It is really simple: is the character within 2 squares?

If "yes", she can treat it as adjacent.

If "no", then she can't.

That's all we care about for this power. LOF, elevation, etc. are all irrelevant.

I understand what everyone is saying, don't get me wrong. If a normal earth quake hit, it would shake buildings no problem. But in the game I don't see how with regards to Elevation when her power does not ignore it.

Is it a close combat attack? Yes
Are they on different elevations? Yes
Does her power ignore elevation? No

You forgot one:
Is the character 2 squares or less away?
If yes, then it is treated as if it was adjacent to Quake. Elevation is not mentioned, so it does not affect this SP.

And I would have no problem agreeing with that if it were not for the part under elevation that's states "for any game effect"

Would you say Larfleeze cannot use Poison against an enemy on a different elevation that is adjacent to an Orange Construct?

Ah, finally an argument based on the same perception.

His power allows for poison and close combat purposes to be allowed for characters adjacent to his constructs. But it is defying the rule of elevation.

Give me a minute to ponder this.

We have the absolute wording on elevated terrain.Then we have another game effect:
There is no rule that says "for any game effect except those that specifically contradict this rule". (That is simply a rule of thumb we use to stay sane...) This means the 'as if adjacent' and actual adjacently are NOT equivalent because otherwise the rules specifically contradict themselves.

This means:
Quake: requires adjacency
SP: treats the figure AS IF they were adjacent if they are within range 2
Is the figure adjacent? No
Can the attack be made anyway? Yes
It's that simple.

The 'as if', 'considered', 'regardless of' and 'may target' wording all imply that they are exceptions to the standard rules. The difference in wording is more sloppiness than intent. It would be better if they all included the word 'ignores' which has a defined meaning in the glossary.

I'm at work now so its hard for me to comment to much on the subject but:

Nothing has a full defined meaning in the glossary.

@MisterId:

I think where you're getting hung up is on the fact that they're not adjacent, and you're right that they aren't. The part you're overlooking is that they don't need to be adjacent for her special brand of quake. Don't let the phrase, "as if they were adjacent," mislead you too much.

@Jak - trust me I'm not Hung up on the adjacency part. It's the rules on Elevation part I'm Hung up on.

@Quebster - Yeah I know how Larfleeze works. I have 6 of him (tried to get more for norm but friends are greedy). I also under stand how Quake's and Rulk's special powers are supposed to work.

I honestly saw that little part on Elevation "for any game effect" and thought hey that's a big inconsistency. I think I have brought a good argument to the table that maybe it will get looked at in the future. Thanks all for the debate.

Another similar example would be cases of special Outwits like Crispus Allen's or Skrull Spider-Woman's. In those cases, the Outwit is based off of adjacency, and therefore has been ruled to be used on Stealthed figures, as the requirement of adjacency in the SP trumps the requirement that LoF is needed even in adjacency.
Similarly here, the requirement of "as if adjacent" means that everybody within the 2 square radius is technically adjacent regardless of blocking terrain or elevated terrain, even though those terrains would typically render characters non-adjacent. Her power doesn't need to specify that it ignores terrain, as it specifies that they are to be considered adjacent, and therefore legal targets.