Definition of a Kharacter

M

MoonEye821

New member
There needs to be a clear understanding among fans of the difference between a Mortal Kombat Entity and a Mortal Kombat Kharacter.

Mortal Kombat Entity: Anything in a Mortal Kombat Video Game that has a presence in said Mortal Kombat Video Game.

Mortal Kombat Kharacter: Any Mortal Kombat Entity that is playable by the Human Player and was intended to be playable by the Human Player by said Video Game's Designers.

Basic Kharacter Definition: Anyone you can play as that you didn't have to hack into to with an outside tool such and GAMESHARK and the like to be able to play as.

Why it Matters: This matters greatly because there was great argument, and there seems to still be great misconception, about what a Mortal Kombat Kharacter is. I lost my honor in the Official Mortal Kombat Boards over arguing this issue vehemently and was banned for good. Mortal Kombat means a lot to me, and every Kharacter is important. To me it was a great dishonor when Midway considered dropping some Kharacters' inclusion into The Last Great Tournament. It was as if they had turned their back on a part of their past, a part of my past, a part of our past. And it hurt me too that so many people who considered themselves fans didn't care. I don't see how a fan couldn't care. A fan would stand by the Kharacters.

By definition, the only Kharacter that failed to be included was Khameleon. To be honest, we gained more Kharacters then than you might have guessed. I will explain the mechanics of the definition. Moloch became a Kharacter in Armageddon and not in Deadly Alliance. Meat was a Kharacter first in Mortal Kombat 4 and not Mortal Kombat Armageddon. Chameleon and Khameleon became Kharacters in Mortal Kombat Trilogy. Onaga became a Kharacter in Armageddon and not in Deception. Sareena became a Kharacter in Mortal Kombat Deadly Alliance Tournament Edition for the Game Boy Advance and not in Armageddon. Then, Goro, truly became a Kharacter in the Game Boy Version of Mortal Kombat One that did not have the Game Boy Version of Mortal Kombat Two combined with it; not in Mortal Kombat One for the Arcade or in Mortal Kombat Trilogy. The list could readily go on.

Now, as long as Midway keeps Chameleon too, the Nintendo Wii version of Midway's Mortal Kombat Armageddon will truly be the first Mortal Kombat to have every Kharacter, which was what was truly promised to us in the beginning. While regretting it was not true across the board, I know many fought for it to be, I am glad that one version of Armageddon can hopefully still actually keep the promise of what the game was supposed to be. Let us hope for the true completion of the Wii Armageddon.
 
Last edited:
I believe you are konfusing "kharacters" and "kombatants". What you have described has always been called a "kombatant". A "kharacter" is any person, creature, or thinking entity. The One Being I would konsider a kharacter. Masked Guards I would konsider a kharacter. Tremor, No Face, Tasia (I think that's her name), and Pyro I would konsider kharacters. But as far as kanonical MK games go every single "komabatant" is in MKA (as of the Wii version).

I would also like to slightly amend your definition that I previously called that of the "kombatant". A "kombatant" is anybody who has kompeted in a Mortal Kombat tournament. Meaning Onaga and Moloch are definitely included as of their first introduction. Now to klarify, Monster is NOT a Kombatant as he was only in a side mode known as Konquest. Konquest kharacters have not kompeted in a tournament and as such are not kombatants. So MKA can still say it includes all of the kombatants.
 
Actually, I do not fully disagree with you. For the most part, your Kharacter is my Entity and your Kombatant is my Kharacter. Though, there are slight and important differences between our two definitions.

The truly important part, really, is that we both agree that with the inclusion of Khameleon in the Wii version that everyone who is supposed to be present is there.

I actually like the terms Kharacter and Kombatant better because even I felt the word Entity was belittling. I still like the fact that my definition hinges on the Kharacter being playable by the Human Player to be a Kombatant. I prefer this to yours in that respect because it is incredibly hard to diagnose from the Mortal Kombat Video Games what is and is not a Tournament. Really, there was only three true tournaments in the entire history of the Mortal Kombat Video Games. Mortal Kombat One, Two, and Armageddon.

Mortal Kombat One was actually the only true Mortal Kombat Tournament. Mortal Kombat Two was only Kahn's personal Tournament in Outworld, besides the chance for Kahn to kill off his foes, it really did not have the impact or the rulings of an official Mortal Kombat Tournament. Remember, those are held once a generation, not whenever the heck Shao Kahn feels like it. Mortal Kombat Three - Trilogy were not even Tournaments at all. They were simply Shao Kahn's invasion and the subsequent events that fallowed. Mortal Kombat Four was the Second Raiden Shinnok War, not a Tournament. Mortal Kombat 5 was a battle against the Deadly Alliance and Mortal Kombat 6 was the battle against Onaga, both equally not true Tournaments in any way shape or manner of the word. Armageddon was a Tournament, but not officially Mortal Kombat.

To say that the fighting games are more important than the other Mortal Kombat games is not true, a large chunk of the storyline actually comes from games like Mythologies Sub-Zero and Deception's Konquest Adventure. So, to say that only the people in the fighting games count would also be wrong.

By your definition, as I understand it, we would have probably less than half of the Kombatants we really do.

Let me try to combine my definition with your terminology to get a better definition.

Mortal Kombat Kharacter: Anything in a Mortal Kombat Video Game that has a presence in said Mortal Kombat Video Game.

Mortal Kombat Kombatant: Any Mortal Kombat Kharacter that is playable by the Human Player and was intended to be playable by the Human Player by said Video Game's Designers.

I hope I have not offended you, and I actually thank you for giving me better terms to use. I hope you understand why I still stick to me mechanics for my definition, though.
 
Last edited:
firstly, Character is spelt with a C.

Secondly, anybody in any work of fiction is a character, playable or otherwise. I believe that the word for 'entity' (wtf?) that you are looking for is NPC, which stands for non-playable CHARACTER. So there you go.

Why do people all have to see things the same way? Why does there need to be a clear understanding? If Boon or Vogel or somebody addressed this "problem" personally, then yeah, I could see it as being serious, not just some guy who thinks he knows more than someone else about something as trivial as a videogame.

And, erm, honor? It's an internet forum not a samurai academy. If you must stick with some kind of explanation, then go with Glamador's, it makes the most sense, but I think the best thing to do is switch off your games console and relax a bit, before you end up going mental.
 
MoonEye821 said:
While regretting it was not true across the board, I know many fought for it to be, I am glad that one version of Armageddon can hopefully still actually keep the promise of what the game was supposed to be. Let us hope for the true completion of the Wii Armageddon.
Click to expand...

PS2 has every fighter (playable or not) from the Playstation versions of MK.
Wii will have every fighter (playable or not) from the Nintendo versions of MK.
They're both complete as far as I'm concerned.

Cheers - G
 
Gordonut said:
PS2 has every fighter (playable or not) from the Playstation versions of MK.
Wii will have every fighter (playable or not) from the Nintendo versions of MK.
Click to expand...

I'd say it if it haden't been said already :mrgreen:

PS:Any one know a good website to get MKA character Bios?
All the bios i have found aren't worth a crap or they don't have all the characters:sleep:
 
MoonEye821 said:
By your definition, as I understand it, we would have probably less than half of the Kombatants we really do.

...

I hope I have not offended you, and I actually thank you for giving me better terms to use. I hope you understand why I still stick to me mechanics for my definition, though.
Click to expand...

I'm not offended nope. Just a little difference of opinion. But I stick by my description of having competed in an MK tournament, which I consider to be MK1, 2, 3, 4, DA, D, and A. I don't see how that removes half of our characters. MK1, 2, and DA were indesputibly tournaments. MK3, 4, and D were just battles but that's part of what I meant. And MKA is debatable. It's technically a tournament brought about by Shinnok's deception. The only games aside from that which introduced character were MKMSZ and MKSF. I firmly deny MKSF's characters as kombatants. But MKMSZ characters were all verified in later tournaments as Kombatants. What other characters in MKMSZ were left out later? Prison Guards? Monks? The Lin Kuei Grandmaster? He's dead. My definition best describes what the MK Team meant by the inclusion of every character.
 
I wouldn't call DA a tournament. It was a rally, but not ordered. Also, Armageddon is a tournament. Once again, Mortal Kombat One is the only Mortal Kombat Tournament. Mortal Kombat Two was Kahn's personal Tournament. Mortal Kombat Armageddon was the Tournament created by the God Argus because his wife Delia foresaw the coming of Armageddon, the claps of the realms of reality from the Dragon King's Medaling with the Kamidogu. Now, I know people will debate me on this, but it makes the most sense. I think to make Armageddon more accessible to everyone they said something along the lines of, "the warriors would tap into the forces that make reality possible." But everyone knows that has to be Onaga and his medaling with and trying to merge the Kamidogu. That, by what was said in Deception's Konquest, would bring about the end of reality. I see Armageddon the Tournament as not Armageddon itself but a mechanism put in place to prevent it. We have not yet seen true Armageddon in the Mortal Kombat Video Games. But, if what they keep saying about the new game is true, Armageddon probably took place. Though, we won't know which “what if ending” is true until a couple years from now.

I define a tournament as an ordered succession of battles built around a mutually agreed outcome. For example, if Kahn won ten tournaments in Mortal Kombat he gained right to attack Earthrealm.

DA, by that definition, was not ordered. If anything, it was the Deadly Alliance taking out the established order. Their killing off of "Kahn" and Kang made for Chaos and not order. In that case, no true tournament existed. It is the difference between fighting and tournaments.

The PS2 was not complete. They said every Kombatant and Khameleon was left out. But I agree that with her inclusion, and with Chameleon staying in place, the Wii version does by both our definitions hold every Kombatant. So, we are bickering over points, but we are not really fighting. In fact, I enjoy talking with someone who knows the Mortal Kombat Tradition and can argue his points validly. To be honest, your definition is probably more along the lines of what the MK Team met. But, I still see mine as what is should mean, and with the Wii, does mean as well as yours. I am not trying to include Special Forces as Kombatants. Or Mythologies Sub-Zero. By my definition and understanding my definition works, though I have not played Special Forces, it appears that Jax is who you play as in Special Forces. Sub-Zero in Mythologies. None of the side games, from what I have played of them, let you play as anybody you don’t get to play as in the other games. My definition is not based around side games, main games, or anything like that. It is based around who is and who is not playable.

Khameleon was the only playable Kharacter, and thus Kombatant, that did not make the cut into Armageddon and that is my gripe. But I really don’t have a gripe because she’s being put into the Wii. So, my only real gripe now is that she should have been there in the first place. But, honestly, I am happy that they are at least fixing their “mistake.”
 
If you think of Khameleon as a "Nintendo Exclusive Bonus Character" then you'll find it easier to accept the fact she's missing from PS2 :mrgreen:
 
And yet I don't accept that fact. MKA deserves all kombatants, exclusive or not. Chameleon was a PS2 exclusive but he was still on the bloomin' Xbox. They didn't specify "MKA will include all non-exclusive kombatants." No they said ALL kombatants. The anger at Khameleon's rejection originally was that Boon went back on his word. But it's a moot point now, Khameleon's in!
 
Okay I annostly don't see what the problem is, maybe Boon just wanted to include Khameleon wii and keep it like in N64. Chameleon would be put in well you know. Eitherway Chameleon and Khameleon are pretty much the same character or combatant what ever, that fact that the gender is opposite, i'm not to familiar with their bios so correct me if i'm wrong.
 
Yes, I shall correct you, for you are wrong. Chameleon had no backstory, bio, or ending. He was a crappy character who was just newly redesigned and made awesome for MKA. Khameleon had backstory, a bio, and an ending. She furthered the story. That WAS the issue. But now it's moot 'cus she's in!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top