WanderingWind
Mecklemore Is My Favorite Wrapper
Well, no. That's not hyperbole. That's not what the word means.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Adam Orth no longer with Microsoft
- Thread starter Wario64
- Start date
Well, no. That's not hyperbole. That's not what the word means.
I get that you are Adam's friend, but this story blew up because:
1. The always online nonsense
2. His flippant attitude towards everyone regarding said nonsense
If there were no rumors regarding an always online xbox, no one would have noticed and/or cared. He picked a terrible opportunity to either, break his NDA or act like a twat. He chose both. Clifford then accused everyone here as yearning for Microsoft to fire him and rejoicing when it happened. Which is categorically untrue.
Wickerbasket
Member
It's not an exaggeration when you directly quote something.
How else would you show examples of hyperbole other than quoting it? Genuinely curious.
Chie Satonaka
Member
It's funny, because he took to twitter saying he should blog about it. At that point, it should have been clear that we were going to get what we had coming to us.
And then I read it.
I haven't been served
a shit sandwich
davidjaffe
The Fucking MAN.
You are aware that industry people- myself to be sure- can be sympathetic to the arguments against ALWAYS ON while a) feeling Adam's actions were in no way proportional to the punishment and b) being willing to wait until Microsoft actually- you know- ANNOUNCES SOMETHING before I choose to attack Microsoft for a practice I'm have no idea if they are even supporting?
I've never considered myself anti consumer. Even with used games, which I HATE and wish would stop from a development standpoint, I feel consumers should buy used games if they want because they should always choose the best deal for them.
AstroZombie
Banned
Don't start none, won't be none.
Then you really should be blaming Microsoft, as they ultimately decided his fate. It's not GAF's fault.
davidjaffe
The Fucking MAN.
Agree with all you say except:
#1- He didn't break an NDA.
#2- I agree with Cliff that there is a lynch mob mentality that the gamer hive creates when it doesn't like something and there's just such a rare opportunity for shades of grey and discourse with the hive when that happens.
blitzcloud
Banned
Okay. whatever. Not my fight.
My argument about the society of information being a constraint for the society itself as freedom of speech was in 1984 was not hyperbole. If anything it's a comparison.
He's using it as a rhetorical figure of speech for creating an impression,exaggerating the effects of every (piece of) statement by gluing them together into a sentence. Apparently, that's not hyperbole.
Not making a rhethorical statement for starters.
airmangataosenai
Member
Is the game industry really so insulated that people who work in it can't comprehend of consumers being upset over a move by corporations trying to move all ownership rights over $60+ purchases? I mean, this seems pretty simple to me. The guy made a joke bordering very closely to a "Let them eat cake" mentality, he did something that would've gotten him fired in any business involving consumer products. You may not run a company Jaffe, but would you hire a guy like him? He's looking for work and you apparently think he's a pretty great guy, do him a solid!
But yeah, it's all just an Internet lynch mob guys! Give me a fucking break.
davidjaffe
The Fucking MAN.
A- they didn't. He resigned.
B- I'm not saying GAF got the guy fired. I just said I agree with Cliff about the negativity of gaming's lynch mob mentality.
Wickerbasket
Member
Statements don't inherently require a response in the first place.
Can you please explain what you mean?
Edit: I've googled it and rhetorical statement's don't seem to be a negative thing. Infact, it seems to be a positive.
There doesn't actually seem to be any rhetorical questions/statements in what you replied to however.
davidjaffe
The Fucking MAN.
Speaking for myself, I can totally see and even support a large % of the anti always on issue.
blitzcloud
Banned
How can you be upset about something you don't even know what it's like and if you'll buy. It's like people forget they can simply not buy a product?
You can quote the statements you find to be using hyperbole, quote them and tell everyone about it. By mixing them together in such a sentence, you're going for the style, which is inherently a feature of rhetorical way of speaking (sorry for using the word statement if it's not possible). And for everything I previously said, I think he's using hyperbole to emphasize the point that some people used hyperbole.
Phonomezer
Banned
Agree 100%. I said something to this effect in the thread itself.
ColonelColon
Member
They understand quite well, which is why the games media/developers will try to brand detractors of always-online DRM as hysterical weirdos who need to just "deal with it".
BlazingDarkness
Member
Times this sentiment by the thousands of people who complained about it + internet anonymity and that's what Orth brought to his own door step.
I... don't think you know what "hyperbole" means.
Out of context? Sorry, but the people he quoted were resorting to those statements to discredit the critics. All refer to the same thing: that us forum members as a whole (and in doing so, falsely constructing a single entity which they assume represents our single point of view and opinion) rejoice in the fact that a man lost his job, and were the ones responsible for it. You couldn't ask for a clearer context than that.
And what you call "adding 'ooomph'" is nothing more than quoting those phrases, commentaries and posts to show that in fact they are extremely hyperbolic. He made a statement ("Many defenders of Orth are making exaggerations") and provided proof for it. How is that hyperbole again?
If he wanted to converse or clear up that mess he started he should have. Instead he went into hiding and made his twitter private. He got called out, started to slam people for not living in an ivory tower like he does, so he started flinging shit and people are crying he got shit back in his face?
So... voting with their wallets? Weird that you'd suggest that since a lot of people around here seem to be giving Microsoft grief over doing exactly that.
airmangataosenai
Member
Ultimately this is what it'll come down to, yeah. The reason for all the anger is that the industry and top figures in it for years have been trying to develop an air of inevitability around the idea in order to discourage opposition to the move. They weren't expecting the push-back hence all the outrage over the "Lynching" of their buds like Sweet Billy.
Chie Satonaka
Member
Wait, what?
Of course we can be upset about it. Regardless of if Durango ships with always online connectivity or otherwise, the idea of it is upsetting, can, and SHOULD be discussed on a gaming enthusiast web forum.
Certainly not buying it speaks volumes, but I don't think we should temper all discussion into the "wait and see!" camp.
Wickerbasket
Member
Yeah, he didn't use any rhetorical statements or hyperbole in what he wrote though.
What he did was make everyone look bad by quoting what they wrote. There's not really a good defence against that.
Social media gives everyone a voice, for better or worse, and those voices are cumulative. It is not a lynch mob or a hive mind, it is a large contingent of individuals happening to express a similar sentiment within a larger body of diverse opinions. Among these people are some assholes, but they don't speak for everyone, and it's incredibly disingenuous to characterize it to the contrary. There is no hive mind. NeoGAF isn't a person. Gamers don't run in lockstep. Your perceptions are inaccurate.
davidjaffe
The Fucking MAN.
Well I have no idea if you are throwing me in with this group of 'industry' but this idea that we were not 'expecting the push-back' like it's some sort of shit storm that's shaken the foundations of gaming or some such shit- get over yourself, sir.
As I've said: I can be anti ALWAYS ONLINE while still thinking people have been utter assholes to Adam, well beyond the proportional response most sane folks would expect was merited.
David
blitzcloud
Banned
Oh, it was more in the line of that $60 imaginary purchase, that's what left me wondering. Yeah, I'm totally for expressing discomfort. Then again, people should express discomfort as soon as they announce it officially (which will still be way off from shipping, and this is probably a software measure so it can be modified unlike hardware).
The problem of getting so upset about it now is that people may go through the 5 stages of grief and end up accepting it before the unveil, lol.
So you think the voices of several people glued together is representative of each opinion? Good to know. Funny when we're explicitly saying that GAF is "individuals", not a "collective"... then we proceed to make an individual collective collage.
CassidyIzABeast
Member
You talk about always-online as if its SOPA. Its not that serious.
Petrae
Member
This is an attitude that's been building for some time, sir. And it's not *everyone* of course, but it's a prevailing attitude that I've been seeing-- especially over the past year. There's seemingly nobody in the consumer's corner, or at least making an attempt to understand the consumer's point of view.
On the industry side, as someone who makes a living designing, programming, managing, etc... I can kind of see it. I wouldn't endorse public disagreement with or calling out those who you depend on to buy your product. But press? There's little neutrality there. And that's the unfortunate thing.
What happened to Mr. Orth is unfortunate. Job separation is never a pleasant occasion. I feel that, had the issue stayed here and not spread to dozens and dozens of websites who basically reported that Orth's opinion mirrored Microsoft's position, there wouldn't have been such a PR nightmare to deal with. I'm not on the sideline cheering. But I do understand the end result; if an employee's public opinion creates negativity for your brand, disciplinary action is usually the result. We see this happen quite a bit, and we must learn that social media isn't the best platform on which to share certain things unless we're willing to accept the consequences that come with those comments.
lastflowers
Banned
I don't think you quite recognize how this event occurred....
And for being called pirates.
Wickerbasket
Member
When the object is to highlight the hyperbole being used in those opinions? Absolutely.
Some posters, and I stress some, have been using ridiculous hyperbole as seen in that post.
Unspeakable Evil
Member
People care way to much about what cliff and David say. What they say isn't the Gospel. They're just two dudes who made video games.
It's funny how people seem to come to this conclusion. Oh no lots of people seem to disagree with me. It can't be because I've done something wrong, no, these people are just out for blood. Let's just lump everyone together, and call it the hivemind, because that always works out well.
People tend to care more about the opinions of those they respect than of complete strangers. That's why it's sad to see them so out of touch with the consumer's concerns.
davidjaffe
The Fucking MAN.
You are under the impression- as others on this thread seem to be- that I feel NEOGAF is the tip of the anti-Orth spear. Most of the anti-Orth sentiment I've tracked has come from Twitter.
And I do see a lynch mob mentality in this, mostly because there has been enough news of this story where it was made clear where Adam was just trolling his friend but you've still got a vast majority of folks who seem to simply ignore this aspect. Makes it pretty obvious to me that many folks are just piling on (aka lynch mob).
Related: I get folks attacking my views of ALWAYS ONLINE whenever I call out the WAY folks have treated Orth. Given I've NEVER expressed support of ALWAYS ONLINE it makes the lynch mob accusation that Cliff was calling out seem pretty accurate to me. Lots of folks looking to support their narrative - in this case when it comes to Always On, a narrative I tend to think I agree with- to such a degree they are willing to ignore and toss out the facts that don't suit the story they want to be true. Very witch hunty/lynch mob to me.
airmangataosenai
Member
The last post wasn't directed at you, I saw the post where you expressed your opinion about AO. It's more just general venting about reactions to his termination that I've been reading online. Far too many working in gaming entertainment both in the journalism and developer side of the house have been quick to blame the customers for the outrage.
And yes, despite the attempts to downplay things like EA winning the Consumerist award twice in a row or top Microsoft executives getting fired, I'd say that this policy has become a pretty big deal.
VeryGooster
Banned
I think while there is indeed a number of people online who overstep their fervency, what Cliff does in his (in my opinion, hastily constructed straw-man) tirades doesn't exactly show an attempt at discourse, comes off as simply stirring the hornet's nest, and contributes to the "gaming lynch mob" he condemns.
In fact, when he last posted about EA in relation to microtransactions and the SimCity situation, and the thread about it was made here, I don't really remember seeing much interest in discussion, opting instead for the now memetic "TOO BAD, MOTHERFUCKER."
I'm not even really disagreeing that some people overdo it, but the culpability goes both ways.
Chie Satonaka
Member
Edit: Already did!
davidjaffe
The Fucking MAN.
See?!?!? This is why I cry 'lynch mob' mentality!!! Attack someone without knowing the facts- just make sure the story you want to be true can seem true. COME. THE. FUCK. ON!!!!!!
How am I out of touch with consumer's concerns?!?!
StreetsAhead
Member
EviLore, thank you.
I don't agree with the gentleman who posted about his marker story yesterday and I don't want to be associated with him. The only thing we have in common is having a NeoGAF account and to describe us (or any two people on these forums) as the same is not just disingenuous, but dismissive. There's been a plethora of opinions expressed on the forums about this issue and to paint them all as a 'lynch' mob and to try and argue against 'GAF' or 'gamers' is a trite simplification to skirt actually debating people's opinions.
EDIT: And if indeed large parts of the 'lynch' that is being spoken of occured on Twitter, then gaming journalists who ran the story without contacting Mr. Orth beforehand and solely went off the Tweets (and/or GAF Thread) were acting incredibly unprofessionally, because their dissemination of the supposed misinformation on the topic almost certainly had a far greater reach than GAF.
RobotMafia
Banned
lastflowers
Banned
It's impossible to expect every consumer to have reasonable concerns, therefore it is impossible to expect every creator to be 'in-touch' with their concerns.
I'm not saying that decrying always-online is an unreasonable concern, just that to make such a grand sweeping statement is to be completely out of touch with reality...
davidjaffe
The Fucking MAN.
David, why did you ruin Twisted Metal. It makes me sad.
I wanted to make you sad.
Mission. Fuckin. Accomplished! YES!
Wickerbasket
Member
That's one guy, not a mob. It's most likely a misunderstanding of when you said you agreed with parts of Cliff's post.
There was some real anti-consumer stuff in that post.
SlowRevolution
Member
i feel like you're yelling right into my heart when I read ALWAYS ONLINE
I wanted to make you sad.
Mission. Fuckin. Accomplished! YES!
brb posting this to n4g.
As to the "lynch mob." It's the internet. There's assholes everywhere. Consumers don't really have any way to push back, seeing as how the games media is just a mouthpiece for publishers.
blitzcloud
Banned
Then it's an attempt to ridicule by mixing hyperbole with forms of speech and genuine that quoted alone and in their full context are not as harmful as in the way he depicted? Should one take it as a personal attack when your opinion is being mixed with the opinion of others for the sake of satire?