Topic: Hobbes' Theorem on Over/under rating

Theorem: No game is over rated or under rated. All games are merely rated.

Proof: For every person who claims a game is over rated, there will be at least one person who claims it is under rated. Likewise, for every person who claims a game is under rated, there will be at least one person who claims it is over rated. As the number of people claiming one way for any given game approaches infinity, so to does the number of people claiming the opposite, thus canceling each other out. Since the difference between over rated claimers and under rated claimers is zero, a game is merely rated. This holds for all games.

I think this theorem is overrated

The concept of overrated or underrated is silly to begin with. All it says is whether the average rating is above or below your personal rating, which is not inherently better than any other rating to begin with. Except for mine.

So...........if I say that Halo is overrated, there is some Halo fanboy out there who thinks it's underrated?

Almost certainly, lz.

Does said theorem take the variable of fanyboyism (which eats logic like cancer) regarding reviews into account?

What if I somehow convinced those fanboys to hate Halo and think it's overrated?

Fanboyism helps balance the whole equation. Otherwise, games such as Halo would cause problems with the whole idea

It's just a matter of opinion, in the big picture.

Actually the theorem does not work.
Proof: Infinity minus infinity is indeterminate. Infinity cannot be treated as a number and no infinity may be equal. Infinity is a concept not a constant. Also, they will not be equal as I highly doubt any Halo fanboy would say that Halo is underrated. Someone may say a game is overrated because it is really popular, if it is really popular, you think there are a lot of people thinking it is underrated. Basically, you are subtracting two variables which may grow at different rates. Sure, x^2^ - x^3^ may be equal at certain points, but not all the way throughout their domain. I explained that better with math than I did with actual examples O.O

@Ravage: Fanboys ruin all logic

@lz: Then I am ruining a good bit of logic.

I never claimed they were at infinity. Just some number approaching it. The limit of the difference would approach zero

My theorem:

For every theorem involving talk of a debate that nobody could be right about, people will start to debate the new theorem in the same manner.

You can't possibly know that for sure, MetalMario, without testing every theorem imaginable. I disagree with your theorem. Let's debate it.

Theorem: if we all stopped worrying about whether or not a game is under or over rated by the majority and just thought about what we thought about it individually, and on the merits of those we trust (ie, the reviewers we choose to read before deciding what game to buy) then the whole problem eats itself and we're all better off for it. I couldn't care less whether X game is overrated or Y game is underrated, it makes absolutely squat difference to my own personal enjoyment (or lack thereof) playing it.