Valve is the best games developer
Round 1. Acceptance and stating developer
Round 2. Listing pros of your dev and cons of the opp's dev
Round 3. Rebuttal
Round 4. Further rebuttal, either against points forgotten or left out by text capacity, or against Round 3.
Pros of Valve as a developer:
Cons of Ubisoft as a developer:
Valve's games available on PC. Only games developed by Valve count. http://store.steampowered.com...
Ubisoft's games available on PC. Only games developed strictly by Ubisoft count. http://store.steampowered.com...
Surprised you chose Ubisoft over Ubisoft Montreal, but you chose it and it is up to you to stop digging the hole you jumped in the moment you accepted the debate.
Graphics wise they're just decent. Half Life graphics are terrible by today's standards. Graphics in the other games are ok on console, and pretty good on pc.
Dota isn't very good if you're comparing it to LOL, and that's not just me talking. I haven't played CS:GO.
To be fair, videogames are a moneymaking industry, so at some point, you have to favor making money over pleasing ALL of your fans, which is near impossible.
Ubisoft releases it's games on consoles and pc's. Because of this, they have to change their engines regularly to accommodate the constantly changing specs.
Now onto attacks made on me. First of all, my opponent only talks about games on Steam, but fails to consider console gamers. Far Cry 3 is hugely popular, and so was Splinter Cell Blacklist. And Watch Dogs is hugely popular. Don't forget about the Rayman games that came out. My opponent is being a bit close minded.
The multiplayer is quite fun, especially in Assassin's Creed 3, and Splinter Cell Blacklist. I haven't played Watch Dogs, but I get the feeling that my opponent is referencing Watch Dogs because that's the only one he's actually played. Whereas I've played two so I know what I'm talking about.
Arguing graphics is weak because their games are also ported to consoles which naturally look worse than pc.
Then my opponent brings up the games Valve has versus the ones Ubisoft has, but it doesn't account for all the games so it's pointless.
From saying that you said 'Graphics wise they are just decent', I can assume you are a console player. Good graphics aren't defined by the blooms and reflections. The source engine has the most advanced lightning I have seen, and the textures and among the most highly detailed. Even today, Half-Life 2 has aged well enough to rival call of duty and other releases of today (I admit call of duty isn't hard to beat, but HL2 is 10 years old).
Then, he claimed that the Assassin's Creed 3 mp was fun. I know many people who have played the AC games from launch. They all agree it is less fun, as, on PC at least, it didn't add anything graphically and they had removed the only game mode any of them ever enjoyed, from Brotherhood.
Finally you say LoL is superior to DoTA. DoTA started the genre, and is completely original. Even I admit DoTA is more balanced, fun, good looking and amusing than LoL and I hate MOBAs. If you disagree then it is clearly down to a personal opinion. Knowing how popular COD instalments are, you can't bring in the argument of popularity.
Watch Dogs is the only game developed by Ubisoft I have played, but not the only one PUBLISHED by Ubisoft I have played.
It's my opponents OPINION that Valve is the best game developer. I don't think that Ubisoft is the best, but I think they're pretty good. I've enjoyed the games they've made, so I consider them one of the best, much like my opponent. I think the same of Valve. However, if I had to pick the "best," I would choose Bethesda. However, my opponents BOP is to prove that Valve is the BEST, which is inherently impossible, because there are always going to be people whose opinion it is that Valve is just decent, or perhaps bad. Me for example. Because my opponent can't fulfill his burden of proof, this debate is impossible for him to win. Keep in mind, that I don't have to prove that any developer is the best, just that Valve is not. Which I have because there are people whose opinion is that Valve is decent or bad but not the best. Vote Neg.
The point of this debate, was for Con to bring to the table a single developer, which could show Valve is not the best. I have given my points, yet you have taken every oppurtunity to NOT make your own relevant ones or completely ignore the point.
To ultimately win over the last votes, I believe it is simply necessary to give a reason why he is wrong. Saying that someone is the best is not down to opinion. Valve have successfully made several games which are superior in the ways stated above. Con's choice to leave them out of his argument, implies he does not wish to bring them up, and as such I can assume that he agrees that the games are superior in that manner. They do have amazing, deeply developed storylines when Valve chooses. In Watch Dogs, the game with what I would call the best story of all games published by Ubisoft, you have 11 frames of daughter, which I cannot remember, as a motive to hunt down the man who ordered the hit. It strays away too much. In Half Life, you are in a life or death situation. You are being hunted by the military for your involvment in an enormous accident, and you must fight your way out. It develops as you go (I won't give spoilers) and feels immersive. In Watch Dogs, the story does not provoke emotions, nor does it flow smoothly, or get adrenaline running.
Then, he brings up opinion in multiplayer being good. It is the general opinion that it is boring. Evidence? The waiting times for small lobbies. He also brought up the problem of graphics being bad because it was ported to consoles. Counter Strike was ported to consoles, but it still had a beautiful version. So why would any other game be excused? Not primarily a PC developer? Put more effort into the console version. Watch Dogs bottlenecked the PS4? Their fault they chose the wrong market.
The BoP I feel has been lying on top of Con like a corpse on a bed of nails. It won't move and he can't move it. I have provided both opinion and fact, mostly the latter. It is not my fault if Con completely missed the point of the argument. I admitted Bethesda was better at storylines, but they aren't better at everything. A single developer, where both common opinion and fact state that it is better in most or all ways was asked for. They brought to the table a less than satisfactory argument, as thus dug a hole pretty deep. They failed to provide sufficient fact over opinion, digging further. Then, they wasted a turn by attempting to divert the floor's opinion without an argument, lying down, getting shot and being left among his other Jewish friends and family. Sorry for the holocaust analogy, but I think it proved my point rather well. I urge the floor strongly to vote for Pro, especially those who got annoyed about missing appostophes. Thank you and good night.
Reason 1 to vote the affirmative down: See above.
And now I'm going to move on to reason number 2.
This entire debate has been a waste of time. The resolution is worded in such a fashion that the Aff can't win. In order to decide if something is the best, you have to have a unanimous decision. Two people saying something is the best is not reliable. Many people think that Valve is ONE OF THE BEST, myself included, but not all gamers. You must take into account all the people that prefer console gaming, and all the people that don't hardcore game at all, and instead just play Angry Birds on their iPhone. They don't think Valve is the best. A lot of them probably don't even know what Valve is. So because there are people who think the negatory, this means a unanimous decision is impossible. Thus, Valve is not, nor ever will be, the best developer.
So, this means that the ONLY POSSIBLE DECISION IS TO VOTE NEG. Namely because I've proven that Valve is not the best games developer. I'm the only side that has fulfilled their BoP, thus you must vote for me.
Reason number 2 to vote down Aff: He can't win. Plain and simple. He says I dug a hole for myself by picking Ubisoft. I say he dug a hole for himself the second he wrote the resolution.
I understand a lot of Valve fans are going to vote aff, and provide some BS reason for doing so, but for the more logical minded folks out there who are following this debate, I urge you to carefully think about what I've said here.
For once you do, the decision will become clear.
|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||6|