Nice to get more and more data out of all of this.

Well you said "c'mon dude" and, I quote, "lol". So yeah, I guess these are better arguments. But hey, someone who spent his whole days reading this kind of declaration and their actual meaning (and explaining them to people who overlook and see what they want to see) vs a guy having a non-biased Halo avatar. I guess I am the one who's wrong.

Thanks.

You got me, I have a Halo avatar.

This isn't the first time someone has called out my Halo avatar because they ran out of argument.

Though I don't base my entire argument on what avatar someone has, I actually watch users on this website, like you for example, someone with obvious bias against Xbox and constantly eager to downplay them, especially in regard to how much they will sell or have sold.

Here is what I think, you saw this news and, in your eagerness, to post news to downplay Xbox's sales and discredit VGChartz's numbers as over tracked, you didn't bother reading the true source of the information, once you were corrected, you couldn't stand being wrong, you couldn't stand that maybe VGChartz numbers are actually pretty accurate after all for Xbox.

So, you had to attempt to spin and twist the wording to your favour with claims that made absolutely no sense if you spent a few minutes thinking deeply about them. In your eagerness to downplay Xbox, you are making very weak arguments and assumptions because you WANT to be right. Now your argument has evaporated to "You are wrong cause you have a Halo avatar"

It is telling that you seem to be the only one reading it in this way, but of course, you're a lawyer, it means you're automatically right, and I'm wrong, because I have a Halo avatar, that's some next level lawyer logic. You'll be okay either way you know? Xbox is still being crushed no matter when the date of these numbers is, only thing that changes is VGChartz's accuracy.

I think there's some room for ambiguity but this doesn't make any sense. 

MS is trying to show that Sony has a massive advantage market wise.

They did not say 1st party titles. They said exclusives, most of which are pretty much going to be random indie titles that most of us haven't heard of.

I'm not certain being a lawyer should give you credence in interpreting statement. But I guess I understand the logic, as a lawyer of course you need to interpret any statement in the most favorable light to your cause even if it's the least likely of scenarios.

Nope, I don't think I am the only one here remembering MS saying things in a such twisted manner that can be say the exact opposite of what they're actually saying. And I'm just focusing on that.

I mean the whole point of the response to CMA was to point out the way MS twists its wording to appear as a poor indie console manufacturer which tries to survive against Sony the giant.

Nice straw man fallacy here, and pretty ironic.

I've said a lot of things, and the avatar stuff wasn't even being called out (I mostly called you for saying "c'mon dude, lol" which isn't an argument), but you point out the only thing you could use for your comeback. Once again, you just saw what you wanted to see.

So I guess you were out of argument here.

Well with the kind of interpretation you did of that sentence I'm not the slightest surprised you also interpreted past MS statement the same way.

"I mean the whole point of the response to CMA was to point out the way MS twists its wording to appear as a poor indie console manufacturer which tries to survive against Sony the giant."

Certainly you must see there that you do exactly what you accuse Microsoft of doing turned to 11? How about this interpretation :"The whole point of the response to CMA was to point that Sony as a clear and undeniable lead in the market and that it's acting like a cry baby over the transactions which, even if it goes through, will still leave Sony with that same said dominant position". 

It wasn't really my interpretation, more likely what journalists have to say about it, ex:

https://mobile.twitter.com/tomwarren/status/1580125033690644480

"here's Microsoft trying to make it look like it sucks at Xbox and gaming :

• "last place in console" • "seventh place in PC" • "nowhere in mobile game distribution"

All those statement you highlighted are true though so how is MS twisting things exactly?

Well when you compare it to all statements about the last 2 years where they keep telling how the revenue of Xbox division was better than ever, and how they were the best selling console (1) (2) (3)

(1) only in the US

(2) only for a specific month

(3) only amongst "next gen consoles"

it kind of ironic how the turntables can turn when the message should be saying otherwise.

Do you see my point ? If not, it's okay, I believe it's the same kind of battle it is pointless to even have a draw in it. I recall some guy explaining on Twitter that of course MS doesn't share profit/loss of Xbox brand cause it's too much complicated to calculate these things. I believe it's a similar situation here.