My response, as a gamer and developer, when yet another guy tries to explain how "mercurial is so much easier to use":

Git gud

Mercurial with its "branch-is-a-full-copy-in-another-directory"-concept is more like the backup1.zip-backup2.zip-backup3.zip-strategy of non-VCS-users.
So they can use their known tools for diff and merge without learning how to really use the VCS.

It would be better to know your tool, but it's always the same "If you only have a hammer, every problem looks like a nail"

@ddephor I think you are confusing mercurial with SVN.

From what I know, mercurial's branches are much like git's.

@shellbug I didn't mean SVN. AFAIK the preferred way of branching in Mercurial is cloning the repository and Mercurial supports working over several clones.

Mercurial also has "named branches", which is the equivalent to git branches, but they are not very popular.

@ddephor Wtf? If they have branches why do they do that?

@shellbug According to mercurial tutorials it's "easier to understand" if branches live in their own directory.

Not my kind of mindset, that would drive me crazy, but luckily I don't have to use mercurial, so I don't care.