NON-MELTY RELATED TOPIC Do you guys think we'll see Vivian's skin in the stream tomorrow?

>>1029709 I used my selector on her just to have all the standards

>>1029758 If we don't, I'm going to swear off ZZZ for a day so I can play AvP Extinction or Black or some shit idk

>>1029758 i think vivian is purple

>>1029746 >But we aren't talking about "my image". It's completely irrelevant to the conversation I agree, you did make an irrelevant argument >The only "perspective" at play in this case is the perspective created the the in-game camera. There's always perspective at play in drawings. You don't see that S11 is tilting her head to eat noodles because you have only half a brain. >but then you realized that that statement would be objectively wrong when applied to a disembodied head I didn't suddenly realize what argument you were trying to make, I knew it from the start. But it's true that it doesn't make sense to see her hair directly under her mouth as that violates the perspective we are viewing her from (straight-on).

>>1029758 Vivian on the left looks 13-years old.

>>1029717 Wait where did they talk about Nineveh.

>>1029766 I'm starting to think you don't actually know what a 13 year old girl looks like, bwo

>>1029770 Yeah as someone who had to manhandle girls 10-15 that looks 14 at least.

>>1029770 All those porn videos where 30yo women introduce themselves as "college" and "high school" girls are finally getting to the people

Retarded little skirmish there, let's try to have a cleaner next thread

>>1029759 Same.

>>1029770 Post some 13-year-old girls for me then.

>>1029765 >I agree, you did make an irrelevant argument This is ad-hominem. >There's always perspective at play in drawings. This is completely irrelevant to the conversation >You don't see that S11 is tilting her head to eat noodles This is a strawman >because you have only half a brain This is ad-hominem >I didn't suddenly realize what argument you were trying to make, I knew it from the start. This is a weak lie. You have long proven how inept and clueless you are. >as that violates the perspective we are viewing her from This is the only actual point you are attempting to make. And it happens to be objectively wrong. No, from the perspective we are viewing her from we are supposed to be seeing the ponytail. What you are confusing is the perspective and the style implications. Because the implications of seeing the hair below a head is an actual disembodied head, which is jarring and it clashes with the otherwise cutesy art style, hence why you apparently can't see it. But the fact remains that it's the ponytail you are seeing. Trigger didn't abruptly grow the beard, that's not how her cloak looks like regardless of stylization, it clearly and deliberately uses the same color as the rest of her hair and it has deliberately added details to make it look like her hair. Additionally, drawing the cloak only on her would imply only Trigger is drawn having a body. That, again, clashes with the style.

I'm not reading that, but I want to fuck the Dullahan and Mermaid

stfu and MOVE >>1029799 >>1029799 >>1029799 >>1029799

I read all that and I think you've won.

>>1029789 No, i'm not going to encourage the the weird obsession you guys have with being called pedos

>>1029806 Then I'll keep saying what I think.

>>1029770 And it better remain that way

>>1029795 >This is ad-hominem. Uhh no, I just repeated back what you said >This is completely irrelevant to the conversation You're just throwing random accusations at random statements now >This is a strawman You directly said she wasn't >This is a weak lie It's the truth. You're so mad and retarded that you're like a headless person. Your image is very appropriate. >No, from the perspective we are viewing her from we are supposed to be seeing the ponytail. Nope. Every single person that looks at the drawing instinctively sees something wrong with it. It looks like a beard for a reason, because the perspective is being violated (or it's something else).

>>1029824 >Uhh no, I just repeated back what you said This is a lie. >You're just throwing random accusations at random statements now No, I'm dissecting your post line by line. I get that you are underage and can't argue in good faith to save your life, so I'm explaining to you how retarded you're sounding. >You directly said she wasn't That's not what I said. And not even what I implied. >It's the truth. Anon, if that's "the truth" it just makes you a genuine retard. >You're so mad and retarded that you're like a headless person. Your image is very appropriate. This is ad-hominem >Nope. Your "nope" is objectively false >Every single person that looks at the drawing instinctively sees something wrong with it. And I have just explained what exactly that is. >the perspective is being violated This statement is completely retarded as you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about. >(or it's something else) Yes, it's something else. I have told you what is it.

>>1029842 >all his lines are now just "nuh uh"

>>1029847 That's a literal lie, though. YOUR lines are "nuh uh". I am literally explaining every point I make. It's not my fault that out of all of everything you've said there's only a single line containing a point while everything else is just fallacies.

>>1029850 I'm sorry you can't think rationally. It's kind of easy to see from the way you rage and sputter.

>>1029856 >ad hominem Glad to see you have nothing to say. Good luck on your next argument on the Internet. Maybe you'll embarrass yourself less.

>>1029860 Your posts are full of ad hom lmao The difference is that I'm not using them as an argument, I'm just commenting separately since I already demonstrated how wrong you were. You constantly contradict yourself, which makes it easy, but then you always deny it.

>>1029865 >Your posts are full of ad hom lmao Some are, because you well deserve it. But all of them have a point as well. Yours are nothing but ad hominem, strawman, and literal lies. >The difference is that I'm not using them as an argument This is a lie, for example. No, 90% of your "argument" was ad hominem. You fail to defend your point because you don't really understand what you're talking about and as you are proven wrong, you immediately resort to ad hominem. >since I already demonstrated how wrong you were This is a lie as well. So far you have only embarrassed yourself at every given opportunity. >You constantly contradict yourself, which makes it easy, but then you always deny it. This is a lie. I haven't contradicted myself once. The things you think are contradictions are the result of you taking your strawman so far you have completely lost the plot and started believe retarded bullshit you were spewing. Again, good luck next time, little bitch.

>>1029758 yes her rerun will be announced too she will be with lucia and hugo will be with yiddy screenshot this

>>1029883 Yeah I'm not reading that wall. Continue seething while being wrong, you've already long since proven that you can't stick to your own claims. You call them irrelevant and then play stupid (or rather, you just are stupid).

Bring the debate to the next thread please.

>>1029897 New thread, new me

>>1029896 >y-you are w-wrong >s-seethe Bye-bye, little bitch

>>1029898 No. New thread, old me.