Hoo, boy, this is gonna be quite an interesting ride.
I didn't say this, I said Zelda games [as a whole] don't resemble real life. Anyway, there could certainly be storms in OoT, or other various things that affect the overworld. The issue here is you are exempting every single other Zelda game from this almighty judgment of yours.
No, not really, just pointing out things that could have made the atmosphere on the Great Sea much better than it was. The real difference, here, is that land and sea travel require different tactics, and storms are one of the things that can really aid the latter, especially when it comes to sailing.
And this part "let's not forget that there's no possible way the GameCube could have rendered graceful animations to make storms actually impressive and impactful." when did I even IMPLY that it couldn't do this? Never? Okay, so why are you using sarcasm regarding this. I wasn't even talking about the GC capabilities. U w0t m8?
You said it was made in 2002 and that I shouldn't compare it to ACIV because of it. That heavily implies "the hardware wasn't powerful enough back then to do ___."
This condescending bull **** really bothers me. Wanna know why? Because I think you believe you are the best debater on the entire forum and you never say anything that is a "poor counter argument". I really believe you think this. So every ****ing time you belittle someone on this forum it makes me feel sick to my stomach that someone is out there as disgustingly egotistic as you just belittling people left right and center because you are such a great debater. You must be well aware that half of the ****ing forum talks about how you belittle people, have no sense of the line between subjective and objective, you ignore people whenever they prove you wrong (whether it be literal SB ignoring or simply skipping over their posts as you have several times to me lately), how you have an ego out to wazoo, and can't EVER admit you're wrong. You always tell me you admit when you're wrong but I've yet to see you do it even when I prove you to be factually wrong (i.e. when you used the term "straw man" incorrectly). Seriously, you have the ****ing audacity to say that YOU KNOW what the best Zelda game is and what the worst is? Your signature embodies everything wrong with your childish crap, I can't believe you're 20 years old.
Well, I'm glad you paid so much attention to me in the SB, because there are multiple times where I've admitted I was wrong on something. I've done so in posts, as well. I even just recently requested a thread of mine be deleted so I could remodel it, as the information surrounding it provided a shaky foundation, which I only realized after it was pointed out to me. I also don't "skip over" posts unless they're absolutely irrelevant to what I'm saying. If I miss a key post by someone, it's because I legitimately missed it. Threads can move really fast, and posts can easily be missed because of that. It's happened multiple times since I've been here, and it will continue to happen in the future. It's an inevitability.
I'm also legitimately surprised you're bringing up my signature when there's a pretty large number of other members that have similar ones. It's a pretty popular thing to do here at the DGN. It also pretty much automatically implies an opinion, which should go without saying.
You are going to sit here and belittle me? You are going to regularly insult my debating skills along with those of many others despite serious flaws in your own? Can anyone's behaviour really be this juvenile? Do you know why people made stuff like "JJ *you know what* over"? Do you know why people rip on you behind you back? Because you are absolutely beyond rude to people who are having discussions with you.
I'm aware I can come across an ***hole due to having poor social skills (and that it often hits high points at certain intervals), but I don't act condescending to someone unless they've greeted me with the same attitude.
That little "novel" was also written because Axle stood up for me multiple times, so there was a brief period of time (unless it's still going on) where people did a JJ x Axle thing out of spite. I would appreciate you knowing the whole story behind something before bringing it up as an example.
Oh, I can't say I like something because I like it? That's not enough for you? I'm objectively wrong? I say TWW is the best Zelda game and I'm objectively wrong? I say the atmosphere in TWW is good and I'm objectively wrong?
Who the hell do you think you are? God? Do you think you are God? Cause you sure as **** act like you are thinking you know who is objectively wrong.
I'm sorry, but I'm pretty sure I don't just go around randomly saying, "This is objectively wrong, that's objectively wrong, YOU'RE ALL OBJECTIVELY WRONG, WAHAHAHA!!!" Since you brought it up specifically, though, I also don't say that it's "objectively wrong" that The Wind Waker is the best Zelda game. I certainly believe it to be false, and I certainly state my reasons as to why, but
that's how debates work. People state their opinions and why they have said opinions, which was the entire point behind me addressing the "subjectivity" issue that was brought up in this thread. Again, you can't just right off the bat say, "Oh, it's all subjectivity," as an argument without it being a cop-out. It's little more, if anything, than a reason to not go into detail about why you believe something. And that's what I always do: go into detail about why I believe something. It's something I do frequently here on a forum where one of the main attractions is to do that very thing. Again, I'm aware I can come across as an ***hole while doing so, but it's never my intent unless it's a situation where I just don't give a ****.
Do you know why people don't like to give you reasons for anything? Cause you tell them they are ****ing wrong. It's a goddamn opinion. Hit me up when you figure out what that means.
I only tell people they're wrong if it's a legitimate fact that they're wrong. Otherwise, I offer my take on whatever the current situation is. If you (and others) want to view that as me telling them they're wrong, well, there's not really anything I can do about that other than let you know (ironically enough) that's wrong. In fact, it's quite the opposite. It's me telling you why I believe something I do, which BY DEFAULT makes me believe I'm right about it. That's how people work. If they believe something, they think they're right about it. That doesn't mean that they automatically are and that they can't take others' thoughts and opinions into consideration (which I always do, otherwise I wouldn't be able to provide relevant responses), but that doesn't stop them from thinking they are. Why else would you even debate about something? Why would you debate about something if you don't even believe what you're saying to be true? That would be a class-A example of redundancy.
Can't wait till you ignore this post, too, as you do with every post that calls you out for being the condescending child that you are.
Well, then...
), not how subjective vs objective and stuff.....
