spemanig said:
pokoko said:
"GAMERS WIN" is every bit as valid an opinion as anything else. It seems kind of silly to suggest that it is not. The only dispute would be with context and if it's relevant to the discussion at hand. If the question is, "who won E3," then it's fine. If the question is, "which company will see the most economic impact from their E3 presentation," then it is not.
Regardless, it seems an odd thing to get upset about, especially when so many people are over-exaggerating specific games simply because they're exclusive to their favorite platform. That's much more annoying than someone trying to be optimistic. |
No it isn't. Gamers are not a candidate in the competition. Gamers don't win anything. They didn't compete. They didn't participate in the competition. They are not a factoring party, they are the judge. They are irrelevant to the question being asked. That's like asking "who won the dance off?" "The audience." No. The audience didn't compete. They're irrelevant to the question.
|
You seem to struggle with the concept of what is relative. This really isn't hard. If a question is open-ended, with no parameters set, then it can be answered different ways. Still following? As such, "who won the dance off" does not apply, as it that is a specific contest, while "E3" is not. You understand? E3 is an exposition intended for--that's right--consumers.
Anyone asking "who won E3" without setting context is the one at fault if they don't get the answers they want. Sony, From Software, Ubisoft, Nintendo, even Hello Games would all be valid responses. That's because "who won E3" by itself is kind of stupid, as it's not an official contest. As such, "won" could be considered anyone who came out in much better position than they were going in.
