GameTavern - Pretty Bold Statement

Man, this is classic sh!t.

I've been in countless debates/arguments before, and this is easily one of the most one-sided of them all. I'm amazed that at your persistance Stu, because you had no basis for argument from the very start. Nothing I said I this thread was bias or shallow(and certainly not "ridiculously" so, as you claimed)and your pathetic attempts to prove so, were, of course, to no avail. I can't allow any fool to be taking cheap, unwarranted shots at me, and even thinking their acts were appropriate. It'll cost ya.

First, I'll point to the very statement that put me on the offense(or on the defense, depending on how you look at it).

You quoted me saying:
"I feel sorry for people who were so certain this generation would spark some kind of online frenzy."

You replied:
"I feel sorry for people who Nintendo have by the tit"

I don't think you're even aware of how absurd is was for you to take my original post (or any statement within it)and -- for whatever reason -- spin it into something it just it was never meant to be. Then, followed by your feeble attempt to justify what you did. If you don't agree with anything I say, the smarter thing to do -- being in a forum and all -- would be to... gasp... post your opposing view. Hiding behind allegations of me being biased and or firing cheapshots and retreating seem like the punk way out, if you ask me.

Quote:

Originally posted by Perfect Stu
Your comments were ridiculously biased and shallow.

Hello!? I posted my stance on where online gaming is in this generation, and on the statemnet which Break-A-Bone based this thread. Hell is wrong with you, kid? There's NOTHING here to be biased or shallow about. You either agree, disagree, fall somewhere in the middle, or STFU. If you think online gaming took some kind of significant step and it did caused a frenzy, then say so and quit acting like I'm holding you're opinion hostage. If that's you're perspective, then I totally disagree, but it'd be foolish of me to accuse you of being bias or taking Sony's side. Do you realize how dumb that sounds? To turn this into some "D-real & Nintendo Vs the world" issue -- as you have -- is idiotic, reflects your own bias, shallowness, ignorance, and lack of understanding.

Quote:

Online gaming is simply just an 'X, Y, Z' game with online play strapped on? I guess that voice chat with people from different countries to plan an attack on a team of 8 user-controlled enemies from different areas of the continent is simply a 'regular old single player game with something "strapped onto it"'. Talk about misleading the reader.

Misleading the reader? The only one misled is you, my naive friend. That's due in large part to your inability to comphrehend. If reading is a challange for you, perhaps the following link may offer a glimmer of hope. Hooked On Phonics!

Ahaha, that was too irresistable, but who knows, maybe it might actually help. ;)
Seriously, before you pick a bone with someone, you should first make sure you were certain of what they said. Not what you think they said. Anything less sets you up for easy ripping. But why tell you, when I can show ya, hmm?

Here's what you said:
"Online gaming is simply just an 'X, Y, Z' game with online play strapped on?"

Here's what i actually said:
"On one hand, you have a certian group thinking that having a fun multiplayer experience simply means taking X, Y, or Z game, and slapping it online with a multiplayer mode..."

I know where online gaming IS right now, and where It'd COULD go. I'd be damn if I said something as stupid as you implied I did. How you transladed my statement into that crap you just said is beyond me. I wouldn't go as far as saying you blatantly lied, I'd just say you need to think before you speak, or in this case read(and comprehend) before you type. Whatever the case, by now, everyone -- except you -- sees how wrong you are. Wrong... yet, persistent? :confused:

Quote:

Why don't you explain EXACTLY what is 'strapped on' and why it adds nothing to the regular split screen/single TV multiplayer experience. There are always two sides to the fence, and you always seem to get your jollies by frolicking on the Nintendo side.

Yo, are you so imature you can't see things in any other light than that of picking sides? There's no sides to pick in this thread, just drop it already! I told you; either you agree, disagree, fall in the middle somewhere, or shut up. But, I'm curious though, so let's say this were a thread where I could pick sides. Why would me -- a Nintendo fan -- choosing to side with Nintendo bother you so much anyway? :hmm:

Oooooooooooh! Heh, that's irony for ya!

Also. Why should I explain something I never said? Show me where I said -- or hell, even implied -- that online gaming adds nothing to the regular offline multiplayer experience. You're just pulling stuff out the air, aren't you? Are they 2 or 3 more Perfect Stus that's I'm not aware of? How can ONE guy be THIS wrong? This is just pathetic!

I don't even know why I even wasted my time. You're inconsistent, you're taking everything I said out of context, you're basing your supporting argument on points I never made, you're claiming I said things I never did, and more importantly, all of this crap stemmed from you taking an ordinary cut and dry statement/post, and mutating it into this bunch of bull about being bias, picking sides, and everything which the nature of the thread doesn't even foment. Maybe the driving factor for me here is the thought of you even harboring the idea that you have something on me. pppff. :rolleyes:

Quote:

4-player Pac-Man using 4 GBAs as controllers is not evolutionary. It's new. New means nothing...people farting the tune to a song would be new...but in the end, it still stinks. This area of gaming that Miyamoto has given us from the gods may have a future of new, exciting possibilites...but right now, all I see is four people mildly enjoying themselves playing a 20 year old game.

Well, then that's you're perspective on the whole Pac-man deal. The thread encouraged you to post your view, didn't it? I'm not sure where this would fit in your attemp to prove these "ridiculously bias and shallow" statements that I allegedly posted, so there's not much I can say here, except for the fact that I hold a different perspective here. Based on what was said in the quoted, it would appear like the reality was much further from your idea of four people mildly enyoying themselves playing a 20 year old game. But whatever...

Last, but not least.

Quote:

But keep convincing yourself that I'm backpeddaling...that way, at least you like yourself...because that's what's really important, right? :)

I was wrong, admittingly. No back-peddaling here. You're just running dead smack into brick-walls. :(

You're play!
You post, I rip. Simple little game, isn't it?

As a matter of fact, I said much of what was needed to be said. Seeing that you've been on the wrong track from the start, I don't see your argument going anywhere. So, you can have the last word. Just don't make it too tempting. ;)