I understand where you're coming from but ... the first part of your comment is literally just a question (which is really a correction). It isn't your overall "point". The only argument you really put forth and gave to Mandalore was the last part of your comment. The first part of it is just a question, or really more of a correction, because he made a mistake. It isn't the meat and potatoes of what you were saying. I don't even feel like that should be argued. And since I was only replying to you, it's a bit disingenuous to suddenly only care about the set time frame in the OP. My entire condition for replying was on the comparison to the 24th month.
If you want to call that nitpicking, then just be aware you did the same exact thing to Mandalore. The only part of your reply that was correct was a nitpick of the fact that he was technically wrong on the amount of price cuts the system had. And now you're saying that was your main point. So if your main point was just to correct him on a number ... is that not a nitpick? I was at least addressing an actual argument being put forward. Mandalore's argument relies on the PS4 having a price cut, but not so much on the amount of cuts the PS4 had. That's really tangential to his overall point. On the other hand, what I replied to was very obviously the main point of your comment, and I don't know how it could be claimed otherwise. Again, the first half of your comment wasn't an argument it was just a factual correction, the second part of it is the only part where you're actually making a point to be argued for.
I just feel like I needed to state all of this because I don't want to end the discussion on a summary that I take issue with. But, I don't think it needs to be argued anymore. No need in getting frustrated over this. Cheers.
It's not a nitpick for someone to claim that it's close between the Switch and PS4 because it's had 2 official price cuts when on the graph there are 0 price cuts. How is that nitpicking?
I'll break down my comment. My comment was "2 Official price cuts? Where did you get that from?
PS4's first official price cut was on the 9th October 2015. 2 years after launch. The switch hasn't even been out for 2 years."
1. I asked him where he got that figure from that is incorrect. Factual
2. I said the date PS4 got it's first official price cut. Factual.
4. I said the switch hasn't been out for 2 years. Factual
3. I said it was 2 years after launch. It was 23 months. But it's quite obvious why I said 2 years. I'm not gonna say it was 693 days, or whatever. That's the part you have an objection with that's the only factually 'incorrect' thing that I said. I should've just said 'approximately'. The graph this entire thread is based on doesn't even show the switch against a pricecut because in the launch alligned graphs that hasn't even happened yet. That's why I said you're nitpicking.
Him saying that the PS4 has had 2 official price cuts in 23 months is ridiculously incorrect and I have no idea how anyone could say that pointing out that that's wrong on every level is nitpicking.
It seems like at this point you just can't admit you were wrong ... I mean, we have been over this. We weren't talking about the graph. You made a comparison of 24 months. And I already went over in my first or second reply why it was ridiculous for you to say two years. It wasn't due to the fact that I was just being a fact nazi. I don't expect you to say the precise amount of days. The reason why it was ridiculous was because you made a comment about how the Switch hadn't even been out for two years, when in fact it has already been closer to it's 2nd year anniversary than the PS4 was when it got a price cut. Making your entire point invalid.
Half of his comment was a factually incorrect statement, the other half was his argument. You corrected the factually inaccurate part, but made an inaccurate counter-argument when you were arguing against the 2nd part of his comment. I only argued against half of your comment, but I was at least arguing against a point you were making, not the factual correction. If you're going to say I'm nitpicking when I'm literally replying to an argument you're making ... then I don't think you're using that term correctly. If your entire point wasn't centered on which system has gone on the longest without a price cut, you'd be correct that it was a nitpick. Unfortunately, the part I replied to WAS about that.
You are starting to twist the discussion into a post-factual one. You basically already admitted I was right earlier when you said that you didn't have any grievances with what I was saying, except that it was a minuscule point that I was focusing too much on. So what is it? Was it a wrong point, or a correct one that just frustrated you because it focused on something "minuscule"? And let me just say again, it wasn't a minuscule point. It was literally the only argument you brought up against Mandalore. Correcting someone isn't an argument in and of itself in that context. Mandalore's comment would have been better had he not said there was two price cuts, but his point still stands even when corrected. It's a little bit more ridiculous, sure, but that's it. Whereas the entire argument you brought up against him crumbles under the correction that the Switch has already gone on longer than the PS4 did with a price cut.
And this is just getting a tad ridiculous. No matter how much you shift discussion to the graph, it doesn't change what you said. I only replied to what you said, that's it. No matter how minuscule it was to you or no matter how much it doesn't relate to the graph, you aren't giving a valid argument against my reply to something you said. You are just shifting focus. If it didn't relate to the OP well .. maybe don't say it in the first place then? There's nothing wrong with having an incorrect counter-argument, we've all made them. But defending it on and on isn't doing any favors.
Last edited by AngryLittleAlchemist - on 09 February 2019