The Instigator
linkish
Pro (for)
Losing
43 Points
The Contender
TheSkeptic
Con (against)
Winning
45 Points

zelda better then final fantasy

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  
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: 4/11/2009 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,286 times Debate No: 7787
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (17)
Votes (15)

 

linkish

Pro

I say that zelda beats ff by far, look at it zelda has had a lot less games then ff. zelda also offers the most entertainment then ff, and zelda is a little bit more story based. plz start the debate.
TheSkeptic

Con

I thank my opponent for creating this debate, and I apologize in advance for what I'm about to do...

In the true path of being a douche, I argue that neither Zelda or FF is better than the other. Because calling games "good" is inherently subjective, it is meaningless and baseless to attempt to place one game at a righter platform than the other. Unless my opponent can find an objective basis for calling a game "good" or "better" than other games, his arguments are simply irrelevant.

So there you go - Zelda isn't better than FF. FF isn't better than Zelda. They are both on the same standing.
Debate Round No. 1
linkish

Pro

ok then I thank you for thy rebuttal.
Well in my case I have a lot to answer for on this one I mean shure they are both the same but have you ever heard of entertainment my friend. Well there's alot to say I would love to say that I am a Zelda fan but I will play ff once and a while, it is not nearly as fun based as Zelda and I believe that ff would not nearly be the same as Zelda.
TheSkeptic

Con

I thank my opponent for his quick response.

However, my opponent has said nothing to further his case. He has simply restated that he believes zelda is better than FF. My argument still stands untouched. He has yet to show why his subjective meaning of a "good game" should be objectively higher than anyone else's subjective meaning of a "good game".

I'm sorry, but if my opponent can't do more than this then there really isn't much of a debate.
Debate Round No. 2
linkish

Pro

Well I would like thank my opponent for a wise response.

Ok, first I'd like to say that I'm a little new so don't blame me for my non challenging response. Now on to the debate first you said that Zelda and ff where the same, I'd like to let you know that that is not correct. In a way of such you would not know, Zelda is a rpg action based story, in other words it is an "role playing game" that follows a specific sequence until the end, in this story there is loads of action, for instance, you kill a guy over here, he shrieks more come to the aid of his, so in other words this game uses real lifetime choices. On the other hand Final Fantasy uses a technique called fictinary sequence making everything seem easy to do, also in ff there is no choice you have to do what the game tells you or you merely die, thus making Zelda better.
TheSkeptic

Con

Yes, it is true that Zelda and FF are differently constructed games - I never contended that. In fact, I'm sure that many reasons why people like Zelda or FF is in how the game was constructed (obviously).

However, that's not the point. My argument was that my opponent cannot show how, in an objective manner, Zelda is a "better" game than FF. This is because calling a game is purely subjective, as saying a song is better than some other song. We can't show that Zelda is mathematically correct and FF is not, or that Zelda is parsimonious. There is no standard for which we can truly compare these games, or anything to do with media, so my opponent's resolution is negated.

Zelda is not better than FF because neither are better than the other.
Debate Round No. 3
linkish

Pro

I would like you to know that zelda is played more often for an ex http://www.escapistmagazine.com...
more people liked zelda better then ff. Zelda has also been around a lot longer then ff, making it more popular, then ff.
I probably lost this debate but still I like zelda better!
TheSkeptic

Con

Just because Zelda is more popular, does not mean it's objectively "better" than FF. Again, my opponent has failed to respond to my argument pertaining to the subjectivity of art. If something is subjective, there is no way to say it's "better" than other things in it's category.

There really isn't much left to say in this debate. Nothing constructive has come up, and it's quite obvious who the winner is. Vote CON.
Debate Round No. 4
17 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by linkish 7 years ago
linkish
hey wow I have a little bit more votes then I was thinking I might get hmm well At least I tried but I think about the fun it was you know...
Posted by linkish 7 years ago
linkish
wow I really need to be more, more, well I need help. oh well I have plenty of time
Posted by TheSkeptic 7 years ago
TheSkeptic
So at best, you say that an objective way of measuring which form of art is superior to another is by how much money it makes. Sure, that's a possibly viable argument - but my opponent sure as hell didn't use it.

In relevance to the point about a "contextual viewpoint, I meant on what level should we view art when judging it's value? Stemming from your own words, it seems you take a somewhat utilitarian approach to it, with making money as the good.

Not only that, but you say the value of art is culturally relative. This may seem to conflict with many people's opinion - such as those who say classical music a superior art form when compared to gangsta rap. All I'm saying is that these are possibilites my opponent never entertained, and you can see how much they have to be developed.

The debates here are vale tudo unless specified otherwise.
Posted by Logical-Master 7 years ago
Logical-Master
"So the value of art is in how much money it makes?"

The Value? I thought we were talking about A value. But yes, more or less. :D

"I mean OMG Miley Cyrus is valued more than Mozart :O!?"

Valued more than Mozart is currently? Yes, I see nothing wrong with that.

"Notoriety would be much harder to defend, and to even measure. "

On the contrary, I'd imagine it as being more difficult for the one the argument is being used against, especially if one were to insist that both were equally notorious. As PRO, one could simply cite IGN polls, G4 polls, other game incorporated polls, appearance in Super Smash Bros games, records set in pre-ordering, as well as anything else that establishes Zelda as being iconic. You'd have to somehow establish that Final Fantasy was equal or superior.

"Not only that, but would that mean personal songs I make for, let's say my girlfriend, will be utterly valueless or "worse"? "

I don't see why not. After all, you did imply that personal thoughts dealt with taste and were hence irrelevant with your position, not to mention that you are just one person.

"It then depends on the contextual viewpoint you are looking at it as well."

Your words: "Unless my opponent can find an objective basis for calling a game "good" or "better" than other games, his arguments are simply irrelevant."

You acknowledge different contexts for better, but simply requested that your opponent provide one which could be measured on an objective basis.
Posted by TheSkeptic 7 years ago
TheSkeptic
"Financial success and notoriety. Both easy to measure objectively."

So the value of art is in how much money it makes? That would be a very interesting argument if he used it, and I'm sure it be equally fun to pick apart at. I mean OMG Miley Cyrus is valued more than Mozart :O!? Notoriety would be much harder to defend, and to even measure. Not only that, but would that mean personal songs I make for, let's say my girlfriend, will be utterly valueless or "worse"? It then depends on the contextual viewpoint you are looking at it as well.

I know what you mean pertaining to "read behind the lines", but I thought I could've made this an interesting debate about the philosophy of art. How do we, or should we, value art? I thought this would've been a great topic, though admittingly probably out of place.

Oh well.
Posted by Logical-Master 7 years ago
Logical-Master
edit: "providing more entertainment"
Posted by Logical-Master 7 years ago
Logical-Master
On second thought, if two out of my three paradigms did not consist of tabula rasa primarily, I probably would have voted this a tie. Although PRO makes mention of Zelda being more entertaining, he never really establishes how one's properties are superior to the other.
Posted by Logical-Master 7 years ago
Logical-Master
"Then it be great to hear it ;)"

Again? Sure thing. :D

1) Financial success and notoriety. Both easy to measure objectively.
2) Amount offered in attempt to entertain. PRO alluded to this in the first round as being the reason Zelda > FF

"Stating that neither game is better in a debate comparing games is perfectly fine, unless stated otherwise."

I beg to differ. You stated that neither was better, but your premise for it is completely of no relevance to PRO's first round. As insisted, given a majority of my debating paradigm, I have penalized him for not pointing this out. However, that's just the way I view debate. There are indeed many others who could reasonably vote against you given that not everyone comes into a debate only entirely (superfluous?? :D) basing their judgment on what the debaters say in the round.
Posted by TheSkeptic 7 years ago
TheSkeptic
"The point I'm making is that there are indeed objective reasons to list one as being better than the other."

Then it be great to hear it ;)

"...in a discussion of which provides "more", your sole argument would be irrelevant."

Stating that neither game is better in a debate comparing games is perfectly fine, unless stated otherwise. I'm sure PRO didn't mean for me to use such an argument, but at least now he learns to prepare for tricky things like that.
Posted by Logical-Master 7 years ago
Logical-Master
Yes, but this doesn't cover why neither would 'truly' be better. Even in your first round, you flat out stated that neither was better unless PRO could find an objective reason for why one was better. The point I'm making is that there are indeed objective reasons to list one as being better than the other.

"He could've tried to develop this point, but seeing as how he didn't..."

Depending on one's debate paradigm, there really would be no need to. In PRO's first round, he stated that one game offers more entertainment. Regardless of whether or not one chooses to accept this entertainment (which is where the matter of taste comes about), in a discussion of which provides "more", your sole argument would be irrelevant.

Nevertheless, 2 out of my 3 paradigms are centric around the tabula rasa mindset, thus I voted CON.
15 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Gaming_Debater 2 years ago
Gaming_Debater
linkishTheSkepticTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:33 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's arguments were, like, Con said, completely subjective, but Con's arguments were objective. Pro had a source and Con was kind of a douche.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
linkishTheSkepticTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: I believe con does not deserve a 7-point vote, so counter.
Vote Placed by rbrownell 7 years ago
rbrownell
linkishTheSkepticTied
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
linkishTheSkepticTied
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 DictatorIsaac 7 years ago
DictatorIsaac
linkishTheSkepticTied
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 Me100 7 years ago
Me100
linkishTheSkepticTied
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 The_Booner 7 years ago
The_Booner
linkishTheSkepticTied
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:70 
Vote Placed by numa 7 years ago
numa
linkishTheSkepticTied
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:70 
Vote Placed by Moose 7 years ago
Moose
linkishTheSkepticTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:24 
Vote Placed by rougeagent21 7 years ago
rougeagent21
linkishTheSkepticTied
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:70