>>79469835>Jesus fuck, I cringedThinking is hard.
>I just told you it does mean something. It shows they are the limit of human capabilities within their universe. There is no arguing this, stop trying.Except I just fucking said that their human "limits" already exceed what even some superhumans are capable of dealing with even in their own universe, that's no longer peak human by that point.
>Our universe is different than the one they are written in. Stop comparing the two. The writers are the ones who give them limits.And they don't even know how the powers worked before, or different writers have a different idea of what it means, they just want to tell a story. As far as they're concerned, fire guy does things with fire, and they write around that regardless of whether or not there is precedent for how their powers should work, it tells a story, but the abilities aren't consistent.
>What exactly did you mean by this? I can't make sense out of it.Guy A = "Peak human" Able to do whatever limits a "peak human" can do in that universe, whatever the writer can bullshit up
Guy B = Superhuman, 20-tonner, bulletproof, can run up to 100 miles per hour, superhuman reflexes and reactions good enough to dodge bullets like they're nothing. He can do what no one within human limits within the fictional world can or should do.
Guy A takes a hit from a skyscraper-crushing robot, isn't splattered or hurt that bad, or alternatively, manages to somehow dodge the hit.
Guy B takes the same hit from same robot, isn't splattered, but is visibly more hurt and/or dazed than Guy A. The guy can flip around bullets with ease, but can't dodge a punch.
That's what I'm talking about internal consistency, it's not hard.
>It isIt's not.
>I agree, but that isn't the case with thisIt is, it doesn't even follow its own conventions.
>You clearly do not understand it.You don't understand that I understand that it's dumb, but that's your problem.
