The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
7 Points

Plants vs Zombies plants are better

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/26/2011 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,327 times Debate No: 17663
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (1)




In the popular game plants vs zombies, some might wsay zombies rule. BUt if properly argued you will find that plants are alot better. if zombies were better then why have the goal of the game be to defeat and kill the undead. most of the time plants win, and if you beat the game that means you have defeated all the zombies. If zombies are better then why do that?


I accept. This is going to be ridiculous.
Debate Round No. 1


Well, maybe the game is skewed to the player, but when the people made the game, they knew that plants were better. That's why it's Plants vs Zombies not Zombies vs Plants. It could be you against the plants, which does happen in the game, but only cardboard cut outs, and you are just training the zombies so your battle can b much more fun.So Plants are better than plants. Why is the object of the game to defeat the zombies if the zombies were better than the plants? Answer that question.



As Pro, my opponent has the burden of proof and must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that in the video game Plants vs Zombies, the Plants are "better".


I can't tell what exactly my opponent's points were, if s/he had any at all.

Pro did propose a question, however. Why would the object of a video game be to defeat an enemy that is superior to the protagonist? Well, to that I would say Super Mario. Metroid. Final Fantasy VII. If one doesn't know these old games, I'd say Demon's Souls. Metal Gear Solid 4. God of War III. Limbo. Many of the biggest games of all time have had the protagonist begin weaker than the antagonist(s) in the game. It makes everything that much more exciting. Who would take pride defeating a weak opponent? What kind of boss fight would that be? This is nothing new in games just like it's nothing new in movies, books, plays, music, ect. Hell, if you want a really old example just look at David and Goliath in the valley of eli ( I think that's what it was called). That's a template that's thousands of years old that is used all the time in video games (Shadow of the Colossus). If the only arguement my opponent has is that a protagonist in a story wouldn't be weaker than his/her opponents, then this isn't going to be a very fun debate.


I was hoping that Pro would state his/her definition of "better" as it pertains to the resolution, but since s/he did not, I will argue the most likely definitions.

1. The Zombies are more noble than the Plants.

One the one side, you have human beings who were (presumably) infected against their will with a horrible, flesh-eating disease trying desperately to end their pain. On the other hand, you have plants. They eat/shoot/blow up people. Umm... Yeah.

2. They are more dangerous than the Plants.

Zombies are a determined group of sick humans who would do anything to thrive as an organism. Plants are a group of plants that shoot pellets their enemies safely from from 20 seconds away in order to have any chance of surviving. A plant that needs to attack from a safe distance away in order to not be destroyed in seconds up against a Zombie that, depending on the type of Zombie, could eat a whole row of the weaker plants by itself.

3. In a violent confrontation between Zombies and Plants, Zombies are more likely to win.

In a violent confrontation, the more dangerous participant is more likely to be the victorious one. Q.E.D., the Zombie is the more likely victor.


Unfortunatly, I can't draw up any solid conclusion because I don't know exactly what this debate is about. The term "better" is one of the more subjective terms and an odd one to see in a debate resolution. I strongly suggest Pro define it as it relates to the resolution if s/he want's either side to make any kind of strong argument.

For all I know, we could be debating which of the two is "better" at water polo.
Debate Round No. 2


smonie55 forfeited this round.


Well... Alright then.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Travniki 4 years ago
I must say this debate really echoes the airtight grasp both sides have on the entire concept of abstract thought tinted with our contemporary society. Not only were they able to take the very wisp of an idea and ruthlessly yet eloquently analyse it, but critical thinking was compellingly applied to how electronics have evolved in our modern society. I particularly enjoyed pros point about the evolution of our perception of zombies since the 20th century, but I think con countered it brilliantly with his thorough statistics about the link between the Russian Revolution and the drop in plant fertility
Posted by Pozzo 5 years ago
I was going to have fun with this.
Posted by Xboxlive 5 years ago
Isn't that the point of the game to make the plants better?
Posted by Pozzo 5 years ago
I'm going to download the app, then I may take this.
Posted by Maikuru 5 years ago
I love the game but I'm not really sure about this topic. The plants clearly have more abilities than the zombies, as the game is skewed toward the player. I'm curious and will stick around.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by ApostateAbe 5 years ago
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: forfeit