I take the hints at Eva being a witch a little more seriously than the ones that hint Eva was a whore.
eva...a witch...wow...that really makes sense now
I take the hints at Eva being a witch a little more seriously than the ones that hint Eva was a whore.
eva...a witch...wow...that really makes sense now
bear in mind, it's completely not canon. While kamiya did create both devil may cry and bayonetta (and the character Eva) he lost rights to the IP by the time he made bayonetta. This is just an easter egg that, while never proven wrong, probably won't be proven true either unless the next guy to write devil may cry decides to pick it up.
I do like the explanation though
That is all I wanted to hear.
I WIN!!!
if that's what you wanted to hear, why did you disagree with me the first time I said it was unofficial? The explanation is plausible, and no amount of ****posting will ever change that. If any post does eventually prove me wrong, it won't be from a post like yours just now.
Well by then the argument wasn't official and my reaction to that comment was more of if anything countering the possibility of Eva being a witch if Kamiya was in charge or not.
If Capcom or PG ever decides to make Eva a witch or make it canon I will still say bullsh*t or the very least call asspull and I gave you my reasons why.
you've had 3 pages to give me your reasons why, right now. You don't get to keep your reasons to yourself and then repeatedly declare yourself "the winner" of an argument. That's now how discussion works.
Either contribute or sit quietly in the peanut gallery
All right. No more little digs or "funny" gifs. Also, Stylish Nero and I have since buried the hatchet.throwing in little digs, "funny" gifs and whatever else, you will be temp-banned
Sir it seems you present a statement of declaration or challenge is in past tense and present tense mixing up the two concepts of your stating something in the past but at the same thing offering a challenge in the present thus sparking confusion in the initial target of your comment (me the responder). So I take initiative that you as the original commentator to make it more clear of the intent and purpose of your statement before further action must be taken place to advance the nature and growth of our conversation.
Hey... maybe you should stop arguing. Not telling you what to do, but after seeing... the post... I think it would be better not to push our luck.you're saying it's my fault for not explicitly telling you that you're supposed to back up what you believe by offering reason?