> 2625759425619671;10486:
> > 2533274886529017;10497:
> > …Sorry, but you did that, yourself. Sure says a lot about your pride and the lengths you’ll go to defend it. If that’s all you have though, then this mockery of a done to death and back “debate” is done.
>
>
> I didn’t want to do this, but the actual quote was on page 492 (above) and I was paraphrasing from you because I didn’t remember.
>
> 1) Shouldn’t it be the other way around though? Like the way I look at debates is that “I can be absolutely firm if the post demands it, otherwise I’m going to be subjective” Versus you stating, “I can be subjective when the post demands it,” which is sort of backwards to the way an open-minded debate is supposed to work, isn’t it? Otherwise I agree with the rest of this point (though I think it has little if anything to do with sprint and its effects on Halo so I’d ask you PM me if you want to continue that discussion)
>
> 3) Not everything needs to be “factual,” for it to be an insightful discussion point about sprint in this thread. Granted facts and sources do help- I just don’t agree that they need to be demanded for in order to partake in this discussion. I see what you’re saying (I really do) but you have to understand that your anti sprint opinions (such as your own knowledge of game mechanics and level design) is still your opinion… No matter how right you feel that your opinion is that’s still what you met my pro sprint opinions with. What I was trying to interject was the compromise in that scenario was going to be to “agree to disagree,” because I won’t accept you telling me that my pro-sprint opinion was wrong on the basis that you somehow know more than I do about map design and game mechanics… And it went further than that even- you used my time played against me to both mock me for having played that much and to discredit me by claiming, “I can’t believe that a champion has no idea was he’s talking about.” Once more, nothing you met my pro sprint opinions with was definitive or factual- to you it may be simply because that’s what you firmly believe but I don’t see the level design the same way that you do… To you that makes me “dead wrong,” but to me that makes you non-subjective on this issue.
>
> 5) I’ll have to go back when I get more time then to re-read stuff… Bout to get off and I don’t have the time or energy to even try that post again. If it was presented differently then I would have certainly responded to it immediately but then again it shouldn’t really matter. Plus if you really absolutely MUST get an answer out of me, then there’s always the PM option that I’ve consistently offered up there… Not something I’m asking for either, but it’s not like I ignore people. I always appreciate it when someone chooses to take an argument “offline,” so to speak if it has the potential to go off-topic.
>
> 6) Well I’m open to going back and re-reading… Usually when someone says something blunt or potentially rude to me I purposefully have a quick memory and forget it. Whether to wash things under the bridge or to just move on. Maybe I could take some time later on to go back and re-read posts if that’s what you’re suggesting.
1.) So you meant an entirely different comment I made with an entirely different context. Makes sense. 
The comment wasn’t bad, either. Swallowing one’s pride isn’t exactly an easy thing to do, and is the most common reason a stalemate in a debate may happen. And no, not really backwards. If I’m talking about how a game mechanic functions and how certain aspects of the game are thus shaped around it, I’m going to be firm, because there’s no room for subjectivity with it, and I’m just going to get my point across. Debates aren’t always “open minded opinionated affairs”. There’s going to be debates where there’re crucial rights and wrongs to a situation or point. I’ll be subjective when you ask why I like/dislike it, or when you speak about why you like it, as I spoke on and stated.
3.) I never said factual info needed to be demanded for insightful discussions, but again, you can’t brush off game design as just an “opinion” that’s what I’ve been trying to hammer in with my footnotes. It’s not just my opinion that things change due to how game mechanics work. It’s a provable observation in many different ways. Again, whether or not you like the mechanic’s effects are subjective, but the effect isn’t.
Past that, I didn’t use your time played to mock you at all, given I have a ton of playtime myself. I used it, specifically the ratio of Arena to Warzone playtime to imply that a sprint heavy Warzone player’s probably going to end up favoring sprint in the way you do since it’s constantly being forced upon the player to be used in the way you play. You’re used to its use, meaning that the idea of taking it away, even if valid is probably going to make you defensive. The Champion comment wasn’t even a jab. Could be construed as rude, entirely, but it was more so a very blunt and somewhat baffled comment that said “Despite the playtime, you don’t know how X effects Y” which was my point beforehand. It’s all about context.
If you don’t see level design the way I (More so “we”) do, then again, you’re wrong. There isn’t another way to look at how sprint affected a map like Truth, the most prominent example of this argument of how it negatively impacts maps. There isn’t another way to see that dead space becomes readily more apparent (By intentional design) when you push sprint into your game. Nor is there another way to see the change in pace and consistency that sprint forms over a universal movement speed. That isn’t just a case of me (we) being “non-subjective”, that’s just understanding how a certain feature works. It isn’t a matter of “belief” and as I said to another user, just because you don’t see the other side of the coin, doesn’t make your side of the coin the most valid one. And that isn’t just a thought I share, alone. Have you seen the amount of people who’ve been supporting my comments? It’s insane. (Still, thanks to all who do, if you read this) I’m just the most vocal on these thoughts, bar one or two others.
_But past that, through all of that, again, I never said your pro sprint opinion was wrong due to it. I’ve said, over and over, and over, it’s fine to like sprint. I don’t care if you like it, that isn’t, and never was my issue. And I’m stressing that, because you keep saying I’m saying your opinion is wrong, when I’ve gone on record saying it isn’t wrong, multiple times._5.) Presented differently how? I was literally just answering your/Josh’s defense of sprint. I wasn’t calling you, or him out, or anything. Again, just read what I say when I write it, like I do for you, because when you don’t, it leads to me having to repeat myself, in this case, well over three times, when the point I made was easily found in my initial post. And past that, I don’t WANT the topic to go off topic. I’m not debating anything else but sprint and its gameplay effects here. And that’s an argument that many others can weigh in on as well, or support if we’ve said all they were going to. It has no need to be in a PM.
6.) That’s exactly what I’m suggesting, because a lot of the points you used against me (Calling your opinion wrong, for example) are points that I’ve gone in depth on and spoken about and disproved when need be. A lot of repetition in what we’ve had to say could be eliminated by doing that.