"That" being this post:

So, basicallly, you react poorly when someone asks legitimate questions to see if you have the basic knowledge necessary to suport your position...

Because... then it puts to light the fact that you don't have said knowledge?

One thing is sure, Marucha didn't ask you in an aggressive way or anything. But your answer to her did indeed put into question any credibility you could have about this topic.

DING DING DING!

If you have a mic, drop it and walk away. You ended the topic.

I don't see anyone saying gameplay is objective and presentation is subjective. You seem to try to construct a strawmen. What I can see is, that many people say they prefer NSMB-gameplay over Gunman Clive-gameplay. That is OK. It would also be OK, if you say you don't like NSMB-presentation. What get's people upset is, that you recommend Nintendo should change the NSMB-formula. Because these people like the formula as it is. If I would say Sony need to change the Uncharted-formula or Ubisoft the Assassins Creed formula to match my preferences, people would also be upset. And they're are right: all three games sell multiple millions, so everything is fine with the formula of these games. Although I personally do not like all three.

Gameplay is as subjective as presentation. Sure, we all can agree that Uncharted has a better presentation than Pong and that QTE's are a lazy gameplay-mechanism without deeper value.

I personally don't like Jump&Runs. That's why the gameplay of NSMB gives nothing to me. I prefer the gameplay of Battle for Wesnoth, Etrian Odyssey, Baldur's Gate or Pen&Paper-RPGs. But if I would demand Nintendo should change the formula for NSMB and create turn-based-fights like EO, that would be foolish of me. And it would be foolish of Nintendo if they actually did that.

Honestly....I agree with quite a bit of your post.  I always preferred the old Mario style and I think they'll drop the "new" style pretty soon.  Why?  Because if you think about it, they reached the full potential of the "New" series with NSMBU.  Graphically, gameplaywise, difficulty, ect..  I think the next game will have a significantly different art style (please have sprites, please have sprites).  However, I think the price even at $60 would be more than fair for a game that provides AT LEAST 30 hours of fun, and way way more depending on your family and how much you enjoyed it.

Going back to the OP, opinions should be respected, unless they are pushed as facts.  When they are pushed as facts, you get pushed back. Also, stop blaming us for enjoying games you don't like.  Stop trying to convince us that the games that make us happy, shouldn't make us happy.

No it isn't bullshit. If I think something is ugly, to me and my mind that is correct. Fact. I find it ugly. Same if I were to find something beautiful. And then to each his/her own. To that persons mind, what they think or believe is fact. But that does not mean that is fact for everyone. Because it is a fact not everyone has the same opinions. 

I'm sorry to say happydolphin but just because someone goes into great detail to explain why something is technically hideous does not make that true for everyone. If someone loves or likes the look of something, no critic, art school trained or not is more right than the non trained person regarding whether or not it can be regarded as beautiful. For example, on a personal note, you can explain to me in minute detail why and how NSMB is the ugliest and worst presented thing on this planet. And frankly my opinion would still be the same; that is I think it looks gorgeous and I get immense pleasure out of it each time I play. And no person earning $1 million a year can dissuade me from that.

How did this thread come about?

Anyway, if you want to measure presentation objectively then you have to set criteria and limits which I haven't seen done in this thread. Even then, the criteria you choose is going to be skewed so (as FOX mentions earlier) you need to take into account what the purpose and motivations behind the presentation in a game actually are. Without setting these criteria your views on art-style or presentation are entirely subjective.

As for gameplay, that's far more mechanics based and is easier to measure objectively because the criteria are usually already set by the genre. There are literally hundreds of gameplay reference points in any given game genre. The same can't be said of presentation (just look at the differences between Borderlands 2 and CoD).

LOL, XKCD never stops being funny. And this comic is the correct answer to the OP.

*nods head*

And I didn't even need a wall of text to explain my position. So even if I'm wrong, at least my approach is beautiful.

[/subjective opinion]

*take two*

My post was very to the point, and although some may prefer longer expositions, I think we can agree that the post served its purpose well since somebody actually referenced it.

[/see what I did there]

I'm reminded of the adage: opinions are like assholes...everbody has one and everybody thinks that everybody else's stinks.

I'm kind of getting annoyed by the amount of people misinterpreting my posts, so I'll ask you and the others a very simple question. Do you think this is art and had proper art style designed into it?

There is a degree to what is subjective and to what is not, and that is all I'm saying, and I believe gameplay follows the same rule.

@hynad. Please, you're a nice guy, go re-read my posts. I never pretended to have any credibility when it comes to formal training. Her attitude was looking at me from a higher ground, and that to me was obvious. If she had actually realized I never pretended to have that eductation, she wouldn't have done that.

@Normando. If someone says that they consider presentation a gimmick, I reserve the right to consider my opinion more valid than theirs, period.

@rol. No, I don't fully believe I'm hard to deal with. I just believe people misunderstand me incessantly. This thread should be proof of that.