Talk:Great Kung Lao

I am very curious. The article says Great Kung Lao soul was finally freed after Shang Tsung is killed by Raiden's failed attempt to destroy the Dragon King. Wouldn't his soul be free when Liu Kang defeated Shang Tsung in Mortal Kombat 1? I know the story is different from how the game ended. In that Liu Kang didn't really kill Shang Tsung in that tournament, Shang just fled. But I think maybe Liu free some souls in the fight, which may include Great Kung Lao. What do you guys think? Seasrmar 08:06, December 23, 2009 (UTC)

Age?

So it says he was 26 when defeated by Goro in his sidebar. Yet in the main text it says he defeated Shang Tsung, then was beaten by Goro 50 years later in the next tourniment. The ages don't exactly match up.]

According to the rules of the Mortal Kombat tournament, the champion is granted extended youth until the next tournament, because, being Mortal Kombat, most of the kombatants are mortals. -Rm2kking 03:00, May 22, 2011 (UTC)

Possible Plothole

How can Kung Lao be the Great Kung Lao's reincarnation if Shang Tsung consumed his soul? -Rm2kking 03:02, May 22, 2011 (UTC)

It's probably not a canonical ending. Either that or the MK team really doesn't care :P --Azeruth 03:07, May 22, 2011 (UTC)

I'm sure if asked about it they'd make up some scenario where the Elder Gods freed Kung Lao's soul to be reincarnated to fight Outworld once more or something. Whatever. Just something I noticed whilst playing Shaolin Monks last night. -Rm2kking 03:56, May 22, 2011 (UTC)

Maybe Shang Tsung can only hold certain souls for a limited period of time... or maybe he lost it in a card game or something. 96.236.25.74 01:45, February 12, 2012 (UTC)

Defeat

One thing I never really understood is how Kung Lao was able to own Shang Tsung, and then get owned himself by Goro. If Shang Tsung really is more dangerous than Goro (which he should be), how is this so? He was in his prime, powerful and unbeatable thanks to the soul drain. He was the undisputed champion until Kung Lao came along. It is blatantly expressed that anything Kung Lao did was pointless in the face of Goro's brute strength. If Goro really was so much stronger than Shang Tsung back then, he could've double-crossed him and succeeded. Jayspyder (talk) 00:06, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

Don't try to make too much sense out of it, it's a fighting game's story, after all.

--Byakuya ^{The Slayer of Colossi} 01:58, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

== Are we sure that's him in the Aftermath Ending? ==

The way Kung Lao talks about him not being 'the Kung Lao I knew' it sounds like he's an alternative version of his friend, not his ancestor.

(Roxanne1991 (talk) 09:56, May 27, 2020 (UTC))

Hmmmmm.... Can be... Its even more logical then Great Kung Lao lol. Probably you are right, man!

Dickjones265 (talk) 13:27, May 27, 2020 (UTC)

Anima2900:

i find it quite simple really It isent the great Kung Lao shown Aftermath Ending. that is a fan theory nothing more, i can give definitive proof and rebuttal to otherwise just 2 points, just hear me out..

my rebutal to the most reasons people sees is the statue most say: the statue which we first saw in MK X is an heirloom so it must be the orginal/great kung lao in the ending..

but that doesent prove or have any merit of anything other then a man named Kung Lao made it.. an heirloom doesnt have to be old, the fact that Kung lao was killed and it was given to lord raiden is enough to make it an heir loom regardless of its age..

fact/definitive proof is liu Kang says he knew him and in this time he isent as arrogant.. liu kang NEVER knew the great kung lao. how do i know? because in MORTAL KOMBAT X kung jin mentions his great ancestor that saved earth realm from shang sung

and we are also told it was over 600 years ago..

so saying that it is the great Kung Lao in the ending is factually wrong from what we are told in game.. i get some might want it to be him, but that is a fan theory that are neglecting the facts we are told.

on a page that is supposed to be for correct information, fan theorys shouldent take presidence over what is factually stated and we are told from in-game lore

It's kinda obvious it would be more directed towards being the Great Kung Lao, yes given the statue which was specifically stated to be a Lao family heirloom and you're seeing the character make it. You also gotta take into consideration that the character doesn't really look like the current Kung Lao, so Liu Kang just made a new Kung Lao instead of restoring his beloved ally? Also the whole "Liu Kang never knew the Great Kung Lao" doesn't really work in the argument given he is the Keeper of Time, he controls everyone's fates now for fuck's sake. He specifically wanted the Great Kung Lao to be his champion. Yeah there are a shitload of plot holes and inconsistencies that arise from the story going forward but that's how NRS wants it to go. Doesn't entirely make sense sometimes but we're not the writers or storytellers but they are. Sometimes it's good, sometimes it's bad, sometimes it's breathtaking storytelling or a pile of dogshit. Also just gonna point out that it's common knowledge in the story's lore that Kung Lao is the reincarnation of the Great Kung Lao, hence why Liu Kang makes the comments as he did.

And the idea of saying the character at the ending of Aftermath being the Great Kung Lao is just a fan theory is kinda wrong. You also gotta take into account neither of the two ending of Aftermath have been ruled out as canon yet, given there were two separate endings to the original story and then Aftermath kinda just RKO'd the endings out of nowhere. So there's that too. ----Fizorak (talk) 06:44, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

to Fizorak

several holes in your statement

first your argument that liu kang is the god of time so he knows everyone... saying that he knows everyone in the time line simply isent true as far as what we are told, we are simply told as players he can shape time nothing about being him knowing every person/being omnipotent, thats you speculating not useing what we are told as facts in game so totally invalid point.

second: yes currnet Kung lau is the reincarnation not saying otherswise and dont see how that matters in this conversation

third: you saying he wanted the great kung lau as his champion is again you speculating without any proof to back it up from within the game so again you dont have a case there, i can back my claim up why cant you? because it isent stated while my point is..

Fourth: you say it isent canon which is true :-) but it is still put up on this page as truth on the great Kung lao page so trying to say well it isent canon yet if ever doesnt make any sense, since this page about great Kung lao states it as canon, which it shouldent and that is one of my points so thanks for pointing that out, just another reason it shouldent be stated on the great kung lao page untill confirmed by the writers of the story

fifth: as i said using what people want and think are one thing what is factulally stated is another. i keep to facts, what you say are what people think and want not what is stated in game... that is VERY much the definition of fan theory, nothing more

but i will end with this, you were right in two statemets.. we dont know canon ending yet and Kung lao is a reincarnation

Anima2900 10:34 8 february 2021

..... So you're saying that as the Keeper of Time, the person that decides the fates of everyone in the timeline as Kronika did, Liu Kang does not know that the Lao he is talking to is the Great Kung Lao? Plus you saying that everything that is discussed on the page about Lao's appearance thus far being all fan theories and such is pretty arrogant. We've been given limited information regarding the character and what is presented to us is what we are given, therefore we put it on the page as correctly as we can by what is given. The page itself is not all fan theories, so I don't really know why you are arguing about it and saying that.

You're also the one arguing about whether or not this Lao is the Great Kung Lao or not, and I'm backing up my argument by saying that the reasons Liu Kang makes the comments about how this Lao is different from his is that Kung Lao is a reincarnation of the Great Kung Lao, so due to that, Kung Lao is different from his ancestor. You have decent claims for your argument but at the same time,you're not looking into shit correctly to properly back up your arguments . ---- Fizorak (talk) 10:36, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

To Fizorak

im not saying EVERYTHING on the page is theory, not even once dont know how you got to that, what i am is saying that including it as the great kung lao on the page is theory because it isent confirmed to be him it could as easily be the new one. which is why it shouldnt be on the great kung lao page until confirmation is given, until then it is theory and speculation wheter or not it is him. which is the truth nothing arrogant about, it's factual.

you say it's arrogant to call it a fan theory or speculation. sorry but when something isent a fact it is a theory, thats how it is defined. if you still think im wrong to use the word theory and about the definition you will have to take it up with oxford dictionnaire comitèe.

im the only one argueing if it's one kung lao or the other? are you being serious? there are plenty of like minded people on several forums beyond this one, so sorry but that couldent be further from the truth, do you really think im the only person on the planet that thought of that possibilty, you give me too much credit.

thank you for seeing i have decent claim i can apriciate that, but you saying: i dont look into shit correctly. the same could be said about you i at least have facts to back up what i say, all your giving is personal oppnion's and theorys which are worthless when discussing facts and you do it without any proof from official sources (except about the reincarnation), so ill consider this conversation over have a nice day :)

regards Anima2900 11/02-2021

You contradict yourself more than providing a reasonable argument. You argued as to whether or not that Loa is the Great Kung Lao, you also made comments that the page requires factual information and not “fan theories” on the page, which is why I made my comments on you be arrogant because going off of the logic information provided, it would make more sense for Liu Kang to be meeting the Great Kung Lao rather than a random ass remade Kung Lao. Saying Liu Kang created a completely different, random ass Kung Lao that has no connection to the original Lao or the Geat Kung Lao sounds more like a fan theory than anything. And you saying I don’t look into my shit correctly is even more arrogant given that if I didn’t have anything to back up and argue with I wouldn’t have typed my messages lol. ———— Fizorak (talk) 16:45, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

to Fizorak

it isent confirmed to be the great kung lao, dont know how you can say it belongs on page for facts when it isent confirmed but here we are..

and again you write without providing any proof of your claims while i have plenty for mine. at this point you still havent provided any proof to the contrary

we have had numorus conversations about it at this point and still nothing so the conversation is going no where, you best argument has has been redused to the classic: -because i say so- and that is all you have given so far

so sorry but i have better things to do, then argue with someone who spouts theorys and cant even give a single proof of their claims so ill say it again cause you clealy dident understand it the last time the conversation you and i are having is over

have a nice day regards Anima2900 00:52 12/2 2021

I literally gave points towards an argument and you ignored them lmao. Never once did I every say that the shit put on the page or anything else was “because I say so” lol. You say my points are fan theories and just say “it’s not confirmed” as your only rebuttal, then when I argue your points, you ignore my arguments towards your claims, which sounds more like a fan theory than my points lol. Then the best part is you just ditch the conversation for no reason. So don’t say “have a nice day” when you choose to be arrogant and rude a majority of the time and ditch the conversation. ———— Fizorak (talk) 02:27, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

to Fizorek

you gave points that are unconfirmed by the writes of the game so far so while you might feel your claims is ignored by me it is for that very reason. it is unconfirmed so you are simply theory crafting. i cant help you cant support your arguments with ingame facts or by something written by the writes thats on you not me. i dont use theory or personal oppinon i use ingame dialoge to support my claims and you cant even do that.

no you dident say it was because you said so and i didnet say you did.... what i am/was saying is that your only Arguements so far has been theory crafted and you trying to fill the gaps yourself without ingame support. in other words your only argument is 'because you said so' and you have no other ways to support your claims then to use theory crafing which is worhtless when talking supported facts.

if no reason counts as: i am talking to someone who cant support what they say with facts and ingame proof and cant see that they are doing it AND cant see the conversation is going no where.. then yes im abandoning the conversation for no reason.

so ill say it again..

have a nice day regards Anima2900 20-02-2021

The page is not filled with fan theories, it's pretty obvious that Liu Kang is talking to the Great Kung Lao. It makes literally no sense that Liu Kang would create a completely different Kung Lao rather than restoring his best-fucking-friend, his family back to the timeline. The heirloom was passed down, discussed in MKX, given to Raiden. The same heirloom is seen being made by the Great Kung Lao. The Great Kung Lao was alive about 500 or so years before getting fucked over in the tournament by Shang Tsung, and then you say that Liu Kang doesn't know the Great Kung Lao. He is the fucking Keeper of Time at this point, deciding the fates of everyone in the timeline, he knows the Great Kung Lao, and yet you completely ignored my points towards this. Lao may be the reincarnation of the Great Kung Lao, hence why Liu Kang said "The Kung Lao I knew" but again, you ignored it, Hell you even said you didn't know why it was being brought up in the argument.

Literally, you refuse these points and don't accept the argument being given to you. It's either your way or the highway, and that shit doesn't fly here. Don't be disrespectful to the others giving points towards arguments and especially don't be disrespectful towards the Admin trying to have a peaceful conversation about this with you. If you don't have anything nice to say, don't bother messaging this talk page, especially if someone is giving an opinion, argument or simple discussion and you refuse to acknowledge or ignore what they say because your ego doesn't accept it. This is your last warning. End of discussion. ---- Fizorak (talk) 09:21, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

to Fizorak

okay you probly kick me then, so let me say this your the one swearing at someone not me, like useing words such as F**king.. you say this is the last warning? but it is the first given so saying it is the last make no sense since not one was given before your abouve statement what i have said, got nothing to do with ego but with what we factually know, unlike you who clearly give credance to theorys and flying off on childish tantrums.. you your self use the words pretty obvious so it is un-confirmed and non-canon and still it is on the page... im not saying it is filled with fan theorys but i am saying, that saying it is the great Kung lao 'is' until confirmed otherwise. if facts dosent matter and everyone can write half assed theory to put on this page then yes i agree it doesnt fly and i wont be a part of it im out leaving of my own volition..

Saying I’m throwing a childish tantrum over me swearing on a website for an M-Rated video games series is laughable, especially when you accuse me of such behavior when you’ve been doing it ever since I responded to your message at the start of this, which now this Discussion post has literally changed to us arguing over bullshit and nonsense now because you refuse to basically let others speak. You refuse to accept other peoples’ arguments because you want to go off facts and say the page is filled of fan theories. The information given about the Great Kung Lao is limited given how much the character has actually been presented in the series, so saying that it’s fan theories because it hasn’t been outright confirmed is completely asinine. There are plenty of things from other media franchises that have been established without outright being confirmed by the makers of said media franchise. A lot of the time, they do this intentionally which can cause investment into the topic or tease future events for their franchise.

So I’ll help you on your way out since you’re still accusing the page of being filled with fan theories after I told you to stop. ———— Fizorak (talk) 13:02, 5 March 2021 (UTC)