Hate to keep having to correct you, but where does it say "they did it, too" in that post? Who is this supposed other party that makes "too" applicable? All I see in that post is you making a bunch of incorrect and unsubstantiated claims about Sony's business practices. Ones that aren't really relevant anyway. Like I said, you just took the post the wrong way and jumped on the attack. When I said Sony lost billions I wasn't implying they lost it buying up content and all that other crap you posted. Though, they certainly spent plenty on that ;)

Hope that helps. If not, let me know exactly what has you so eager to play defense here.

Hate to break it to you, but you're not reading in between the lines. Hitting CTRL + F, typing in the phrase vertatim, and saying "nope, not there" doesn't change the fact that you still pointed the finger at the other company.

You typed "Yet Sony has done all of that." as a response to "That's funny because I don't recall Sony ever resorting moneyhatting tactics, buying timed exclusives, timed exclusive DLC, and forcing parity." But yes, continue to feign ignorance.

There's that defense I am talking about. Where did I "point the finger"? Is correcting you about Sony's business practices "pointing the finger"?

I said they lost billions. I didn't say they lost billions doing the things you are defending. And I never even said those things would be bad. I don't care if a company pays for exclusives or content, platform companies should secure that content.

Still waiting on an explanation for your lulz. I am beginning to think it is a lost cause though.

Read my edit above. The fact you just posted in just a snap of the fingers show that you're replying on instinct, rather than through investigative reactions. I knew that you would not go back and read your own comment and thus, I had to point it out for you. Yes, Sony indeed forced parity last gen for a console that was more powerful than the 360. Lulz, indeed. Good day.

I read your edit. My reply still takes care of your edit.

And actually I think posting too quick and needing to go back and edit your posts is a far bigger sign of posting "from instinct" ;) Seems you should maybe take more time before you hit submit.

Your reply does not, I'm afraid. Again, instinctve instead of reactive. Try again or rather, you'll refuse to since the evidence is right in front of your face. Winking isn't going to magically refute my correct conclusion, unfortunately. Good day.

Good day to you as well. If you ever wanna explain why you got so defensive over something that wasn't even negative, feel free to explain yourself :)

Likewise, if you like to explain why you wouldn't acknowledge evidence presented to you despite its obviousness, do tell.

Well the evidence of your activating super defense mode is here, which is obvious and I have no problem acknowledging said evidence.

The explanation for such lulz though, you are yet to provide. And I am bored of waiting on. Bye.

Supre defense mode? More like calling out on your hypocrisy. Did you forget your "buying gens" schtik?