Frequently Asked Forum Questions
Search the HBO News Archives Any All Exact		Search the Halo Updates DBs Halo Halo2		Bungie Webcam HBO XBL Gamertags *Ar's Simple HTML Guide Shishka's Guide for Newcomers The Lowdown on Download Accelerators Red Loser's Anti-Spamming Guide Egg FAQ | More Egg Stuff c0ld's Movie Starter Guide Shishka's HaloPC Pre-Release FAQ 3.1 AutoMagic 117 StripzMaker
Search Older Posts on This Forum: Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts

Re: Why PCDestroyer is off
Posted By: protexts <protexts@cs.com>	Date: 4/18/02 2:11 p.m.
In Response To: Re: Why PCDestroyer is a mental midget LONGGGGGG (PCDestroyer) : (as a side note... I had to read yer post a couple of times before I : determined it might be worth my time to reply...) Judging from your response, you need to read it again. : You are entitled to your opinion... of course, I would have made it look a : lot cleaner and used some common sense and creative writing... but then, : you really didn't state an opinion... did you? Creative writing has little to do with your argument or the counter argument. : But whatever... you didn't have to be a jackass about any of my points... I : wasn't about any of the points in the post previous to mine. I admit the title of the post was a bit harsh. There wasn't enough space to put in the qualifier -- "with regard to the PC/Mac release of Halo." Who knows, you might not be a mental midget in other areas. The content of the post still stands. If you still think you know what MS is up to behind closed doors, I want to see some evidence instead of your half-baked speculations -- more evidence than the fact that PC Halo didn't come out hot off the heels of Xbox Halo. : I've stated these views on here before... and I'd have to say that you are : the one that has least swayed my opinion in any form or fashion. Well, you're quite set in your ways of believing that it's all a marketing conspiracy, so I don't expect you to be swayed. Hopefully, though, this post combined with other posters comments will bring you over to the "dark sid---" er, I mean "logical side." : You know, I am not some idiotic asshole cynic... I will change my viewpoint : given enough evidence to warrant such. Doubtful. Since you already have an opinion that is based on a lack of evidence, evidence doesn't seem to play an important role in the opinions you hold. So why would evidence be important to you? : You want to tear apart sentences that sound dumb? How about the one where you : said.... : "Now what I want to know is, what is your evidence for the first : premise? From whose a$$ did you pull this premise? Where are your : facts?" : Well... where is your evidence to the contrary? Obviously, you don't see the problem with your so-called "proof." The 1 million figure is completely arbitrary. I get the impression that if Halo had sold 500,000 copies, you would still say the same thing. Or if, on top of that, say Oddworld or Max Payne had done well... uh which they have...you'd still pimp your view. You're just making up some post hoc criterion to fit your theory about MS' policy on the release of Halo. For this argument I don't have any counter-evidence, but then again I don't have any counter-evidence that there's not an alien race living 100km below the surface of Mars. Just as this is not testable, neither is your criterion for holding back a product, because neither you nor I have that many facts to support or refute the criterion to begin with. So we might as well be talking about aliens under Mars. This is the point. Do you know for a fact that : there is no marketing strategy behind the release of the Mac/PC Halo and : the sales of Halo for the XBox foreign and domestic? Whose ass at : Microsoft did you pull the answers out of? Nope, I don't have any hard evidence. I don't have any interoffice memos in front of me or, MS' numbers for the marketing plan, haven't talked to any reliable higher-ups in MS other than what Matt said on here. All I have is: 1) what Matt said 2) the fact that Xbox's competition is not with the PC Market but with PS2 and Nintendo 3) It is reasonable to expect a delay between production and distribution of Halo Xbox and PC/Mac. Given that, I will *entertain* (and I want to stress that word!) the opinion that MS is not delaying release. But who knows? I certainly don't, but you seem to think you know. : Bottom line, you know just as much as I do and the rest of the community : about Halo, Bungie, the XBox, Microsoft and the Mac/PC release... Strange... I thought you said you had "proof." I thought you held pretty strong opinions on this. But now you are saying you don't know anything more than me or anybody else? Seems like you are revising your position a bit. : We know about as much about the Mac/PC release as we do about Phoenix. We know what Matt said. Obviously, you think he is lying. : Try stating your own opinion next time on the same subject instead of : mindlessly ripping someone elses to pieces. If you don't have a counter-argument to the counter-argument, that's your problem not mine. One doesn't have to have a definitively opposite opinion of yours to be able to shred your argument. You never stated what you : thought... only "you are wrong because..." Yes, but I am not the one claiming to know the truth about what MS is up to, and claiming people are liars. You're the one with the claim buddy. : That is being cynical... in not letting anyone have an opinion. In what way did I not allow you you're opinion? You posted your opinion. If you argument cannot support your opinion, and someone points it out, again that is your problem. Just because I don't agree with anything you say doesn't mean I am not "letting you have an opinion." You're responsible for your own words. As a note, I think "authoritarian" was the description you were looking for, not "cynical." Either that, or you need a better definition of "being cynical" in relation to these posts.

Message Index

Big News!! - DirectX for Macintosh!	Miguel Chavez	4/17/02 11:19 a.m.
Yeah... Kinda	Mr. Zarquon	4/17/02 11:56 a.m.
Geez... why the negative spin?	ferrex	4/17/02 1:03 p.m.
Because, I am.	Mr. Zarquon	4/17/02 1:10 p.m.
Re: Geez... why the negative spin?	Kanen Faud'r	4/17/02 1:26 p.m.
Re: Geez... why the negative spin?	PCDestroyer	4/17/02 2:32 p.m.
Re: Geez... why the negative spin?	Mark Levin	4/17/02 3:07 p.m.
Carmack...	Miguel Chavez	4/17/02 3:22 p.m.
Re: Carmack...	ferrex	4/17/02 7:08 p.m.
Re: Carmack...	Mr. Zarquon	4/17/02 9:31 p.m.
Re: Geez... why the negative spin?	PCDestroyer	4/17/02 3:45 p.m.
Re: Geez... why the negative spin?	ferrex	4/17/02 7:02 p.m.
Re: Geez... why the negative spin?	PCDestroyer	4/18/02 9:57 a.m.
Why PCDestroyer is a mental midget LONGGGGGG	protexts	4/18/02 4:46 a.m.
Re: Why PCDestroyer is a mental midget LONGGGGGG	PCDestroyer	4/18/02 10:11 a.m.
Re: Why PCDestroyer is off	protexts	4/18/02 2:11 p.m.
Make a 1AC!	123456789	4/19/02 11:47 a.m.
Why PCDestroyer is NOT a mental midget	kiro69	4/18/02 11:19 a.m.
Re: Speak for yourself there, parnter...	Lophan	4/18/02 12:09 p.m.
Re: Why PCDestroyer is NOT a mental midget	protexts	4/18/02 2:30 p.m.
Re: Why PCDestroyer is NOT a mental midget	PCDestroyer	4/18/02 4:37 p.m.
The place where your whole argument falls down...	Louis Wu	4/18/02 4:54 p.m.
Re: The place where your whole argument falls down	PCDestroyer	4/18/02 5:04 p.m.
Ack.	Louis Wu	4/18/02 5:16 p.m.
Re: Ack.	PCDestroyer	4/18/02 5:45 p.m.
Re: Ack.	protexts	4/18/02 9:34 p.m.
Re: Ack.	kiro69	4/19/02 10:36 a.m.
Re: Ack.	Louis Wu	4/19/02 10:54 a.m.
Re: Ack.	protexts	4/19/02 10:01 p.m.
As I said before, I agree.	123456789	4/19/02 5:36 p.m.
Re: Why PCDestroyer is NOT a mental midget	protexts	4/19/02 5:38 a.m.
Re: Why PCDestroyer is NOT a mental midget	PCDestroyer	4/18/02 4:26 p.m.
awesome reply, pcd *NM*	kiro69	4/18/02 10:43 a.m.
Re: Quick note...	Lophan	4/18/02 12:38 p.m.
Re: Quick note...	PCDestroyer	4/18/02 4:40 p.m.
Re: Quick note...	Warbow	4/18/02 4:42 p.m.
Re: Quick note...	PCDestroyer	4/18/02 4:57 p.m.
Re: Let's look at this a little closer...	Lophan	4/19/02 12:24 a.m.
Re: Let's look at this a little closer...	PCDestroyer	4/19/02 10:24 a.m.
Re: Let's look at this a little closer...	vector40	4/19/02 9:03 p.m.
Re: Then again, theoretically...	Lophan	4/20/02 12:13 a.m.
Re: Then again, theoretically...	vector40	4/20/02 1:12 a.m.
Re: Then again, theoretically...	PCDestroyer	4/21/02 6:27 p.m.
Re: Then again, theoretically...	protexts	4/20/02 5:15 a.m.
Re: Then again, theoretically...	vector40	4/20/02 4:09 p.m.
Re: Then again, theoretically...	PCDestroyer	4/21/02 6:24 p.m.
Implementation and Stealing	protexts	4/22/02 3:24 a.m.
Re: Implementation and Stealing	Aida-kun	4/22/02 5:15 a.m.
Re: Implementation and Stealing	PCDestroyer	4/22/02 9:56 a.m.
Re: Implementation and Stealing	protexts	4/22/02 2:45 p.m.
Re: Implementation and Stealing	PCDestroyer	4/22/02 9:49 a.m.
Re: Implementation and Stealing	protexts	4/22/02 3:05 p.m.
Re: Implementation and Stealing	PCDestroyer	4/22/02 8:34 p.m.
Re: Implementation and Stealing	kiro69	4/23/02 10:35 a.m.
I agree	123456789	4/17/02 3:19 p.m.