You dismiss my evidence, have been doing so for the last 6 pages and bring up a totally unrelated variation, claim it as an evidence and expect me to not counter you?
No, I haven't. In fact, I have incorporated
your "evidence" into proof that you are wrong.
Remember, that this picture
showing the same undersuit that Chief is wearing with the same groin region as your supposed "crotch armor"
was your "evidence"
referring to Chief's Halo 4 armor as Gen-1 was your "evidence"
proving that it is the techsuit that is colored in the armor's color, not the other way around, was your "evidence"
You literally disprove yourself at every corner, then accuse me of twisting your words. It would be hilarious if it weren't so sad.
You, at multiple occasions brought up MP armors as your "proof" despite me affirming that I am focusing on Chief's armor. I have mentioned this not once, not twice but multiple times througout the course of this.... farce of a conversation.
See, the reason for that is that neither
this thread in general are or even were focusing on Chief's armor, ever. And I will not let you discredit valid proof just because it contradicts your claim.
You are not judge, jury nor executioner here. You are the defendant
. You have to defend
your claim against proof to the contrary, and it is not your
decision which proof is accepted.
The "dog-poodle" example doesn't really work here as the sentence explicitly mentions the "sharing" of colors, implying that the techsuit and the external plating can share colors, regardless of which is which.
It's not the "sharing" part that is the problem. It's the other
part of the sentence:
"Some models have portions of the bodysuit
share their color with the external armor plating".
It is the bodysuit
that is fragmented into different colors. Not
If it were the other way around, the sentence would have been:
"Some models have portions of the external armor plating
share their color with the bodysuit" or "Some models have the bodysuit's color shared with portions of the external armor plating
You feel you are "not hallucinating" but being unable to see something that exists while having a fully functional eye classifies as hallucination.
No, see, a hallucination is classified according to ICD-10 Code R44.3 as "A sight, sound, smell, taste, or touch that a person believes to be real but is not real. Hallucinations can be caused by nervous system disease, certain drugs, or mental disorders."
Seeing crotch armor that isn't there is
a hallucination, while not
seeing crotch armor that isn't there is called "normal vision".
I would urge you the re-read the entire thread once again, wherein I have mentioned countless times that I am explicitly referring to the Chief's armors.
I know. I just don't care, because this was never the topic of this discussion.
We have established for a fact that the H4 variation possess a crotch armor that is quite visible, to which you said it "used" the gen-1 parts.
No, I haven't. I have said it is
a Gen-1 armor. That's a difference.
I cannot be bothered to quote every comment I made so feel free to read the entire thing.
Yes, you can. It is your
job to keep your claims consistent. So far you have just been doing that very thing you accuse me of: Shifting your goalpost
Psychologically, this is referred to as projection
. So we already have two symptoms you are suffering of: This and hallucinations. Keep it going and we might end up with a valid diagnosis when this is over.
Nothing in the statement cotradicts anything I have written and why you would assume otherwise is simply baffling to me. At this point, I have no choice but to assume brain damage.
Does parroting me count as a separate symptom or is it just another manifestation of (reverse) projection?
(Now that I remember, you only started to talk about goalposts after if pointed out
how you are shifting yours...)
Multiplayer designs are something I never brought up in this entire discussion, you are the one who keeps bringing them up.
Yes. Because this was the initial topic of this thread. It is about the "Halo 4 variation[s] of [the] mjolnir" and since I mentioned Gen-2 from the very beginning it is pretty obvious that these were the ones I'm referring to, as they are the only Gen-2 armor that appears in that game.
Not that it would matter. As you said, Chief's armor in H5G is a Gen-2 as well, and as such it suffers from the same lack of protection in the same areas as the Spartan Ops fireteams.
Now, according to my own very title "Halo 4 variation of mjolnir", oh would you look at that, it is far better armored than the old design with better aesthetics to boot.
No, it's not, and it is butt-ugly on top of that. Not that it matters, plenty of Gen-1 armors were visual pollution as well, but at least they functioned as that what they were designed for: Actual armor
I gave up arguing the Halo 4 bit and now you come back to it.
Because you mentioned goalpoast shifting, and I showed you your shifting live in action.
If this is not goalpost shifting then I don't know what is.
No. You actually don't
know what it is, and you have shown that several times throughout this thread.
Chief's armor in the campaign is an UPGRADED gen 1 that functions similar to gen-2, forgot to add that bit there didn't ya?
No, I didn't forget anything. I mentioned the relevant part of that statement: Namely that it is a Gen-1 armor
I would also like to add that the original post never mentions the armor generation, all it did was comment on the aesthetics and "look" of the armor and it was you who brought the whole generation argument with you.
Correct. I mentioned how Gen-2 armor is inferior to Gen-1 armor (which includes Chief's Halo 4 suit). This made you butthurt for whatever reason and since then you've tried in vain to disprove this statement.
remember the progress of this thread. It is you
who "cannot be bothered to quote every comment I made".