Board Thread:Metal Gear Solid V/@comment-6747658-20150826194634/@comment-1672596-20150828002305

Kornflakes89 wrote: Weedle McHairybug wrote:

I showed you two screenshots that came from the game that he had verified, plus an entire internet post given by a guy who made pretty clear that he's not the type to take statements made by people who claim to have the game lightly, AND the fact that the guy that I linked to who made that Dutch article verified that the leaks are indeed true (and he's know, he was part of the Konami LA group). That should be reasonable enough proof to take into consideration. Just because you would be the type to claim falsehoods and doctor images as you pretty much admitted in an earlier post doesn't mean everyone is that, so stop projecting yourself on the world and its populace. You ask for proof, I gave you it, and you still stubbornly refuse? Last I checked, when someone gives proof, undeniable proof as this turns out to be, they'd submit to it.

And I'm NOT a fool. When I turn out to be right, you're going to owe a very big apology. And yes, if I prove to be wrong, I'll owe you an apology as well.

All I see from you is talk and excuses, talk and excuses, talk and excuses.

If you don't have a video or screenshot that directly ties to those claims, you have nothing.

Not a fool? You took a guide that presented info as speculation as if it were fact, you saw that the guide had conflicting information and went with one of them without considering that the other one could be true, you're currently taking claims from people who've given no proof to those claims as confirmed facts, you were told, multiple times, to leave the page as it is until the games official release yet did not listen and apparently don't understand that simply giving proof that you've played a game does not mean every single claim you make is confirmed fact until proof to those claims is given. You're as big a fool as anyone could be.

Now do us all a favor and make like a tree, and get out of here, claims with no proof to support them do not belong here and neither do people who believe the opposite. That guide only gave speculation because Konami pretty much forced them to not directly confirm the source. Everything else in that guide has been proven verifiable, and even the Ishmael bit was pretty clearly proving itself valid by the day (case in point, one of the players had actually confirmed the bit about Huey encountering Big Boss was indeed valid, including that during the meeting, there was a hint that Venom Snake wasn't actually Big Boss. The only mistake the guide makers made is claiming Huey didn't recognize him. It was actually the Mammal Pod who didn't recognize him. One of the players actually directly verified it. I'll even give you his name if you wish). And for the record, they're playing the game, the thread is literally called Metal Gear Solid V The Phantom Pain - Spoiler Thread, and the people on there are either playing the broken street dates themselves or otherwise watching leaked videos/streams showing exactly that. That sounds very much like actual confirmation and actual verification. The entire point of such a thread is to discuss spoilers, which can only be obtained if you've actually PLAYED the game.

Seriously, this is coming across as less that you are being reasonably skeptical (I myself can be very skeptical if needs be. For example, I wasn't really willing to trust the spoilers that Hans was the bad guy in Frozen, not because I wanted him to be the good guy, but because most of the spoilers were coming from novelizations and adaptations that were released before the movie [I know about how Destiny Deoxys' manga adaptation changed quite a lot from the actual movie, so I am VERY reluctant to trust statements made from adaptations unless backed up by the source material, and for good reason]), and more of someone who is utterly in denial under the five stages of grief, because even people innately skeptical of things would have bought into the leaks by now, especially with more information coming out that if anything is proving most if not all of the leaks to be correct.