Consoles & Propoganda

What changed is that XBox was inducted into the realm of culturally 'cool' items. News stations covered the game launch, "Pimp My Ride" started putting Xbox's in cars, casual cultural references began to reference 'XBox' where they may have referenced 'Playstation' before.

There was a shift, believe me. And if you didn't notice it happening, that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

The shift I'm describing had zero to do with graphics or pushing the system by the way - the public doesn't understand those things - those were just intangibles that set the whole thing in motion among the hardcore Halo fans, and it snowballed from there.

PS - Aselto I don't think you're in NA are you? This is a phenomenon that was local to North America, just for context.

 

...And there is the rub.

Cheers!

 

You know, the sad thing for us "graphic whores" is wii has this shift you're describing now...

 

good observation.... without that, honestly Xbox 360 would probably not even exist.

But since it did, MS is capitalizing as completely as possible now with 360.

 

Yes, exactly - Wii has the cultural wind at its back now.

Luckily for me I'm not a graphics whore.

 

Yeah I can't wait to play the first hentai games for the wii...

 

hmm ... "tech whore"?



Horrible terminology whoever coined the term, but you catch my drift I'm sure.

Could you imagine If xb360 "flopped" and ps3 "flopped" and Wii was the new ps2 (ie: lead dev platform) ...

...

 

Fixed.

 

Yeah, that more accurately describes me.

See, I don't care about 'lead' platforms though - that's why you'll never see me upset if PS3 is in third place, if every multiplatform game has Wii-level graphics... whatever. So long as there are a few games (or apps even) that push the envelope, I am satisfied. Today, my gaming will consist of protein folding - some might find it boring, I find it fascinating. The entire console 'war' to me appeals due to the aesthetic of people clashing in terms of ideas, risks, ingenuity, business acumen... all of it combined. If Wii wins, it deserves to have won - for me it's as simple as that. Sony's strategy will always have been the one I respect this gen though, because it mirrors my own beliefs on technology - or at least it did under KK; we'll see if the KK/Hirai combo results in a change.

So for now, Sony is my 'team' (think sports) in terms of play-style. I don't begrudge other teams their victories, and I respect them for their well executed strategies... both Nintendo and MS have really come on strong this gen. And I haven't always been a Sony fan to boot; I left(?) Nintendo after the FFVII defection. I still loved the N64, and later the GameCube though, even if it was my secondary.

Anyway on a more practical level, there will always be titles that cater to high-level graphics... so even in your worst-case scenario Chef, I wouldn't worry about the titles you care about getting reduced to Wii-level graphics. For these, I think 360 will likely remain the lead even if its install base were to be eclipsed by Nintendo.

 

Impossible imo. There's no way this influx of casual gamer would ever supplant the larger traditional base....at least I hope so

 

I've seen quite a few people who like the Wii but don't want it to win the console wars. Very odd.

 

Interesting. Sony was my team with ps1 (easy to dev and great results = dev support), they had me at the EE unveiling prior to ps2 proper, they lost me prior to DC after the first round of ps2 games looked ick in Japan, then switched up to xb after it seemed Sega was teamed up with MS and Halo had my eye year(s) prior when it was destined for pc.

In this gen, I liked what MS was doing and was wowed/skeptical (ps2 unveiling!!) of what ps3 offered. Kept a pretty open mind though until the price announcement.

Tech-wise I liked what MS was offering but it seemed ps3 was going to wipe the floor with it, so I searched and researched and found this site along the way.

I don't like the way Sony is playing the game or has played the game as I don't feel they've backed up their talk since ps1.

I appreciate what they're doing with cell but I think rsx was a last minute addon. I liked what MS was doing with xenos and xenon but they did aim a bit low in the cpu target. However they made up for it with great software tools and an "easier" system to dev for. (key)

Nintendo - I had high hopes for what they were planning with rev. In the end they let me down on the tech side but the wiimote thing makes it a very compelling and distinct offering.

I have my "team" but I also like to evaluate the other teams as well and evaluate if I would have done things differently in their shoes (with only the limited knowledge an outsider can have).

In this respect I think Sony has done poorly on many fronts. Nintendo has done very well (although I would not have risked it with the "wii" name). MS has done ok but mostly has been artificially proped up by Sony's mistakes.

I don't begrudge other teams victories, as long as the refs didn't decide it.

Regarding the likelihood of Wii becoming the lead plat, I realize it won't affect ps3/xb360 development as the bar has been set for these consoles but I sure hope Sony/MS don't let the bean counters get a hold of Wii sales data when concept planning for ps4/xb720.

 

The refs are the consumer - how can they not decide it? In that context, every move, every play, every strategy... is fair game.

 

neneno ... the consumer is the score board. The refs are media/pr/etc. Misc things that have little to nothing to do do with the consoles, the services, and the games.

 

They aren't the refs at all. Media and PR are both tactics to be used. Maybe you feel differently, but when I say whoever wins deserves to have won, that's exactly what I mean. If Nintendo were to win on PR and cultural hype, well... there ya go - it deserved to win.

It's not about who should win, or who I want to win... it's about knowing in this great world of ours, victory has to be taken - it is not given. And if you have a weakness, you find the opponent's as well and play to it. Nintendo has no ability to wage this war on hardware strength, so they ignore it entirely and play to their strengths. Props go to Nintendo.

 

They are still manipulation of the game at hand. The scoreboard is the consumer. Otherwise what is the score for?

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.

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.

-edit- man we have ruined this thread! Good discussion though.

Regarding the N comment: I agree but that is still a team move not a ref move. They got good press because the thing sells itself. Their marketing efforts to target the thing are obviously effective but again it isn't selling on the concept of something it isn't. I agree, props go to Nintendo. But the wiimote was part of the team strategy, not "let's get good press and spin this system as the second coming". (or a balistic missle guidance system or a supercomputer etc)

 

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.

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.

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.

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.

 

I agree pretty much wholeheartedly with xbd. The main point of argument seems tobe about which rules you think they're playing by - Rugby League or Rugby Union? TheChefO thinks the rules of the game don't allow for PR spin as a legitimate move. xbd views the game as that being one of the options of play. From those different perspectives, Sony's PR maneouvres are either clever tactical positioning (ignoring all the fumbles) or down-right cheating. And for those that think they're cheating, hostility is directed towards them.

I agree with xbd that it's an open playing field where pretty much any tactic is fair, as the competition are allowed to use the same 'dirty tricks' if they choose. Personally I'd prefer the rules were changed so that PR nonsense and FUD was dropped from the game, and I do complain about it's use - like unfair offsides in Soccer or 'Missed Balls' in Snooker. But whoever wins within the rules of the game, they've won because they played it best. Which is how I play board games - may the best cheat win!

 

For me: "May the best man win" - That is my outlook on life and on the "systems wars". I don't like backroom deals and handshakes and the rest, even though I recognize these things are a part of life and potentially difference makers. (yes, I realize MS is probably just as guilty as Sony and Nintendo for that matter. But I can't say for sure, I only know what I know)

I disagree: If the liars won, they won, but they did not deserve to win. Big difference.

Regarding misinformation etc, I don't want this to get out of hand either and honestly I would not dismiss evidence of misinformation from Nintendo or MS or Sony. I just think Sony has a bigger audience so what they say has more weight. (see ps2) If Nintendo crushes 360/ps3 sales this gen and has everyone's ear and overpromises nextgen (n64) there should be repercussions for that. I see the best thing that has happened in this regard is the explosion of the internet and the ability to find the truth if you seek it.

Agreed - we are a (small) part. On this very board when I joined I felt a very heavy bias and I felt the need to speak up in instances where I felt a properly balanced viewpoint was not being represented. Some of you guys thought (think) I was a troll etc because my views did not align with the majority but I still felt the need to offer ... balance.

Hey as long as you're ok with it, I'm ok with it.