Dodece said: @Reasonable
I see your viewpoint, but popular misconception isn't an argument for the continued existence of outdated slurs. The popular misconception also says the PS3 doesn't have any games, has a lot of delayed ports, and is a failure of a console. That has not translated into the liberty for members on these forums to say things like the PS3 has no games, or to call the console the Delaystation.
Moderators have asked that members no longer use them, because they are firstly not as true as they were at one time, and secondly that they are only incendiary. This holds true for Shooter box as well as the others. The label just doesn't have a basis in reality.
The original poster is just asking that the same consideration be extended. When the 360 fans are not permitted to use slurs. Why are other fans being permitted to do so. Being on the losing side does not excuse you from behaving in a civil manner, or from using blatant propaganda. |
I agree with you in terms of people who should know better, posting on the forums, etc. I'm just pointing out that outdated misconceptions take a long time to disappear.
The PS3 is still seen by many as having a weak library or terrible ports. The Wii is seem by many as for families/kids only, etc.
I made it clear in my post it didn't excuse things, but on the other hand there's no point ignoring how long perceptions take to change.
Oh, and kowenicki, I do think I was perfectly reasonable. I made it clear I didn't see the 360 as a shooter console, but so far as I can see many people do and the general perception seems to skew that way. I'm happy to be proven wrong but I'd argue it does have that image - note I'm talking image, not reality.
You and Doece have made good points - I was just responding by noting that market perception is a fickle beast and slow to change and that early perceptions stick. For example I just noticed that VG247 has yet again called out as news Halo 3's triumphant place at top of Live charts - what image do you think that reinforces?
The PS3 I believe is still seen as too expensive because you have to get BR too. It's still seen as being weaker in the library department, although that is clearly changing as these days a casual stroll of a store shows almost identical titles for each ( the few exclusives that really stand out aside). I think that many see it as also being somewhat shooter centric (an image mistake on Sony's part I believe, overly focusing on titles vs what they saw as 360 strengths and too slow to broaden their catalogue).
Like everything I can only go on the general perceptions I see given on internet, by marketing and in surrounding comments. I certainly have the perception that the 360 is still seen as being shooter centric. I haven't really sensed that it is seen as just another console now. Why do you think it is? What do you feel has changed and why?
I still observe teenagers / young adults happily extrolling its virtues for online shooters and hacks in CoD4 or buying it to play shooters first and foremost . I don't see / hear older gamers seeming that interested in general - they seem to lean to PS3 so far as I can observe. I don't observe younger kids wanting one for Banjo, etc. - they want a Wii or PS3 to play R&C, etc. that is familar from PS2.
Like I say I'm not claiming as a fact 360 is perceived as shooter centric, but I see little evidence it isn't and plenty it still is. Just walking in a game store almost every banner, etc. for 360 pushes the latest big shooter or GTA or reprises iconic Halo/Gears images, etc. I never see a big, consistent message that 360 is for movies, or family games, etc.