I frankly don't understand why Queso lost it a little bit there. It was a perfectly reasonable line of questions and discussion, and very reasonable to, upon facing a very strong correlation, to actually ask what's causing it.
I didn't lose shit.
It was a reasonable line of questions and discussion... back when we did the whole line of questions and discussion the first time some weeks ago.
Then the same questions come back. And the same responses, and the same challenges to positions I'm not even taking.
All I've EVER stated, was that the data correlates, and my HYPOTHESIS is that it's not the audience moving away from packaged console games, but rather publishers.
I never said that the hypothesis was the truth. I never claimed it could be proven. I never claimed that the correlation is foolproof.
THERE'S NO WAY TO PROVE THAT A CAUSAL RELATIONSHIP EXISTS. I've said that over and over.
There's no way to estimate the impact of digital, because no reliable source of digital data exists.
So when I'm hounded again and again by certain users to PROVE my hypothesis with unquestionable proof, and I say that I cannot do that, nor am I claiming I am able to, I get the same line of questions again.
WTF am I supposed to do? The data isn't available to solve for X. It just isn't.
So why would anyone continue to engage in discussing a topic when they've already admitted the limitations to what they're presenting, that there are a number of unknown factors, and a number of unmeasurable, unknown influencers?
It's like people want to throw away what limited data that DOES exist because a bunch of stuff DOES NOT exist.
It's a waste of everyone's time.