219 réponses à ce sujet

[Steelcan]

*makes popcorn and pulls up chair*

[txgoldrush]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

So you are inventing arguments for them now...when did I say they MUST do it, because I recall I say they CAN do it. Two different things.

And I disregard you opinions because you base them off of invalid evidence or inaccurate information. Metacritic user scores and internet polls are not really valid, they are biased and flawed. Market research is, and why would Bioware lie to itself when Mericzan claims that the majority don't want more post ending DLC.

Nevermind anti enders disregard others opinions...like the 5 editors who liked the ending. Nevermind I don't even like the original ending, they do...tough.

You invented the argument there, Butch. They can do it, correct, but you're also phrasing your argument to sound as if they all did it. I'd wager that less than 5 percent of players took that route. I have no evidence, but then again, neither do you.

So I'm to trust BW at their word, just because they say so? Why? What have they done to engender trust from me and for the masses? Am I to take them at their word just because their BW? Jessica Merizan is the last person I trust with information from BW. It's her job to make the company look good. She's being paid to do so. BW can make whatever claim they want to make since only they hold their information. I certainly don't trust it. I think BW is just trying to defend themselves. I don't trust anything they say, but I'm not at all surprised that they're saying whatever suits their interests.

Of course they're going to inflate their own opinion! It's their product on the line. I agree; Metacritic and internet polls are not entirely accurate. Very few sources for official polling on the internet are. But that street goes both ways.

By the way, admitting that you disregard opinions means you just admitted that you broke your own argument. Especially when you make claims that everyone who doesn't agree with you is unfair and biased, without credible proof, of which I can guarantee you have none.

I'm not disregarding other opinions. I'm asking them to back them up. More often than not, they can't. Why did the 5 editors like the ending? Can they make a rational argument defending it narratively and thematically and from its execution? Can you?

No, you are not telling the difference between the words "can" and "must".

And why would Bioware lie to themselves? Why would they falsify their own confidential research? What good does that do? People are paid to make someone look good, but that doesn't mean they will lie to themselves when data is not in their favor. But I guess you have no experience with political or business polling.

The street goes both ways, but not all the traffic does.

So I should hold into regard an opinion based off of ignorance or inaccurate information? So I should regard an opinion from those who basically ignore the story and its themes? Who ignore evidence against them?

Why do I like the ending (or the EC version)? Because it fits thematically with the game and the series while being unconventional with the main antagonist.

[Indy_S]

txgoldrush wrote...

So I should hold into regard an opinion based off of ignorance or inaccurate information? So I should regard an opinion from those who basically ignore the story and its themes? Who ignore evidence against them?

Evidently yes, unless of course you don't hold your own opinion in regard.

[txgoldrush]

Indy_S wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

So I should hold into regard an opinion based off of ignorance or inaccurate information? So I should regard an opinion from those who basically ignore the story and its themes? Who ignore evidence against them?

Evidently yes, unless of course you don't hold your own opinion in regard.

No, I have the actual narrative of the game to back me up.

[Bourne Endeavor]

txgoldrush wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

So you are inventing arguments for them now...when did I say they MUST do it, because I recall I say they CAN do it. Two different things.

And I disregard you opinions because you base them off of invalid evidence or inaccurate information. Metacritic user scores and internet polls are not really valid, they are biased and flawed. Market research is, and why would Bioware lie to itself when Mericzan claims that the majority don't want more post ending DLC.

Nevermind anti enders disregard others opinions...like the 5 editors who liked the ending. Nevermind I don't even like the original ending, they do...tough.

You invented the argument there, Butch. They can do it, correct, but you're also phrasing your argument to sound as if they all did it. I'd wager that less than 5 percent of players took that route. I have no evidence, but then again, neither do you.

So I'm to trust BW at their word, just because they say so? Why? What have they done to engender trust from me and for the masses? Am I to take them at their word just because their BW? Jessica Merizan is the last person I trust with information from BW. It's her job to make the company look good. She's being paid to do so. BW can make whatever claim they want to make since only they hold their information. I certainly don't trust it. I think BW is just trying to defend themselves. I don't trust anything they say, but I'm not at all surprised that they're saying whatever suits their interests.

Of course they're going to inflate their own opinion! It's their product on the line. I agree; Metacritic and internet polls are not entirely accurate. Very few sources for official polling on the internet are. But that street goes both ways.

By the way, admitting that you disregard opinions means you just admitted that you broke your own argument. Especially when you make claims that everyone who doesn't agree with you is unfair and biased, without credible proof, of which I can guarantee you have none.

I'm not disregarding other opinions. I'm asking them to back them up. More often than not, they can't. Why did the 5 editors like the ending? Can they make a rational argument defending it narratively and thematically and from its execution? Can you?

No, you are not telling the difference between the words "can" and "must".

And why would Bioware lie to themselves? Why would they falsify their own confidential research? What good does that do? People are paid to make someone look good, but that doesn't mean they will lie to themselves when data is not in their favor. But I guess you have no experience with political or business polling.

The street goes both ways, but not all the traffic does.

So I should hold into regard an opinion based off of ignorance or inaccurate information? So I should regard an opinion from those who basically ignore the story and its themes? Who ignore evidence against them?

Why do I like the ending (or the EC version)? Because it fits thematically with the game and the series while being unconventional with the main antagonist.

Technically, they do not even have to, yet it can still be disingenuous. I have long suspected the data they reveal regarding single player is based upon a first file per IP. For instance, were I to start a Soldier file initially to practice. That class is locked on my IP and any subsequent files are not accorded for. Therefore, they can accurately boast claims like "60% play as a "Soldier" or "45% chose Synthesis" despite it lacking any context.

Nevertheless, you are acutely naive to believe companies will not lie to the public to maintain rapport and maximize profit. Both often go hand in hand, thus making it in their best interest to only publicize positive feedback and disregard any and all negative has a "vocal minority."

There was a speculated report a month or two ago on Reddit that cited Microsoft actively embarking on a reputation management campaign due to the overwhelming backlash toward Xbox One. EA has a list a mile long od sleazy business tactics and intrusive DRM. And I need only point to SimCity as my evidence. SquareEnix released Final Fantasy XIV when it was barely worth being considered alpha tested.

Likewise, ever take notice how BioWare stopped pumping DA2 once someone posted statistics that showed DAO badly outsold it? Or how The Old Republic barely gets a whisper when it proved to be a colossal failure financial? Both BioWare and EA went out of their way to promote these games and blatantly skirted along the fence to deflect negativity.

Businesses do whatever is necessary to promote their product. BioWare will vehemently deny any backlash and downplay it to the best of their ability because it benefits them, regardless if said backlash is a whimper or a roar.

And for sake of reference. The vast majority of people likely purchased ME3 based on hype, expectations due to its predecessors or curiosity, possibly derived by word of mouth. I reserved a copy the moment a could - it was an immediate "must have" and at the time my expectations were sky high because I loved the series. I also convinced my cousin to play ME2 and a friend to pick up the entire trilogy.

Using ME3's sales are itself, disingenuous, as it ignores the majority doing exactly what I did - buying into hype.

Modifié par Bourne Endeavor, 26 juillet 2013 - 04:22 .

[txgoldrush]

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

So you are inventing arguments for them now...when did I say they MUST do it, because I recall I say they CAN do it. Two different things.

And I disregard you opinions because you base them off of invalid evidence or inaccurate information. Metacritic user scores and internet polls are not really valid, they are biased and flawed. Market research is, and why would Bioware lie to itself when Mericzan claims that the majority don't want more post ending DLC.

Nevermind anti enders disregard others opinions...like the 5 editors who liked the ending. Nevermind I don't even like the original ending, they do...tough.

You invented the argument there, Butch. They can do it, correct, but you're also phrasing your argument to sound as if they all did it. I'd wager that less than 5 percent of players took that route. I have no evidence, but then again, neither do you.

So I'm to trust BW at their word, just because they say so? Why? What have they done to engender trust from me and for the masses? Am I to take them at their word just because their BW? Jessica Merizan is the last person I trust with information from BW. It's her job to make the company look good. She's being paid to do so. BW can make whatever claim they want to make since only they hold their information. I certainly don't trust it. I think BW is just trying to defend themselves. I don't trust anything they say, but I'm not at all surprised that they're saying whatever suits their interests.

Of course they're going to inflate their own opinion! It's their product on the line. I agree; Metacritic and internet polls are not entirely accurate. Very few sources for official polling on the internet are. But that street goes both ways.

By the way, admitting that you disregard opinions means you just admitted that you broke your own argument. Especially when you make claims that everyone who doesn't agree with you is unfair and biased, without credible proof, of which I can guarantee you have none.

I'm not disregarding other opinions. I'm asking them to back them up. More often than not, they can't. Why did the 5 editors like the ending? Can they make a rational argument defending it narratively and thematically and from its execution? Can you?

No, you are not telling the difference between the words "can" and "must".

And why would Bioware lie to themselves? Why would they falsify their own confidential research? What good does that do? People are paid to make someone look good, but that doesn't mean they will lie to themselves when data is not in their favor. But I guess you have no experience with political or business polling.

The street goes both ways, but not all the traffic does.

So I should hold into regard an opinion based off of ignorance or inaccurate information? So I should regard an opinion from those who basically ignore the story and its themes? Who ignore evidence against them?

Why do I like the ending (or the EC version)? Because it fits thematically with the game and the series while being unconventional with the main antagonist.

Technically, they do not even have to, yet it can still be disingenuous. I have long suspected the data they reveal regarding single player is based upon a first file per IP. For instance, were I to start a Soldier file initially to practice. That class is locked on my IP and any subsequent files are not accorded for. Therefore, they can accurately boast claims like "60% play as a "Soldier" or "45% chose Synthesis" despite it lacking any context.

Nevertheless, you are acutely naive to believe companies will not lie to the public to maintain rapport and maximize profit. Both often go hand in hand, thus making it in their best interest to only publicize positive feedback and disregard any and all negative has a "vocal minority."

There was a speculated report a month or two ago on Reddit that cited Microsoft actively embarking on a reputation management campaign due to the overwhelming backlash toward Xbox One. EA has a list a mile long od sleazy business tactics and intrusive DRM. And I need only point to SimCity as my evidence. SquareEnix released Final Fantasy XIV when it was barely worth being considered alpha tested.

Likewise, ever take notice how BioWare stopped pumping DA2 once someone posted statistics that showed DAO badly outsold it? Or how The Old Republic barely gets a whisper when it proved to be a colossal failure financial? Both BioWare and EA went out of their way to promote these games and blatantly skirted along the fence to deflect negativity.

Businesses do whatever is necessary to promote their product. BioWare will vehemently deny any backlash and downplay it to the best of their ability because it benefits them, regardless if said backlash is a whimper or a roar.

And for sake of reference. The vast majority of people likely purchased ME3 based on hype, expectations due to its predecessors or curiosity, possibly derived by word of mouth. I reserved a copy the moment a could - it was an immediate "must have" and at the time my expectations were sky high because I loved the series. I also convinced my cousin to play ME2 and a friend to pick up the entire trilogy.

Using ME3's sales are itself, disingenuous, as it ignores the majority doing exactly what I did - buying into hype.

That's not the marketing data....that was player stats pulled from online gamers. That only shows who played what and what choices were made. It doesn't cover player desires.

You are giving me examples of cases where companies have admitted their failures. An its not failures coming from dishonesty, but bad decisions. And could the marketing research tell them that they made bad decisions? I bet it is. Why? Because they would not lie to themselves.

And TOR was not a financial failure, it was profitable. You do not have a fact right. The problem was the subscription model is out of date and the subscriber based MMO market is collapsing. Also take into account EA's push for free to play games.

And really, if ME3 is such a disappointment, why is it still selling. Why was there no sudden drop in sales like DA2 witnessed? Why does the sales match the predecessor? And if you want to use hype...ME1 and ME2 sold copies on hype as well. Why didn't the hater backlash for the ending stopped its sales?

Face facts here, the game is selling well even after the hype phase. This was not the case with DA2.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

txgoldrush wrote...

No, you are not telling the difference between the words "can" and "must".

You literally changed your argument and are drawing a conclusion I didn't define simply to use against me because I didn't make it. Stop changing your arguments and moving the goalposts. I'm more inclined to take your arguments and opinion seriously if you do so.

This point is irrelevant, and it is meangless. It is invalid.

And why would Bioware lie to themselves? Why would they falsify their own confidential research? What good does that do? People are paid to make someone look good, but that doesn't mean they will lie to themselves when data is not in their favor. But I guess you have no experience with political or business polling.

Why would BW lie to themselves? I don't know. Inflated ego's perhaps? I don't think that's entirely the case. Maybe they want to show something to EA. Maybe they really are just out of touch with their fans these days. Maybe they want to justify to themselves that they can switch to a different style and genre of games to maximise profits by marketing games towards different audiences. You never know with people. They're not trying to convince themselves by the way. They're trying to convince the consumers, and they're trying to convince their publishers.

I'm not even going to mention the fact that you're bringing in internet polling into this debate in a meaningless way. I thought this was about market research? I'll take that as an attempt to discredit me, and a bad one I might add.

The street goes both ways, but not all the traffic does.

Did you really just steal my quote just to say this? You're making a confirmation bias argument, and neglecting to inform of any reasonable alternative that the public has access to. 

This point is irrelevant and invalid.

So I should hold into regard an opinion based off of ignorance or inaccurate information? So I should regard an opinion from those who basically ignore the story and its themes? Who ignore evidence against them?

My opinion isn't based off of inaccurate information or ignorance.

It's based off of the game. It was bad. Very bad. Especially the ending. I hated it. I still hate it. It's not good. At all. 

And you're now saying that everyone who doesn't agree with you is wrong. I'd provide an actual analyization of the ending themes and the narrative for them (and still will upon request) but I feel that it will upon a mind that doesn't want to challenge itself or think hard enough to see that BW is trying to sell us something that doesn't add up logically.

Back to the part about disregarding opinions you don't agree with, you're doing nothing but hurting your own argument and strengthening my own.

Why do I like the ending (or the EC version)? Because it fits thematically with the game and the series while being unconventional with the main antagonist.

And I disagree vehemently and completely. There is no narrative in the ending. The Catalyst contradicts itself several times with its definitions of words.

The main antagonist was made unconventional after the entire series was pretty clear-cut up to that point on what they actually were. They didn't need to make a switch on them. They shouldn't have. They spent so long defining the Reapers up to a certain extent that arbitrarily changing that to ultimately excuse a concept that didn't fit narratively or thematically with the ending, and is executionally inconsistant with itself and simply defined very, very badly with non-science and mystical crap.

Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 26 juillet 2013 - 04:55 .

[Steelcan]

@txgoldrush,
I'm not sure if I should take you seriously or not

[AresKeith]

Steelcan wrote...

@txgoldrush,
I'm not sure if I should take you seriously or not

I stopped taking him serious when he started every reply with "You don't get it" or randomly attacking other games

[Mr. Gogeta34]

txgoldrush wrote...

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

It's a known fact that some reviewers don't even finish the game before submitting their review.

But most reviewers have.

Tell me, of the 7 Gametrailers editors, why only two did not like the end, and only one passionately?

Of the 7 Gametrailer editors, 2 payed attention while the others enjoyed "the journey" and more or less ignored the topic of the ending itself.  Another was basically like this:

//ME3 end credits

Reviewer:  ... so Shepard saved the galaxy?  Cool.   //turns off game.

so lets disregard their opinions...yeah

And what if they did find it logical? Some of them did.

Then they weren't paying attention.  For the record, I don't disregard their opinion.  I'm just saying what those opinions mean.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 26 juillet 2013 - 05:07 .

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

AresKeith wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

@txgoldrush,
I'm not sure if I should take you seriously or not

I stopped taking him serious when he started every reply with "You don't get it" or randomly attacking other games

I just see "buzzzzzzbuzzzzzzbuzzzzzzbuzzzz" whenever he posts.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

AresKeith wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

@txgoldrush,
I'm not sure if I should take you seriously or not

I stopped taking him serious when he started every reply with "You don't get it" or randomly attacking other games

Or objectively trying to proclaim that his interpretation is the only correct one.

[CronoDragoon]

dreamgazer wrote...

chemiclord wrote...

We're still fighting over the minority/majority thing, are we?

The minority are. The vast majority no longer give a cluck.

YOU BETTER HAVE STATS 2 BACK DAT UP MANG.

[txgoldrush]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

No, you are not telling the difference between the words "can" and "must".

a) You literally changed your argument and are drawing a conclusion I didn't define simply to use against me because I didn't make it. Stop changing your arguments and moving the goalposts. I'm more inclined to take your arguments and opinion seriously if you do so.

This point is irrelevant, and it is meangless. It is invalid.

And why would Bioware lie to themselves? Why would they falsify their own confidential research? What good does that do? People are paid to make someone look good, but that doesn't mean they will lie to themselves when data is not in their favor. But I guess you have no experience with political or business polling.

Why would BW lie to themselves? I don't know. Inflated ego's perhaps? I don't think that's entirely the case. Maybe they want to show something to EA. Maybe they really are just out of touch with their fans these days. Maybe they want to justify to themselves that they can switch to a different style and genre of games to maximise profits by marketing games towards different audiences. You never know with people. They're not trying to convince themselves by the way. They're trying to convince the consumers, and they're trying to convince their publishers.

I'm not even going to mention the fact that you're bringing in internet polling into this debate in a meaningless way. I thought this was about market research? I'll take that as an attempt to discredit me, and a bad one I might add.

The street goes both ways, but not all the traffic does.

c) Did you really just steal my quote just to say this? You're making a confirmation bias argument, and neglecting to inform of any reasonable alternative that the public has access to. 

This point is irrelevant and invalid.

So I should hold into regard an opinion based off of ignorance or inaccurate information? So I should regard an opinion from those who basically ignore the story and its themes? Who ignore evidence against them?

d) My opinion isn't based off of inaccurate information or ignorance.

It's based off of the game. It was bad. Very bad. Especially the ending. I hated it. I still hate it. It's not good. At all. 

And you're now saying that everyone who doesn't agree with you is wrong. I'd provide an actual analyization of the ending themes and the narrative for them (and still will upon request) but I feel that it will upon a mind that doesn't want to challenge itself or think hard enough to see that BW is trying to sell us something that doesn't add up logically.

Back to the part about disregarding opinions you don't agree with, you're doing nothing but hurting your own argument and strengthening my own.

Why do I like the ending (or the EC version)? Because it fits thematically with the game and the series while being unconventional with the main antagonist.

e) And I disagree vehemently and completely. There is no narrative in the ending. The Catalyst contradicts itself several times with its definitions of words.

The main antagonist was made unconventional after the entire series was pretty clear-cut up to that point on what they actually were. They didn't need to make a switch on them. They shouldn't have. They spent so long defining the Reapers up to a certain extent that arbitrarily changing that to ultimately excuse a concept that didn't fit narratively or thematically with the ending, and is executionally inconsistant with itself and simply defined very, very badly with non-science and mystical crap.

a) It is YOU that are doing what you are accusing me of. You drew the false conclusion, not me.

Or maybe they are not and the vocal minority just can't accept that many do not share the same opinion. And why would Bioware side with a vocal minority? Sometimes you have to admit that you don't get your way. Stop trying to say they are "out of touch" when they are being anything but. And Citadel DLC shows that they have been in touch.

Just because they don't suit your personal needs doesn't mean they are out of touch.

c) I guess you did not get the quote. You are saying its a two way street, but really traffic is only going one way. Why? Because its the anti enders that are the vocal ones, not the pro enders.

d) and I bet the ending themes you are thinking of is not the actual ending themes. Also the EC basically adds a thematic statement to ME3. The main theme is "victory through sacrifice", that's not an opinion, that is a fact. That's why all three "good" endings end at the memorial wall.

e) And sometimes antagonists are contradictions and ironies. That doesn't make them bad, that makes them possible antagonists. Shepard keeps saying that the Reapers don't truly understand organic life and at the end, whaddya know? The catalyst doesn't truly understand organic life....and that causes the CENTRAL CONFLICT. Not organics vs synthetics.

And really you don't get the ending because you just do not see the thematic connection. How many times has one or an entire race try to create or harness forces they cannot control and try to shape their destiny and then there is rebellion and conflict? You know the main storylines of the series. Face it, the Reapers and the starchild is another example of this, but on the grand scale.

And they were NOT clear cut, they had no motive.

[Indy_S]

txgoldrush wrote...

Indy_S wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

So I should hold into regard an opinion based off of ignorance or inaccurate information? So I should regard an opinion from those who basically ignore the story and its themes? Who ignore evidence against them?

Evidently yes, unless of course you don't hold your own opinion in regard.

No, I have the actual narrative of the game to back me up.

Uh huh.

txgoldrush wrote...

Wow, haters can't simply accept the fact that they may be the vocal minority.

An opinion based off ignorance or inaccurate information.

txgoldrush  wrote...
Metacritic user scores and internet polls are not really valid, they are biased and flawed. Market research is, and why would Bioware lie to itself when Mericzan claims that the majority don't want more post ending DLC.

Ignoring evidence against you.

And for all your claims that

...it fits thematically with the game and the series while being unconventional with the main antagonist.

, you don't actually use a supporting argument. Other people so far have asked for it and you do not provide it. I have to assume you don't have one and if that's the case, you are basically ignoring the story and its themes.

Is that 3/3? I think that's 3/3.

[txgoldrush]

Indy_S wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Indy_S wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

So I should hold into regard an opinion based off of ignorance or inaccurate information? So I should regard an opinion from those who basically ignore the story and its themes? Who ignore evidence against them?

Evidently yes, unless of course you don't hold your own opinion in regard.

No, I have the actual narrative of the game to back me up.

a) Uh huh.

txgoldrush wrote...

Wow, haters can't simply accept the fact that they may be the vocal minority.

An opinion based off ignorance or inaccurate information.

txgoldrush  wrote...
Metacritic user scores and internet polls are not really valid, they are biased and flawed. Market research is, and why would Bioware lie to itself when Mericzan claims that the majority don't want more post ending DLC.

Ignoring evidence against you.

And for all your claims that

...it fits thematically with the game and the series while being unconventional with the main antagonist.

c), you don't actually use a supporting argument. Other people so far have asked for it and you do not provide it. I have to assume you don't have one and if that's the case, you are basically ignoring the story and its themes.

Is that 3/3? I think that's 3/3.

a) Yep, and are you going to just ignore it.

and anti ender driven internet polls aren't?

Wow

c) I just provided it, learn to read.

Modifié par txgoldrush, 26 juillet 2013 - 05:23 .

[AresKeith]

@Txgoldrush David and Wolf is that you?

[CronoDragoon]

Fandango9641 wrote...

To claim that ME3 was an unmitigated success is to mark yourself out as someone to be ignored. Tha game was not well recieved. What point trying to pretend otherwise? 

The ending was not well received by a vocal (not getting into minority/majority) contingent of fans, but the game except for the ending was very well received. Just check out threads after release asking for ratings of the game sans ending. Looot of 10/10s.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Fandango9641 wrote...

To claim that ME3 was an unmitigated success is to mark yourself out as someone to be ignored. Tha game was not well recieved. What point trying to pretend otherwise? 

The ending was not well received by a vocal (not getting into minority/majority) contingent of fans, but the game except for the ending was very well received. Just check out threads after release asking for ratings of the game sans ending. Looot of 10/10s.

QFT... but the ending, without question, was not well received.

[AlanC9]

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

Technically, they do not even have to, yet it can still be disingenuous. I have long suspected the data they reveal regarding single player is based upon a first file per IP. For instance, were I to start a Soldier file initially to practice. That class is locked on my IP and any subsequent files are not accorded for. Therefore, they can accurately boast claims like "60% play as a "Soldier" or "45% chose Synthesis" despite it lacking any context.

You're not saying that Bio doesn't  actually know what players do on playthroughs past the first one, right? Just that they're reporting misleading numbers because reasons?

Also, did Bio ever release any figures about ending percentages?

Modifié par AlanC9, 26 juillet 2013 - 05:33 .

[spirosz]

Tx is back and golden.

[Indy_S]

txgoldrush wrote...

a) Yep, and are you going to just ignore it.

An unproven assertion? Sure will!

and anti ender driven internet polls aren't?

Wow

Strawman. I haven't made that claim. Metacritic user reviews are not invalidated by bias. They do not represent the player base at large but they do represent themselves. You cannot claim that their opinion does not matter simply because yours doesn't align with them.

c) I just provided it, learn to read.

I looked for it in the past 4 pages. Only your claims that its true, no supporting argument.

Tx: 2 + 2 = 5!
Indy: Prove it.
Tx: I just did!