Literalists say the darndest things

Because some people wanted somewhere to vent. Byne suggested the title.

I'm gonna go get some popcorn, this is thread gonna be fun

Lets attack one individual at a time, first their most influential(or stupid): Seival

ok - maybe not literalists.

Gods answer to holy shit stains. Legbiter.
Quote: ''Chris's been rousting out the IT bums. Beat it.''





actually if i said what i thought about literal interpretation of the car crash that is mass effect 3's ending i'd possibly be banned from here as well.

I got some good quotes:

"Shepard cant be indoctrinated because I, the player control Shepard and I'm not indoctrinated"

"This whole indoctrination concept is just head canon, man. It's not real at all"

I meet the most interesting literalists in MP lobbies.

Phantom Infiltrator wrote:
"This whole indoctrination concept is just head canon, man. It's not real at all"

Someone actually thinks indoctrination never featured in the games? That is a good one.

RavenEyry wrote:

Phantom Infiltrator wrote:
"This whole indoctrination concept is just head canon, man. It's not real at all"

Someone actually thinks indoctrination never featured in the games? That is a good one.

This of course came from a player who bought me3 primarily for its MP, has never touched the trilogy, and has only played me3s story once.

Phantom Infiltrator wrote:

"Shepard cant be indoctrinated because I, the player control Shepard and I'm not indoctrinated"

I love this one, that is just brilliant.

Heretic_Hanar once said during a debate whether Shepard survived the blast (paraphrased though):

"Even if it was like a nuclear explosion, you have to keep in mind that nukes in space do not explode, but implode. Then they emit electromagentic radiation and cause an EMP. Hence Shepard could've survived even a nuke."

I was not present during that discussion, but later on posted this to illustrate my disagreement with his statement.
Ever had a sun burn? Well, multiply that with 10000000 and you may see what EM radiation can cause during the ending.

Restrider wrote:Heretic_Hanar once said during a debate whether Shepard survived the blast (paraphrased though):

"Even if it was like a nuclear explosion, you have to keep in mind that nukes in space do not explode, but implode. Then they emit electromagentic radiation and cause an EMP. Hence Shepard could've survived even a nuke."

I was not present during that discussion, but later on posted this to illustrate my disagreement with his statement.
Ever had a sun burn? Well, multiply that with 10000000 and you may see what EM radiation can cause during the ending.

Also we quite clearly see fire engulf the place Shepard should be...

Restrider wrote:Heretic_Hanar once said during a debate whether Shepard survived the blast (paraphrased though):

"Even if it was like a nuclear explosion, you have to keep in mind that nukes in space do not explode, but implode. Then they emit electromagentic radiation and cause an EMP. Hence Shepard could've survived even a nuke."

Same discussion, he kept using the tower not being badly damaged in the explosion as proof Shepard could survive it, ignoring me every time I reminded him Shepard is not inside the tower but on the surface.

I know IT cant be discussed on BSN, but I really want to put together 50 tough questions for literalists to answer about their interpretation. I want them to struggle to answer each and every one of them without resorting to the bad writing argument.

I think I can do that without once mentioning IT or my support for it.

"There was no foreshadowing for Synthesis."

There was, and it was all negative.

"The Prothean Beacon vision wasn't a warning, it was just information"

Aha. Hahaha. Hahahahahahahahaha.

Phantom Infiltrator wrote: I know IT cant be discussed on BSN, but I really want to put together 50 tough questions for literalists to answer about their interpretation. I want them to struggle to answer each and every one of them without resorting to the bad writing argument.

I think I can do that without once mentioning IT or my support for it.

Oh... I just had a great idea.

Phantom Infiltrator wrote: I know IT cant be discussed, but I really want to put together 50 tough questions for literalists to answer about their interpretation. I want them to struggle to answer each and every one of them without resorting to the bad writing argument.

I think I can do that without once mentioning IT or my support for it.

IT can be discussed. CP said so himself. It just can't be made into some massive IT info dump thread like before. It has to be discussed in the context of specific scenes. At least that was my interpretation of his answers to me. People have discussed IT without being banned or the thread locked even after he nuked the IT thread.

Edit:in some ways I don't blame CP for nuking the thread, he just showed horrible diplomatic skills when doing so. The IT thread was nearly as active as the entire rest of the forum combined, it makes their jobs far easier if its not there, he should have said this rather than what he did. If they had more paid mods they likely would have left it open.

ElSuperGecko wrote:
"The Prothean Beacon vision wasn't a warning, it was just information"

Aha. Hahaha. Hahahahahahahahaha.

Apart from Vigil, y'know, directly calling it a warning.

RavenEyry wrote:

ElSuperGecko wrote:
"The Prothean Beacon vision wasn't a warning, it was just information"

Aha. Hahaha. Hahahahahahahahaha.

Apart from Vigil, y'know, directly calling it a warning.

And Shepard saying it was a warning.
And Javik saying in ME3 it was a warning...

What? It wasn't a warning, that ought to be clear.

Phantom Infiltrator wrote: I know IT cant be discussed on BSN, but I really want to put together 50 tough questions for literalists to answer about their interpretation. I want them to struggle to answer each and every one of them without resorting to the bad writing argument.

I think I can do that without once mentioning IT or my support for it.

. Sometimes the shoe fits

Phantom Infiltrator wrote: I know IT cant be discussed on BSN, but I really want to put together 50 tough questions for literalists to answer about their interpretation. I want them to struggle to answer each and every one of them without resorting to the bad writing argument.

I think I can do that without once mentioning IT or my support for it.

Have you seen the "OFFICIAL reason why Harbinger didn´t kill Shepard"?, if you did then you know you have to make those questions now, i want to laugh

Fur28 wrote:

Phantom Infiltrator wrote: I know IT cant be discussed on BSN, but I really want to put together 50 tough questions for literalists to answer about their interpretation. I want them to struggle to answer each and every one of them without resorting to the bad writing argument.

I think I can do that without once mentioning IT or my support for it.

Have you seen the "OFFICIAL reason why Harbinger didn´t kill Shepard"?, if you did then you know you have to make those questions now, i want to laugh

Im already working on it. Ought to be ready tomorrow for posting.

I've got a bunch of literalist posts which are just hilarious to read. Instead of quoting them all, I would just link them:

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

Something I've noticed is that a literalist will tend to react using their emotions, while an ITer tends to react using logic and reason.

Wait, the Bioware founders left because of fan negativity? Did they fail to see the connection between pissing off the entire fanbase and their being a spot of fan negativity.

Restrider wrote:Heretic_Hanar once said during a debate whether Shepard survived the blast (paraphrased though):

"Even if it was like a nuclear explosion, you have to keep in mind that nukes in space do not explode, but implode. Then they emit electromagentic radiation and cause an EMP. Hence Shepard could've survived even a nuke."

I was not present during that discussion, but later on posted this to illustrate my disagreement with his statement.
Ever had a sun burn? Well, multiply that with 10000000 and you may see what EM radiation can cause during the ending.

Hanar is a dribbling moron on multiple levels.

Even if nukes could implode in space, what we see happening to the Citadel is not an implosion. It is quite clearly an explosion.

And even if that was an implosion, guess what? Shepard would be pulled into it and would die anyway.

And even if Shepard wasn't pulled in, the Citadel is still crippled by the overload and is visibly damaged all over. Meaning that field that kept the air in during the final scene isn't there anymore, and Shepard doesn't have a helmet. Or a pressurised suit. Or much blood.

I mean the facts are so heavily stacked against Hanar's assertions its not even funny anymore.

Andromidius wrote:

Restrider wrote:Heretic_Hanar once said during a debate whether Shepard survived the blast (paraphrased though):

"Even if it was like a nuclear explosion, you have to keep in mind that nukes in space do not explode, but implode. Then they emit electromagentic radiation and cause an EMP. Hence Shepard could've survived even a nuke."

I was not present during that discussion, but later on posted this to illustrate my disagreement with his statement.
Ever had a sun burn? Well, multiply that with 10000000 and you may see what EM radiation can cause during the ending.

Hanar is a dribbling moron on multiple levels.

Even if nukes could implode in space, what we see happening to the Citadel is not an implosion. It is quite clearly an explosion.

And even if that was an implosion, guess what? Shepard would be pulled into it and would die anyway.

And even if Shepard wasn't pulled in, the Citadel is still crippled by the overload and is visibly damaged all over. Meaning that field that kept the air in during the final scene isn't there anymore, and Shepard doesn't have a helmet. Or a pressurised suit. Or much blood.

I mean the facts are so heavily stacked against Hanar's assertions its not even funny anymore.

The entire thing is based on the fallacy that the Citadel explosion was nuclear in nature. It wasn't nuclear in nature, but nuclear explosions are the only types that most people are familiar with being of that magnitude. I thought about explaining this to him, but then I realize I'd have better luck trying to teach a cactus trigonometry.