To be honest, I think you're simply throwing stuff at the wall and seeing what sticks.
Nope.
The game was bad competitively, thus people did not enjoy playing it in a competitive environment (even when they did go, it was for money and not game itself as can be widely attested by anyone in attendance), thus it was not played. This is not theory or opinion, it's recorded history with an encyclopedia of facts backing it up.
That's phrased with bias, and is again an opinion that you want to indicate as fact. There may be a lot of facts that support your opinion (which seems to be a hypothesis). From a ridiculously unnecessary but technically accurate standpoint, it would read:
"A large proportion of the DOA community has been observed (scale req.) not enjoying the competitive aspects of DOA4 as much as previous titles (stat req.). The intent of the tournaments involving the game were strictly commercial and did not emphasize the technical, competitive nature of the game, as indicated by some (source req.), and it is believed that this (an observably less competitive fighting build, scale req.) was an indication that the primary independent variable as to why proportionally less players played the game than previous installments (C.I. req.). This is my hypothesis, which is supported through the empirical data of my observations as can be viewed through enyclopedias (source req.) and facts (source req.)."
Each fact lead to the other. That's all that has been said here, and not a single portion of that argument can be refuted.
It most certainly can (proving causality is very difficult). Not that if the above experiment were run I believe it would prove false (I actually speculate it would be very accurate), but that does not change the context of the word "bad." That word is always subjective. No testing can change that. It's a word that is socially constructed and applied to different perspectives.
It has nothing to do with Hive minds or Jesus. It has everything to do with the fact that it was a bad game.
Agreed and disagreed. It has to deal with a perception of "bad."
Now if you choose not to accept that reality, then that is on you. Something tells me however, that this is largely because you were not actually one of the people playing the game in tournaments and running into the same roadblocks as everyone else was.
This is not where the opinion grows from either, it is still a fact that the game is bad competitively. A man who never comes out during the day can think the sun does not exist, but this is not so.
Your "reality" is subjective, and is constructed based on your cognitive bias.
I think there may be some confusion. I'm not arguing that it was competitively viable. In fact, quite the opposite. Hopefully everyone's aware of that.
@Awesmic: This is how I chill. I don't get worked up in debates. I actually find them calming, and I like hearing others' opinions on matters, even if they differ from mine. Others' opinions are particularly amusing when the individual refuses to acknowledge it's even an opinion. Perception is such an intriguing human condition.
edit: Well this turned out to be a long post. I don't hold it against anyone if they don't read the whole thing. =P