Dual weild

[scaevola]

Double negatives can denote one of two things: an inversion of the verb's original meaning. "I didn't do nothing" Not doing nothing = doing something.

There seems to be some confusion here.

In order to be a double negative in the sense that you mean, the two negatives must be in the same clause.

I have never claimed

independent clause; negative used to underscore absence of an as-of-yet-unidentified claim

that

optional introductory word for dependent clause, which I omitted

every other job in the game is not pretty bad compared to MNK

dependent clause that admittedly could do without "pretty"; internal litotes ("not bad"), clause as a whole refers to the claim the independent clause said I wasn't making


The two negatives create the effect of a litotes throughout the phrase ("I wouldn't say it isn't bad", if that serves as a simpler example)

Dig?


EDIT: "I didn't do nothing" could actually be a good example of a litotes, though not in the sense you're using it. "I didn't do nothing" could mean something distinct from "I did something" in the same way "It isn't terrible" means something distinct from "It's great".