VS Battles Wiki Forum

Abstractions

Huh? There isn't exactly any way to contextualize something that's known to be the character's mindset... he successfully recruited Sam and was ecstatic when he thought he had successfully recruited Raiden, Armstrong's In-character has him trying to recruit the opponent to his plan, this happened in both fights with him, he had no reason to put in full "I'm trying to kill you" force into any of his attacks during it, he can't recruit a dead body.

There definitely is a way to contextualize it, as a rational person wouldn't exclaim they want the death of a person and punch them with enough force to blow up the thing they are currently on, that isn't an example of pulling punches. It's 100% wholly rational to believe that Armstrong is irritable and was incredibly pissed off with Raiden to want him dead within that moment, to suggest he didn't really mean what he said would be not taking him at his own word.

Doktor is a reliable source

Someone being reliable doesn't mean they can't be wrong ever, in this instance Doktor was clearly wrong because Raiden was never one-shot in any instance, so you can't use it that way.

The amount of time in-between the beatdown that caused Raiden to cough blood, and the one that ended in the 121 Kiloton explosion is pretty substantial in terms of where the fight went, considering Armstrong is smart enough to see this guy he wants to recruit cough blood and know he needs to turn it down a notch so he doesn't accidentally cause irreparable damage/kill his opponent/new recruit.

There isn't evidence of Armstrong toning it down on Raiden, he increasingly got more aggressive, which can be seen in the clips.

So we're just going to ignore the multiple times I've conceded when the opponent actually makes a good point...?

You can still be capable of stonewalling and in other instances concede, the two aren't mutually exclusive. You're also under the impression that the comment is directly about you when it was referring to your side of the argument in general, as I have been stonewalled in previous Metal Gear threads.

That's not condescending Abstractions, wasn't trying to be at all or anything, are you sure you aren't reading it to yourself in such a tone or something?

You can say you weren't trying to be but those remarks are definitely that of condescension irrespective of intent, but I'll acknowledge that you didn't mean it that way if that's what you insist.

DaReaperMan

There definitely is a way to contextualize it, as a rational person wouldn't exclaim they want the death of a person and punch them with enough force to blow up the thing they are currently on, that isn't an example of pulling punches. It's 100% wholly rational to believe that Armstrong is irritable and was incredibly pissed off with Raiden to want him dead within that moment, to suggest he didn't really mean what he said would be not taking him at his own word.

You mean like Armstrong does all the time? You think he was trying to kill Raiden with EXCELSUS now too? Armstrong has well proven that him saying he wants someone dead shouldn't be taken literally considering he pulls 180s to recruiting them 5 seconds afterwards

Someone being reliable doesn't mean they can't be wrong ever, in this instance Doktor was clearly wrong because Raiden was never one-shot in any instance, so you can't use it that way.

Which, again, Armstrong had no reason to put in enough force to pull of anything like what Doktor stated, he can't recruit a corpse, I'd love to see him run Raiden or Sam the hell through with his fist or something, but he had no reason to go that hard on them

There isn't evidence of Armstrong toning it down on Raiden, he increasingly got more aggressive, which can be seen in the clips.

Raiden did not cough blood after the beatdown where he went for the 100+ punches, that is proof of either RPL or Armstrong toning it down. And seeing as the former is rejected I can only go with the ladder.

You can still be capable of stonewalling and in other instances concede, the two aren't mutually exclusive. You're also under the impression that the comment is directly about you when it was referring to your side of the argument in general, as I have been stonewalled in previous Metal Gear threads.

Gotcha.

Abstractions

You mean like Armstrong does all the time? You think he was trying to kill Raiden with EXCELSUS now too? Armstrong has well proven that him saying he wants someone dead shouldn't be taken literally considering he pulls 180s to recruiting them 5 seconds afterwards.

Yes, he was trying to kill Raiden with that punch, it's why he exclaimed to want him dead as he blew up the mech with a hard enough punch.
Nah, you can exclaim to want someone dead and change your mind when your perception believes it's going the way you want.

Which, again, Armstrong had no reason to put in enough force to pull of anything like what Doktor stated, he can't recruit a corpse, I'd love to see him run Raiden or Sam the hell through with his fist or something, but he had no reason to go that hard on them

He had a perfectly fine reason to go hard on them when he sees it not going his way, these people are nice to have but they aren't completely irreplaceable, Doktor's statement relies on flimsy logic to use 100% literally when the context of the game points a different direction.

Raiden did not cough blood after the beatdown where he went for the 100+ punches, that is proof of either RPL or Armstrong toning it down. And seeing as the former is rejected I can only go with the ladder.

There's no subconsciously toning it down or RPL required, it's just your perception that attempts to reason it as such when it can be as simple as Armstrong not being able to one-shot somebody. I don't know about you but my example of toning it down doesn't have me exploding this gigantic piece of equipment I and the person I'm punching are standing on while wishing death on that person.

DaReaperMan

Yes, he was trying to kill Raiden with that punch, it's why he exclaimed to want him dead as he blew up the mech with a hard enough punch.

So it's seperate from all the other times he's exclaimed to want someone dead for whatever reason?

Nah, you can exclaim to want someone dead and change your mind when your perception believes it's going the way you want.

Extraordinary claims require Extraordinary evidence, there is also a simpler option in he didn't want them dead anyway, which lines up with his motivation being to recruit, and not the honestly stupid thing of "Oh I want this guy dead, oh I want to recruit him, oh I want this guy dead" rinse, dry, repeat every single time he says he's going to kill someone/wants them dead ever.

He had a perfectly fine reason to go hard on them when he sees it not going his way, these people are nice to have but they aren't completely irreplaceable, Doktor's statement relies on flimsy logic to use 100% literally when the context of the game points a different direction.

He was still trying to convince Jack after the man literally called him "bat-shit insane", I think he was holding back as to not be lethal.

The context of the game and story points to Armstrong holding back, this lines up with his motivations he's proven to have, which is to recruit for the fights.

There's no subconsciously toning it down or RPL required, it's just your perception that attempts to reason it as such when it can be as simple as Armstrong not being able to one-shot somebody. I don't know about you but my example of toning it down doesn't have me exploding this gigantic piece of equipment I and the person I'm punching are standing on while wishing death on that person.

Which Armstrong never hit with anything but a get up punch before that, and you know why him saying "I'm going to kill you" isn't at all an indication of effort or even wanting said individual dead

Abstractions

So it's seperate from all the other times he's exclaimed to want someone dead for whatever reason?

You mean the one other instance that exists in gameplay as a recycled voice line?

Extraordinary claims require Extraordinary evidence, there is also a simpler option in he didn't want them dead anyway

No, actually him wanting Jack dead after exclaiming to want that and punching him into a mech so hard it explodes and believing that claim is the simpler option, it takes more leaps in logic to suggest he didn't want that.
"I didn't set the house on fire while people were sleeping in it because I wanted to kill them, officers. I just wanted a cool light show."

He was still trying to convince Jack after the man literally called him "bat-shit insane", I think he was holding back as to not be lethal.

The context of the game and story points to Armstrong holding back, this lines up with his motivations he's proven to have, which is to recruit for the fights.

And I disagree, having played the game and understanding the context of it myself that isn't the conclusion I came to so it's evidently not an objective view of it, which you seem to understand with your phrasing of "I think".

and you know why him saying "I'm going to kill you" isn't at all an indication of effort or even wanting said individual dead

Yeah, and we have a fundamental disagreement on that, because I can explain to you otherwise and it just not be heard. Which is my primary frustration with these Metal Gear threads, as it's the people within the affirmative circle that are the ones that never seem to understand what I'm articulating when other fans have.

DaReaperMan

This is going in circles, better to make a CRT to remove the quote at that point so aren't just using rinse repeated arguments and have more input I'd say, just saying I've done the same thing and came to the conclusion Armstrong was holding back so hey

Abstractions

This is going in circles, better to make a CRT to remove the quote at that point so aren't just using rinse repeated arguments and have more input I'd say.

I did say the quote can exist to denote superiority, which we know Armstrong has, just that using it 100% literally is the problem you're having.
And the thing is, even if I make a CRT, Metal Gear CRTs have been stonewalled in the past by people who agree with you as they are deadset on their perceptions. So what issue can actually be solved there? In the instance of acceptance by others despite their disagreements I close the thread I end up accused of mod abuse for not letting the conversation come to a conclusion, but the problem is that it doesn't ever get there.

just saying I've done the same thing and came to the conclusion Armstrong was holding back so hey

I don't blow up mecha while punching my opponent to hold back, but sure, you're within your right to think that way. Nobody's going to be able to change your mind on the subject.

DaReaperMan

It'd be solved by laying out the arguments for both sides and bringing in neutral parties, like the usual thing with a CRT and such

Abstractions

It'd be solved by laying out the arguments for both sides and bringing in neutral parties, like the usual thing with a CRT and such

Which is exactly what happened, yes. Still stonewalled.

VS Battles Wiki Forum

Forum statistics

Share this page