"You are a liar because you lie. That's how words work - for someone who uses them truthfully, anyway, which you don't." - strawman argument
That's not a strawman. So, have you been screwing up your every response because you aren't reading what you're responding to, or because you don't understand what you're reading? Either way, you have lied multiple times, and had hissy fits when it was pointed out.
Just to cover a lot of the following copy-and-pasting in one go: Ugmaro doesn't understand what a strawman argument is and made about a dozen individual claims of strawman arguments from my post, but in not a single one of their accusations was there actually any strawman argument from me. Ugmaro was probably worked into a fit over me saying this, and just wanted to throw the charge of using a strawman argument back at me, despite not understanding what it means:
Originally Posted by Delicieuxz
You stuck your foot in your mouth by coming at me with a strawman argument. Now you're trying to obfuscate your mistake by ranting about other things - things which are just as absurd as your previous arguments.
Quote
"Larian have said that their D&D DOS2 clone doesn't carry on the story of BG2 and doesn't include its characters." - no source
"And I have pointed out that Larian's D&D DOS2 clone is a sequel to Descent Into Avernus which doesn't relate to the story of BG1 and BG2 and takes place hundreds of years after BG2. And I have said that if I come across Larian mentioning it again, I will post it here." - true and does not relate at all to any of my points
Actually, that information is the appropriate response to an extremely ignorant and arrogant comment of:
"please tell me how you know the story has nothing to do with the narrative and/or characters in those 2 games. Oh you don't? OK."
Quote
"Your every attempt to cover your ongoing mistakes is to further peddle absurdity, strawman arguments, and disinformation. From the beginning you stuck your foot into your mouth and proceeded to do the same thing over and over, being refuted at every turn. You were done here before you started." - strawman argument right there if I ever saw one
That's not a strawman. You need to look up what the term means so that you don't keep embarrassing yourself by using it incorrectly.
Quote
"And you still show no signs of having actually read my post that you tripped and fell over:" fell over what, the lack of conciseness or your ever growing failure to actually make a point? Also, I read it, so you know... STRAWMAN ARGUEMENT
Not a strawman. Look the phrase up.
Quote
"Larian have stated that they have control to choose what their D&D RPG game is, and that they chose the TB combat system because they were afraid of taking risks after the success of D:OS2" - pretty much true, followed by "(hence why they've basically just copy-and-pasted D:OS2 into D&D...)" - either a very malicious "interpretation" or a straight up lie. The following is by definition a strawman arguement
Not a strawman or a lie, and also literally what Larian said in an interview 3 days ago.
Quote
"So, Larian is really just using the "Baldur's Gate" name as a husk to fill with a D&D D:OS2 clone, exclusively for the purpose of sales (that's what the "it's a big risk" remark refers to). It's a cash-grab." - Another strawman where you claim what they're claiming. The "big-risk" is in making a type of game they're not good at making. It is not a cash grab, it is making sure they make as good a game as they can for the fans (both fans of BG games as well as their own fans).
Not a strawman. Look the phrase up.
Quote
"BTW, TB games have on average been performing worse than RTwP games. And Larian's D:OS2 didn't come close to the amount of sales RTwP legend Dragon Age: Origins did. So, really, there is only a single big hit TB game while RTwP games are on average performing better." - And so you're burying your own point by saying RTwP games sell better... good job?
I haven't said that RTwP games sell better nor does pointing out the fact that RTwP games have, on average, performed better than TB ones contradict any point I've made. What is your level of English comprehension? It obviously is not very high.
Quote
"Wasteland Remastered and Torment: Numenera tanked in sales and are unpopular. More people own Pillars of Eternity on Steam than own Wasteland 2 on Steam. When PoE 2 had TB added to it, its sales didn't improve at all and its Steam user rating didn't increase by even a single percentage-point. Pathfinder: Kingmaker is currently more popular than any TB game outside of Divinity: Original Sin 2. And Dragon Age: Origins (3.2 million copies sold in 3 months) greatly outsold Divinity: Original Sin 2 (1 million copies sold in 2.5 months)." - More about RTwP games selling better - good job?
And? Your point... doesn't appear to exist.
Quote
"Larian have become superstitious slaves in the wake of the success of D:OS2 and traded their integrity for the comfort and sales of an echo chamber of D:OS2 fans. So, there is literally no justification to using the "Baldur's Gate" name, when Larian's upcoming D&D RPG has as much in common with the Baldur's Gate series as ..." - Some more strawman...
That's not a strawman. Do yourself a favour and learn what a strawman argument is.
Quote
*Insert quote to look smart to myself*
You've failed and done the opposite.
Quote
"Larian's "Baldur's Gate 3" has not even the faintest tiniest shred of relation to the Baldur's Gate series in character, experience, or gameplay and yet they're exploiting the name with a D:OS2 clone set in D&D for the purpose of the money doing so can make them. Larian have sold-out and literally become a hack developer for the sake of monetary gain." - It's true because I say so. STRAW FUCKING MAN ARGUMENT AGAIN
That's literally not a strawman. Do you enjoy humiliating yourself?
Quote
And on a final, personal note:
Fuck you
Yes, I think that everybody who's bothered to read your absurdities is already well aware by this point that you haven't much intellectual resources to draw upon and are an emotional knee-jerk reactionary. Your forceful confirmation of that was not needed.
"A straw man (or strawman) is a form of argument and an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not presented by that opponent." which is the only thing you've been doing this entire time. Claiming others have said something they haven't (lying) or "misinterpreted" with malicious intent - a very clear straw man in each and every case.
The ONLY case where you stood a chance of refuting it you've decided to cut my comment short. How fitting.
