FFXI Remaster - Remake

[Alhanelem]

I mentioned numerous times that I'm not here to argue,

You say that, but you make arguments. And I don't mean the fighting kind, I mean the making a case for something kind. If you make a case for something and I feel it's not well supported, well, I'm going to challenge it. It's not a matter of hostility, it's just good and proper discussion.

If you did not understand the statement, or did not agree with it, that by nature does not make it "flawed."

It doesn't automatically make it flawed, but I can certainly give reasons why I think it does make it flawed. There's a difference, and I'm not sure if you're just being obtuse or actually don't see the difference.

but I will only do so, if you agree to put in proper effort to consider what I'm saying, and respond with reasoning and civility.

I always consider what people say, and I always respond with reasoning and civility. I'm sorry if you've ever felt otherwise, but I never enter any discussion without considering the other point of view. But you have to understand that one can respect other's points of view without agreeing with them. Me disagreeing with you on something or finding flaws in the cases you make for something doesn't mean I didn't consider your point of view.

-I will not participate in "arguments" on the FFXI forums.

The whole point of a forum is do discuss and debate. If you won't participate in "arguments" (you used quotation marks), then you're in the wrong place. And again, when I use the word "arguments" I don't mean "fights," but rather making cases for positions. If you make a good case for something, I will back it. If you don't, I will certainly say why I think so.

I don't feel that I've ever been uncivil toward you in this thread. If you feel otherwise, I'd really appreciate you identifying what you felt was uncivil.

If you come on to a forum and post opinions about things, other people are going to respond with theirs, and why they agree or don't agree with yours. I'm not sure why this seems out of the ordinary to you.

First, my statement "RPG's should not be easy and simple" and you chose to only focus on the "easy" part of my statement, when the statement is clearly a very simplified blanket statement about the nature of design of RPG's as a whole.

I focused on the entire statement- there wasn't much to it. you said RPGs should not be easy and simple. And while I realize that it is a blanket statement, it's still an opinion and I can still dispute it. It depends on the target audience. There are RPGs with difficulty and depth, and there are those that aren't. There's nothing wrong with either one- you are asserting that "easy and simple" is wrong and something else is right. I disputed it because it is an opinion, not an indisputable fact. You then proceeded to cite various games by SE and others, and pointed out how the deep, difficult games sold better. I disputed this as well, because there was a lot more to the success of those games than simply them being tough. The whole reason I took issue with what you said is because you took an opinion and framed it as a fact.

going back to the quote, you said I "only focused on the 'easy' part of your statement." Well, there is only one other part to the statement, and that is "simple." And frankly, that has a largely similar meaning to "easy." So I'm not sure what else there is to "focus on" here.