Call of Duty:Modern Warfare 2 is a better game than Call of Duty:Black Ops

For this round I will be going over the entire round of the debate and addressing everything made in this debate. My Opponents case Knifing Argument/Shotgun Arguments/Camping Arguments Because my opponent cannot find any sources My Opponent has openly stated that I may have this point. I would like to note that ALL OF THESE arguments were Three of my opponents Five original points Lag Argument This argument was not even addressed by my opponent. So this point should be count as a voter for the Con side. Spawn argument This was the only argument my opponent actually kept and backed up with a source. But I would like to point out multiple things wrong with this argument and source. First of all, an Excerpt from a popular Gaming patch and update site. "ï¿½€ï¿½Added a negative influencer to all spawn points to decrease the chances of spawning near an enemy. This will further improve spawning protection on top of previous updates. "[1] The company has already addressed this issue in the latest patch. My Opponent might not have the latest patch, when this issue was fixed. Second I would like to look at my opponents source date. That article was written on November 10, 2010. Black ops was released on November 9,2010[2] A one day later article? How is that article legit? This proves the invalidity of this point and also proves the developers have fixed this now, non-existing problem. Now Everything up to now was my opponents original case. He has tried to take some clarification points I have brought up during the round an put them on his side. I will address these points, but I would like to note that his original case has already been addressed. Now to some clarification points Experienced player Clarification My Opponent has stated the only experienced players he has sourced is his team. So how much time have they spent on the game? When do they become experienced? Do you guys have any proof of your experience? From looking at your blog I do not see anything about experience My Opponent never clarified this point fully, so what is an experienced player? Definition of Better Clarification I was only stating what my opponent said. If my opponent wanted the criteria to be "based upon user reviews". That's what he should have said. Judges, my opponent is trying to use a source with one set style of attacking(this attack being the marketing campaign) and trying to incorporate another attack under it(That being of user reviews) You see he is trying to add on to his original definition. Research Clarification sub-point Well, that is your own fault, You pre-order an new the risk of being first for something. An if the game is not in your opinion of good, then that's your fault for not researching as you said you did. Evidence of user Reviews Sub-point Well, Lets take a look at the article date shall we? November 12,2010. This time his source is a an article that was two days after Black Ops release date. Black Ops Selling More Argument This was my main argument this round. His rebuttal might have slightly held if he did one important thing. A Source to prove how the marketing budget directly affect the sales. Do you have a poll to show how many people brought black ops because of the marketing campaign? How about an article to show how many brought it because of the marketing campaign? The only source he says is common sense(which isn't even a real source) That is why this argument stands Conclusion My Opponent has honestly proved nothing. His sources were outdated and immediately followed the release of Black ops(Which was Nine months ago). Four of his original points were dropped. Another was rebuttal with an outdated source. He tried to switch his definition to save himself and incorporate more non-sourced attacks. Thank you Sources 1-. http://www.nextgenupdate.com... 2-. http://kotaku.com... I'm sorry but no joke this time