You should read the whole article before "quoting" eight words out of a three page article and calling it biased. Like Shifty mentioned the context of that phrase is types of issues encountered not numbers.
Digital Foundry tech analysis channel at Eurogamer
- Thread starter FirewalkR
- Start date
- Status
You should read the whole article before "quoting" eight words out of a three page article and calling it biased. Like Shifty mentioned the context of that phrase is types of issues encountered not numbers.
PS3's Blu-ray lens faults are because of heat ?..
Btw , Dr. Evil, is that your mission to defend grandmaster? If so you're trying hard but not enough. If you'll quote me than take the whole sentence ; " actually I've not read the whole article after seeing this. " . And I think grandmaster can defend his article well enough if he thinks he has to , noone needs your empty words. Thank you
.
Last edited by a moderator:
The article isn't about the lens, it's about concentrated heat, poor dissipation, and lead-free solder which is common to both consoles (in different measures). That and the short life span of current generation consoles. No one is out to get your precious console.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Again, this shows your blatant disregard for everyone telling you to read the article, which would fully explain the context of those words you seem to be unreasonably stuck on.
Everyone else understands the context.
And yes for this particular issue he was talking about it is essentially EXACTLY the same.
And BluRay lens faults aren't even remotely the cause of the majority of failures for this shop to repair.
Regards,
SB
DuckThor Evil
Legend
Part of the problem is that the article is framing PS3 reliability in terms of the 360's reliability and then chooses to paint them as much closer to parity. It never outright says it, but weasel-words go a long way. I'm not going to claim bias, though, though I will claim needless sensationalism. 360 hardware failure news isn't news, PS3 failure news is.
For instance, early on there's this:
By whom? Again, you're trying to compare two figures that, as of last report, are not remotely comparable, and he's hand-waving away that detail by mentioning both problems in the same breath.
Then on the very next paragraph:
That's 6-o-clock news attention-grabbing stuff. Is it worth mentioning? What isn't it true for? 'It seems that simply using your pants for the job they were designed can cause cumulative damage'. On its own, it's useless information. He comes back to this point later on, but it doesn't stop being obvious. There's no mention of real hardware failure rates to put this sort of information into context. If you say that driving your car causes cumulative damage to it, people will look at you funny. If you say that everyone you know who has that car had their axle snap at 10000km, that's real information.
Further on:
Mind you, 60/40 is 12:8. And yes, it does prove that using your console damages it (which isn't news) but again there's an attempt to frame both systems' failure rates together. He then goes on to, in fact, say that 'well, we can't really conclude anything from that figure... but still, that's the figure'.
The 60/40 figure itself is meaningless because all that's being said is, again, 'PS3 and 360 have died after repeated use and repair centers fix them the same way'. You could say that if the ratio was 50/50 or 99:1. The 60/40 shouldn't have been brought up because it's just noise -- but again, it draws attention, it baits bloggers.
For instance, early on there's this:
By whom? Again, you're trying to compare two figures that, as of last report, are not remotely comparable, and he's hand-waving away that detail by mentioning both problems in the same breath.
Then on the very next paragraph:
That's 6-o-clock news attention-grabbing stuff. Is it worth mentioning? What isn't it true for? 'It seems that simply using your pants for the job they were designed can cause cumulative damage'. On its own, it's useless information. He comes back to this point later on, but it doesn't stop being obvious. There's no mention of real hardware failure rates to put this sort of information into context. If you say that driving your car causes cumulative damage to it, people will look at you funny. If you say that everyone you know who has that car had their axle snap at 10000km, that's real information.
Further on:
Mind you, 60/40 is 12:8. And yes, it does prove that using your console damages it (which isn't news) but again there's an attempt to frame both systems' failure rates together. He then goes on to, in fact, say that 'well, we can't really conclude anything from that figure... but still, that's the figure'.
The 60/40 figure itself is meaningless because all that's being said is, again, 'PS3 and 360 have died after repeated use and repair centers fix them the same way'. You could say that if the ratio was 50/50 or 99:1. The 60/40 shouldn't have been brought up because it's just noise -- but again, it draws attention, it baits bloggers.
Richard , would you please tell me what I have to understand from these sentences ;
.
First bolded part is what I mainly disagree and for the second bolded part , it drops a hint, IMO.
And if you think people will take this article as a "shop's experiences" rather than generilisation , its a bit "optimism" if you ask me.
Last edited by a moderator:
grandmaster
Veteran
After a protracted delay in sourcing one, I'm pleased to say that I'll have my PS3 Slim tomorrow! While I guess there is no longer a need to dismantle it (the existing teardowns are more than sufficient), I will be following up on the stuff suggested earlier.
I don't think you're being fair. This blog post/article is not supposed to be a news blurb. Just because people (alright fanbois) now use it as ammo does not and SHOULD NOT influence the author.
By the people bringing in their consoles to that repair shop? This isn't a study of 10.000 console users from around the world. You'd be on less shaky ground if you dismissed the figure as pure anecdotal evidence - which is okay because, as I interpret it, the article wasn't about that at all: it was about the reasons for failure and the short life span.
My NES and my SNES for instance. Or my GeForce 2 GTS, Radeon 9800 Pro which are still going strong. I may need to blow into the cart port of my NES but it still works. And this article was about why that is, not about a fraction figure.
You're drawing attention to it. It's mentioned in three paragraphs at the end of the second page, the article's title doesn't even mention it like your attention-draw theory dictates. You're getting too hung up on a very small, small anecdotal figure provided by an employee of a repair shot and missing the important parts of the article.
The core problem (heat, solder, dissipation) and the methods to fix the consoles are the same. The second sentence are some of the qualifiers grandmaster was talking about. That figure is meaningless when taken out of context: for instance, because the PS3 has a shorter warranty more consoles will be brought to repair THUS inflated figure. The figure isn't wrong, you just need to read the article for the context.
Oh I know that, on my first comment about this matter I mentioned people would take it out of context. But I don't agree with watering down articles for fear of fanboi wars - those will happen regardless; it's a losing proposition.
Try bolding it differently to understand the real meaning...
The shop shows the same fault fixed by the same means is present in both designs, but the numbers are meaningnless.
And I think that a more measured approach would produce a much better article but draw much fewer clicks to Eurogamer. Besides a multitude of big flashy links pointing to other Eurogamer articles, there's a huge Batman banner on the page I saw. Digitalfoundry may be independent from Eurogamer, but they're still running EG's ads.
Oh, come on. This is the very same weaselly 'some people say' trick broadcast news uses when they're trying to pass opinion as fact. You're going to refer to shifting public opinion, well, how about some evidence? It's a technical blog, right? It's still one of the most objective blogs in all of gaming.
My SNES broke down. I gave away my NES but I remember a lot of problems with the front-loader. My Geforce2 GTS AND my Radeon 9700 Pro died early deaths on me. I've had several video cards just go kaput. I've lost numerous HDDs and mainboards over the years. And even that is just missing the point badly. This isn't about anecdotal evidence (because I can match you tit-for-tat), this is about reporting what is essentially a truism as news. Are you going to really claim that using the hardware you listed doesn't cause any sort of damage at all? Is planned obsolescence becoming news again? It's only been 50 years.
You're again missing the point very, very badly. It doesn't have to draw regular reader's attention so much as it has to draw the attention from the content-linking blogs like Kotaku. They'll direct people over there to have a good yell. The 60/40 is an easy 'sound-bite' to quote, to draw ire. And again, why talk about a number that is ultimately meaningless? Why use it as an opening for one of the more inflammatory parts of the article?
Silent_Buddha
Legend
So when writing an article about facts you should omit any facts for fear that some portion of the population would find it inflammatory? Self-censorship for fear of public reprisal?
The 60/40 was just a direct numbers relationship for the number of each console type received by this shop for this particular repair. And to highlight that it IS a valid problem for the PS3 as well as the X360.
He even goes out of his way to make sure the reader understands this isn't an absolute reflection of how many consoles fail out in the wild. Even going as far as speculate at length as to why that number isn't relevant to real world failure numbers.
Thus, showing that while you can't ignore the problem, it may not be as prevalent as the shops number would make it appear. But on the same hand, you shouldn't just dismiss it out of hand because it is a real problem.
Regards,
SB
I don't think you're aware but you're now impuning GM's motives; on nothing but your gut instinct. So your argument is that GM wrote a sensationalist piece so EG gets more hits, more advertisement and give GM more candy?
I don't read anything on that article except anecdotal evidence, insight on why consoles break, methods of fixing them and an opinion on lifespans. The evidence is all anecdotal.
Actually, that fraction you're so hung up on is anecdotal evidence. I'm sorry your SNES broke down, mine didn't. Do you think I'm being sensationalist too?
To the point where there are repair shops with their hands busy 3/4 years after the initial launch? To the point where consoles break down within 2 years? Yes, I'm going to claim some hardware doesn't cause that kind of damage.
The article is clear on this point but to reiterate: lead-free solder wasn't instituted by MS/Sony; small console cases are preferred by consumers. Gamers want top graphics. If planned obsolescene was the issue we'd be getting next generation consoles every other year.
I didn't miss your point; I do disagree the article is drawing attention to it.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Unfortunately, it appears more and more electronics are trending that direction. And quite a lot of it due to the unneeded use of lead free solder which decreases reliability/lifespan and increases cost. So in the effort to reduce pollutants, govenment agencies have increased pollutants.
The refurbished market appears be growing quite significantly each year. Even some e-tailers focused on refurbished electronics now.
Regards,
SB
So because he's a member here I shouldn't speak up when I think an article is sensationalistic? Do I believe that EG has say over DF's editorial content? No. Do I think that journalists will go out of their way to draw people's attention? Yeah, it's their job. But it has to be tempered with something real, and I think most of this article doesn't pass the muster -- I think trimming it to the simple facts would result in an article a third the size, though.
Are you really not aware of the weasel-expression 'some people say'?
Right, that it is anecdotal evidence is my whole point. The point is that the number itself doesn't prove a single thing. The number is unnecessary. But it's still there and its presence can't be ignored; maybe it's just a lack of an editor, as blogs generally don't have copy editors, in which case I apologize if I did impugn GM's motives.
And why would I think you're being sensationalistic? That doesn't even make sense. Write a sensationalistic B3D article, then we can see if I call you sensationalistic as well.
Not what I asked. I'm asking if you're aware of any physical product in which day-to-day wear and tear doesn't result in cumulative damage. Sure, the better-built ones will result in less damage, but again, what is essentially a truism. That's essentially where you can find the main piece of new information: that despite forum arguments, the PS3 isn't really made to last either. But you can make that point practically without mentioning the 360. You can certainly do it while not trying to fit both consoles' failure rates into the same frame of reference.
Planned obsolescence also has the broader meaning of 'not made to last'. It's had that meaning again, for about 50 years. It's even further accelerated in electronics, as you and grandmaster were just complaining about. I'm not saying it's a good thing (or bad), I'm saying that 'things break down' isn't news.
Not when you have no hard facts of your own and are simply arguing that a small, small figure buried in the middle of the article - again, not on the title, not even the main point of the article - is evidence the piece is sensationalist.
Yes, but I still fail to see the relevance to GM's post.
As you no doubt know anecdonal evidence rarely proves anything. Console crusaders may grab onto that figure and run with it but I believe what you're arguing (removal of that anecdotal number) is ultimately pointless itself because console crusaders would pick up another sentence of the article instead. For me: was the figure clearly qualified as anecdotal? Yes. Was there analysis of that figure pro/con? Yes. If other people will take it as a de facto ratio, that's just normal console fandom.
The point GM was making, and that I'm arguing, is not that stuff breaks down. It's that it breaks down inside a time frame a reasonable person wouldn't expect it to.
Again, I think you're reading too much into that figure. GM was at a repair shop, he talked to the employee, there were xboxes there for repair, there were PS3s there for repair. GM asked the obvious question, the guy answered and GM put it into context. Maybe someone on the intertubes will go on a different repair shop and ask and we get a different figure and it's equally valid.
What I'm saying is that, historically for consumer electronics, things breaking down this fast is news. More than news, it should be broad consumer knowledge to put pressure on console makers, industry and government that, for instance what Silent_Buddha mentioned, measures to reduce pollution may in fact increase it. Then you can also argue that the current situation provides jobs in the refurb industry and what not. Or we could argue design deadlines, lack of testing or even engineering competence. But we're not having those important discussions, we're arguing a fraction.
Panajev2001a
Veteran
Grandmaster, have you done or have you been thinking about a Ghostbusters tech analysis... not a PS3/Xbox 360 comparison... just about analyzing the effects the engine shows (I think Terminal Reality also tried to make a bit of a technical demo with the game [I like the game btw]) which are not ruined IMHO even on the PS3 version.
Steep parallax mapping (used quite extensively in some areas), normal mapping and anisotropic filtering (Central Park's cemetery under the rain... at the fountain...), what seem to be dynamic normal maps (Uncharted 1 like) used for clothes, various particle and water effects, ... the engine is not bad...
Steep parallax mapping (used quite extensively in some areas), normal mapping and anisotropic filtering (Central Park's cemetery under the rain... at the fountain...), what seem to be dynamic normal maps (Uncharted 1 like) used for clothes, various particle and water effects, ... the engine is not bad...
Have we become so spoiled by high quality manufacturing processes that we expect new, faster, hotter running equipment to have the same MTBF ratings as old, proven technologies? Is it really that unusual to expect a console made by either Sony, MS, or Nintendo to exhibit similar hardware faults? Come on. I consider it a success when I have a piece of electronic kit last over a year. An unqualified success if I can use it multiple years. My TiVo from 2000 qualifies as a smashing success -- but mostly attributed to the fact that it's been running continuously without lots of power downs/ups. Still, I fully expect that HDD to seize up should the UPS it's connected to fully drains during a power-outage.
This article is not inflammatory, except perhaps to business people who want to argue that companies need not provide warranty service for their products.
This article is not inflammatory, except perhaps to business people who want to argue that companies need not provide warranty service for their products.
To restate Richard's point: Are have been proposing that Grandmaster wrote certain things with the specific intent to drive additional traffic.
That is a *big* problem. A very common one in forums, but a big one none-the-less.
No one will argue that people who write content for the media what eyes on their product. That is the nature of the product: I write, you read. The question is the integrity and cohesiveness of the product. Is it researched? Is it sourced? Is the person in a position to make certain judgements?
Obviously most here engage in activity that in "professional" channels would be so far out of bounds because they lack all journalistic criteria. As for the article (which I have not even read... haven't even read this entire thread fyi) there are two issues:
1. Did the author write statements backup up with facts. The facts may be limited (e.g. MS and Sony are not giving us hard numbers of average and median life span of consoles, % needing repairs, what models needing repair, exact technical issues, etc) but has the author made a conscious effort to gather facts from reputable channels and tempered those in the context of the entire article?
2. The second issue is the accusation of motive. An author can make a "journalistic mistake" without having a direct motive to be sensational. On the other hand an author can have a blatant motive and still be accurate.
Unless the author has stated the latter clearly it should be left alone because EVERY media source can be attributed as such. Now some things are known over time (e.g. La Inq has certain biases based on history; the mainstream press leans left in general; etc) but your connection (advertising and content) as a means to accuse is flawed as it lacks any relevance in the market.
And pretty silly.
Having been accused being an Xbot and receiving stuff from MS (or worse, working for MS) I find insinuations like yours insulting--only because MS has never given me a darned thing!! Ad hominem insults and judgments of motives really aren't necessary.
Just the facts folks, just the facts. And state your opinions of the facts as opinions, and leave character assessments unsaid unless there is something it adds to the value of the discussion.
- Status
Similar threads
