What's Your Favorite Zelda Game?

[JuicieJ]

A Link to the Past with the N64 gems close behind. I think if this poll was redone now that Skyward Sword wouldn't have as many votes as it does. People were just hyped at the inital release but it doesn't deserve to have more votes than any of these games.

It's amazing how having a bias will blind people's judgement.

 

[Deleted member 14134]

It's amazing how having a bias will blind people's judgement.

I don't know what bias you mean. I'm not a fanboy who defends my favorite game in every way I can. I played all the Zeldas and Skyward Sword wasn't fun. That's my opinion. Stop trying to pick an argument because someone has different opinion than you. Good day sir.

 

[JuicieJ]

I played all the Zeldas and Skyward Sword wasn't fun. That's my opinion.

My point exactly. You didn't like it, so you think its high amount of votes is due purely to hype. Bias.

 

[Jamie]

My point exactly. You didn't like it, so you think its high amount of votes is due purely to hype. Bias.

You can't really deny the possibility.

 

[JuicieJ]

You can't really deny the possibility.

Except there's zero evidence to support the notion.

 

[Ronin]

A tie between Majora's Mask and Twilight Princess.

My point exactly. You didn't like it, so you think its high amount of votes is due purely to hype. Bias.

Careful broseph; bias works both for and against an object of [dis]interest.

So let's say that I absolutely cannot tolerate Skyward Sword, and you absolutely love the game to the point where you'd defend it. In a thread that asks for my favorite, I'd put down my preferred game and possibly feel led to list my least favorite game below it. Sounds biased, right? So then you come in and point out that SS can't be my least favorite for whatever reason, and claim me to be biased. Well, for starters, in this type of thread I'd immediately come off as biased due to listing my favorite game, but then I could turn around and claim that you'd be expressing bias by pointing out my bias. Now we're both in quite a jam, huh? A deadlock of sorts... I guess the only respectful recourse would be a compromise; agree to disagree, yeah?

 

[Deleted member 14134]

Careful broseph; bias works both for and against an object of [dis]interest.

So let's say that I absolutely cannot tolerate Skyward Sword, and you absolutely love the game to the point where you'd defend it. In a thread that asks for my favorite, I'd put down my preferred game and possibly feel led to list my least favorite game below it. Sounds biased, right? So then you come in and point out that SS can't be my least favorite for whatever reason, and claim me to be biased. Well, for starters, in this type of thread I'd immediately come off as biased due to listing my favorite game, but then I could turn around and claim that you'd be expressing bias by pointing out my bias. Now we're both in quite a jam, huh? A deadlock of sorts... I guess the only respectful recourse would be a compromise; agree to disagree, yeah?

Actually you beat me to it but put it in words better than I could of. Couldn't agree with you more.

 

[Jamie]

Except there's zero evidence to support the notion.

It's a hypothesis. There doesn't have to be explicit evidence. He is hypothesizing. It is fair for him to do so. It is completely reasonable to hypothesize that the results of a poll a month after a game's release and several years after a game's release would be different. How is this an unreasonable suggestion? He said "I think". Get a grip. It's his opinion.

You can't deny the possibility. Except nothing. You can't logically deny the possibility because you don't know.

 

[JuicieJ]

Careful broseph; bias works both for and against an object of [dis]interest.

So let's say that I absolutely cannot tolerate Skyward Sword, and you absolutely love the game to the point where you'd defend it. In a thread that asks for my favorite, I'd put down my preferred game and possibly feel led to list my least favorite game below it. Sounds biased, right? So then you come in and point out that SS can't be my least favorite for whatever reason, and claim me to be biased. Well, for starters, in this type of thread I'd immediately come off as biased due to listing my favorite game, but then I could turn around and claim that you'd be expressing bias by pointing out my bias. Now we're both in quite a jam, huh? A deadlock of sorts... I guess the only respectful recourse would be a compromise; agree to disagree, yeah?

Actually you beat me to it but put it in words better than I could of. Couldn't agree with you more.

I never denied that possibility, but he literally said that it wouldn't have so many votes if the poll were started today despite having no concrete evidence to even support the idea. There's no way a bias isn't involved in that, plain and simple.

It's a hypothesis. There doesn't have to be explicit evidence. He is hypothesizing. It is fair for him to do so. It is completely reasonable to hypothesize that the results of a poll a month after a game's release and several years after a game's release would be different. How is this an unreasonable suggestion? He said "I think". Get a grip. It's his opinion.

You can't just say "it's his opinion" and expect to be taken seriously. Opinions need to be backed up by solid reasoning and must lack any logical fallacies. He has no evidence to support his notion, so there's no reasonable way he can state it.

You can't deny the possibility. Except nothing. You can't logically deny the possibility because you don't know.

Okay, then, let's put that concept to the test. Let's say that, theoretically, I were to claim that I'm the smartest person in the entire world. Obviously I would be wrong about that, BUT WAIT, you can't deny the POSSIBILITY that I am, correct? I guess it wouldn't be able to be combated, then. After all, it would be my opinion.

You see how that works?

 

[Jamie]

You can't just say "it's his opinion" and expect to be taken seriously. Opinions need to be backed up by solid reasoning and must lack any logical fallacies. He has no evidence to support his notion, so there's no reasonable way it can be supported.

Actually, what's interesting about a hypothesis, is the hypothesis itself doesn't need to be backed up to be a valid hypothesis. Backing it up with evidence is what comes later. However, how can he back it up with evidence? The only way would be to create a new poll. Well, I doubt that would be allowed, so it's not really possible.

Think about it this way. The world just began. I hypothesize "If I drop this apple off a roof, it will hit the ground." At this moment, all this is is a hypothesis. Is it right or wrong? We don't know. Is it still a hypothesis? Yes. Is it a valid hypothesis? Absolutely.

But to humour you, I do think he has solid reasoning. Do you really think it is far fetched to imagine a poll being different 1 month after a games release vs 2 years? Maybe Skyward Sword would get more votes because the hate surrounding it after its release dissipated, but I don't think it's far fetched to imagine hype gave it more votes than it deserves. Perhaps it's wrong. We don't know. There is likely limited evidence. I don't have a source but I'm sure you can find somewhere on the internet where the general opinion of a game changed over time. I mean, this is just a guess, but I think it's a pretty reasonable idea. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, I'm saying it's not far fetched. I don't think anyone aside from yourself would argue that it is.

Okay, then, let's put that concept to the test. Let's say that, theoretically, I were to claim that I'm the smartest person in the entire world. Obviously I would be wrong about that, BUT WAIT, you can't deny the POSSIBILITY that I am, correct? I guess it wouldn't be able to be combated, then. After all, it would be my opinion.

You see how that works?

No, I wouldn't be able to deny the possibility. I don't know you. I've never met you. I haven't tested you against other intelligent people. The only way we could absolutely prove you were wrong is if we tested your IQ against someone else's and it was lower. I can have reasonable doubt, but I can't deny the possibility. Sorry, but by all logic you can't deny the possibility of things that haven't been proven otherwise. So you really made zero point here.

I never denied that possibility, but he literally said that it wouldn't have so many votes if the poll were started today despite having no concrete evidence to even support the idea. There's no way a bias isn't involved in that, plain and simple.

You are lying. Re-read his post. He did not "literally" say that, he "literally" said that he thinks that it wouldn't have so many votes.

Do not use the term "literally" if that is not what they literally said. People misuse this phrase way too often.

 

[Deleted member 14134]

I never denied that possibility, but he literally said that it wouldn't have so many votes if the poll were started today despite having no concrete evidence to even support the idea. There's no way a bias isn't involved in that, plain and simple.

As repentence said, I said "I think." I wasn't claiming this to be fact, just what I think would be different about it today.

You can't just say "it's his opinion" and expect to be taken seriously. Opinions need to be backed up by solid reasoning and must lack any logical fallacies. He has no evidence to support his notion, so there's no reasonable way he can state it.

Opinions don't need to be backed by reasoning, I have a right to my opinion just as you have a right to yours. It also does need to be logically sound. There are many accepted theories in science today. This means that there is some support behind it but it doesn't mean it's a law. Like opinions, theories have the possibility to have truth to them and also be changed or improved upon. It doesn't mean it's completely wrong just because it isn't 100% sound.

Okay, then, let's put that concept to the test. Let's say that, theoretically, I were to claim that I'm the smartest person in the entire world. Obviously I would be wrong about that, BUT WAIT, you can't deny the POSSIBILITY that I am, correct? I guess it wouldn't be able to be combated, then. After all, it would be my opinion.

You see how that works?

You couldn't of said this any better. You said that because your opinion cannot be proven wrong that it may be right. Just like my opinions. You say opinions have to be logically sound and then you post an opinion of your own and say it cannot be proven right. Try to apply this idea you have here to other peoples opinions. That way you wouldn't feel the need to tell me my opinions wrong every time I post one.

Anyways I admire your persistence and your ability to always have an answer to something you don't agree with. I just wish you would try to see things the way I do. We're like a two sided coin. One side can't exist without the other, you just need to flip it over to see it.

Edit: Off topic but I also agree with the choice to include Greninja in Smash Bros. Guess that's something we don't have to argue about lol.

 

[JuicieJ]

So let me get this straight. Hypothetically, I could say that it's my opinion that the world is flat, and I couldn't be proven wrong just because it's my opinion?

Okay, then.

 

[Jamie]

So let me get this straight. Hypothetically, I could say that it's my opinion that the world is flat, and I couldn't be proven wrong just because it's my opinion?

Okay, then.

When did we say that? Stop putting words into our mouths. No, you can be proven wrong. I just can't deny the possibility without evidence. If we tested HOT's hypothesis, and it was wrong, then that's that. It's a valid hypothesis but his conclusion was wrong. But if you said the world was flat, and we had no proof to the contrary, no, you couldn't be proven wrong. Just like, as an Atheist, I can't deny the possibility of God, although I don't believe in God. Does that make sense? This is a very simple concept, and you are changing it up every time. I already said if I were to compare your IQ against someone else's and it was lower, then your "smartest person" claim would be proven wrong, but before I do this there's no evidence.

Honestly dude, when did I ever say you couldn't be proven wrong? You are just being silly now.

 

[JuicieJ]

When did we say that? Stop putting words into our mouths. No, you can be proven wrong. I just can't deny the possibility without evidence.

The problem is that's a catch 2-2. You also can't SUPPORT it without evidence.

 

[Jamie]

The problem is that's a catch 2-2. You also can't SUPPORT it without evidence.

1. It's a catch 22, not a catch 2-2.
2. That's not what a catch 22 is. A catch 22 is a situation that can't be solved without a prerequisite, with that prerequisite not being able to be achieved without that initial situation. I can deny something without supporting it and vice versa. A good example of a catch 22 for your learning purposes: I can't get a job without job experience, but I can't get job experience without a job.
3. He never argued that he was right, it was just a thought. "I think".
4. That still has nothing to do with what I said. I said you can't deny the claim. That's it. Except nothing. Point blank period. End of discussion. I literally said once sentence, that was all, and you started throwing a bunch of broken logic at me (like that earth is flat thing).