Roblox is Dying and Should Retire Its Servers

Now for the closing argument which will consist of possible errors/improvements to your argument, errors in pro/cons argument, and final point clarification. 1.) I made many errors in my argument. First of all my opening argument was very poorly constructed with little elaboration and that weak base I feel crippled the rest of my argument. I failed to quickly define "dying" in this context. Clearly you and I differ on the definition when it comes to video games. I apparently was not impartial enough when it came to the young user base issue. 2 and 3.) Now for what I feel Con did wrong First of all you immediately refute my statement that said you said I was biased because the game was popular and people can become successful which is outright false. You clearly say why you think I am biased: "This is where I believe your arguments are proven to be mostly bias. You dislike the games that are popular and dislike the community." but then you say you didn't say that later and claim I am biased because: "I don't claim your arguments are bias because the game is popular, I claim their bias because the only objective arguments you put forth were hacking and exploiting and Roblox making money." This is an outright contradiction. Next you state that the majority saying something is true doesn't mean it is true (obviously) but then you say "I'm not viewing it as I played it I'm viewing it as a game. Your largest gripe with it is it doesn't follow it's mission statement to inspire innovation. The game does do this, you can create and build your own games as you wish." but this is where I feel my arguments come out as mangled in your counter argument. What I originally said was:" If If Roblox's mission statement is to inspire innovation then THE VERY GAME should reflect that. It does not, at least not as you would expect" that last part: "NOT AS YOU WOULD EXCPECT" was pivotal because it implies that the company is fulfilling its mission statement but not as it should by allowing less monopolies to grow. Innovation means: "the action or process of innovating." innovate means: "make changes in something established, especially by introducing new methods, ideas, or products." Making a game isn't innovation, innovation is experimenting with new ideas and methods. And I am certainly not saying Roblox has never fulfilled its mission statement because it has many times, its amazing to see what one person can do with Lua and the Roblox Studio, the possibilities are endless, what I was implying and later implying was that Roblox is no longer representing its mission statement not by its own fault though, but rather a natural repercussion of less creators making revolutionary games. This is also where I feel your argument that lack of diversity doesn't mean the game is dying really falls apart because less and less creators are becoming very popular IS AN UNDENIABLE SIGN that something is wrong. I am not saying monopolies are 100% the cause, but they don't help, they don't allow creators to get their name out there and become famous via the popular tab which is one of the only ways you can advertise your success. There you have it, less encouragement to innovate, less innovation. Now this is where you were really wrong: "Pro then goes into an argument that talks about the game's community as if it's important to the game itself not "dying." Pro just claimed that when a game is dying it is "the digression of the very fabric of the game itself and the community that revolves around the game." The community has no play in the game itself, just because it is changing and evolving doesn't mean it's dying. You don't like the changes the community is undergoing so you view it as dying, when it isn't." this entire paragraph denies the very nature of MMO's and Roblox itself. THE COMMUNITY IS THE BACKBONE. Without the community the game virtually does not exist. The community makes the games, plays the games, buys the goods, and converses. "The community has no play in the game itself, just because it is changing and evolving doesn't mean it's dying." this is the most false statement in the argument here, the community evolves and evolves THE GAME, the community is tied to Roblox, it is so pivotal but you make it seem like its practically worthless. Roblox is not a game, it is a platform for games, THE COMMUNITY IS THE ONE MAKING THE GAMES!!! You say you are looking at the game alone but how can you without looking at the community as well especially on a platform so multiplayer centered. KEY POINT: When the community digresses SO WILL THE GAME. Then you go into how Roblox is a "free market" and monopolies aren't bad because they really aren't directly stifling innovation. "Again, this doesn't mean the game is dying. The game is a free market as far as this goes, and you can play whatever game people post. Most people play these games because they are good." Yes, Roblox is a free market, and I know about free market economies. I am going to be frank here, I am a right wing pro capitalist conservative, so naturally I am all for the free market, BUT, it no longer becomes a free market when MONOPOLIES are created. I am very anti monopoly. I am not saying that people being successful is bad but when you and a few choice games that are always on the popular tab WITH NO CHANGES it becomes unhealthy for competing developers. The FREE MARKET IS ABOUT COMPETITION, you cant have competition with constant monopolies and new developers cant show of their INNOVATION with the COMMUNITY. You also misunderstood the hacking point. Of course Call of Duty 3 original is not taken care of anymore, it practically ancient in internet years. But games that are nearing their end always have MORE HACKING THEN USUAL as can be observed in MANY DIFFERENT GAMES. Next is where I feel you think I resent the community because it is young, this isn't true. I resent toxic community sects that are predominantly younger. You were a kid, I was a kid, we were annoying and immature. Not all young players are bad of course and if they are having fun no one has the right to take that away. Next: Roblox was a "MORE MATURE user based sandbox" emphasis on the MORE part because it is MORE mature than it is now. You made it seem like it was just mature. I meant it as a comparison, ask any Roblox veteran and they can confirm early Roblox was less toxic and MORE mature. "damaged its reputation from a more mature creator based sandbox programming game" This is another example of my arguments coming out mangled, the omission of a SINGLE word skewed the entire quote to make it sound like something it wasn't. Of course Roblox community isn't mature, but it was MORE mature back in ye olden days. Point 4 was by far the most bastardized of all my points. You didn't even mention the issue with the removal of Tix and the apparent necessity of 2 extra VIP memberships. Conclusion: There are games on Roblox that are popular but when a few games that are ALWAYS WITHOUT FAIL on the popular tab and hold a monopoly on everything and discourages people from creating their own games because they know their name will never go out there. You act like the monopolies are not a big deal because people will eventually find another game to play. To that I cite YouTube as an example, people subscribe to games on Roblox, people subscribe to video makers on YouTube, its kind of similar, but the difference YouTube is so diverse monopolies don't work because YouTube unlike Roblox gives people WAY more viewing options and recommended tabs and such and doesn't let an entire tab be monopolized. Because I am running out of characters I am wrapping up my final argument. I feel like the debate wasn't as constructive as it should have been which was mostly my fault. Thank you for being rational and civilized, I am not the "get off my lawn" type of guy but I believe in equal opportunity.