What do you wish to see in a Video game but never seen?

[Frogger]

Hynad said:

It's not eating at me. You ususally come up with counter arguments when you know someone here is mistaken. But in this case, you were quick to assume Barlog lied without even bothering to provide evidence that what was being claimed by GOWTLOZ was false/wrong. 

As for the "then" part. That's quite the spin. Sure it's conditional. That's doesn't make your statement any less hasty and lazy. In other circumpstences, I am sure you would have taken the time to prove the guy wrong. But for some reason, for this game, you didn't bother going for a factual stance.

"But in this case, you were quick to assu-" Stop. I already made it clear that I didn't assume Balrog lied. And it's not a spin. It's grammar. It makes my statement wholy unhasty, though I can agree that it was lazy. I don't have the time or the care to fact check every forum post I respond to when there is a communication tool available that absolves me from always needing to do that ala conditional statements. You said it yourself - I usually come up with counter arguments when I know when someone here is mistaken, like I just did at length in my previous post response to you.

But there was no counter argument to make here, because I wasn't making that statement to make the argument that GOWTLOW was wrong about Balrog lying. In fact, once again, I never accused Balrog of lying at all. I was making the conditional statement to set up my primary statement, and the object of my response thread, which was that there was a cutscene in the gameplay shown of the new GoW, therefore it won't have what I wish to see in a video game but haven't seen yet. Proving, or even knowing, whether or not Balrog lied was irrelevant to the argument I was making, so I made that statement conditional and moved on, as should you right now.