One sided and generic arguments that piss you off.

[Mister K]

For me it's " I don't like [genre/game/book/whatever] because it's gay" argument. I really don't think that people use this word in it's original meaning.
I am not pissed of by it, rather puzzled. Is it bad, because gay people like it? Or because [x] is historically asociated with gays? Well, I bet many gays like CoD, but nobody says that it's gay. It is as if saying that, FOR EXAMPLE, that you don't like basketball because it's black, or something.

 

[blackdwarf]

Every one has his own Opinion. that is you argument when I ask to back your opinion up.

It is such a lazy answer and I really feel that the person isn't taking me serious when he/she says that. It happened multiple times that I had a argument with someone and then he asked why I have my a certain opinion about the matter. I back it always up. He says he disagree and I ask why? Then he answers he has his own opinion. That is not a argument? That is just a statement without any content.

 

[Hagi]

Anecdotal evidence...

People under the delusion that their own personal experiences are so important and meaningful that they can be directly extrapolated over the rest of humanity. That their own judgement is of such quality and inherently unbiased that it can be used to make accurate statements on the state of society.

This usually comes in the form of a sheeple argument. Almost everyone, and most certainly the average person, is completely idiotic and the poster is one of the few intelligent people capable of recognizing this elusive thing that is the truth of human nature. Because hey... you just have to look around and it's obvious. If you can't see it then you must just be another idiot incapable of seeing the truth of things.

 

[dimensional]

Well if it a proper argument it doesnt bother me even if I have a strong opinion one side or the other whats annoying is the abandonment of all logic and reason entrenching a position with more and more ridiculous statements presenting thoughts as fact and basically losing sight of what the hell the subject was in the first place.

A lot of arguments arent really arguments though they are just contradiction which will never reach a conclusion seeing as its not designed to come to any sort of consensus.


Also cant believe this hasnt been posted yet.

 

[Pink Gregory]

A lot of arguments arent really arguments though they are just contradiction.

No they aren't!

 

[Shadow-Phoenix]

PC vs Console debates- I really really dislike those because it's never going to end and the PC only people love to slap the facts as well as the last word in there, people can be fine with just consoles and you don't need to shit on them and make them feel like a lesser being.

Oh and while some are still on about fans disliking the new DMC I for one dislike it mainly because it doesn't feel like previous DMC's and I just can't bring myself to liking it and what's worse is the game will probably continue in that direction meaning the previous games are in the dust and remain at a complete stand still.

It's also one of those feelings you get when a game changes completely for another audience and you feel like you get punched into a corner for simply disliking it and losing a franchise you once loved because that's how it felt to me.

 

[veloper]

Deal with it. Except maybe for ad hominems, which can get nasty, a weak argument is just one that is easy to counter.

 

[ohnoitsabear]

Oh hey, someone in America has done something questionable or stupid. AMERICA IS STUPID LOL!!

No, we are all not like that. I especially hate it when someone says something along the lines of "Stay classy America" in an sarcastic way. To me, it just comes off as incredibly snobbish and annoying.

I have seen this one on these forums way too much. It's stupid, uninformed, and lazy. It pisses me off to no end.

While TES:O is a much lesser case than DmC I've heard people who're saying "it's going to be trash" and making up the most absurd criticism that they can think of because they'd rather they had TES6 than an ES MMO. The most cringe worthy thing I've heard about this game is that if it had a subscription fee it'll go F2P in a year, the game hasn't even been revealed that much to the public and Beta Events haven't even started BUT YET people think they're wizards and can determine what the game will truly be like in the end, just like DmCmC.

In fairness, with the lack of success of the subscription model in the past few years, a potential subscription is a perfectly valid concern. Personally, I know I will be far more likely to get the game if it doesn't have a subscription. I'm interested in this game, but they still have to prove to me that this game will be worth my time and money.

Although I do want to say, anybody that thinks this game will affect the development of a single player Elder Scrolls in any way really doesn't know what they are talking about.

"YOU DON'T LIKE THIS GAME CAUSE YOU'RE SHIT AT IT!!!!"

I want to add that not being good at a game is a perfectly valid reason to not like it. Constantly sucking is not fun, and there's no reason you should play a game if you aren't having fun. It's not a valid reason to think that the game is bad, but you don't have to think a game is bad to not like it.

Anyway, I really hate when talking about DRM (specifically always-online DRM) when somebody says something along the lines of "you're already on the internet anyway, why is it a big deal?" This argument completely ignores several factors.

1. Just because somebody is online now doesn't mean that their connection is reliable enough for an always-online game. And even if it is, some people enjoy playing in situations where they don't have access to internet (like if they're traveling).

2. You are dependent on servers being online to play a game, which has been an issue in just about every game with always-online DRM.

3. Just because it may not be an issue for me doesn't mean that it's not an issue for somebody else, or that it doesn't deserve criticism.

Look, I'm not saying that people who are unaffected by always-online DRM should take up arms for the people who are. But we should try to be a little more understanding of other people's legitimate issues with something.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Fighting brown or black people in games = RACISM!!

Aye on this one. Fucking media right? They see a screenshot of a white guy shooting a black guy and they scream racism. Jesus Christ people, he's a fucking zombie! I'm shooting him because he's a zombie, not because he's black!
Ten years of shooting undead hetero white males and people still don't get it. It's not about color, it's about being undead and threatening your life.

 

[thesilentman]

"YOU DON'T LIKE THIS GAME CAUSE YOU'RE SHIT AT IT!!!!"

I want to add that not being good at a game is a perfectly valid reason to not like it. Constantly sucking is not fun, and there's no reason you should play a game if you aren't having fun. It's not a valid reason to think that the game is bad, but you don't have to think a game is bad to not like it.

I was talking about the guys who keep attributing my dislike of a game to me sucking at the game in general. The ones who don't listen about flaws in the gameplay, story, presentation, whatnot.

I'm just pointing that out as people can get rather defensive when it comes to critiquing a genre, game, or series.

 

[Sonic Doctor]

These threads always humor me

Most of the complains thrown into these types of threads are one sided and generic arguments...if you don't agree with the argument

Might as well throw mine into the ring:
-Piracy is OK because the game company is EEEEEVIL!!!! (DRM, makes a shit ton of money, labor law issues, etc.)
-Piracy is OK because information WANTS to be free! Why you be caging up information brah!?
-Piracy is OK because it's legal here!
-Piracy is OK because it's just copy-right infringement! You're not hurting anyone!
-Piracy is OK because I wouldn't have bought it anyway.

And so on and so on. Just like they're going to argue about my reasons for why pirates are thieves is a one-sided and generic argument.

Totally agree.

Though you forgot one point some pirates like to make.

-Piracy is OK when the game company doesn't give me a demo to play. I've got to test the game out to see if it is worth buying!

 

[Lonewolfm16]

This is a somewhat odd one, but I really hate when people divide games into the catagories of "Did I like it?" and "Objectively good/bad". There is no such thing as objectivity in a entertainment media. The purpose of it is to entertain human beings, so if you were entertained by it then it has been successful at its goal. Humans like diffrent things, and while we can achieve some general consensus on things that the vast majority of humans like/dislike being truly objective requires judgeing games by something other than enjoyment... and enjoyment is the purpose. To clarify this comes up alot when people are saying how terrible a game (or show or book or... just some piece of media) and someone retorts "Well I liked it." and then people start going on about how it doesn't matter if you enjoyed it, it is objectively bad. No. If it achieves its goal of being enjoyed it is not objectively bad. Besides even if I concede that all the flaws you are complaining about exist, if they didn't bother me, then they don't really matter (to me at least.)

 

[Fractral]

'It's good because it's realistic.'
Maybe the game is good, maybe it isn't. I don't have a problem with this argument if the game is realistic, but when it's applied to very unrealistic games, such a CoD or Minecraft, it does surprise me a bit.
'It sold well, therefore it is good.'
Sometimes. Realistically, if a game sold well then it probably is good, but when it is used to imply the inverse- that it's bad because it sold badly- then it's a bit silly. There are plenty of reasons why a game would sell badly other than it not being good, such as being poorly advertised, or being a JRPG.
Not on games as such, but 'Just because you can't prove or disprove its existence doesn't mean it doesn't exist.'
Obviously relates to God mainly, but I used the metaphor of an invisible elephant in the room which has no way of interacting with us or any matter at all, to prove my point. The person I was talking with then went so far as to argue that the elephant must exist, despite me just making it up.

It's funny how often XKCD gets things exactly right. If only more people understood that they were so similar to other people, then I reckon the world would be a better place.

 

[Yopaz]

Well I'm probably gonna open a can of worms with this but.

Spoiler

Anyone who tries to use this as the basis of their argument is missing the point.

I have a rant the size of Texas to explain why that picture is stupid. However I wont go into that and I hopefully wont get mixed into another gun control argument in the near future. Let's just leave it at I agree with you sooooo much.

OT: one sided debates always annoys me regardless of where I stand on the matter. in high school we had a debate in social studies about gay people's rights to adopt. Now my class was fairly liberal with the exception of two religious people (one who doesn't feel that strongly on gay people's rights) and one who is slightly homophobic (also not much of a speaker though he participated a little). Out of my entire class two people spoke against their right to adopt.

Me being OK with them adopting was on that side too, but there wasn't a debate at all. I got incredibly bored and so did my friend. So after a short break we decided to stir up some hell in the class and he took the role of a serious Christian who used the bible as a reason why they shouldn't be allowed to adopt. I took the homophobic stand and stated that it would lead to homosexuality being accepted more and their kids would also become gay and that kind of bullshit.

This might not be quite what this thread was about though...
I do also get annoyed at the people saying that graphics don't matter then follow up with that they play Minecraft or Dwarf Fortress. Yes, there are good games without great graphics, but there are some games that a certain level of graphics to make it work. L.A. Noire is a great example since the facial expressions are important for the selling features of the game.

 

[FFP2]

-Anything from a "typical" feminist. Either have FULL equality or shut the hell up. Don't cry out "sexist!" only when it suits you.
-Them DS assholes that think that their game is flawless and will dismiss the opinion of anyone that says otherwise because they "just don't get it and you probably suck at it and only real gamers play it"
-Nostalgia chained fanboys that can't accept change. See FF, MGS, GTA, DMC.
-The people that still shout out: "EA is the DEVIL!!!". We get it, they ruin everything. Stop giving them more publicity.

 

[Something Amyss]

-le snip-

No offense, but several of these strike me as strawman versions of arguments, and that in itself is a problem for me.

-Stop liking what I don't like... too obvious what's wrong with this; I need no explanation.

People usually offer this one up when someone simply says something sucks, or asks why other people like it. And before anyone offers that other one-sided argument of "opinions," don't. Opinions are best when they have foundation.

-Brown games = bad... no they aren't! Stop saying this, and acting like you're so clever for noticing a game needs more primal colors!

Usually this too is only part of the problem.

-Innovation or burst... the game plays it safe. It's crap! Every game needs to be a new and beautiful experience that excites the senses and creates new ones... -_-

This one actually does seem to be quite common, and it's annoying. People are too tangled up in "innovation," which usually doesn't really equal innovation anyway.

-Remakes = garbage... Dante is garbage because they turned him into a hipster looking dude. -_-

While I'm with you on the general point, Dante is garbage because they took a lot of the style of Devil May Cry, including retorts that didn't involve screaming "FUCK YOU!" and a good chunk of the over-the-top action sequences and made the game a lot duller. Even the new Metal Gear has more of a DMC feel to it. At least, that's from what I've seen, and I don't care enough to actually see more. This is not "hate" for Devil May Cry, but I've not been interested in DMC for a few years now, and the remake had nothing to do with it.

I don't care about Dante's hobo jacket or his hair, but there are a lot of valid complaints going on, and I think they're being swept up along with the "He no longer bleaches his hair!" bit.

-Violence towards women in games = misogyny... NO IT DOESN'T! (unless it's torture porn) You're really being sexist if you think killing billions of bad dudes is ok and killing one bad female is wrong.

Which, of course, is something pretty much nobody's saying. You mention MovieBob. You don't have to agree with him, but he makes a broader case for H&G than that, and to attack him with it is to do a disservice to all the arguable stuff he acually says.

-Lens flares = movies crap... THAT IS NOT TRUE! Sure lens flares might get annoying, but there's more to a movie than just technical annoyance like lens flares, slo mos, and shacky cams. You know? Pacing, story, plot and character development...?

Yeah, except again, he's voice his opinions on Abrams before and while that gag involved lens flares, his primary criticisms do not. Didn't Bob hate the pacing, story, plot and characters (period, not just development) of the new Star Trek? Yeah, pretty sure he did.

Spoiler

I wouldn't even mind that argument as much if they STOPPED TRYING TO LEGISLATE WHAT I DO IN MY BEDROOM!

Sure, why not. I'll play. There's a few I particularly hate.

THE ARGUMENT: IT HAPPENS TO MEN ALL THE TIME
WHERE WE SEE IT: In every feminism/gender wars thread.
HOW IT'S USED: As a rebuttal intended to debunk a claim that something bad happens to women. Woman is raped? Men get raped too you know! Woman faces prejudice? Men face prejudice too you know!
WHY I HATE IT: It's completely irrelevant, and presumes that men and women are competing teams attempting to stockpile outrages for the purposes of winning the sympathy sweepstakes. If bad things happen to group A, bad things also happening to group B doesn't make what happened to group A any less bad, or their complaints any less valid.

False equity in general tends to piss me off.

Oh hey, someone in America has done something questionable or stupid. AMERICA IS STUPID LOL!!

To be fair, that has more to do with possessing pattern recognition.

 

[The White Hunter]

PC vs Console debates- I really really dislike those because it's never going to end and the PC only people love to slap the facts as well as the last word in there, people can be fine with just consoles and you don't need to shit on them and make them feel like a lesser being.

Oh and while some are still on about fans disliking the new DMC I for one dislike it mainly because it doesn't feel like previous DMC's and I just can't bring myself to liking it and what's worse is the game will probably continue in that direction meaning the previous games are in the dust and remain at a complete stand still.

It's also one of those feelings you get when a game changes completely for another audience and you feel like you get punched into a corner for simply disliking it and losing a franchise you once loved because that's how it felt to me.

PC vs Console debates are a thing where spoilt 12 year olds argue with slightly poorer 12 year olds over the format their parents bought them.

Grown ups can have whatever they damn well please and thus shouldn't need such petty and foolish arguments.

You shouldn't be chewed out for not liking the new DMC, if you can give valid reasons why you don't like it then that's perfectly acceptable, similarly I've grown weary already of being snarled at just for not despising it without giving it a chance. I personally enjoyed it, and in a way I hope they can make both sides of the franchise continue, as Capcom did for many years with Mega Man/Mega Man X.

OT: I hate the arguments that Nintendo doesn't innovate and hasn't since the NES days. Really? Licenced software production to prevent saturation of the market with trash. Cross D-pad. Anolog stick. Dual-Screen gameplay. Motion control. Asymmetric gameplay. These are things nintendo either invented, popularised, or in some way pioneered. Feel free to have your opinion on NIntendo's current state, but do not brush aside the things they did for the industry.

And no, not every title they put out is ground breaking, but they're usually creative and enjoyable anyway.

 

[ComradeJim270]

-Piracy is OK when the game company doesn't give me a demo to play. I've got to test the game out to see if it is worth buying!

That's actually the only argument for piracy I'd accept without much qualification, aside from my reason for pirating games which is either "I lost the fucking disc" or "It's as ancient as the Holy Grail and about as easy to find".

On most things in life I am an idealist, but when it comes to the game industry I am hopelessly cynical. So I am distrustful of companies that don't release demos. I haven't actually done this, but that's probably because it hasn't occurred to me.

This is a somewhat odd one, but I really hate when people divide games into the catagories of "Did I like it?" and "Objectively good/bad". There is no such thing as objectivity in a entertainment media. The purpose of it is to entertain human beings, so if you were entertained by it then it has been successful at its goal. Humans like diffrent things, and while we can achieve some general consensus on things that the vast majority of humans like/dislike being truly objective requires judgeing games by something other than enjoyment... and enjoyment is the purpose. To clarify this comes up alot when people are saying how terrible a game (or show or book or... just some piece of media) and someone retorts "Well I liked it." and then people start going on about how it doesn't matter if you enjoyed it, it is objectively bad. No. If it achieves its goal of being enjoyed it is not objectively bad. Besides even if I concede that all the flaws you are complaining about exist, if they didn't bother me, then they don't really matter (to me at least.)

I kind of agree, but I'd make an exception for games that are very buggy. If a game cannot be played, you can make a good case for it being objectively bad, since it's effectively a defective product.