Minecraft is a lousy game 7

Before beginning my conclusion to both my opponents and own argument, let me say that I could not place my sources because of lack of characters. I will do so in this round, and new sources for this round. To begin, my opponent argues that he asked for a game as glitchy as Minecraft in the last round. He did not specify that claim, because this is what my opponent said: "You should prove a bestselling badly glitchy game except Minecraft". Meaning he did not specify enough as I answered his question with: "Any old game in the past". Then my opponent states that I have no evidence for other games having more glitches, than Minecraft. Like I stated earlier, I ran out of characters so here is my evidence being: Gmod. A game that has as much, or more glitches than Minecraft; but still is a fun game. The sales state that it has sold 1.4 million copies in one month, and is actually rising as sells move forward. A game that has a similar popularity rating as that to the game Minecraft. For the glitches in the game, my opponent admits that the mine cart glitch is forced by the player. Here is the evidence to support this statement: "I admit that it is forced by a player by moving around the mine cart". So if the glitch is player enforced, is it truly a glitch? Where I defined a glitch or lag, in my first argument, as: "A sudden, usually temporary, malfunction in the programming in the game". If its forced, this does not make it a glitch or lag! Then my opponent brings up his evidence of Youtube videos about certain glitches. In my first argument, I stated that glitches happen; but most people ignore it and move on. My opponent admits this with his quote of: "By the look of plenty of Youtubers playing with their friends, there should be some stampylonghead or popularmmos video that shows the glitch as they ignore it". As it is seen, my opponent admitted that they ignore it; so is it really an issue if people ignore it; even those who play Minecraft, and has a dedicated Youtube channel for it. For the TNT incident, I stated that it is self choice made to use it or not. My opponent agreed that it is a self choice made, and says that it is a "cheat". It is not because of the player being smart enough to use his or her own resources to mine. My opponent even agrees to this statement, with the following statement: "But the player was smart enough to make advantage of the unnatural cheat to decide whether he should mine there or not". The word "cheat" is defined as: "A person who behaves dishonestly in order to gain an advantage". So we can assume that the "dishonest action" is hacking the game. So is it truly a cheat if the game designers gave you TNT to be used? My opponent also tries to back out on saying that TNT is not a cheat, when he stated in his fourth argument as: "The TNT part is major as it can affect unnatural mining, now you can estimate where to mine, where is the lava, where are the ores. This is a cheat". So my opponent has no valid argument if he agrees with me that the idea on TNT is not a cheat, in this round of the debate. Then my opponent states that I keep reusing the laptop story is my previous argument. I do, admittedly, but my opponent has not placed any further arguments about the lag in Minecraft. To further extend the laptop story argument, my little brother does indeed play online with others; and has no issue with lag. Once is a while it does occur, but nothing can be done because of an overwhelming amount of "stuff" happening all at once. To support this claim with evidence, I will use a quote mentioned in the "Game Engine Architecture Second Edition", where is states: "Perhaps we can tolerate a one-frame lag". Meaning that lag happens, and most Gamers move on, like stated by my own opponent previously. Later, my opponent addresses that Minecraft should get a more in depth story, than allowing the player to create their own story. I still will stand upon the position that allowing players to create ones own story is far greater than changing it up. In my previous argument, I brought up a source about how innovation in games fail; yet reused concepts still sell very well. I stated one game, for an example, being Call of Duty; where they still sell very well, even though nothing has changed. My opponent claims that I stated that Call of Duty is an original concept, where I truly stated: "Call of Duty still sell very well because of its lack of change in a game". Not, on what my opponent perceives, as me saying that Call of Duty is an original game. Proving that my opponent produced false evidence in his argument. Then my opponent claims that I did not address his Wikipedia list on the best selling games. To address on why I denied this evidence, is because of using Wikipedia as a source; when Wikipedia is not reliable. The reasoning why, stated in the Modern Education Department, is because of the possibility of changing information on Wikipedia; making it not truly reliable. Speaking of sources, in the previous argument my opponent used four sources that were mainly Wikipedia sites and forums. These sources do not count because of having no factual evidence, compared to my sources that do have factual evidence. My opponent further argues that the graphics in Minecraft are "intolerable". My opponent claims this as more of his own opinion, without evidence to support his argument. While I use evidence that Graphics do not determine if a game is good or bad; with the examples of Indie Games. Where, previously, I provided evidence that Indie Games are one of the highest selling points in the gaming market. Because of its fun Gameplay, and not based on Graphics. Minecraft delievers this experience with its own unique touch, which my opponent agrees with his statement of: "Minecraft is unique". He later does say say that its bad, but with no evidence to prove this claim! My opponent then discusses about the difficulty of Minecraft. Previously, I mentioned that being simple is good because of allowing a low key stress experience. My opponent claims that people will not be stressed, and will like the idea of a realistic survival game. To support my previous claim, I will used the article titled: "Are Modern Games Easier or Simply Designed Better, where it states that many claim that having an easy game is bad, but in reality; its good. Its good because it allows more production for the company, to immerse the gamer in a higher experience, and give more versatility in the game. Minecraft does this with its unique Gameplay, that my opponent agreed was unique, and gives an easy experience to the player. Limiting the stress levels of a player, who could have already had a stressful day at work. Now to my conclusion, as you can see in these arguments, and previous arguments, that I state that Minecraft is not a "lousy" game. My opponent makes an argument, but does not follow through with his argument. He more often "nitpicks" anything possible within Minecraft, with an opinion not supported by facts. He even took the time to use Wikipedia as a source, even though it is the least reliable source on the internet. While I use sources that he may or may not agree upon. My opponent also "gives up" on previous arguments within the debate. Examples being the merchandise in Minecraft, and gaming addiction towards Minecraft; meaning that he "dropped" those arguments. While I continued with my first arguments, and did not contradict myself throughout the debate. And my opponent states that I have been "recycling" my arguments to make my argument longer; that is false because I am adding more factual evidence on my beginning arguments, compared to my opponent who failed to do so. There is nothing wrong on making your argument long! So voters, who will you vote for? My opponent who gives opinions not supported by facts, or myself where I make stronger arguments and expanded them throughout the debate? Thank you for this debate my opponent! Sources: http://www.pcgamer.com... Game Engine Architecture, Second Edition by: Jason Gregory http://www.p4rgaming.com... http://venturebeat.com... Game Theory: Are Gamers Killing Video Games? By: MatPat; on Youtube Channel: The Game Theorists