Anything to do with Nintendo or the Wii U being a failed/dead console or them having jumped ship for the NX or it not being worth bothering with the company until the NX releases.

You are obsessed with the meaning of opinion to the point you will try and find something out of nothing so you can prove to everyone that you know what it means.

First

You need to clarify if it's an opinion.

Samus Aran - "Well, I've never seen anyone say that. My guess is you're talking about their first party support. (I think) Bloodborne was their only excellent game this year."

That does not show it's an opinion. What I added in brackets is an example what can make it an opinion. I will show how you can use Metacritic as a fact in a minute.

spemanig - "No, he didn't. You just read his opinion incorrectly. He didn't need to clarify anything. The way he structured his statement and the context in which he stated it was enough for anyone to be able to reasonably deduce that it was an opinion of his. There is absolutely no circumstance what-so-ever where the sentence 'the PS4 only has one decent exclusive so far this year' could ever be anything other than an opinion, so there is absolutely no reason whatsoever that it should ever be misinterpreted as being a fact  or "stated as a fact" outside of a literal lack of understanding from the reader on what does and does not constitute as an opinion."

Whole paragraph is full of it and what context? There is absolutly nothing in those sentences that suggests an opinion. I mean I get it if the conversation was continuing from "what's your favourite games" or something but it wasn't.

Second 

I do not go for this pretentious bullshit. By having the meaning of "opinion"  in your signature doesn't give you the right to blindly go around picking fights and in the case the wrong fight for 2 reasons. Samus Aran clarified what he/she said and the issue was over until you came wading in like the "Opinion Meaning" police. The other reason, you are wrong.

spemanig - "Because it can be safely assumed that anyone participating in these forums is old enough to have been taught the meaning and application of an opinion."

spemanig's sig

Seriously who do you think you are? I'm aware you have admitted one of your intentions on this site is to wind people up. But what's the point in having this cynical demeanor?

Third

Now how can this - "Bloodborne was their only excellent game this year" - be considered a fact. I thought it would be quite easy to grasp but here goes. One kindergarten lesson of opinion and fact coming up.

So we're going to use Metacritic as the example here because most of the time when people talk about quality of a game they use Metacritic. Metacritic is one of a few places that subjective reviews can be looked at objectively.

Here's what Metacritic says about the average scores. http://www.metacritic.com/about-metascores

So we can say that to metacritic says that games over 90 is "Excellent" right.

The only new game in 2015 to score over 90 was Bloodborne. The rest are below 90. Now can you see how "Bloodborne was their only excellent game this year" can be used as fact. This is why I was trying to get clarification. He had just been talking about Metacritic in he's previous post so wanted him/her to clarify if they've played Sony's 2015 games or come to that conclusion using Metacritic. We cleared it up and that was that.

In future if you want to talk to anybody about anything, do not use the same attitude. People will not listen to you and it only cause friction and arguments. I'm assuming you're a clever person but that attitudes just makes you look like an idiot.

I'm not.

1. No, he doesn't. Excellent is a qualitative word. It can't be objective at all. There's no objective measure of excellence. Nothing can be objectively "excellent," which means that a statement like "Bloodborne was their only excellent game this year" obviously a subjective opinion. After that, the only thing that would need clarification is of whom the opinion belongs to. Since he's the one saying it, that much is obvious. Of course that's what he thinks. He's the one saying it. The only reason he'd need to clarify the holder of the opinion is if he was talking about someone elses opinion, which he wasn't. No clarification needed. Just basic english and reading comprehension.

When you write, the argumentative stance is assumed. "I think" is an implicit preface to all you say. The reader already knows that you offer him/her your convictions with the assurance of certainty. When you see newspaper editorials, they don't say "In our opinion, Donald Trump doesn't have a chance of being elected for President," they just say "Donald Trump doesn't have a chance of being elected for President." The only reason for any confusion is solely on behalf of the reader, who didn't approach the work with the approapriate foreknowledge of the way and rules by which English is read.

2. Not the topic of this debate at all. Why are you getting wound up?

3. "Metacritic is one of a few places that subjective reviews can be looked at objectively."

Absolutely not. Being placed on a numerical averaging tool does not suddenly make "Bloodborne was their only excellent game this year" an objective statement at all. Excellence doesn't suddenly become objective when it's organized. Opinions don't become fact just because you add them up and divide them by five. It's still a bunch of opinions. Bloodborne could have a 0 on Metacritic, and it would hold absolutely no effect on the validity of that statement. The PS4 could have 20 games with a higher Metascore than Bloodborne gaving been released in 2015, and it would hold absolutely no effect on the validity of his statement.

"Bloodborne was their only excellent game this year" is opinion. It was obvious that it's an opinion the first time reading, and it was obvious who's opinion it was the first time reading. It wasn't and couldn't possible have been "stated as a fact," and it needed absolutely no further clarification, what-so-ever.

NX will release in 2017 or 2018 because 5-6 years cycle. Ignore financials results, there's a cycle that must be completed no matter what.

Zelda HD is delayed because Nintendo loves us and they are sinking even more money into the game. They are adding "new mechanics" and it will be the "ultimate Zelda experience".

Splatoon updates are *free*.

Nintendo handles DLC godly. SSB4 DLC is a gift send by god himself.

Nintendo sells amiibos only for collecting purposes, not because it's DLC behind a figurine.

They are going to announce a new Metroid at E3 2013.
I can feel Metroid this E3 2014.
I can bet my d*ick that Metroid is announced this E3 2015.
Lol, it's pretty obvious that they are going to show us a new Metroid at E3 2016.

NX is a handheld, not a homeconsole. Reggie and Tanabe are wrong, ignore their arguments.

Remakes and spin-offs don't take resources from the main team. They are made 100% by other teams and with thin air.

etc...

I agree with everything except the bolded. That was me. Especially this E3. Still hurts.

Also, the NX is both. Lah-dee dah-dee dah~~~

But with Remakes and spin offs, they usually don't. Not to the point where it's significantly impacting the developement of main series games.

You deserve that for believing Nintendo has a little of common sense. You want Metroid? Enjoy your Federation Force game.

Context, I refer to people that believes it's exclusively a handheld.

Still, it takes time and resources. If are a lot of not, it still takes some.

Oh, thanks for reminding me. I'm sick of seeing people insist that NX (if it's a home console) will launch in 2016 because the Wii U is doing so badly and despite Nintendo consistently revealing codenames for new consoles about 2.5-3 years before we get them (which would put this console right in line for a late 2017/early 2018 release) and despite the late Iwata explaining why they revealed it earlier than they had wanted to in the first place.

Great example as how people seems to ignore circumstances and apply a weird logic.

I actually like what I've seen of FF, outside of it's shitty artstyle.

Oh.

Not to where it impacts development. MM3D, for example, had no effect on the progression of Zelda U. It's made by a different dev, and since Aonuma is a producer and not a director, he doesn't need to be there for developement to progress on schedule.

I don't. It's another waste of time. They could have done a better job with the franchise.

And with Hyrule Warriors Aonuma took an important role, even to the point of hinting new mechanics for Zelda U thanks to his involvement in the game. And let's not forget The Wind Waker HD.