>If you weren't the one who said it why bother responding to it?
Because, I felt like it. Though, I responded to everything but that specific point so idk.
>I never said he "failed" to do anything, now that's strawmanning. I'm telling you he backed away from it because he clearly wanted to get away from the thing that could easily crush him, indicating that he clearly cannot lift it.
No, but what you have arguing is that he would have failed, even though nothing says that other than your blatant headcanon that's proven false by the source material. Yes, he backed away, because why in the ever loving **** would anyone willingly let themselves get attacked by a giant mecha. Gray Fox dodges Rex too and we know for a fact he can lift it. Your arguments are awful, they're entirely reliant on the fact that Snake absolutely could not under any circumstance lift the thing, even though he never actually got the chance to see if he could and it's just you assuming he could not.
>"Big Boss does it three times" is not an evidence because you lack the ability to prove that isn't an outlier for him being able to do that. Stop bringing up Peace Walker if you cannot back it up with other games.
Gray Fox does the same thing and he's comparable to Snake. This isn't an inability to prove it isn't an outlier, at this point you're in straight denial. Big Boss performs a feat on three separate occasions. Gray Fox, in another game, does the same type of feat without breaking a sweat. Cool so 4 similar feats from two different games that coincide with each other and imply your extrapolated headcanon of something that never occurred to be false. Simple as that, nothing more to add.
>Snarky comment aside, you needing to provide a link to the thing you are talking about should be mandatory. It is not up to me to find your argument for you when you have the burden of proof. That's just how that works.
First off, I lied about it being like Class 50, some random dude figured out how much tons of force a Tank's recoil is in lbs of force and newtons, in regards to it and it's like 239.73214285714286 tons of force. Assuming this random ass dude's math is correct and I'm just not being baited, could be though, so don't hold this against me.
Wasn't a snarky comment, even rereading it I don't see how it could be seen as snark, maybe a bit rude and blunt, but not snarky. What it was, was me telling you flat out, actually read the thread, or do not bother, I'm not going to spoonfeed you every little thing, when I've explained the feat I'm talking about 4 times I think? An explanation once? Perfectly reasonable. A seond time in case it was missed and for newcomers to get caught up? Fine was well. 3 is pushing it. 4 is where you're on your own. Hell I shouldnt of even done it the 4th time, 3 is where it gets ridiculous. Burden of proof is on me, of course, I did bring up the feat in question, and I gave it, have some decency and actually bother to read the thread, simple as that. Why repeat myself when it's already there? Are you incapable of simply just paying attention?
>You clearly do not if you called it a strawman when I directly responded to something someone had said, I provided you the quote.
Do you really need a breakdown of exactly why your initial post in this discussion was a blatant misinterpretation and over simplification of the proposed claims being made?
>Go into more details as to why it's suspicious. Also claiming it's my headcanon when my argument requires no assumptions doesn't make any sense.
Because someone who he's shown comparable if not outright physically above did it anyone, that would be why it's suspicious.
Your argument is quite literally by definition an assumption. You are assuming that Solid Snake would have failed to lift REX when nothing actually confirms that to be the case. Couple that with feats and scaling that suggest the complete opposite. You are by, literal, 100%, definition as per the English language. Making an assumption of how something would have played out that we never see fulfilled or actually occur.
This isn't even subject to debate
We could stop wasting our time if you could provide anything that supports the rating that isn't Peace Walker or attacking Gray Fox.
>We could stop wasting our time if you could provide anything that supports the rating that isn't Peace Walker or attacking Gray Fox.
We could stop wasting time if you didn't have an extremely ass backwards way of thinking too but here we are. Ignore 3 solid explicit feats from one game and ignore Gray Fox, someone who's weaker than Solid in physical statistics, doing said feats. Basically a full game proving you wrong and a character Solid overpowers in the very game you're clinging to proving you wrong. And that's without getting into some other shit, I'd have to look, but on the chance that a single character struggles or even breaks out of Mantis' telekinetic grasp, bam, that's another solid mech lifting feat as Mantis can casually move mecha's over 4000km with his telekinetic power. Also the fact you have to say "that isn't peace walker" because it proves you wrong flat out should be evidence enough that this conversation is pointless, just because there are multiple feats that prove your extrapolation false doesn't mean you can just say they don't count.
"But they're outliers"
They're only outliers if you ignore them as reasoning as to why your counterargument is false in the first place, you're skipping a step here to reach the goal of outlier, not how it works.
>Are you saying that Gray Fox wasn't staggered when Solid Snake had thrown him, decreasing the odds of him actually fighting back against it? Because the video you showed me shows that exactly.
The very fact he was staggered by Snake but not when the mecha tried to crush him would imply Solid>REX's in raw physicals and hydraulics.
>I make the claim that he cannot lift it based on Gray Fox himself coming in to stop it for Snake, I do not need any assumptions to make a claim that Snake cannot lift a Metal Gear based off this nor do I need to make flimsy excuses such as "dramatic framing".
Huh well shit, guess that means Goku couldn't beat Frieza because Trunks came into to beat Frieza for him, or that time Vegeta came in and blocked an attack for Goku who would have had no trouble blocking himself, etc. You know this argument doesn't work? This would have credence if Peace Walker didn't prove it wrong, but Peace Walker did prove it wrong, and it's far more recent too, it isn't like Peace Walker came first then MGS1, no, Peace Walker is basically MGSV Part 1, it's existence after the fact sheds light on what would have happened if Snake was forced to try and lift Rex, and it isn't what you're saying it is, its not a one off thing done in the game either. You can't just close your eyes and plug your ears and pretend the game doesn't exist. You need literally nothing but assumptions to conclude this.
This isn't even debatable. you saying you don't need to assume doesn't change the fact that you are. Dramatic framing doesn't matter, at all, regardless of what it is, Big Boss proves he can multiple times in a more recent game, in the primary source material the little foundation to this point that you have is nonexistent as well, only actually existing in Twin Snakes, which is some weird mixmash of canonicity.
>Yes, we ignore outliers because Snake doesn't have anything else to reasonably support it in any other media, what's so hard about this to understand? Bringing up "other verses" doesn't matter because we are specifically talking about Metal Gear here, if you want to downgrade said other verses you are free to do so.
Not an outlier, or hell, maybe it is? But sure as hell ain't for the reasons you're giving, it'd only be an outlier if it was consistently proven false by things that aren't PIS (your example mind you isn't even PIS, it simply doesnt exist), but it's the opposite, it's actually the most consistent lifting feat in the series, no other feat in the whole franchise happens this often except bullet dodging. There's nothing difficult to understand here, the issue lies in the fact your entire argument is based on conjecture, assumptions and, no offense, ignorance, while simultaneously ignoring the fact it's actually shown doable, but instead of taking said examples as evidence that your preconceived notion is what's likely in the wrong, you assume the multiple feats are what's wrong, not your headcanon. In OTHER media you say? Don't make such bold claims, need I remind you the comics exist? Nobody here actually wants to downgrade other verses off of such a hypocritical and faulty notion. Other verses may be used as an example, but they're not used to say two wrongs make a right, they're used to say this is double standards and honestly implying such downgrades to actually be justifiable is a dishonest act as it isn't true for other verses and it isn't true here either.
