Microsoft refers to core audience as "Sweaty thirty year olds in Metallica t-shirts"

[Cunning Sage]

You people are all tools every single one of you. Get off of the Microsoft Hate-Bandwagon.

You SHOULD read this as a compliment. The line reads defying the stigma that THE PUBLIC applies to you, not Microsoft. Unless you are arguing that you are indeed a fat sweaty 30 something metallica t shirt wearing ingrate and are some how being offended by this.

Look at the context.
"Gaming's not just for sweaty thirty year olds in Metallica t-shirts"

Lemme break it down for you.
If it read "Gaming's just for sweaty thirty year olds in Metallica t-shirts" I wouldn't be posting this. And your hatemachine would be right. But there is some strong Keywordage in there known as the word NOT.

So, yes, please continue to hate microsoft on baseless internet hatemachine tactics and CONTINUE to define the stigma that in fact you all are sweaty thirty year olds in Metallica t-shirts.

This

 

[SomeBritishDude]

I honestly say I laughed when I saw the title. And I think i can safly say he's only half wrong.

 

[Lonewolf266]

the fact you spelt martial arts with the completely wrong word makes me doubt that you are trained in them but you know maybe its some super secret form of fighting i don't know about

 

[DanDeFool]

He doesn't play on Xbox Live. Obviously.

If he did, he'd probably say that their core audience is obnoxious, racist, homophobic tweenage kids who have some very bizarre ideas about how to treat other people's mothers.

OT: Fuck you too Microsoft. I'll admit, if your console had actually, you know, worked reliably when you first released it, I probably would have bought one. I might still buy one if your redesign actually addresses the RRoD issue. But I am NEVER buying a Kinect. Unless the most fucking awesome game in the universe is released for it, which it probably won't be, I will shove a Kinect up my gaping, distended sphincter before I buy one.

Oh, and by the way, I ENJOY LISTENING TO SMOOTH JAZZ AND WEARING NECKTIES, YOU STEREOTYPING ASSHATS!

 

[AzrealMaximillion]

Snip


It's called the English language, and you might want to get a grip on it if your going to talk about context.

you had a good argument up until you used language as a punchline. Because you obviously understood what I was talking about to counter point it. And then you go off and make a fool of yourself claiming a language superiority.

Yes, I obviously knew what you were talking about. I also knew that you observed the context wrong due to one word. Last time I check, you miss one word and a sentence's meaning can be changed. Last time I checked misunderstanding the meaning of a sentence because you didn't take into account one word falls under semantics. And Last time I checked semantics is the study of the meaning of human phrases.

Which requires language.

And seeing as how you misunderstood one part of the sentence in question, you misunderstood the language.

Which happens to be in English.

This is why we read books kids.

Or, I am putting more emphasis on a different part of the sentence? And you are falling to trolling levels calling out language specifics when I was arguing specific context?

Tomayto Tomahto.

Meh, you putting more emphasis on one part of the sentence isn't this issue. You can't take context from one part of a sentence if the previous part of the sentence completely contradicts your point. You have to take the context of the entire sentence, not just a part of it. Taking context from a part of a sentence and trying to argue it makes you look like your trying to twist the meaning. The entire sentences completely went against your point.

And you really need to look up what trolling is. Me arguing with you isn't trolling. If you wanna see trolling, go to GameSpot.

Okay, so you want to argue language. "it's not just for" shortening the line in question to the part we are arguing about.

Not turns a verb negative, just usually quantifies absolutism as an adverb "Its just (blank)". And in this case, not is breaking the absolutism of the statement. If you remove the "not" from the sentence it turns into "it's just for". which connotes absolutism in fact.

So, adding the word Not, indicates that the following statement isn't true anymore.

Now, lets implicate it into the whole sentence.
"Gaming's not just for sweaty thirty year olds in Metallica t-shirts,"
So, by placing the emphasis on JUST. You are implying that they are thinking their entire "core demographic" is a bunch of 30 year olds in band tees. Which, by placing the emphasis on NOT. Means they are saying they appeal to an entire range of folks, and not just the so called "core demographic".

So, by taking offense to this, you are placing yourself INTO this demographic. It's not going the other way around. They aren't implying anything. Its a statement of acknowledgment, not speculation of interest.

Who's twisting words to fit their argument now? They are simply acknowledging that "gamers are NOT" the stereotype that was placed on them anymore.

Please, PLEASE continue grammar nazi-ing when you OBVIOUSLY have no idea what you are saying. I gave you the out, and you didn't take it, now bow your head in shame and kindly let the big boys speak.

Again, and Again you fail.

Point one. A comeplete sentence means something a partial one doesn't. Clearly you don't seem to understand that basing an arguement of context on part of a sentence is completely asinine. Which is whatt you continue to do.

Point two. I'm actually not being a grammar nazi. I'm actually arguing semantics.

Point three.

"So, by taking offense to this, you are placing yourself INTO this demographic.So, by taking offense to this, you are placing yourself INTO this demographic. It's not going the other way around. They aren't implying anything."

Yeah, I'm a hardcore gamer, and proud of it.... What's wrong with that? And yes they are implying that all hardcore gamers are sweaty thirty year olds. You messed up semantics once again.

They didn't put you there, you did. The only reason you are offended is because of yourself. So back to some of my other posts, get over yourself your club isn't exclusive anymore deal with it.

Your rebuttals have provided me with quite the amount of laughter.

This line here made you lose this entire point:
"They didn't put you there, you did."

Go back to what I said. I haven't said that I was "in rage" or pissed off. I originally was pointing out the flaws in that extensive novella you wrote that started this debate. All you done is say that I'm offended by what he said. I haven't even given up my opinion yet. So all your saying that I'm mad at Mircosoft for calling me a "sweaty Metallica shirt wearing 30 year old" was all your blindness to the arguement.

Here was my original point.
Your argument is invalid

I also stated why your arguement is invalid numerous times. All you done is insult me and try and stick an opinion into my point.

Here's my opinion of this situation, are you ready? Here goes:

I laughed at loud when I read the article. I actually feel sorry for this poor bastard is he truly still thinks that hardcore gamers look like The Simpsons' Comic Book Guy.

I'm a 19 year college business student who games in the free time I get that's not spend with scotch in my hand and a cigarette in my mouth(and a growing sword collection as indicated by my display picture). Why should I get mad? The only people who should get angry are the few 30 year old sweaty Metallica fans left that have read the article.

Look,all I did was agree with The Drunk Ninja about that flaws of your rant and offer my critisism, and what happened?

You insulted me more than the sentence that spawned this topic. That's really all you have done. But hey. Until my college workload becomes heavy, I'd love to keep exchange literal barbs with you for a while. It's the best comedy I've had on the internet since ready Least I Could Do.

 

[DNA]

Snip


It's called the English language, and you might want to get a grip on it if your going to talk about context.

you had a good argument up until you used language as a punchline. Because you obviously understood what I was talking about to counter point it. And then you go off and make a fool of yourself claiming a language superiority.

Yes, I obviously knew what you were talking about. I also knew that you observed the context wrong due to one word. Last time I check, you miss one word and a sentence's meaning can be changed. Last time I checked misunderstanding the meaning of a sentence because you didn't take into account one word falls under semantics. And Last time I checked semantics is the study of the meaning of human phrases.

Which requires language.

And seeing as how you misunderstood one part of the sentence in question, you misunderstood the language.

Which happens to be in English.

This is why we read books kids.

Or, I am putting more emphasis on a different part of the sentence? And you are falling to trolling levels calling out language specifics when I was arguing specific context?

Tomayto Tomahto.

Meh, you putting more emphasis on one part of the sentence isn't this issue. You can't take context from one part of a sentence if the previous part of the sentence completely contradicts your point. You have to take the context of the entire sentence, not just a part of it. Taking context from a part of a sentence and trying to argue it makes you look like your trying to twist the meaning. The entire sentences completely went against your point.

And you really need to look up what trolling is. Me arguing with you isn't trolling. If you wanna see trolling, go to GameSpot.

Okay, so you want to argue language. "it's not just for" shortening the line in question to the part we are arguing about.

Not turns a verb negative, just usually quantifies absolutism as an adverb "Its just (blank)". And in this case, not is breaking the absolutism of the statement. If you remove the "not" from the sentence it turns into "it's just for". which connotes absolutism in fact.

So, adding the word Not, indicates that the following statement isn't true anymore.

Now, lets implicate it into the whole sentence.
"Gaming's not just for sweaty thirty year olds in Metallica t-shirts,"
So, by placing the emphasis on JUST. You are implying that they are thinking their entire "core demographic" is a bunch of 30 year olds in band tees. Which, by placing the emphasis on NOT. Means they are saying they appeal to an entire range of folks, and not just the so called "core demographic".

So, by taking offense to this, you are placing yourself INTO this demographic. It's not going the other way around. They aren't implying anything. Its a statement of acknowledgment, not speculation of interest.

Who's twisting words to fit their argument now? They are simply acknowledging that "gamers are NOT" the stereotype that was placed on them anymore.

Please, PLEASE continue grammar nazi-ing when you OBVIOUSLY have no idea what you are saying. I gave you the out, and you didn't take it, now bow your head in shame and kindly let the big boys speak.

Again, and Again you fail.

Point one. A comeplete sentence means something a partial one doesn't. Clearly you don't seem to understand that basing an arguement of context on part of a sentence is completely asinine. Which is whatt you continue to do.

Point two. I'm actually not being a grammar nazi. I'm actually arguing semantics.

Point three.

"So, by taking offense to this, you are placing yourself INTO this demographic.So, by taking offense to this, you are placing yourself INTO this demographic. It's not going the other way around. They aren't implying anything."

Yeah, I'm a hardcore gamer, and proud of it.... What's wrong with that? And yes they are implying that all hardcore gamers are sweaty thirty year olds. You messed up semantics once again.

They didn't put you there, you did. The only reason you are offended is because of yourself. So back to some of my other posts, get over yourself your club isn't exclusive anymore deal with it.

Your rebuttals have provided me with quite the amount of laughter.

This line here made you lose this entire point:
"They didn't put you there, you did."

Go back to what I said. I haven't said that I was "in rage" or pissed off. I originally was pointing out the flaws in that extensive novella you wrote that started this debate. All you done is say that I'm offended by what he said. I haven't even given up my opinion yet. So all your saying that I'm mad at Mircosoft for calling me a "sweaty Metallica shirt wearing 30 year old" was all your blindness to the arguement.

Here was my original point.
Your argument is invalid

I also stated why your arguement is invalid numerous times. All you done is insult me and try and stick an opinion into my point.

Here's my opinion of this situation, are you ready? Here goes:

I laughed at loud when I read the article. I actually feel sorry for this poor bastard is he truly still thinks that hardcore gamers look like The Simpsons' Comic Book Guy.

I'm a 19 year college business student who games in the free time I get that's not spend with scotch in my hand and a cigarette in my mouth(and a growing sword collection as indicated by my display picture). Why should I get mad? The only people who should get angry are the few 30 year old sweaty Metallica fans left that have read the article.

Look,all I did was agree with The Drunk Ninja about that flaws of your rant and offer my critisism, and what happened?

You insulted me more than the sentence that spawned this topic. That's really all you have done. But hey. Until my college workload becomes heavy, I'd love to keep exchange literal barbs with you for a while. It's the best comedy I've had on the internet since ready Least I Could Do.

Indeed good sir, I've had a blast as well. But I think its time to let this topic die.