The "PC Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
y r games so expensive when cds r 10p to make each but new games are £30 each i say that that much profit is a sick way to get money take bill gates windows xp over £100 i don't now how he can sleep at night
Page:
Little Hobbo wrote:
> If that is true, then ditto and likewise, meaning that you too are
> included in exactly the same boat. But I think you'll agree that you
> talk a lot more drivel and crap than I do. Well actually, no, you
> won't agree, but everyone else will. :p
I don't write much crap really. People see it as crap, because they have small brains (joke)
> If that is true, then ditto and likewise, meaning that you too are
> included in exactly the same boat. But I think you'll agree that you
> talk a lot more drivel and crap than I do. Well actually, no, you
> won't agree, but everyone else will. :p
I don't write much crap really. People see it as crap, because they have small brains (joke)
Insane Bartender wrote:
> Little Hobbo wrote:
> If that is true, then ditto and likewise, meaning that you too are
> included in exactly the same boat. But I think you'll agree that
> you
> talk a lot more drivel and crap than I do. Well actually, no, you
> won't agree, but everyone else will. :p
>
> I don't write much crap really. People see it as crap, because they
> have small brains (joke)
Your arguments are sometimes alright, but your only weak point is that you will never concede as being wrong. If you make a statement then you will back it to the ends of the earth, even if blatantly wrong. If you could overcome this flaw then your arguments would carry a lot more weight.
> Little Hobbo wrote:
> If that is true, then ditto and likewise, meaning that you too are
> included in exactly the same boat. But I think you'll agree that
> you
> talk a lot more drivel and crap than I do. Well actually, no, you
> won't agree, but everyone else will. :p
>
> I don't write much crap really. People see it as crap, because they
> have small brains (joke)
Your arguments are sometimes alright, but your only weak point is that you will never concede as being wrong. If you make a statement then you will back it to the ends of the earth, even if blatantly wrong. If you could overcome this flaw then your arguments would carry a lot more weight.
Little Hobbo wrote:
> Your arguments are sometimes alright, but your only weak point is that
> you will never concede as being wrong. If you make a statement then
> you will back it to the ends of the earth, even if blatantly wrong.
> If you could overcome this flaw then your arguments would carry a lot
> more weight.
I'm not that often wrong you'll find. I get into arguments usually because people don't like what I have to say, not because what I say is wrong. I won't back down to someone who attacks me on the principle that they don't like what they are reading. The level of credence my arguments have with anyone else doesn't really matter to me.
> Your arguments are sometimes alright, but your only weak point is that
> you will never concede as being wrong. If you make a statement then
> you will back it to the ends of the earth, even if blatantly wrong.
> If you could overcome this flaw then your arguments would carry a lot
> more weight.
I'm not that often wrong you'll find. I get into arguments usually because people don't like what I have to say, not because what I say is wrong. I won't back down to someone who attacks me on the principle that they don't like what they are reading. The level of credence my arguments have with anyone else doesn't really matter to me.
Insane Bartender wrote:
> I'm not that often wrong you'll find. I get into arguments usually
> because people don't like what I have to say, not because what I say
> is wrong. I won't back down to someone who attacks me on the principle
> that they don't like what they are reading.
Purely your assumption. And I can prove you wrong by merely pointing to the other thread we have been 'discussing'. You posted 'GTA3 is gay'. I responded merely because I did not agree with that argument, not because I didn't like the way you said it. I would have been fine if you'd written 'GTA3 kicks ass'.
> The level of credence my
> arguments have with anyone else doesn't really matter to me.
Audience consideration should be one of your main concerns, you don't make any friends by having an attitude like that.
> I'm not that often wrong you'll find. I get into arguments usually
> because people don't like what I have to say, not because what I say
> is wrong. I won't back down to someone who attacks me on the principle
> that they don't like what they are reading.
Purely your assumption. And I can prove you wrong by merely pointing to the other thread we have been 'discussing'. You posted 'GTA3 is gay'. I responded merely because I did not agree with that argument, not because I didn't like the way you said it. I would have been fine if you'd written 'GTA3 kicks ass'.
> The level of credence my
> arguments have with anyone else doesn't really matter to me.
Audience consideration should be one of your main concerns, you don't make any friends by having an attitude like that.
Little Hobbo wrote:
> Purely your assumption. And I can prove you wrong by merely pointing
> to the other thread we have been 'discussing'. You posted 'GTA3 is
> gay'. I responded merely because I did not agree with that argument,
> not because I didn't like the way you said it. I would have been fine
> if you'd written 'GTA3 kicks ass'.
That hardly counts, since we're doing little other than taking the mickey out of each other there. BUT GTA3 is pants...
> Audience consideration should be one of your main concerns, you don't
> make any friends by having an attitude like that.
I'm discussing games, not making love.
> Purely your assumption. And I can prove you wrong by merely pointing
> to the other thread we have been 'discussing'. You posted 'GTA3 is
> gay'. I responded merely because I did not agree with that argument,
> not because I didn't like the way you said it. I would have been fine
> if you'd written 'GTA3 kicks ass'.
That hardly counts, since we're doing little other than taking the mickey out of each other there. BUT GTA3 is pants...
> Audience consideration should be one of your main concerns, you don't
> make any friends by having an attitude like that.
I'm discussing games, not making love.
"I'm discussing games, not making love."
WHAT A QUOTE!
heh, ok I will revise again now.
WHAT A QUOTE!
heh, ok I will revise again now.
Insane Bartender wrote:
> That hardly counts, since we're doing little other than taking the
> mickey out of each other there. BUT GTA3 is pants...
Hellooooo.....
You have just entirely missed the point you yourself made. You said that people took issue with the way you said things, and not what you actually said. I proved this wrong by showing that it is what you say that I disagree with, not how you say it. Whether GTA3 is pants or not has no relevance in this argument, I used it merely as an illustration.
>
>
> Audience consideration should be one of your main concerns, you
> don't
> make any friends by having an attitude like that.
>
> I'm discussing games, not making love.
Immature comment, any right-thinking person would see the sense in making friends.
> That hardly counts, since we're doing little other than taking the
> mickey out of each other there. BUT GTA3 is pants...
Hellooooo.....
You have just entirely missed the point you yourself made. You said that people took issue with the way you said things, and not what you actually said. I proved this wrong by showing that it is what you say that I disagree with, not how you say it. Whether GTA3 is pants or not has no relevance in this argument, I used it merely as an illustration.
>
>
> Audience consideration should be one of your main concerns, you
> don't
> make any friends by having an attitude like that.
>
> I'm discussing games, not making love.
Immature comment, any right-thinking person would see the sense in making friends.
Little Hobbo wrote:
> Hellooooo.....
> You have just entirely missed the point you yourself made. You said
> that people took issue with the way you said things, and not what you
> actually said. I proved this wrong by showing that it is what you say
> that I disagree with, not how you say it. Whether GTA3 is pants or
> not has no relevance in this argument, I used it merely as an
> illustration.
No, I merely claimed that the thread you pointed out had little relevance due to the complete lack of serious debate in it.
> Immature comment, any right-thinking person would see the sense in
> making friends.
I didn't join this forum thinking "maybe i'll make some friends and be less lonely". Anyone who thinks that has a problem. I cam here to discuss games, life, and the future. If discussing, and indeed arguing, doesn't gain me great favour, I am still content in that my view has at least been read. Besides which, I don't have THAT many "enemies" on these boards, you are massively exaggerating my position.
> Hellooooo.....
> You have just entirely missed the point you yourself made. You said
> that people took issue with the way you said things, and not what you
> actually said. I proved this wrong by showing that it is what you say
> that I disagree with, not how you say it. Whether GTA3 is pants or
> not has no relevance in this argument, I used it merely as an
> illustration.
No, I merely claimed that the thread you pointed out had little relevance due to the complete lack of serious debate in it.
> Immature comment, any right-thinking person would see the sense in
> making friends.
I didn't join this forum thinking "maybe i'll make some friends and be less lonely". Anyone who thinks that has a problem. I cam here to discuss games, life, and the future. If discussing, and indeed arguing, doesn't gain me great favour, I am still content in that my view has at least been read. Besides which, I don't have THAT many "enemies" on these boards, you are massively exaggerating my position.
Insane Bartender wrote:
> Little Hobbo wrote:
> Hellooooo.....
> You have just entirely missed the point you yourself made. You said
> that people took issue with the way you said things, and not what
> you
> actually said. I proved this wrong by showing that it is what you
> say
> that I disagree with, not how you say it. Whether GTA3 is pants or
> not has no relevance in this argument, I used it merely as an
> illustration.
>
> No, I merely claimed that the thread you pointed out had little
> relevance due to the complete lack of serious debate in it.
You STILL miss the point. No matter what the argument consists of, I was using it as an illustration ONLY to prove my point. Try reading my posts properly.
>
> I didn't join this forum thinking "maybe i'll make some friends
> and be less lonely". Anyone who thinks that has a problem. I cam
> here to discuss games, life, and the future. If discussing, and indeed
> arguing, doesn't gain me great favour, I am still content in that my
> view has at least been read. Besides which, I don't have THAT many
> "enemies" on these boards, you are massively exaggerating my
> position.
When did I say that you do have enemies?
> Little Hobbo wrote:
> Hellooooo.....
> You have just entirely missed the point you yourself made. You said
> that people took issue with the way you said things, and not what
> you
> actually said. I proved this wrong by showing that it is what you
> say
> that I disagree with, not how you say it. Whether GTA3 is pants or
> not has no relevance in this argument, I used it merely as an
> illustration.
>
> No, I merely claimed that the thread you pointed out had little
> relevance due to the complete lack of serious debate in it.
You STILL miss the point. No matter what the argument consists of, I was using it as an illustration ONLY to prove my point. Try reading my posts properly.
>
> I didn't join this forum thinking "maybe i'll make some friends
> and be less lonely". Anyone who thinks that has a problem. I cam
> here to discuss games, life, and the future. If discussing, and indeed
> arguing, doesn't gain me great favour, I am still content in that my
> view has at least been read. Besides which, I don't have THAT many
> "enemies" on these boards, you are massively exaggerating my
> position.
When did I say that you do have enemies?
Little Hobbo wrote:
> Insane Bartender wrote:
> Little Hobbo wrote:
> Hellooooo.....
> You have just entirely missed the point you yourself made. You said
> that people took issue with the way you said things, and not what
> you
> actually said. I proved this wrong by showing that it is what you
> say
> that I disagree with, not how you say it. Whether GTA3 is pants or
> not has no relevance in this argument, I used it merely as an
> illustration.
>
> No, I merely claimed that the thread you pointed out had little
> relevance due to the complete lack of serious debate in it.
>
> You STILL miss the point. No matter what the argument consists of, I
> was using it as an illustration ONLY to prove my point. Try reading
> my posts properly.
>
>
> I didn't join this forum thinking "maybe i'll make some friends
> and be less lonely". Anyone who thinks that has a problem. I
> cam
> here to discuss games, life, and the future. If discussing, and
> indeed
> arguing, doesn't gain me great favour, I am still content in that my
> view has at least been read. Besides which, I don't have THAT many
> "enemies" on these boards, you are massively exaggerating
> my
> position.
>
>
> When did I say that you do have enemeys
people this is not an isult place if it were don't you think somebody would start a thread of it come on we can sort this out or we can whine
> Insane Bartender wrote:
> Little Hobbo wrote:
> Hellooooo.....
> You have just entirely missed the point you yourself made. You said
> that people took issue with the way you said things, and not what
> you
> actually said. I proved this wrong by showing that it is what you
> say
> that I disagree with, not how you say it. Whether GTA3 is pants or
> not has no relevance in this argument, I used it merely as an
> illustration.
>
> No, I merely claimed that the thread you pointed out had little
> relevance due to the complete lack of serious debate in it.
>
> You STILL miss the point. No matter what the argument consists of, I
> was using it as an illustration ONLY to prove my point. Try reading
> my posts properly.
>
>
> I didn't join this forum thinking "maybe i'll make some friends
> and be less lonely". Anyone who thinks that has a problem. I
> cam
> here to discuss games, life, and the future. If discussing, and
> indeed
> arguing, doesn't gain me great favour, I am still content in that my
> view has at least been read. Besides which, I don't have THAT many
> "enemies" on these boards, you are massively exaggerating
> my
> position.
>
>
> When did I say that you do have enemeys
people this is not an isult place if it were don't you think somebody would start a thread of it come on we can sort this out or we can whine
Page: