ciortas1 said:
solidstatemind said:
Pretty much everything you said here is fallacious, but I'll point out the ones that'll take the shortest time.
It's a logical fallacy to think that because someone has achieved something, he instantly knows better than one who hasn't. If this weren't true, critics would be an anomaly rather than an accepted, how do you say, occurrence in today's society.
Second, just because someone has proven they can create quality products doesn't mean they're only going to create quality products.
I find it funny that you instantly hide behind "It's all subjective" right after.
There's nothing subjective about seeing the difference in tone, art style and all that jazz, between two titles of an established franchise, in case you didn't realise that. There are a couple of other things I'd like to say about subjectivity, but I won't, because that'll result in a wall of text.
As for the "you're not the developer" part... So? Doesn't mean I, or anyone else, can't voice his concerns about where the franchise is going. Frankly these obligatory idiotic apologetic posts with nothing to say are getting on my nerves.
First things first: I was not addressing you. Feel free to jump in and make yourself look like a jerk, tho. (I particularly liked the part where you didn't even quote my previous post, so no one would be confused by the incongruity between what I said, and what you claimed I said.)
Also, assuming you actually understand what 'fallacious' means, I have to say that I'm sorry, but you're completely and utterly wrong:
1) Your counter 'argument' (and I use that term loosely) fails to take into account that respected critics, while perhaps not being successful developers, usually have extensive background and/or training in the genre they are working. Otherwise, they're just random people shooting their mouths off- like, say,
YOU- whose opinion I really don't give a flip about, since it's no more valid than mine (nor should you care about mine, for that matter-- even though I've actually played the game at the past two BlizzCons...something I doubt you can say). Exceptions may exist, but I doubt you'll find them within the depths of a message board.
2) Along those same lines, we are not talking about a finished product here. How many critics do you see that review half-completed movies or books? Ergo, at this moment, no one is actually able to make a definitive judgement on the game, because
it doesn't exist yet. Which segues nicely into--
3) The strongest indicator we have of future performance is past performance. Is it a guarantee of success? No (particularly in the financial sector), but it is an efficient barometer for gauging the possibility of success. Did I say that Blizzard would absolutely get it right? No. But I said it was reasonable to give them the benefit of the doubt.
4) Did I ever claim that tone, art style, and 'all that jazz' hadn't changed? Uhm, no-- but nice attempt at a straw man, tho. I specifically stated that people's opinions on whether or not the change was an improvement or a detriment was a subjective opinion.
And finally, I was not 'hiding' behind the statement that "it's all subjective"; I was attempting to gracefully soothe any ruffled feathers that my statements may have caused. I have been known to be... harsh.
I am going to close this by- again- trying to be as polite as possible. I disagree with your position, and your reasoning is faulty on
many levels. Before you start trying to act all intellectual, you may wish to read Kant and perhaps take a course on argumentation theory when you get to University.
