Dude, of course it's the return of Flappy Birds. The girl was doing it wrong, she should have tapped instead of dragged.

I love Eternal Blue. It's one of my favourite games of all time.

IMO, the game looks ugly.

I would.

Ignoring how nonsensical that is ("let's show players something worse than what our game really is, because, you know, marketing!"), it doesn't really apply in this case. It's not a matter of there being interesting encounters in which the enemies had very low health; no, the encounter design - in the demo, just…

I agree. It really didn't impress me. The enemies we see were more afterthoughts than real challenges, easily defeated by the main character alone with little help from the rest of the party. The part showing the tactical combat didn't end in a second just because one party member ran through the map aggroing…

See, I hope you have learned the lesson here. The next time you think you can easily antagonize someone and use empty rhetoric to contest someone's point when you know you are wrong... It may be a good idea to stop and think if you really want to go through with it. Otherwise, you may find that who has fallen in your…

See, that's your "intellectual dishonesty". You are not a judge. I'm not trying to impress you. More importantly, this isn't a high school debate - you are not going to foolish anyone trying to dodge the issue of how you are wrong while trying to hide behind empty rhetoric.

Feels like you came to this discussion, knowing that your position was obviously wrong, just to be antagonistic against TrippyTreeFrog and expecting high-school levels of rhetoric to be enough in an adult discussion.

See, the fact your only remaining statements are to attack me are pretty much proof of your lack of arguments. I'm still waiting for my reply:

Irrelevant. Again, I ask:

"I did point it several time now. Here it is right here:

"'Ergo, used games are leading to new games not selling as much as they could have been sold if used games were not sold.'

"'We know used games have led, at least in one store (GameStop) to a focus on sales of used games to the detriment of new games.'

Yeah, "intellectual dishonesty". I'll repeat it, in hope eventually you'll answer it instead of trying to change the subject:

See, beginning your reply with statements such as "I have never made a claim" is, again using your words, "intellectual dishonesty". This isn't a debate class, in which your attempts to dodge the matter being discussed could (maybe) work.

Irrelevant.

Calling them "insufficient" is an opinion, one from someone who has been antagonistic to the concept from the beginning of this discussion. What the links show is that GameStop makes a bigger profit through used games than through new games, and ergo they try to sell more used games than new games, ergo they sell less…

I can, actually. Examples:

I take it you didn't think it's amazing, then? D: