It is a fact that PL is the only Raiden to win a major.
You are entitled to your opinion.
My grammar might be faulty but so is your interpretation. I don't care if people follow my point or not. It is just an opinion. If people think the same way as me or not doesn't really matter. What matter is that I can write in whatever way I want. You are giving an absolutist opinion in that things go over better in a simple way and a bigger write up would be obsolete. Show me where this has been proven. Show me and I won't do a big write up ever again.
Please show me why you say my opinion is absolutist and I will sure to change it cause it really wasn't meant to be that way.
Perfect Legend won with Kung Lao because of his reads and his understanding of the game. People di'nt know hos to exploit Kung Lao for two EVO'S. That is a fact.
This is a theory, not a fact. He may have been a better player, people may not have known how to exploit Kung Lao, these are all things that cannot be proven beyond the shadow of a doubt with a sample size as small as what you presented. You shouldn't attempt to pass things off as fact if you cannot back such claims up.
Your grammar is fine, but your approach is flawed fundamentally.
The ability to give ones opinion in a shorter manner reducing the odds of mistakes in the entire work are consistently proven both through practice and can even be proved mathematically using statistics and probability. The more you have of something, the more likely you are to provide error towards such things. Exponentially so, in fact. I'm not sure if you'd like me to provide you with an equation or actually calculate the probability of error (or margin of error) within your posts, but given enough time I can do so.
The phrase "get to the point" isn't just lip service either, you know.
3: Tight is good
Take a look at this excerpt from a suspense novel that reads like a Real Estate ad:
The late afternoon sun streamed through the balcony-facing, floor-to-ceiling windows.
By the time the reader has stumbled through the words ‘balcony-facing’ and ‘floor-to-ceiling’, any suspense has long evaporated.
To keep your readers’ attention, you need to shake loose and discard unnecessary words.
The fix - Cut out all adjectives and adverbs and re-insert only those that are absolutely necessary.
from:
http://writetodone.com/2012/08/15/how-to-write-better/
I find them to be somewhat reliable and the tips are pretty commonplace, though tip number 3 is the only necessary one for this. Specifically, the shaking loose and discarding of unnecessary wordage.
Before I can show you why you may hold an absolutist point of view, do you know what an absolutist point of view entails with inclusion to what I had already said? If so, then re-reading over your original post should show you at least 4 points where you held an absolutist view of the situation.
Kung Lao was unfairly nerfed and many other characters went under the radar and we now know in what beasts they turned out to be.
vs
He won it with an unfairly nerfed Kung Lao.
When you stated Kung Lao was "unfairly nerfed" in the first paragraph, it would be naturally taken as opinion. It was an adverb at the time, innocent enough in describing the action of nerfing him while other characters went untouched. As someone reading your post, I would question how "unfair" such a nerf was in reference to your previous post which you even reiterated upon when you said the quote "Unfairly nerfed? GTFOU" or however it was.
However, when you took said adverb and made it an adjective to describe the character, you are no longer simply giving an opinion on the degree of nerfing but directly attributing it to the specific character that is Kung Lao. You went from saying "The degree of the nerf was unfair to Kung Lao" (opinion, could be possibly greater or lesser than the speaker believes) to "Kung Lao won despite having been nerfed to an unfair degree" (the unfair nerf is an absolute instead of a possibility, the speaker showing the nerf was unfair).
As an example.
In my opinion, by the time of the second EVO for MK9 people still didn't know how to fight Kung Lao
Opinion, as stated. Could go either way, the sample size would be too small for just the one event with a lack of personal survey of any kind. It is a possibility, but reinforced by the phrasing of "in my opinion". Non-absolute.
Some of you might not believe me or maybe your ego's will make you deny my following statement. Perfect Legend won those two EVO'S for MK9 because he knew and played the game better than all of us. He outplayed all of us (MKC). He was on a higher level than most of the MKC. Many people just panicked and cowered at his Kung Lao. People where terrified of the teleport late/instant 3, his dashing in hitting buttons etc and many people didn't do shit to punish him. Nobody abused the fact that Kung Lao had no mid hitting starting normal and could only jail you with his most useful strings after a jump in punch.
This is basically the polar opposite of the above quote, the entire thing phrased in absolution. From the top...
Some of you might not believe me or maybe your ego's will make you deny my following statement.
This has the speaker pressing his statement as truth, as evident by the "Some of you may not believe me." This turning of phrase invokes the reader to see this as a "I have the truth, its your choice to accept it." Which is further accented by the proposition of denial of said statement, with the reader's ego being called into question. Raises fault with the reader's ability to hold their own opinion in contrast. Absolute, the speaker holds their statements as something that
can be denied however does not outright admit or even hint at possible inaccuracy.
Perfect Legend won those two EVO'S for MK9 because he knew and played the game better than all of us. He outplayed all of us (MKC). He was on a higher level than most of the MKC.
All of the verbs hold no ground for leeway towards another argument. They are as the first line said, statements. They don't hold the same bearings as opinions which would be more along the lines of "He may have been on a higher level." or "He could have won because he knew and played the game better than us." All 3 sentences are absolute statements, being ones which take themselves as factual standings.
Many people just panicked and cowered at his Kung Lao.
Hyperbole. Its doubtful, but this looks to be more of an enhancer of the image presented.
People where terrified of the teleport late/instant 3, his dashing in hitting buttons etc and many people didn't do shit to punish him.
This is a statement that can go either way, he won so it can be taken as true that people weren't as strict on punishing him as they could have been, however at the same time it would be an overstatement to accept it as a whole.
Nobody abused the fact that Kung Lao had no mid hitting starting normal and could only jail you with his most useful strings after a jump in punch
This is the only statement barring the enhancement that could be taken as an acceptable absolute because of how it is worded. Using evidence and match videos, this statement would have enough of a sample to prove and justify. Regardless though, acceptable or not, it still stands as an absolute statement.
I could go on but this post is getting lengthly.
