| Zod95 said: Those are neither videogames (rather educational software) nor developed by Nintendo. I could even take that as a promotion strategy for the real Mario games, which never left Nintendo consoles. Videogame marchandising has many forms and educational software is a poor excuse to counter-argue that Nintendo has tried to create a pronounced environment of exclusivity. Ironically, I am the one accused of bias. I tell you what: accuracy is one thing, falsehood is another. Is the OP 100% accurate? Probably not. But does it have blatant lies? So far, it seems it doesn't. Nothing is 100% accurate and even the most professional journalistic articles would be "proven" to hold blatant lies with posters as picky as you commenting on them. You can torture the facts as you want, but that only shows your true colors. |
No, you were simply wrong. You're now trying to redefine what a video game is. They were clearly video games. You're also doing your best to avoid replying to me directly because you know that I would just tear it apart. Your statement was saying Nintendo games. Mario & Zelda are both Nintendo games, whether or not Nintendo directly developed them or not. Nintendo had given permission for them to be developed onto the PC.
Also, Sony and Microsoft is just about the same when it comes to this "exclusivity" you're talking about. Maybe Microsoft less so... but primarily because Microsoft is a PC software company that has a console brand so it really doesn't make sense to include Microsoft.
Also, accuracy and falsehood are pretty much hand-in-hand things. If you aren't 100% accurate, your argument contains false information unless otherwise stated it isn't completely accurate (and you did NOT do this, you in fact claim you were 100% accurate by saying there isn't anything in your OP that is false).
This isn't about being picky. You're outright changing what you said so it makes it seem like you weren't posting lies.
