Little more than a month ago I wrote about the fact that several "gaming" journalists
scrambled at the launch of the PS3 slim to try and downplay it's effect on the market. It was almost as someone directed them to try and sway the public opinion in order to counter Sony's efforts to regain a wider market share.
Now, more than one month later, it's pretty clear that the PS3 slim's effect on the market (and the effect of all the big games that are gonna be published in the coming few months) has been pretty radical, and that such evidently biased articles didn't have much of an effect to stop Sony's quick freeclimb out of the hole.
With their efforts being so useless, one would expect that the anti-ps3 journalist clique would have stopped, given that that it's not exactly smart to jeopardize one's credibility in order to try and torpedo a ship that won't sink, but is instead speeding full steam ahead.
Well, too bad. They didn't stop. Just a few days ago the internet was fed some controversial sony ads from Chile (funny how some people go all the way to countries like Chile to fish some anti-Sony news), portraying Nazi blood transfusions and similar "not so politically correct" themes. The press dived on them like a bunch of vultures, with "journalists" like Matt Furtado of the Examiner slapping in our faces fighting titles like "
New Sony ads are creepy and distasteful".
This of course, only to see their credibility sink even lower by having to write that the big news they found were indeed fake, as Sony never authorized those ads that were just a promo concept by a Chilean advertising company.
As I said, anyone capable of a bit of logic would think that this campaign should stop to avoid those journalists inflicting more self-damage to their own reputation.
Quite the contrary. Looks like the army is still recruiting, and since generalist journalists don't seem to have enough of an impact, it's time to try and get some actual specialized gaming journalists into the ranks, may it be that their closer contact with gamers could actually make them more effective?
We're already quite used to see the regular Sony-bashing by Microsoft-friendly sites like Kotaku or Destructoid. What we didn't see much, before, was some mindless PS3 hate from IGN, that always had a pretty solid reputation as a neutral site.
Unfortunately they just had to shatter such a reputation with
this editorial, published two days ago by the likes of Rus McLaughlin.
Since it's Saturday, and on Saturday gaming news are slow, let's take our time and dismantle the article piece by piece. After all, it's so pathetically biased that showing the real extent of such bias is almost fun.
Of course Mr. McLaughlin begins with the usual plea on how much he loves the PS3, and how he criticizes just because he cares. That's the typical lines we read from biased journalists trying hard to persuade us that they are indeed neutral and, as such, credible. An attempt that normally falls horribly short while reading the rest of the article. That's exactly what happens in this case.
But let's not speed ahead and go on orderly. I'll quote what the poor sod writes in italics, and then I'll comment it:
"
For starters, Sony's gotten way too comfortable being the catch-up console. Seriously, they've taken ownership of last place and made it their own"Given Sony's recent marketing efforts, the strong line-up of incoming of AAA titles, and the fact that such efforts are actually allowing them to catch up, I'd say that they don't feel comfortable at all in their position, and that they're doing quite a lot, and successfully, to address the situation.
Strike one.
"blithely copying trends set by others... but not right away. Oh no, they hold off a while before jumping on a bandwagon that's already halfway to the next town. Trophies, Sony's answer to the Xbox 360's brilliant Achievements system , showed up nearly three years too late and weren't made mandatory until 2009."
Welcome to the world of game development, where nothing stays exclusive for long, and where good ideas are often going to appear in competing products sooner or later. It's not like the first time that Sony copies something from someone (just look at all the concepts from the Super Nes that were implemented in the PS1), or that someone else copies Sony. Do you really think, my dear Rus, that Microsoft didn't learn and copy a lot of concepts from the PS2 when creating the Xbox or the Xbox 360? Think again.
Strike two.
"Their newly unveiled motion controller doesn't have an official name or a final design nearly three years post-Wiimote. "
Actually, McLaughlin seems to have forgot that Sony has been studying motion control for years. I shouldn't need to remind him that the first controller including motion sensing released this generation, got on the Japanese shelves on November the 11th, 2006, eight days before the launch of the Wii. You got it, it's the PS3 Sixaxis.
While he gets bent of absolutely trivial details like naming and exterior design (that are probably handed by completely different people than the technology), it's quite obvious that the PS3 wand is in a very advanced state of development. Advanced enough to be applied to games (as shown at the Tokyo Game Show) and to be released soon.
That kind of technology isn't developed in six month or a year. Even a kid would understand that Sony continued evolving their own motion sensing technology since the release of the Sixaxis independently from the Wii and starting quite a lot before it's success.
With the fact that it's largely based on the Playstation Eye, and is paired with features like face and voice recognition, it's pretty easy to see that the PS3 wand (just as much as Microsoft's Natal) has very little in common with the Wiimote. It's an entirely different technology based on the evolution of Sony's camera, that has been under development since well into the previous generation.
Strike three. But I'll be lenient. I'll amend to the rule of the "three strikes and you're out", and I'll continue to ridicule the poor McLaughlin 'till the very end of his misguided article. Am I not merciful?
"Instead of wasting time sponsoring the Me Too! console, Sony needs to cowboy up and lead again. Drop motion control (whoops, too late for that). Nobody on the PS3 cares, and nobody with a Wii will buy in. It only invites cheap ports from the Wii shovelware pile. Concentrate on meeting the potential of the technology already in place"
So
now Sony should scrap a technology that they've been developing for years because Mclaughlin thinks that "nobody" will care.
Is that so? Looks like a lot of developers are looking into supporting Sony's wand and Microsoft's Natal. Capcom has already announced a wand-supporting director cut edition of Resident Evil 5. While I'm personally not a firm supporter of waggle and motion control, even I can see the potential of it for many core games, like shooters, that would finally stop suffering for the lack of a mouse.
Sony's technology seems to be extremely precise and intuitive, featuring a lot of nuances that the Wiimote doesn't have, but even more than that, it'll feature the most important element that the Wii lacks, and that's core games and HD resolution.
Sony's motion control and Microsoft's Natal have a place for a lot of gamers exactly because of the "Wii shovelware pile". Many gamers would like that kind of technology applied to a true core-oriented software library, and Sony is doing exactly that. Telling that no one will care is a serious statement of ignorance on the state of the market.
Strike four.
"
For starters? This is supposed to be the graphics powerhouse that delivers imagery no other gaming platform can, but as-is, you can count the number of games that look better on the PS3 than the 360 on your thumbs. Some look worse. Most developers build for the Xbox because it's easier, then tear off a quick port to the PlayStation, so you know where the love is going. Sony's first move should be to add PS3-worthy graphics requirements to the PlayStation Technical Certification Requirements (the guide for publication approval) and make some show of enforcing it. If they're going to be treated like a chore, get mileage out of it. "
Great idea, goon. So Sony should make things worse for the developers that produce games for the PS3, with the effect of turning some multiplatform games into Xbox 360 exclusives. There aren't only multiple console owners like me and you out there, and fanboys that will cry if a game on their console of choice runs with 1 fps less than on the competing one. There are a lot of gamers that own only a PS3, and I'm pretty sure that they're quite happy to be able to have a wider software library, even if a small part of them runs slightly better on a console they don't have. Let's not even go that for any game that runs better on 360 there's another that runs better on PS3, because of course that would be a moot point.
It's laughable to think that Sony would be better off handing out free exclusives to their competitor than letting some fanboys rage over minimal differences.
Instead of making things
worse for developers by placing laughable rules that no one would uphold, Sony is doing the right thing by sending representatives of their most expert studios like Naughty Dog to support those independent developers and share they knowledge and technology so that more games can properly utilize the full power of the console.
Strike five.
"
Next, let's do something to stop all the top exclusives from walking out the door. It's almost a running joke now, guessing which former Sony showcase will announce their defection at Microsoft's E3 press conference. There are only two developers left who consistently produce A-level games exclusively for the PS3 at a reliable clip: Naughty Dog and Insomniac. If Insomniac and the lead talent at Sony-owned Naughty Dog jumps, the PlayStation 3 takes a giant step towards becoming nothing more than an expensive Blu-ray player. "
Oh really now? Despite Mr. McLaughlin's blatant ignorance, Naughty Dog isn't the only game development studio owned by Sony, so even if someone they don't literally own could decide to go multiplatform, Sony would still have (besides the already mentioned Naughty Dog) Polyphony Digital, Evolution Studios, Guerrilla Games, Team ICO, Sony bend, Sony Online Entertainment, Zipper Interactive, BigBig Studios and all the internal SCE studios like Japan Studio, Liverpool Studio, Cambridge Studio, London Studio and Santa Monica Studio (God of War III anyone?).
Not so shabby for an "Expensive Blu-ray player", is it?
Now let's give a look to the second party studios that McLaughlin seems to think so weakly linked to Sony that they could move to multiplatform on a whim: We have
twenty studios, featuring big names like Media Molecule, From Software, Sucker Punch Media. Vision or Insomniac. Even considering the possibility of Microsoft persuading a couple of those twenty to go multiplatform or even move on the other side, Sony would still have a number of owned studios and second party partners much superior to the competitor, that at the moment has only 7 internal first party studios and 10 external partners. We're talking about a current proportion of 2 to 1 in favor of Sony. Again, an "Expensive Blu-Ray player"? Yeah, sure. Given simple math, it's not surprising that the upcoming PS3 software line-up is so much stronger than the 360's.
But then, is that link between Sony and those twenty second party studios really so weak that Microsoft could easily break it? Maybe in McLaughlin's fantasy world.
Most of those studios are used to working on the PS3 hardware, and their expertise is becoming stronger by the day thanks to constant support from Sony. Why would they give that all up and start from scratch abandoning the console that, at the moment, shows the strongest rate of growth? But even more than that, while those studios aren't owned by Sony, most of their IPs are indeed Sony's property. A studio that decided to move out of Sony's sphere of influence would have to leave their most successful IPs behind (and Sony could just give them to another studio to develop), I seriously doubt that many developers in their right mind would easily do that, given that the IPs are more known to the general public than the studios themselves. Rebuilding one's popularity using only new IPs is as easy as rebranding, which normally means not easy at all.
Strike Six. And this is indeed quite a big strike, because it shows an unsightly degree of ignorance about the gaming market, and while a generalist Journalist can more or less get away with such displays of clueless-ness, a gaming journalist doesn't have that luxury.
Let's not even get on the useless rant about how the price cuts should have come earlier. In an ideal world that'd be true, but we aren't in an ideal world and Sony is a business. While their competition slapped on the shelves hardware made of tinfoil and paper that breaks in humongous percentages, the PS3 has always been a pretty reliable machine, made with quality hardware that doesn't melt down often. Quality standards and technology have a price and I (and many other gamers) very much prefer a console that costs a little more (but offer MUCH more bang for the buck) but at the very least won't implode if I push the power button the wrong way.
Sony had the same problem with the PS2 and learned from it, lowering the prices as soon as they could afford doing it while keeping a sustainable degree of quality and without cutting technology. The result is that only three year into this generation (it's funny how some journalists often write like the generation was already about to end) the PS3 not only offers the best bang for the buck, like it always did, but also has the same affordable price as it's most direct competitor.
Strike seven, but let's move on:
"
The "Everything Box" can't even count on Blu-ray money anymore, since brand-name Blu-ray players retail under $200 nowadays"
Yeah, too bad that those blu-ray players offer ONLY blu-ray playback, it's pretty obvious that everyone that wants Blu-ray, gaming, and everything else the Playstation offer is going to buy a PS3, not a stand-alone player, so yes, the PS3 can still count on Blu-ray money hands down.
Strike eight.
McLaughlin then moves on bashing the lack of backwards compatibility (I'm not quoting everything because it's becoming tedious, and it's really not worth to consume space with those nonsensical rants), and rants on how that would be an evil ploy to juice humongous amounts of money out of the poor little gamer victims with their PS3 editions of PS2 games, as he says "
some of that will be at the expense of You, The Gamer. "
Excuse me? If one already owns God of War 1 and 2 (or other games that will be re-published for the PS3), chances are (unless they bought them to use the DVDs as flying discs or expensive but original coasters) that he already owns a PS2. As such, he does
not need backwards compatibility.
If one doesn't own the games and a PS2, he can buy the revamped game and enjoy better graphics on the PS3 (probably better than what he would have had with the software up scaling offered by backwards compatibility on the old PS3 models) and a few little treats like trophies, And that, for 37 dollars, doesn't really cost, to the gamer that doesn't own them already, much more than buying the two games for the PS2.
So how is Sony re-publishing games "at the expense of the gamer"? No one forces gamers that already have them to buy the new edition (with all the games coming out in the next few months it'd simply be foolish), and the ones that don't, have everything to gain and absolutely nothing to loose from the offer. But McLaughlin has to slap in our faces pathetically emotional lines like "
Sony thanks you for your $40 donation to subsidize the Slim".
If I have the product, i give Sony nothing. If i don't have it, I get to enjoy it for the same price. How in the world is that a "
donation"?
Strike Nine.
Of course could our friendly neighborhood journalist fail at jumping on the bandwagon of the PSP Go Criticism? Of course not, as he drools:
"
You can plainly see Sony latching onto the concept of medialess content with the PSPgo, because there's nothing else about the Go that suggests it's a good idea."
Well, looks like he's quite blind, or maybe just ignorant. As I already said in previous articles, so many developers have scrambled to develop new games in time for the release of the Go or shortly after that the now the PSP software line-up for the upcoming months is absolutely
bloated and trumps that of the Nintendo DS so radically that it isn't even a fair competition.
The biggest disadvantage the PSP had compared to the DS has always been that it's software library wasn't as rich. The release of the PSP Go erased that disadvantage in one strike and turned the tables around leaving Nintendo's handheld to eat the dust software-wise. I'd say that's q quite a big element suggesting that the PSP Go is a good idea.
Price isn't even a factor, since Sony isn't stopping to support the cheap (and UMD-loaded) PS-3000 solution. Want a luxury item that'll fit in a small pocket and that won't force you to carry your discs around? Great, you can buy the PSP Go. You don't care that much about size and have enough room for discs? Awesome, you can buy the 3000. Anyone that has even the slightest knowledge of marketing knows that providing different options is one of the best ways to appeal to a wider market share.
Strike ten.
Finally, McLaughlin falls into the most pathetic and laughable banter as he blurts:
"
So here's a last piece of advice for Sony... wait. Give it two years, five years, whatever. Gain a little ground if possible. Don't lose any. Wait until that 250GB Slim is standard issue, and high-speed internet's a little more uniform in North America, and then dump Blu-ray hard."
Lol... seriously
LOL! Retailers are already moping and boycotting because the PSP Go cuts them off the sales chain, robbing them of part of their share, and McLaughlin would encourage Sony to
shoot themselves in the foot by blatantly and arbitrarily go to every retailer in the world and punching them in the face? How can he be serious? There's an important reason why physical discs will never die, and that goes beyond the fact that most dedicated gamers are also collectors that want their discs in full display, or that the global status of internet lines won't be in any shape to support the widespread download of 50 Gb games anytime soon.
Until someone invents a teleporting technology, you won't be able to download a console. Sony, Microsoft or anyone else will still have to count on the retailers to sell their machines. Why would the retailers carry a brand if such brand doesn't give them any share of the profits (and the bulk of the retailers profit is on games, not on the consoles)? Of course they wouldn't. So McLaughlin is effectively asking Sony to say bye bye to retailer support and have their consoles sold only on generalist electronics stores. Good way to say bye bye to their gaming market.
To put it down simply, it's utterly laughable.
The Blu-Ray/Hard Disk combo is now starting to show it's potential, as bigger games like Gran Turismo 5 or Uncharted are starting to be published. Multiple disks simply don't cut it, as they force developers to split the game in "chunks" and limit their development options, by avoiding the story to go back to already visited places (or forcing the gamer to swap disks an humongous amount of times, like in Star Ocean 4, putting more strain on the disks themselves and on the drive), implementing unsightly placebos like Forza Motorsport's infamous "blob cars" and so forth. As Naughty Dog clearly states that games like Uncharted 2 couldn't be developed without the Blu-Ray (and no one else proved them wrong yet, given the unprecedented quality of their game), should Sony drop the advantage their format gives them against the competition because McLaughlin asks? Please...
So, here we are,
eleven strikes in two pages. Quite an accomplishment, isn't it? Maybe Microsoft will award McLaughlin with a special achievement for this.
What's sad is that McLaughlin isn't alone on this crusade, as more and more gaming journalists are starting to spout that kind of nonsense. While it's unsurprising to see it from non-gaming journalists, given that they are, by definition, less knowledgeable about the market, and that they just need to fill up some space for their publishers to be happy, it's quite surprising to see it coming from IGN and similar portals.
Gaming-related sites can ill-afford seeing their credibility jeopardized by trashy articles like McLaughlin's, so this means that there has to be a reason for them to feed that kind of misinformation.
Unfortunately, tactics like spreading FUD (Fear, Uncertainity and Doubt) are very much established in many markets, it's not unlikely that, given the violent competition of this generation, they are becoming widespread in the gaming market as well.
Microsoft has become more and more prone to the temptation of trying to bash the competition instead of upholding their own quality to try and gain an edge. Dan Greenwalt's
outings against Polyphony Digital are quite a clear example of that. A Microsoft employee has even been recently
busted posing as an anonymous user of the forum NeoGaf (a community that's well known for setting quite a few gaming trend, and as such a real gold mine for guerrilla marketers trying to spread some FUD or anonymously badmouth competitors) to violently criticize Gran Turismo 5 and publicize Microsoft's competing product.
In the light of those facts, I honestly don't see using "friendly" gaming journalists to spread FUD as a tactic that would be beyond Microsoft. Is that the reason behind the large number of "PS3 Hate" articles we've seen lately? is it even acceptable given the conditions of the market?
Your mileage may vary. As usual, everyone will see the facts and forge his own opinion.
or 
