Nerf This

Because that’s totally the biggest difference, along with the ‘theory’-cum-fact that Scott alluded to all three stories taking place in the same universe, and not at the same time…

To be more clear on it, Destiny did mention having killed most of his kind (leading to the current conflict between her and Chase), which leads one to figure ‘how did she miss Monty,’ at which point one remembers he’s been with Nergil for (x) out of the (x) years Nergil’s been cursed, with no mention of where Monty was or came from before that time.

That said, allegedly it’s been decades to centuries since ‘now’ in Motokool, where monsters like that are everywhere (and the company was founded by the first/last human king, who believed humans and monsters could work together). Now, given how long it allegedly took Monty to grow from his previous form, who’s to say he wouldn’t eventually get more human arms and legs? Too significant of a difference, you say? That’s closer to being the /only/ difference, aside from the ability to copy words and wear monocles.

*scratches head*
I could have sworn I stated that clearly.
“It’s been decades to hundreds of years since ‘now’ (Nerf-This) in Motokool.”

What I was saying about Nergil was that he’s had Monty for who-knows how many years since he’s been cursed, but it hasn’t been said how long Monty was around before Nergil got ahold of him. Which had to be clarified because of (and I’ll requote) “How did Destiny miss Monty when she was going about killing off the rest of his kind?” And you don’t have to read every comment by Scott, it’s been brought up in the comment section by people other than Scott every now and again how what theory fits into the timeline.

There, does that make more sense? Not meaning to come off as ‘preachy’ but it does get annoying to see a comment attempt to disprove something that’s already been stated nigh-clearly.

… How? How did you, once again, read that /wrong/?
Let me try this in all-caps.

MOTOKOOL. IS SET. DECADES TO HUNDREDS OF YEARS. IN THE FUTURE. FROM THE CURRENT TIME. IN NERF-THIS.

How you keep mistaking “since (which is just as good a substitute for ‘from’ [denoting time moving AWAY from a set point in time {WHICH I CLARIFIED TO BE THE CURRENT TIMELINE OF NERF-THIS}]) for before (which is the only way I would have bothered to write the phrase you’re stating I did)”, I have no clue.

For clarity, I’m saying Motokool is decades to centuries in the future of Nerf-This, likely closer to decades, but repeating ‘centuries’ since I said it in previous comments. But perhaps the needless part of this sentence confused you, so let me punctuate this for emphasis.

IN THE FUTURE! OF! NERF-THIS!

Now, do pardon me if I came off as preachy, but once again, it does so enrage me to see a comment try to twist words around to a point that is difficult for one reading in a logical fashion to comprehend.

TL;DR – Please, do tell me you were trying to troll. It would really be a sad thing for the state of your mental faculties if you were not.

Well, would you look at that, you’ve made me go and say something with confidence something I wanted to say was “in theory.” Congrats you bilgerat, you’ve gone and irritated me to the point of spontaneously openly supporting an opinion. WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO COUGH UP A LUNG FOR YOU TOO?

http://motokool.net/historical-platter-3/

Now, if you’ll look at exhibit (A) -*SEPARATE BUT RELATED NOTE* in its entirety, you fool, not just the singular post. That is to say, the pages before and after the subject matter- *BACK TO THE EXAMPLE*, you’ll see that there was once a human king who founded the company Jarvis is applying for. Posted January 18, 2011.
http://nerf-this.com/dream-adventure/
In exhibit (B) -*SEPARATE BUT RELATED NOTE* which should be ‘exhibit A’ since it is noted to have come first in the production line, but won’t for the sake of making you go through mental acrobatics to understand it, even though it is in essence QUITE simple – *BACK TO THE EXAMPLE*, you’ll see quite a similar character design, yes to Jarvis, but also to the ‘someone’ in the painting. You say it’s coincidence and anachronism; I say there’s most certainly a reason beyond that.
Now, do try to remain consistent in you disproving of a theory. First it’s “highly improbably” because it’s “most certainly not set in the past” when I never said such a thing (do try to explain, how in my sentence structure you thought that was what I was saying. Do try.), now it’s “improbable” because you think I have no source, when the “source” is in the very webcomics you claim to be reading.

Of course, on the offchance that debates like this have put Scott off of the thing, congratulations, you had an effect on a project you are not reportedly a part of. More than some can say about subjects such as this.

And let me reiterate, I truly and wholly have an intense dislike for people that you that try and twist peoples words around to the point that they don’t make logical sense to you, and then you try and decipher a hidden meaning in something that wasn’t even coded to begin with.

DECADES TO CENTURIES SINCE “NOW” =/= DECADES TO CENTURIES BEFORE “NOW”

“NOW” CLARIFIED TO BE THE CURRENT TIMELINE IN “NERF-THIS”

NERF-THIS ONCE-MORE CONFIRMED TO BE THE ‘CURRENT’ TIMELINE

“Why didn’t you just say ‘it takes place after’?” I did. I /so/ did.

*Ahem*
Do I care whether or not you are “nearly,” “more,” or “not at all” as invested in this discussion as I am? I do not, but obviously you feel the need to point it out, which by proxy leads one to believe that you’re trying to disconnect yourself from the situation, having been disproven on all points that you attempted to argue… and failed to back up.

Certainly I could, but at no point did I /claim/ to be an intellectual, now, did I? I simply stated a point as *cough cough* “simply” as I could, with you failing to comprehend my simplicity. By all means, I am quite the idiot, I just know how to use and comprehend a number of words that the average ‘idiot’ would not be expected to know, let alone properly utilize.

And to clarify, my ‘tantrum’ was not even over the theory itself, but your continued refusal to acknowledge that you’re a failure of a “Know-It-All” fish in a barrel. There are plenty of you where you came from, feel free to return to your brethren in shame, knowing you could never fit into the sea you’re trying to swim in.

Ta, now.

“I’ve been skimming what you wrote.”

That, and the fact that you bothered to reply /yet once more/ at my behest, just prove my point. If you want a goddamn explanation, read the entirety instead of nitpicking.

Oh, and by the way? You nitpicked again. I already said I’m an idiot. You, meanwhile and /by your own admission/, just proved yourself to be the bigger one in this simulation. Neat, isn’t it, how the moment I’m not obviously enraged, you suddenly are fed up with this call-and-response.

Obviously, you are no ‘brethren’ of mine.

*handwave* Goodbye now~ goodbye, and make sure you have everything you came here with before you go~

But by all means, do continue this. It’s been a while since I’ve had someone to rip into to the point where they try to flee claiming “I’m too good for this.”

Please. Do go on.

It could also be joking reference to the fact that characters in his different comics tend to look pretty similar (e.g. here http://motokool.net/new-hire/ protagonist has clearly turned into Chase). I think the similar-looking characters came about from lack of artistic maturity (which no longer applies, of course – Scott’s art is ridiculous now) but it could possibly play into a parallel-worlds connection or something.