Instigator / Pro
7
1470
rating
50
debates
40.0%
won
Topic
#2020

[Micro-debate]The presence of Blue Shells in Mario Kart games is justified

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
0
6
Better sources
4
4
Better legibility
2
2
Better conduct
1
2

After 2 votes and with 7 points ahead, the winner is...

RationalMadman
Tags
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
2
Time for argument
Two days
Max argument characters
2,500
Voting period
One week
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
14
1687
rating
555
debates
68.11%
won
Description

Blue shells are Mario Kart items. They are blue in color and they will fly to the first place driver and flip them over, causing them to often lose first place if so. Blue shells can spin out second places and/or other drivers if they are really close to 1st place.

There are entire forums about why Blue shells should not be allowed. Many Mario Kart races are ruined because of one single shell on the last lap.

I, User, will argue that Blue Shells have the right to exist and should remain existent.
You, whoever you are, will argue that Blue shells should be removed from the game.

We can use Mario Kart games as Canon, especially MK8/NX since they are the most recent Mario Kart games and it is my most experienced Mario Kart game(3 stars every 150cc cup, 1 star every 200cc cups). We could, however, use other games, and they are allowed.

Just to catch on the trend, I will use the Micro-debate format. 2500 characters as the limit and 4 sources at most.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

Argument: Con's argument of game fairness, particularly in the round 2 argument that by luck, alone, 2nd place could win. Game fairness s a fundamental. While luck can and does pla a part n all games, skill ought to be the deciding factor in game outcome. Point to Con

Sourcing: tie

S&G tie

Conduct:Pro used a Con comment outside the debate as an argument. No argument outside of debate, other than sources, ought to be entertained. Point to Con

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

To start, I nearly tied arguments. Had I done that, I would give con the conduct point for pro's unsportsmanlike out of context quotation. Con could love the Blue Shell, and in the confines of this debate still advocate against them.

So pro proves there was a reason (to make it less about luck in the early race). Con casts doubt on the soundless of that reason, as it seems to harm certain playstyles and penalize skill in favor of luck. Both seem to agree they've had to engage in powercreep as a result, which con did a very good job using to imply that the continued presence of the Blue Shells is not reasonable.

Of course the definitions should have been in the description or pro's R1, them coming up in con's closing were not ideal. This is most of why I considered tying arguments.

The final decision was made looking at the resolution. The introduction of them seems quite justified, but the current and continued presence seems dubious in light of the arguments presented.