By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - PS Community Reborn!!!-An outbreak?! PSX has a date!!!

 

What did you think about Sony's Pre-TGS Conference?

It was nice 10 11.90%
 
Nothing that really caught my attention tbh 25 29.76%
 
It was awesome! 8 9.52%
 
Not Bad 7 8.33%
 
I didn't like it 11 13.10%
 
It was okay 10 11.90%
 
Needed more LoD! 4 4.76%
 
Decent 2 2.38%
 
Other 7 8.33%
 
Total:84
mornelithe on 24 April 2016
bananaking21 said:
mornelithe said:

fucking sony killing the xbox

hehe, right?  Forbes is some high level journalism!



Around the Network
mornelithe on 24 April 2016
BraLoD said:
mornelithe said:

That can't be true.

*open the article*
"And sure, that reign at the top was only because Sony was late with the PS3, but no one cares. Microsoft has sold more than 80 million consoles. It is the clear favorite in North America."

LOL, Globally in the US mentality and petty excusing right from the beginning (after the RROD and problems comentary).

Great article all over, btw!

Damn Sony, why did you stopped making 360s!!??

They actually deleted the tweet after like 5 or 6 hours of being destroyed on twitter lol.  Zhuge was highly amusing.



mornelithe on 24 April 2016
BraLoD said:
mornelithe said:

They actually deleted the tweet after like 5 or 6 hours of being destroyed on twitter lol.  Zhuge was highly amusing.

What did Zhuge said? He has been too trolish on tweeter

 

 

 

 

 

 



mornelithe on 24 April 2016
BraLoD said:
mornelithe said:

I really think he should hold back somewhat, too petty coming from a serious data sharing account.
Feels like a joke post made on forums, not very professional.

I think the opposite, actually.  I think more industry folks need to start pointing out the shitty job journalists are doing, no names on the internet are simply ignored, but when respected members of the industry say something they may start taking notice.



Teeqoz on 24 April 2016
mornelithe said:
BraLoD said:

What did Zhuge said? He has been too trolish on tweeter

 

 

 

 

 

 

I cringe so hard when professionals don't know the difference between a Forbes contributor and Forbes themselves...



Around the Network
mornelithe on 24 April 2016
Teeqoz said:
mornelithe said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

I cringe so hard when professionals don't know the difference between a Forbes contributor and Forbes themselves...

It's an article on the Forbes site, tweeted out under the ForbesTechNews verified twitter handle, if a contributor is meant to be a different level of human than other Forbes writers, they should do more to separate them out.



mornelithe on 24 April 2016
BraLoD said:
mornelithe said:

I think the opposite, actually.  I think more industry folks need to start pointing out the shitty job journalists are doing, no names on the internet are simply ignored, but when respected members of the industry say something they may start taking notice.

The problem isn't with the journalism matter, but the will to give petty blows here and there, as for example using data to mock a side when making a comparision. It's just not professional, it's something I expect on a forum or a blog post, and as it's not being shared with friends as a joke, that's just what it is, petty, flaming on a big scale, coming from a serious source.

While it could've been construed as a jab at Nintendo, I think it was meant to add context to what happens when you have a PS+ like service with tons of different offerings (movies as well as games etc...) versus a service like what Nintendo provides.  Also, if you followed Zhuge, you'd notice he said on Twitter today that he'd love to post Microsoft's network info, but they won't release it.  Soooo, when you only have two companies providing their financials in this regard, well...comparisons are fine imo. 

I think, however, just like when Microsoft, or Sony are struggling, Nintendo folks can be just as overly sensitive and see insult where none actually exists.   It seems that only certain individuals in the forums are given carte blanche to troll, as long as they have previously identified themselves as said troll.  Which is why someone can go into a thread talking about 2015 financials, and post financial information ending 5 years ago, stretching back to the 90's as if that's somehow relevant to the thread.



Teeqoz on 24 April 2016
mornelithe said:
Teeqoz said:

I cringe so hard when professionals don't know the difference between a Forbes contributor and Forbes themselves...

It's an article on the Forbes site, tweeted out under the ForbesTechNews verified twitter handle, if a contributor is meant to be a different level of human than other Forbes writers, they should do more to separate them out.

Articles specify if it's Forbes themselves or a Forbes contributor. As for the Twitter account, that's another story. But I think the correct thing to do here would be criticize the contributor group, not Forbes themselves.



mornelithe on 24 April 2016
Teeqoz said:
mornelithe said:

It's an article on the Forbes site, tweeted out under the ForbesTechNews verified twitter handle, if a contributor is meant to be a different level of human than other Forbes writers, they should do more to separate them out.

Articles specify if it's Forbes themselves or a Forbes contributor. As for the Twitter account, that's another story. But I think the correct thing to do here would be criticize the contributor group, not Forbes themselves.

Yeah see, here's the problem, if there's ever a legal issue, guess who's liable?  Not just the group, but Forbes as well.  They allow their name to be used, they should be providing oversight.  They don't, it's on them.



Teeqoz on 24 April 2016
mornelithe said:
Teeqoz said:

Articles specify if it's Forbes themselves or a Forbes contributor. As for the Twitter account, that's another story. But I think the correct thing to do here would be criticize the contributor group, not Forbes themselves.

Yeah see, here's the problem, if there's ever a legal issue, guess who's liable?  Not just the group, but Forbes as well.  They allow their name to be used, they should be providing oversight.  They don't, it's on them.

Are you sure about that? That seems like something that Forbes would cover in their terms of service/contract or whatever for their contributors.