"I get what you're saying and "why make there be a pass fail for mundane things" (I'm paraphrasing), well, because the developer wanted to make it that way. Sure, you can not like them, you can not like the whole game, who cares?"
My problem was that they kept insisting I meant something else or acting as though I wasn't entitled to not like that part of the game.
I believe that people are entitled to their own opinions, not their own facts, but that also means if an opinion is based on a fact (and logical), then the opinion is valid.
Valid: Dallas made an entire season a dream. That is a factual thing, so opinions based on it are valid.
Not factual: Hating GTA because of a mission where you rape someone. Yes, someone claimed that was actually in GTA IV. I haven't even played the game and I know that's false since every reliable source says that isn't in the game. Thus that opinion of GTA is invalid.
Illogical: Hating a game because of the system it's on. Between me, my brother, and my roommates, we've owned systems by Nintendo, Sega, Sony, and Microsoft (counting both 360 and Windows), so we don't hate on a game just because it's on a certain system (not the same as hating on BS reasons to not put a game on a system, but those are the reasons not the games).
So if the problems I have with Heavy Rain are factually true, I am entitled to not like them. If they are not, I'd like someone to explain it to me instead of acting as though I have a problem for not liking it. Now if I was presented with the facts and still refused to listen, that would be my problem, but they do have to be facts, not your own opinion on the facts.
A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.
Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs