>>723085905
>No I'm saying you're wrong because evidence doesn't back up your claim and you can't handle that you got called out for being a retard
Nope, I wasn't the anon you initially responded and yet surprisingly that's not the biggest indicator that you're a retard here. Your entire argument is literally that there's no evidence that quality leads to success, based entirely on the fact that you have a personal disagreement, which is entirely subjective, as to what the word "quality" means in the context of video games. But of course we're not talking about YOUR opinion in this context, we're talking about the opinion of the general market that buys and plays video games. That's what this entire thread is about and your inability to divorce your personal feelings from what's actually being discussed is what makes you such a mental retard.
>so now you're hiding behind fallacies.
You couldn't name any "fallacies" in my post and you won't even be able to mention any even if you respond to me again, because like I said, you are genuinely not intelligent enough to engage in this discussion, anon.

>>718722391
It's simply pic related. When it's a thing a lot of other people like, it causes severe cogitative dissonance.
It's actually really very sad. It's not superiority or arrogance; they are literally not capable of understanding other people are not them.