a.l.e.x59 said: windbane said: a.l.e.x59 said: windbane said: BenKenobi88 said: Blue3 has received a temporary ban for constant bad behavior. He's had warnings about behavior, and has never acknowledged my posts or even my personal messages, so...yeah...3 day ban.
| For saying something that is clearly true? Why is it that people that say positive things about Sony get banned so easily? I guess all the ones on this forum are just that way... |
Sure whatever he wrote might have been true, but if he wrote it in an bad way, then that is completely different. For example: "Playstation 2 achieved better sales than Gamecube and Xbox, because of its wider video game library, and strong third party support." "Playstation 2 rocks. Only losers buy the Gamecube and Xbox. Gamecube and Xbox have no games at all. Everyone should buy Playstation 2. The rest just suck." They both may be the truth (or at least in someone's opinion), but only the first sentence is acceptable. The other one is just idiotic. |
Well, I think parts of this thread do suck. Jak dropping 5% may be "worse" but it's certainly not "sour" if you start with 90%. |
Please look at my previous post to the post you took a quote from, and you will see my answer. |
I was defending a banned guy. But if you want me to directly respond to your absurd comment, then fine. If the games improved over 90%, what do you expect them to get to? Should every sequel be 100% after 2 or 3?
I find it funny you count combat racing. If you go by a trend to determine the next game's score, then it would "likely" get 82%. Last I checked, that's still good. 85.5% for the last game is hardly sour.
Next time should some gameranking scores to defend your comments rather than just posting your opinions.