CSGO is better than its counterparts eg:Call Of Duty, Battlefield
Debate Rounds (3)
Pro starts the debate by assuming that these things he views are bad necessarily are. In fact, contrary to his probable beliefs, most of eastern society (and even some followers of western Abrahamic religions ) views suffering as a good thing. So, even if having an unfair disadvantage causes personal suffering, you have yet to show how this is anything but good.
"And the game play is better"
What constitutes as "better" in terms of gameplay? There is no evidence to point to this assumption, and due to this is a worthless point.
"but the graphics aren't the best compared to Advanced Warfare or Battlefield Hardline"
I'll consider this a point in my favor.
CodAw:70USD+More Expenses for dlc
Battlefield 4:80USD+(so far) 60USD dlc
Csgo:14USD+0USD Automatic free updates
Its the best game of its genre price wise, it has a wider community, allows any ordinary Joe to upload a map or Gun Skin and they get recognised in "operations" eg:(current) Vanguard, Breakout, Phonies etc where they take maps and skins from the workshop into the game making free money for everyone because the person who makes the skin they get 50% of the money made when people buy and sell there skin. Do you see.
An unnecessary loss of money would cause one to suffer, which is inherently good thing.
"it has a wider community"
This speaks nothing of the community's quality.
"allows any ordinary... buy and sell there skin. Do you see."
Not only was it not explained how anything here could be seen as "good", but the possibility of other games having it was completely ignored.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Envisage 1 year ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||3|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro never responded to both the subjectivism objections, nor the argument from suffering. Given these undermine Pro's case, ignoring these simply isn't an option, thus Con wins.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.