PS4 / Xbox One console war

[system11]

http://www.shacknews.com/article/81899/ ... resolution

"Power is a subjective term"

Is price subjective too?

[system11]

http://kotaku.com/and-heres-another-guy ... 1461279632

TLDR:
Guy bought a Xbox One and Target shipped it too early. He started posting information about it including an unboxing video. Microsoft made a COPYRIGHT claim against his video despite it being a legitimately purchased product.

And posted elsewhere: Then they banned his system.

You would have thought they'd sieze the positive PR on this one since he was posting lots of positive comments, but instead they've acted like a bunch of cocks again.

[Friendly]

After being muted by Our Dear Leader not once but twice, I didn't intend to post here anymore. But when I browsed this forum and saw my thread being bumped, the prevalent lack of information and understanding compelled me to write another post, after all. Weak of me, I know.

These are the facts people should know:

XBone:
1.18 TF GPU (12 CUs) for games
768 Shaders
48 Texture units
16 ROPS
2 ACE/ 16 queues
Coherent bandwidth: 30GB/s (30GB/s shared between CPU coherent read/write and GPU coherent read)

PS4:
1.84TF GPU (18 CUs) for games + 56%
1152 Shaders +50%
72 Texture units +50%
32 ROPS + 100%
8 ACE/64 queues +300%
Coherent bandwidth: 40GB/s +34% (20GB/s for CPU coherent read/write + 10GB/s GPU coherent read + 10GB/s GPU coherent write)

In short: Xbone is 30%+ weaker than PS4 and 100 USD/EUR more expensive.


The result of Microsoft's design-by-committee approach coupled with inane executive decisions:

Xbone:
Battlefield 4 = 720p (60fps)
Call of Duty: GHOSTS = 720p (60fps)
Killer Instinct = 720p (60fps)
Dead Rising 3 = 720p (30fps)
Titanfall = 720p
Ryse: Son of Rome = 900p (30fps)
Forza 5 = 1080p (no AA) (60fps)
Kinect Sports Rivals = 1080p (30fps)

Playstation 4:
Battlefield 4 = 900p (60fps)
Call of Duty: GHOSTS = 1080p (60fps)
KillZone: Shadow Fall = 1080p (MP=60fps, SP=30-60fps)
Infamous: Second Son = 1080p
DriveClub = 1080p (Targeting 60fps)
Resogun = 1080p (60fps)
Knack = 1080p (30-60fps)
Assassin's Creed 4: Black Flag = 1080p (30fps)
Thief = 1080p (30fps)
Blacklight: Retribution = 1080p (targeting 60fps)
Warframe = 1080p
Trine 2: Complete Story = 1080p (60fps)
Flower = 1080p (60fps)
DC: Universe Online = 1080p (60fps)

Since no amount of spinning can change this, Microsoft's Phil Spencer stated a few days ago that "we play the games, not the resolution". Certainly, Mr. Spencer, but why would anyone pay more money to play the same games at lower resolution and with lesser effects? Funnily enough, Microsoft started running this ad at the same time as Spencer's comment:

I am confused. Suddenly resolution does matter, after all?
So Forza 5 runs at 1080p. At what cost? (And i don't mean half the game's content being locked away in the form of DLC, which is another issue entirely). Forza 5 features pre-baked lighting, fake reflections, no anti-aliasing, no dynamic weather, no day and night cycles. Next gen right there. (Note that Sony's delayed Drive Club actually has all of the aforementioned).

Now let's take a moment to reflect on content strategy. Microsoft spends truckloads of money to prevent certain third party titles from being enjoyed by owners of rival systems. They bribe pubishers so additional game content is withheld from competing systems for certain periods of time (eg, "timed exclusivity" add-on DLC like 'Episodes from Liberty City' (GTA IV)). Microsoft wastes hundreds of millions of dollars that way instead of investing this money into developing new games and series using their own studios. The long term result of this is that most content ends up being avaliable elsewhere, while first party support drops off prematurely, as demonstrated by both the original Xbox and Xbox 360, which has been pretty much dead for the past 2 years, while Sony's PS3 continues to be supplied with a constant stream of high quality output (this year alone: Sly Cooper, God of War, The Last of Us, Beyond: Two Souls, Puppeteer, Ratchet & Clank: Into the Nexus, Gran Turismo 6.)
Microsoft's way has always been the way of the money-hat, as opposed to investing into a long-term strategy that is beneficial for both them and their customers.

There is much more to be said, but I'll end this post with the thing that enrages me most about MS/Xbone: They STILL haven't understood why Xbone preorders were abysmal prior to the reversal and that taking away the right of ownership from people is fundamentally wrong (after all, that's what they have been doing with Windows too for two decades). They STILL believe that their forced-online DRM that strips us of our rights is the way of the future, which makes it seem all but certain that it will make a glorious comeback at Microsoft's earliest conveniece. Albert Pennello, yesterday: "People just weren't ready for all digital Xbox One" All digital but somehow physical, too. A.k.a. having the cake AND eating it.
There is a fantastic reply to this in the forum which system11 now frequents, too: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.ph ... tcount=657
You really should read it.

http://kotaku.com/and-heres-another-guy ... 1461279632

TLDR:
Guy bought a Xbox One and Target shipped it too early. He started posting information about it including an unboxing video. Microsoft made a COPYRIGHT claim against his video despite it being a legitimately purchased product.

And posted elsewhere: Then they banned his system.

You would have thought they'd sieze the positive PR on this one since he was posting lots of positive comments, but instead they've acted like a bunch of cocks again.

Glad you understand Microsoft's M.O.

[Ed Oscuro]

@ Friendly:

Isn't what Sony is doing with audio formats a similar attack on consumer freedoms? As I said before, it doesn't matter to me compared to games, but it does show that everybody is opportunistic about chipping away at those consumer freedoms when they don't think anybody is paying attention.

@ Spadgy:

Maybe I'm conflating a few things here. One the one hand there's the feeling (which you get if you read a little of Jim Sterling's commentary at Destructoid) that the rest of the gaming media are very reluctant to call spades. On the other hand, I can't ignore the fact that what I'm talking about is almost completely informed by reporting by that traditional gaming media.

But I don't think that just letting daft press releases speak for themselves is enough here. Newspaper journalism has two components - both the actual reporting, and the editorial section. I would rather deal with journalistic biases than have opportunities for editorializing go unclaimed because people were worried about upsetting their sources. Like traditional newspaper reporting, if the gaming media doesn't constantly press for the issues, this is just weakness, and the companies will be happy to sit on their PR nightmares and just smile until it blows over.

Oh, and system11's post is why I take the "kotaku is awful" thing with a grain of salt. Kotaku's organization makes it easy for this kind of reporting to get lost in the shuffle, but at least they are actually reporting these things, whereas many mainstream sites just give us airbrushed and vapid "roundups" that tend to miss all the important things. This is another example of Kotaku actually providing meaningful journalistic commentary and oversight (even if the method is just taking off from NPR's reporting).

[Friendly]

@ Friendly:

Isn't what Sony is doing with audio formats a similar attack on consumer freedoms? As I said before, it doesn't matter to me compared to games, but it does show that everybody is opportunistic about chipping away at those consumer freedoms when they don't think anybody is paying attention.

You mean the lack of mp3 at launch? Shuhei Yoshida (and others) already confirmed that it will be coming later. Note that last I heard Xbone doesn't support mp3 at launch, either. Besides, why even bring it up in this discussion? Have you completely forgotten about Microsoft's many proprietary formats? MS's closed audio/video codes (wma/wmv) are but a tiny fraction of all their closed format transgressions committed in the digital world.

[Ed Oscuro]

Have you completely forgotten about Microsoft's many proprietary formats?

My question was about Sony - trying to divert the topic back to Microsoft isn't an answer. Saying "somebody else is worse" isn't an answer - if there's any possibility that Sony is doing bad things, I'm not going to accept the lesser of two evils as a reasonable choice. Microsoft's ever-changing office formats (which I care about a great deal, and dislike greatly) simply aren't directly relevant to the discussion.

Now, it might not be a "lesser of two evils" situation, but for me, both Sony and Microsoft have a hill to climb because of PC gaming and the many intriguing developments coming to it soon. Microsoft just has so much farther to go because of their many, many terrible decisions.

About the MP3 business - it's good to hear what I was basing that off was incomplete and wrong. What I was reading was based on this official source:

Does PS4 include a music visualizer feature?

No.
Will I be able to play MP3s on PS4?

No*.

*We appreciate your feedback and are exploring possibilities.

That was released October 30th, and what I said about Sony being opportunistic appears to have been bang on the mark. In this pre-release era, "we appreciate your feedback and are exploring possibilities" is obvious double-speak for "we'll back off if it looks like people will stay away because of this." Nobody expects that Sony will have to "explore possibilities" very far to discover that their current generation machine is more than capable of decoding MP3s and playing them back in real time.

That such debates are possible reinforces the fact that consoles are intended to be a restrictive walled garden for playing the types of media the manufacturer (Sony, in this case) wants you to play. Microsoft's ineptitude has skewed the discussion very far to the right towards very restrictive policies being considered the norm, and makes it easy to forget there are many truly open platforms available (well, at least the PC) which support the programs you choose to use.

It's almost funny that you try to use this terrible topic-diverting tactic of talking about Microsoft even when you could have given a clear, simple answer; that only reinforced my determination to find out the (comparatively complicated) true story. Sometimes being a blind shill is counter-productive to your cause. Again, "Microsoft is worse" is not an excuse; and I'm a bit disappointed you would try such a maneuver on me.

[BulletMagnet]

Guy bought a Xbox One and Target shipped it too early. He started posting information about it including an unboxing video. Microsoft made a COPYRIGHT claim against his video despite it being a legitimately purchased product.

And posted elsewhere: Then they banned his system.

For whatever it's worth apparently they do plan to unban it at some point.

[Ed Oscuro]

Guy bought a Xbox One and Target shipped it too early. He started posting information about it including an unboxing video. Microsoft made a COPYRIGHT claim against his video despite it being a legitimately purchased product.

And posted elsewhere: Then they banned his system.

For whatever it's worth apparently they do plan to unban it at some point.

I found it pretty funny the guy thought Microsoft had "some 'splainin' to do." What, you're surprised that Microsoft is going to take advantage of the agreements you scrolled through that let Microsoft ban you for anything they want, when you're using the console in a manner it was not intended to be (i.e., before the official launch)? Again, it's a walled garden...they can pretty much do whatever they like.

What I'd like to know is whether he can still play games offline and whether he can receive updates. Edit: He can still "use the console," so I assume play games offline. Not sure about updates and the like.

NeoGAFfers have me disappointed. So many posts about an embargo but nobody seems to have tweaked to the real basis for banning the console (which is an agreement the guy actually agreed to).

[Friendly]

@Ed Oscuro
Well, then we are both a bit disappointed. My post was a comparison between Xbone and PS4, the most important points of which you ignored while only addressing a miniscule detail. And by using my post as a starting point, saying that both are identical (or that one is better, or worse than the other) is completely legitimate; this is not a tu quoque defense (aside from me not having to (or trying to) defend anything).

[system11]

Guy bought a Xbox One and Target shipped it too early. He started posting information about it including an unboxing video. Microsoft made a COPYRIGHT claim against his video despite it being a legitimately purchased product.

And posted elsewhere: Then they banned his system.

For whatever it's worth apparently they do plan to unban it at some point.

I wonder if they'll consider not claiming Youtube copyright over him unboxing a product he paid for too.

Whole situation stinks.

[replayme]

Does the machine suck as much as we all think it does?

To answer this and address much of the points made thereafter, I do think the PS4 is the better machine, mainly due to the accessibility, potential, support, internal architecture and development environment it offers developers.

But the Xbox One is by no means a bad machine. Forza 5 was remarkable and did feel to me 'next-gen'. 3D graphics so long ago became glossy and detailed it seems harder for a new generation to have the same impact it used to, but the detail in the words, and the things the machine allows for (how far Turn 10 have pushed the 'Drivatar' thing is insane, even if the word is horrendous!).

And I will say I was impressed with the new Kinect. The original Kinect was like Leap Motion; an ultimately flawed glimpse of something with potential that has only managed to add novelty to games; all too often very badly. I for one put my Kinect straight in the back of the cupboard. Kinect 2, however, in my experience works brilliantly in very low light in tiny (and large) spaces. It's accuracy is pretty damn good (Having to use your hand to squeeze a throttle trigger to accelerate in the jet ski game in Kinect Sports Rivals was amazing). I'm not interested in leaping about and flailing my arms around to play a game, but I can see how it could offer some truly beneficial extras to a sit down console game (interacting with alien UI, for example) and be the core of some wonderful indie-style games. And the fact it comes bundled mean more developers will feel confident in supporting it; which means more will be learnt collectively by the industry, pushing what can be done and what us games can enjoy.

A smaller detail is the controller. Having spent a good few hours with both consoles now, I can reasonably confidently say I prefer the PS4 controller; it is a better shape for my hands and more robust/high-quality. But playing Forza 5, the vibration in the Xbox One controller was amazing, in that it seemed to come form different directions in a way that communicated the physicality of the game very well. I liked that a lot.

So, better than the PS4? Almost certainly not. But the only options here aren't that it has to be fantastically good or just awful. It's a good bit of kit, and I'm sure it will deliver some great game playing experiences over the years.

It may not be "better" than the PS4, but it's certainly better than the Wii U. This time next year, it's going to have far more games available for it, and far more games worth playing, than the Wii U. Hence why it's a better "investment".

That Martin Robinson dude from Eurogamer really was putting across an ill-advised short-sighted spin when he proclaimed the Wii U to have the best lineup this Xmas. But what about next Xmas, when the wider industry as a whole has written it off?

[Ed Oscuro]

Friendly, I am very much amused to think that you know enough to use a Latin term for a fallacy, but either don't know or won't admit that is exactly what you did (unless you are hoping that the point that I am not being hypocritical will save you - the name of the fallacy, including the Latin phrase, technically depends upon the other party having the behavior being criticized; do I have to assure you I don't work for Microsoft just because I leveled a charge at Sony?) "I don't have to defend anything anyways" reminds me of an old joke about a lawyer who borrowed some garden tools and didn't give them back: "I didn't ask to borrow the tools; I gave them back in better condition than I got them; I didn't get them yet." You're just vomiting words here, trying to cover all the bases while losing sight of what you are actually trying to argue (or hoping that we will do the same).

You seem to resent any attempt to take the discussion in new directions that you don't approve of. I think that development, not stagnation, is a key element of developing useful topics. Perhaps reflecting upon this point might provide insight into why you might upset the referee here. Personally, I definitely don't mind if you think that Sony's transgressions (at least this go-around of the Sony "universal set-top box that does everything" merry-go-round - lol rootkits on CDs) are lesser than Microsoft's. In fact, I think much the same, and I welcome developments from Sony that are pro-consumer. Nobody was attempting to create complete equivalence between Sony and Microsoft - but rather to point out that what distinction there is will be partly a matter of degree; trying to whitewash Sony policies is misguided and counter-productive if you really care about consumer freedoms.

If you weren't blind to new ideas, you would also have noticed that my original post explicitly states that Microsoft is also attacking consumer freedom. I was pointing out (and I think I still can) that any attempt to paint Sony as not at all opportunistic is naive, which you don't care to consider; you seem to be demanding that I just not discuss the point at all. Uh, request denied.

The subtle key here is presenting evidence that is adequate for the case you're trying to make: Saying "Microsoft is bad too" obviously won't excuse Sony; saying "you didn't talk about what I wanted to talk about" is simply laughable - dem cookies are tough! Saying I "ignored the most important point" of your comment doesn't make any sense to me because it looks just like pouting that I didn't see the value in taking my turn to beat the dead horse so you could have a breather from that very tough job. Whatever you are trying to accomplish, I am sure you don't need my help in amplifying your points. At the same time I assure you that if I discuss other views, it shouldn't imperil your argument - if your argument admits realistic comparison between different parties, that is.

Speaking of factual things, I see also that Audio CDs and SACD are not to be supported by the PS4 - at least I haven't seen Sony changing course about those as well. That instantly disqualifies the PS4 as having any claim to the "do-everything box" title, in my view.

[spadgy]

@ Spadgy:

Maybe I'm conflating a few things here. One the one hand there's the feeling (which you get if you read a little of Jim Sterling's commentary at Destructoid) that the rest of the gaming media are very reluctant to call spades. On the other hand, I can't ignore the fact that what I'm talking about is almost completely informed by reporting by that traditional gaming media.

But I don't think that just letting daft press releases speak for themselves is enough here. Newspaper journalism has two components - both the actual reporting, and the editorial section. I would rather deal with journalistic biases than have opportunities for editorializing go unclaimed because people were worried about upsetting their sources. Like traditional newspaper reporting, if the gaming media doesn't constantly press for the issues, this is just weakness, and the companies will be happy to sit on their PR nightmares and just smile until it blows over.

I feel we could talk those issues over in so much depth we could go on until we're old and grey! You make some important points, and I could ramble forever about the issues around pure objectivity coming from any human brain, the idea that if a journalist loves a genre they are the best and worst person to tackle it etc etc. But I will say this. The fact that games journalism is watched more today than ever before, and that many people like yourself are thinking about it so much and bringing it up, is a great thing. Journalism should always be watched closely and held accountable, and as the medium of games has become more respected/recognised, today games journalists are watched more closely. I certainly feel an increase in such pressure these days as a full time games journalist, and that's a good thing; it makes me stop and think and helps me do my job better. All of those in my career should feel that too. So I think things are changing for the better (lest we forget the days of the 1990s, when games journalists were showered with far more gifts, spoilt with much more ludicrously expensive trips and treated to far more by PRs. I missed out on that period, by and large, but I hear many tales from the 90s of casinos, cocaine and brothels; frankly horrible things). Here in the UK those days are certainly gone.

On the other hand, it's becoming harder to be positive as a games journalist (in terms of reviewing). I love games, and the games industry, and when I play a fantastic game to review that I adore, I want to share that with people and praise the game for being wonderful. But it feels today that if you're negative and aggresively-critical as a journalist, you're doing OK, while if you're do some positive coverage, it feels that it's assumed that you must be being influenced by PRs and such. That's a shame, because there are great creations out there that deserve praise. Hopefully we can finally arrive at a point where there is balance. Hopefully, this whole process of games journalism's new accountability will get us there in time. And I for one can like a game without a PR telling me to!

Back to my experience of the Xbox One, that wasn't me presenting my games journalist expert opinion (if I have such a thing! ). Rather plain, dull old spadgy speaking on a personal note: 'I played these games and had some fun'. I did, and it gave me reason to be a bit more optimistic about the Xbox One. It reminded me that I should give the machine a chance. And I posted here in case people wanted any details on the games themselves.

And to put it all in context, I'm a contemporary journalist who prefers a PVM over an HDTV, and is far more excited about, I dunno, the AC release of Caladrius or my copy of NEO XYX turning up, than a new console arriving. So don't listen to a word I've ever said about Xbox One! That's why I'm largely an industry journalist (aside from my paper reviews that's all I do). Writing about a new motion capture camera, theories about script writing, the infrastructure of the games development education system, the role of traditional psychology in game design, or interviewing NASA about their work using game development tools is more interesting to me than the work that plenty of other journalists are already clamouring around to cover, so I'll stick to my odd little corner of games journalism!

EDIT: As I read this again I realise I'm talking as a reviews and features writer, while you're talking more about news. So maybe I just typed a load of irrelevant waffle!

[HydrogLox]

For whatever it's worth apparently they do plan to unban it at some point.

Frankly I wouldn't be surprised if they leave the console ban in place - their official language does not suggest the that there is the concept of a "non-permanent console ban".
Xbox Live suspensions and console bans

Console bans

Xbox consoles may be permanently prevented from connecting to Xbox Live for one or more violations of the Xbox Live Terms of Use. Consoles can be banned from Xbox Live for several reasons including, but not limited to, the following reasons:
...
Customer Support for Xbox Live cannot undo an Xbox Live suspension for a console. Xbox Live console suspensions may also include permanent suspensions of Xbox Live accounts as well.

Obviously there may be PR implications if they do not remove the ban - but is anybody going to be paying attention to this after 2013-Nov-22? Seems Microsoft is wearing their weasel stomping boots right now.

[Ed Oscuro]

@ Spadgy, He Of The Mighty Pen and Unexpected Acorn Bombing, Our Befurred Overlord in the Oak, and sundry other titles

That's a good point about finding the right balance of coverage - but I think that there are ways to be critical without being a meanie. Jim Sterling tends to be grumpy because, well, from the metric of "are we talking about important stuff" many outlets often appear to be failing to do that, and that invites grumpiness. So I think there's importance in keeping separate the professionalism of asking the right questions, and the enthusiasm to keep on the beat. I know many "traditional" journalists understand this; games journalism just appears to be a bit behind the curve here.

A digression about the question of objectivity: It amuses me to be arguing what look like two sides of the same story in different threads, as I was defending (allegedly) IGN's having different scores for God Hand and Party Babyz. I've spent my time studying and reading about objectivity and theoretical possibility in scientific theory, social science, and philosophy, and also thinking about how it applies in concrete situations, so...if there's a criticism in there that I'm expecting some kind of objective standard, you can just look at what I wrote about God Hand and Party Babyz that to see that I don't have any such illusions about what's possible. To finish the tangent, I think that it would be OK by me if games websites dropped review scores altogether, especially ones with decimal scores. "Good," "Okay but not worth the time," and "Bad" are all I want from a website; where does this pretentious "we have this down to at least a tenth of a point SCIENCE YO" come from?

Part of the reason that games journalism appears behind the curve must be that, up until recently, it was all fun 'n' games and there wasn't much at stake for anybody but the industry. Nowadays, people can get shafted on their media libraries in ways that don't make sense - I mean obviously you can't expect Atari VCS games to work on your Nintendo, and even comparibility on the 5200 and 7800 is a gift, but then what's the reason Sony wouldn't support Audio CDs? People can get shafted on access to the system for strange reasons - back in the day, if you bought a console before the official release date, you were just lucky, and nobody stopped that fun. Today, people can make personal creations and even real money in games.

There is a lot that needs to be covered but I am disappointed to see many outlets sticking to the "nothing serious" coverage that was appropriate in the days of the N64. If anything, it looks like many journalists know all about the restrictions and problems that affect them but they don't show vision in taking a big breath and reminding themselves that they are also there to serve the public. Yet newspaper journalists have been doing just that for a very, very long time, even going to jail for the sake of reporting when they thought it right to do. Even in the Gilded Age journalists were doing what they could to tell people the whole story.

Yes, maybe we're both expecting to make great strides in looking at things that don't matter; frankly, I think that even if you are a features and reviews writer, you should be concerned about rethinking the question of what actually gives users value. I don't see the value in review scores anymore. Many people don't.

I do see the value in impressions and even reviews, but at the same time it's easy to be resentful of the two-tiered "reviewers" and "everybody else" system in place today. I don't have a good reason for that resentfulness but it sure seems like anybody can go out, play a game, and share their impressions. At the same time, when Car & Driver reviews a car, they don't get it before everybody else and go "well, it only flipped over twice today when I was turning after a red light, but man I love driving so I gotta be optimistic about this." At least, I don't think they do that. Maybe it's not the right thing, but there's certainly a kind of immediate and lasting value in the kind of work that Consumer Reports does, too. I think the "golden age" of EGM and the like was all about screenshot porn anyway; probably nobody really cared if Dave Halverson reviewed Cybermorph on LSD because look, pretty pictures! So I think the right way to end this rant / ramble is to say: The times they are a changin'.

[spadgy]

To finish the tangent, I think that it would be OK by me if games websites dropped review scores altogether, especially ones with decimal scores.

I'm very lucky. I've reviewed games for a paper for about seven years, and in that time we've never run review scores. It's great, because when I've written elsewhere where scores are needed, representing copy that says 'this is good and this is bad' pair with a single number is really bewildering!

That said, just a couple of weeks ago the website of the paper requested that for the online versions of my print reviews, I should score out of five stars.

There is a lot that needs to be covered but I am disappointed to see many outlets sticking to the "nothing serious" coverage that was appropriate in the days of the N64.

A very good point. I'm sure in my past, as I learned the trade, I fell into that trap and penned the odd shit novelty piece, but you're right.

they are also there to serve the public

While there's lots of downsides to training in journalism, I thank my post-grad journalism course for drilling this into my head. I always try to remember when reviewing a game that I'm am just another person with an enthusiasm for games, with an opinion no more 'correct' or worthy than that of any non-journalist, and yet what I say happens to be printed in however many thousands of copies of a newspaper, and may cause somebody to invest £40 of their hard earned cash.

EDIT: Re-reading your last paragraph Ed, you've made me think! I'll carry on thinking before I carry on waffling, but you've made some very interesting points!

[replayme]

I think the whole argument of journalism being corrupt lacks credibility. Every jobs has its perks. And every person who doesn't act accordingly (in context) besmirches their name and standing.

I don't really see what the problem is tbh. If you don't agree with someone's professional conduct or opinions, just go elsewhere. That's what I would do. Especially in this day and age when we have so many alternatives at our disposal.

Karma bites everyone in the ass eventually. Hence the reason why Edge is no longer the force it used to be. Ever since the redesign (and even before), they've been a joke. But I don't complain. If one wants a print alternative, there's always Games TM. And if Eurogamer ever get on my tits, there's always Destuctoid.

The point is: everyone should be accountable to themselves - regardless of the industry they work in. Blame the people, and not the profession.

[BulletMagnet]

Frankly I wouldn't be surprised if they leave the console ban in place - their official language does not suggest the that there is the concept of a "non-permanent console ban".

I recall the guy saying that he was still able to get onto XBL with his 360, so they didn't ban his account...that being what it is I'm not sure what else they could mean by saying that the current ban isn't permanent. Even if they can't reverse the ban they placed (which sounds unlikely offhand), I'd guess they'll send him a new system or something like that, especially considering that this case has already earned them some unwanted publicity.

[broken harbour]

MS banning a guy with a legally purchased XB1 just shows how they feel about their customers. Even a temporary bricking of the dudes console is BS.

[Ed Oscuro]

To finish the tangent, I think that it would be OK by me if games websites dropped review scores altogether, especially ones with decimal scores.

I'm very lucky. I've reviewed games for a paper for about seven years, and in that time we've never run review scores. It's great, because when I've written elsewhere where scores are needed, representing copy that says 'this is good and this is bad' pair with a single number is really bewildering!

That said, just a couple of weeks ago the website of the paper requested that for the online versions of my print reviews, I should score out of five stars.

At the same time that I say "well, this is a problem," it's easy to see why five star reviews are compelling. People want something simple to point to!

It's kind of funny, but based on some snarky comment I heard in a classroom, I realized that I needed to focus part of an upcoming presentation on "what science can do for you." If you, or I, or anybody spends their time just saying "here's the nuance" then many people lose interest. That bulletpoint list of good and bad things? Since when do people care (with apologies to Friendly) if the lighting is prebaked? People played the HELL out of Quake and Goldeneye. What is going to make somebody interested is finding out whether it addresses the one or two points they have already identified as important. So if I was scoring a multiplayer game in the post-Goldeneye era, I would not only keep that history in mind, but probably specifically tailor the review to try to answer the questions people cared about. I guess that's another nail in the coffin of "objective judgments."

What I treasure about good reviews is the human element, and the wisdom behind the comments made by the reviewer (unfortunately, the very nature of these reviews is often that there isn't enough time to write them as art for art's sake - but I often enjoy that element as well - yes, I've gone out and hunted down reviews of games long after release and having played the heck out of a game so that its comments would not realistically have any impact on my thinking about the game). People who fight endlessly over the God Hand vs Party Babyz gaffe are choosing to focus on something that is there for convenience - the element that is by design meant to boil down all that bothersome text into some kind of point of reference. Personally I would rather do head-to-head comparisons before a number score; even those I wouldn't boil down to a single number comparison, like "God Hand is 5.6 times better than Party Babyz," because that is going to be pretty meaningless to somebody who is really upset by God Hand's imagery and who feels the Party Babyz are more compelling - that element of opinion is so hard to tackle.

EDIT: Re-reading your last paragraph Ed, you've made me think! I'll carry on thinking before I carry on waffling, but you've made some very interesting points!

Why are you so humble, anyway? I appreciate that somebody is actually taking time to try to engage with me, especially given that I have that reputation as being hard to understand or approach. Anyway, cheers!

I think the whole argument of journalism being corrupt lacks credibility.

That's one way of looking at the argument. I'm with you in at least one respect - I think that the argument should be that journalism needs to stay fresh. It's a matter of interpreting things.

I don't really see what the problem is tbh. If you don't agree with someone's professional conduct or opinions, just go elsewhere. That's what I would do. Especially in this day and age when we have so many alternatives at our disposal.

What I said before should help make my comment here clearer: Spadgy talks about doing people a service. Likewise, I'm not here ranting about how horrible games journalism is and wanting it to die, or even just saying (even if it is realistic) "All creature will die and all the things will be broken. That's the law of samurai." If you want to be completely hands-off, you can expect things to get progressively worse. It's like voting, you know. Better to get your foot in the door and try to make a change - if you care. Otherwise, don't bother people who do care! I'm entering the conversation feeling that there are real jobs here at stake and real opportunities to make things better (not necessarily "easier") for everybody.

So I think we all agree that a big part of the question is whether journalism - even individual outlets - can continue on as before. The answer is probably a resounding "no," if we mean IGN having people review complicated, deep games in a week on coffee and no sleep, and trying to score a Ninja Gaiden the same way as a Nintendogs, the same way they would score anything else, ticking off invisible boxes which would (if they existed) ask questions like "does this game look like a next-gen title?"

Karma bites everyone in the ass eventually.

Maybe I'm just naively optimistic because I believe that we can actually make positive changes.

The point is: everyone should be accountable to themselves - regardless of the industry they work in. Blame the people, and not the profession.

I agree with the first statement - there's personal ethics. But I don't agree with the second at all - we have professional societies which come up with professional ethical standards. Quite often those ethical standards were put in place because people (maybe the general public) got fed up with bad behavior, or sloppy behavior, and the professionals stepped in to save the profession. But it is very hard to do something if the balance of power is on the side of those not caring to change.

[spadgy]

Why are you so humble, anyway?

Because I am the best in the fucking world at it by such a long shot!

(The reality is I'm just an all round wimp!)

And at the risk of taking this any further of topic and then being guilty of creating a thread I have to then split, the other new issue is that of the general demise of the larger studio, and the subsequent rise of the small team developer with no PR liaising directly with journalists. While such a dev contacting a journalist in such a context is arguably still PR, it not done with the same approach or experience, and creates a new dilemma. How will journalists continue to balance their objectivity/subjectivity when they are getting to know (and even befriending) the devs themselves? With the PR middleman out the way, a new challenge arises.

And believe me, giving a game made by a lovely person a bad review feels awful, even when it's for the greater good of the public.

[Ed Oscuro]

Well, regular journalists have been befriending their marks while still writing important coverage - so there's no reason to be too worried about doing it. It wouldn't be easy emotionally, I agree.

On the plus side we are not in a world where anything can change at any time, through the power of electromagnetic pulses, so perhaps it's OK to say "it still needs some work..."

[Friendly]

Speaking of factual things, I see also that Audio CDs and SACD are not to be supported by the PS4 - at least I haven't seen Sony changing course about those as well. That instantly disqualifies the PS4 as having any claim to the "do-everything box" title, in my view.

Yes, and it won't wash your laundry, either. They never said it would be a "do-everything box", they said PS4 would be a video game console. Which is precisely what it is. People who buy $400 game systems to play audio CDs need to check their priorities (fun fact: I have never once played a single audio CD in any of my consoles. Why anyone would do this and thereby wear down a potentially expensive and difficult to replace optcial console drive instead of using a $10 CD player is beyond me).

Have you read this yet? http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.ph ... tcount=657
Jack of all trades, master of none.

Remember that quote by Yusuf Mehdi (corporate vice president of marketing and strategy for Microsoft)? "People don't pay attention to a lot of the details" was his reply at E3 when he was asked why he thought Xbone's DRM scheme would succeed, one week prior to their DRM reversal, after they suddenly realized that consumers are not quite so ignorant after all. It's comforting to know that despite of a marketing budget of several hundreds of millions, Xbone is still being outsold at a rate of 2:1 or worse in most regions. Even that much money can't make the weaker, more expensive hardware look like the better deal.

One more tidbit that may interest potential Xbone buyers:
Microsoft CEO candidate Stephen Elop said to consider selling Xbox business, killing Bing

[Ed Oscuro]

So, attempts to redefine the problem away aside, they do use ability to play media (and play media at any time you like in-game) as marketing points. The PS3 was many peoples' first Blu-Ray player, and Sony has not included Netflix, Hulu Plus, Amazon Instant Video, and other streaming services because they want people not to think they should buy the PS4 as an entertainment system.

Basically it was fine with them if it was a surprise for people having bought the console that MP3 (and Audio CD, and SACD) was not supported, as a way to push them towards newer (and more profitable) formats.

Sony themselves talk about the PS4's November 15 launch as showing "what the future of gaming and entertainment looks like." Gaming and entertainment.

So yes, people with legacy media collections (that nevertheless are essentially free to integrate on any well-designed optical disc system using the same physical size format, as they were on e.g. the PS3) seem able to claim that Sony has decided to drop consumer format support for tactical reasons that don't suit the consumer.

People who buy $400 game systems to play audio CDs need to check their priorities (fun fact: I have never once played a single audio CD in any of my consoles. Why anyone would do this and thereby wear down a potentially expensive and difficult to replace optcial console drive instead of using a $10 CD player is beyond me).

Agreed, but this is another prime example of one of your diversionary tactics. I'm sorely tempted to say that I won't bite, but I will admit that it's one of my pet peeves when people ruin consoles on dumb things. Again, though: PS3 as a Blu-Ray player was not a terrible choice at launch for many early adopters, and the original model of the PlayStation has its audiophile fans even today.

The more important point is your stance is incompatible with the "it's your console, do what you want" stance that you seem to say Sony is big on, and which they seemed to garner goodwill from with their E3 policy speech. But more fundamentally, who appointed you the designator of what's right and wrong to do on consoles?

[system11]

I wish the PS4 could play audio CDs, it's quite disappointing that it can't.

[Ed Oscuro]

We can also take this the other direction. I wish games consoles didn't have optical media because they're not necessarily very durable. But, oops, that's what the anti-physical-media crowd says, and we know they don't care about having tangible product, which results in new problems by itself. For what it's worth, the Xbox One can act as a "media server" (I guess this is a fancy term for "disc player that goes on the Internet") and play CDs. Don't know how this means its OS needs many gigabytes of memory to work - I do hope that they will start shaving off a gigabyte off that requirement to give back to future games.

[Lord Satori]

I wish the PS4 could play audio CDs, it's quite disappointing that it can't.

"I just got this amazing new soundtrack on a CD! Time for me to turn on the tv so I can turn on my console and listen to it!" said no one ever.

[Friendly]

On a related note, this just in: Xbone doesn't play 3D Blu Rays.

[Ed Oscuro]

I wish the PS4 could play audio CDs, it's quite disappointing that it can't.

"I just got this amazing new soundtrack on a CD! Time for me to turn on the tv so I can turn on my console and listen to it!" said no one ever.

"Just think of all the money I can save by not having to pay for audio CD compatibility in my PS4!" said no one ever.

however, lol Microsoft

[Lord Satori]

On a related note, this just in: Xbone doesn't play 3D Blu Rays.

you're still here?