Sonya's role in the story definitely was downplayed in MK3, 4, and DA. (And Shaolin Monks if you want to count it) Combine that with the fact that she didn't appear at all in 2 except as part of a background and Jax's story, or in Deception except in Ermac's ending. (Kitana, by contrast, got to be in 3 endings, was 3 characters' motives for even being in the game, and was made playable in a later version)

And in MK1, I don't think you can actually say ANY of the characters were intended to be the main, all of them were supposed to be of equal importance because they hadn't yet intended a sequel, they just wanted you to play as everybody and each one had a different motive. There were no heroes, just 7 neutrals. In fact, as I recall, the exact reason Sonya and Kano weren't playable in MK2 was they were the least used characters in MK1 according to statistics Midway went out and collected from local arcade cabinets.

Basically, the movie and MKvsDCU were the only times Sonya was a main character.
Sonya is definitely popular, perhaps more popular than Kitana, but Kitana tends to figure much more prominently into the storyline.

But we can't go back and forth with what the core is of what we're discussing. I mean, we spend two or three huge-ass posts (God, they're growing into monsters) discussing whether or not the MK Team means for Kitana to be the main, clearly giving the "what was meant or not meant" mentality much importance. Then, all of a sudden, that doesn't count anymore?

I do think Kitana reached a high in MKDA, I'm not gonna disagree. However, I think this "high" is more of a consequence, especially given her MK4G storyline. She was great in UMK3, then fell into a bottomless pit in MK4, then came back in MKDA to a level that is definitely not impressive enough that it is made more vital than other characters'. The only reason it IS considered a high is, again, because of her very recent past spent in a big low. Her MKDA storyline was most certainly nothing to be considered so special, at least not more special than other characters'. And I gave a solid reason of why I don't interpret it as majestically as you do.



I think this would-be inconsistency you bring up has been debunked enough times that it has lost credibility, at least enough to be referred to as opinion rather than asserted as fact.



Here's where I think we reach "the big wall" that divides our perspectives.

You seem to think the "lead" of anything has to be of utmost importance to the story. Sure, maybe the LEAD has to be, but Sonya isn't the LEAD of Mortal Kombat. Her "lead" status only comes when you separate the cast by gender.

Let's see the cast in a non-gender-specific way for a second. Sonya now turns into a supporting character for the lead (be it Liu, Raiden, or whomever else), disregarding, of course, the fact that she has her own separate goals and storylines. I think it's safe to say, from having watched countless movies, seen countless other stories, etc., that characters who act as support for the lead can fulfill their purpose without being as important or as prominent as the lead in the main story. By this solid knowledge, Sonya isn't the lead because she's as important to the story as Raiden or Kang or Sub-Zero. She's the lead because she is an active support of the lead. This active support is always CONSISTENT, regardless of how "high" or "low" it is. It's this consistency that grants her a status of female lead. Sure, it's a bland consistency. Sure, it's an always-expected consistency. But it's the consistency that makes her the lead's supporting character and, if you group the cast by gender, the lead female.

Kitana doesn't have that consistency. She DOES very actively aid the protagonist when the storyline at hand gives her the chance to, but that's it. That's why you've seen her as a prisoner (while Sonya maintained her consistency) and as a minor character (while Sonya maintained her consistency). This doesn't take away from the fact that Kitana IS a very important character. This importance is just not relevant when it comes to pinpointing a lead female, regardless of how 'high' or 'low it's been in the past.



Hm, I think I understand you. You're not a big fan of the princess story arc, but you still manage to see these hints of her undisputed importance within it despite your distaste for it.



This is one of the contradictions I've been trying to point out to you. If Kitana's creators regarded and regard her as the lead female, why are they giving you reasons to write this letter? That's not how a creator treats one of their leads. Kitana is important, sure, but obviously not important enough that the MK Team opts to spend the necessary time, attention and effort on her. They don't market her enough, they don't give her consistency with her vitality, they don't grant her worthy new looks and designs, they don't improve her gameplay enough - these are all things that, if Kitana were regarded as the lead female (not "a" lead female, but "the" lead female), she would've been given already! There's really no arguing against something like this.

It's as if I came to you and said "I love my dog, it's the best dog in the world!" then I kicked its ass right in front of you. Of course, this is an exaggeration, but a necessary one.



Well, who are we to judge who the MK Team finds important? This isn't DC's game, it's MK's. I was not at all surprised to see Catwoman as the first DC female. Keep in mind that, right now, Batman and Co. are way more marketable, and the targeted audience for this kind of video game wants Batman and his people, not Superman's or whomever else. A random person is much more likely to recognize and prefer one of Batman's characters than any other. Of course, a worthy side note: keep in mind that Superman HAS been in the media recently, and is an icon despite my dislike (lol), and THAT would be why he came with Subby and Scorp even if his buddies didn't.

Again, the MK Team selected the order of announced characters based on their view of importance. THAT's why Scorpion and Sub-Zero were the very first ones, THAT's why Batman and Superman came with them, and THAT's why Sonya was the first female and why Catwoman was the second. We could go into various little strategic decisions that were a part of this "marketing campaign", but I feel like this isn't a topic relevant enough for us to spend THAT much time on.



Well, now you just confused the crap out of me again! You've said a bunch of times how the MK Team always meant for Kitana for be the main heroine, in fact I'm pretty sure this is what gave life to this discussion! Now you're telling me their intentions don't matter, and you also state that you don't think they ever meant for her to be the main heroine...

I'm veeery puzzled on this one... is this how you really think, or should I still give importance to your last and especially first few posts? 'Cuz if this is how you actually think, I don't see a reason for this discussion to live.



Fighting Quan wasn't the only thing she did in the story but, as I see it, it was the highlight, the only thing intriguing enough to the point where you'd want to draw a huge conclusion from it.

As for the UMK3 and Sindel thing: the logic that applies to the convenience of MKDA doesn't apply to UMK3 and her mamma. Kitana already came into the MK Universe before Sindel did. Sure, Sindel was the catalyst for Kitana's awesome transition, but the fact is that Sindel came in as sort of a "follow-up", after Kitana. In MKDA, it's a very different situation, there's not even possibility for a comparison. Kitana's relationship with Liu Kang had been established before, as had Kung Lao's. Therefore, his death was the reason for their fights with the bosses. I've always seen this as common knowledge, I mean, it's a recurring theme on plenty of movies, TV shows, etc.

All I can really do here is show you the "why". Like I said before, I can't nor do I have the right to stupidly enough try and dissuade you from disliking a character. I think it's your intense and "where-the-fuck-did-that-come-from" dislike for Sonya that motivates you to draw these out-there conclusions from otherwise simple story elements, and I'm never gonna go as far as trying to debate against THAT.



But you just said how this is all because the MK Team MEANT to show Kitana as the main heroine! What the heck...



Well, I think it's unfair for you to say I questioned her prominence. I never did that. I said and continue to say that Kitana IS a prominent character, even if not consistently (I look at the bigger picture). What I question is your assumption that her prominence is superior to Sonya's and many others' to the point where she has an indisputable title within the franchise.




Call me overconfident, but I seriously believe that the basis and reasons I've presented to you so far are extremely valid because facts support them (I.E.: Kitana's diminished vitality in the years after MK3). I think they transcend the realm of "opinions" for that very reason, into something much more concrete that I think you should give more credit to.



And like I said before, this is something that I think backfires on you, because it gives other people the impression that your opinions are based on your personal, unreasonably-intense hatred for a character, rather than based on facts or solid grounds.

I've been making my points nonstop throughout these posts, but never once did I show hatred for Kitana or attack her. This shows that I have nothing against the girl, and so, hate for Kitana isn't a motivation for me. The opposite is true for you, as you yourself admit to having a weird hate for the character.

Dislike for a character is understandable. I dislike Mokap and Meat for obvious reasons. HATE isn't acquired as easily. More reason why I find myself having a very hard time being receptive to your perspectives.



I said your hate for Liu is a consequential dislike (or consequential hate, I guess I should say). I'm basically stating that I believe you hate Liu Kang because you love Kitana, and he takes away from her. I get the additional impression that your hate for Sonya is very similar.



I disagree with you, obviously. And the MK Team disagrees with you, too, because Liu and Johnny have returned and Sonya never went anywhere. The thing here is that you evidently WISH that the MK Team would drop them, especially Sonya, and embrace Kitana and whomever else you perceive as a "worthy new face" or "worthy identity" of the series. You wish the MK Team would stop marketing Sonya, stop using Sonya, stop working on Sonya, and devote all that to someone who you think is worthier but isn't getting the same treatment. So yeah, this whole section here is your own thing.



How can you say she was not advertised any more or any less than any other character? She's almost as overused as Scorpion and Sub-Zero! Can you say the same thing for freaking Tanya (I like Tanya though ) or Baraka or even Reptile? This is a big no-no.

Well, you say you've never seen her presented as a major figure, and this is, of course, your opinion and your choice of perspective, something I got no business debating.

Like I said, though, what is playing in Sonya's favor here is her consistency. She may not have had big impacts on the main storylines like Sub-Zero or Liu Kang have had, but she consistently returns and consistently fulfills her role as active support for the protagonist and, logically, given her gender, the role of lead female which, again, is only something to be taken into account if you care to break apart the roster by gender, so it's not like this is some life-altering thing.

As for the movies and TV shows, she played the same role as in the games. She was the girl with personal goals and story, but whose role ultimately supported that of Liu Kang, the protagonist, and thus, she was the lead female, a big one. In the games, she has her own things going on, but ultimately, he role supports that of the protagonist, Liu in the past, Raiden in recent games. Just because she actually speaks and acts in live action on TV doesn't mean it's a parallel universe.

Furthermore, remember that Boon has involvement in the pre-production stage of MK's media. Sure, they took liberties (especially in Annihilation), but demeriting a character's importance in the franchise is something that didn't happen. Liu was always the main hero, Shao Khan and Shang Tsung were the big villains, Raiden was the powerful mentor and warrior, and of course, Sonya was there looking good and helping with the ass-kicking. Why didn't Boon go: "Get Sonya out of there! It's Kitana who should be doing this stuff! Put Sonya to go after Kano and nothing more!"



Nothing further to add. I'm moving across the country by myself in January and, guess what, until then, all I do is sit around at home and go out on weekends. I'll take any hobby that comes my way.

You share XD's view of what a "lead", or rather, a supporting lead has to represent. Read my post if you've got a couple minutes.




Just because a sequel isn't planned for a story doesn't mean that story should be flat and tasteless. Every story needs heroes, villains, and supporting characters. Liu + Sonya + Johnny, Tsung, and remainder, respectively.

And I don't know where you got those statistics from, so I'm not gonna talk about them (I, at least, never heard of something like that). I think Sonya was a necessary casualty for MKII'2 storyline, she was the bait for the second tournament. And we all know Kano had no potential for life without Sonya, so, yeah.




Sonya isn't the main character, but she's always been A main character. Again, you seem to share XD's view of what a main character needs or doesn't need to have, so it drives you to think this way. Like I said before, I'm not gonna go so far as to try and debate opinions, that's just unfair and unnecessary.

Dude, Goro's death was one of the most important plot points of MKDA and that was part of Kitana's story. A big part. You are totally underestimating the importance not just of Kitana in Deadly Alliance, but of Deadly Alliance's importance in general to the MK mythos. It was, perhaps, the single most important game, storywise, of them all. It made everything that came before it richer and more detailed AND it set up everything that happened afterward in Deception and Armageddon. MKDA was the Keystone game.

And what did Sonya spend it doing? Failing to rescue Cyrax and Kenshi, and getting killed by nameless Tarkatan foot soldiers.

I don't underestimate Kitana's or MKDA's importance, because if you ask me, there IS no importance as huge as you think there is. Every installment is a set-up for future ones, that doesn't make MKDA any more impressive. In fact, I don't think MKDA's storyline was at all impressive for the very reason I stated two posts ago; the writers went to Raiden, Kitana, Sonya, Jax, Johnny, and Sub and said "you're the good guys!" They went to Quan Chi and Tsung and Co. and said "you're the bad guys!" Then they said "Fight!" and MKDA happened. It was two big groups going to battle. Nothing intricate, nothing mesmerizing enough to make MKDA this "OMG!" game that you perceive it as.

As for the Tarkatan thing, how is that a point against her? Read my last posts, see my points about Liu Kang's death, and you'll see where I'm coming from.

So what we have here is a disagreement on the fundamental level of what makes something "important".

Well...I can't argue someone into changing their whole point of view of the world any more than you can. In the event of a stalemate where further discussion accomplishes nothing for either side...what do you propose we do? End the topic and walk away, never to speak with each other on the subject of the Mortal Kombat Storyline again? Somehow, I don't think either of us could stay committed to that decision.

Uumm... lol I don't know, your choice. I'm up for whatever. Like I said, still a whole month to go with nothing important to do

I didn't say you didn't contribute an opinion. I said you didn't contribute anything to the discussion.



None of us are posting treatises on the subject. We're discussing our favorite characters and their future storyline development. I don't traipse into a gameplay topic and mock people for wasting time on button combinations when there's a story to be read. Not all people derive the same enjoyment from the same things. Get used to it, and for the love of God don't troll in a topic just to be an ass.




That's just not true. You didn't write a factual statement. I'm sorry.



This is all a matter of a difference in defining "intellectual discussion." I'm not claiming what we do here is worthy of being classified as "academia." For me, intellectual discussion on a video game forum involves polite discourse on a semi-controversial and arguable topic that doesn't dissipate into name-calling or petty, shallow comments about a character's headgear or arm-band color. I think we do it well, and we've had interesting exchanges.

I didn't get upset at your comments. They made me chuckle, and I enjoy chuckling. And if you truly don't understand why we're having this discussion in the first place, why on earth would you bother to bash this topic? We're not going to convince you; you'll still mock the topic, and you will have achieved nothing. What is the point to anything we do? I'm not invading a favorite topic of yours and remarking that you could be spending your time doing better things. Give us the same courtesy.

Just addressing the points that seem specifically aimed at me. Firstly, about sex in Mortal Kombat: The point you made seems very weird, but maybe it's just me. Basically no sex in Mortal Kombat unless *list of ways sex could be used in Mortal Kombat*. I'm not saying I agree with your list (because I don't), but I don't see why you're disagreeing with my point that sex could be used a lot more effectively than it has. Especially considering the designs they are using for their female characters.

Now onto Sindel:

Look, anyone can write anything about anyone or anything. I HATE censorship on an adult level, and I hate the way it is currently carried out relating to young ages. I'm a writer myself, and pride myself on how to use the creative side of my brain. That being said, let me be logical for a second. As I have gone on in my training and research as a writer, I am learning that applying rules and logic to writing, and following a structure that may appear "restricting" or "censoring" provides a writer with something molded and structured.

Meat could become the main villain of the next game. Fuck, he could be the main hero. Let's make that happen, all it would take is some imagination! No. Especially when you consider that a writer's imagination will often be more expansive than that of the average consumer.

Of course Sindel could be brought back and turned into something interesting. I touched on some of those possibilities myself (well, at least I think I did), but let's take the one you threw out there: Sindel avenging the death of her daughter at the hands of her daughter's clone. Yes, the feelings of a mother having to deal with the loss of her daughter well before her time would emotionally charge and carry the storyline, but what you are doing is scrapping the Kitana character to feed Sindel. As I asked QueenSindel (a great poster, by the way), is it worth putting Sindel in the story over Kitana? Sindel's character could be revived with that, and given 40 points, but if you are trading in 65 that Kitana is already worth, you're not really breaking even.

As I said, I'm not good with this forum layout, so I can't quote Keith in this edit, but I kept reading and saw something he said about Sindel being the one to destroy Shao Kahn because she is the closest to him and lost everything because of him. In response I have to say: Sindel and Shao Kahn probably didn't have a health marriage.

Seriously, though, Sindel offed herself from her original mortal life, didn't she? It makes her a tragic character, but she took the way out. I think a good person she'd serve is being a contrast to Kitana, who fought and fought against Shao Kahn.

Some points about Kitana now:

In the story, she is the main female character. I'm sorry, but I just cannot see any other female with nearly as much importance. She also has the distinct look people associate with the MK franchise. Sonya was the first female of Mortal Kombat, and definitely iconic. Her story just isn't as important, though. She has, however, been in one or two more games, but she did also get a head start.

That being said, she is reportedly one of Boon's favourites, so you can be sure that she remains a constant in the series (well, it seems likely, anyway). Sonya's character perhaps even needs more of an overhaul than Kitana's, though.

While I've switched gears to the importance of characters, let me say this: Leo, I don't mean to say this in an offensive way, but your argument pertaining to Sonya being the third announced for MK vs. DC makes her more important than Kitana is ridiculous. Sonya and Kano were the first two characters announced for MK3. Was Sonya the main character of that game? Surely that means Kano was the most important figure in that installment? You do not know for a fact that the MK Team released characters in terms of importance. It was probably done for convenience, and to keep appetites wet (why the announcement of Wonder Woman took so long).

Your point pertaining to the Batman characters being announced first is silly. Of course Batman has been in the news, but Catwoman hasn't been a part of that. The Joker would have made sense if they were riding The Dark Knight's fame. So would a less cartoony Batman. Wonder Woman is the third DC character, that's pretty much all there is to it. The order of the characters being released makes very little sense in terms of ranking it by importance.

Also, you really missed a lot of XD's points. Again, I'm not trying to assault you, just trying to clear things up. Xia never did say that the MK Team intended Kitana to be the main heroine. What he said was that the complete Kitana package (the look, the story, the charisma, the twin, the moves, the gameplay, and even her role in the movie) all added up to something that was probably more special than what the MK Team intended. Rolling with that punch would have been smart, and they sort of did, by giving her the role of main heroine, and making her struggle as Princess of Edenia so crucial to MK4 and MKDA. Now they're just like "we can't be fucked." That's not right. I don't feel like they "owe" the character anything, but I think it is wasted potential and a step backwards, which is never a wise thing unless you are standing on the edge of a cliff.

Nor has Xia been saying that Kitana being the main heroine is so important. What he's been saying is that as MK's most important female, the contradictory writing for her character could potentially ruin her. That's what I've taken from him, though.

Throwing my two cents in on the Kitana/Quan Chi/MKDA issue: I don't get the whole "she was avenging Liu Kang's death" defense for her not being the main female. Hello, the death of Liu Kang was her motivation to become the main heroine. If Kung Lao and Kitana were not the main protagonists for that game, then I'd love to know who was.

If an action movie, who is the protagonist? It surely can't be the guy who has his family murdered at the start because he HAS to get revenge because his family was murdered, you know? Maybe it was his dead wife who had two lines in the movie? Yeah, that might be it...

I really don't see people's point there. The only thing to it is that Kitana didn't succeed in her goal. David might have been trying to save Goliath. I just realised how cool a feud between Kitana and Scorpion in MKD would have been if Kitana had killed Quan Chi before Scorpion had a chance to. Just a random though.

Also, MKDA is a very important game. Probably the keystone game, as Razor said. Just because you don't like the story, doesn't mean it doesn't fill that role. It bridges everything before it with everything after it. It connects Shang Tsung through to Blaze. It is the inciting incident that brings Onaga back, which sets pretty much everything into motion. Onaga returns, Raiden goes evil, Liu Kang won't stay dead, Armageddon happens so this shit can end. It's very easy to see MK1, MK2 and MK3 as its own arc in comparison to MK4, MK5 and MK6, but MK5 (Deadly Alliance) really does connect the world of 1, 2 and 3 with the world of 4, 5 and 6.

Uh, I think so that maybe Ermac could be the new hero because he has very nice outfit and he's made of lots of souls which means he's probably a very nice man who could save all the good people from the bad people with the power of his souls that he is made of because he does not like it when Shao Kahn or Shang Tsung use his souls for evil because they can control souls which is not a nice thing to do to be controlling Ermac who does not want to be controlled but cannot fight it because they are sorcerers who control souls for evil because they hate Raiden and the Earth and want to rule it and merge it with Outworld which is where Ermac is from I think but maybe because he's made of lots of souls he is actually from all the realms so he could fight for Earth or Edenia or Vaerternus or Seido or any of the realms that he might like to save because they are good and not evil like Outworld and Shao Kahn who Ermac would have to beat to become the new Mortal Kombat champion and to get a nice medal from Raiden and be like the new Liu Kang only he is the friend of Liu Kang so maybe he would leave it on Liu Kang's grave as a tribute to him because he helped him when Liu Kang was a spirit looking for his zombie body and he had to help the heroes who got killed by Shang Tsung and Quan Chi who killed a bunch of guys and then Onaga resurrected them but it was okay because that meant that even though they were slaves to Onaga they were alive and when Ermac helped Liu Kang he freed them which is just more proof that he could be a very good hero I like that song that was on Deadly Alliance called Immortal about a leader of lost souls because I think that could be a musical way to describe Ermac who both is lost souls but by becoming a singular persona called Ermac could lead and protect the lost souls which would not necessarily be a function of being the Mortal Kombat champion in which case could provide a good reason for him to remain as a secondary character because it's nice that he could technically be immortal and he could keep absorbing lost souls to give them purpose as part of Ermac which means he is one of the characters who could be around forever even though at any moment he could be controlled by someone like Shang Tsung or Shao Kahn which is sort of a little bit tragic and maybe something he is aware of which is why he stays a little bit hidden and tries to make the most of every day because he knows that it could all be taken from him again and he would be a puppet to evil and he does not like that thought which is nice pathos which I like and also it is a good motivation in the sense that he probably does not want that to happen to other souls even if he is not singularly aware of the wrongs committed to each person that makes up his legion-self but he would want to defeat men like Shang Tsung and Shao Kahn to stop them from ever displacing souls like that again and would also want to help the souls that for some reason could not pass to the next life either netherealm or heaven which are maybe places he could be able to visit although I wonder if maybe if he went to heaven he would not be able to escape because his souls would get trapped there and it might make it hard for him to reform and leave because they might become part of the ether or whatever happens to you in heaven I'm not really sure but I guess that would sort of be a nice ending to him but a bit of a waste of a really good character who might not be able to pass on anyway and maybe his strength and will would keep him on Outworld or Earth anyway because he really wants to help and atone for any crimes Shao Kahn made him do even though just by fighting he runs the risk of being recaptured and used by someone like Shang Tsung as a living battery that he could feed off of indefinitely and be used as a crude communication device.

Ermac is good. I am a writer.


In a final act of self-sacrifice Ermac expands to become a sentient realm that uses it's soul power to tempt Outworld into voluntary merging by offering everyone their deepest desires -- AND THEN DESTROYS THEM!



Ermacrealm wins! Unreality!

My god...it's full of stars.

Importance? I fail to see how a character with such inconsistency story-wise as Kitana can manage to have all this amazing importance. You obviously don't think that the fact that Kitana has been taken prisoner, put in the background, and portrayed as a minor character hurts the god-like image you're trying to give her, but I see things differently. I give a lot of importance to the fact that the MK Team does not treat Kitana like a main heroine. You don't, and choose to give importance only to assumptions drawn from a couple positive events that pale in comparison to the countless examples of Kitana being disregarded by her very creators.

I don't know if you read through my posts or just replied to random points, but I'll repeat this one thing: the importance of Sonya's storylines is debatable and unimportant, what needs to be looked at is consistency, which Kitana lacks. This 'main female' role isn't as complex as you're trying to make it. You don't need to be an intricate character, or have amazing storylines, or be responsible for impressive twists and events (all of which Kitana has also lacked through her inconsistency). What you NEED to be in order to be considered 'main female' is 1) be a female and 2) have a role in the story that supports the MALE lead.



Look, I don't mind anyone disagreeing with me and wanting to discuss or debate, but could you go ahead and address all of my points if you're gonna go for it? It's so annoying having to repeat myself and re-post the same thing over and over again because it's being ignored. If you're gonna reply to me, reply to everything I said, not just partially and not generally. Please. Using a "Kitana is more important" statement against the barrage of contrary points I took the time to make is just insulting.



I don't see anyone complaining about Sonya. Everyone's perfectly happy with what they're doing for her. They gave her a great new look, great new gameplay, and portrayed her amazingly well with the prominence she is worthy of. So, no.



Why do you honestly think Sonya and Kano were the first announced for MK3? Isn't it obvious? They were the ones who were absent during MKII, and the MK Team was basically saying "don't worry, they're back". Furthermore, there's nothing that should make you believe they ALWAYS announce characters in terms of importance, especially when there's always additional factors that influence that decision. In MKDC, though, it was the perfect chance for them to line characters up through importance. I mean, they were pitting MK's Top Vs. DC's top. It was the first MK game on PS3, and everyone desperately wanted to know who was chosen to be a part of it, to represent the franchise. If there was ever a game where they would announce characters in terms of importance from a strategic and marketing point of view, this is it.

Saying it was done for convenience borders on denial, especially when Sub and Scorp and Batman and Superman were the very first. Feel free to maintain this perspective, but to me, it just sounds way too far-fetched.



MK isn't a sausage fest. Again, from a strategic standpoint, Catwoman was a correct choice because Sonya had just been announced as the (then) only woman in a pool of men. It's not all "Dark Knight" this or "WW is more important" that, like I said, there's factors that influence everything related to marketing, and it seems like you're not picking up on it.

And besides, it isn't like I used the MKDC sequential line-up as my one and only basis. Again, I don't mind discussing things or even debating them, but take the time to read everything and address everything. I'm not writing all these things for them to be ignored in favor of a general statement.



As did you, which prompted me to say what I just said. And as did XD, which prompted me to say to him the same thing I said to you. I don't think it's right for you to point a finger at me when I actually have taken the time to read everything you guys have said and addressed everything accordingly. Anyway...



XD said the MK Team made Kitana into the main heroine through everything they did for her. This of course, contradicts, STRONGLY contradicts the fact that the MK Team has done very little for Kitana except for MK3. That's where we are right now.

I do think the overall Kitana package adds up to something special, maybe something the MK Team should spend more time on. But again, as I've said a bunch of times, I don't see how the MK Team "made" Kitana into the main heroine when they've continuously failed to put forth for Kitana the necessary effort that a "main heroine" requires. And again, I don't see a girl who got taken prisoner while the protagonists fought, who was recently portrayed as a minor character, and who has never received any impressive redesign as a main heroine, even if this same girl DID have high points (very inconsistent high points) in her career as an MK character. Furthermore, Kitana contributed nothing to MK4, because I don't count the fact that she's Edenian as any sort of catalyst for that storyline. And her struggle for Edenia did nothing for MKDA as I recall for it. She was an active heroine because she joined up with the Earth fighters, not because she struggles for Edenia.

As for Kitana having wasted potential, I think I agree with it even if the potential and importance I see in her doesn't reach as high as in your case.



Once again, you seem to not have read my past posts in their entirety. Kitana as the most important female is not fact, it's you and XD's opinions, and again, they're opinions the MK Team clearly doesn't share, why, because they don't give her the necessary effort a main heroine or most important character in her group deserves. I'm going in a loop here, are you serious! You admit yourself that the writing for Kitana and the decisions for Kitana contradict her as the main heroine, yet you continue to insist upon the fact that she undeniably is! And honestly, with all due respect, this is something nobody has directly shed light on, only danced around.



First of all, I never said she was avenging Liu Kang's death. I said it was only right for her to have a fight with one of the bosses because she was one of the (probably THE) character who most suffered as a result of his death. Again, it's a common theme in the fiction media, it's only predictable that it appears in MK's storylines.

Liu Kang's death is her motivation to become the main heroine? What happened to "Kitana IS the main heroine of MK"? Liu Kang's death was something for MKDA only, not any other game. If you wanna argue that Kitana was the female lead in MKDA, I think we can reach some sort of agreement, but again, nothing that's been said so far has convinced me to believe this out-there assumption that she was and always will be the main heroine of the franchise as a whole.



I honestly didn't understand this. Kitana versus Scorpion? Wha...



Well it's my turn to say I don't mean to sound rude or offend you, but saying MKDA "connects all of the MKs together" seems like one of the most out-there, random assumptions anyone's ever made, maybe even more out-there than saying it makes Kitana the main heroine.

You listed a bunch of events that happened after MKDA, but this list fails to even remotely prove how MKDA is the most important of all games and brings every MK together. That's like me saying MK2 is the keystone game because Shao Khan becomes the lead villain, Sindel comes to MK, and the Earth is invaded. You'd go "??? What???"

Once again: if you'd like to reply to anything I've said here or in the past two pages, pleeeeeaase, for all that is holy, address everything I've said, don't just pick your favorite points or the points that you can more easily debate! I don't take the time to make all these points and responses just for them to be ignored and thrown away through a "that's your opinion" or "no, you're wrong" kind of statement. It's insulting to have that happened, and the most annoying thing in the world to have to repeat myself and quote myself constantly. Thank you.

Hoo-boy, I don't even know where to start with that wall of text...which apparently we absolutely must address every single bit of, point-by-point, or else.
Y'know what? I don't think I will. I'm done.
Good luck to the rest of you, but trying to explain to Leo that his interpretations are wrong strikes me as a hopeless endeavor without reward.

Why are we getting bitter here? That's not a trait a good debater has, buddy. If you're angry that this discussion isn't going the way you want it, keep it to yourself, no reason to reply bitterly to me. And nobody's "trying to explain to me why my interpretations are wrong". What I've seen is people trying to show me why their assumptions should be considered fact, but at the same time, failed to show me why I should not regard these assumptions as borderline absurd due to their weak basis.

"We" are getting bitter because when I see a post a mile long and every single thing in it is wrong, imagining just how much work it would take to correct your backwards thoughts makes me cry on the inside. Fair enough?

No, not at all. The problem is that you're seeing a post that is long, and you don't like to read long posts unless they agree with your point of view and support what you say. You're taking the easy way out of this discussion, and it shows you should've never taken part of it. I would've respected you more if you'd stuck to your last post where you said 'we're at a stalemate'. But no, you had to come back and make a bitter post showing your anger. Sad, it was good in the beginning.

And you're damn right I'm asking people to reply to every point I make! What, people wanna debate and discuss, but only if it's against someone who writes one short paragraph that can easily be destroyed? Sorry, buddy, but I'm very good at expressing my thoughts, and if you or anyone else wants to have a discussion with me, you better get used to that AND the fact that I want all the points I make addressed. If you have bitterness in place of patience, then again, you should've stuck to your post up there, which was a respectable way to ending the discussion. Good riddance, can't say it was very worthwhile.

I'm taking the easy way out of discussing things with YOU. I'll still be a part of this discussion when I disagree with anyone else, just like I was before you entered the topic, but you clearly don't live in the same reality as the rest of us, so I'm done with you in specific.

You think Kitana is portrayed "inconsistently"? Sure, in Shaolin Monks and MKvsDC, neither of which are even canon. The REAL Kitana, from MK2 to Deception Unchained, is depicted properly the whole way through. If you can't see that after the argument's gone on for THIS damn long, I can't fix you.

You think MKDA isn't the most important game in the series plot-wise? That's the world you live in, not the world the rest of us live in. I can't fix that either.

I'd accomplish more trying to argue what the color red looks like to a blind man. So that's it. I'm done. You can believe whatever you want, it won't make it true.

One thing is certain - none of the "writers" in the thread are editors. THE PAIN! I mean, you don't get this kind of crap from Johnny Cage fans!

Why do you say you're not gonna continue the discussion yet you keep throwing replies to my posts at my face?

First of all, "the rest of us" = You and about 2 other people. If you haven't noticed, the world as a whole isn't a hardcore Kitana fan, and Kitana's fans aren't all composed of obsessed human beings who think that everyone seeing Kitana as they do is the most important thing in the Earth. Why can't all big fans be like WarriorPrincess, the only person who has stated her opinions and let that be it instead of trying to jam other things down people's throats? Well, not just her, but 90% of the other people who posted in this thread, she just came into mind.

Anyway, I'm not gonna spend time quoting myself again, which is what I'd need to do to reply to your two little "points" (which I've already addressed at least thrice this page alone).

If you don't wanna read long posts that crush your hopes and dreams of a fairy-tale land where everyone thinks like you, then please, turn your back and walk at least a hundred miles away from me and my posts, or guess what, you're gonna keep getting bitch-smacked with this type of response.

Dude, I like you as a poster. You obviously have the spirit of a debater...it just doesn't add up for you. Trust me, Razor does not have problems reading long posts. I've had some very healthy debates with him in other topics. Very smart guy, and passionate about arguing his viewpoints. That being said, I understand where he comes from.

I'm a little offended you assumed I didn't read everything you typed. I'm sorry, but I did, and I disagree. You can talk about consistency being the most important hing in a main female character all you want, but it doesn't make you right. If you want to talk about females supporting male leads -- hello, Kitana is fucking banging Liu Kang (to put it crudely and to read between the lines a little). Sonya is not always at Liu Kang's side, either. I don't know where people got that from. She pretty much has her own thing going on. In MK1, she was hunting Kano. In MK2, she was prisoner (wow, she was taken prisoner, no way she can be he heroine now, right?). In MK3, the alliance with Liu Kang and co. started. She threw Kano off a building and then who knows what. In MK4 she was hunting Jarek.

Kitana's objectives in the story have been her own, but they make good companions for Liu Kang's. Much better than Sonya's, anyway. If Liu Kang is the "male lead" (which he is), then Kitana is the closest female to him.

Also, you've left me totally confused with your announcing of characters points. You're all over the place. Of course the reason Sonya and Kano were announced first was because it was a random "they're back!" thing. That's my fucking point -- get your own. How can you say that Sonya being announced third means that she's more important than someone else, if being announced first means jack and shit? Also, get acquainted with Occam's Razor. It's a pretty cool concept. The simplest explanation is often the most likely. If you think convenience is delusional in a series where they actually created new characters by changing the colour of their costume, you are the one that is delusional. If you cannot understand why Sub-Zero, Scorpion, Batman and Superman were the first four characters announced for MK vs. DC, and can't appreciate why the other characters were released as randomly as they were, I can't help you anymore.

"It was the perfect time to reveal characters in terms of importance?" If you hear hooves, think horsey; not zebra. You don't think they might have left some big surprises to the end? You know, so people didn't get bored with the reveals?

And back to Kitana: Look, I've explained it. Kitana became close to Liu Kang, had a more important plot than Sonya, and now runs her own realm in the story. If you cannot see how that gives her higher dramatic stakes than an army girl, I can't help you. And I don't dislike Sonya. I'm just saying, this is getting tiring. Yes, Sonya is consistent. It's because she was the first female of MK, I'm willing to bet. That would make perfect logical sense, and is probably why Boon hasn't given her much of a break yet.

Xia has explained that the reason for his letter is because MK is treating one of their main heroines wrong. I don't understand your delusion that a gaming company cannot treat their main characters wrong. I just don't see it. It can happen, and it is happening in front of us, which is why a lot of people aren't happy with her right now. We have both explained that Kitana's increased stakes in the story is the reason she has become so important, and you misunderstood what I meant when I replied to you and said that Kitana being Quan Chi's presumed opponent in the finale of Deadly Alliance is because she is the main character, with the death of Liu Kang fueling that.

You cannot explain her involvement in MK:DA by saying "Well, of course she would fight Quan Chi, he killed the main character" without accepting that this, in turn, builds on the dramatic investment in the Kitana character. I have to think of a way to make it more obvious, but I don't know if I can do better than the action hero analogy.

Also, if you think my keystone assessment of MK:DA is random, you have a lot to learn. First, do you know what a keystone is? It's OK if you don't, just admit it. We all have to learn something initially. If you did, I think you'd know that MK3 does not equate to anything new a keystone for the series. Especially with the points you mention, such as Earth being invaded and Sindel coming back.

Guys, I hate to say it, but the discussion started out well and has gotten to a point where we've all hit a big brick wall. In fact, it isn't even a discussion anymore as much as it is three people who share a perspective teaming up to shove said perspective down the throat of someone who thinks differently but, unfortunately, is the only one "of his kind" with enough free time and disposition to post. When it was me and XD trading ideas, it was good. When it's me having to deal with bitterness, and having to see myself inadvertently fueling the growing hostility, then it's time for me to realize how dumb it would be to keep going.

I'm gonna say what I have to say at this point, with the exception that I'll try to word it in a way that won't incite the three of you to continue what is turning into a tag-team handicapped match rather than a discussion, where I write a big-ass essay every 3 hours and each of you write a smaller one every 2 days or so. I may have a lot of free time this month, but that doesn't make me stupid.

You-Know-Who, the thing that differentiates us is clearly what we give importance to. When it comes down to it, no one here made anything up or told any lies. We all used facts to support our viewpoints, even if indirectly or exaggeratedly. I think it's clear, however, that the facts and arguments you used are the facts and arguments you give the most importance to, and believe to matter the most - and of course, they favor your perspective. The same can be applied to me. I use my facts and arguments because I believe them to be the most important, the most influential, and they just so happen to favor MY perspective. That's why you (and your 2 back-ups) are so certain you're right and I'm wrong and delusional, and that's why I'm so certain that I'm right and you guys are making absurd and convenient assumptions.

We keep this going, and you know what's gonna happen? You're gonna make dozens of posts talking about why your choice of arguments hold the most vitality where I, in turn, will shoot a bunch of rebuttals your way talking about why my arguments deserve the credibility we're arguing about. You and your support team are gonna keep talking about Quan Chi fights, sex with Liu Kang, and random storyline events, all of which I'll set out again to debunk with my talks of consistency versus inconsistency, the bigger picture versus smaller details, and tidbits about character announcements and marketing. In most cases, I would still keep going with the discussion, and I would keep trying to reach a common ground before my hopes for any sort of agreement fade. In this case, however, with 3 people growing increasingly bitter and bothered by said situation and me having to deal with it, it's just stupid for me to insist (notice that anyone who shares my view has long left this thread. Smart them).

That's what I'm thinking right now. Let's face it: you're not gonna get me to buy that Kitana is the main heroine because she fucks Liu Kang, or has high stakes in the story, or what-have-you. Why do I know that? Because XD has tried the same thing for about 3 pages and here I stand not one bit convinced for the reasons stated above. Similarly, I'm not gonna manage to convince you that consistency is an important factor and favors Sonya, or that the amount of attention a creator spends on his creation says a lot, or anything else I've mentioned. Why do I know that? Because I'm finding myself repeating the same points continuously, and even quoting my pasts posts to respond to yours and Co.

To be honest with you, I started replying to your post before I wrote this one. I started to give life to another monster that would, in the end, turn into wasted effort. Wanna know what made me change my mind about my post? I'll tell you. It was the very moment where I hit my browser's BACK button in order to quote myself again as a response to one of the same points you brought up for a second time. Like I said, I'm enticed to keep going with the discussion for at least a little bit more despite our continuous disagreement, but the fact stands that you guys's hostility is spreading (going from XD's out-of-nowhere and entirely suspicious hate for Sonya, to RazorsEdge and his childish dislike that I won't agree with him, to you and your usual level-headed personality that I see is wearing thin and will soon turn into a RazorsEdge Strikes Again sequel.

Here's something that's probably not relevant but is still interesting: I've been trading PMs with a big Kitana fan who posted in this thread but (like the other lucky people) left, and our discussion lasted about 2 PMs before we reached common ground and started talking about something else. I'm sorry, but this says a lot to me: it says that there can be a big difference in Sonya/Kitana discussions depending on who you're having the discussion with. I'm not going any further into this point because, again, I'm trying to write a post that won't fuel the little flicker of flames.

So that's basically it, You-Know-Who. Hopefully you and the support team are smart enough to agree at least with THIS post. I hope you'll also see the same brick wall that I'm seeing, and also realize as I do that, while this brick wall can easily be broken and the discussion extended, what lies on the other side of the wall is too ugly to bother with for obvious reasons.

I will say this though: I don't take well to hostility, and I will continue not to. I'm not going to single out anyone anymore, but I'll just make a note that I will gladly respond to any hostility hereby directed at me with even bigger and badder hostility. Trust me, I'm very good at it. I'm writing this sensible and, honestly, very truthful post in hopes of avoiding exactly that: a trade of hostility. Hopefully the three of you see that (maybe not XD since he hasn't shown hostility TOWARD me, per say), and will do the same thing I'm doing, knowing that I won't think twice about turning nasty. I avoid starting wars, but I sure have fun ending them. Call it immaturity if you label it as such.

Leo, I'm sorry you sensed hostility. I probably did come off as a bit bitter, but if you can appreciate that the three of us (who aren't a team, mind you -- we're just three guys who share the viewpoint that Kitana is more crucial to the story than Sonya, who often disagree about a lot of other things) have been rebutted in a straw-man fashion, and then we're expected to respond to something that missed our original point in the first place, it gets a bit tedious.

This is my favourite thread on MKO right now, and I'd hate to see the discussion end, but when two sides are stubborn for no good reason at all, then I don't know what to do. If you feel like discussing the issue still, I've got a few questions you can answer:

1) Why is consistency relevant? Why does that trump story importance?

2) I don't actually know myself, but which character has been marketed more over the years -- Kitana or Sonya? I mean with statistics to back this sort of thing up, if they are out there. I've always thought Kitana more marketed, because she is the more identifiable of the two (Sonya changes her look every few games, and if you saw a poster of her, she'd need to be accompanied by the MK logo for you to know it was her).

3) What exactly do you mean by the attention a "creator spends on his creation?" How does this favour Sonya over Kitana? Sure, Sonya gets a new model every game, but her costume is very flexible. She wears regular clothes, it's easy to change up. Kitana wears a marketed theme. Kitana obviously gets more attention in the story; I just want to see exactly what you mean and how that favours Sonya.

So much cat-litter in the form of words. You people should really try to not to make your paragraphs of merry-go-rounds. State the idea and be done with it!

I knew this would turn into a Sonya Vs Kitana thread. These kind of threads never work, and Kitana has fuck-all to do with Sonya's plot so can't there be a discussion on Kitana without dragging Sonya into it?

Why do these Sonya freaks have to intrude a strict KITANA discussion to shove the blonde loser down everybody's throat? Why does she have to steal the discussion of another character? When will people learn where to stop?