Support NeoGAF

[family_guy]

But iPad sales go down every year. Don't you think console, a much niche product, should be worry about slow adoption rate?

Doesn't matter if unit sales go down. The millions of iPads out there can largely use the same apps so there's still plenty of money to be made. Slow adoption rates don't matter as much if you're business model remains profitable. High adoption rates were more important when console makers were typically taking a loss on hardware.

 

[b3b0p]

Colin is the reason I have a hard time listening to their podcast.

I don't even think he likes games or playing them.

He is negative, pessimistic, selfish, and sounds miserable and always tired.

He makes statements that he acts like or claims are facts on the podcast, but never backs it up with where he gets the information or the source. He acts like he knows. It's frustrating to hear.

He makes their podcast a hard to listen to miserable experience. His co-host however, is positive, fun, enjoyable, and always sounds extremely happy and energetic.

Regarding his tweet and the topic of this thread, I want to know how many developers? 1, 2, 50? How many development studios / companies are these developers spread across? Were these all in the same studio? What kind of developers? What range of titles or backgrounds do these developers have?

Without any information except what he has stated I call bullshit and take his statement as just that. A statement, of his opinion.

 

[nib95]

Releasing 2 models at the same time does not help Sony .
Unless they plan to do it 3 years later again .
Releasing a model a few yeas later help them in many ways .
It allows them to react faster for software and hardware , it allows them to get people buying the system twice .
They can have a high and low price at all time ,cause certain gamers to be hype about hardware again .
That is just to name a few points .

Just to clarify, most people who buy the PS4K who already bought the PS4, are likely going to fund the new purchase by reselling or trading in their existing PS4, and the sale of that traded in second hand PS4 still means one less 'new' hardware sale for Sony. In other words, Sony could gain a new PS4K sale from an existing PS4 buyer, but potentially lose a sale from whoever buys their second hand PS4 unit. Though it still paves the way for accessory and software sales which Sony could profit from.

Also, whilst a mid-cycle release does allow them to be a bit more reactionary in terms of tech advancements, I'm not really sure hype and media attention is necessarily all one sided or positive. As the leaks of the PS4K show, it's drawn as much negativity as it has positivity, as many existing PS4 owners are pre-emptively feeling short changed, or others are annoyed at the prospect of having to spend more money on mid cycle iterative console releases.

Anecdotal I know, but throughout the day I've been talking to my casual gaming friends and relatives about this, and I'd say the majority (though not all) have had largely negative outlooks or responses to the news. A few who don't yet own PS4's however, seemed more optimistic about it, though their optimism seemed dependant on the price of the new system.

 

[Moneal]

Doesn't matter if unit sales go down. The millions of iPads out there can largely use the same apps so there's still plenty of money to be made. Slow adoption rates don't matter as much if you're business model remains profitable. High adoption rates were more important when console makers were typically taking a loss on hardware.

Yep profits have always been in software, and now services. Allowing 2 or even three hardware models to run the same software, at different levels of performance, makes sense from sony's perspective. They don't need everyone to buy the newest hardware, if people are buying the software to play on older models and paying for services(psplus, vue, etc.). They just need to keep 70+ million on their supported hardware models total. The console space is changing towards the ios model.

 

[AuthenticM]

I'm listening to the PS I Love You podcast. I have listened to quite a bit of them so far, and I think I am now realizing that I dislike Colin. He's loud and petulant. He sounds like a boy who throws tantrum when things don't go as he wants them to. Right now, he's not even being rational. He's just repeating "MIDDLE FINGER FUCK YOU FUCK THIS SLAP IN THE FACE RAH RAH RAH".

Like, chill dude.

 

[nib95]

I'm listening to the PS I Love You podcast. I have listened to quite a bit of them so far, and I think I am now realizing that I dislike Colin. He's loud and petulant. He sounds like a boy who throws tantrum when things don't go as he wants them to. Right now, he's not even being rational. He's just repeating "MIDDLE FINGER FUCK YOU FUCK THIS SLAP IN THE FACE RAH RAH RAH".

Like, chill dude.

Link to the podcast in question?

 

[AuthenticM]

Link to the podcast in question?

https://soundcloud.com/psiloveyouxoxo/ps4-neo-reaction-ps-i-love-you-xoxo-ep-32

I'm 20 minutes in. I have stopped counting the number of times he's yelled "IT'S A DISASTER". He's really insufferable.

edit: youtube link

 

[The God]

Because then you'd effectively be screwing over previous model owners, in a much shorter time frame than is typical of most generation cycles. In other words each purchase of the said console would have much less value proposition. Far fewer people would be likely to buy a console that was going to be phased out in just a few years. Add to that, you'd be left with smaller and smaller install bases, that means less software sales for developers. Eg right now the PS4 has an install base of 40 million, throwing that away with the PS4K would be ludicrous. The market is not at the point of saturation yet where they're yearning for a new generation of tech and bored or unimpressed with the current gen, instead that 40 million install base simply wants more games.

Install base would be a problem going forward anyway with mid-gen refreshes(for example why buy a PS_ when I can just wait for the PS__ that plays games better). The phase-out period in my example would be 6 years.

They will all play the same games so there will be no actual exclusives like there would be with a real PlayStation 5. People will buy into the "ecosystem" whenever they get ready.
I don't think we're getting the actual PlayStation 5 that folks are expecting.

IMO it sounds like a shitty future but I don't see why it's unlikely.

 

[nib95]

https://soundcloud.com/psiloveyouxoxo/ps4-neo-reaction-ps-i-love-you-xoxo-ep-32

I'm 20 minutes in. I have stopped counting the number of times he's yelled "IT'S A DISASTER". He's really insufferable.

Cheers!

 

[Glorified G]

Lol, the PS6 doesn't replace a PS5Neo the same way a PS5Neo utterly replaces a PS5. Apples and organes. Consumers will shift to the most cost effective solution - which is the neo revision. If Sony are banking on desperate gamers buying weaker hardware because they think they can't wait, they're going to lose out.

You're really overestimating the patience of early adopters. Even if it was known 3 years ago that Sony was going with a PS4 upgrade in 2016, would hardocre Playstation fans be just playing their PS3's this whole time?

 

[Bananajama]

I'd have stuck to my PC till the Neo

 

[FarFromAnyGame]

If Sony are banking on desperate gamers buying weaker hardware because they think they can't wait, they're going to lose out.

I don't understand why people are getting it the other way around. The PS4 is not the "weaker" hardware. It is what it is and will be what it would have been without the Neo on the market. The Neo is just more powerful. It's a glass-half-full situation here.

 

[The God]

I don't understand why people are getting it the other way around. The PS4 is not the "weaker" hardware. It is what it is and will be what it would have been without the Neo on the market. The Neo is just more powerful. It's a glass-half-full situation here.

Because it is the weaker hardware?? In the future people will ask themselves, "why get the weaker PS_ when I can get the stronger one in 3 years?". That's what he means.

 

[FarFromAnyGame]

But iPad sales go down every year. Don't you think console, a much niche product, should be worry about slow adoption rate?

You don't need fast adoption rate when games are forward and backwards compatible. Console manufacturers have been making profit mostly on software anyway. Sometimes they sell consoles at loss.

Because it is the weaker hardware?? In the future people will ask themselves, "why get the weaker PS_ when I can get the stronger one in 3 years?". That's what he means.

So you think that people would miss out on 3 years of games because of that? And guess what? Most of those games if not all of them won't get patched to run better on the Neo mode anyway.

 

[gundamkyoukai]

Just to clarify, most people who buy the PS4K who already bought the PS4, are likely going to fund the new purchase by reselling or trading in their existing PS4, and the sale of that traded in second hand PS4 still means one less 'new' hardware sale for Sony. In other words, Sony could gain a new PS4K sale from an existing PS4 buyer, but potentially lose a sale from whoever buys their second hand PS4 unit. Though it still paves the way for accessory and software sales which Sony could profit from.

Also, whilst a mid-cycle release does allow them to be a bit more reactionary in terms of tech advancements, I'm not really sure hype and media attention is necessarily all one sided or positive. As the leaks of the PS4K show, it's drawn as much negativity as it has positivity, as many existing PS4 owners are pre-emptively feeling short changed, or others are annoyed at the prospect of having to spend more money on mid cycle iterative console releases.

Anecdotal I know, but throughout the day I've been talking to my casual gaming friends and relatives about this, and I'd say the majority (though not all) have had largely negative outlooks or responses to the news. A few who don't yet own PS4's however, seemed more optimistic about it, though their optimism seemed dependant on the price of the new system.

Don't forget the money is not from hardware but locking people into the ecosystem .
Like you said they make money from accessories ,software , other things they sell on the store and don't forget PS+.
So i don't think they would be to worry once the person get the system be it new or a second hand system .

Yes we are seeing some negativity but don't forget part of the reason for this is because this is new to consoles .
If this become the new norm i don't think we will see the negativity any more since people would know what to expect .
Consoles will just become like everything else and you chose the best time to jump.
With specs being a extra factor to think about along with everything else.

 

[ninjablade]

Because it is the weaker hardware?? In the future people will ask themselves, "why get the weaker PS_ when I can get the stronger one in 3 years?". That's what he means.

Who wants to wait 3 years? Why buy a iPhone 6 when you wait a year for the iPhone 6s? who wants to buy a game day 1 when you can wait for 4 months and get it 50% cheaper, people have disposable income, who waits 3 years just to save 200$ with that line of thinking consumers will never buy anything upgradeable.

 

[00ich]

Because it is the weaker hardware?? In the future people will ask themselves, "why get the weaker PS_ when I can get the stronger one in 3 years?". That's what he means.

Sony doesn't need those customers anyway. They will never buy a game because they always wait for the sequels.

 

[Razgreez]

Really? You'd be happy about a constant cycle of iterative releases? That's possibly the worst thing that could happen imo, and guarantee's stifled progress in terms of tech and design, as new, vastly more powerful hardware will be forever held back by older, far more inferior hardware. The equivalent would be something akin to a permanent state of cross gen game releases.

I really, really hope the PS5 is still a thing, and that it isn't iterative, and isn't tied down or held back by either the PS4, or the PS4K. I want next gen advanced hardware that isn't held back in any way, where devs are allowed to truly extract the absolute most from it, from the ground up, without consideration of inferior products.

You see 'held back' while developers and publishers see 'larger group of potential customers'. Yeah I know who is going to win that battle.

Company's are still going to fund high fidelity exclusives even at the risk/cost of alienating a portion of the potential consumer base if it makes financial sense because it may push them towards purchasing the current more advanced unit over their now (likely one than one iteration) outdated model. It all makes basic economic sense.

Simply remove emotion from the situation and you'll gain perspective

 

[The God]

You don't need fast adoption rate when games are forward and backwards compatible. Console manufacturers have been making profit mostly on software anyway. Sometimes they sell consoles at loss.



So you think that people would miss out on 3 years of games because of that? And guess what? Most of those games if not all of them won't get patched to run better on the Neo mode anyway.

Source?

Who wants to wait 3 years? Why buy a iPhone 6 when you wait a year for the iPhone 6s? who wants to buy a game day 1 when you can wait for 4 months and get it 50% cheaper, people have disposable income, who waits 3 years just to save 200$ with that line of thinking consumers will never buy anything upgradeable.

I didn't say everyone will wait. But I think a good amount of people will wait for a revision that's objectively more powerful than what you get at first. Especially if these refreshes are successful, that's incentive for Sony to push developers to create "Neo mode benefits"

Sony doesn't need those customers anyway. They will never buy a game because they always wait for the sequels.

Great comparison. These two things are definitely the same.

 

[FarFromAnyGame]

Source?

Common sense. You really think most devs would bother patching their 2-3 year-old games to look/run better?

 

[nib95]

You see 'held back' while developers and publishers see 'larger group of potential customers'. Yeah I know who is going to win that battle.

Company's are still going to fund high fidelity exclusives even at the risk/cost of alienating a portion of the potential consumer base if it makes financial sense because it may push them towards purchasing the current more advanced unit over their now (likely one than one iteration) outdated model. It all makes basic economic sense.

Simply remove emotion from the situation and you'll gain perspective

By this sentiment, why even have new generations? Why haven't console manufacturers just made every new console backwards compatible? The reason for new generations un-anchored by older ones, is because consumers like progress and want to see comprehensive jumps in technology, fidelity and design, not just meagre ones, especially for hundreds of dollars of their hard earned money. You take that away, and you make improvements more incremental or less substantial, and you run the risk of limiting value proposition perception, and garnering less interest from potential consumers.

Hell, many complained or are still complaining about that with the current platforms, especially the Wii U and Xbox One, which are comparatively underpowered and not really delivering the fidelity many expected of the generation, and you can see how those two consoles are faring.

Source?

Apparently Sony isn't allowing it. Anything released before October this year can't be patched to have future Neo support. I suspect as a result of that we'll see more games delayed in order to get the support in, eg Horizon.

 

[smashballTaz]

I understand everyone's frustration at feeling like Sony have become somewhat arrogant, I think the only way to see how this will fall out is wait and see what the adoption rate is from customers and developers 6 and 12 months after the launch of the Neo.

I think I'll wait and see for now, I'm more than happy with my gaming PC + Wii U combo currently.

 

[Coolbgdog12]

Colin needs to get a fukkin grip Jesus Christ.

 

[CosmicQueso]

Common sense. You really think most devs would bother patching their 2-3 year-old games to look/run better?

Of course some will. We live in the era of remasters and rereleases. Some devs will choose to patch their titles so they can be sold to Neo adopters.

Apparently Sony isn't allowing it. Anything released before October this year can't be patched to have future Neo support. I suspect as a result of that we'll see more games delayed in order to get the support in, eg Horizon.

Oh where did you come up with this nonsense. Of course older games will be able to be patched.

 

[farisr]

Apparently Sony isn't allowing it. Anything released before October this year can't be patched to have future Neo support. I suspect as a result of that we'll see more games delayed in order to get the support in, eg Horizon.

Incorrect. Anything October onwards will need neo support on their shipped games (aka right off the disc). Anything late September will need a day1 patch for neo support. Anything before that is entirely up to devs if they want to patch a neo mode or not. Any old game can be patched if the devs want to patch it. If a dev wants to go back patch a launch ps4 game, they'll be able to. But yeah, it's just not a good idea to expect patches for any games before late September, as there is no real incentive for the devs to do so.

Games that have a lot of active users may get patches, actually just thinking about it. But I hope Rocket League gets a patch so the game can run locked 60fps in 4 player splitscreen at all times.

 

[The God]

By this sentiment, why even have new generations? Why haven't console manufacturers just made every new console backwards compatible? The reason for new generations un-anchored by older ones, is because consumers like progress and want to see comprehensive jumps in technology, fidelity and design, not just meagre ones, especially for hundreds of dollars of their hard earned money. You take that away, and you make improvements more incremental or less substantial, and you run the risk of limiting value proposition perception, and garnering less interest from potential consumers.

Hell, many complained or are still complaining about that with the current platforms, especially the Wii U and Xbox One, which are comparatively underpowered and not really delivering the fidelity many expected of the generation, and you can see how those two consoles are faring.




Apparently Sony isn't allowing it. Anything released before October this year can't be patched to have future Neo support. I suspect as a result of that we'll see more games delayed in order to get the support in, eg Horizon.

You can't release a game after October without Neo upgrades and then patch them in later, but if your game releases before that you can patch them in. So in the future, if your game releases and year before the new PS and its mandate, you'll be able to patch it.

 

[FarFromAnyGame]

Of course some will. We live in the era of remasters and rereleases. Some devs will choose to patch their titles so they can be sold to Neo adopters.

My statement still stands. Most of them will not bother. They made their money.

 

[nib95]

Oh where did you come up with this nonsense. Of course older games will be able to be patched.

I thought it was part of the leaked documentation. Apologies if it isn't. Personally I'd love an Uncharted 4 patch!

Incorrect. Anything October onwards will need neo support on their shipped games (aka right off the disc). Anything late September will need a day1 patch for neo support. Anything before that is entirely up to devs if they want to patch a neo mode or not. Any old game can be patched if the devs want to patch it. If a dev wants to go back patch a launch ps4 game, they'll be able to. But yeah, it's just not a good idea to expect patches for any games before late September, as there is no real incentive for the devs to do so.

You can't release a game after October without Neo upgrades and then patch them in later, but if your game releases before that you can patch them in. So in the future, if your game releases and year before the new PS and its mandate, you'll be able to patch it.

Appreciate the clarification. But it's interesting that this means devs will actually be forced to provide Neo support and can't just ignore it? Does this also count towards Indie devs?

 

[CosmicQueso]

My statement still stands. Most of them will not bother. They made their money.

Funny thing about that... Having more money is better.

New generations hit and devs are lazy if they can't hit 1080/60. This happens and a patch to support the slightly better hardware is like inventing a perpetual motion machine.

Madness.

 

[ninjablade]

Source?

I didn't say everyone will wait. But I think a good amount of people will wait for a revision that's objectively more powerful than what you get at first. Especially if these refreshes are successful, that's incentive for Sony to push developers to create "Neo mode benefits"


Great comparison. These two things are definitely the same.

I doubt anybody would wait that long, if you're gonna wait for a ps5.5 what's stopping you from waiting for a ps6, anybody who cares about upgrades that much will want the newest and best tech, and will just sell or trade his older ps4 model for a new one.

 

[Boombox On]

By this sentiment, why even have new generations? Why haven't console manufacturers just made every new console backwards compatible?

Because up until very recently, consoles were based on fully customized processors that were specialized to handle gaming, and that specialization repeating itself twice a decade required all-new designs that, in a rapidly growing industry, could sacrifice compatibility with older titles.

The fact that Sony and Microsoft have both elected to work with AMD to acquire chips found on PCs with comparatively little additional work should indicate that such specialization is not as necessary anymore, at which point you'd be losing backwards compatibility for nothing.

is because consumers like progress and want to see comprehensive jumps in technology, fidelity and design, not just meagre ones.

You say this as if any other type of gaming medium besides consoles works the same way (which they obviously don't)

 

[Orayn]

I can see where some of the discontent comes from; mandating a NEO version means testing a NEO version, and there's a certain minimum amount of work associated with that even if you use that extra GPU power pretty conservatively. Likely a bigger problem for smaller developers whose person-hours are already spread pretty thin.

 

[EASTC0AST_GH05T]

arghhhh gahhh at this Neo stuff!

 

[The God]

I thought it was part of the leaked documentation. Apologies if it isn't. Personally I'd love an Uncharted 4 patch!





Appreciate the clarification. But it's interesting that this means devs will actually be forced to provide Neo support and can't just ignore it? Does this also count towards Indie devs?

It counts towards anybody that wants to make a PS4 game. They don't have to upgrade the game itself but it's required to run on the PS4K.

 

[CosmicQueso]

arghhhh gahhh at this Neo stuff!

On so many levels.

 

[farisr]

I thought it was part of the leaked documentation. Apologies if it isn't. Personally I'd love an Uncharted 4 patch!





Appreciate the clarification. But it's interesting that this means devs will actually be forced to provide Neo support and can't just ignore it? Does this also count for Indie devs?

As far as we know, every single ps4 game that releases october onwards will need a neo mode to pass Sony cert. No exceptions. But yeah, for indie devs, maybe Sony will help out if needed.

The only real requirement for a neo mode that's known so far is that the resolution has to be a minimum of 1080p and the game can't perform worse than the ps4 version. Seeing as most ps4 games are 1080p anyways and ps4neo is able to handle ps4 games as they are, devs who don't/can't put in more work for a proper neo mode may just be able to ship as it is and pass cert without any enhancements. But this is just speculation at this point.

 

[nib95]

It counts towards anybody that wants to make a PS4 game. They don't have to upgrade the game itself but it's required to run on the PS4K.

I thought one of the mandates was that it had to run at a minimum of 1080p? If the PS4 version runs below that, that basically means certain devs will have to develop an upgraded version for the PS4K.

 

[bigkurz]

Colin is the reason I have a hard time listening to their podcast.

I don't even think he likes games or playing them.

He is negative, pessimistic, selfish, and sounds miserable and always tired.

He makes statements that he acts like or claims are facts on the podcast, but never backs it up with where he gets the information or the source. He acts like he knows. It's frustrating to hear.

He makes their podcast a hard to listen to miserable experience. His co-host however, is positive, fun, enjoyable, and always sounds extremely happy and energetic.

Regarding his tweet and the topic of this thread, I want to know how many developers? 1, 2, 50? How many development studios / companies are these developers spread across? Were these all in the same studio? What kind of developers? What range of titles or backgrounds do these developers have?

Without any information except what he has stated I call bullshit and take his statement as just that. A statement, of his opinion.

Sounds like you just don't understand Colin or his humor. To say he doesn't seem to like games means you haven't listened to them much or at all.

And on the podcast he specifically said one developer.

 

[FarFromAnyGame]

I thought one of the mandates was that it had to run at a minimum of 1080p? If the PS4 version runs below that, that basically means certain devs will have to develop an upgraded version for the PS4K.

Only games released in September 2016 and later have to run at 1080p on PS4K.

 

[farisr]

I thought one of the mandates was that it had to run at a minimum of 1080p? If the PS4 version runs below that, that basically means certain devs will have to develop an upgraded version for the PS4K.

Honestly, sub 1080p res is a non-issue if we're talking about indie devs for the most part. In general, nearly all sub-1080p games on the ps4 are from the bigger devs/publishers. The only indie game that I can recall being sub-1080p is The Witness.

 

[The God]

I doubt anybody would wait that long, if you're gonna wait for a ps5.5 what's stopping you from waiting for a ps6, anybody who cares about upgrades that much will want the newest and best tech, and will just sell or trade his older ps4 model for a new one.

Before this gen, there were already people who were waiting on Slim models to jump in the generation. This Neo thing will probably amplify that just off the fact that it isn't just a "Slim model", it's a -more powerful- box altogether + the addition of 4K Blu-ray capability. I think that's a pretty big jump from the OGPS4. Sure, not everyone will wait, but the point is that this new direction will cause customers to be a lot more "wait and see "-ish when it comes to buying these boxes.

 

[farisr]

Sounds like you just don't understand Colin or his humor. To say he doesn't seem to like games means you haven't listened to them much or at all.

And on the podcast he specifically said one developer.

Wait, what? So "most developers" from his tweet is actually one developer. So the tweet is basically a lie?

 

[wapplew]

Because up until very recently, consoles were based on fully customized processors that were specialized to handle gaming, and that specialization repeating itself twice a decade required all-new designs that, in a rapidly growing industry, could sacrifice compatibility with older titles.

The fact that Sony and Microsoft have both elected to work with AMD to acquire chips found on PCs with comparatively little additional work should indicate that such specialization is not as necessary anymore, at which point you'd be losing backwards compatibility for nothing.

I thought choosing AMD and x86 are more about save R&D and production cost, not necessary about BC.
Cell can have BC if they make stronger chip base on same architecture, just like Nintendo system always have BC even they are not using x86.

 

[SneakersSO]

I thought one of the mandates was that it had to run at a minimum of 1080p? If the PS4 version runs below that, that basically means certain devs will have to develop an upgraded version for the PS4K.

1 - we're not talking about an altogether different version. We're talking about the same game running on two different machines, with different runtime behaviors set for each respective machine.

2 - Resolution is actually a very easy thing to change up during runtime. Heck, we don't even need the PS4K to see examples of that in current games. Several XB1 games, including Halo 5, use a runtime scaling resolution right now. Heck, if all we're using the expanded horsepower of the GPU in the NEO is for getting games to run at 1080p, with no other differences, then it's a very 'non-issue' thing.

 

[The God]

I thought one of the mandates was that it had to run at a minimum of 1080p? If the PS4 version runs below that, that basically means certain devs will have to develop an upgraded version for the PS4K.

When October comes around, that's true.

 

[CosmicQueso]

Wait, what? So "most developers" from his tweet is actually one developer. So the tweet is basically a lie?

Well 1 out of 1 developer is most of that sample of developers. So not really a lie, just left out that sample size part.

 

[Commanche Raisin Toast]

Well 1 out of 1 developer is most of that sample of developers. So not really a lie, just left out that sample size part.

"most people don't like videogames"

well, i mean i only asked one person and she said she didn't...

come on

 

[Boombox On]

I thought choosing AMD and x86 are more about save R&D and production cost, not necessary about BC.

That is no less correct, amongst a bunch of other reasons, but the fundamental core of the decision had to be based on the fact that they had to consider the PC-like nature of these chips to be suitable for their "next-gen" experiences.

Cell can have BC if they make stronger chip base on same architecture

Sure, but it's clear now that supporting the Cell architecture into the long term is a bad investment.

 

[b3b0p]

Sounds like you just don't understand Colin or his humor. To say he doesn't seem to like games means you haven't listened to them much or at all.

And on the podcast he specifically said one developer.

Wrong. I have heard him since IGN. I've heard him for years. He even said at times he doesn't. Humor? Unless I have my hosts mixed up, this guy is not humorous at all. He is a Debbie Downer.

 

[Scrotum Phillips]

This is pretty nitpicky, but Colin's tweet still just irks me from a journalistic point of view. Like, I understand the limitations of twitter and that he can't go into exact specifics to protect his source, but he knew exactly what he was doing by sending such an extremely vague tweet at that time when people were starving for any news on this topic. Using language like "most" and "extra nonsense" without really breaking down exactly what he means either in subsequent tweets or even better, a video, would add some much needed meat to this.

Whatever. This just seems gossipy rather than reporting when you put something so juicy out there that draws the response that it did and not expound on it or clarify it really at all.