They are still manipulation of the game at hand. The scoreboard is the consumer. Otherwise what is the score for?
For me, it's simply an aesthetic to see what pattern of human effort and behaviour has resulted in what end. For you, I don't know - I think there may be a more fundamental interest in the path the gaming business takes. Like I said though, I don't care who's first or who's last from anything other than a psychological/sociological level.
If you think it's ethical etc to "use" the refs to achieve an agenda that's your opinion. Personally I think when they get too involved it's not a good thing. I'd rather see the teams play and win/lose on their own merits rather than a phantom holding call at the goal line.
Uh... what? Just for the record I think Microsoft's "use" of press and media, as well as viral marketing and the rest, has been insiduous on a level
well above Sony's. I mention this out of nowhere like this because I *know* that all of this angst of yours is directed towards what you consider to be Sony 'PR BS' and such. But, unlike you I don't care if such efforts were to result in 100% defection from Sony. It's like this - I will rage against the whole Major Nelson DSP/Integer thing, because it's an afront to have to read it in places I consider to foster learning and knowledge. But that doesn't mean I hold it against Microsoft for having done it, know what I mean? They're trying to win, and their efforts reflect it; again - props from me. If someone is willing to make the world more ignorant than others are willing to make the world more knowledgable, hey - the liers simply deserve to win. What do I care if MS spends $100 million more in advertising vs $100 million more in CPU development? If the former yields the greater results, *that's* where the efforts should go.
And for the record I'm not trying to differentiate MS from Sony in terms of honesty here; afterall people are upset with Sony PR for a reason. It's just hard to knwo where to lay the blame when you think about how FUD spreads - is it the companies trying to profit, the press that is eager to sensationalize, or the consumer too lazy to research? All three play a role. For my part, I make sure that as a consumer I'm educated, and as press I write pieces that reflect my own ideals for what the world should be. But seriously, we should all just make sure we're educated on things and always thinking critically; the console war is a joke compared to politics for example, yet there are
so many similarities to how opinions are swayed. And that's because both efforts are rooted in human nature and the means to influence opinion.
But you are right, the refs are a part of the game and they can influence the outcome. I'm just saying I don't like it when that is the case.
We are all of us part of the game, and like the companies themselves, we choose how to play (or not play). For instance Chef-O, you have a lot of posts on a prominent forum, and you openly back and support MS' efforts. Do you not think you have influenced some consumers in your day? Now... is that right or wrong? And I'd say to you - it's not anything, it just is what it is. How we perceive and react to the physical actions and creations of these companies is just as important and fundamental as the creation itself, and the companies have to be ready to do combat on that level if they wish to have *any* control over their message.
-edit- man we have ruined this thread! Good discussion though.
This thread was destined for terrible things from the outset if all the GAF-references at the start were any indication; now at least it's something of worth.
