Current Events > Life is too short to spectate video games

(+) Yeah! (+)

post 4 6 8 actually

not the same argument at all. you invented it in post 89 and you think i owe you an answer to that before you owe me an answer to like, post 10. that's not how it works. you're so bad at this.

Fluttershy posted...

not the same argument at all

yes it is, if you bothered to read them

still waiting on that rebuttal, mr "im so genuine"

they're not.

Seriously what the hell is this

so you can't refute them. called it

It's like two rogue AIs started fighting each other

i could refute any argument you make, but you refuse to make any.

you keep saying you've 'called it' because you can't handle being served all these losses by a brony. you're out of your depth dude. you simply do not have the wit to bullshit on internet forums.

you are actually doing mental gymnastics to convince yourself that this wasn't ridiculously one-sided.

Fluttershy posted...

i could refute any argument you make

doubt it when your only defence mechanism is flaming

all that 'being afraid to actually make one' tells me otherwise lol. define your point unless you're chicken.

you havn't refuted the first one yet, why would i give you a second to run away from?

yikes. you can't talk about turn order, remember? you're still first in line to define your stance. chop chop.

unless you're chicken, of course. if you can admit to that i can respect it. but if you keep living this lie i can't.

?

read posts 4 6 8 and address them. like directly refute them. and dodnt dodge this time

no, they weren't addressed to me lmao. respond to mine, and define your stance.

i mean, if anyone's dodging, it's you. and you have been, the whole time. do i have to reiterate the carpet metaphor or not.

you're literally just imitating me back to me and hoping something sticks. i've never seen someone more out of material and out of their depth.

Fluttershy posted...

they weren't addressed to me

then why did you reply to begin with?

Fluttershy posted...

i mean, if anyone's dodging, it's you. and you have been, the whole time.

nah. i posted my stance and you melted down even though you can't refute it

i'm not answering posts directed to other people just because you're sealioning. again, brandolini's law. you want to bullshit your way out of this and that involves demanding i put in more effort than you.

you're really bad at this.

lol, back to the meltdown thing. is ad hominem after that? you have like no material and you weren't ready for any of this.

i posted my stance

What about cutscenes
What if they want to tell a story though
Not always viable

this is not a stance. this is you driving by and saying 'no you're wrong,' because you're trying to talk about something you don't understand.

you're a little too eager. clipping off all the context to my posts just makes you look desperate.

just answer the question. you "won't reply to posts addressed to someone else", except for when you did. why was that?

define your stance first and i'll answer your question lmao

you don't understand that you don't get to ask anything until you come through with a little something yourself. because until then you haven't proven you're not operating in bad faith.

but apparently retroactively you didnt reply to me to begin with

even though you did reply to me

yeah, i feel like i've short-circuited you. tempted to call mercy.

yeah, you're done. dwell on this L. really think about it, you could learn something.

i mean you still never refuted posts 4 6 8. that offers still on the table. dunno why you're incapable of refuting them

What's going on in here

VisionSkeins posted...

What's going on in here

i posted the controversial opinion that ingame dialogue can't replace cutscenes and other storytelling methods in games in all cases and flutterfly did a double take and started angryposting
very unbecoming of a brony who is supposed to support friendlyness and love instead of just flaming people out of nowhere