IGN Doesnt Think MGS4 Ranks In The Top 100 Modern Games, Do You?

[QUOTE="clone01"][QUOTE="Mozelleple112"] Absolutely not. The quality of the story, acting, cinematography, ending, intro, voice acting etc makes even games like Mass Effect / Bishock look bland and boring in my opinion. I've been spoiled. finalfantasy94

that makes the game bad how?

He never said the game is bad.

Maybe we should dial down the defensiveness a bit.

[QUOTE="Mozelleple112"] Absolutely not. The quality of the story, acting, cinematography, ending, intro, voice acting etc makes even games like Mass Effect / Bishock look bland and boring in my opinion. I've been spoiled. clone01

That doesn't make the story bad. It's humor, though you're free to find it not amusing.

[QUOTE="clone01"][QUOTE="Mozelleple112"] Absolutely not. The quality of the story, acting, cinematography, ending, intro, voice acting etc makes even games like Mass Effect / Bishock look bland and boring in my opinion. I've been spoiled. calvinsora

That doesn't make the story bad. It's humor, though you're free to find it not amusing.

[QUOTE="dreman999"]

[QUOTE="Mozelleple112"] finalfantasy94

I wouldint call it logic just more simple. SO yea MGS3 has a more simple and straight forward plot then the other MGS,but that doesint make it better.

That doesn't inherently make it better, but in the case of MGS3, I think those things do make it better (among other things), and I think stories in all mediums tend to come out better when they are kept simpler and more straight forward. Convoluted stories have a higher chance of being an unfocused mess.

[QUOTE="calvinsora"]

[QUOTE="clone01"] Which part, the bisexual vampire or the mercenary who has diarrhea? Or maybe the African guy with white hair and his soda-addicted monkey helper?clone01

That doesn't make the story bad. It's humor, though you're free to find it not amusing.

That I can agree with, sorry for my hasty response :P

[QUOTE="clone01"][QUOTE="Mozelleple112"] Absolutely not. The quality of the story, acting, cinematography, ending, intro, voice acting etc makes even games like Mass Effect / Bishock look bland and boring in my opinion. I've been spoiled. Mozelleple112

How is that a fact? :?

Also, I don't really agree about Vamp. I don't think he's that original or all that well-developed.

Don't get me wrong. He's an entertaining character, but I think you're overstating how good he is.

[QUOTE="finalfantasy94"]

[QUOTE="dreman999"]Because MGS3 had everything MGS4 had but with a more logic plot and then Added peace walker on top of it....

GreySeal9

I wouldint call it logic just more simple. SO yea MGS3 has a more simple and straight forward plot then the other MGS,but that doesint make it better.

That doesn't inherently make it better, but in the case of MGS3, I think those things do make it better (among other things), and I think stories in all mediums tend to come out better when they are kept simpler and more straight forward. Convoluted stories have a higher chance of being an unfocused mess.

To be honest thats why I think some people like MGS3 so much since its pretty straight forward to follow and some just dont wanna bother with the over the top story of the usal MGS game. Though I can take ether which is why I dont think MGS3 as the best MGS.

[QUOTE="clone01"][QUOTE="Mozelleple112"] Vamp has one of the greatest character personalities I know of... I'll agree with you on the diarrhea thing, that was terrible, but it doesn't really change the fact that MGS4 is an 11/10 game, no matter how many useless SW opinions don't agree with that.Mozelleple112

The point with opinions (and note, game appreciation is all opinion) is that there's no awful opinion. When there's an opinion you disagree with, you discuss why you disagree, not disregard the opinion altogether.

There are a hundred good modern games? Since when?

[QUOTE="Senor_Kami"]Didn't IGN give it a 10?DJChuy

Yeah, but it was one person (reviewer) that gave it a ten, and I think that reviewer is no longer with IGN. This list was chosen by the whole IGN staff, and they thought Peace Walker was better than MGS4.

[QUOTE="clone01"][QUOTE="Mozelleple112"] Vamp has one of the greatest character personalities I know of... I'll agree with you on the diarrhea thing, that was terrible, but it doesn't really change the fact that MGS4 is an 11/10 game, no matter how many useless SW opinions don't agree with that.Mozelleple112

The thing is, one might feel your opinions are crazy as well. For instance, the idea that MGS4's is worthy of Oscars.

LOL at people who actually thinks Portal 2 is better than Portal.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="Mozelleple112"] It would win a dozen oscars or so.Mozelleple112

Sarcasm, right? :?

We're not comparing to Mass Effect and Bioshock. We're comparing to films when we talk about Oscars.

Do you really think the story in MGS4 stacks up to the kind of films that win Oscars? If so, what about it makes you think that?

LOL at people who actually thinks Portal 2 is better than Portal.

Gxgear

You can LOL all you want, but it doesn't really count for much unless you give an argument.

And even if you do, your opinion about IGN's placement of Portal 1 over Portal 2 is not really relevant as far as taking IGN seriously is concerned.

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

LOL at people who actually thinks Portal 2 is better than Portal.

GreySeal9

You can LOL all you want, but it doesn't really count for much unless you give an argument.

And even you do, your opinion about IGN's placement of Portal 1 over Portal 2 is not really relevant as far as taking IGN seriously is concerned.

I don't need to explain myself when you're the one disagreeing with me. There is no argument, I just find it funny. Feel free to justify yourself if you want and I'd be happy to respond.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

LOL at people who actually thinks Portal 2 is better than Portal.

Gxgear

You can LOL all you want, but it doesn't really count for much unless you give an argument.

And even you do, your opinion about IGN's placement of Portal 1 over Portal 2 is not really relevant as far as taking IGN seriously is concerned.

I don't need to explain myself when you're the one disagreeing with me. There is no argument, I just find it funny. Feel free to justify yourself if you want and I'd be happy to respond.

Justify myself? I never gave an opinion on Portal/Portal 2 since I've never played Portal 2. But considering the disparity between Portal 1 and Portal 2's metascores (in Portal 2's favor), it seems a little obnoxious to act like putting Portal 2 over 1 is LOL-worthy. Maybe you disagree with that notion, but it's hardly some kind of radical opinion.

But you did say this:

IGN picked Portal 2 over the original, so that should give you a good indicator of how seriously to take the list.Gxgear

And really, it's not a good indicator at all. Maybe a good indicator for you, but not for anyone else.

LOL at people who actually thinks Portal 2 is better than Portal.

Gxgear

I don't see why that is funny, most people I've seen scoring the game think so as well.

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

LOL at people who actually thinks Portal 2 is better than Portal.

calvinsora

I don't see why that is funny, most people I've seen scoring the game think so as well.

That's what I was trying to say.

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

You can LOL all you want, but it doesn't really count for much unless you give an argument.

And even you do, your opinion about IGN's placement of Portal 1 over Portal 2 is not really relevant as far as taking IGN seriously is concerned.

GreySeal9

I don't need to explain myself when you're the one disagreeing with me. There is no argument, I just find it funny. Feel free to justify yourself if you want and I'd be happy to respond.

Justify myself? I never gave an opinion on Portal/Portal 2 since I've never played Portal 2. But considering the disparity between Portal 1 and Portal 2's metascores (in Portal 2's favor), it seems a little obnoxious to act like putting Portal 2 over 1 is LOL-worthy. Maybe you disagree with that notion, but it's hardly some kind of radical opinion.

But you did say this:

IGN picked Portal 2 over the original, so that should give you a good indicator of how seriously to take the list.Gxgear

And really, it's not a good indicator at all. Maybe a good indicator for you, but not for anyone else.

First of all, you're giving an opinion based on metacritic scores? Now that's pretty "LOL-worthy" to me.

Secondly, it's only common sense to not take IGN's list seriously. To have a list as long as 200 games, and place them in static rankings is as ludicrous as it gets. They may be a review site, but ultimately it's still just an opinion. Not to mention the fact that there's inherent flaws in constructing something like this, as the process is surely a group effort, of people who haven't played all the 200 games mentioned (and beyond, as I'm sure there's more than 200 "modern" games out there).

I mentioned Portal 2 because it's one of the top 10 games listed that seems obviously out-of-place, and serves as an example of the deficiencies of the list only. People who's actually played the games would have a better understanding of why I feel this way.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

I don't need to explain myself when you're the one disagreeing with me. There is no argument, I just find it funny. Feel free to justify yourself if you want and I'd be happy to respond.

Gxgear

Justify myself? I never gave an opinion on Portal/Portal 2 since I've never played Portal 2. But considering the disparity between Portal 1 and Portal 2's metascores (in Portal 2's favor), it seems a little obnoxious to act like putting Portal 2 over 1 is LOL-worthy. Maybe you disagree with that notion, but it's hardly some kind of radical opinion.

But you did say this:

IGN picked Portal 2 over the original, so that should give you a good indicator of how seriously to take the list.Gxgear

And really, it's not a good indicator at all. Maybe a good indicator for you, but not for anyone else.

First of all, you're giving an opinion based on metacritic scores? Now that's pretty "LOL-worthy" to me.

Secondly, it's only common sense to not take IGN's list seriously. To have a list as long as 200 games, and place them in static rankings is as ludicrous as it gets. They may be a review site, but ultimately it's still just an opinion. Not to mention the fact that there's inherent flaws in constructing something like this, as the process is surely a group effort, of people who haven't played all the 200 games mentioned (and beyond, as I'm sure there's more than 200 "modern" games out there).

I mentioned Portal 2 because it's one of the top 10 games listed that seems obviously out-of-place, and serves as an example of the deficiencies of the list only. People who's actually played the games would have a better understanding of why I feel this way.

I didn't give an opinion based on the game. I'm just saying it's not a radical opinion.

Secondly, it's fine to state flaws with the list, but I really don't see how your opinion on Portal has any real relevance. It's just your opinion.

I didn't give an opinion based on the game. I'm just saying it's not a radical opinion.

Secondly, it's fine to state flaws with the list, but your opinion or Portal has no real relevance.

GreySeal9

I've explained why it's relevant in the last post.

Regardless of what you opinion is now on, it's still a snap judgement based on Metacritic.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

I didn't give an opinion based on the game. I'm just saying it's not a radical opinion.

Secondly, it's fine to state flaws with the list, but your opinion or Portal has no real relevance.

Gxgear

I've explained why it's relevant in the last post.

Regardless of what you opinion is now on, it's still a snap judgement based on Metacritic.

I don't think the explanation held water as it's simply based on your opinion about what's "out of place". That opinion doesn't really highlight any inherent problems with the list because if someone think it's not out of place, that example is moot.

I don't really have any issues with going off of Metacritic. I think it's a decent way of measuring consensus along with opinions in the gaming community. From what I've seen, most people seem to think that the 2nd Portal is superior, which is why, even if I though Portal 2 was worse, I wouldn't LOL because it doesn't seem warranted.

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

I didn't give an opinion based on the game. I'm just saying it's not a radical opinion.

Secondly, it's fine to state flaws with the list, but your opinion or Portal has no real relevance.

GreySeal9

I've explained why it's relevant in the last post.

Regardless of what you opinion is now on, it's still a snap judgement based on Metacritic.

I don't think the explanation held water as it's simply based on your opinion about what's "out of place". That opinion doesn't really highlight any inherent problems with the list because if someone think it's not out of place, that example is moot.

I don't really have any issues with going off of Metacritic. I think it's a decent way of measuring consensus along with opinions in the gaming community. From what I've seen, most people seem to think that the 2nd Portal is superior, which is why, even if I though Portal 2 was worse, I wouldn't LOL because it doesn't seem warranted.

You don't think it's out of place because you've NEVER played it. All you really can say is you don't understand the comment, which makes even commenting on it curious to begin with.

Defend metacritic as you will, but the bottom line is it's not really your opinion. You saw one number greater than the other, and decided to disagree. People unable to think for themselves and treating an aggregate score from metacritic as the be-all-end-all, that's what I find funny.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

I've explained why it's relevant in the last post.

Regardless of what you opinion is now on, it's still a snap judgement based on Metacritic.

Gxgear

I don't think the explanation held water as it's simply based on your opinion about what's "out of place". That opinion doesn't really highlight any inherent problems with the list because if someone think it's not out of place, that example is moot.

I don't really have any issues with going off of Metacritic. I think it's a decent way of measuring consensus along with opinions in the gaming community. From what I've seen, most people seem to think that the 2nd Portal is superior, which is why, even if I though Portal 2 was worse, I wouldn't LOL because it doesn't seem warranted.

You don't think it's out of place because you've NEVER played it. All you really can say is you don't understand the comment, which makes even commenting on it curious to begin with.

Defend metacritic as you will, but the bottom line is it's not really your opinion. You saw one number greater than the other, and decided to disagree. People unable to think for themselves and treating an aggregate score from metacritic as the be-all-end-all, that's what I find funny.

I didn't disagree with your opinion of the game. I disagreed with the notion that YOUR opinion speaks to any flaw in the list and that it is LOL-worthy to disagree with your opinion. It's possible to disagree with someone's opinion on a game with their disagreement being LOL worthy.

I didn't treat anything as be-all, end-all. I just think your logic doesn't make sense in that your own opinion has no bearing on what anybody should think about the list, especially when the consensus seems to disagree with you.

I'm commenting because the overriding logic of your comment is flawed. I think you vastly overestimate the relevance and usefulness of your own opinion.

Also, Gxgear, I never gave an opinion to whether Portal 2 is out of place or not. I simply said that if you're going to tell people that your opinion on Portal 2 should make them have a certain opinion about that list, it's pretty important that they agree with you (and it doesn't seem like too many people agree with you), which shows the limitation of personal opinion.

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

I don't think the explanation held water as it's simply based on your opinion about what's "out of place". That opinion doesn't really highlight any inherent problems with the list because if someone think it's not out of place, that example is moot.

I don't really have any issues with going off of Metacritic. I think it's a decent way of measuring consensus along with opinions in the gaming community. From what I've seen, most people seem to think that the 2nd Portal is superior, which is why, even if I though Portal 2 was worse, I wouldn't LOL because it doesn't seem warranted.

GreySeal9

You don't think it's out of place because you've NEVER played it. All you really can say is you don't understand the comment, which makes even commenting on it curious to begin with.

Defend metacritic as you will, but the bottom line is it's not really your opinion. You saw one number greater than the other, and decided to disagree. People unable to think for themselves and treating an aggregate score from metacritic as the be-all-end-all, that's what I find funny.

I didn't disagree with your opinion of the game. I disagreed with the notion that YOUR opinion speaks to any flaw in the list and that it is LOL-worthy to disagree with your opinion. It's possible to disagree with someone's opinion on a game with their disagreement being LOL worthy.

I didn't treat anything as be-all, end-all. I just think your logic doesn't make sense in that your own opinion has no bearing on what anybody should think about the list, especially when the consensus seems to disagree with you.

I'm commenting because the overriding logic of your comment is silly. I think you vastly overestimate the relevance and usefulness of your own opinion.

I'm free to react however I want. People who adapts critics views and aggregate review scores as their own is pretty "LOL-worthy" to me.

Also, Gxgear, I never gave an opinion to whether Portal 2 is out of place or not. I simply said that if you're going to tell people that your opinion on Portal 2 should make them have a certain opinion about that list, it's pretty important that they agree with you (and it doesn't seem like too many people agree with you), which shows the limitation of personal opinion.

GreySeal9

Yeah, except for the fact the both of you who responded have even played Portal 2 :?

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

You don't think it's out of place because you've NEVER played it. All you really can say is you don't understand the comment, which makes even commenting on it curious to begin with.

Defend metacritic as you will, but the bottom line is it's not really your opinion. You saw one number greater than the other, and decided to disagree. People unable to think for themselves and treating an aggregate score from metacritic as the be-all-end-all, that's what I find funny.

Gxgear

I didn't disagree with your opinion of the game. I disagreed with the notion that YOUR opinion speaks to any flaw in the list and that it is LOL-worthy to disagree with your opinion. It's possible to disagree with someone's opinion on a game with their disagreement being LOL worthy.

I didn't treat anything as be-all, end-all. I just think your logic doesn't make sense in that your own opinion has no bearing on what anybody should think about the list, especially when the consensus seems to disagree with you.

I'm commenting because the overriding logic of your comment is silly. I think you vastly overestimate the relevance and usefulness of your own opinion.

I'm free to react however I want. People who adapts critics views and aggregate review scores as their own is pretty "LOL-worthy" to me.

I didn't do that. I don't have an opinion on the game. Why do you insist on putting words into my mouth? To make what I'm saying more LOL-worthy than you could reasonably portray it were you to be honest about what I've said?

I'm arguing the logic of your idea that one person's opinion about a game has any usefulness as far as determining the flaws of a list. It doesn't and it sounded downright absurd to suggest that it does.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

Also, Gxgear, I never gave an opinion to whether Portal 2 is out of place or not. I simply said that if you're going to tell people that your opinion on Portal 2 should make them have a certain opinion about that list, it's pretty important that they agree with you (and it doesn't seem like too many people agree with you), which shows the limitation of personal opinion.

Gxgear

Yeah, except for the fact the both of you who responded have even played Portal 2 :?

It doesn't matter.

If you're going to say that people should see a flaw with this list because of your opinion about a game, it is pretty important that there is some kind of consensus.

Even if there was, your opinion still doesn't really speak to any inherent flaw about the list.

Like I said, I just think you believe your opinion is more consequential than it is.

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

I didn't disagree with your opinion of the game. I disagreed with the notion that YOUR opinion speaks to any flaw in the list and that it is LOL-worthy to disagree with your opinion. It's possible to disagree with someone's opinion on a game with their disagreement being LOL worthy.

I didn't treat anything as be-all, end-all. I just think your logic doesn't make sense in that your own opinion has no bearing on what anybody should think about the list, especially when the consensus seems to disagree with you.

I'm commenting because the overriding logic of your comment is silly. I think you vastly overestimate the relevance and usefulness of your own opinion.

GreySeal9

I'm free to react however I want. People who adapts critics views and aggregate review scores as their own is pretty "LOL-worthy" to me.

I didn't do that. I don't have an opinion on the game. Why do you insist on putting words into my mouth? To make what I'm saying more LOL-worthy than you could reasonably portray it were you to be honest about what I've said?

I'm arguing the logic of your idea that one person's opinion about a game has any usefulness as far as determining the flaws of a list. It doesn't and it sounded downright absurd to suggest that it does.

You didn't have an opinion, yet you still responded to it, and proceeded to use metacritic as some sort of argument for it. That's not me putting words in your mouth. I used Portal 2 as an example, and I already explained why I used it. You just choose to ignore it and proceeded on saying how my example has no relevance. If you never played the game and the example is lost on you, then it's not really my fault is it? Should have moved on, but you didn't. I'm not the one forcing you to keep harping on an example that you have zero knowledge in, yet you keep beating the dead horse anyways.

It's not really my responsibility to make any of my comments useful to you. The "LOL-worthy" reply didn't sit well with you, and now you're just picking a fight.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]
An opinion on my opinions, when you haven't even played the game I made my opinion on? That's rich. You can't even begin to argue the logic, because all your're using is the metacritic against me. If this was even a constructive discussion on Portal 2 then I could perhaps go further and explain myself, but again; you've NEVER played the game. If the comment has no bearing for you, then maybe you should have just moved on.

I'm free to react however I want. People who adapts critics views and aggregate review scores as their own is pretty "LOL-worthy" to me.

Gxgear

I didn't do that. I don't have an opinion on the game. Why do you insist on putting words into my mouth? To make what I'm saying more LOL-worthy than you could reasonably portray it were you to be honest about what I've said?

I'm arguing the logic of your idea that one person's opinion about a game has any usefulness as far as determining the flaws of a list. It doesn't and it sounded downright absurd to suggest that it does.

You didn't have an opinion, yet you still responded to it, and proceeded to use metacritic as some sort of argument for it. That's not me putting words in your mouth. I used Portal 2 as an example, and I already explained why I used it. You just choose to ignore it and proceeded on saying how my example has no relevance. If you never played the game and the example is lost on you, then it's not really my fault is it? Should have moved on, but you didn't. I'm not the one forcing you to keep harping on an example that you have zero knowledge in, yet you keep beating the dead horse anyways.

It's not really my responsibility to make any of my comments useful to you. The "LOL-worthy" reply didn't sit well with you, and now you're just picking a fight.

I'm not picking a fight. Let's not be melodramatic.

I never responded to your opinion on the game. I responded to your logic that people should see a flaw in the list due to your opinion. Even if I agreed with yourabout the game, I would still disagree with that logic. So, yes, you did put words into my mouth. I never said Metacritic average=my opinion, so your claim that I took on the MC average as my own opinion is false. If you disagree, with actual quotes, show where I took on the MC opinion as my own. If you can't demonstrate that with actual quotes, then you should just admit that I didn't say that.

I thought the LOL thing was kinda obnoxious, but it's essentially just normal SW behavior. What doesn't sit well with me is someone telling people how they should look at a list based on something as limited as their own opinion.

It doesn't matter.

If you're going to say that people should see a flaw with this list because of your opinion about a game, it is pretty important that there is some kind of consensus.

Even if there was, your opinion still doesn't really speak to any inherent flaw about the list.

Like I said, I just think you believe your opinion is more consequential than it is.

GreySeal9

It's all that matters, you saying it doesn't matter doesn't make it true. You've never played Portal 2, forming a valid opinion about it is impossible.

Again, I used it as an example, and never said it's the reason why the list is rubbish. You're the one who's putting words in my mouth by suggesting that's what I believe.

Feel free to say something constructive for a change as to why the list isn't flawed, I'm all ears. You haven't done that.

My opinions are my own, you don't have to respond to it if you know nothing on the topic.

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

I didn't do that. I don't have an opinion on the game. Why do you insist on putting words into my mouth? To make what I'm saying more LOL-worthy than you could reasonably portray it were you to be honest about what I've said?

I'm arguing the logic of your idea that one person's opinion about a game has any usefulness as far as determining the flaws of a list. It doesn't and it sounded downright absurd to suggest that it does.

GreySeal9

You didn't have an opinion, yet you still responded to it, and proceeded to use metacritic as some sort of argument for it. That's not me putting words in your mouth. I used Portal 2 as an example, and I already explained why I used it. You just choose to ignore it and proceeded on saying how my example has no relevance. If you never played the game and the example is lost on you, then it's not really my fault is it? Should have moved on, but you didn't. I'm not the one forcing you to keep harping on an example that you have zero knowledge in, yet you keep beating the dead horse anyways.

It's not really my responsibility to make any of my comments useful to you. The "LOL-worthy" reply didn't sit well with you, and now you're just picking a fight.

I'm not picking a fight. Let's not be melodramatic.

I never responded to your opinion on the game. I responded to your logic that people should see a flaw in the list due to your opinion.

You can stop right there because I never said that. If you're not going to get over that misunderstanding on your part then this is pointless. Everything else that follows is just petty obsession over how exactly I've phrased my words.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

It doesn't matter.

If you're going to say that people should see a flaw with this list because of your opinion about a game, it is pretty important that there is some kind of consensus.

Even if there was, your opinion still doesn't really speak to any inherent flaw about the list.

Like I said, I just think you believe your opinion is more consequential than it is.

Gxgear

It's all that matters, you saying it doesn't matter doesn't make it true. You've never played Portal 2, forming a valid opinion about it is impossible.

Again, I used it as an example, and never said it's the reason why the list is rubbish. You're the one who's putting words in my mouth by suggesting that's what I believe.

Feel free to say something constructive for a change as to why the list isn't flawed, I'm all ears. You haven't done that.

My opinions are my own, you don't have to respond to it if you know nothing on the topic.

You said it's a good indicator of how seriously one should take the list.

I'm not responding to your opinion. I'm responding to your logic about your opinion as "indicator".

It's silly logic and I think you know it. I assume that's why you tried to twist my words about Metacritic to make my argument seem LOL wothy.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

You didn't have an opinion, yet you still responded to it, and proceeded to use metacritic as some sort of argument for it. That's not me putting words in your mouth. I used Portal 2 as an example, and I already explained why I used it. You just choose to ignore it and proceeded on saying how my example has no relevance. If you never played the game and the example is lost on you, then it's not really my fault is it? Should have moved on, but you didn't. I'm not the one forcing you to keep harping on an example that you have zero knowledge in, yet you keep beating the dead horse anyways.

It's not really my responsibility to make any of my comments useful to you. The "LOL-worthy" reply didn't sit well with you, and now you're just picking a fight.

Gxgear

I'm not picking a fight. Let's not be melodramatic.

I never responded to your opinion on the game. I responded to your logic that people should see a flaw in the list due to your opinion.

You can stop right there because I never said that. If you're not going to get over that misunderstanding on your part then this is pointless. Everything else that follows is just petty obsession over how exactly I've phrased my words.

You clearly implied that Portal 2's existence on the list over Portal 1's is a reason for others to not take the list seriously.

It's like if I said, "Super Mario Galaxy 2 sucks, so you shouldn't take this list seriously!"

That would be asburd, but it is no different than what you said.

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

It doesn't matter.

If you're going to say that people should see a flaw with this list because of your opinion about a game, it is pretty important that there is some kind of consensus.

Even if there was, your opinion still doesn't really speak to any inherent flaw about the list.

Like I said, I just think you believe your opinion is more consequential than it is.

GreySeal9

It's all that matters, you saying it doesn't matter doesn't make it true. You've never played Portal 2, forming a valid opinion about it is impossible.

Again, I used it as an example, and never said it's the reason why the list is rubbish. You're the one who's putting words in my mouth by suggesting that's what I believe.

Feel free to say something constructive for a change as to why the list isn't flawed, I'm all ears. You haven't done that.

My opinions are my own, you don't have to respond to it if you know nothing on the topic.

You said it's a good indicator of how seriously one should take the list.

I'm not responding to your opinion. I'm responding to your logic about your opinion as "indicator".

It's silly logic and I think you know it. I assume that's why you tried to twist my words about Metacritic to make my argument seem LOL wothy.

It's a good indicator to me, it's not to you because you haven't played it. That's unfortunate but nothing I can do about that. Obviously my comment is directed at those who has.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

It's all that matters, you saying it doesn't matter doesn't make it true. You've never played Portal 2, forming a valid opinion about it is impossible.

Again, I used it as an example, and never said it's the reason why the list is rubbish. You're the one who's putting words in my mouth by suggesting that's what I believe.

Feel free to say something constructive for a change as to why the list isn't flawed, I'm all ears. You haven't done that.

My opinions are my own, you don't have to respond to it if you know nothing on the topic.

Gxgear

You said it's a good indicator of how seriously one should take the list.

I'm not responding to your opinion. I'm responding to your logic about your opinion as "indicator".

It's silly logic and I think you know it. I assume that's why you tried to twist my words about Metacritic to make my argument seem LOL wothy.

It's a good indicator to me, it's not to you because you haven't played it. That's unfortunate but nothing I can do about that. Obviously my comment is directed at those who has.

It has nothing to do with me not playing it. It's the realization that a single person's opinion in no way invalidates a list.I mean, why should anybody expect any list to conform to every single one of their opinions? And then to take that further and suggest that other people should somehow see the rest of the list as suspect because you personally disagree with it?

And also, what does stating you're addressing people who have played the game change? It's still not a good indicator as it's simply your opinion of the game and from what I've seen, it's not even an opinon with consensus. A good indicator would be somethiing like unearthing evidence that they left a console out of consideration or something like that.

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

I'm not picking a fight. Let's not be melodramatic.

I never responded to your opinion on the game. I responded to your logic that people should see a flaw in the list due to your opinion.

GreySeal9

You can stop right there because I never said that. If you're not going to get over that misunderstanding on your part then this is pointless. Everything else that follows is just petty obsession over how exactly I've phrased my words.

You clearly implied that Portal 2's existence on the list over Portal 1's is a reason for others to not take the list seriously.

It's like if I said, "Super Mario Galaxy 2 sucks, so you shouldn't take this list seriously!"

That would be asburd, but it is no different than what you said.

Actually I'm not sure if Portal is on the list, I just know Portal 2 is in the top 10. Someone else said that they didn't use another game from the same franchise on the list.

It is absurd, but it's completely different than what I've said. I think Portal is better than Portal 2, so it's a good indicator for me. Now with someone who's actually played the game maybe there's opportunity for discussion as to why or why not, but you haven't played it. That's the whole point of the comment: to maybe segue into a healthy discussion about some of these titles. Heck, that's the whole point the list was even made.

I didn't declare the list lacks credibility because of Portal 2, you just presumed I did. And you're still not over it.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

You can stop right there because I never said that. If you're not going to get over that misunderstanding on your part then this is pointless. Everything else that follows is just petty obsession over how exactly I've phrased my words.

Gxgear

You clearly implied that Portal 2's existence on the list over Portal 1's is a reason for others to not take the list seriously.

It's like if I said, "Super Mario Galaxy 2 sucks, so you shouldn't take this list seriously!"

That would be asburd, but it is no different than what you said.

Actually I'm not sure if Portal is on the list, I just know Portal 2 is in the top 10. Someone else said that they didn't use another game from the same franchise on the list.

It is absurd, but it's completely different than what I've said. I think Portal is better than Portal 2, so it's a good indicator for me. Now with someone who's actually played the game maybe there's opportunity for discussion as to why or why not, but you haven't played it. That's the whole point of the comment: to maybe segue into a healthy discussion about some of these titles. Heck, that's the whole point the list was even made.

I didn't declare the list lacks credibility because of Portal 2, you just presumed I did. And you're still not over it.

You clearly expressed that it was a good indicator of how seriously to take the list, which speaks to its credibility. To try to argue otherwise is simply slippery semantics and mispresentation of your own comment.

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

You said it's a good indicator of how seriously one should take the list.

I'm not responding to your opinion. I'm responding to your logic about your opinion as "indicator".

It's silly logic and I think you know it. I assume that's why you tried to twist my words about Metacritic to make my argument seem LOL wothy.

GreySeal9

It's a good indicator to me, it's not to you because you haven't played it. That's unfortunate but nothing I can do about that. Obviously my comment is directed at those who has.

It has nothing to do with me not playing it. It's the realization that a single person's opinion in no way invalidates a list.I mean, why should anybody expect any list to conform to every single one of their opinions? And then to take that further and suggest that other people should somehow see the rest of the list as suspect because you personally disagree with it?

And also, what does stating you're addressing people who have played the game change? It's still not a good indicator as it's simply your opinion of the game and from what I've seen, it's not even an opinon with consensus. A good indicator would be somethiing like unearthing evidence that they left a console out of consideration or something like that.

Everything you just said is presuming that's what I'm suggesting, to which I've already clarified several times that it is certainly not the case. You just keep ignoring it which is not something I can control.

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

You clearly implied that Portal 2's existence on the list over Portal 1's is a reason for others to not take the list seriously.

It's like if I said, "Super Mario Galaxy 2 sucks, so you shouldn't take this list seriously!"

That would be asburd, but it is no different than what you said.

GreySeal9

Actually I'm not sure if Portal is on the list, I just know Portal 2 is in the top 10. Someone else said that they didn't use another game from the same franchise on the list.

It is absurd, but it's completely different than what I've said. I think Portal is better than Portal 2, so it's a good indicator for me. Now with someone who's actually played the game maybe there's opportunity for discussion as to why or why not, but you haven't played it. That's the whole point of the comment: to maybe segue into a healthy discussion about some of these titles. Heck, that's the whole point the list was even made.

I didn't declare the list lacks credibility because of Portal 2, you just presumed I did. And you're still not over it.

You clearly expressed that it was a good indicator of how seriously to take the list, which speaks to its credibility. To try to argue otherwise is simply slippery semantics and mispresentation of your own comment.

The comment is my opinon and I thought it was a good indicator to me.

You've been trying to argue semantics from the get-go, and that's all you really have going for you. Twisting my words is all it is: changing the context of what I've said to imply something I didn't. Not to mention utterly pointless.

The comment is my opinon and I thought it was a good indicator to me.

You've been trying to argue semantics from the get-go, and that's all you really have going for you. Twisting my words is all it is: changing the context of what I've said to imply something I didn't. Not to mention utterly pointless.

Gxgear

The only person twisting words is you when you claimed that I took the Metacritic average as my own opinion, and you still haven't either admitted I didn't say that or proved that I did with quotes.

But I am not twisting your words. You are. Because this is what you said:

IGN picked Portal 2 over the original, so that should give you a good indicator of how seriously to take the list.Gxgear

Notice that you didn't say "IGN picked Portal over the original, so that's why I don't take the list seriously."

You said "That should give you a good indicator of how seriously to take the list."

The thing about message boards is that they leave a record of one said, so I'm not sure why you'd attempt to act like you were only talking about how good of an indicator it is to you.

If that's what you meant, then you obviously didn't choose the right words, which is not my fault.

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]The comment is my opinon and I thought it was a good indicator to me.

You've been trying to argue semantics from the get-go, and that's all you really have going for you. Twisting my words is all it is: changing the context of what I've said to imply something I didn't. Not to mention utterly pointless.

GreySeal9

The only person twisting words is you when you claimed that I took the Metacritic average as my own opinion, and you still haven't either admitted I didn't say that or proved that I did with quotes.

But I am not twisting your words. You are. Because this is what you said:

IGN picked Portal 2 over the original, so that should give you a good indicator of how seriously to take the list.Gxgear

Notice that you didn't say "IGN picked Portal over the original, so that's why I don't take the list seriously."

You said "That should give you a good indicator of how seriously to take the list."

The thing about message boards is that they leave a record of one said, so I'm not sure why you'd attempt to act like you were only talking about how good of an indicator it is to you.

If that's what you meant, then you obviously didn't choose the right words, which is not my fault.

That was a general "you", for someone who obsesses over semantics it should have been obvious. It kind of is your fault for twisting the context of what I've said into a declaration of some sort.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]The comment is my opinon and I thought it was a good indicator to me.

You've been trying to argue semantics from the get-go, and that's all you really have going for you. Twisting my words is all it is: changing the context of what I've said to imply something I didn't. Not to mention utterly pointless.

Gxgear

The only person twisting words is you when you claimed that I took the Metacritic average as my own opinion, and you still haven't either admitted I didn't say that or proved that I did with quotes.

But I am not twisting your words. You are. Because this is what you said:

IGN picked Portal 2 over the original, so that should give you a good indicator of how seriously to take the list.Gxgear

Notice that you didn't say "IGN picked Portal over the original, so that's why I don't take the list seriously."

You said "That should give you a good indicator of how seriously to take the list."

The thing about message boards is that they leave a record of one said, so I'm not sure why you'd attempt to act like you were only talking about how good of an indicator it is to you.

If that's what you meant, then you obviously didn't choose the right words, which is not my fault.

That was a general "you", for someone who obsesses over semantics it should have been obvious. It kind of is your fault for twisting the context of what I've said into a declaration of some sort.

A general you is still stating the "indicator" to be meaningful outside of yourself.

Simply, it is not a fair statement to say I twisted your words when you did say "you should take that as an indicator" any way you slice it. You can go on and on about what I should have thought you meant, but those are your words.

I'm just going off of what you said and did say "you should", in which case it seems reasonable that you're addressing the thread at large or a subset of people inside the thread (and you actually admitted as much). It would not be reasonable to look at words you should and infer that it was ONLY meant personally, especially when people often do project their opinion in the way that I've described.

So you remain the only person that twisted someone's words.