See this is not true.
You seem to ignore the majority of my explanition in the post, I didn't simply say Indigo League is best 1 Hit KO's are better, I said why I felt they were better and why I disliked Ash vs Paul, your either ignoring it or your mind is so full of your own thoughts.
I believe the latter.
Let's back up a bit.
I said "I don't understand preferring Ash/Tobias over Ash/Paul."
You said:
Go back 1 page and you'll see that I responded why I prefer 1 hit KO battles like Tobias's.
So I read the post you made regarding why you preferred 1 hit KO battles. It explained NOTHING to me. Like I said before, you directly addressed why you preferred one-hit KO battles in ONE paragraph, and even that wasn't an explanation! It was just you saying you preferred Kanto and that long-winded battles were boring.
That post of yours on page 1, the one you directed me to, DID explain a lot of things, but your reasoning for preferring OHKO battles was not one of them.
Same as above, you ignored all of my explanitions.
Do you want a god damn example from it? Here:
That is an explanation to an opinion, something you very clearly don't seem to get.
But it doesn't explain the one thing you said it DID explain. You said it explained why you preferred OHKO battles and it comprehensively does not. The other things you bring up - Paul's team being changed, stuffl like that - is ultimately irrelevant.
This all came about because you said
Go back 1 page and you'll see that I responded why I prefer 1 hit KO battles like Tobias's., I looked and I did not see an explanation. You explained your opinion regarding Ash/Paul SPECIFICALLY but you NEVER addressed why you actually prefer battles to end in one hit. And you said you did. So I called you out on it.
Who do you think you are?
New to this? Generally overall, I've been around on SPPF a lot more than you by the look of your post counts.
And obviously by your ridiculous reasoning and argumentitive attitude you don't understand how forum conversations work.
"This" = arguing. Your constant hiding behind the word "opinion" and your need to constantly bring up the fact that what you are stating is opinion is unnecessary.
Like I said, this is an argument. It is a clash of two opinions. When you state something, what you are saying is opinion unless proven otherwise. So you don't need to constantly bring up how what you are saying is your own opinion, because I already know that.
For an example of what I mean, look no further than:
But it doesn't deny how it made me enjoy the battle more, like i've send countless times before trying to get through to your skull is that it's my opinion on what made it more enjoyable.
This is not me dictating to you what you should and should not like.
Do you see what I mean? I am not trying to make you think like me. I am trying to find what makes you have such an opinion - an opinion that is very strange to me. You are doing the same, but in reverse. THAT is the basis of an argument. I am arguing that my opinion makes more sense, and you are doing the same. That is the basis of any argument ever, and it is the fact that you do not seem to get this is what makes me ask if you are "new to this".
This is partially correct it is style true, but it can create substance, it's a VERY memorable moment from previous series which was brought back for that ONE episode of the entire DP series, that captured a lot of memories/nostalgia and created what you like to call 'substance'.
Nope. Like I said, it's something refreshing, exciting, unusual, but ultimately
meaningless. It's like adding red food colouring to your cake to make it look cooler. It had little to no impact on the episode or the battle itself, and was just a fun, ENTIRELY AESTHETIC choice by the writers. It's the very definition of "style" over substance.
I tend to watch the dub, but I did happen to watch the Ash vs Paul japenese version too and I still prefered the Tobias battle music.
Fair enough; I thought Ash/Paul in the original was wonderfully well-timed, with the finale of the song being timed with Buizel's winning Ice Punch over Gastrodon being a highlight, though the general timing of Type:Wild and the way it became almost serene when Infernape/Electivire were duelling Flare Blitz and Thunderpunch was great too. But yeah you could easily say similar for some moments in Ash/Tobias.
And once again, yes it is style, but it CAN be substance too, it's this what drags the viewer into the fight, for me it gave me that very powerful impact and emotion.
Like I said though, it's food colouring. It improves the overall package, but the overall package still has to TASTE good. The TASTE is the substance, the appearance is the style. Do you see what I mean?
So music, when timed well and used well, can improve the show. But on its own it is nothing.
Don't get me wrong; I believe Ash vs. Paul had plenty of style too. But it never compromised the actual substance of the battle.
I can hardly put it down? You haven't explained jack sh*t to why you prefer a lot of these things.
Do you not even understand what I said there?
Previously you said you preferred one-hit-ko, short battles to longer affairs like Ash vs. Paul. Right? But I don't understand how you can then claim to like the Pikachu/Latios battle which was long and drawn-out, certainly the longest individual battle of the match.
Can you not see how this conversation is merely you rejecting my opinions and only you claiming your own as legit answers?
There not. You keep telling me your OWN opinions but YOU aswell need to explain, hypocrite.
Why can you not see that? I thought a post this long would actually have a decent reasoning but your terrible at this, I can't believe how this convo has elevated.
I was never asked to explain or to go into further detail. I never SAID I would explain or to go into further detail.
You said "look at that post I made for an explanation". I looked. There was no explanation. I asked you for an explanation and you provided one. If you wish for me to expand on or explain any point I have made, I will do so. I believe I have explained my stance, throughout the course of this topic, but if you are unhappy with an explanation, please do tell and I'll go into further detail.
I only click "submit reply" if I am happy with the explanations for my points. If you are distinctly unhappy with that explanation TELL ME, and I will happily expand on it.
Oh my god. I've bolded what's wrong with this.
YOUR GOD DAMN OPINION. STOP BEING A HYPOCRITE.
As I said before, stating your opinion as fact is a legit argumentative technique. It sounds more forceful and more convincing. Why should I have to add "IMO" onto every post I make? Like I said, it's an argument. Everything I post is ASSUMED to be opinion, unless I say otherwise.
Yes it did ASWELL, but so did Ash vs Tobias and there's no reason to think otherwise.
It signified for both, and for 'Ash is pretty good', yes it did say that and it does for every saga, your point being? Everything I said in the last still stands.
Ash vs. Tobias did very little to show how far Ash and Pikachu had come. There was shown to be a decent gap between Ash and Paul, especially at the lake, so Ash overcoming Paul to ultimately win was a huge deal. Ash vs. Tobias was like "ok, we have to make Ash lose here, but we'll do it in a way that makes him look fairly strong and we'll throw in rarely-seen legendaries to keep the kids happy".
Yes and I denyed none of this, I know that, it was development, so what are you saying?
That doesn't mean there isn't build up for other battles, for Tobias's character no there wasn't development, for the overall battle there was.
The whole point of each saga is for Ash to reach the league and get as far as he can is it not? In this case, the whole saga was build up however faint this may have been shown.
I personally wait the most for the League battle loss/win.
There was buildup for other battles, yes. There was even some buildup for Tobias' - but VERY little, and practically none. If you are arguing that "Ash is eventually going to lose" is buildup, then wow.
Again, I didn't deny, so why are you repeating~?
Because you questioned why I thought there was "no payoff" for Ash vs. Tobias, and I showed that since there was virtually no buildup, there could be no really satisfying payoff.
What you are essentially saying is "the writers didn't introduce Tobias early enough". That is a CRITICISM, not an excuse. Had they introduced Tobias earlier in DP and gave him a couple of episodes, yes, there would have been more genuine buildup. As it is, Tobias is a Diabolous Ex Machina (look it up - it's different from Deus Ex Machina).
Huh? I really don't understand your mind at this point.
I said, Pauls battle had development since we met him at the start of DP and his development carried on throughout the saga, for Tobias's battle, we didn't meet him or learn of his character.
I didn't deny anything, I stated the facts.
Exactly. You were saying we've known Paul from the start and we never met Tobias pre-league. But you acted as if this was somehow an excuse - as if it wasn't the writers fault we never met Tobias before the league, as if that didn't affect the buildup of the Ash/Tobias battle at all.
Ash/Tobias would have better buildup if Tobias had been introduced beforehand, right? But the writers didn't plan that far ahead. With Ash/Paul, they did, so it had better buildup almost by default.
You're acting as if I shouldn't factor in Paul being introduced early, when introducing Paul early is just good storytelling and introducing Tobias late is bad storytelling.
Whatever your trying to say here is pure nonsense, your coming up with insane comments which arn't actually relevant.
Did you look up "diabolus ex machina"? Here, I'll help you.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DiabolusExMachina
You know what Deus Ex Machina is, right? When the writers come up with a completely illogical, nonsensical plot twist that saves the heroes? Diabolus Ex Machina is the opposite, when the writers come up with something out of the blue that puts the heroes in trouble. Tobias is pretty much the definition of that.
Yes, remember the battle was dragged on? For 3 episodes? They had enough time to showcase plenty of stategies.
I never even said their wasn't any in the battle, you just brought it up.
No you didn't, but you implied that because you could name one or two that somehow made it all OK. I pointed out that no, it still isn't OK because Ash vs. Paul still had more strategies.
And yes, being 3 episodes long means you can use more strategies. And in any case, just take a small sample: episode 2 of Ash vs. Paul had Buizel using its ring to escape Drapion's clutches, Drapion using Toxic Spikes, Infernape getting rid of the toxic spikes, Froslass using Hail/Snow Cloak and Gliscor using that "use Giga Impact and run away" strategy. That's 5 and I feel like I'm missing a couple.
So even if you just take one episode of the three, Ash/Paul had more strategy involved in it.
Not exactly, Torkoal barely got to fight, I like some action, which would last lets say a minute or two.
Or, imagine Ash vs Ritchie, lengths like that.
Right.
No, this is just you IGNORING my other reasoning.
Going crazy? I merely mentioned it once to say why I enjoyed it.
This is my point, your mind is so deluded you exaggerate every part of my post, and even better this whole conversation has been exaggerated because your incapable of accepting other peoples opinions aside your own.
When you bring up something as ultimately irrelevant as "ASH FLIPPED HIS HAT OMG" I will bring it up. It does serious damage to your own point, since Ash flipping his hat is practically the definition of style over substance.
Yeah I roughly meant that too, meaty because Ash and Paul had loads of development to back up the battle.
That doesn't change my though's I still prefer Ash vs Tobias.
So to be clear you have now admitted that Ash/Paul had better character development, better characterization, better buildup and better payoff, yet Ash/Tobias is still better?
Highlighted important part.
This is your opinion, I preferred Ash vs Gary.
Me stating opinion as fact once again which is 100% ok.
Yes but what difference does it make, like I said, it made the battle show how much Ash had grown to finally defeat his DP rival.
You argued that there was no emotional impact and I showed you a list of things that oozed emotional impact. That makes a lot of difference. Everything in the battle was just done in a more subtle way than I have come to expect from Pokemon.
I didn't admit anything, I said it slightly showed some style of emotion, or at least tried too, it didn't grab my attention too well, unlike Pikachu vs Latios.
What attention it grabbed from you is irrelevant - the point if the emotion of the battle, which you admit is there. You can admit things, you know, it doesn't kill your point.
IMO all I witnessed was fighting which dragged on for too long, your responses are clearly your own thoughts you are such a hypocrite it's unreal.
Yes, they are clearly all my own thoughts. That is the point of an argument - me expressing my opinion and arguing the merits of that opinion. What is hypocritical about that? I have merely argued my case.
OH MY, ALL YOU'VE BEEN DOING THIS WHOLE CONVERSATION IS STATE YOUR OWN GOD DAMN OPINIONS, YOUR MIND, HOW THE HELL DOES IT WORK?
Yes, that's exactly what I've been doing...? Like I said. Stating your opinion as fact is a legit argumentative technique. It sounds more forceful and more assured. Why should I have to tack an "IMO" on the end of every statement?
WHICH IS EXACTLY MY POINT.
MY OPINION IS I PREFER ASH VS TOBIAS OVER ASH VS PAUL.
LET THAT SINK INTO YOUR BRAIN.
I disagree with your opinion completely and will argue otherwise until you get bored/admit defeat. That's the entire point. I don't see why you are so upset about this.
No, because it consists of both.
And once again, it is my opinion, just because you don't see substance in the battle doesn't mean others don't.
I saw one incredibly effective and emotion filled battle which was still action packed.
It's style
over substance, not style
instead of substance. A battle should be mostly substance, but with a little bit of style added on to make the whole thing better in terms of overall presentation. If a battle has more style than substance, for me, something has gone wrong.
But some people prefer style over substance, they prefer seeing things like Ash turning his hat back and legendaries being used in the league and stuff. I like it too, it's novel. But it's not substantial. So yes, Ash/Tobias had substance, but not enough. And the lack of substance was disguised by OMG IT'S DARKRAI AND LATIOS, HOLY CRAP.
I've reasoned, if you can't read posts properly or are literally crazy, that's your problem.
If you can't seem to accept my opinions, thoughts and reasons, that's your problem buddy.
I don't get your reluctance here.
Like, is it just because you would rather be illogical than admit I am correct? I don't get it. I already said there's nothing wrong with preferring style to substance...I just don't see why you won't admit it at this point =/
Why do you constantly bring back the hat turning backwards? I mentioned it once and didn't even say it was brilliant, I just said it did make the battle more fun.
It was enough of a big deal for you to remember it and bring it up, so it's quite clear it meant a lot.
And NO once again, it doesn't mean I prefer style over substance hell i'd never even heard this saying before you arrived on this site.
...you'd never heard that saying before.
wow.
I know which battles I do and do like whether they have either of them ridiculous things you say, you can't decide, or change my opinion so I don't know who you think you are.
And once again for the final god damn time, it's your opinion, the music and whole atmosphere of the battle made great substance to me.
Please read my previous statements on this matter.
I hate to say it, but this is the most pointless and stupidest conversation i've ever had, your reasoning and replies are pathetic, half the time you were being a hypocrite, and the rest consisted of you ignoring my reasoning, exaggerating everything and pushing out every opinion aside your own.
Please explain precisely how I was ever hypocritical.
I also do not appreciate the overly personal tone you have now taken. I think it's completely unnecessary to say my replies have been "pathetic".
I actually can't believe some of the things you said, im still trying to get over them now they were terrible and horrible to reply too.
I end with this statement once again.
Everybody has a god damn opinion, you can't act like your's is the only valid reason around. It's not, you don't know other peoples thoughts.
I will always stand by and argue in favour of my opinion. I am not rejecting your reality and substituting my own, but I am making sure my reality is heard loud and clear. It's not a case of me believing my opinion is fact, that you are wrong. I state my opinion as fact because I shouldn't have to constantly tell you that this is all "IMO".
Obviously you prefer Paul's battle for reasons even you didn't explain properly but made sure that I did.
I prefer Tobia's battle.
LEARN WHAT OPINIONS ARE. /END.
I did explain why I liked Paul's battle more. Please go back and reread my comments earlier in this thread.
Mostly I said the 3-episode system gave every Pokemon a chance to shine and that it had far better buildup and payoff than any previous battle in the series. I believe that is explanation enough and I believe I have already made that abundantly clear here.