Raiders Infield Dirt

[bucky60]

Quote: Originally Posted by aholbert32

I wasnt saying that you said those things specifically. I was talking about the thread as a whole. I dont have a problem with guys like Big F'n Deal's post even though 90% of them are negative as long as they are based in fact or fact based speculation. Same goes with A&S and his positive takes. I dont see anything wrong with me correcting someone if I think their speculation is incorrect based on known facts.

Then you and I are pretty much agreeing here and we are pretty much done. Thanks for the responses.

[Big FN Deal]

Quote: Originally Posted by aholbert32

No its disagreeing with your opinion. You could tell me that you think that the most important issue in the game is mouthpieces not being in the game. I'm not allowed to disagree without being accused of belittling? I'm not allowed to speculate why they arent in the game? I'm not allowed to identify major issues of the game that could be considered a bigger issue? Cause thats pretty much all people have been doing here.

Those examples I used actually happened in this thread and they are belittling by definition. Of course simply disagreeing isn't, it's all about context.

Let's flip it, if this were a thread about Atlanta's new stadium, where the OP was wondering about how were they able to get it in, complimenting it being something like the attention to detail The Show would accomplish and just generally offering up discussion about the excitement of having it in, would someone posting, this thread should be three posts long, referring to how it's just one field out of many in the game and how small an impact it has on games played as a whole, be disagreeing then or belittling?

[aholbert32]

Quote: Originally Posted by Big FN Deal

Those examples I used actually happened in this thread and they are belittling by definition. Of course simply disagreeing isn't, it's all about context. Let's flip it, if this were a thread about Atlanta's new stadium, where the OP was wondering about how were they able to get it in, complimenting it being something like the attention to detail The Show would accomplish and just generally offering up discussion about the excitement of having it in, would someone posting, this thread should be three posts long, referring to how it's just one field out of many in the game and how small an impact it has on games played as a whole be disagreeing then or belittling?

Stating facts isnt belittling. Oakland is one of 30 stadiums in the game and the infield appears maybe 3 times a year if that. Thats a fact.

Your Atlanta example doesnt totally work.

Using your example, if someone said "The fact that EA added the Atlanta stadium is the greatest accomplishment EA has ever made in Madden" (which is the opposite of what the OP said about Oakland), I wouldnt consider it "belittling" if someone responded "Really? Its a good add but you only see it in season 2 of Franchise and its one of 30 stadiums".

Thats just stating a fact. That fact happens to counter the OP statement. There is nothing wrong with that.

[Big FN Deal]

Quote: Originally Posted by aholbert32

Stating facts isnt belittling. Oakland is one of 30 stadiums in the game and the infield appears maybe 3 times a year if that. Thats a fact. Your Atlanta example doesnt totally work. Using your example, if someone said "The fact that EA added the Atlanta stadium is the greatest accomplishment EA has ever made in Madden" (which is the opposite of what the OP said about Oakland), I wouldnt consider it "belittling" if someone responded "Really? Its a good add but you only see it in season 2 of Franchise and its one of 30 stadiums". Thats just stating a fact. That fact happens to counter the OP statement. There is nothing wrong with that.

So what about the this thread should be three posts long comment, it's certainly not a fact? That said, facts can be used to belittle, which those things were.

Also the OP never made the infield dirt out to be the opposite of "the greatest accomplishment EA has ever made in Madden", so those statements weren't used in the context of your example to counter/disagree with the OP's POV, again, they were used to belittle it.

[kehlis]

Quote: Originally Posted by Big FN Deal

Is saying this thread should be three posts long belittling?

Belittling is a stretch but I would agree that it was very unproductive.

Quote:

How about referring to how it's just one field out of many in the game and how small an impact it has on games played as a whole? To me they goes beyond trying to offer an opinion about any technical limitations of this detail and goes into the literal definition of belittling it.

This I can't agree with you on, this is a fact. It's not only one field, it's a very minimal impact of games. We're talking two preseason games and at more four regular seasons games. As an A's fan I'm sad to report last year and this year it will be at most one regular season game.

This conversation has spread to way more than "technical limitations" and you know that. Calling that demeaning is pretty hypocritical as it's pretty standard for us all to use factual real life events to discuss it's relevance in a game. You do it, I do it, everyone does.

[Big FN Deal]

Quote: Originally Posted by kehlis

Belittling is a stretch but I would agree that it was very unproductive. This I can't agree with you on, this is a fact. It's not only one field, it's a very minimal impact of games. We're talking two preseason games and at more four regular seasons games. As an A's fan I'm sad to report last year and this year it will be at most one regular season game. This conversation has spread to way more than "technical limitations" and you know that. Calling that demeaning is pretty hypocritical as it's pretty standard for us all to use factual real life events to discuss it's relevance in a game. You do it, I do it, everyone does.

I don't get why anyone keeps mentioning those statements being facts, that doesn't keep them from being belittling. If you go back to read the OP, those facts where never called into question, they were presented to belittle infield dirt in Raider's stadium. Whether that's ok to do or whatever, I'm not trying to get into or imply, I'm merely stating that they were used to belittle, by definition.

Like with my Atlanta Stadium analogy, if someone goes in that thread where it's being discussed in a favorable light, where no one has claimed it's the greatest accomplishment in Madden ever or anything close to that, saying those same things I referred to would clearly be understood to be belittling the accomplishment, so there shouldn't be ambiguity here.

[kehlis]

Quote: Originally Posted by Big FN Deal

I don't get why anyone keeps mentioning those statements being facts, that doesn't keep them from being belittling. If you go back to read the OP, those facts where never called into question, they were presented to belittle infield dirt in Raider's stadium. Whether that's ok to do or whatever, I'm not trying to get into or imply, I'm merely stating that they were used to belittle, by definition. Like with my Atlanta Stadium analogy, if someone goes in that thread where it's being discussed in a favorable light, where no one has claimed it's the greatest accomplishment in Madden ever or anything close to that, saying those same things I referred to would clearly be understood to be belittling the accomplishment, so there shouldn't be ambiguity here.

Big, you know me. You've seen me post both negative and positive about the game. I've contradicted others when I see the need to regardless of name, color, join date or post count.

The first post asked if the dirt would be in the game.

Since no one disagreed that they wouldn't like to have the dirt in the game, the conversations turned into reasons why it might not be in the game.

One of those points that has been made is an issue of priority and with that comes questions of why it might not be a priority which is why any of those facts were brought up.

I'm a very realistic person and am able to see both sides of the coin. There are many posters here who may not post but may PM you that can confirm that.

Simply stating logical reasons why EA may not have chosen to take the time to add dirt is NOT belittling, it's adding to the discussion.

Belittling would have been someone saying "Why would you want that in the game anyway? It only applied to 1/8th of the season. It's pointless."

If anyone said that, I would agree with you 100% but I haven't seen that.

[iFnotWhyNoT]

To end this, let's all agree we don't have all the answers but common sense tells us there is a significant reason as to why its not there. Whether it's a time or financial reason.

Let's not try to dictate to others that what is more important, because we all value different aspects of the game more than others.

Lastly, i don't know any of you, but i love you all ... no homo ...unless you want it to be.