-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Jaffe:"Is this biased journalism? Or is it just me?"
- Thread starter FrankT
- Start date
- Status
These arguments always start off well intentioned and informative but they always inevitably devolve into what you see. I'd honestly love to contribute but the thread has become a heated mess now. Forget it.Armitage said:
Short opinion: The questions are valid and unbiased. Sony had to work VERY hard to put the PS3 in the position it is in right now. And again, this is coming from a PS3 (only) owner.
Justin Bailey
------ ------
There's certainly a place for these types of questions and the articles they create, but that place is usually in the checkout line at the grocery store. . . so it's a bit surprising coming from a place that likes to consider itself a news organization.Salazar said:
RandomVince said:Im trying not to be disingenous here, so bear with me please.
If growth was the be-all and end all, why would the manufacturers drop previous hardware and start from scratch every 5 or 6 years? Every company takes a risk when upgrading to a new system that is not guaranteed to attract more customers than the last one.
When Sony priced PS3 at $USD600, I would hazard a guess that they weren't expecting to sell 140 million units at that price, or at a rate comparable to that at which the PS2 sold. To that end, the metric for the PS3 sales to be considered a 'success' would thus have to be different to last generation.
Do I know what they consider success? No. It probably is a combination of bluray uptake at some particular rate, turning profitability on hardware on some timescale of a couple of years, licensing X number of software titles, and continuing to support the PS2 and PSP end of the market to supplement the Division's net profit.
I don't know exactly what the criteria are, nor what Sony's internal evaluation of PS3 is to-date, but I would bet that it is not a failure just because it is in 'third place'.
Hopefully that's clear enough to not sound hostile.
Not hostile at all, so don't worry.
I imagine they drop hardware because they reach saturation and growth stagnates. I don't necessarily agree with the idea of dropping consoles like the industry has done, though.
See, I'd agree with you about the PS3 if we didn't have tons of quotes from executives prior to the launch pretty much showing they expected it to be a huge success. You know, the whole 2 jobs thing, 5 million would buy it without games, etc. There's nothing to suggest that Sony were aiming for anything but market domination again.
I think Sony completely underestimated both the idea of brand power in videogames, and their competitors. They should have taken notice when Nintendo completely dropped the Game Boy line and still managed to be a huge success. Hell, they should have looked at their own rise to power and how easily people kicked Nintendo and Sega to the curb. They weren't taking the Wii seriously and they let Microsoft take a whole bunch of Japanese support. They screwed up.
This doesn't mean that Sony is dead and can never have another successful console. This doesn't mean the PS3 has no games. This doesn't mean that those who own the system can't enjoy said games and look forward to future titles. What it does mean is that in terms of business and finance, the PS3 is a disaster. I know it sounds like very strong wording, but I just don't see how it's possible to see it any other way. Like I said earlier, they've gone from 75% to 20% market share all the while losing billions and billions of dollars. The Playstation line used to be the cornerstone of the entire Sony Corp, and now it's a massive drain.
lowlylowlycook
Member
On the one hand I'm perplexed why people can't understand the need to dig harder after negative information than positive information even though Sony has PR people who's job it is to spread every bit of positive info.
On the other hand Sony's PR release from the Jan NPD was a bit anemic so maybe that isn't quite the factor it would normally be.
On the other hand Sony's PR release from the Jan NPD was a bit anemic so maybe that isn't quite the factor it would normally be.
DangerStepp
Member
Man, reading through this thread...
Why don't some of you get on your knees and suck his dick a little there.
Why don't some of you get on your knees and suck his dick a little there.
artredis1980
Banned
its all about perception.
People think Wii is everything
People think PS3 is losing this console war
No one has a perception of 360 because its in the middle. most people I know talk of the PS3 being too expensive or has blu-ray or they say that Wii is so fun to play or about Wii-sports. but alot of them have a 360 in thier home. they just play games on that
People think Wii is everything
People think PS3 is losing this console war
No one has a perception of 360 because its in the middle. most people I know talk of the PS3 being too expensive or has blu-ray or they say that Wii is so fun to play or about Wii-sports. but alot of them have a 360 in thier home. they just play games on that
lowrider007
Licorice-flavoured booze?
They were stupid questions engineered to provoke a reaction.
im sry i ca nt spe a k prope r ll y wth dic in my m ou th
<swallows>
The guy is awesome.
DangerStepp said:
im sry i ca nt spe a k prope r ll y wth dic in my m ou th
<swallows>
The guy is awesome.
Ninja Scooter
Member
MORGION said:
Justin Bailey
------ ------
He didn't even do that right, though. At least ask a few basic questions before you go for the kill. Based on this I can conclude that a) he's a bad journalist and b) he's bad at being a bad journalist.Salazar said:
RandomVince said:
Not sure, but their goal was that they expect and hope that the PS3 is attractive enough that the consumers will go "I will work more hours to buy one" or in other words, or indirectly saying that the price isn't much of a factor since the consumers wouldn't mind working more to purchase a PS3
CrushDance
Banned
What the hell are you on?AlternativeUlster said:
Snipes424 said:
Not to pick on you, but this is a common misconception. I know that it often seems prima facie reasonable to withhold judgment when you don't have certainty, but that's not actually a good way to go about deciding what you ought to believe. We say that we have knowledge of lots of stuff that we're not certain of - to take the obvious case, we have no problem saying that "the sun will rise tomorrow". Although there are a few ways in which that could fail to happen, someone who denied this would be judged a fool. None of us really have a problem claiming knowledge when our confidence exceeds some level, and that level falls far short of certainty. At some point, it becomes sophistic to insist on withholding judgment until we get more information, and we certainly don't have to wait until we have certainty.
I've yet to hear someone offer even a semi-plausible way for the PS3 to end up making a profit for Sony. They really do need to start selling consoles for hundreds of dollars of profit each. People thought that Sony was going to dominate this generation again, but no one was saying that there was no way for Sony to screw it up (just that it would be hard). Now, though, it really does seem like there's no way for Sony to save this thing. Short of a miraculous (at least double) and sustained (at least a few years) uptick in sales without a price cut, nothing's going to help.
Barkley's Justice
Member
it's the truth just get over it
I wonder what the reaction would be if there was an interview with Reggie and they asked:
"It seems that in 2008 you failed to deliver core game experiences to Wii owners, how did 2008 slip through the cracks like that?"
"Disaster Day of Crisis is finished and translated. Why won't you relese it in America?"
"It has been 3 years since the Wii launched and so far the only storage solution is to "clean out the fridge" when will you deliver something useful?"
I think even the most avid Nintendo Fanboys would be patting the journalist on the back for asking those "mean" questions. But that is because Nintendo is on top. For Sony these questions seem just to be kicking a man when he's down.
"It seems that in 2008 you failed to deliver core game experiences to Wii owners, how did 2008 slip through the cracks like that?"
"Disaster Day of Crisis is finished and translated. Why won't you relese it in America?"
"It has been 3 years since the Wii launched and so far the only storage solution is to "clean out the fridge" when will you deliver something useful?"
I think even the most avid Nintendo Fanboys would be patting the journalist on the back for asking those "mean" questions. But that is because Nintendo is on top. For Sony these questions seem just to be kicking a man when he's down.
CrushDance
Banned
Ah okay, thanks.FartOfWar said:
MORGION said:
Joke post?
Microsoft didn't cut the price for nearly two years. Sony on the other hand slashed the price by $200 within 18 months.
Microsoft didn't even have Halo 3 until September 2007, a full 23 months after the 360 launched. They've had consistently big years in terms of releases...not sure how you're qualifying the big guns being released early.
OldJadedGamer
Banned
RandomVince said:
"It's not fun for me replicating the PS2 numbers. I've seen that movie already," the SCE boss said. "I want to try to see if we can exceed the PS2 numbers after nine years, otherwise why are we in this business?" -Kaz Hirai
http://kotaku.com/5027131/kaz-wants-lifetime-ps3-sales-to-beat-lifetime-ps2-sales
dead souls
Member
M3wThr33 said:
Reality has a well known anti-PS3 bias.
DanteFox said:
And what angers me the most is people saying this isn't biased.
Biased statements are still FULLY CAPABLE of being truthful. They are NOT mutually exclusive. You guys seem to think that if he's not lying, it's not bias.
The goddamn fucking definition of Bias:
So every one of you says that there's no bias means you think the writer has NO inclination of the outlook of this article? There's no slant or overall guess you could make at this? You gotta be fucking kidding me.
Byakuya769
Member
So we're supposed to get mad at questions that are grounded in the reality of ps3's lackluster performance in the current market?
Would Jaffe be screaming about bias if he saw a reporter ask former Pres. Bush why he thinks the Iraq war has failed?
for some reason I doubt it
Would Jaffe be screaming about bias if he saw a reporter ask former Pres. Bush why he thinks the Iraq war has failed?
for some reason I doubt it
Learn2read
Member
M3wThr33 said:
"Testicle Cancer is Awesome. Agree/Disagree"
OMG I'M A TOTAL TESTICLE CANCER FANBOY
Byakuya769 said:
Yes, if the questions were phrased like this:
"Some say that you are the worst president ever. Agree/Disagree?"
"Sources say that you are responsible for the current economic crisis. Do you feel bad for making so many people homeless and commit suicide?"
"What do you want to say to the people that are celebrating because the Republican party sucks ass?"
"Katrina victims really hate you. A lot. And you don't care about black people. Agree/Disagree?"
Those questions could be asked in a MUCH MORE tactful manner and get a much more polite response. Going in like a hard ass interviewer isn't going to get you friends and in the long run, people will be less likely to respond to your questions.
DanteFox
Member
Byakuya769 said:
TheFallen said:
mamacint said:
You guys are missing something fundamental and rather rudimentary: Like Mewthree said, Just because something is true, does not make it unbiased.Which is exactly what Jaffe was irked by. You may agree with every single assumed statement in the interview questions, but they do not present each side of the argument.
Here's an easy example of true, but still biased:
Let's say someone is accused of a crime (murder, rape, etc.), and the news runs a story on it. in the story, they interview the family/friends of the alleged victim, and proceed to fill the story with quotes from the victim's family/friends, but fail see what the accused person has to say about it, or print his side of the story. Even if everything in their article is grounded in truth as far as the quotes, etc. are concerned, it's still biased because it only presents one side of the story.
The same is true here. People are saying "ZOMG JAFFE IS TEH BIAS CUZ HE WANTS THE ARTICLE TO TALK ABOUT THE POSITIVES OF THE PS3 AND NEGATIVES OF XBAWKS" but Jaffe just wants to see a bit of journalistic neutrality/ fairness in the questions.
That is all.
JordoftheDead
Member
legend166 said:
*thumbs up*
JordoftheDead
Member
TheFallen said:
So Awesome.
Trailblazer
Banned
DanteFox said:
DUDE just stop it all ready!!
Your trying too hard to inject logic and reason in this cluster fuck of " Durr PS3 and Sony sucks" Thread.
- Status