Print

[silentbob343]

QUOTE(Deftech @ Oct 16 2006, 04:03 AM)

So yeah and...people are supposed to believe that this far off from the supposed launch?

Where in my post does it say I believe them?  You guys are free to spout off and post all sorts of wacky shit, so I figured I would post Sony's response.  I don't have a crystal ball nor can I see in to the future.  Will another delay happen for Europe,  who knows?  You can conjecture all you want, but we don't know.  Blind belief?  Again you put too much importance in these video game affairs.

[Deftech]

Thanks for finding that article mike!

[Pheidias]

Seems that Kei Sakaguchi where the only one doing the lying, they never really had a spring launch date they were just aiming for it, until Kei used his split tounge and commented on Joe Oeshas report. But I do like the spin some but on stuff    

[Deftech]

QUOTE(silentbob343 @ Oct 16 2006, 04:33 PM)

All I did was post an on-topic reply in a thread about a possible Euro delay, no additional comments, just the quote that appeared on the PS3-scene homepage and a link to it.  To which I get, "you are an idiot if you believe that and a blind sheep"  No, not exact quotes.

I assumed from you posting that link that you were showing sonys stance on it and believed it, hence my mentioning the whole spring '06 debacle. I assumed that from past posts, but now I think I was confusing you with Fetus, and I apologize.

Dont forget kids, if someones posts arent worth looking at, theres always the wonderful Ignore feature. Im sure I'll be using it again soon enough  

[Mr Invader]

QUOTE

Sony has told GamesIndustry.biz that reports the PlayStation 3 could be delayed in Europe until May next year are "categorically not true."

"Categorically not true"?. Does this mean anything different if they were to simply say, "not true"?

Leave it to Sony to add an extra word to change the entire meaning of the phrase. Just like with the price of the PS3, Sony said, "It would be worth the price, but it certainly wont be $700!" They're "categorically correct", it was 100 dollars cheaper. But it still doesn't benefit the consumers.

[Deftech]

QUOTE(silentbob343 @ Oct 16 2006, 07:41 PM)

Using the modifier "Categorically" is a more emphatic was of saying not true.  If it helps replace "Categorically" with absolutly.
Main Entry: cat·e·gor·i·cal
Pronunciation: "ka-t&-'gor-i-k&l, -'gär-
Variant(s): also cat·e·gor·ic  /-ik/
Function: adjective
Etymology: Late Latin categoricus, from Greek katEgorikos, from katEgoria
1 : ABSOLUTE, UNQUALIFIED <a categorical denial>
2 a : of, relating to, or constituting a category b : involving, according with, or considered with respect to specific categories
- cat·e·gor·i·cal·ly  /-i-k(&-)lE/ adverb

ouch I guess I'm on that list.

Now stop assuming, I never do!  

Youre not even close, the 17 on there now were terribly annoying(Most are now banned so I could remove them huh?).

[Mr Invader]

QUOTE(silentbob343 @ Oct 16 2006, 06:41 PM)

Using the modifier "Categorically" is a more emphatic was of saying not true.  If it helps replace "Categorically" with absolutly.
Main Entry: cat·e·gor·i·cal
Pronunciation: "ka-t&-'gor-i-k&l, -'gär-
Variant(s): also cat·e·gor·ic  /-ik/
Function: adjective
Etymology: Late Latin categoricus, from Greek katEgorikos, from katEgoria
1 : ABSOLUTE, UNQUALIFIED <a categorical denial>
2 a : of, relating to, or constituting a category b : involving, according with, or considered with respect to specific categories
- cat·e·gor·i·cal·ly  /-i-k(&-)lE/ adverb

yeah, pretend to be smart. But without a true release date for Europe, they could change it any time they wanted.

[silentbob343]

QUOTE(Mr Invader @ Oct 17 2006, 10:18 PM)

yeah, pretend to be smart. But without a true release date for Europe, they could change it any time they wanted.

Ok, I never said otherwise.  You asked; "Does this mean anything different if they were to simply say, "not true"...Leave it to Sony to add an extra word to change the entire meaning of the phrase." to which I responded by saying the word categorically was used to add emphasis and provided a definition, that's it.  It does not change the entire meaning of the phrase.  Don't try and paint it out like I believe Sony, I merely answered your question.

[Pheidias]

Silentbob343 I think it won't matter what you say, D and Mr invader will try to spin it into you being a fanboy everytime they aren't exactly multicolored  

[Deftech]

QUOTE(Pheidias @ Oct 18 2006, 04:56 PM)

Silentbob343 I think it won't matter what you say, D and Mr invader will try to spin it into you being a fanboy everytime they aren't exactly multicolored  

Kira, hush. Damn, another typo  

[Mr Invader]

QUOTE(silentbob343 @ Oct 18 2006, 12:27 PM)

Ok, I never said otherwise.  You asked; "Does this mean anything different if they were to simply say, "not true"...Leave it to Sony to add an extra word to change the entire meaning of the phrase." to which I responded by saying the word categorically was used to add emphasis and provided a definition, that's it.  It does not change the entire meaning of the phrase.  Don't try and paint it out like I believe Sony, I merely answered your question.

And i guess you missed my point from the beginning. You probably misunderstood me, but i wasn't actually asking what "categorically" meant. My point was that time after time, Sony slips by with either carefully chosen words, or lies.