Support NeoGAF

[blitzcloud]

The blatant denial of personal responsibility is sad to see. Always someone else's fault, or something else's fault. Never the person who makes the bad judgment call.

Orth needed to be more cognizant of his environment before he decided to joke around via a public platform. He wasn't, people picked up on it, the situation exploded, and... that was it. His thoughts. His jokes. His tweets. Him pressing that SEND button.

We complain about lack of personal responsibility when it comes to people blaming video games instead of people who screw up, commit crimes, etc. Yet here, people are blaming every other thing than the person who screwed up.

Go figure.

The society of freedom we're making is oddly similar to the one depicted in 1984: one mistep and that's it. Except there's no big brother, there's "crowd". Under normal circumstances his comment is fairly innocuous, and you have to like drama to make a deal out of it.

I don't think people are saying he didn't do something stupid. It was something worth mocking, and even a meme fad exploitable. But it went too far and that was not on his hands anymore.

 

[CaptainGyro]

God forbid someone working there has an opinion. Great working environment.

Yup, that's it. He just got fired for having an opinion. Clearly the company hates and punishes opinions.
You're making it seem like he got fired for just voicing an opinion, as if the company would also fire somebody who just tweeted " you know what? I don't think The Shawshank Redemption was all that" or "Wow bologna is really gross".

 

[Bedlam]

I bought Diablo 3 because of the gameplay. One of its big features that I LOVED was that it was so easy for my friends to join me, and for me to join their games. I didn't have to go back out to the menus, deal with lobbies, etc to play with each other. Since you were "always online" and in a server, that's what made this possible.

I would have bought the game either way, but I loved what being connected to the internet allowed.

Yes, error 37 sucked at first, but once they fixed that, the game was pretty damn fun (caveat: I'm not a huge Diablo fan so all of the issues with item loots I've read didn't really bother me, I still enjoyed the game).

What a huge [self-censored]. An optional offline mode would've been no hassle at all if implemented correctly. Instead of clicking on "start game" you click either on "multiplayer" or "singleplayer". The optional multi-player mode could've looked exactly as it is now - only, you know, optional. What's so hard to understand about that?

Example: Dark Souls. When you start up that game, you're automatically in online mode. If there is no connection, then the game automatically goes into offline-mode. That'd be one of the many viable solutions.

Look, I agree with you, but the guy just said it was no big deal to him. Did ya need to be an asshole in response?

Sorry, but the nonsensical reasoning ticked me off.

 

[WanderingWind]

redacted

Look, I agree with you, but the guy just said it was no big deal to him. Did ya need to be an asshole in response?

 

[StreetsAhead]

Back in college, I worked at a market research firm. One of the 20-somethings working with me posted on Twitter about a survey we were doing for a client, by name (hence how he was found).

Client complained and he lost his job.

You don't fuck around with company's private information.

 

[Wickerbasket]

The society of freedom we're making is oddly similar to the one depicted in 1984: one mistep and that's it. Except there's no big brother, there's "crowd". Under normal circumstances his comment is fairly innocuous, and you have to like drama to make a deal out of it.

I don't think people are saying he didn't do something stupid. It was something worth mocking, and even a meme fad exploitable. But it went too far and that was not on his hands anymore.

It's more like, with the greater reach of the internet comes more responsibility for how you act when representing a company. When you work for a high profile company you have to be more mindful with what you say and how you say it.

He wasn't forced to disclose his own name and job position, it was his own stupidity that led to this situation.

There's literally no comparison to 1984, he could have said this all anonymously and no one would have cared. It was only because of his position at MS and the attitude he gave consumers that lead to this situation.

 

[CassidyIzABeast]

Disappoints me that Jaffe agrees with that horrendous rant by Cliff. Usually I appreciate his insight.

How was it horrendous? The only questionable thing he said is that Diablo 3 sold as much as it did because of always online.

 

[Wickerbasket]

How was it horrendous? The only questionable thing he said is that Diablo 3 sold as much as it did because of always online.

Called anyone who disagreed with online only pirates, also said that those it inconveniences don't matter. It was basically one giant post of anti-consumer nonsense.

 

[Ninja Scooter]

Cliffy is right on the button about people "reveling" in a guy getting fired. That is a little crazy. People who celebrate it remind me of those crazy PTC moms in the 80s who would bitch and complain about controversial music albums and call for them to be banned. The guy made a relatively (in the grand scheme of things) harmless remark on Twitter. Yes it was really irresponsible for a person in his position, but it was fairly tame compared to other twitter comments that have gotten people in hot water.

On the other hand, the rest of his complaints should be directed at MS. They are the ones that decided that Orth's comments and actions were cause to terminate the employment (if that is what happened), not anyone on a gaming forum. It ultimately doesn't matter if you, or I, or CliffyB thinks what Orth did warranted him being fired, Microsoft did.

 

[CaptainGyro]

How was it horrendous? The only questionable thing he said is that Diablo 3 sold as much as it did because of always online.

the "well behaved people rarely make history" comment was unbelievably bad. He doesn't even understand the original meaning of the line. It doesn't fit this situation at all

 

[Foxy Fox 39]

Cliffy is right on the button about people "reveling" in a guy getting fired. That is a little crazy. People who celebrate it remind me of those crazy PTC moms in the 80s who would bitch and complain about controversial music albums and call for them to be banned. The guy made a relatively (in the grand scheme of things) harmless remark on Twitter. Yes it was really irresponsible for a person in his position, but it was fairly tame compared to other twitter comments that have gotten people in hot water.

On the other hand, the rest of his complaints should be directed at MS. They are the ones that decided that Orth's comments and actions were cause to terminate the employment (if that is what happened), not anyone on a gaming forum. It ultimately doesn't matter if you, or I, or CliffyB thinks what Orth did warranted him being fired, Microsoft did.

Yeah. Still a shame.

 

[mullet2000]

The society of freedom we're making is oddly similar to the one depicted in 1984: one mistep and that's it. Except there's no big brother, there's "crowd". Under normal circumstances his comment is fairly innocuous, and you have to like drama to make a deal out of it.

I don't think people are saying he didn't do something stupid. It was something worth mocking, and even a meme fad exploitable. But it went too far and that was not on his hands anymore.

It's not like 1984 at all.

The guy signed an NDA not to talk about Durango, and he did so anyway, with a little bit of tip-toeing around the actual word "Durango".

When you do that, yeah, it's probably going to be one misstep and you're done. In this way it has nothing to do with him as an individual - anyone who did what he did would have been let go the same way he was.

It was always in his hands. He chose to say what he said, it's his fault. What was "the internet" suppose to do? Not talk about it? It's not our job to not talk about information that's put onto our lap, especially information like what he was talking about that has been rumored heavily for a long time now. To top it all off he was antagonistic to people about it, putting more fuel on the fire for people to talk about it.

It's sad that he lost his job, but he only has himself to blame. It's not our job to not talk about him messing up and it's not our job to not talk about a feature we've been wondering about for months.

 

[cpp_is_king]

The society of freedom we're making is oddly similar to the one depicted in 1984: one mistep and that's it. Except there's no big brother, there's "crowd". Under normal circumstances his comment is fairly innocuous, and you have to like drama to make a deal out of it.

I don't think people are saying he didn't do something stupid. It was something worth mocking, and even a meme fad exploitable. But it went too far and that was not on his hands anymore.

It didn't go too far. People are acting like the dude's family got executed. He'll find another job, and hopefully he'll learn his lesson. It's not a big deal.

I think the people who are freaking out about him losing his job have never worked with sensitive information or in a public facing role before. With great power comes great responsibility.

People have been fired for much less, I can promise you that.

 

[blitzcloud]

It's more like, with the greater reach of the internet comes more responsibility for how you act when representing a company. When you work for a high profile company you have to be more mindful with what you say and how you say it.

He wasn't forced to disclose his own name and job position, it was his own stupidity that led to this situation.

There's literally no comparison to 1984, he could have said this all anonymously and no one would have cared. It was only because of his position at MS and the attitude he gave consumers that lead to this situation.

we have seen things happen to people that do not have a responsability. I'm all for the idea that you have to be responsible of what you say and not blame everyone else.

In this case though, people meddled into the conversation of two individuals that were in fact just having a hangout via quick messages as if they had been insulted themselves! some people need to fabricate drama as a method of coping with their own life better, and the media loves fabricated drama.

It is like 1984, mullet, in the sense that the internet is becoming a big brother database in which you put leftovers of data that pile up to create a profile of you. This case is not the most clear about what i'm saying, but some internet detective jobs, when targeting individuals, seem like the work of various ministries from the fictional novel.

 

[stufte]

Cliffy is right on the button about people "reveling" in a guy getting fired. That is a little crazy. People who celebrate it remind me of those crazy PTC moms in the 80s who would bitch and complain about controversial music albums and call for them to be banned. The guy made a relatively (in the grand scheme of things) harmless remark on Twitter. Yes it was really irresponsible for a person in his position, but it was fairly tame compared to other twitter comments that have gotten people in hot water.

On the other hand, the rest of his complaints should be directed at MS. They are the ones that decided that Orth's comments and actions were cause to terminate the employment (if that is what happened), not anyone on a gaming forum. It ultimately doesn't matter if you, or I, or CliffyB thinks what Orth did warranted him being fired, Microsoft did.

This is the most correct. I'm appalled that some people are out for blood over a video game topic. Video games.

 

[Wickerbasket]

we have seen things happen to people that do not have a responsability. I'm all for the idea that you have to be responsible of what you say and not blame everyone else.

In this case though, people meddled into the conversation of two individuals that were in fact just having a hangout via quick messages as if they had been insulted themselves! some people need to fabricate drama as a method of coping with their own life better, and the media loves fabricated drama.

Well now he'll know not to post his private messages in a public forum, especially on an account which ties him to his job. He'll also know in future not to comment on company rumours or speculation, as I'm sure that's what led to him being "retired".

There would be no drama if not for his comments and they way he put them across. He wasn't only responding to his friend, which some people seem to want to forget.

The guy cost MS a ton of bad PR, when you attach your name and company to your online profile what you say online has consequences.

Edit: Also, it doesn't take an internet detective when your full name and job description is attached to your tweet account; he wasn't hiding anything.

 

[MyAbsolution]

Just like its unfair to label all of GAF as haters and a mob that revels in someone losing their job... (sure some do, thats wrong)

It is equally UNFAIR to label all those who oppose always-online as pirates.

 

[blitzcloud]

Well now he'll know not to post his private messages in a public forum, especially on an account which ties him to his job. He'll also know in future not to comment on company rumours or speculation, as I'm sure that's what led to him being "retired".

There would be no drama if not for his comments and they way he put them across. He wasn't only responding to his friend, which some people seem to want to forget.

The guy cost MS a ton of bad PR, when you attach your name and company to your online profile what you say online has consequences.

So what you're saying is that we should always be polite, respectful and wise. I think I fit into the category without many problems. Today. A few years back maybe not so much. And unlike many people I stick to my nickname.

I can foresee getting fired over something I said when I was 16.

Just like its unfair to label all of GAF as haters and a mob that revels in someone losing their job... (sure some do, thats wrong)

It is equally UNFAIR to label all those who oppose always-online as pirates.

Is it fair to generalize that the always online method will fail because servers fell on 2 always online games?

Is it fair to take every sample of opinion as a generalization about a collective?

 

[xelios]

Cliffy is right on the button about people "reveling" in a guy getting fired. That is a little crazy.

This is the guy who couldn't wait to make a stupid quip about a critic of "video games as art" dying. Lecturing others on respecting someone who just lost their job. Sorry but I'm going to request my moral outrage come from a little higher up the food chain.

 

[Neuromancer]

Can someone link me the Jaffe blog post/whatever it was? Thanks.

 

[Zabka]

Is it fair to generalize that the always online method will fail because servers fell on 2 always online games?

Is it fair to take every sample of opinion as a generalization about a collective?

Absolutely. Every single online game ever has downtime. It is inevitable.

Not to mention issues like the recent hurricane that knocked out internet for weeks to months in some areas. You might as well use your console as a footwarmer in that situation.

 

[ThatObviousUser]

Disappoints me that Jaffe agrees with that horrendous rant by Cliff. Usually I appreciate his insight.

Jaffe, insight?

 

[MyAbsolution]

Is it fair to generalize that the always online method will fail because servers fell on 2 always online games?

Is it fair to take every sample of opinion as a generalization about a collective?

You make two generalization statements that you are... assuming I agree with?

You just defeated your own point but i see where you were going.

 

[Chie Satonaka]

Absolutely. Every single online game ever has downtime. It is inevitable.

Not to mention issues like the recent hurricane that knocked out internet for weeks to months in some areas. You might as well use your console as a footwarmer in that situation.

As an aside, CenturyLink randomly decided they were going to be "upgrading the connection" in my area without bothering to notify me or any of the other users in my area.

We were offline for 15 hours.

I get that we live in a reality where a lot of people have blazing fast, super reliable internet, but that's not the case for everyone. It's just weird. I don't understand why anyone would defend an always online philosophy that ISN'T directly involved in the games industry. Even a fanboy should be able to recognize that it potentially alienates customers and isn't the best idea for someone's bottom line.

If this is all true, it sounds like Microsoft is really betting the farm on the new audience the console will potentially bring.

 

[blitzcloud]

Absolutely. Every single online game ever has downtime. It is inevitable.

Not to mention issues like the recent hurricane that knocked out internet for weeks to months in some areas. You might as well use your console as a footwarmer in that situation.

indeed that seems like it. However, on the bright side, focussing on always online might have some benefits, and even though right now the market for ISP kinda stalled, google is starting gigabit projects and in a few years we may see that always online is a lot better.

who am I kidding, I just can't defend it. I see no reason to be always online. If we ever get to the point of always online being a possibility, making it so is easy even in the middle of a console generation...

unless, of course, it's not clear at the time of purchase. That would lead to a shitstorm.

You make two generalization statements that you are... assuming I agree with?

You just defeated your own point but i see where you were going.

I didn't make statements. I was genuinely asking. Nothing about making generalizations is good. But some generalizations seem to be on the eye of the beholder, not the one who stated it.

 

[StreetsAhead]

Also, remember that tester from TT who posted the 'updated' Wii U controller with clicky sticks? Fired, too.

You don't get to fuck around with company secrets.

 

[Branduil]

CliffyB's wife: sometimes I am on a trip and play a videogame for entertainment for some period of time

CliffyB: it would be cool if you were not allowed to do that

LOL

The anti-consumer attitudes on display from journalists and developers alike are exactly why this us vs. them mentality has developed. It's YOUR fault, industry, and you need to own up to your disdain for consumers. I don't expect you to, though, which is why this antagonism stands no chance of ending.

 

[Darkmakaimura]

This is the guy who couldn't wait to make a stupid quip about a critic of "video games as art" dying. Lecturing others on respecting someone who just lost their job. Sorry but I'm going to request my moral outrage come from a little higher up the food chain.

Reveling in Orth losing his job over his dumb and douchy Twitter really isn't much better than Orth themselves. The death threats sent to Orth should be rightfully reported to authorities.

That said, Orth still deserved disciplinary action. He's still represents his company and a product. Add that he might have broke a non disclosure agreement makes even more sense. I mentioned before I worked for one of the major console companies as lowly tech support but even we were sternly warned about sharing any information and would be disciplined appropriately. Internet forums and places like MySpace were mentioned (pre-FB and Twitter popularity days). This included even "hinting" at things we were privy to.

 

[[HP]]

If anything, this made me extremely paranoid about what I post on twiter

 

[CaptainGyro]

This is the most correct. I'm appalled that some people are out for blood over a video game topic. Video games.

I love all the hyperbole and blowing out of proportion that is being used. So far this is a "lynching" by people who were in "utter hysterics" and "out for blood" in a society "oddly depicted in 1984", all because "God forbid someone working there has an opinion".

It's more like a shitload of people voiced their displeasure about an employee telling them to to "deal with" their anti-consumer BS. There is absolutely nothing wrong with letting a company know that you don't just want to "deal with it". That's what you're supposed to do.

 

[davidjaffe]

Drives me fucking ape shit that so many on the net can't comprehend what they read. And/or jump to any conclusion they can concoct in order to support a narrative they are committed to, regardless of facts.

AKA:

I NEVER said I was pro always on. I never said anything about that.

I was supporting Cliff's anti-lynch mob statements.

David

 

[JDSN]

At the end of the day, developers are gonna look out for each other and defend the industry with no discrimination. Ditto on journalists protecting their future jobs as community managers.

Shame that the most insightful games journalists of this decade (Green and Elliots) move on to better things.

 

[blitzcloud]

I love all the hyperbole and blowing out of proportion that is being used. So far this is a "lynching" by people who were in "utter hysterics" and "out for blood" in a society "oddly depicted in 1984", all because "God forbid someone working there has an opinion".

It's more like a shitload of people voiced their displeasure about an employee telling them to to "deal with" their anti-consumer BS. There is absolutely nothing wrong with letting a company know that you don't just want to "deal with it". That's what you're supposed to do.

Your post is nothing short of hyperbole, oddly enough.

 

[Wickerbasket]

So what you're saying is that we should always be polite, respectful and wise. I think I fit into the category without many problems. Today. A few years back maybe not so much. And unlike many people I stick to my nickname.

I can foresee getting fired over something I said when I was 16.

Fortunately the guy didn't lose his job for something he said when he was younger, he lost it for commenting on a heated rumour when, most likely, it was company policy to make no comment.

You appear to be talking about some other situation where someone has lost their job for something they've said 10 old years ago. That situation isn't what happened here, and if you'd like to talk about that then maybe OT would be a suitable place for a thread on it.

Just as a general rule though, don't be rude to customers when you represent your company. It's a fast way to lose your job.

 

[blitzcloud]

Fortunately the guy didn't lose his job for something he said when he was younger, he lost it for commenting on a heated rumour when, most likely, it was company policy to make no comment.

You appear to be talking about some other situation where someone has lost their job for something they've said 10 old years ago. That situation isn't what happened here, and if you'd like to talk about that then maybe OT would be a suitable place for a thread on it.

Just as a general rule though, don't be rude to customers when you represent your company. It's a fast way to lose your job.

I'm just talking about how things are shaping up to be in the society of information, when a collective patch of work can flip your entire life if you did/do something stupid. Sometimes it does good too: read, kickstarter millionaire for funding daughter rpg game.

 

[Mr. Enigma]

Here's an idea:

Don't want a lynch mob after you? Don't say unbelievably stupid shit in public. Sounds easy to me.

Also: understand times have changed and everything you say or do is about 30 seconds away from being all over the Internet. For someone who was so pro-Internet like Orth, it's amazing he didn't seem to realize that.

 

[Wickerbasket]

I'm just talking about how things are shaping up to be in the society of information, when a collective patch of work can flip your entire life if you did/do something stupid. Sometimes it does good too: read, kickstarter millionaire for funding daughter rpg game.

That's why most company have a social networking policy, it's to prevent stuff like this. It's not smart to attach your real name and company to your online rants, it's common sense.

The size and reach of the internet magnifies any stupid action you do on it and the consequences with that.

 

[Zephyrus]

So what you're saying is that we should always be polite, respectful and wise. I think I fit into the category without many problems. Today. A few years back maybe not so much. And unlike many people I stick to my nickname.

I can foresee getting fired over something I said when I was 16.



Is it fair to generalize that the always online method will fail because servers fell on 2 always online games?

Is it fair to take every sample of opinion as a generalization about a collective?

It absolutely is since those games were highly anticipated.

When I buy (key word BUY. Not lent. BUY) something, I expect to use it immediatly.

I bought a car? Well I'm driving it home. I don't need to have neon on it before I can use it.

I bought a TV? Well I'm using it as soon as I get home. I don't need cable on it before I can watch something.

I bought a console? Well I'm playing something as soon as I get home. I shouldn't have to connect it online before I can play anything that isn't MP only.


If in this gen always online was demanded, I'd have sitted at home with a 600 euros paperweight for 4 months. That's how long it took to get the internet in my home, and only because I finally needed it in order to study and do homework.



And this gen. What happens if I go on vacation but take my console only to find there's no wi-fi spot in my vacation house/motel/hotel?

Tough luck? Deal with it?

I bought the console and a damn game for it so I should damn well be allowed to play it where I damn well want it. It's my game. It's my console. I paid for both of them.

I'm not being lent anything where I have to subject to the owner's TOS.

I paid for the products.

 

[GillianSeed79]

Isn't it possible that he was fired for hinting at the always on rumors to be true?

Anyway, I don't get what the fuss his about. The guy made those tweets. If those tweets got him fired then it's only his own fault. People need to realize that Twitter is public ground.

It probably wasn't the tweets themselves that got him fired or their insulting tone, it was probably the 30 or so different news stories that his tweets generated that circulated around the world on the internet and in publications. Microsoft is a mult-billion dollar corporation that goes to great lengths to enforce NDA's and prevent leaks by even keeping shit secret about the Durango from their own employees. Then there's the whole we don't "comment on rumor or speculation."

Twitter trolling or not, you don't want to be the guy that intentionally or unintentionally leaks potential information about an unannounced product that will place your company in a bad light with its consumers.

I said this in the other thread: I was offended about his comments about people that live in rural communities, but I kind of feel bad that the guy lost his job and he's probably kicking himself or drowning himself in alcohol for making such a stupid mistake. We all make mistakes, he just happened to make a big one on Twitter for all the world to see.

The fact is that there has been months of negative rumors about the possibility of Durango being always online. By representing Microsoft and suggesting that it may be a possibility, Orth became the focus of the entire internet's rage at the idea of always online. Like I said in the other thread, if the Durango is always online, it wasn't probably Orth's call to implement that feature. The real ire should be directed at the suits who think it's a good idea.

He still acted like a dick, on Twitter no less, to Microsoft's consumers and community.

Microsoft wants to carefully control and craft their message for the Durango and this guy threw a wrench into their public image for a lot of people before MS even had a chance to publicly unveil the console under their terms and marketing message (blegh).

I mean, there's even speculation Microsoft had to covertly peform damage control by way of the recent slate of rumors that Durango won't be always online as everyone feared immediately and convieniently after this PR disaster.

I feel bad the guy got fired, but he brought it on himself. I just think maybe we shouldn't be kicking him while he's down or spiking the football. Not that everyone is doing that, but there are certainly people celebrating his professional and likely public image demise.

I can hate what the guy said, but still feel empathy that the guy lost his job and became an internet meme overnight. I don't know what I'd do if I were him. I'd probably be considering jumping off the nearest bridge I'd be so embarrassed and depressed.

 

[MyAbsolution]

Drives me fucking ape shit that so many on the net can't comprehend what they read. And/or jump to any conclusion they can concoct in order to support a narrative they are committed to, regardless of facts.

AKA:

I NEVER said I was pro always on. I never said anything about that.

I was supporting Cliff's anti-lynch mob statements.

David

You are mad that people are putting words in your mouth.

People are mad that they are being called out as lynch mob out for blood haters reveling in the job loss of one man.

 

[orznge]

Famous Game Designer Who Perfected The Vaseline-Smear Art Style Pastes Platitudes From Teen Girl's Facebook Profile

 

[Acorn]

LOL

The anti-consumer attitudes on display from journalists and developers alike are exactly why this us vs. them mentality has developed. It's YOUR fault, industry, and you need to own up to your disdain for consumers. I don't expect you to, though, which is why his antagonism stands no chance of ending.

This. Their goal is to maximise fleecing and diminish rights, consumers job is to resist being fleeced and fight for our rights. But so many willingly give up their rights that inevitably companies win. Its the same in any industry right now.

Nobody cares or is too lethargic to do anything.

 

[xelios]

Drives me fucking ape shit that so many on the net can't comprehend what they read. And/or jump to any conclusion they can concoct in order to support a narrative they are committed to, regardless of facts.

I know, right? Drives me ape that they can't comprehend why Adam Orth really lost his job, so they completely ignore the facts and create this whole "internet/GAF" boogeyman scapegoat.

 

[RionaaM]

Your post is nothing short of hyperbole, oddly enough.

Can you show me the parts of his post which delved into hyperbole? No matter how hard I try, I can't see it at all.

 

[Road of Ease]

I disagree with CliffyB on "always online" and disagree with him on the Adam Orth debacle. We interpreted these things differently, but he was very articulate and reasonable in his writing. It certainly wasn't a "rant".

I'm not happy that Adam lost his job, but let's not forget that his attitude made Microsoft look very bad in the eyes of their customers.

 

[BlazingDarkness]

Blaming GAF for any of this is ridiculous - every website and community that was privy to the Orth debacle reacted in the exact same way GAF did, it may have started with GAF but it wasn't this website that orchestrated the reaction.

 

[Camp Lo]

Blaming GAF for any of this is ridiculous - every website and community that was privy to the Orth debacle reacted in the exact same way GAF did, it may have started with GAF but it wasn't this website that orchestrated the reaction.

To be fair,

GAF > internet > GAF

 

[Dibbz]

How can a person even come to the conclusion that Diablo 3 sold what it did because it had shitty DRM? Come the fuck on. Diablo 3 sold because it was the sequel to Diablo fucking 2.

CliffyB sure does think highly of himself though, so I'm not surprised he comes up with shit like that. The all knowing CliffyB giving everyone a lesson right there.

 

[Petrae]

The anti-consumer attitudes on display from journalists and developers alike are exactly why this us vs. them mentality has developed. It's YOUR fault, industry, and you need to own up to your disdain for consumers. I don't expect you to, though, which is why his antagonism stands no chance of ending.

I can remember a time when I thought that at least gaming press was on the consumer's side. Industry information that was passed on was generally positive. We got excited to play games based on how they were shown to us. Gaming press was more enthusaist-based.

Now, there's a perception that gaming press and the industry are allies and it's a battle with consumers. Consumers are "entitled". We always want more, or too much. We are told how to react, how to behave, what to think.

I get that gaming press develops relationships with industry folks, and it's normal to stick up for your friends, but who does the consumer have? Nobody, really.

So it's an "us versus them" situation. Sad, really. And it gets exacerbated when industry folks pile on.

This problem won't get resolved quickly, if ever. It's just unfortunate to see. There's more contentiousness than excitement. And it makes me long for the "good old days."

 

[blitzcloud]

Can you show me the parts of his post which delved into hyperbole? No matter how hard I try, I can't see it at all.

Patchwork of different statements by different people out of context to add "ooomph" to the statement about people doing hyperbole?

Oddly familiar to the case of Orth too!