Physics. Can Dante generate more thna the absolute minimum which Link withstood? That's physics you're staring at. Link was put under and took no damage from that much PSI, why would it be different when Dante applies the force?
Also, find me one example in fiction where strength and durability don't scale together? If it didn't strong characters would tear themselves apart.
Originally posted by ScreamPaste
Physics. Can Dante generate more thna the absolute minimum which Link withstood? That's physics you're staring at. Link was put under and took no damage from that much PSI, why would it be different when Dante applies the force?Also, find me one example in fiction where strength and durability don't scale together? If it didn't strong characters would tear themselves apart.
This is an odd character to state, but kratos. He can stop the hands of atlas, man handle hydras, yet when he gets easily impaled by a sword and ends up near death. Not that he's not durable, its just that his strength far outweighs his durability.
Last time i checked kain wasnt all to strong yet his durability is absolutely tremendously high.This is an odd character to state, but kratos. He can stop the hands of atlas, man handle hydras, yet when he gets easily impaled by a sword and ends up near death. Not that he's not durable, its just that his strength far outweighs his durability.
As for Kratos, the Atlas feat is nonquantifiable because we don't know how much effort was put into it, if any at all. I do know he's got some very good durability feats, who stabbed him, exactly? [This is also relevant because KRatos is in this thread, win.]
Edit: The Atlas feat could be argued as beign as much durability as it is strength.
Originally posted by Sappho
This is exactly wut i meant, hes taking everything to literal, the n64 not having great graphics is a perfect example.
This is a statement me and now many people have made about his so called incredible link feat. That combined with the countless other reasons and whether the move is canon or not as well is why this use of physics and maths in a fictional and fairly outrageous vague world is redundant and should be ignored.
So, we should simply guess about everything and go with such an illogical concept as what 'feels' right? That's not how a logical debate is done. I've rounded all of my nubers down and lowballed to an absolute minimum. If you're somehow bothered by numbers proving Link's not as frail as you thought, do your own math.
So, like I asked. Zeus stabbed Kratos with the blade of Olympus, yes?
This would in no way disprove Kratos durability, as the damn thing ended the war of the titans in one blow.
What feels right is not the same as actual logic reasoning based on what we can see. Making maths equations for vague universes based on our rules is also redundant. Nobody has to do their own math, nor agree just because you like using math for fiction. Its absolutly outrageous claim to think any Link is a 1000+ tonner over a non consistent feat based on a piece of rock and that makes sense because the unvierse may not have the same rules as ours, nor do we know if that was supposed to be a serious feat, although I think any non link fan could understand how Link being 1000 ton+ is ridiculous anyway.
And its nothing to do with ending the war of the titans, its a super blade sure but the only reason it may not disprove Kratos' durability is because Zeus is pushing it into him, not just some normal joe. Jim or george.
And its nothing to do with ending the war of the titans, its a super blade sure but the only reason it may not disprove Kratos' durability is because Zeus is pushing it into him, not just some normal joe. Jim or george.More to support that this doesn't disprove Kratos durability.
What feels right is not the same as actual logic reasoning based on what we can see.Explain the difference? Logic is cold fact, numbers, physics, they do not lie, and in this case, have been low-balled to a ridiculous extreme. 😊
"actual logic reasoning based on what we can see" means; 'how it looks to us', and based entirely on a glance you can make what logical conclusions? How is my math any different than you taking picturews of irl rocks to compare to the in-game rocks from Lok? Aside fromy my method beign more accurate, being downrounded, ect..
Its absolutly outrageous claim to think any Link is a 1000+ tonner over a non consistent featIt's consistant..
nor do we know if that was supposed to be a serious feat, although I think any non link fan could understand how Link being 1000 ton+ is ridiculous anyway.It's ridiculous because you say so? Or because that 'seems wrong', so you, despite no legitimate evidence to the contrary?
Also, it's a serious feat, lol. OoT is srsbznz, sir. Play it.
Originally posted by ScreamPaste
More to support that this doesn't disprove Kratos durability.Explain the difference? Logic is cold fact, numbers, physics, they do not lie, and in this case, have been low-balled to a ridiculous extreme. 😊
"actual logic reasoning based on what we can see" means; 'how it looks to us', and based entirely on a glance you can make what logical conclusions? How is my math any different than you taking picturews of irl rocks to compare to the in-game rocks from Lok? Aside fromy my method beign more accurate, being downrounded, ect..
It's consistant..
It's ridiculous because you say so? Or because that 'seems wrong', so you, despite no legitimate evidence to the contrary?
Also, it's a serious feat, lol. OoT is srsbznz, sir. Play it.
They dont lie in our world, that is if their done by adequate people. Our world is based on tangible rules not fiction that is based on the whims of its developers, not the public. 😉
Your math is based on rules of our maths and our universe without enchanted items, and our rules of math are based on facts, you dont have facts on LOZ because your basing such direct and apparently accurate measurements on what you can see from the rock and the idea that its granite. Despite it going against the philosophy of LOZ (gadgets, tonnes of equipment, puzzles etc not brute force) as well as not actually stated by developers. Hell even that guide you claim says its granite could be questionable.
Never consistent, hes lifted one type of stone ,thats it....
Ive seen only one serious game from Zelda, thats Twilight princess and even that having been developed by the same people with the similiar idea and character is debatable. Its ridiculous because A: your maths is based on what is simply a move to make up for bad graphics that cannot show a more clear scene. If Link was really that strong, or canon they would not need silly little schemes and Link would never need any other weapon other than perhaps the Mastersword for killing Ganon as according to your math he is probably invincible t almost every other entity in the game. This goes for the link you claim just as strong as the one with the Golden gauntlets.
They dont lie in our world, that is if their done by adequate people. Our world is based on tangible rules not fiction that is based on the whims of its developers, not the public.Proof the physics are different? Everything supports that they're the same. Also, physics remains the same in seperate universes if you want to get technical, the entire concept comes from physics.
Despite it going against the philosophy of LOZPlay a Zelda game, you don't know the philosophy of LoZ.
Ive seen only one serious game from Zelda, thats Twilight princess and even that having been developed by the same people with the similiar idea and character is debatable.haermm Dude, seriously PLAY A ZELDA GAME. 😆
The rest of your post is riddled with bad grammar and is pretty much indecipherable. 😐 Repost and I'll get back to you.
I would think they'd keep the VERY basic physics, like gravity going down, planets, etc., but i really think they would not get to technical at all... and nice, I can easily make out what he said, if you want to use that as an excuse to get out of an arguement, be my guest, but just so you know its obvious that that's not the reason you didnt post.