| Zod95 said: Effort can be represented in man-hours work, which is different from time. Better saying, man-hours work is one (eventually among several) objective variable that represents effort and time. Effort is about talent, capabilities, dedication...basically how much you put in an our. And time is time. Both, with money (which is the source for the other resources), translate the commitment of the game developer in producing the best outcome for its clients. |
Here is an issue with your 'objective' measure: one of your core 'objective' metrics is subjective at heart by your own definition. How can you objectively measure talent, and then how it translates to work output? Keep in mind that passing the buck to 'payroll' for talented staff is inherently fallible, as there are many other deciding factors that determine pay.
| Zod95 said:
Licensed soundtracks are neither greater nor lesser than original soundtracks, and I never said anything against this. But if your trying to compare licensed vocal soundtracks with original instrumental, you are already mixing 2 subjects and now I understand why you are making wrong conlusions. Usually, vocal music is indeed more demanding than instrumental (you already know my opinion about this) but it has nothing to do with whether it's licensed or original.
The onus of proof is mine regarding everything that is said in the OP but you must also answer for your claims. You cannot say the OP is wrong without presenting evidence. At most, you can say it may not be right. But then I ask you to specify which sentence of the OP may not be right regarding this subject. |
1. This is your opinion, you said it yourself, but you still state it as fact. Also, using "usually" is a complete cop-out, which you will no doubt return to when someone points out your error to exhonerate yourself of the claim, yet you will continue to treat it as a solid claim. You can't have it both ways.
2. This seems to be the source of a lot of your confusion. You agree that the burden of proof is yours, but if flaws are pointed out, the onus is still on you to counter appropriately with evidence.
"When debating any issue, there is an implicit burden of proof on the person asserting a claim. An argument from ignorance, which is a logical fallacy, occurs when the lack of proof for a proposition is assumed to prove that the proposition is false. This has the effect of shifting the burden of proof to the person criticizing the claim, but is not valid reasoning" [1]
I can indeed say the OP is wrong without providing evidence. If you cannot provide sufficient evidence to actually support your OP, then it is not valid. Not the other way around.
Similarly, I have pointed out serious flaws in your 'objective' measure of 'effort' in games to filter out quality titles, and shown that your filter is flawed and omits many quality games. The onus is not on me to provide you with a flawless system, that is your job. Furthermore, that does not validate your 'quality filter' just because it is the best tool you have at your disposal. You know its limitations, yet continue to use it to work outside those limitations i.e. prove all games that don't meet your criteria are bad/not requiring effort.
