| Shiken said: Ok quick reply to your two main points. When I replied to the guy, he straight up called me annoying. Ok cool, I am thick skinned, NP. But what this implied was that maybe he was annoyed with my responses and failed to add anything contructive to the discussion. Admittedly however, I was working when I made that reply and maybe I jumped the gun. If so, my bad.
To the next point, I was simply trying to nip in the butt the bias arguments of only looking at their own point of view. The point of the thread is to illustrate how the Switch is just as viable as a primary platform as any of the others based on the needs of the gamer. What it is NOT about is trying to discredit any of the other platforms, but highlight that many gamers have different needs. You have to admit, there is an abundance of people who would dismiss the viability of a platform to "real gamers" because of their own bias. As you can tell by the replies however, it did not work (to be fair, it should have been obvious it wouldn't lol). |
If you wanted to nip that in the butt you should have wrote a thread that began with constructive arguments. You get what you give. The problem with doing it in this method is that it's almost like a poll with no context. It doesn't really offer anything of substance. Now that being said, if that's your intention and you're aware of that, go for it. But I always write my critiques assuming that someone wasn't aware of why an argument or idea didn't make sense, and that clearing it up would make them understand the error. Which I think is essentially how most people write arguments.
I'm just bringing this to your attention, because I don't want to see good users that make threads in which, if the user in question was different, the motivations or contents of the thread would be an instant red flag. You don't have to agree with the criticism or take it to heart. 
