The Instigator
swagasaurus
Pro (for)
Winning
3 Points
The Contender
MaxDong
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Video games are for loser Nerds

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
swagasaurus
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/6/2016 Category: Games
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 743 times Debate No: 86166
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (3)
Votes (1)

 

swagasaurus

Pro

I contend that Video games are for stupid nerds with no life. Debate me if you desagree IMO
MaxDong

Con

I believe your comments need context before they can be debated. Explain what you mean when you say "loser nerd". Then explain what no life is defined as in regards to the current debate.
Debate Round No. 1
swagasaurus

Pro

nerds are
1. nerds dont get invited to parties
2. nerds dont get TANG

losers are
1. people who lose

Everyone KNOWS that people who play games dont win at anything ecept their world of wercraft bate champtionships. Clearly, no VICTORY, no PARTIES, no TANG = LOSER NERD IMO.

Having a life needs ONE thing SHOTS, TANG, a COLLAR shirt, and $$ in the BANK. Naerds are too busy playing anime MMOIMO's to win Anything!!!!
youre turn
MaxDong

Con

Replacing your words, with your definitions:

Video games are for people who lose and who do not get invited to parties. Nor do these individuals get TANG.

Given that video games tend to have a fail state, this also implies the possibility of victory, or a win state. Therein-by an individual who is deemed a loser has the potential to see victory by the nature of what a game is. It cannot be proved that anyone is without defeats before participating in a video game. This presents the possibility that both a loser and winner are capable of achieving a victory or a loss. This contradicts the notion that video games are only for people who tend to lose. This contradiction comes from the ability of winners to play a video game. If video games were in fact for losers, that would make it impossible for winners to even play.

By establishing that winners and losers are both capable of playing a video game, I have rendered the noun of nerd irrelevant in regards to your proposal. If video games were "for" a specific audience, it would be prominently displayed by those creating games who their intended audience is. It would also be of common knowledge to a wider public who this audience is. There is no such common understanding between persons that video games are intended to be played by nerds. To which you defined as those who do not get invited to parties or who do not get TANG. Common knowledge is not basis for conclusive findings or a statement of fact. It applies in this instance as the debate is one of the intended audience. By establishing that those outside the intended audience play video games, you can disprove the notion of your proposal.
Debate Round No. 2
swagasaurus

Pro

Yeah sure but do they get TANG IMO?
MaxDong

Con

The acquisition of TANG is important in contextualizing what your definition of "nerd" is. What has been proved is the irrelevancy of the tag of "nerd". If you so desire, feel free to debate the quantities of TANG acquired by "nerds". It has no bearing on the current discussion. The topic is if video games are intended for those you define as "loser nerds". As I have established, video games are capable of being playing by anyone. So them being "loser nerds" and how much TANG they receive matters not.

If one were to say a nerd gets zero TANG, that would meet your definition. Now if that person were to play a video game, that does not necessarily make the game one that caters to this nerd and his lack of TANG. The ability of those who do get TANG to play video games, disproves the idea that they are only for those who are TANGless.
Debate Round No. 3
swagasaurus

Pro

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, this is where you mess up. You have fallen into my logic trap.
You see, ONLY Nerds play video games, so cool kids like me dont play video games because they are too busy playing BOOTY games. IMO this article for evidence of statistic http://hubpages.com...
Therefore, if all but nerds get booty and are too busy earning cash and booty to play stupid games, that means the only people left with time to play video games are filthy nerds.
MaxDong

Con

MaxDong forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
swagasaurus

Pro

swagasaurus forfeited this round.
MaxDong

Con

MaxDong forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by VocaloidMan 12 months ago
VocaloidMan
Srsly Nerds I'm just saying most "people make there money of this so thats just stupid to say that video games are for nerds (HOW DO YOU NOT LIVE WITH FPS OR GTA?)
Posted by swagasaurus 1 year ago
swagasaurus
I'll have you know Kaeli that was a very hurtful comment. Maybe instead of your angel picture you shoudl change it to a picture of diabolo Satanas. MaxDong has been a good opponent until now but to say that I am some 12 year old is just childish. You shoudl really just grow up and get some real criticisms of me instead of whining like a little bittle baby for not liking what I have to say.
I reported your comment for Hate Content. Enjoy your ban :)
Posted by Kaeli 1 year ago
Kaeli
wow, PRO. Can you judge more? Your logic is ridiculous and need major modification. CON present non-judgmental statements and is clever not to get mad at your ignorance. I hope you learn from MaxDong, he is very smart. I doubt you'll win with the sour attitude you have during this debate. Who knows? Maybe you'll get a sense of respect, its about time. That's a lot coming from a 12 year old who barely knows you, isn't it?
Way to go, MaxDong! Thanks for doing this debate, I have learned lots! Thanks!
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by U.n 1 year ago
U.n
swagasaurusMaxDongTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Only Pro cited a source. Con forfeited more turns.