Right. When I read that post I took it to mean that you’re agreeing with that dude’s opinion of “these cosmetics are bad and it’s understandable this dude doesn’t like them.”
Nope. But a few years back I did proofreading/copy editing for documents that were going to be read by publishers. So I’d say I’m slightly more informed on grammar than the average forum goer. I’ve got a friend with a master’s in english, so whenever I’ve got a hyper specific question I ask her. I’m so confident that this dude is talking out his butt that I haven’t even bothered to check if I’m wrong on this one.
Haha, nah I just didn’t think you guys would ever agree to disagree, just opinions bout a game and the cosmetics in it at the end of the day. I guess reading all these posts ignited the mediation side of my brain, sorry about that. Love and not war and all that, or something.
It’s not in vain, the forum members are seeing you be schooled first hand; its entertainment. But back to the point. (Although I’ve already explained this) “And” and “or” quite literally meaning different things, despite you clinging on to hope for arguments sake that it doesn’t. I don’t care about your different examples, you’ve directly implied more than one thing without knowing and then tried to get on me for it when it is actually YOU that is wrong: https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/grammar/parts-of-speech-the-preposition-and-the-conjunction/introduction-to-conjunctions/v/coordinating-conjunctions-final
Link for reference. Skip to 2:10 and 3:00 for complete obliteration of your vernacular. Please, for everyone’s sake, proceed no further in this regard.
Seeing as how you confused something as simple as “and” and “or” I’m not surprised you missed:
Which has nothing to do with multiplayer and I have no clue as to why you brought it up.
Good question. As I have said, it was the combination of logic leading up to its inclusion that justified its existence within the game. AND it was the only armor set distinctly inspired by the real world. In infinite we have 4 different yoroi armors. None of which are meant to corroborate with halos’ art style (direct quote from 343 btw). What’s worse is that there are more to come based off what we’ve seen in the mcc.
Well literally the entire rest of that point in my post was about older halos, but fine… According to 343’s older treatment of pvp, if it’s in the multiplayer, it has a canon explanation. 343 is just stepping on their established lore.
I actually looked it up to see if the cat ears were canon as you said and couldn’t find anything. Assuming I missed something and it is true, do you really think cat ears on mjiolnir is just as sensible as an armor making an homage to something that actually occurred in humanities past?
Fine. At the end of the day it was 343 that made the multiplayer canon, which imo is a good thing. The only issue is now they have to honor that. Hence why seeing cat ears, and an armor set that literally doesn’t exist in the universe (nor does it fit the art style) is not believable.
Don’t worry, by the time you will have read this post you’ll have a full understanding of the proper whooping you got
You either missed what I said again, or you’re deliberately refusing to address the initial point again.
Yup. I know this.
Because they prove you wrong over and over. If what you’re saying is true, then my examples which use basically the same structure and use of “and” should be incorrect, right? If your claim that you can’t use “and” when the subject of the sentence is a group is true, then each of my examples should fall apart, right?
Yup. And because the subject of the sentence was “older Halos” the use of “And” works just fine. If I used “an older Halo” and not “older Halos” as the subject of the sentence, you’d have a point. The argument isn’t that “and” and “or” are used differently (I never claimed otherwise, by the way). Your claim is that I’m improperly using conjunctions when the subject is a group (“Older Halos”). Hence why I gave all those examples of acceptable sentences that you conveniently ignore.
Nope, I’m not confusing either of those words. The use of “and” is totally apt when the subject is “Older Halos.” That’s why you keep ignoring the examples because they’re functionally the same as the initial sentence that you’re critiquing.
I asked for an objective standard. Nothing in this paragraph sets an objective standard.
You’re still not answering the question. Are you okay with flaming helmets being canon in the lore now? Here’s why I’m asking. You’re stating that one of the problems with halos/cat ears is that due to the canon nature of the multiplayer scenario, these things are now within the lore of the game and therefor it is problematic. Because of this lore argument, I’m asking if you think that flaming helmets should also be removed from multiplayer.
You said they were canon in the multiplayer. The cat ears have a manufacturer in-game.
I’d say they both make about as much sense, which is to say they both make zero sense at all. I can imagine no scenario in which an in-universe power is like “Hey remember one random video game 500 years ago that wasn’t even that significant? Yeah there’s a ninja in that game, let’s make a very impractical helmet based off that.”
