Sure. But 'I beat Saitama' is not a power Cell has. And 'my character has the power to beat every character that automatically beat everyone that automatically wins crossover fights' is the kind of character concept that reveals the absurdity of the exercise. If you're resorting to that, one hopes you're not expecting to be taken seriously, because you sure as hell as don't deserve to be.
There's basically no reason to even use Saitama if you're going to ignore his central concept.
![]()
This ain't Death Battle. Not everyone cares about meticulously calculating the size and weight of the mountain that Goku destroyed in panel six of issue 57.
edited 4th Mar '17 7:37:48 PM by TobiasDrake
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.My takeaway from this is that the properties of fictional universes are inherently incompatible with each other.
This song needs more love.But that's not even Saitama's character. He wasn't designed as "he beats any character across all mediums of fiction, end of discussion lul". And even if he were, the author's intent would mean nothing without the evidence to back it up.
Pretty sure that's not how fiction works, Saitama doesn't just get to do anything he wants to characters that could be nigh-omnipotent just because some people say he can......
He's absolutely not that concept.
It's not that simple. There are reasons why he can't beat certain characters, and those reasons are backed up with sound evidence.
Yeah, I'm not responding to anymore Saitama stuff after this. Have already said plenty enough.
edited 4th Mar '17 7:44:52 PM by hardcorefakes
![]()
Quite. Everyone's losing this argument, and will continue to do so until someone wins. But no one's ever going to win. So.
Here is the best lawyer in the world, who is also a pony.
◊ He won the argument. The rest of us lost.
We all good?
edited 4th Mar '17 7:45:10 PM by TobiasDrake
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.I literally explained, in detail, the core concept of Saitama on the last page but I guess that doesn't matter.
Let the joy of love give you an answer! Check out my book!Goku v. Superman already set a precedent for DB accepting the premise of a character being infinitely powerful. Swap out Supes for Saitama and most of the arguments they made about how he has no limits and is infinitely strong are basically the exact same.
edited 4th Mar '17 7:51:35 PM by TobiasDrake
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.Superman having no limits and being infinitely powerful was the logic they used in the first battle.
They just restated it in the second one. Their logic for Superman beating SSB Goku was, "Infinity still means f*cking infinity, you guys. It doesn't matter how strong Goku gets. Infinity wins. Always."
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.I feel like I'm going in a circle with this, but Superman isn't infinitely strong, and has been bested by the likes of Flash, Wonder Woman, Batman, Darkseid, etc, and none of the above characters are infinitely strong. He has established limits.
![]()
Yeah, their first video was the correct approach in that regard, but they went overboard on their second one, and were rightfully criticized for it.
Specifically, they are most criticized for using out of context feats and statements to ascribe Superman "infinite" strength, which any actual Superman fan with knowledge of his character and his abilities would question.
edited 4th Mar '17 8:11:14 PM by hardcorefakes
The point of 'feats' is to establish characters' limits, to show how strong these characters maximum's are. Saitama is a deconstruction of the typical idea of the 'literally invincible superhero', which partially makes him a gag character, even if his particular gag if often Played for Drama. Literally the very concept of Saitama's character is that he is the man who can defeat anyone, no matter how strong, in a single punch, and he's not particularly thrilled with that.
To ever have Saitama face someone he couldn't defeat in one punch (notice the wording there: I said couldn't, not doesn't, there's a couple enemies whom he hits once and they don't stay down, where it's made clear that he would wreck them in one punch if he held back just a tiny bit less) would be to completely destroy the point of the series and give Saitama what he wants in life: a challenge.
Until such time as Saitama is shown to have limits, he should be treated as if they don't exist, as is literally stated by multiple characters in his series.
I figure the fight with Boros is a decent template for how a fight with Cell would go, down to the enemy regenerating from attacks, big desperate transformed states that burn through stamina like crazy, and a final showdown against a full-power planet-destroying beam attack.
Boros is probably more in line with Freeza's power scale than Cell's, so the fight (while probably having the same outcome) would likely be closer to a challenge than the Boros fight.
I have a message from another time...

I'm not a Saitama fan. I just think that denying the fact that authors can go 'this character wins all crossover fights'- and then it's true because that's how fiction works- is intellectually dishonest at best. To react to a character that's absolutely that concept by going 'okay, but but he couldn't beat this character' to downright mockable, and absolutely a sign of this sort of thing way, way, way too seriously.
edited 4th Mar '17 7:29:48 PM by Gilphon