Whoops!

Tripped on Zoy' s retro-giz there. Might want to clean that up a bit dude.

PS3 offers a gamer alot of ' fun' things wich your 360 dosn' t, i.e. free online gaming, you can play online for free whenever you want, without having to pay for it, that isn' t a option on your 360,

Just because it' s free doesn' t mean it' s any more " fun" than Xbox Live. In fact, you' d be hard pressed to find anybody who says that Playstation Nothing (Because it needs no name after all) is a better experience than Xbox Live. Microsoft has had years and years more experience with centralised online play than Sony, and it shows. Does this mean I like shelling out $4 a month for online play? No, but...

hey...

wait...

It IS only four dollars per month!!!

It' s many ' fun things' to do on it, and there will be many more fun things to do on it. That' s the whole point of the statement. Deep down inside, you know there is stuff that you' d løike to do on PS3 if you are a gamer, wich you won' t get on your 360.

Erm... no. The whole point of the statement was to say that anybody who plays games wants a PS3. Sony' s error in that statement is trying to define what a " real gamer" is. We' ve been trying to establish that for months here on the forums, with nothing more than petty arguments ensuing, and it' s fairly obvious that there' s no real answer to the question, because the question itself is flawed. So, for all intents and purposes, a " real" gamer is anybody who likes videogames. I know people who like games, who don' t want a PS3, so therefore not every " real" gamer wants a PS3.

In the end, Sony has had some awful advertisements for the PS3 in the past & this ' aint an exception. It' s not like I don' t expect this stuff after all.

8$ downloadable arcade version of tekken with 0 loading time, Motorstorm, Resistance, etc.
And if that' s not enough for you, there will be other reasons wich will make you want to have a PS3, i.e. GT5, Litle Big Planet, Ratchet Clank later are also things real gamers would like have a PS3 for.

You could compare future AAA titles for years without getting anywhere. Look at the games right now, and tell me if it warrants $630 of my hard-earned cash, and that' s not even including games.

P.S. Is " no loading time" really a perk worth mentioning for a tiny HDD title?

ORIGINAL: KongRudi



I can reread the thread, but who is the liar, you or Ornodeal? :-/
None of you provides a link to your original source, and both of you give different versions of what he have said, the only thing you agree on are that he is arrogant due to the thing he said, but you do not agree on WHAT he said. :-/

The forumite plot thickens...

Hold on neither of us is a liar, neither of has directly quoted from the interview, neither of us has contradicted what the other has said, infact the discussion has moved on (See Eddie' s post on bottom of page 2.) I don' t get what you are trying to prove?

Right back to the topic.

I do feel sorry for Dave Karraker, he has one of the hardest jobs in the industry trying to turn the fortunes of the PS3 on it' s head, especially after some of KK' s comments. Still he sounds like he knows what to do.

http://www.gamepro.com/news.cfm?article_id=112808

alijay034, did the Sony rep say that anyone who did not buy PS3 aren' t true gamers now?

Well, if they say that any real gamer would want a ps3 and someone doesnt want a ps3, wouldnt that mean they arent real gamers?

To do a decent quote, and not trying to paint him in a bad light, I can do a copy and pasteof his exact words:

I am pretty sure if you asked just about any real gamer out there if they would like to have a PS3, their answer would be a resounding " Yes!" I think a lot of this goes back to the proliferation of the Internet, where a very vocal minority can make a lot of noise and potentially alter perceptions of the masses, whether they are accurate or not.

ORIGINAL: mastachefbkw

alijay034, did the Sony rep say that anyone who did not buy PS3 aren' t true gamers now?

Well, if they say that any real gamer would want a ps3 and someone doesnt want a ps3, wouldnt that mean they arent real gamers?

If there isn' t anything on the playlist for a specific console that the person wants to play then no, you can' t just buy a console just for the sake of it, just to make you a " real gamer." Like I said at the begining of this thread " how do you define a real gamer? "

The title I started the thread with was paraphrased deliberately to provoke debate - but it gave a fair summary of what was said in the original interview. You could get into semantics over the wording, but ultimately that' s what I believe he was saying, any real gamer would give a " resounding Yes" to wanting a PS3. And that is what I took exception to, it is the latest in a string of quotes from senior Sony people demonstrating their arrogance over the industry.

I certainly don' t hate Sony, I am fairly ambivalent towards them at the moment, sure the PS3 (and PSP for that matter) are impressive gaming machines, but currently they offer nothing that is making me want to go out and buy one - but that does not make me any less of a gamer, and I was a gamer long before the current MS/Sony fighting. Sure some titles may come out that are exclusive to PS3 or show a marked technical gap over the 360 and my opinion may change, but as of this time there is nothing that is a must-buy for me personally.

And I am waiting for Speedball on the 360, if it can be as good as the original then it will be fantastic.

I think you just proved his point.
You are part of that very vocal minority, and you tried to take a ' swipe' at him portraying him as arrogant altering the perceptions of the ' masses' here at Kikizo, instead of as a person wich simply were doing his job, answering hard questions.

I think this is a bad thing, the last thing just about any gamer would want is that Sony also would start to become more like Nintendo, where it is impossible for any journalist getting any sort of feedback on any questions, wich is not screened by Nintendo beforehand.

If you really have been a gamer as long as you claim, you would want a PS3, because if you don' t get one, there will be games wich you will miss out on, just like I will miss out on the 360-games, since there is currently only one game in the making wich is interesting enough for me, to invest in that platorm.
But if you give me one, I would want it so I could play it.

I don' t see what so arrogant in saying that..

But it tells me alot about you that when, Dave Karraker answer why he thinks PS3 has gotten so much negative press, and what Sony will have to do to improve gamers impression of them, you feel he is arrogant when he answer that he thinks just about any real gamer would want a PS3.

Atleast it could have been much worse, he could have said like you in your profile:
' You' re not a real gamer unless you' ve played Horace goes Skiing'

Terms like " Fanboy" and " Real gamer" piss me off. Label me and i' ll cut your fucking nuts off...

I suppose it comes to opinions on how he phrased his response, would I like a PS3 (yes), do I want one (not currently) - it was the implication that the lack of wanting one made you some less of a gamer - that I take as arrogance. I understand you don' t feel it comes like that to you, that' s fine but that' s how it first felt to me. It certainly isn' t the worst offender of marketing talk associated with the PS3 (work harder to afford one springs to mind), but their PR department does need to improve in order to get information of what is a good bit of hardware across to the market so people buy it. Statements like this are not wholly constructive in my opinion.

and my profile contains some bits of sarcasm you might find.

Yes, but it weren' t a statement. :)
It were a answer to the question, on how he dealt with negative consumer perceptions from public relations perspective. :)

And he DID say; ' That' s kind of a tough question to answer. I am pretty sure if you asked just about any real gamer out there if they would like to have a PS3, their answer would be a resounding " Yes!" I think ...'

and your answer is:

I suppose it comes to opinions on how he phrased his response, would I like a PS3 (yes), do I want one (not currently)

If you read the follow up question, when he were asked if some of the perceptions were justified, it would probably have answered some of your second answer..
I really liked that answer, alot of that made sense, especially when he compared the launch comparison ( I like to say it is like birth: " The actual labor may not be all the pretty, but the result is pretty darn amazing." ). :)

Also that he now preferred to talk about the games, wich the journalist did somewhat follow upon, when he asked what Sony did to adress the concerns of gamers who are interested in owning a PS3 but haven' t yet made the jump..
Amongst informing the gamers about the things you mentioned in your original message technology only available on their platform, he also mentioned that their first party studios planned to release 15 PS3 exclusives this fiscal year, and gave some examples, wich I guess must be the ' such like sycophantic poodles' part you mentioned. :)

But to answer your question (about Sony PR management), I think Sony has hired a very good person in Dave Karraker, and he does a very good job, especially concidering they didn' t have anyone in charge of PR when that Monica-woman quit a couple of months before he were hired.

Certainly Dave Karraker does seem to have a good head on him and a lot of experience, hopefully he can provide a bit of stability in the outpourings from the PR department in Sony, and rebuild some of the bridges that were broken between them and parts of the gaming community.

ORIGINAL: KongRudi



If you really have been a gamer as long as you claim, you would want a PS3, because if you don' t get one, there will be games wich you will miss out on, just like I will miss out on the 360-games, since there is currently only one game in the making wich is interesting enough for me, to invest in that platorm.
But if you give me one, I would want it so I could play it.

That is complete and utter Bollocks, when there is something that whets my appitite for the PS3 then I will get one until that time, the answer is I will wait, does that make me any less of a gamer?

I' m waiting til it comes down in price more than anything. I wouldn' t like a PS3 for that price. I would like a PS3 for less. I would very much like a PS3 for free!

There are some great exclusives on the horizon, but none that are worth that much to me.

I reckon Karraker chose his words poorly, and he came across sounding arrogant to me too. I think he underestimates how big this ' vocal minority' is, and what' s worse is he blames the internet. " Nothing to do with our business decisions here, it' s the intarweb, and all those false gamers!"

Response to message above, not ETH:

If you read the interview, you' d see he only answered the questions asked.

You can see for yourself allready in the initial message here, that Karraker is right.
Ornodeal only focused exclusively on the negatives in the interview, and he even paraphrased it deliberately to provoke debate (using his own words, instead of Karraker' s arrogant ones), sure, he _intended_ to give a fair summary, but he only offered his own point of view, in his own words, that Ornodeal wanted to prove him arrogant.. And right after that all the Kikizo-sheeps went ' baeee baeee' and decided that Karraker is arrogant..

Nobody mentioned the positive things in the interview, like the games coming, and when he answered what Sony would have to do to change the minds of people who hadn' t allready gotten a PS3.

I don' t think that Ornodeal is a non-gamer like Karraker, but I assume he is a fanboy trying to put Sony in a bad light, because it will make him happy for some reason. :)
It would be nice to see he answer the question Karraker posed, the thing about how it would benefit the gamer to constantly bash on something?

I have about the same fanboy levels that you have KongRudi.

I think we can all agree that the PS3 is a great machine and there are some great games due out within the next 12 months, and if I omitted that from my original thread I do mostly humbly apologise; however that doesn' t detract from my original argument that Sony expected to bring this shiny new machine out and everyone would fall over themselves to buy one, and anyone who didn' t was somehow un-educated as to the benefits of the machine.

And to answer the question, if we don' t criticise and point out flaws in all our machines then the manufacturers won' t be under pressure to correct them either in this generation or the next even. Therefore ' bashing' does in the long run have a benefit to all gamers.

I suppose you could call anyone who disagrees with you Rudi sheeple. Fact is, whether the PS3 is godly or not, its public perception Karraker' s trying to turn around, and that part of his statement didn' t help.

however that doesn' t detract from my original argument that Sony expected to bring this shiny new machine out and everyone would fall over themselves to buy one, and anyone who didn' t was somehow un-educated as to the benefits of the machine.

That' s not what he said in the interview, either.
He said something along the lines that it were Sony' s job to educate the consumers about the benefits you could only get on PS3, not that everyone who didn' t invest in a PS3 were un-educated.. :-/

Every answer he gives, you pick the first part of his answer, and then put your own spin on the second part, in order to make him look worse. :-/

It' s not that you' re having a different opinion than I do, wich I find annoying.
I find it annoying that you' re making up stuff wich he supposedly said, when it' s not what he did say.

And to answer the question, if we don' t criticise and point out flaws in all our machines then the manufacturers won' t be under pressure to correct them either in this generation or the next even. Therefore ' bashing' does in the long run have a benefit to all gamers.

So, you' d rather have downgraded the PS3' s with DVI instead of HDMI 1.3, 720p instead of 1080p, DVD instead of Bluray, normal 3.2PPC-processor instead of the expensive cell, optional HDD, and optional wifi, just so it can come under the magic 500$ pricepoint, during the launch-window?
I think it' s alot of cool stuff to get, and don' t feel that it' s a problem paying extra for all those things, just like you probably find it OK to pay MS for the ability to hosting your multiplayer-games on your own console. :)

I assume that is the flaws you have the most problems with, since that were some of the things you mentioned in your original message.. :)

I suppose you could call anyone who disagrees with you Rudi sheeple. Fact is, whether the PS3 is godly or not, its public perception Karraker' s trying to turn around, and that part of his statement didn' t help

Yeah, you suppose right.. j/k, only used it as a metaphor.

Anyway, the statement weren' t that bad when it were in context of the interview, unless ofcourse you were part of the vocal minority he speaks about offcourse, then it' s you who get' s put in a bad light, and noone wants to be put in a bad light.
But the statement were much when it were changed and pulled out of context, way it were portrayed in the original message. :-/

Kong, all of those features you just mentioned about the PS3 are all of the points some of us made in another thread as to why some will not buy a PS3 as a gaming machine.

HDMI does not make for better gaming, it makes for watching movies better. Same goes with Blu-ray. Blu-ray does not make gaming on its own better. As for Cell, it is yet to be shown how big of a difference it will make over the 3.2PPC processor the 360 has.

So if you are going to talk strictly about a gaming console, then don' t mention all of those nice extra features Sony put into the PS3. They have nothing to do with gaming on its own at all right now. In the future, that could change.

I guess the biggest question we should ask, is if you think in 2-3 years time will the PS3 BE leaps and bounds ahead of the 360 graphically and in gameplay?