PRO should have won this debate.

The debate: http://www.debate.org... In this debate, my opponent will analyze the debate linked above. I will argue that PRO should have won. My opponent will argue that CON should have won. We will both discuss Conduct, Spelling and Grammar, Arguments, and Sources, properly weighted. Whoever wins Arguments for this debate is voted the Arguments and Sources points. Spelling/Grammar and Conduct are normal. For example, if it is concluded that PRO should have won Sources, Conduct, and Grammar (four points), but CON should have won Arguments (three points), then the Arguments and Sources votes for this debate would go to PRO. In the hypothetical situation in which, say, PRO definitely won three points, but Arguments is up for grabs by either PRO or CON, then PRO would be considered the proper victor, because any decent number of votes would give the advantage to PRO. Now, to analyze the key contentions of said debate: 1. Price In Round 1, PRO established the Wii to have a low price. CON countered by saying that the XBOX has a low price and more features. PRO then listed numerous accessories on the Wii, asking for CON to reply with more accessories on the XBOX to keep up. CON did not, and instead criticized the use of price as a factor. This went on, with the actual Wii vs. XBOX conflict forgotten, until CON pulled, right out of the blue, a source that made the XBOX cheaper than the Wii. This was a completely new argument (poor conduct) that PRO had already won. 2. Controller CON: "I have already addressed the issue of variety and proven that the 360 has just as many functional controllers as the Wii." This is false. CON never once cited any controllers, rather only listing a few for the XBOX. PRO responded that these were also available on the Wii, along with the standard controller, but the Wiimote (and all variations thereof) and the Wii Balance Board are only for the Wii. CON now claims that the XBOX has a Wiimote and Wii Balance Board as well. 3. Performance/Graphics This is the only thing the XBOX would win. 4. The Market CON completely dropped the point that the Wii and its games dominated in sales, rather concentrating on the price. She also stated, "There are professionals whose jobs literally revolve around judging and rating games; not consumers," but without a source. Additionally, CON gives no reason to think that a professional's opinion on a game is more important than those of the people. 5. Playability PRO: "If you look at the list of top games, rated by IGN, you'll notice that Nintendo dominates. Furthermore, many games on the list are available to the Wii..." CON: "Now, just because Nintendo dominates the list doesn't mean that the Wii itself does, and it is the WII - not Nintendo - that is up for discussion in this debate." But the games are for the Wii... "In fact, the majority of those games mentioned all pre-date the Wii..." That had nothing to do with anything. "...and many of them are specifically designed for arcade systems anyway." Nor did this. 6. The Dropped Arguments CON decided to wipe out the dropped arguments all in the last round, after they had been dropped. In Round 2, PRO said, "Furthermore, you have admitted that most players do enjoy using the Wiimote." In Round 4, CON finally replies, "This is an opinion with no evidence to support it." A bit late. To settle the Wii Fit dropped argument, CON said, "So, in conclusion, both systems offer games with health benefits [never knew that, and a lack of sources doesn't help] and yet only the Wii has been known to cause damage or injury [sources?] [maybe because it's the only one that's known to have games with health benefits]. It would seem to me, then, that the 360 wins this category as well (in terms of safety and well-being) [because nobody's ever injured themselves, apparently, because nobody's ever played them, because nobody knows they exist]." Basically, it is an argument from silence, and a poor one at that. As for one-player games, "Listing the fact that there are many 1 on 1 games you can play on the Wii is entirely irrelevant, since there are just as many 1 on 1 games that you can play on the 360." Sources, sources, sources. To analyze CON's re-cap: "The 360 is cheaper [new argument] and is therefore more widely accessible, which Pro deems highly important as he has repeated this concept consistently throughout the entire debate." If one removes the new argument, as one should, this becomes a point for PRO, not CON. "The 360 consistently achieves higher performance ratings than the Wii from gamers and esteemed critics alike." Actually, if one looks at the only source CON used that talked about performance, it was only between the XBOX and the PS3. They didn't even try to compare it to the Wii. "Plus, while the Wiimote is versatile, I have proven that the Xbox comes with just as many functional controllers." Wii has all that the XBOX has, plus the Wiimote and Wii Balance Board. CON had nothing to validate this statement. "The 360 has just as many 'Best Games' on the Best Game's top 10 list than the Wii, as I have also indicated in earlier rounds." Sources, or it didn't happen. As you can also see, CON's arguments were extremely lacking in sources, with only three total, compared to PRO's twenty, when CON really needed more. CON also had poor conduct, bringing up new arguments and claiming to have done what wasn't done. And so, PRO should have won Arguments, Sources, and Conduct. I reserve the right to bring up new contentions and arguments in future rounds. Good luck to whoever accepts this debate.