I have not really played Prototype, because I did not like the game. Two infamous is a lot better and Cole will tear him up especially on the evil side. Cole gets his strength and power from electric currents like power lines and things of that nature. he can slide on rail road tracks. So you telling me a guy that can slide on rail road tracks and power lines will lose to one that has to get close to you to hit you. Cole can hit from a distance. Alex is a shape shifter and he has some pretty sick moves, but i think that Cole has him beat.
Debate Round No. 1
GeorgeCarlinWorshipper

Pro

I would like to begin by thanking my opponent for taking this debate and the readers for their time.

REBUTTAL
NOTE: Due to the wording of my opponent's arguments, I will assume he is arguing for "Evil Cole". If that is not what he is arguing, then I would like him to state the specific "alignment" of the Cole he is arguing for in his next arguments or in the comment section.
1) My opponent's first argument is that he likes Infamous more than Prototype, and thus Cole would "tear Alex up". This argument is invalid because my opponent's videogame preferences have no effect on this conflict.
2) My opponent's second argument is that, because Cole gets power and energy from electrical currents, he can outlast Alex. It can be inferred from this that my opponents is trying to argue that Cole would outlast Alex due to the vast amount of electricity available to Cole in NYC. However, this argument is also invalid, as Alex has the entire human and animal population of NYC as his own power source, thus canceling out Cole's advantage. Also, Cole must be within roughly a yard of a source of electricity to recharge with it and must remain stationary for the duration of the "charging"; Alex could take this time to throw a nearby object, such as a car, at Cole. He could also rush at Cole, and due to Alex's extreme speed, Cole would be unable to charge for more than a moment or two at a time at best without Alex slashing him in half with the Blade (http://prototype.wikia.com...) or impaling him with Whipfist (which has a maximum range of roughly 6 yards) and consuming him.
3) My opponent's third argument is that Cole would defeat Alex because Alex must get close to Cole to kill him; however, this argument is untrue, as Alex could throw an object at Cole or attack him with Whipfist or a handgun stolen from one of the numerous police officers in NYC. Also, Alex is capable of great speed both in midair and on the ground, allowing him to dodge the imprecise, large-scale, group-oriented attacks of Evil Cole (source: http://infamous.wikia.com... ). Lastly, the fact that Cole can slide on railroad tracks and power lines is, if anything, an advantage to Alex, as moving along a linear path allows Alex to better aim his attacks at Cole since Alex can observe where Cole will be in advance from the direction of the power line/railroad track.

I would now like to move on to my own arguments.
3: My third argument is that Alex need only bring Cole into contact with water to stun or injure him, allowing Alex to close the distance between him and Cole and "whipfist" Cole, consuming him. To bring Cole into contact with water, Alex could smash a fire hydrant that Cole is near with a thrown object, possibly while Cole is recharging. When Cole comes into contact with water, a "massive amount of energy will be released into it, much like short-circuiting. This release is of such high-voltage that even Cole himself is injured by the discharge." (source: http://infamous.wikia.com... ) If Cole were to be stunned by contact with water, Alex could easily tear a piece of pavement from the ground and hit Cole with it, then consume him through either closing the distance between them or Whipfist use.
4: My fourth argument is that Cole cannot defend himself against Alex' more powerful attacks, while Alex can evade Cole's. Cole lacks enhanced speed, and his only defensive measures are limited regeneration and the Polarity Wall (http://infamous.wikia.com...). Evidenced by its name the fact that the Polarity Wall only defends against gunfire, it can be reasoned that the Wall defends Cole through magnetism. However, any thrown object, the Whipfist, or Alex's midair Blade attack (http://prototype.wikia.com...) will punch through the Polarity Wall, as its magnetism is not strong enough to stop the Blade's momentum. If Alex could hit Cole with the Blade, Cole would be injured and stunned enough for Alex to consume him.
Please comment on ways I could improve my debate technique. Thank you for your time.

SOURCES: http://infamous.wikia.com...
http://prototype.wikia.com...
Lucky120

Con

Well either way good or evil Cole is more powerful.

One Cole can throw bombs that blow up so Alex has no chance. Cole also can call thunder from the sky and strike. TO be honest he has more powers then Alex does and he is more powerful. You just looking at what all Alex can do in his diversion of the game. You have to look at if he comes in contact with Cole. Like i said before far distance is the best way. Alex can jump high while Cole can fly and make a huge drop to the ground that actually can injure Alex. plus Alex can be shocked to death by Cole's shock wave.
Debate Round No. 2
GeorgeCarlinWorshipper

Pro

I would like to begin by refuting my opponents' arguments.
4) His fourth argument is that Cole's attacks cover too large an area for Alex to escape them; however, Cole's "area attacks", such as the lightning grenade, are mostly either ground-based or must make contact with an object to "explode". Alex could easily escape these attacks.
5) His fifth argument was that Cole could use Lightning Storm to kill Alex; however, this attack, aside from requiring use of an impractical amount of power for Cole to expend on one attack, would provide both that Cole has clear access to the sky and is planted firmly on solid ground. Also, as long as Alex dodges the Lightning Storm once, he has clear access to Cole, as Cole is incapable of "pulling" the lightning back towards him when he is redirecting it. Also, the lightning storm is not even a one-hit kill on Cole's more powerful Conduit enemies; someone with regenerative abilities like Alex could definitely survive the Storm.
6) His sixth argument was that Cole could use the "Thunder Drop" to kill Alex; however, Cole cannot "fly", only glide, and he would have to both reach a great height without being injured/killed and hit Alex with the less-than-precise Thunder Drop.
7) His seventh argument was that Cole could "shock Alex to death with his shock wave", but Alex has too many cells stored for Cole to kill him in one burst, even with a full "battery". He would have to recharge, at which point Alex could kill him.

I would now like to move on to my own arguments.
5) My fifth argument is that Alex could kill Cole with a Claw Groundspike ( see video; warning: graphic violence). These groundspikes do not require line of sight (http://prototype.wikia.com...) and are capable of wreaking havoc on the human body, such that Cole would be unable to regenerate from the wounds the spikes would inflict.
6) My sixth argument is that Alex could easily close the distance to Cole and pummel him with Musclemass (http://prototype.wikia.com...). Musclemass augments Alex' midair kick, a homing attack that is capable of almost completely destroying Apache Helicopters in one hit and hits a humanoid with enough force to allow Alex to "surf" on their body for roughly three-quarters of a city block. This allows Alex to mount a powerful attack from roughly the edge of Cole's effective range.
7) My seventh and final argument is that Alex can defeat Cole with the Critical Pain devastator, a concentrated blast of Biomass powerful enough to punch through tanks (http://prototype.wikia.com...). This attack can be successfully used in midair, allowing Alex to drop from the top of a building and maintain downward motion to make himself more difficult to hit while preparing the attack. If Cole were to be hit by this attack, he would suffer an extreme amount of damage, effectively winning the fight for Alex.
Thank you for your time. Please vote PRO.
Lucky120

Con

What a great argument I have to say that my opponent says that Alex can beat Cole with all these attacks, but one question is are they far range or m�l�e? If these are m�l�e attacks Cole has a greater chance of moving out the way before the attack is prepared or better yet finished. Another thing i have to say is this is true they are evenly matched with some of their attack powers. here are some pros and cons

Cole Pro
Can recharge with using anything like power lines
Glides no need to use transportation
No need to buy batteries

Alex Pro
Can transform into anyone
Can glide 3 city blocks
can run up side buildings with speed

Cole Con
Climbs buildings
Can't step on foot in water
Just throws electricity in different shapes

Alex Con
Has to eat people to recharge
Limited health generation

These are my arguments.Yes close call, but I think Cole has a better advantage. With Alex if no people are around how will he recharge himself as with Cole if there are no power lines.
Debate Round No. 3
GeorgeCarlinWorshipper

Pro

I would like to being by refuting my opponent's arguments.
He argued that Cole could evade Alex's melee attacks, but Alex is too fast in close range for Cole to evade his attacks. Also, Alex does not possess "limited health generation" relative to Cole; Alex can store far more cells than Cole can energy, accounting for energy expended in attacks. Given that the Alex I'm arguing for is from the chronological end of the game, it can be reasoned that he possesses a prodigious amount of stored cells with which to regenerate. Also, my opponent's "no people around" statement is invalid; this fight is in New York, one of the most populated cities in America. Alex could easily find some people to consume in an emergency, assuming one somehow emerges. However, Alex could deprive Cole of power by destroying power lines with Whipfist and keeping him away from other power sources with his attacks. Cole lacks the speed to evade Alex's attacks and is limited by the biological weaknesses of a human who heals very quickly; if Alex shatters Cole's spine, crushes his skull/torso, or inflicts any other number of damage types that the human body is incapable of healing from, Cole will be easily consumed.
Since I have no new arguments that wouldn't merely be restatements of my previous arguments, I would now like to weigh the debate. While I have present seven clear arguments and shown a good understanding of the topic, my opponent's arguments are short, confusing, and do not show a strong understanding of the debate. I have refuted all of my opponent's arguments (as best as I can distinguish them), whereas my opponent has not refuted most, if not all, of mine. For these reasons, the PRO has won this debate.
I would like to thank my opponent for taking this debate and the viewers for their time. Please vote PRO.
Lucky120

Con

Well I have nothing more to say on this one. Thank you for the debate. You have pretty good arguments.
Debate Round No. 4
26 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Blade_0f_AwE 4 years ago
Blade_0f_AwE
I have reasoning to make this argument invalid: Good Cole, (SPOILER), dies at the end of the second game. Thus, declaring Alex winner by forfeit but the fight never actually took place.

But if good Cole dies, then whom is Alex to fight? Zeke? HELL NO! He is to fight evil Cole. And as I remember, at the end of the second game for the evil side Cole (SPOILER) becomes the Beast. And Cole could just fight Alex as the Beast. While fighting Alex in this form would greatly drain Cole, it could also do a significant amount of damage. Using Ray Sphere-like explosions to trigger nearby conduits and knock Alex away, possibly even killing him. The conduits would most likely fight WITH Cole due to their newly earned powers, and maybe even for Cole curing the plague from them. Thus, ends why Alex, should initially, suck it.
Posted by ciphermind 7 years ago
ciphermind
You should have argued using Kessler.
Kessler IS Cole and exists during the events of the game, and in terms of raw power is unmatched until he lets Cole defeat him.
Posted by Lucky120 7 years ago
Lucky120
I voted for Pro yes I did
Posted by philosphical 7 years ago
philosphical
Lucky technically forfeited the whole debate..
Posted by Chrysippus 7 years ago
Chrysippus
RFD:
C: tied.
SP/G: tied.
A: Pro. Cons arguments were often vague, and he could have spent more time explaining his points. Con often came across as arguing from his own emotional reaction, rather than from facts.
S: tied.

The below comment, btw, was directed at GCW.
Posted by Chrysippus 7 years ago
Chrysippus
"Please comment on ways I could improve my debate technique."

Not bad; a little work on format and form will go a long way toward good debating...

======
FORMAT:
======
Think of it this way: if you post everything in one chunk, people tend to skim.
Analogy: http://geekpadshow.com...

Use blank lines, and dividers to separate your points:

-----------------

Clearly label your sections; all caps.
Your R2 was pretty good, format wise.

=====
FORM:
=====

Pretty good, overall.

I make a point of thanking my opponent at the beginning and end of each round. After all, they are humans, and deserve respect; they didn't have to let me trample on their beliefs/opinions, and it's nothing more than common courtesy to let them know of my respect for them.

Also, though not important in this debate, quoting your opponent's exact words in quotation marks helps avoid charges of dropped arguments. Taking your opponents arguments one-by one in order, as you did here, also helps that way.

=========
CONCLUSION:
=========

Sometimes this is the most important part of the debate. Lazy readers will skim; and the opponent that sums up his arguments well in his (well-labeled) conclusion can sometimes steal votes from a harder to follow opponent.
Posted by Zetsubou 7 years ago
Zetsubou
Such a one sided debate.
Posted by Lucky120 7 years ago
Lucky120
I like this debat I am playing Con right now and I hope it goes well thank you. This was the first one I accepted.
Posted by Lucky120 7 years ago
Lucky120
I did not really like prototype, but I will take this debate.
Posted by Zetsubou 7 years ago
Zetsubou
I have the game and, If I'm bored enough I'll take this debate, If I do can you please vote on my Debate. (Rules: NOT FOR ME FOR WHO YOU SEE FIT.)
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by Equinox 7 years ago
Equinox
GeorgeCarlinWorshipperLucky120Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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:60 
Vote Placed by L_Bloodless 7 years ago
L_Bloodless
GeorgeCarlinWorshipperLucky120Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by GeorgeCarlinWorshipper 7 years ago
GeorgeCarlinWorshipper
GeorgeCarlinWorshipperLucky120Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Vote Placed by philosphical 7 years ago
philosphical
GeorgeCarlinWorshipperLucky120Tied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Chrysippus 7 years ago
Chrysippus
GeorgeCarlinWorshipperLucky120Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:30 
Vote Placed by Lucky120 7 years ago
Lucky120
GeorgeCarlinWorshipperLucky120Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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:60