[@SleepingSilence]

>The thing you don't know about, you don't consider a problem. Good for you?

Nope, read it again. I do know the things you've mentioned. You consider them problems but you haven't been demonstrated them to be in any adequate way. I don't know what to tell ya.

>Great, you know. So...maybe...look those videos up and watch them then. 

I originally asked you for non-youtubers who have been attacked by naughty dog, you said they existed but haven't shown a shred of evidence in that direction, so I'm assuming you've all but abandoned that bluff, which would explain the pivot. Me watching a youtuber who didn't like the game is completely pointless and has nothing to do what's being discussed.

>But, my focus was never really talking about the game in particular. So feel however you want about it. 

Well you said the story is bad and you haven't played it. So I can [i]feel[/i] that your perspective isn't very useful. You said that Naughty Dog was a bad company because they attack 'high profile' individuals. I asked you if any of said individuals weren't just youtubers with an opinion and you choked on that front. You also said that having overpriced pre-orders and multiple delays is the sign of a bad company and CD projekt red is one of the better ones. I told you CD Projekt red engaged in both of those things and you mentioned PR problems and issues 'behind the scenes'. 

Now again unless you are some sort of journalist with an insider source, why would you be more privy to 'behind the scenes' issues than anyone else with a working internet connection. You're either overstating your importance or too lazy to source your arguments.

And I see how quickly you abandoned the spelling insults when you yourself put a quote without a closed bracket.

Maybe you should hold yourself to the standard you set for others, yes?