LudicrousSpeed said:
lol @ not liking the thread topic. Whatever you need to tell yourself. A big piece of his logic pie regarding PS4's supposed lack of games is that Sony apparently offers much more support for their consoles after the successors are out, while Nintendo and MS do not. As an Xbox 360 and PS3 owner, I know this statement to be 100% pure BS, so I called him out on it. Because the rest of point #1 is pretty much all subjective.
Yeah, it is grasping at straws. But that's ok, nothing tickles my funny bone in a discussion like straw grasping, and goal post shifting. Is there anything that can make a person better feel like they presented the superior argument than someone having to so drastically alter the rules in order to present what they deem to be an acceptable retort?
Your dismissive attitude towards those games MS actually had a big hand in bringing to 360 is made a million times more hilarious/sad when you later are here giving Sony credit for games they had nothing to do with, based on nothing more than sheer speculation that "hey, sony probably maybe paid for this exclusive release guys!1!". LOL. If speculation on paying for an exclusive factor qualifies for support then I could easily add games like Titanfall, Peggle 2, PvZ, etc to my list of MS support. I mean, hey, they paid to make them timed exclusive = support. Are you done reaching? I hope not. I want this to be like Inception. I wanna see a reach within a reach within a reach. I mean hey I am sure at some point Sony had to supply EA some PS3 dev kits, right? Hey that means Sony supported Battlefield 4 on PS3! And next month without Sony's support, PS3 wouldn't see Madden 15! Oh man no wonder some people here shift goal posts and reach so much, bickering is so much easier when you can just pull whatever you want out of your butt. Of course, even after all of this, all we are left with is a situation where the OP is still incorrect. You can reach and speculate and make up new rules for supporting a console and provide me a list of 300 PS3 games, it won't change the fact that MS has still supported the 360 very well after November's Xbone launch, or that Nintendo provided the Wii with a huge Zelda title. Hope that helps.
Where did I say his entire thread should be called something else? I am talking about the part I quoted from him. "nintendo and MS don't support their console after their successors are out". That can just be called something "Things people say and decide to forget when talking bad about Nintendo and MS." Are you understanding now? Ok, good. LOL.
This is all a wonderful story and all, but why am I supposed to care? In your little story, why did you not care to try any of those Xbone games? Is it because they don't appeal to you? If so, then why would you bother to try them? You'd be just in claiming Xbone has no games. Of course, I would put it in a better form, such as "Xbone has no games I would play", kind of like I do with PS4. But again, irrelevant. I was merely explaining to the OP that he kind of answered his own problem with the moniker. I hope that helps both of you. And I am not going to bother replying to you again on this matter as I have already made my point and don't feel like a petty back and forth about how vital Sony's support has been for Call of Duty AW on PS3 this year, or whatever hilarious reach you intended to make next. Edit: Moderated - Starcraft |
We get it you love XBox and Hate PS cool. Everything MS good everything PS bad. Maybe just try to be a lil open minded huh? Any thing
else?
