A pattern can be two, my evidence would have to be the notion that Ice Climbers and G&W/ROB and Pit are in the game. Secondly, I do not need evidence, I am not asserting a claim. That is not how it works. The only evidence I need, is to show that there is a pattern. This is a case of res ipsa loquitor (the thing speaks for itself).
You keep bringing up the "a pattern can be two" deal, yet I'm not arguing it can't. I'm saying the pattern doesn't exist for the umpteenth million time!
Your evidence is IC/G&W and Pit/R.O.B., when I've pointed out CONTINUOUSLY that Mr. Game & Watch doesn't follow the suit! That is why the pattern doesn't exist!
My point is not that there are no patterns at all, but that your proposed pattern is not a legitimate pattern.
Examples of a legitimate pattern:
-There is a Star Fox character added in each released Smash thus far. (
)
-There are two Pokémon Newcomers added in each Smash released thus far. () Also, Pokémon from the latest Generation before release are added. ()
-In Melee and Brawl, there has been in terms of Fire Emblem characters, Marth and the Lord from a game in development when Smash starts its own development. ()
-My satire example; There is at least one character with a swollen nose and mustache added in each released Smash thus far. 
)
-The legitimate alternative to your pattern; In Melee and Brawl, there is at least one character included whose franchise has been dormant for at least a decade in all regions prior to inclusion. ( )
There however, was not 2 "retros" added to each Smash.
Here we go with the "Sakurai is god" mentality! We cannot possibly understand what Sakurai's direction is because he is so beautiful and in charge of everything. You can paraphrase it however you went in a reasonable context. I suppose heavily implying a revival cannot possibly be interpreted as the inclusion of a new character. That isn't logical at all. He could be talking about a stage or something!
How many times have you hit your head as a child?
This has nothing to do with praising Sakurai like some deity, but
everything to do with calling out when someone twists what Sakurai
actually said into something entirely different in order to support their case.
You claim you can "paraphrase it however you 'went' in a reasonable context", yet my entire point is that your paraphrasing
wasn't reasonable.
Like the braindead Ridley detractors that turned "An enemy of Samus may appear at any second" into "Ridley's going to be a stage hazard!" when the first Pyrosphere image was posted, you've turned "I am planning on doing my best to bring old characters back in Smash Bros. From that perspective, I am probably in the most fortunate position in the world." into "I am going to include a retro character".
I mean really, that's not a "heavy implication" that he's
going to do it; it's one that he's going to
try to do it. There's a major difference there.
And considering this part of my previous post was still present in your quote:
Me said:
What he said was that he planned on doing his best to breathe new life into older characters through Smash Bros., and that he's fortunate for the opportunity.
That doesn't mean there without a doubt will be one. Just that Sakurai is interested. Which is nothing new.
Your last point comes off as just plain idiotic as it shows you either did not read or you deliberately chose to make a poor attempt at sarcasm.
You will get a kick out of this. You antagonized me, so you have another fun post to respond to. If you so choose, that is. If you don't want to, I can completely understand, I wouldn't want to either. Once you realize we should have agreed to disagree 2 days ago, you realize how pointless this argument is. I have a feeling that we both have misconceptions about each other. Nevertheless, let us continue our chronicles.
Lol at only continuing because I "antagonized you". Just lol.
I do not flip-flop. My premise has always been the same. I do not think the pattern means anything, I merely acknowledge that there was a pattern. That isn't even the debate, you are just changing the premise so that it is easier for you to argue.
It is also likely that we will get two... just like Melee, and just like Brawl.
However, a pattern was established. To question that, would be to question my sanity. That doesn't mean I think 2 retros will be in Smash 4. That doesn't mean that I think Sakurai is going to stick to the pattern.
Yeah, you don't flip flop all right....
You should really pay attention to the things you say.
That also covers your demand in the quoted part.
The pattern is objective, two components can make a pattern. The interpretation of the pattern is subjective. There is a difference. I suppose since you blantanly disregard the definition of a pattern, I will go ahead and quit. That is all I am arguing, if you don' t see the overt pattern, that is not on me.
Then by all means, quit.
You fail to realize that the pattern was never real to begin with and go off on a tangent that I don't know what a pattern is yet seem to except me to bend over to your argument.
You just don't acknowledge the pattern that you are following.
Lol, try me.
I don't really care which group you are in, I am attempting to convey that you have a narrow mind-set. I am guilty of it as well, the main point is that following only one path will get you to one place. I like to try and remain objective, if and when something happens, I can claim I was a part of it. That is why I never really put my cards on the table, I like proceeding to be more ambiguous. I don't want to do this, but I have to for the sake of a good example. It might be objective fact to me that I am going to to get of the wheel (samsara) in Hinduism; however, by blatantly disregarding all other religion, there is a chance that I might be a part of the wrong one. That is a struggle many people deal with. So same thing, if there are two retro characters, you would be wrong and I might question your intelligence, if I am (arbitrarily) wrong and there are not two retros (despite not being what I am debating at all) I would look quite stupid.
If there are two retro characters, I am not wrong.
Do you get why? No? Because I'm not arguing there won't be. I'm arguing that there is no existing pattern that shows there will. Though there being 2 in Smash 4 would establish the pattern that would have started in Brawl.
I am sorry, I stopped reading after the quoted portion. That notion is antithetical. This is why you can't comprehend what I am saying.
I am not arguing that red cant be considered a color, I am saying that red isn't a color. That is essentially what you just stated. I am not calling Habanero an idiot, I am saying that you are unintelligent and the only reason he could possibly agree with such fallacy ridden logic is because he likes you more. If he blantantly tells me that he agrees with the above quote, I will put him in the same category that I just put you in.
First, you must have missed the part in a previous post when I said this:
And people siding with me has nothing to do with them being my friends. If they feel I'm spouting off nonsense, they won't hesitate to call me out on it, some with harsher remarks than others (such as Habanero and JohnKnight). If they're siding with me, it means they agree with what I'm saying.
and when Habanero said this:
Yes, I would chew you out, but conversely if I agree on your points (which is the norm) I'll stick to you.
You have my respect, I'm not going to sugar coat it, but I'm not soft either.
So I will repeat myself; him agreeing with me has nothing to do with him liking me.
And funny that you try to save face by attempting to keep the discussion to a PM, since relatively early, you tell me this:
You were right about a few things. I did call Habanero an idiot.
And later stated that it "wasn't an apology, since you're not sorry".
I just read a the last portion of your argument, I think it is funny that you don't think you are following a pattern. Sakurai is unpredictable for the sake of being unpredictable, hence you are following a pattern. I know the premise is difficult to grasp. It is true though.
Refusing to follow a pattern is not following a pattern. I know the premise is difficult to grasp. It is true though.
And no, I
never said Sakurai was "unpredictable for the sake of being unpredictable" aside from a few weeks back in a joking manner.
As for the editing, you did it on 4 or 5. I am not sure your reasons on the other ones. The two were the only ones edited to the extreme. I was arguing qualitative or quantitative though. You doubled the length of one post and completely changed the context and meaning of another (both after I responded as a feeble attempt to make yourself sound feasible). A logical fallacy is a fallacy, you cant expect me to sit there and take a strawman fallacy. That is absurd.
Look at all the posts I've made in this conversation and see which ones have a "last edited by GoldenYuiitusin" on it.
Only two posts have it.
They are the only two I've edited.
And you know what else?
They're the posts I've already shown you what the edits were.
One with information to support a claim that was unsupported, the other with satire.
Both edited before the responses.
SmashBoards has no filter for "major" edits or "minor edits". An edit is an edit. If the only thing that is changed is adding a punctuation mark that is missing, it still says the post was edited.
So Quit. The. Bull****.
You just interpret what Sakurai said differently, you cannot necessarily take the literal meaning when we don't understand the primary context. We already know the conversation was filtered to Smash, so it is up for speculation. I never directly stated that is what Sakurai intends to do, I implied it, which is rational. If you honestly think that there will not even be one retro character, you had better be prepared to be disappointed. There WILL be a retro character.
You never directly stated that is what Sakurai intends to do?
Not to mention Sakurai already mentioned he would be adding a retro character (paraphrasing).
You don't know what it means to
imply something, do you?
Also, refer to what I said earlier about the quote.
The only thing contradictory about me is that I stated I wouldn't respond. I couldn't help it though, not like you didn't beg me to, this is a circular argument and I can keep it up all day by re-stating the same points I made before (just like you). I have a serious question to ask you, I am not asking this in a derogatory way, I am not attempting to be pretentious, but how old are you? You have a job, that scares me (it doesn't really, there is no way you would question objective fact with an innate subjective nature to my face, or anyone's... the internet is truly a wonderful thing). It is a serious question though, I showed my sister a portion of this argument (the one we had 2 or 3 days ago that has devolved into ad hominem) and she wanted me to ask you. I predicted you were in your tweens, she said that you were too intelligent, I actually agreed. It is difficult to maintain any significant respect that I once had though. Not because you are being an *******. I am an *******. Mostly because you have the audacity to call me a contradiction. That is beyond hypocritical.
How is that hypocritical, pray tell? What have I said that is contradictory?
I've already pointed out your contradictions, but seeing as you "didn't read past the quoted portion", you clearly don't read what I say.
And if you must know for whatever reason, I'm 19, going on 20 in about a week. Not that it means anything.
To summarize my point... again. A pattern exists Regardless of any relevance or significance, regardless of whether it was Sakurai's intent, and regardless of whether or not it can be interpreted objectively.
All you keep saying is a pattern exists even when it doesn't.
Since AGAIN, the "2 Retros" pattern doesn't ****ing EXIST.
As for the rest I can't quote, pretty sure I covered it already.
