@DrizztDark:said, "I thought as much... Avoid talking to me in person then it's OK"

I'm not avoiding anything. The only person avoiding something in this DEBATE is you. I have no issue debating you over Skype, but first, you have to prove you can actually debate. So far you haven't done even that.

@DrizztDark said, "You really don't have much going on do you? I comment on my lunch break and you seem to be able to write for paragraphs at any given time..."

Well, I work Monday-Friday swing shift (that's 2pm to 10:30pm). So as of right now no, but again that has nothing to do with this DEBATE. You haven't even countered any of my "arguments" or "points" not even once, let alone twice. And you say I'm hiding behind my keyboard...

@DrizztDark said, "That's why just want to have a debate over Skype on an evening just to see your thought process and have an actual person in person conversation man you can avoid it though."

To scared to try and type for this debate?

@DrizztDark said, "Gaming is one of my stress relief's for a couple hours before I have to go to bed and I enjoy it thoroughly... Sad that you can't..."

Oh, yes nice ASSUMPTION. Gaming on my custom PC, iMac, my retro consoles, 360, PS3, PS4, Xbox One....oh yes I don't enjoy gaming....

*rolls eyes*

@DrizztDark said, "And you really do need to come to conclusion that you are scared to talk to me."

I've been having a conversation/debate with you. Do not blame me because you lack the ability or will to have one.

@DrizztDark: said, "what the hell is wrong with you?"

Hmmm, as I expected. You would resort to nonsense instead of actually debating. I have brought "facts" to the table and you simply dismiss them.

@DrizztDark said, "Cut the BS with that long-winded post and basically you are another person that does not want to pay an extra dime for any additional content after her game is released."

Once again, someone took the time to answer your question and point out your childish attitude, but the post is BS in your eyes; no surprise. And no it's not about NOT paying for extra content, but paying for GOOD extra QUALITY content that actually adds value & enjoyment to the game again. Here I'll even give you a few examples: The Ballad of Gay Tony (GTAIV), The Lost & The Damned (GTAIV), Dawnguard (Skyrim), Dragonborn (Skyrim), Ryder White Campaign (Dead Island), & Undead Nightmare (Red Dead Redemption).

So again you're not paying attention as it's not about not paying for extra content (which by the way microtransactions is not TRUE extra content), but getting QUALITY extra content.

@DrizztDark said, "That is all this argument is about and you're the same one post that 10 paragraph comment in retaliation for the 8 that GS gave dark souls 3 which was absolutely pathetic for a grown man to get up in arms over..."

Actually, this is called a DEBATE. Here I'll educate you here as well:

1) Argument - an exchange of diverging or opposite views, typically a heated or angry one.

2) Debate - a formal discussion on a particular topic in a formal way, in which opposing arguments are put forward.

So a person who brings "opposing arguments" to the table is 'pathetic for a grown man?'

No, what's pathetic is someone who doesn't understand what "debating" is and resorts to childish tactics without bringing their own "opposing arguments" to the table.

@DrizztDark said, "I would love to have an actual man-to-man conversation with you over Skype and I will discuss my opinions on people like yourself and the whole industry as a whole.."

I'll touch on this last...for now...

@DrizztDark said, "I actually read the whole comment and was amazed at the amount of time that you had to put this whole thing together over not wanting to pay any more money for additional content because that is what this argument is about right?"

No, as I already explained it's about paying for QUALITY extra content that adds to the STORY, CHARACTERS, WORLD, etc. that already exist in the game.

@DrizztDark said, "Point being, I make a damn good living and enjoy gaming. It's cool if you disagree with micro transactions and there's a lot of them that I think is complete bullshit too..."

Which has nothing to do with this debate in any fashion.

@DrizztDark said, "But if you're going to generalize anybody that spends any money on additional content after a post-release is unintelligent like the guy that I originally commented too, then I'm going to question, how so?"

I have one word for you: HYPOCRISY!!

You did the exact same thing. Plus, as I explained it was @the-games-masta's opinion and it bears nothing on his intelligence what so ever. You getting butt hurt over his "opinion" however is childish.

@DrizztDark said, "You folks have no problem hiding behind a keyboard and throw out insults for people that spend money on additional content but never have the balls to actually talk to somebody in person ..."

Nice generalization. Also, I haven't insulted anyone. I have pointed out your hypocrisy and childish behavior. And I don't hide behind a keyboard; I just happen to be on the internet which means we are not face-to-face to debate. That should be quite obvious. But once again you resort to a child-like state (no doubt trying to "bait" me to get angry or mad).

@DrizztDark said, "You're going to have to realize there's a lot of people out there that have good paying jobs and they're able to afford things like this with disposable income and game companies realize that therefore are not going to bow down to the lowest common denominator's like yourself which I call bottom feeders..."

See once again you bring up INCOME & ASSUME I can't afford microtransactions or DLC simply because my view is different than your own.

"Bottom feeders"

Another "bait" tactic no doubt hoping I will get angry and start cursing you out, but I'm sorry to say unlike some people in this debate I'm a grown man who is bringng "opposing arguments" to the table and not childish insults or assumptions.

@DrizztDark said, "You folks have no problem hiding behind a keyboard and throw out insults for people that spend money on additional content but never have the balls to actually talk to somebody in person ..." AND "I would love to have an actual man-to-man conversation with you over Skype and I will discuss my opinions on people like yourself and the whole industry as a whole.."

We have been debating...well technically I have been debating you and you haven't even countered ONE point I made in regards to your "view" on this subject. And you want to debate over skype? Why don't you prove to me that you can actually debate and stop hiding behind your keyboard?

@DrizztDark said, "So what games do you spend your money on? Are the games that you spend your money on any less stupid? Is it clicking yet on how unintelligent your comment is?"

It is funny that you speak of intelligence and then ask what games does he spend his money on. However, it is actually quite obvious that his comment was in regards to microtransactions and not the video game GTA V itself. In fact, I would bet that @the-games-masta would have commented such a thing for any video game in relation to microtransactions.

Now yes, you could still argue the whole "what do you spend your money on & that individuals intelligence" argument even with microtransactions. Nevertheless, the person's intelligence isn't the question or at play here; microtransactions are. Now yes, it is true video games are "subjective" and there for statement @the-games-masta, "Wow - there are that many stupid people in the world" is based on his own opinion and feelings for microtransactions in a video game. However, your argument doesn't hold much weight when you question a person's intelligence based on their opinion & feeling about something. If a person thinks Final Fantasy sucks or Call of Duty sucks and people who keep buying them are stupid does that inherently make them unintelligent for thinking this? No, it's called their opinion.

@DrizztDark said, "What franchises are you talking about? Please elaborate ..."

I will touch on your first question before going into your childish response.

First, when it comes to microtransactions we should ask two main questions and keep them in mind when a game is asking you to spend real money for specific items.

1. Can they only be earned by paying up?

2. Are they better than what you have already?

In the world of free-play the answer is purely no as "most" are basic cosmetic stuff (And yes even some DLC fits into the microtransaction category; skins & alternate costumes/outfits/weapons/etc.). As for your question: Team Fortress, Train Simulator, FIFA (in fact, any EA sports game), Dragon Age Origins, Sims, Sim City, and Dead Space 3 (craft with cash) to name a few. We can even list the most "hated" microtransactions/DLC released for video games: horse armor, power-up-paywall (dead space 3), weapon skins, house DLC (building).

You see the proof is out there and in truth I'm sure you already knew this.

Now on to your childish response...

@DrizztDark said, "And your response tells me everything I need to know about your age.. My comment had nothing to do with the support of micro transactions..."

And you failed to see that the initial comment was in regards to microtransactions and not the game itself. This was even obvious even before @the-games-masta said, "Carry on supporting pos micro transactions in games that ruin perfectly good franchises, you complete douch". Hence why he brought it up. Perhaps if you had paid attention to his initial comment you would know why he brought it up...because that's what his comment (that you replied to 1st) was about, microtransactions.

@DrizztDark said, "but while were on the topic, it's not other peoples fault you can afford to game my friend.... Instead of being bitter in the comment section, maybe it's time to start working a little harder on your career."

I find it funny that @the-games-masta becomes hostile towards you when your responses are so plainly obvious "troll bait". You speak of @the-games-masta's age & intelligence as if you are on some higher "maturity level & intelligence", which in fact you aren't. You clearly didn't pay attention or understood @the-games-masta's initial comment. This is proven by your responses.

But to add to your so called "intelligence" you then question @the-games-masta ability to afford microtransactions and start telling him how he should focus on his career if he can't afford "something" you like. It is a pure "bait" comment to piss the person off so they respond in a hostile way towards you. Then in your own little world you can feel like the pessimistic self entitled "intelligent" & "mature" person you believe yourself to be.

@DrizztDark said, "I understand you're from the generation of entitlement, it's an eye-opener when you get in the real world.."

Entitlement and the "real world" do not go hand-in-hand. What is so wrong with a person who has a love of video games wanting to be able to play them without having to fork over more cash for the "full experience" of enjoying said game? Is that so honestly so wrong in your "world view" that it some how directly affects you? No!

In fact, truth be told microtrasactions affect those who don't support them more then a person not wanting them would affect you. This is called the domino effect:

EXAMPLE:

1) Microtransactions are created & made available in the first paid triple-a-title.

2) You purchase a few because in your world view you can afford them...

3) Others begin to purchase them...

4) Some gamers see it as a bad thing that should not be supported as it will hurt gaming & gamer sin the long run.

5) You call them "entitled", "whiney", "bitchy", etc. You even claim they should get better jobs if they can't afford to game any more...

6) Then another game is released with microtransactions...it is sadly supported...

7) People who want to game & enjoy it with out paying more money "voice their thoughts & concerns"...

8) Again you call them "entitled", "bitchy", "complainers", etc.

I could go on & on, but I'm sure you understand this now. What you call "entitled" I call a gamer with a passion for gaming who wants to enjoy it without having to pay more cash for the "full experience" of the game.

@DrizztDark said, "bitter bitter bitter... You have no clue how to explain the way you think and you resort to personal insults when question explain your way of thinking ... Your opinion screams I can't afford to game and I'm mad at people that can... Good luck to you on life with that way of thinking"

No the only person here who has no clue is you. The only child I see is you who "baits" a person to get mad and then questions what he "can" or "can't" afford as your main argument.

But I have took the time to answer your childish comment. So please do enlighten us with your "intelligence" and respond!