My point was that a game being from a common genre has nothing to do with its ability to innovate. Not sure where I implied that I was obligated to reply to you. I disagreed with your sentiment, so I shared my own opinion. It’s fine if you feel my comment was aimless, but I disagree.
The Miranda Priestly reference means that I personally don’t find it interesting regardless of it being innovative. But I don’t appreciate that you’re compulsively disagreeing with me on a personal preference, lecturing me on the obvious, and contradicting yourself in the middle of it.
What is your point? If you don’t like people’s opinions about their personal video game preferences, you’re not obligated to comment aimlessly.
My point was that a game being from a common genre has nothing to do with its ability to innovate. Not sure where I implied that I was obligated to reply to you. I disagreed with your sentiment, so I shared my own opinion. It’s fine if you feel my comment was aimless, but I disagree.
The Miranda Priestly reference means that I personally don’t find it interesting regardless of it being innovative. But I don’t appreciate that you’re compulsively disagreeing with me on a personal preference, lecturing me on the obvious, and contradicting yourself in the middle of it.