I wasn't trying to refute his criticism, just the way his review was done, which in my opinion was not good. It was childish and disrespectful to the listener, on top of not being professional.
Then why was the only thing you thought necessary to say regarding his review before being challenged, this:
That's a review on what the game is not. It should be about what the game is. Bad review imho. You should read Eurogamers' review.
That's a direct refute of his criticism. You directly said that what he was
talking about is where your issue lay. Therefore bad review. Read x review instead.
When challenged about what you thought was wrong with what he talked about, you completely ditched what was your only actual point at that time and decided that you just didn't like his tone and that there wasn't actually anything wrong with his actual points. Therefore bad review. Read x review instead.
I mean, if you're going to:
-disparage someone's review as simply a bad review because it talks about the wrong things and doesn't talk about the right things,
-fail to back up your claim and instead move directly to attacking the reviewer instead of any point he made,
-then deny you actually had any problem with what he was talking about when asked why you said you didn't like what he was talking about.......when your whole original point was that you didn't like what he was talking about......
I find people who twist, fold and bend their arguments mid discussion, as if nobody can see what they're doing to be far more disrespectful and childish than a review using negative language to describe things they find negative.
But that's just my opinion.
