The Instigator
mongeese
Pro (for)
Losing
30 Points
The Contender
Logical-Master
Con (against)
Winning
47 Points

PRO should have won this debate.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+4
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/3/2009 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 3,673 times Debate No: 9818
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (32)
Votes (13)

 

mongeese

Pro

The debate: http://www.debate.org...

In this debate, my opponent will analyze the debate linked above. I will argue that PRO should have won. My opponent will argue that CON should have won. We will both discuss Conduct, Spelling and Grammar, Arguments, and Sources, properly weighted. Whoever wins Arguments for this debate is voted the Arguments and Sources points. Spelling/Grammar and Conduct are normal.

For example, if it is concluded that PRO should have won Sources, Conduct, and Grammar (four points), but CON should have won Arguments (three points), then the Arguments and Sources votes for this debate would go to PRO.

In the hypothetical situation in which, say, PRO definitely won three points, but Arguments is up for grabs by either PRO or CON, then PRO would be considered the proper victor, because any decent number of votes would give the advantage to PRO.

Now, to analyze the key contentions of said debate:

1. Price
In Round 1, PRO established the Wii to have a low price. CON countered by saying that the XBOX has a low price and more features. PRO then listed numerous accessories on the Wii, asking for CON to reply with more accessories on the XBOX to keep up. CON did not, and instead criticized the use of price as a factor. This went on, with the actual Wii vs. XBOX conflict forgotten, until CON pulled, right out of the blue, a source that made the XBOX cheaper than the Wii. This was a completely new argument (poor conduct) that PRO had already won.

2. Controller
CON: "I have already addressed the issue of variety and proven that the 360 has just as many functional controllers as the Wii."
This is false. CON never once cited any controllers, rather only listing a few for the XBOX. PRO responded that these were also available on the Wii, along with the standard controller, but the Wiimote (and all variations thereof) and the Wii Balance Board are only for the Wii. CON now claims that the XBOX has a Wiimote and Wii Balance Board as well.

3. Performance/Graphics
This is the only thing the XBOX would win.

4. The Market
CON completely dropped the point that the Wii and its games dominated in sales, rather concentrating on the price. She also stated, "There are professionals whose jobs literally revolve around judging and rating games; not consumers," but without a source. Additionally, CON gives no reason to think that a professional's opinion on a game is more important than those of the people.

5. Playability
PRO: "If you look at the list of top games, rated by IGN, you'll notice that Nintendo dominates. Furthermore, many games on the list are available to the Wii..."
CON: "Now, just because Nintendo dominates the list doesn't mean that the Wii itself does, and it is the WII - not Nintendo - that is up for discussion in this debate."
But the games are for the Wii...
"In fact, the majority of those games mentioned all pre-date the Wii..."
That had nothing to do with anything.
"...and many of them are specifically designed for arcade systems anyway."
Nor did this.

6. The Dropped Arguments

CON decided to wipe out the dropped arguments all in the last round, after they had been dropped.

In Round 2, PRO said, "Furthermore, you have admitted that most players do enjoy using the Wiimote."
In Round 4, CON finally replies, "This is an opinion with no evidence to support it."
A bit late.

To settle the Wii Fit dropped argument, CON said, "So, in conclusion, both systems offer games with health benefits [never knew that, and a lack of sources doesn't help] and yet only the Wii has been known to cause damage or injury [sources?] [maybe because it's the only one that's known to have games with health benefits]. It would seem to me, then, that the 360 wins this category as well (in terms of safety and well-being) [because nobody's ever injured themselves, apparently, because nobody's ever played them, because nobody knows they exist]."
Basically, it is an argument from silence, and a poor one at that.

As for one-player games, "Listing the fact that there are many 1 on 1 games you can play on the Wii is entirely irrelevant, since there are just as many 1 on 1 games that you can play on the 360." Sources, sources, sources.

To analyze CON's re-cap:

"The 360 is cheaper [new argument] and is therefore more widely accessible, which Pro deems highly important as he has repeated this concept consistently throughout the entire debate."
If one removes the new argument, as one should, this becomes a point for PRO, not CON.

"The 360 consistently achieves higher performance ratings than the Wii from gamers and esteemed critics alike."
Actually, if one looks at the only source CON used that talked about performance, it was only between the XBOX and the PS3. They didn't even try to compare it to the Wii.

"Plus, while the Wiimote is versatile, I have proven that the Xbox comes with just as many functional controllers."
Wii has all that the XBOX has, plus the Wiimote and Wii Balance Board. CON had nothing to validate this statement.

"The 360 has just as many 'Best Games' on the Best Game's top 10 list than the Wii, as I have also indicated in earlier rounds."
Sources, or it didn't happen.

As you can also see, CON's arguments were extremely lacking in sources, with only three total, compared to PRO's twenty, when CON really needed more.

CON also had poor conduct, bringing up new arguments and claiming to have done what wasn't done.

And so, PRO should have won Arguments, Sources, and Conduct.

I reserve the right to bring up new contentions and arguments in future rounds.

Good luck to whoever accepts this debate.
Logical-Master

Con

Salutations to my opponent and many thanks for starting this debate.

======
OBSERVATIONS |
======

Upon taking a brief gander at the instigator's arguments, I cannot help but notice that his entire case is dependent on his own debating paradigm. Unfortunately for him, there is already a strict guideline on how one ought to vote on debate.org Thus, this for debate's convenience, I shall post this guideline:

Conduct: Which debater, on balance, was more composed, and used fewer or no personal attacks against their opponent? Improper conduct includes personal insults, profanities, and bad sportsmanlike behavior.

Spelling and Grammar: Which debater, on balance, took the time to insure their writing was easy to read with proper spelling, grammar, and punctuations.

Convincing Arguments: Which debater, on balance, did a better job of clearly explaining their arguments and of exposing the weakness of their opponent's arguments.

Reliable Sources: Which debater, on balance, proved their argument with sufficient quantity and appropriate interpretation of evidence.

Finally, since neither side never really addressed what truly determines which system is better, we are to focus on who won the most arguments in the various topics during this debate (based on the term "on BALANCE). PRO acknowledges that Performance/Graphics are superior, so that's an automatic point for CON. If you agree that CON was superior in two other areas, CON wins.

========
RE PRICE: |
========

PRO argues that the contender of his debate had introduced a new argument in her final round, hence ought to have been voted down on conduct. There are immediately three problems with what he is contesting:

1) As you can clearly see on the DDO conduct description, bad conduct is clearly in reference to any kind of message meant to degrade one's opponent. We have no conclusive reason to believe that introducing new arguments ought to be considered bad conduct here.

2) The contender had addition offered an argument on lower price being a poor factor when determining what is to be considered the "better system." She had argued this throughout all four rounds, hence it wouldn't matter if a judge were to dismiss her citing the newly lowered price of the xbox360.

3) PRO himself had introduced a new argument on his final round. "CON states: "Pro chooses to introduce an entire new argument during this fourth and final round by providing lists of the Greatest Video Games of All Time.

Thus, even if my opponent somehow manages to successfully argue that his paradigm is suggested by debate.org's rendering of conduct, he had "bad conduct" himself. Ergo, this would have to be reflected as a tie.

=======
RE: Controller |
=======

1) CON acknowledged that the Wiimote was more versatile than the 360 remote (hence eliminating all variations thereof). Her counter to this was that the Xbox remote was more functional and she cited evidence which suggested that the Xbox 360 controller was the best controller amongst the console systems at the moment. That answers the WiiMote

2) As for the Balance Board, one has already been developed and shall be released specifically in time for he Tony hawk Game: http://www.pocket-lint.com...

Since the debate was started a day after this article was released, it is indeed fair game. In an case, both of the above make CON's claim correct (which is what PRO's objection is).

=====
RE: The Market |
====

1)PRO claims that CON completely dropped his point that the Wii and its games dominated in sales, however, as we can see in her 3rd round, it's the other way around. Observe what CON said in response to sales:

"The Wii sells more units. The Wii sells more games. I'd say that this is at least a reflection of how much people like the game. If more people buy Honda's, that's a pretty good indicator that Honda is doing something better than the Bentley's, whether it be pricing or advertising." Well, I already explained how just because something might be more popular in terms of sales, doesn't necessarily make it the better product. My opponent cannot expect me to take him seriously when he says that a Honda is a better car than a Bentley, can he? Hondas are more affordable and thus sell more units, similar to why the Wii sells more units despite the superiority of the Bentley."

This yet again comes back to the argument on what ought to be constituted as better. Sells don't necessarily say anything. For instance, compare the quality of the food between McDonalds and Olive Garden. McDonald's may have better sells, but the better food with higher quality can clearly be found at Olive Garden. Potayto-potahto.

In response to this, PRO merely repeated himself in insisting that what the consumers collectively buy determines what's better. As CON later points out, this doesn't really address her argument.

2) Indeed, she did say that "There are professionals whose jobs literally revolve around judging and rating games; not consumers", but there is no need to provide a source for this seeing as how its common knowledge that game companies DO in fact have reviewers constantly reviewing games.

=========
RE Playability |
=========

A misunderstanding. The point is that those extra games were all created on other Nintendo systems. Just because you can play them on the Virtual Console aspect of the Wii (which, by the way, the Xbox 360 allows for such downloads as well, a greater scale of games so to speak) doesn't mean that such games should be attributed to the Wii in the first place.

PERFORMANCE:

PRO concedes here.

===================
RE: The Dropped Arguments |
===================

In response to "In Round 2, PRO said, "Furthermore, you have admitted that most players do enjoy using the Wiimote."
In Round 4, CON finally replies, "This is an opinion with no evidence to support it."
A bit late."

Even if we are to adhere to this idea about the importance of dropped arguments, I believe my opponent is forgetting one crucial thing: IMPACTS. How does the matter of one PERSONALLY thinking that most players enjoying the Wiimote really effect the debate? At the start of the debate, theLwerd admitted to personally liking the PS3 all the systems, yet opponent did not use this to fuel his case. The same reasoning applies here.

In response to "To settle the Wii Fit dropped argument . . ."

CON had mentioned Dance Dance Revolution on the 360 as well as its encouragement of body movements. As for injuries, clear warnings can be found in the Wii manual itself: http://www.1up.com...

As CON herself stated, "Finally, what Pro failed to mention are the various INJURIES that can be sustained from using the Wii (hence the warnings). "

CON insinuates that the reason the 360 wins the category is because there is less physical excursion revolving around its games in general (DDR is one of the only games which lots of body movement is encouraged) whereas the Wii encourages body movement in general for its games. This increases the likelihood of physical injury.

In response to "As for one-player games, "Listing the fact that there are many 1 on 1 games you can play on the Wii is entirely irrelevant, since there are just as many 1 on 1 games that you can play on the 360."

This is another issue of common knowledge. Of course there are a great deal of 1 on 1 games for the 360. If PRO insist, I shall gladly point him to IGN.com and provide quick analysis on Xbox360 games stacked up against Wii games.

>>>>>.AS FOR THE RECAP: I'll respond to the points numerically.

1) There is nothing on DDO which indicates that new arguments count as bad conduct. Not to mention that PRO made a new argument.

2) PRO never pointed this out.

3) Already addressed this.

4) If CON indicated this in earlier rounds and pro didn't address it, it goes through
Debate Round No. 1
mongeese

Pro

I would like to thank my opponent for accepting this debate.

I will accept the voting paradigm of Debate.org as proposed by my opponent.

A. Price

1. My opponent contends that new arguments in the last round are not poor conduct. However, one can clearly see "bad sportsmanlike behavior" as an example of improper conduct. In debate, bad sportsmanlike behavior would obviously include things like making arguments that the opponent has no conceivable way to respond to. It would be like serving the ball while your opponent's tying his shoes.

2. CON's dropped her argument that price was irrelevant by saying, "Point: Con." Had she wished for the price contention to be dropped, she would have to have said, "Point: Neutral," as she did with other contentions.

3. PRO's last-round argument has a key difference from CON's. CON was able to respond to PRO's argument. PRO was unable to respond to CON's argument, which is what makes it classified as bad sportsmanlike behavior.

B. Controller

1. CON's source said that the 360's controller was "arguably" the best, which is really irrelevant to two people who are arguing over the very subject. Anything is "arguably" the best. The question is whether or not it actually is.

2. My opponent cites a skateboard available on all systems to contend the Wii Balance Board. However, there are multiple problems here. For one, the Wii also gets this skateboard, so skateboard plus Balance Board beats just skateboard. For another, CON never actually cited the article that my opponent did. She should have cited it herself to add weight to what she said. Finally, the game's release date is November 17, while the debate in question started on May 15. Because the skateboard wasn't available for use at all at the time of the debate, it was irrelevant. It could potentially be involved in a "The Nintendo Wii will always be the best video game console," but that is not the case.

C. The Market

1. This actually ties back to Price. However, as CON showed the price of the 360 to be close to the Wii, 20 million units cannot be accounted for by a mere $30.

The real origin of the Market subsection was the purchasing of games, not of consoles. PRO showed the Wii's games to tear apart the 360 in top games sold, as sourced in Round 2.

2. My opponent states that professionals review games. However, he does not address the problem I raised in Round 1: Why are the opinions of these uncited professionals more important than those of the people?

D. Playability

My opponent claims that because the greatest games were created for other systems, the Wii gets no credit for them. However, why shouldn't the Wii be credited for providing access to the Greatest Games of All Time? The access greatly helps the Wii. It should be noted that Screw Attack's list also cites actual Wii games (Super Smash Bros. Brawl, Super Mario Galaxy), so these cannot be merely dismissed.

E. Performance/Graphics

Performance and Graphics were grouped together.

F. Dropped Arguments

1. The important thing is that CON admitted that most players enjoy using the Wiimote. PRO could not use CON's statement about the PS3, as the debate is between the 360 and the Wii. Note that CON did not admit to personally liking the Wiimote, but rather admitted that most people like the Wiimote. This was a debate contention, and should be treated as such.

2. CON only mentioned the Dance Pad for controllers until it's mentioning in the last round. CON never argued that physical exertion made the Wii worse. It was that because the 360 had uncited, seemingly unknown games that allowed for exercise, but nobody made a big deal about it because nobody knew it existed, it was better. One cannot say that physical exertion is bad just because it has risk. The people obviously decided that the game was worth the risk; that's why they play.

3. Personally, I can only name two games on the 360 at the top of my head not mentioned in this debate: Halo 3 (because everybody knows it) and Sonic Unleashed (a third-party game). My opponent wishes to analyze 360 games and compare them to Wii games. However, that is what CON should have done in the actual debate. It is too late for my opponent to discuss them. CON should have brought them up to get credit for them. However, she did not. She would not deserve to win that debate just because my opponent can bring up new things today.

RECAP:

A. "Bad sportsmanlike behavior" would include the cheap shot of making an argument that could not be responded to.

B. The only reason PRO never pointed this out was because PRO never got the opportunity to point this out, because the argument was made in the last round (a perfect example of how it is a cheap shot, to be considered bad sportsmanlike behavior).

C. My opponent's recap is "Already addressed this." Not much of a recap.

D. However, CON did not.

Conclusion:

Due to a better price, more versatile controllers, and better games, the Wii was shown to be the better console. Arguments to PRO.

CON showed bad sportsmanlike behavior by pulling a new argument just when PRO could no longer respond to expose it. Conduct to PRO.

My opponent does not contest CON's grave lack of sources. Sources to PRO.

In conclusion, PRO should have won this debate, 6-0.

Good luck.
Logical-Master

Con

As I frequented the Internet,I came across the most compelling piece of evidence I had ever read in my entire life. Indeed, it was like very enlightening and stuff and has changed my views on everything the world. It's so awesome that I can merely link to it in order get past this debate round: http://dr-logic.livejournal.com...
Debate Round No. 2
mongeese

Pro

It appears that I am no longer against the wit of Logical-Master, but rather of dr_logic.

A. Price

1. My opponent's logic is flawed. Why would "bad sportsmanlike behavior" be on the list if it would only encompass the rest of the list? It's purpose is to stand for everything not mentioned in the list that would qualify as "bad sportsmanlike behavior."

My opponent argues that the Contender always has the last word. This is true; however, this only adds more responsibility on the Contender not to abuse this position. Typing up a brand new argument that is impossibe to refute at all would be poor sportsmanlike behavior. For example, take this debate: http://www.Debate.org...
Would it be sportsmanlike for PRO to string along the first argument for the entire debate, only to switch back to an expected argument regarding the U.S. Constitution in the very last round? This would deprive CON of any fair chance of victory, which is poor sportsmanlike behavior. The same can apply here.

2. She dropped it when she said "Point: Con." By acknowledging that if her argument was acceptable, she would win the contested point, she admits that without turning the tables unfairly, she would lose it.

3. The advantage of having an extra round of argumentation is what balances out the general "last word" advantage. However, this does not justify an entirely new argument by the Contender, as it would completely upset the balance, and it would be nearly impossible for any Instigator to win. Ever.

B. Controller

1. My opponent assumes that because the 360 controller can be "shown by argument" to be better than the Wiimote, it is inherently better. However, anything can be shown by argument to be superior to another. In any one debate, multiple arguments are put forward to show by argument how one thing is better than another.

2. My opponent cites a 360 remote. For one thing, CON showed absolutely no awareness that such a thing existed, and should have sourced the page to receive credit. For another, the Wiimote is still superior to the 360 remote, as it has motion-sensor ability, while the 360 remote does not. The 360 remote is merely a bulky, awkward remote when used for 360 games designed for standard controllers, so it would not add anything to the 360 by itself at all, from the argumentation presented in the debate.

C. The Market

1. She had to admit that price did matter to claim the very first point.

2. My opponent chooses to appeal to the video game reviewers' "expertise." Well, seeing as the people aren't actually listening to these uncited reviewers who supposedly favor the 360, maybe they're not all they're cracked up to be. Additionally, while the people may consider the opinions of reviewers, the opinions of the people are the ones that actually matter, as contended.

D. Playability

My opponent ignores the Wii games that are on the list of top games.

Access to the world's greatest games is a very fine point of the Wii, and deserves credit, as access to games is a quality of a system that would put it above a system that lacks it.

My opponent asks about the 360's media access, and why he can't argue with it. The reason is because in the debate, CON never argued with it. CON should not get credit on what she never even hinted at in the debate.

F. Dropped Arguments

1a. It was not expressed as a personal opinion. It was expressed as a fact, that some people held a certain opinion.

1b. In Round 2, PRO said: "Furthermore, you have admitted that most players do enjoy using the Wiimote."
This statement was derived from the statement my opponent quoted from CON. CON had no comment on PRO's statement, making it a dropped argument. She dropped the argument, and therefore conceded it. Denying its existence does nothing.

2. My opponent seems to be deviating from CON's original point, that "both systems offer games with health benefits and yet only the Wii has been known to cause damage or injury." He switches CON's argument to saying that the Wii offers risk with health benefits, while the 360 stays away from the physical activity almost entirely. This misinterpretation has no bearing on the debate being discussed.

People are obviously aware of the risks. They are displayed whenever the Wii is turned on, and stay for a few seconds, in which one has nothing better to do than read them.

My opponent claims that the 360 lacks health risks, contradicting CON's argument that the 360 contains equal health benefits with less health risks, which is in itself false as it is a rather extreme argument out of silence, as explained in Round 1 of this debate.

3. My opponent only contests that there are 1-on-1 games on the 360. He claims that this is common knowledge, despite the fact that I can only name two. What very few people would know is whether or not it is true that "The 360 has just as many 'Best Games' on the Best Game's top 10 list than the Wii," especially when the Best Game's top 10 list isn't even cited. The sources are very lacking. The controllers are unsourced, the games are unsourced, practically the entire argument is unsourced.

G. Re-Cap

1. The same rule does apply to every debate, with the sole exception of 1-round debates, although those are oddballs of debating. Bad sportsmanlike behavior is implied to be any behavior that a fair sportsman would find to be bad, such as taking cheap shots through new arguments in the last round.

2. It was never said that sources were involved. The argument was made in the last round without any sources whatsoever.

3. It's still not much of a re-cap.

4. CON's source wasn't being used for its game list, but for its mentioning of performance and graphics. CON never referred back to the source for its games. Sources are not just big tack-ons of "everything on this source is to be treated as an argument by me in this debate."

H. Conclusion

Conduct: Cheap shots (last-round arguments) are considered poor behavior by sportsmen. PRO's new arguments aren't even cheap shots in the sense that CON's are. My opponent has done nothing to show new arguments made by CON in the last round are a part of DDO, only arguments in general. "New" is the key word here. Arguments are tolerated gladly; new ones are not.

Sources: PRO's sources proved PRO's arguments a great deal. They were used to demonstrate the Wii's low price [1.1], great variety of accessories [1.2], ability to use standard controllers in addition to unique ones [2.1], additional accessories upon buying the Wii [2.7] (dropped argument, really), most popular game sales [2.10], most popular console sales [2.11], health benefits [2.12], whiteboad ability [2.13], great one-player games (which CON initially challenged the existence of) [3.3], and complete domination of top games ever [4.1-2]. While the entire points may not all go to PRO, the sub-points argued with the sources were proven, thus deserving the Sources point over CON.

Arguments: The 6-0 was a reference to the 3 from Arguments, 2 from Sources, and 1 from Conduct. As the Wii had a lower price (+1), greater variety of real controllers (+1), more market-playing (+1), and access to better games (+1), but worse graphics (-1), the Wii would have won Arguments, 4-1. The dropped arguments were actually minor points that impact the entire debate as a whole.

My opponent reminds everybody that he wins in case of a tie. That is true. However, one must also remember that if Conduct and Sources are a given in one side, but Arguments may be split at some percentage, then the one side is considered the victor.

Thank you, L-M (or dr_logic), for this debate. Good luck.
Logical-Master

Con

Logical-Master forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
32 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by RoyLatham 7 years ago
RoyLatham
I started to go through the whole thing, but it's way to much stuff, so I'll refrain from voting. But so much steam has been put into this debate, I'll make a few comments.

In debates about what is "best" a major problem is determining the criteria for judging. If there are n factors and each is assigned a weight, then total rating = sum{w[i]*f[i]} i=1,n is a common model. In other words, what is best depends upon what is supplied and what counts the most. Different people are likely to have different preferences. This makes "what is best" highly debatable, but hard to resolve.

In the early days of video cassette recorders, many people thought the Betamax system had higher quality than VHS, yet Betamax failed in the market place. It turned out that consumers valued recording time higher than picture quality. In general, it may be that if many features are adequate than it may be only one feature that dominates what is found best. For VCRs, all was acceptable except recording time.

Sales figures do give the public's overall decision as to what is best, although that includes the factors of advertising and promotion. For high volume consumer products these days, promotion probably is less important than word-of-mouth, at least after the product launch.
Posted by mongeese 7 years ago
mongeese
Given a slow computer, you should hit Submit at least a minute prior to the due time.
Posted by Logical-Master 7 years ago
Logical-Master
Granted, it was at either the 1 or 2 second mark, but I did hit it
Posted by Logical-Master 7 years ago
Logical-Master
If you'll look to my previous round, I clearly stated that the 360 lacks SUCH (as in, reference to the Wii's level of health risks) health risk. BOTTOM LINE: If I were doing what he claims I'm doing, I'd simply say that the 360 lacks health risk period. Therefore, this is the straw man fallacy at work.
My opponent provides evidence that the health risk are common knowledge, hence we can completely dismiss his position on CON not citing her words.

3. My opponent says that he can only name two games on the 360 which allow the player the ability to play by himself/herself. He says that this is in spite of me saying that the 1 on 1 games are common knowledge. In that case, what about Gears of War, Fable, Resident Evil 5, Ninja Gaiden, Madden, God of War and Oblivion? I just named 7 off of the top of my head.
Posted by Logical-Master 7 years ago
Logical-Master
D. PLayability:

No one has ever disagreed that the Wii games listed on the list of the top games (if it were so simple, I'd simply be pointing out CON's link which indicates the Xbox 360 games accomplishments) are present. The main point contended here was that the Nintendo Wii dominated with PRO citing all sorts of games which aren't even Wii games to begin with.

My opponent continues to advocate that potential access to all of those other games puts it above the systems which lack it. He points out that the 360's media access is irrelevant on the basis that CON did not argue this in her debate. In response, I'd like to remind my opponent that CON's argument was that the Wii did not possess these games in the first place, thus shouldn't be counted. PRO doesn't buy this as being something the audience should agree with. I'm simply illustrating why he is incorrect on the matter. With the 360's nigh limitless media potential (mediums of entertainment which are far more popular than Video Games), this vanquishes PRO's argument.

1a. Yes, but such people's opinion hold no bearing on the debate at hand. Otherwise, one could prove all of their point in citing forums.

1b. Declarations do not equal arguments. My opponent did not prove that PRO said this, thus it is not to be constituted an argument, hence his dropping = conceding point doesn't apply The fact of the matter is that CON simply didn't say what my opponent has accused her of saying, thus his argument crumbles.

2. Even going by PRO's quote, I am not deviating from CON's original point. Read it yourself if you don't believe me. The 360 DOES offer games with health benefits (hence its games wth increased physical activity). The thing is that its games don't completely revolve around exerting oneself. One has the option of avoiding or taking on such excursion for the 360, whereas one (for the most part) doesn't have much of a choice for Wii games. If you'll look to my previous round, I clearly stated t
Posted by Logical-Master 7 years ago
Logical-Master
Next, my opponent argues that the Wii mote is superior to the 360 remote. If I recall correctly, PRO was arguing in favor of quantity as this came down to how many controllers each system possesses. However, even changing his argument to one of quality, the Xbox 360 remote is still superior as it allows direct control over the viewing of films and tv series (both of which are more successful than video games in the eyes of the general public as well as a function which the Wii doesn't even have).

C. The Market.

1. Nah, otherwise she'd be contradicting herself. She proved that even under the presumption that price matters, the Xbox 360 is still superior. In other words, this is what we call efficiency. My opponent still fails to contend the market argument, thus we are to see it as conceded to.

2. Failure to effectively advertise the words of these reviewers as much as the video games are advertised themselves suggests nothing about there actual reviewing quality.

As for the people actually being the ones who matter, I reiterate that this topic has been beaten to death both in the former debate as well as this one and my opponent has never effectively handled it. There is no doubt more quality placed int a meal Olive Garden in comparison to a meal at McDonalds. McDonald's selling more patties does not indicate otherwise. It simply means that simply means that their meals are more affordable to the common man. Throughout most of the life of the Wii and 360, the same could pretty much be said (with the Wii formally being cheaper).
Posted by Logical-Master 7 years ago
Logical-Master
As we can see from the following debate: http://www.debate.org......
Since my opponent didn't vote himself down on conduct, he himself doesn't truly believe what he is saying. :)

2. Nope, sorry. By supporting the exact same argument in the same round which PRO is referring to, this would indicate that she didn't drop it. As far as we are to be concerned, saying "Point CON" means that there's absolutely no reason for a voter to disregard the point being made granted that it was conclusive.

3. I beg to differ. The instigator already has the advantage of being able to start the debate and set the parameters for it; he/she determines nearly everything from the start. As has been shown in the past on this website, instigators can EASILY set the debate up in a way which gives them a nigh unbeatable advantage. Hence, the "balance" which my opponent speaks of is already lost. Clearly, my rendering of debate fairness is the valid one.

==========
RE: Controller |
==========

1. My opponent continues to play semantics

2. PRO suggest that CON showed absolutely no awareness that such that the 360 remote existed. Ladies and gentleman, if you'd take the time to look back at the debate in question, you'll notice that CON was arguing that the 360 had just as many functional controllers as the Wii. I quote: "When I must also acknowledge that the 360 has a dance pad, flight stick, guitar, steering wheel, etc. which provide a superior and more realistic gaming experience than the Wiimote." Obviously, the Xbox 360 remote and anything else which wasn't exlicitly stated yet is very much available to the public can be filed under "etc."
Posted by Logical-Master 7 years ago
Logical-Master
========
RE PRICE: |
========

A. My opponent accuses my logic of being flawed. He requests to know why bad sportsmanlike behavior would be on the list if it were only to encompass the rest of the. This is rather simple, ladies and gentleman. This is because there are far more ways to degrade someone else than what has been listed; one doesn't actually need resort to insults o profanities to put someone down (simply maintaining a condescending tone throughout the debate is a means of accomplishing this). Note that when conduct is being described, it starts with requesting to know who was more composed and used fewer or no personal attacks against their opponent? Being composed and refraining from personal attacks is clearly in reference to civility. When keeping in mind that unrespondable (a word I just made up) arguments exist in every debate on this site as well as the fact that there are some debates (one round debates) which allow absolutely no response from the instigator at any point in the debate, it's pretty clear that DDO does not follow the same debate guidelines as my opponent does.

About the contender always having the last word: My opponent claims that this only adds more responsibility on the contender as typing up a brand new argument that is impossible to refute at all would be poor sportsmanlike behavior. Once again, I remind my opponent of the existence of one round debates on this website. The only way you could possibly buy his argument would be if you were to believe that this website endorses poor sportsmanlike behavior.
Posted by Logical-Master 7 years ago
Logical-Master
Lulz. Seriously? I hit submit!
Posted by Danielle 7 years ago
Danielle
There are some very obvious arguments missing lol.
13 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by M.Hernandez 7 years ago
M.Hernandez
mongeeseLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Logical-Master 7 years ago
Logical-Master
mongeeseLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Koopin 7 years ago
Koopin
mongeeseLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Vote Placed by spinnerclotho 7 years ago
spinnerclotho
mongeeseLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by numa 7 years ago
numa
mongeeseLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by LaSalle 7 years ago
LaSalle
mongeeseLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by patsox834 7 years ago
patsox834
mongeeseLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Nails 7 years ago
Nails
mongeeseLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Danielle 7 years ago
Danielle
mongeeseLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Cody_Franklin 7 years ago
Cody_Franklin
mongeeseLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06