A letter to Square

[SkyeWindbinder]

An interesting and in-depth look at the gaming industry trends right now compared to the past. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZxXEidtxHk

I actually htink this was a well-done editorial. It was excellently spoken, had sources that check out, and makes sense. And a lot of times I found myself nodding to this guy. Not that I think everyone who's not Valve is failing in the gaming industry, mind. But he touched on some good points.

[Abriael]

I actually htink this was a well-done editorial. It was excellently spoken, had sources that check out, and makes sense. And a lot of times I found myself nodding to this guy. Not that I think everyone who's not Valve is failing in the gaming industry, mind. But he touched on some good points.

There are no real sources supporting his conclusions besides other opinion pieces and unreferenced graphs that aren't read that way.

[BruceyBruceyBangBang]

You're basically describing yourself (funny that you call someone "combative", and you came into the thread just to attack that someone on the personal level, without adding absolutely anything to the discussion). You just need to add in the lies. Glad I helped with your soul searching, I guess

So basically, "I know you are, but what am I?" Brilliant. Also, as for the projected window, that was from the time the discussion was taking place. Late November when the info was leaked. You can bother responding to this to show others that you will continue to give the last word. However, you will be happily blocked by me.

[Abriael]

So basically, "I know you are, but what am I?" Brilliant. Also, as for the projected window, that was from the time the discussion was taking place. Late November when the info was leaked. You can bother responding to this to show others that you will continue to give the last word. However, you will be happily blocked by me.

Someone's angry because he's been proven a liar. The discussion was taking place in mid december (December the 12th to be precise) Isn't it lucky that posts are all dated? And you clearly specify "3-4 months from alpha shut down"

May as well read your own posts before you scramble for excuses.

But by all means, block away mate. My job here's done.

[SkyeWindbinder]

There are no real sources supporting his conclusions besides other opinion pieces and unreferenced graphs that aren't read that way.

He does post his references on his video. And a lot of things he said did make a lot of sense to me.

In fact, much of it was what I was thinking myself.

[Abriael]

He does post his references on his video. And a lot of things he said did make a lot of sense to me.

In fact, much of it was what I was thinking myself.

References that don't support his conclusions. A lot of things can "make sense" if arranged in an artful way. Warping reality to prove false (but nicely controversial) points is the bread and water of tabloid journalists.

The whole comparison between the quality at the time of the breakdown of Atari and now is so farfetched that it isn't even funny. We're talking about an overabundance of games that weren't even in a workable state compared with a much lower percentage of games nowadays that can be defined mediocre at worst. Truly shitty games that simply don't work are EXTREMELY rare in nowadays' market while they were extremely common back then.

His list of "debacles" is extremely hyperbolic (he even puts Battlefield 3 into the bunch, where did he take that from? Really don't know, maybe he meant Medal of Honor? If that's how much he knows...) and basically the whole discourse is the videogame equivalent of doomsday preaching on the maya calendar.

[Xeonerable]

Not really. Forums aren't a valid representation of what the real general demographic wants. Poll a different demographic (for instance magazine readers) and you'll get entirely different results.

So basing yourself on forums, or even just "the internet" (provided that there is a way to find an actual consensus on "the internet", and there really isn't) to find a representation of what "The fans" want is flawed at best, ignorant at worst.

People, journalists included, should only talk for themselves. Not for "the fans" or "the majority". That's trying to find a validation for their own opinions that actually does not exist.

Considering the demographic in this matter is a video gaming one, which relies on technology to function, it might be a safe assumption that most of them have internet access these days. So using a forum or the internet to gather opinion might not be entirely off-base.

However I think you are misunderstanding the GameTrailers video as speaking on behalf of the entire fan-base when it isn't. The demographic in question here are the people who are becoming disheartened with Square Enix, and I think the company's latest blunders is reflective of that. (Poor decisions, and even Wada is resigning.) So the "majority" in this demographic probably do share this opinion and as you said the points in GameTrailers' video are "obvious things that can be found on any forum." If we know one thing, it is that people will flock to forums to express their disappointment and those are usually the most vocal. It must be a growing demographic as it appears to be more common.

They're a representation of a very specific demographic (people that go on the internet and feel like chatting about games on forums, and on the western internet at that, since in Japanese forums you'll find entirely different viewpoints), and it has a specifically negative slant, as many are more likely to express negativity in written form than positivity (IE people that have something to complain about are much more likely to write about it that people that are happy about a product). Which is why the internet is becoming a cesspit of negativity and hate and game journalism is following suit (even when hidden behind the "concern" facade of "letters" like this).

You have it in your signature, so I'm pretty sure you can see it as well.

Call me crazy but I find it all ironic to what your first post was.

That was the very definition of pretentious and condescending.

Patronizing with no details as to why. Seeing your other posts in this thread and the tone of your responses... are you being part of the problem that you state?

[Abriael]

Considering the demographic in this matter is a video gaming one, which relies on technology to function, it might be a safe assumption that most of them have internet access these days. So using a forum or the internet to gather opinion might not be entirely off-base.

One. Not all video gamers use the internet.
Two. Not all video gamers that use the internet use forums.
Three. Not all video gamers that use the internet and use forums do so in western forums.
Four. Not all video games that use the internet and forums do so to express sweeping opinions on the development plans of a specific company.

If you look at the numbers of even the biggest gaming forums out there, apply the conditions above and then compare them with the sales of even a mediocre AAA games, you can easily see that people that go to forums for this relevant purpose and even more so people that post regularly are a ridiculously small percentage of the total.

It's not even statistically relevant, as you correctly say yourself, as people that go and are very vocal on forums are more often than not the most negative minded, polluting the validity of the statistical pool.

However I think you are misunderstanding the GameTrailers video as speaking on behalf of the entire fan-base when it isn't.

Not really, he clearly talks about what "the fans" want, which he has no way to ascertain or gauge. The fans want many things, and they're no hive mind.

Mind you, even "the fans that are disheartened with SE" are a hive mind or have any kind of unity of intents or demands.

Some game journalists like him just love to paint themselves as the spokesperson of the hive mind, forgetting that such thing doesn't exist.

Patronizing with no details as to why. Seeing your other posts in this thread and the tone of your responses... are you being part of the problem that you state?

I would say I provided plenty details behind my reasoning, and this forum itself is quite a piece of evidence. I seriously doubt many would say it can be considered representative of the total playerbase of the game, pretty much like any forum on the internet.

The difference between me and "The problem" is that I simply don't try to speak for everyone. I have quite a bit of experience, but my opinions are mine, and I don't need to hide behind crutches like "the majority" or "the fanbase" to give them solidity. They speak on their own without the need of made up pseudo-statistics to compound them.

[SkyeWindbinder]

Seriously, whether the guy says he's "speaking for others" or not, I htink his info is well researched and he gave his opinion based on quite a few facts. Many of his points might prove a bit hard to disprove. I mean, there's no one way to give an editorial. The fact of the matter is, he had a lot of good points, and a lot of people agreed with what he had to say. I know I did.

[Abriael]

Seriously, whether the guy says he's "speaking for others" or not, I htink his info is well researched and he gave his opinion based on quite a few facts. Many of his points might prove a bit hard to disprove. I mean, there's no one way to give an editorial. The fact of the matter is, he had a lot of good points, and a lot of people agreed with what he had to say. I know I did.

Agreement is no proof of validity. Journalism isn't an election (as much as some definitely interpret it as such, and their articles are more pseudo-political and demagogic for the sake of personal popularity than anything else) A lot of people agreed with the maya doomsday theories, and we're still here.

There's no one way to create editorial content of course. There's the solid way based on facts and balance, and there's the hyperbolic way based on alarmism, fanboyism, negativity bias, fearmongering and false/warped information.

One of the best examples of the second kind is what you can define "pandering to the rage", to which pretty much both videos linked in this thread belong (the first a bit less, the second a lot more). It's a very easy and cheap tactic that consists in encouraging and agreeing with the most enraged/irrational areas of the reader/viewer base in order to catalyze the negativity and gain quick consensus while fanning the flames of ire and controversy, no matter if the positions expressed have any degree of validity or not.

The first is legit journalism, the second is tabloid scribbling. If you want to base your perception of the industry on the second you're free and entitled to do so (it's more controversial, and many absolutely love controversy), but that view will be as warped as its source.

To each their own.