3 points
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.
-6 points
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.