You are coming across as confrontational, fractious, and more than a little bit facetious, Dex. If it's not your intention to come cross that way, then please understand that that is how the tone of your posting reads. You 'sound' as though you are spoiling for a fight and wanting other people to 'come at you'. Again, if that's not what you're trying to do, then it might be best if you take some extra time to check your posts and vet them for tone before you post them - I have to do this quite often, and usually give my posts three or four passes until their language is acceptable. Even then, I sometimes come across too harsh.
(Response to the above 'challenge' remark, spoilered for moderate off-topic since the conversation is trying to move on)
Originally Posted by Dext. Paladin
The difference is I'm trying to show you how foolish your list are. It's a sarcasm. Which you know and yet you think I'm serious, that I'm doing "exactly that".
What you're demonstrating is that you did not read or engage with what I said, and that you're still not doing so. You come across as fishing for an argument which I'm not interested in having with you. Yes; you do sound rude. Yes; you're using confrontational language and baiting terms in this thread. No; I'm not interested.
Here's the point of my original post:
You said:
Originally Posted by Dext. Paladin
Because literally everything else outside the Story is objectively worse than BG3.
You claimed that literally Everything outside of the subjective story element, was Objectively better in BG3. That is what you said. There's no “I was only talking about this specific thing when I said that” - you said it bluntly as a universal.
Max responded asking you not to claim something so obviously false and silly, presumably because he, like others here, find that it undermines anything else of value you might have to contribute:
Originally Posted by Maximuus
Don't say "objectively" when you are giving your own opinion... No, everything else is not worse in BG2.
You responded by doubling down on your assertion:
Originally Posted by Dext. Paladin
I am sorry because I'm gonna say exactly that. BG1/2 is objectively worse than BG3 on everything else except for story which are highly subjective.
You repeated, with no qualification and as an absolute universal, that BG1 and 2 are objectively worse in every way, and by every metric of comparison, except subjective story-related ones. You claimed this was an objective truth, external to anyone's subjective opinion. That is what you said, and reiterated; no hedging, qualifying or side-stepping, you were very clear.
Everyone here knows that this statement is ridiculous, but more importantly, that it is Objectively False. Everyone talking here knows that it's a rather silly thing to assert, and will just make you look like you're not interested in having a serious conversation, moreso for trying to defend it after the fact.
It takes away from the weight or value of anything else you might say or any other way you might contribute to the discussion, because it is so silly a claim to try to assert; maybe it's sarcastic hyperbole - and presumably it is - because I don't think anyone here thinks you're that stupid; I certainly don't... but the point being made to you is that using hyperbole like that throws a lot of shade on your own legitimacy in the conversation, and actively undermines the chances of anything else you have to say being taken seriously - or even read at all, by some folks.
That is all I dropped in to say. Don't do that; it detracts from your ability to get your point across or to be taken seriously by others.
Quote
What I was trying to do is to stop "abstract" assertion that "BG2 wuz better" by asking -specifically- what is it that make you think that, and ideally, admit that it's just rose-tinted biased opinion, which I believe it actually is.
By all means do that – but don't do it by using nonsense hyperbole that makes you look the fool and detracts from the value of anything else you might say.
For the record: You also may have missed the point where I said I was not forwarding my own opinion on the matter at all (which I have at no point given on this topic), just illustrating an issue in your comment using the examples that others had already talked about in the thread.
Quote
Let's talk *specifically*....
No. That is not and was not in any way related to the point I was asking you to consider in respect to your discussion habits.
Challenge away; this isn't a fight or an argument, and I'm not interested in your apparent desire to make it one. I'm only offering some advice to you, that you are free to take or leave as you see fit. I can't offer it any more clearly than this, so that is the end of this tangent as far as I'm concerned.
Outside of that, I will say that the things most recently brought up for specific discussion on are all, every one of them, subjective matters. The claim that having your character ability scores affect your dialogue options, and having dialogue checks rolled for conversation options is 'better' than if those things were not being present is, itself, a subjective opinion; Dex may 'prove' all they like; there are others who feel that your character scores should not determine what you can or cannot say in roleplay, and that certain things should not require checks at all - that requiring checks is actually a hindrance to character play, and that having in-your-face dice rolls across the screen in the middle of conversations is immersion-breaking and ultimately bad for investment in the story and immersion in scenes. One may attempt to 'prove' all they like – any opinion that any of that makes one game superior over another is subjective.
