Here is the one fact that you need. Things that are comparable will always have objectively better aspects and subjective aspects. There is no denying that. I doubt you are capable of realizing this because your rebuttal was essentially the same one you used to the person who wrote the objectively better aspects Borderlands has over Destiny which leads me to believe that you can not provide an argument for your way of "everything is subjective in comparisons" style of thinking. I'm not saying that your not allowed to think Destiny is better because that's not the point of my argument and I don't believe that would make the comparison in my OP interesting if Borderlands held everything over Destiny and I do believe that two games are on a similar level of quality with the subjective aspects of Borderlands winning me over.

The response was the same because the argument's the same. Let's take a specific example. #5 - "Greater Enemy Variety" Borderlands has a few main "groups", Bandits, Robots, Hyperion. Then they have differing scales of each - the same enemy could then have a midget version or a badass version. Destiny has a few main "groups" as well, Cabal, Vex, Fallen. Then there are differing scales of each - Knight, Hallowed Knight. (Sorry, no Midget Knights) In any meaningful way, they're essentially the same. Borderlands does have a few random mobs that don't have an analogue in Destiny, like Skags, but what is it that they do differently that makes it "better" ? Various enemies on both sides have "specials" like shooting the head off the Goliath and it rages and punches it's friends, shooting Vex in the head instead of the magical belly button make them go nuts and charge you. If you want to look purely at the numbers, counting enemies, (the objective measurement) the list is accurate and BL2 does have more enemy types than Destiny. However is it meaningful, does it make one game better over the other (the subjective measurement) is always going to be a matter of opinion. I could create a game with 100 different enemy types. If they all used the same attack, who cares? Kind of like Destiny's recycled Halo mechanics. Hobgoblins have Armor Lock. Cabal Phalanxes are essentially really fat Jackals. Bungie can say "Look at these new enemies" but to us it's old news and isn't a defining factor.

Objectively Bl does have the greater variety which extends well past "midgets". Subjectively you may prefer how Destiny went about their variety. The fact still remains that Borderlands has greater variety and that's not subjective because we can quantitatively state that there are more I.e greater amounts of unique enemies in Borderlands than Destiny.

I acknowledged that by the objective measurement, yes there are more enemies... but your OP was not "Borderlands has more enemies than Destiny". Your topic claims that "Borderlands is Better Than Destiny" - whether or not the additional enemies actually back up that assertion is the subjective measurement. You may believe it does, frankly I don't. So there you go.

Let's ignore the OP as it was simply a way to rustle jimmies and I believe this is a quality debate that we are having. I also believe that you have acknowledged the point that I was trying to get across and that's all I cared to prove. The truth is that there are so many subjective aspects that ultimately the comparison is subjective, but the objective aspects are simply indisputable and arguing against those aspects is futile but the importance of those objective aspects is subjective in its own right.

But that would mean that we've agreed somehow. I think we did this wrong.