Support NeoGAF

[Poimandres]

The questions asked do seem to have a negative slant, no two ways about it. Obviously the article is pushing to present a troubled picture of the PS3. That's not exactly balanced, but most journalism is presented with a slant of some sort.

But, the whole angle of not attacking the 360 means bias is bunk here. None of the questions even mention the 360 - its success or otherwise. For all we know there may be a corresponding set of questions sent to some developer in Msofts stable questioning the 360s problems for a different article.

 

[plagiarize]

GAF, you can stop arguing now.

sigh.

i'm not sure whether to be more shocked by you seeming to think Jaffe needs help defending himself or by you seeming to think you are remotely equipped to give him the assistance.

there is a good discussion taking place here. it would be improved without sycophantic 'YOU GO DAVID!' posting.

maybe i'm the only one that thinks that though.

 

[v0yce]

Okay see...there we go. Again, I completely understand you not wanting to bite the hand that feeds. And I understand that the way things have played out...it is no longer your place to answer those questions. BUT don't be disingenuous and just try to degrade the questions and call the media biased. THAT is the problem. These questions ARE legitimate. You should've made THIS post instead of the one you did originally.

Or you should've just been able to read the email and understand how stupid it was for a journalist to be asking those questions in the manner he did.

I know if it would have been me, I'd have had a quick chuckle and then trashed the email.

Is it really that hard to understand?

Don't bother with rezuth, he also spewed garbage in the Halo 3 DLC thread by trolling its graphics. He can't help his inner troll.

Holy Techfuck! Games that were way ahead of their time:

Halo 2 Online
Halo 3 Forge & Theatre.

Coming from the guy with a fucking Killzone 2 supporting avatar? GTFO!

Its interesting to me that Sony fans always feel the need to proclaim their love for the Hyped Game of The Season all the time. Like you have to take up a cause or something.

Chill out guys, there only games. Not some political figureheads.

Oh I see. :lol

 

[Vast Inspiration]

Or you should've just been able to read the email and understand how stupid it was for a journalist to be asking those questions in the manner he did.

I know if it would have been me, I'd have had a quick chuckle and then trashed the email.

Is it really that hard to understand?

Is it really that hard to understand that those are legitimate questions? And even from this thread...most people seem to agree that though tough, those are valid questions to ask.

And are you trying to somehow paint a picture of me? Or saying that I have an agenda?

I have an agenda because I'm a fan of Halo 3? or because I called someone out for trolling in a Forza 3 thread and a Halo 3 DLC thread?

Or because I called a guy out who had a Killzone avatar but claimed that people shouldn't look forward to a game by a developer with a bad last game?

I see you're a fan of Phantom Dust...so am I. Does that make us the same?

You're really going to have to try harder if you want to make a proper point of me being biased myself. You're current effort was pathetic.

EDIT: Damn, it really does piss me off that you used the fact that I like Halo to make a point against me. People like you are so pathetic.

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

Looks just like the reporter has the angle he wants for his story and he's going for it. I think it's a bit rude and presumptuous to make a Sony person answer those types of questions, but I doubt it has anything to do with bias. He's just writing a "PS3 is in third place, but they used to be #1" type of story and those are the sort of questions that come with it.

 

[Son of Godzilla]

again, if the article were about the negative aspects of the PS3 from launch to current date, they would be applicable. but if you're writing a fair article on the life of the PS3 from start to now, you simply cannot solely focus on negative aspects in your questioning. you can definitely ask questions that could deliver negative responses, but it's simply not right to load ALL of your questions with negative connotations when you're supposedly creating an article of a fair viewpoint of an entity's existence- and not solely it's negative aspects.

You are assuming there's any sort of journalistic work to be done in finding out whether or not Sony screwed the pooch with the PS3. There plainly isn't. Even if you utterly demand the "It's not been a total cockup" caveat, the successes and failures are still completely open and known. The journalist's interest was obviously finding out what went wrong and what the response of people along for the ride was and continues be. Asking the questions in a way that provided a neutral out would simply result in that being taken.

 

[voltron]

And for the record, Calling all Cars was amazingly fun and didn't get nearly the love it deserved on PSN.

It got heaps of support on XBLA though. Still in the top 10 last I checked.

 

[Mike Works]

i think the largest base problem is the method the journalist used here.

he obviously wanted to ask some hard hitting questions (to Jaffe) that would get some interesting information/viewpoints from an important figure related to his article.

the problem is, he didn't go at it the correct way.

as i've established already, the journalist claims he is writing an article about the PS3's existence from start to (current).

the best thing he could've done is request an interview- in person or online- with Jaffe and ask open ended questions.

instead of unfairly stating BLU RAY IS SORT OF NOT DOING MUCH JAFFE, YOUR THOUGHTS ON HOW BAD IT'S FAILING, the correct thing to do would've been to openly asking (Jaffe) his thoughts on how consumers are reacting to Blu Ray. if Jaffe were to answer honestly without towing the company line, great, you've potentially got something for your article. if Jaffe weren't to answer truthfully or realistically, putting his own slant on the response, THEN you follow up the initial question, and question his response (perhaps citing Blu Ray adoption rate or something relevant to the question in hand).

the entire problem here is the journalist sent these questions to Jaffe as if Jaffe had already towed the company, which is not only unacceptable, but particularly insulting given how open Jaffe has been with the media.

but even if that weren't the case, even if these questions were directed to a PR manager or something, you still can't go about the way the journalist did and not get called out for it. if you're worried that someone from the Sony camp isn't going to give you good enough material for your article (ie everything will be replied to in a positive slant), then in this case you should let them make that mistake.

if he were to ask Jaffe about Blu Ray and what positives and shortcomings it offered, and Jaffe only replied with EVERYONE WHO SEES BLU RAY LOVES IT AND IT'S DOING GREAT AND HOORAY and didn't mention one negative aspect, like how it may have driven up the cost of the PS3 which hurt it's launch, etc, then put that in your article. put "when asked about Bluray...", put Jaffe's response, and then reply in your article itself with something like, "However, many critics are quick to point out that the inclusion of Blu Ray hurt the PS3's adoption rate due to...", etc.

coming out and asking nothing but questions with a negative slant for an article which isn't supposed to have one is simply the wrong way of doing things, in this case, in my opinion.

 

[chase]

:lol

Oh, Jaffe.

 

[Version 3.0]

I'm way late to the thread, but here's my take:

No, I don't think this qualifies as "biased journalism", unless, as I've occasionally laughed about, "reality is biased!". Har de har.

Having said that, it really looks like this writer is searching for someone as close to Sony as possible to go on record saying "I tried to tell them, but they wouldn't listen to me!".

And that's unprofessional (and unlikely--people say so now, but nobody truly saw this coming). If Sony's treated you well, then answers saying so--or no answers--are just fine.

 

[sloppyjoe_gamer]

:lol :lol Holy shat....16 pages.

 

[rexor0717]

I see nothing wrong with these questions. There certainly aren't any positive questions though.

 

[Mindlog]

What we needed was a pitcher. Not a belly itcher.

 

[slider]

i think the largest base problem is the method the journalist used here.

Young erect penis... er, I mean yep. I tried to say it earlier but a little subtlety in going about your business wouldn't do any harm.

I'm trying to transfer the dynamic to any other real world scenario. My response would be "what's your fucking problem?"

Still, we're going round in circles. I'm out (for the 2nd time if anyone cares!).

 

[D4Danger]

:lol :lol Holy shat....16 pages.

8

 

[[Nintex]]

Just wait 5 or 10 years guys. Just look at the SEGA interviews that popped up years after the thing went bust. Years of hating on SEGA Japan for killing the Dreamcast and years later Peter Moore admits he pulled the plug or Saturn developers finally confirm that the Playstation had better hardware. The subject is loaded at the moment, Sony is in a freefall and the small gain of sales and interest that the PS3 had last year, were swiped away by a single holiday season. We'll get all the answers, we'll just have to be patient. Once Yamauchi dies, I'm sure we'll get those stories as well.

It all depends on Sony's next move, but due to their current position I think they'll continue to fight the uphill battle. They certainly won't pull a Nintendo and drop the price to $99 and send it to die. I'm still wondering if the GCN could've made the 30 million mark if Nintendo didn't drop GameCube support. In the end though, they made the right call and admitting their earlier mistakes(from N64's "power only" approach to no online for GameCube) made them number one again. I'm sure Sony will release an even better machine with even better games in the next generation. The first step though, is to admit they made mistakes. The 'doom and gloom' will become reality if they actually believe their own 10 year plan PR crap. They'll look so stupid when they can't live up to that and I doubt they have any reason to do so once they have a succesfull Playstation 4 in the market.

 

[patsu]

If I were to take a guess...

It's a loaded article. The framework and content of the article is already laid out. They are just looking for confirmation/agreement/quotes from developers. Let Sony marketing handles this. Don't see why David Jaffe wants to get into this mess (Focus on the game man).

May be coincidence, may be timed to counter upcoming Sony ad campaign.

 

[mikekennyb]

Those are all legitimate questions. If it was 1992, and the gaming press was the way it is today, don't you think the same kind of questions would have been asked of Nintendo in regards to the SNES and Genesis? It's not that unusual, Sony was the unstoppable juggernaut, and now is lagging in third place while the mother company is bleeding money. An investigative piece on what a prominent Sony developer thinks about the situation would be interesting. And we don't know exactly how the e-mail was phrased, we got one side of the story. Not to say he did, but it's entirely possible that Jaffe summarized and exaggerated the questions in the e-mail.

Does anyone remember the interview that Shoe did with Peter Moore where he ripped into the early Xbox 360 strategy/performance/etc.? It was a good article, and I doubt that many of the people who are calling foul over the media treatment of the PS3 today were all that concerned over articles like Shoe's.

 

[Vast Inspiration]

Does anyone remember the interview that Shoe did with Peter Moore where he ripped into the early Xbox 360 strategy/performance/etc.? It was a good article, and I doubt that many of the people who are calling foul over the media treatment of the PS3 today were all that concerned over articles like Shoe's.

EXACTLY my first post in this thread.

 

[SuperSonic1305]

Is this biased journalism or valid questions?

I'm working on a story for MSNBC examining the life-to-date chronology of the Wii. As a respected Nintendo developer, would you be willing to answer a few questions? In the interest you are, here goes:

In hindsight, noting the Wii's lukewarm reception from hardcore gamers and relatively high cost for what it is, a lot of people wonder what Nintendo was thinking when developing the Wii. So... what were they thinking?

It's been said that Satoru Iwata dictated what technology the Wii should include instead of doing proper research to what the consumer wanted while paying little mind to price. As a development partner, did you feel that was the case? Why/why not?

It seems that releasing a feature-void console for $280, now still $280, was not a crippling move for Nintendo, especially given the recent economic downturn. Would you agree? Why/why not?

Did you ever perceive low morale within the company once the Gamecube failed? Can you elaborate?
Consumers appear indifferent to hardcore games. Do you feel Nintendo undervalued hardcore games , after they didn't help the Gamecube become such a huge success?

It seems the Wii has been cobbled together since its release: feature lacking to make a profit from the start, patched with controller add ons, patched with internet browser, patched with Everybody Votes Channel -- like the console never had a specific plan. During your tenure, did you feel the powers that be at Nintendo had a grip on what exactly would make the Wii a success? Why/why not?
What has been your biggest concern as a Wii developer?

Was NeoGAF right: has hope faded for Wii as the "hardcore console"?

 

[[Nintex]]

Does anyone remember the interview that Shoe did with Peter Moore where he ripped into the early Xbox 360 strategy/performance/etc.?

From the logo to PGR, back then gaming journalists were convinced that Xbox 360 was the new Dreamcast and would be discontinued quickly as well because MS could never beat Sony. It wasn't untill the PS3 launched and the hype died down that the 360 took off. They didn't have an incredible lead over Sony or Nintendo or anything, I remember the articles stating that MS had lost because they couldn't get enough 360's out there before the PS3 launch. I was convinced the PS3 would wipe the floor with the 360.

 

[patsu]

Those are all legitimate questions. If it was 1992, and the gaming press was the way it is today, don't you think the same kind of questions would have been asked of Nintendo in regards to the SNES and Genesis? It's not that unusual, Sony was the unstoppable juggernaut, and now is lagging in third place while the mother company is bleeding money. An investigative piece on what a prominent Sony developer thinks about the situation would be interesting. And we don't know exactly how the e-mail was phrased, we got one side of the story. Not to say he did, but it's entirely possible that Jaffe summarized and exaggerated the questions in the e-mail.

Does anyone remember the interview that Shoe did with Peter Moore where he ripped into the early Xbox 360 strategy/performance/etc.? It was a good article, and I doubt that many of the people who are calling foul over the media treatment of the PS3 today were all that concerned over articles like Shoe's.

The difference is he interviewed MS directly. Over here, the guy is fishing for info by framing the context first.

 

[Vast Inspiration]

From the logo to PGR, back then gaming journalists were convinced that Xbox 360 was the new Dreamcast and would be discontinued quickly as well because MS could never beat Sony. It wasn't untill the PS3 launched and the hype died down that the 360 took off. They didn't have an incredible lead over Sony or Nintendo or anything, I remember the articles stating that MS had lost because they couldn't get enough 360's out there before the PS3 launch. I was convinced the PS3 would wipe the floor with the 360.

Yeah, people were ready to write the 360 off, jsut a few months after its launch. But when you ask these questions about Sony, years after the PS3 launched...its biased...:lol

 

[mikekennyb]

EXACTLY my first post in this thread.

Didn't get to read through the whole thread, but glad we agree!

 

[MightyHedgehog]

The difference is he interviewed MS directly. Over here, the guy is fishing for info by framing the context first.

Who says that the journalist (if granted the opportunity) won't interview Sony's higher ups if they haven't done so already? There are a lot of assumptions that this is some kind of hit piece. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. We'll have to read the final copy to find out, won't we? And the one asking the questions is trying to get interesting answers that might lead to more interesting material, not PR spin that can be had for free any time of the week.

 

[Burai]

The journalist got his answer.

"We buried our heads in the sand and redefined what success is to fit our agenda."

 

[plagiarize]

i think the largest base problem is the method the journalist used here.

he obviously wanted to ask some hard hitting questions (to Jaffe) that would get some interesting information/viewpoints from an important figure related to his article.

the problem is, he didn't go at it the correct way.

as i've established already, the journalist claims he is writing an article about the PS3's existence from start to (current).

the best thing he could've done is request an interview- in person or online- with Jaffe and ask open ended questions.

coming out and asking nothing but questions with a negative slant for an article which isn't supposed to have one is simply the wrong way of doing things, in this case, in my opinion.

there is a perception thing going on here though.

i'm going to do one of my awful comparisons. if i'm not infamous for these i should be.

imagine a journalist writing an article called something like 'the war in Iraq to date'. imagine if he asked of a general in that war 'how well have things been going?' 'what were your feelings when you saw the battle plans?' or whatever.

those would seem like softball questions. to me at least. if the questions were of the nature 'Why do you think the war has been going so badly?' and 'How horrified were you when you saw the battle plans?' i don't think 'WAIT A MINUTE, YOU SAID THE ARTICLE WAS CALLED THE WAR IN IRAQ SO FAR' would be seen as a rational response.

now i don't think the PS3 is a failure personally, but a lot of people evidently do and i don't think every one of them feels that because of some inherent bias. a lot of them feel it's unquestionably a failure.

this journalist could have merely felt it was plainly obvious that the system was a failure and therefore felt no need to flag up that 'slant' in his description of the article. he certainly didn't hide that slant in the questions, so i don't think there's any real story here.

if he'd asked for an interview with the title, live on TV and then sprung these questions on David, that'd be fucking low, but that isn't what happened here, and if the journalist thought it was widely accepted that the system was a failure then he wouldn't expect his questions to cause shock or offense.

obviously i'm hypothesizing here. i don't know the journalists intentions. the questions certainly aren't balanced, but that doesn't necessarily mean the journalist is wrong to pose these kind of questions.

of course, the telling thing will be the PS4. even if no one at Sony ever publicly talks about the companies feelings towards the PS3, the design and pricing of the PS4 will speak volumes.

 

[patsu]

Who says that the journalist (if granted the opportunity) won't interview Sony's higher ups if they haven't done so already? There are a lot of assumptions that this is some kind of hit piece. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. We'll have to read the final copy to find out, won't we? And the one asking the questions is trying to get interesting answers that might lead to more interesting material, not PR spin that can be had for free any time of the week.

It doesn't matter whether he interviewed Sony or not. The fact is he's framing David's interview into an existing negative framework already.

 

[spwolf]

BluRay is the big fuck up.

It's ass slow, and for some reason they won't let developers put games on DVD if it'd fit. It's more expensive to print the discs. The drive itself costs too much. Most games are multiplatform so there is no advantage in terms of space. Not enough people give a shit about it, I know quite a few PS3 owners, not that many of them even have BluRay films. It's quieter which is cool, but it's no where near enough to warrant it.

I love the PS3 but Sony fucked up, and they're paying for it.

Sony has made mistakes, we should be discussing them. Microsoft also should through MGS, but they shouldn't through MSNBC.

you are very wrong on many points there - it is not slow, a lot of PS3 owners actually buy BD movies... BD drives dont cost that much anymore.

Heck, all of your points can be also told of DVD in its first years.... DVD drives were expensive as shit for a long time, BD prices i believe dropped sooner.

Not to mention that actual BD disc sales are healthy and growing, despite crappy economy.

Obviously author was writing an "failure" article about PS3... he/she already determined that they wanted to write about PS3 being an failure and only such questions was asked. Basically all questions were leading ones to confirm their own ideas.

Only part i think it was funny was this:

It seems the PS3 has been cobbled together since its release: feature-cutting to help cut costs, patched with controller rumble, patched with Home, patched with trophy achievements -- like the console never had a specific plan

Makes you wonder how smart the journalist is... because adding all those features show that Sony had a plan, lol. Or did they think that manufacturers release an product and then stop supporting it? :lol

 

[Malvolio]

Does anyone remember the interview that Shoe did with Peter Moore where he ripped into the early Xbox 360 strategy/performance/etc.? It was a good article, and I doubt that many of the people who are calling foul over the media treatment of the PS3 today were all that concerned over articles like Shoe's.

I wasn't concerned because Shoe was asking the proper person. The person who would be expected to answer those questions.

In this case, Jaffe isn't that guy. That's the real issue.

 

[Cipherr]

but writing a "detailed chronology" and only focusing on those negatives is a very one-sided view.

Perhaps that is the point of the article the interviewer is doing? If he is constructing a story that is set to focus solely on missteps Sony made with the PS3 to get to where they are right now, would that be completely unacceptable? If you think it would be then I would say your wrong, I mean if journalism is going to be worth a damn it has to have at least THAT much freedom.

This is somewhat of a tough thing to argue. It seems the question at the center is, "is it fair to do an interview/article about the shortcomings of the PS3 without counterbalancing it with all of the sunshine and rainbows (I.E. The good things the PS3 has done)."

There was a thread just a week ago focusing on the GOOD things the PS3 has done, and none of the people in this thread calling this unfair had a problem with it. It was titled something like "The PS3 doesn't need to arrive, its already here". That was a perfect example of the flipside of this interview it seems. That article focused on all of the good stuff the PS3 had and has done while leaving the bad stuff to rest. If its ok for a journalist to approach it from that direction, why is it then 'biased' to do the exact opposite? These are questions that perhaps Jaffe didnt want to answer and thats understandable, but unless there is just as much of an response from him when someone asks him questions by email that are the exact opposite then I dont see what he has to stand on here other than ranting fanboys.

If he gets an interview talking about the way PS3 alleviated so many storage issues with BD for Kojima, how it has put money behind developers that others didn't have faith in to bring us games like LBP and brought a whole new source of income for third parties with the buyable content in Home as well, would Jaffe create a blog post the next morning asking us why this interviewer didn't ask him about the horrible mistake the absurd $599 You Ess dollars was?

I dont think anyone here would answer yes to that. It wouldn't happen. He is understandably reacting unfavorably to something he doesn't really agree with, but that doesn't make it cripplingly biased.

 

[Slavik81]

From the logo to PGR, back then gaming journalists were convinced that Xbox 360 was the new Dreamcast and would be discontinued quickly as well because MS could never beat Sony.

What? No way. Nobody believed the 'Dreamcast 2.0' thing was anything more than a bunch of hilarious coincidences. Sony had their disastrous "599 US Dollars" E3, great games like Dead Rising and Oblivion had come out and 1UP Yours couldn't stop saying good things about mediocre games like Prey. The 360 had glowing press in its first year. That's why I bought one at the start of its second.

 

[plagiarize]

I wasn't concerned because Shoe was asking the proper person. The person who would be expected to answer those questions.

In this case, Jaffe isn't that guy. That's the real issue.

you're presuming he only sent questions out to one person and hinged his entire article on that.

 

[Mindlog]

Makes you wonder how smart the journalist is... because adding all those features show that Sony had a plan, lol. Or did they think that manufacturers release an product and then stop supporting it? :lol

It doesn't matter whether he interviewed Sony or not. The fact is he's framing David's interview into an existing negative framework already.

See, there's lots of wiggle room inside a 'famework.'

Tact, is an excellent tool. However, it doesn't really matter how it's used in this kind of situation because the marketing department has a volunteer army ready to pick apart anything it comes across that doesn't support the Holy Gospel according to...

 

[StuBurns]

you are very wrong on many points there - it is not slow, a lot of PS3 owners actually buy BD movies... BD drives dont cost that much anymore.

Heck, all of your points can be also told of DVD in its first years.... DVD drives were expensive as shit for a long time, BD prices i believe dropped sooner.

Not to mention that actual BD disc sales are healthy and growing, despite crappy economy.

BluRay game reading is SLOWER than the 360s DVD.

I don't care how quick it is, it's slower.

I didn't say a lot of PS3 owners don't buy BluRays, I said most the PS3 owners I know personally don't. You don't know my friends, it seems odd that you would claim to know their buying habits better than me.

The BD drive is the source of the initially excessive price of the PS3. It doesn't matter how much it costs, it was far more expensive than a DVD drive would have been, and that cost was carried over to customers, the price was the reason initially that the PS3 didn't fly off the shelves.

I buy BluRay discs quite often, I like the feature, but the PS3 cost way the fuck too much at launch because of the drive, and it's the reason they're still way behind the 360.

 

[Malvolio]

you're presuming he only sent questions out to one person and hinged his entire article on that.

The amount of people that are being asked is not a concern as long as all of the people being asked were responsible for the result. Jaffe isn't one of those people.

 

[Rayme]

you are very wrong on many points there - it is not slow

I'm pretty sure he was talking about the speeds that you can get data off the disk (loading a level, streaming in textures, etc). As compared to the 360's optical drive, at least.

 

[[Nintex]]

What? No way. Nobody believed the 'Dreamcast 2.0' thing was anything more than a bunch of hilarious coincidences. Sony had their disastrous "599 US Dollars" E3, great games like Dead Rising and Oblivion had come out and 1UP Yours couldn't stop saying good things about mediocre games like Prey. The 360 had glowing press in its first year. That's why I bought one at the start of its second.

You call RROD, "Why Xbox 360 will fail without HALO" , "The PS3 will kick-ass" good press for MS?

Just check the archives, the Xbox 360 hype didn't take off untill after the PS3 was out, I think the Gears of War launch was kinda the turn around. Nintendo was called insane, stupid and "They're finally going the way of SEGA!" before the Wii launch. It wasn't untill E3 2007 that they gave the finger to the gaming journalists with their hilarious press conference of mainstream press loving.

Up untill E3 2006 the PS3 was declared winner, after E3 2006 it would be a tight race between Xbox 360 and PS3 with the Wii dead last. It's been doom and gloom for about a year now.

 

[Zenith]

That makes sense to me and was actually the same line of thought I had at the start of this thread (which btw is turning out to be pretty epic). I mean people are asking Jaffe "ANSWER THE QUESTIONS" without actually thinking about how truly honest answers (positive AND negative) may impact his work relationships.

but the main complaint was Jaffe's laughable claim of bias, not whether it was appropriate for someone who ran a first party studio to answer them. There's no way the journo could have known without asking him, it varies from developer to developer about how much they know and how much they're willing to speak and risk "going off message". That's all he did, ask him if he'd be willing to answer those questions.

 

[FartOfWar]

Don't you work for 1Up? :S Why can't you guys ask? Forget it if I'm mistaken.

Nope. He was trying to call me out as a fanboy, if anything I'm a fan of the system and by association I want it to succeed so that my investment is worth it. Hence why I got pretty pissed at the failure of marketing that SCEA has done in the KZ2 thread.

But I still want everyone else to succeed so that the industry can keep moving forward and everyone challenge each other with new ideas which benefit me in the end. I'm not playing nice with any company because at the end of the day they don't give a damn about you when things go wrong. A lesson I learned first hand.

2K Boston these days. But I tried when I was in the press: http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3158490

Caveat: the majority of the questions I asked appeared in print -- GWF magazine no less -- and aren't visible in this excerpt.

 

[patsu]

See, there's lots of wiggle room inside a 'famework.'

Tact, is an excellent tool. However, it doesn't really matter how it's used in this kind of situation because the marketing department has a volunteer army ready to pick apart anything it comes across that doesn't support the Holy Gospel according to...

...according to you ?

You can believe whatever you want to, my friend. It doesn't concern me.

The questions and choice of words are loaded. David is just being fished for information to support the writer's agenda.

 

[v0yce]

Is it really that hard to understand that those are legitimate questions? And even from this thread...most people seem to agree that though tough, those are valid questions to ask...

This is a tough question...

The PS3 has experienced many revisions and additions since its release. Some in response to competetors success (ex: trophies) and some addressing public response (ex: Dual Shock 3). Do you feel there was proper forethought in the development of the PS3? Why/why not?
What has been your biggest concern as a PS3 developer?

This is an incredibly stupid way to ask a question to a Sony employee by a seemingly unexperienced hack.

It seems the PS3 has been cobbled together since its release: feature-cutting to help cut costs, patched with controller rumble, patched with Home, patched with trophy achievements -- like the console never had a specific plan. During your tenure, did you feel the powers that be at Sony had a grip on what exactly would make the PS3 a success? Why/why not?
What has been your biggest concern as a PS3 developer?

Its clear the guy already has his mind made up regardless of what response Jaffe gives and is just looking for quotes to help legitimize his piece. Tough questions are fine. But you don't ask tough questions to a Sony developer in good standing with the company in such a slanted manner.

And yes I was saying you have an agenda. Liking Halo has nothing to do with it. I like Halo quite a bit too. Your posting habits speak for themselves. Why else would you go into a thread titled, "Killzonify your Avatar" and make a fool of yourself claiming its some Sony fan thing, when we've had plenty of those kinds of threads for other games, and other subject matter like the Simpsons and Christmas and so on.

 

[Bizzyb]

Eh, its still got great games and some nice exclusives. Only things that ever irked me with the PS3 was the high launch price and nixing of the BC in later models. Besides that I think it's a solid console and not a failure, at least in the game category. In the future hopefully Sony won't have a high launch price with their next console.

Well yes, I was kind of talking about the Hardware, and HOME. So far the way they have handled the hardware has been the main point of criticism

 

[legend166]

Is this biased journalism or valid questions?

I'm working on a story for MSNBC examining the life-to-date chronology of the Wii. As a respected Nintendo developer, would you be willing to answer a few questions? In the interest you are, here goes:

In hindsight, noting the Wii's lukewarm reception from hardcore gamers and relatively high cost for what it is, a lot of people wonder what Nintendo was thinking when developing the Wii. So... what were they thinking?

It's been said that Satoru Iwata dictated what technology the Wii should include instead of doing proper research to what the consumer wanted while paying little mind to price. As a development partner, did you feel that was the case? Why/why not?

It seems that releasing a feature-void console for $280, now still $280, was not a crippling move for Nintendo, especially given the recent economic downturn. Would you agree? Why/why not?

Did you ever perceive low morale within the company once the Gamecube failed? Can you elaborate?
Consumers appear indifferent to hardcore games. Do you feel Nintendo undervalued hardcore games , after they didn't help the Gamecube become such a huge success?

It seems the Wii has been cobbled together since its release: feature lacking to make a profit from the start, patched with controller add ons, patched with internet browser, patched with Everybody Votes Channel -- like the console never had a specific plan. During your tenure, did you feel the powers that be at Nintendo had a grip on what exactly would make the Wii a success? Why/why not?
What has been your biggest concern as a Wii developer?

Was NeoGAF right: has hope faded for Wii as the "hardcore console"?

none of those questions make any sense, so I have no idea what point you're trying to make.

 

[Learn2read]

The guy gave Jaffe plenty of opportunity of offer an honest rebuttal.

Bullshit like this thread is why the Gaming Forum is completely fucking unreadable.

*Killzone 2 GIF*

*Killzone 2 GIF*

*Killzone 2 GIF*

*Killzone 2 GIF*

 

[patsu]

The guy gave Jaffe plenty of opportunity of offer an honest rebuttal.

If you'd dealt with reporters before... it means that when you refute, you may be asked to provide information, sometimes NDA'ed info to support you.... which David J probably can't say anyway.

At the end of the day, the writer has something in mind. Unless you have more juicy info, he may run with his own using your quotes.

If it's supposed to be a well researched article, the questions won't be framed his way. Sounds like a rush job to me too.

 

[v0yce]

The guy gave Jaffe plenty of opportunity of offer an honest rebuttal.

Bullshit like this thread is why the Gaming Forum is completely fucking unreadable.

*Killzone 2 GIF*

*Killzone 2 GIF*

*Killzone 2 GIF*

*Killzone 2 GIF*

Do you honeslty think, from reading the way those quesitons were framed, that the author would have included all of Jaffe's responses if they refuted what the author has already made his mind up about?

You guys are acting like this was an interview or something. He was just wanting a couple of quotes for back up.

edit: What he said ^

 

[AlternativeUlster]

Well wait a second- I never said the questions themselves were not valid questions. I also said in my video post that someone writing an article ABOUT the current state of the PS3 was/is fair game (warts and all).

What I am saying is: it seems to me that this article is already written and he is just looking for someone to justify his already decided upon opinion so he can attribute some quotes to someone other than himself.

And it is possible that all the negative questions about Sony came to me and the positive ones came to someone else.

But the PS3 is not dead and it's not a failure and it's not doomed. It may NEVER get out of third place. So in the mind of a narrow minded fanboy who actually cares who 'wins' a stupid ass 'console war', sure, go ahead and think that way. But for a pro journalist- or just an adult with a functioning brain- to think the machine is dead because it is in last place?!? That's pretty bush league.

And so I am FINE with these questions if they had been balanced with questions about what the PS3 had done right (i.e. it's almost profitable even tho it's $200 bucks MORE than 360 and we are in a shit economy...and compared to the 360, when you take the significant price point variance into consideration, it's not getting its ass kicked) and what the 360 has done wrong (red ring; hd-dvd misstep). But they were not. They seemed to me like a 'let's bash the PS3' piece and that is why I was asking if you all agreed or not.

And as I said, I could be wrong in thinking this is biased. But don't knee jerk and assume I am bashing these questions cause I don't want them asked. I repeat: they are some valid questions in there and I would love to read the answers as well to a few of them.

David

ps. and fuck you regarding the 'he's playing the wait till X comes out' card...fuck you man. KZ2, GOW3, UNCHARTED 2, MLB09, HEAVY RAIN, GT...and yes, MY fucking game?!? I don't give a shit if Sony drops behind the fucking Phantom in the 'console war'...but to deny that those are some exciting exclusives is asinine. Just like to deny that Msoft has a killer first party stable with GOW, HALO, FABLE,et all is also asinine. To you I say:

'oooh, hey check that out! It's a pickle that's been dipped in hydrochloric acid! Sweet! Do me a favor and ram that motherfucker right up your ass, k?'

:lol Baby's crying. What a loser. :lol

I hope that MSNBC journalist gets ahold of this thread and makes a headline that says, "David Jaffe doesn't sleep at night because he is too busy crying. His beautiful wife? She is leaving him for Olbermann's strong man's penis. Gobama." It is a long head line but I can't think of a more effective one.

 

[NekoFever]

no wonder gaming journalism sucks if you people think those questions were unfair

Got it right on the first page.

 

[Stinkles]

It's standard practice. Ask diffcult, negative and even combative questions to get more interesting answers. See Jeremy Paxton for proof.

If you go the other way, and I have seen this too, asking Yuji Naka, "Why is Sonic so awesome?" is infinitely worse.

The trick to being a great journalist is doing this, but acting on the information that conflicts with your predisposition - and hopefully altering your story's focus when it needs to be altered.

But when you are writing a story about something failing, it would be retarded to try and clutch at straws to prove the opposite. Presumably his editor said, "Can you get me a story explaining why the PS3 isn't dominating?" I can't see the questions being any different.