Sony stands interviewer up, sulks about inFAMOUS coverage

  • 122 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for BioShockOwnz
BioShockOwnz

52901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#1 BioShockOwnz
Member since 2006 • 52901 Posts

Sony stands interviewer up, sulks about inFAMOUS coverage photo

"When it comes to negative press, Sony doesn't screw around. Blogger Tom Chick was all set to have an interview with Sucker Punch concerning the launch of PS3 exclusive inFAMOUS but unfortunately the interview had to be canceled. By "canceled," we of course mean, "ignored in a sulky huff without the interviewer even knowing the promised meeting was off."

Chick was understandably confused as to why he'd been stood up, and asked Sony what the deal was. The answer was formal and to-the-point, claiming that it felt "an interview wasn't appropriate considering last week's coverage of the game." The coverage in question was a pair of articles discussing the pros and cons of inFAMOUS. Apparently, anything outside complete and total adoration is unacceptable to Sony. They must have learned that from the Killzone fanboys.

So, what have we learned from all this? Basically, if you say bad things about Sony, it won't be your friend anymore. Sounds like grade-school drama to me, but this kind of thing happens all the time in the games industry, sadly. At least we can enjoy the irony that the "negative" coverage that upset Sony so much has now been given far more attention than it would have gotten if Sony had decided not to get all stroppy.

Our review of inFAMOUS is coming soon, and we'll try to be nice. We don't want Sony to give us a wedgie in the playground." - Destructoid

-

Full Article: http://www.destructoid.com/sony-stands-interviewer-up-sulks-about-infamous-coverage-133553.phtml

-

Wow, that's just wrong. :| Why are companies trying to dictate reviewers opinions on their games? This is almost as bad as Eidos... almost.

Avatar image for RandolphScott
RandolphScott

635

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 46

User Lists: 0

#2 RandolphScott
Member since 2008 • 635 Posts
Who the hell is Tom Chick?
Avatar image for CajunShooter
CajunShooter

5276

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 CajunShooter
Member since 2006 • 5276 Posts


About two weeks late on this news.

Avatar image for Ibacai
Ibacai

14459

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#4 Ibacai
Member since 2006 • 14459 Posts
A lot of guesswork in this article. Sounds to me like the people are whining and stamping their feet like little children. Guess they'll throw their food around and just cry here in a bit. The little kid analogy kinda goes both ways.
Avatar image for gdp72
gdp72

1270

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 gdp72
Member since 2007 • 1270 Posts

Completely off topic but cool sig. OP.

Avatar image for LOXO7
LOXO7

5595

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 LOXO7
Member since 2008 • 5595 Posts

He said it best. Why do you want to hear something negitive about yourself? If this was anyone else besides Sony, this wouldnt be news.

Avatar image for darthogre
darthogre

5082

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 darthogre
Member since 2006 • 5082 Posts
lol, so a blogger is complaining they didn't get the red carpet treatment? What is the world coming too.....LOL When did a blogger become serious media?
Avatar image for Ontain
Ontain

25501

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#8 Ontain
Member since 2005 • 25501 Posts
this is just like the news. Journalist and their companies are forced to say nice things or at least avoid saying bad things or else they could lose an exclusive interview or ads.
Avatar image for jonnyt61
jonnyt61

2147

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9 jonnyt61
Member since 2003 • 2147 Posts
This is... 1) Old 2) Silly. There's been plenty of mixed reviews for Infamous, and on one else aside from this guy has been "stood up" 3) Disappointing. BioShockOwnz, you were actually looking to be quite objective, now you just seem like you're looking for things to bash PS3 with. Honestly, linking stuff from 26th of last month... Yeaa, good one.
Avatar image for AdmiralWolverin
AdmiralWolverin

479

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10 AdmiralWolverin
Member since 2009 • 479 Posts

He said it best. Why do you want to hear something negitive about yourself? If this was anyone else besides Sony, this wouldnt be news.

LOXO7
yeah it would it would just be surprising insteaf
Avatar image for BioShockOwnz
BioShockOwnz

52901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#11 BioShockOwnz
Member since 2006 • 52901 Posts

lol, so a blogger is complaining they didn't get the red carpet treatment? What is the world coming too.....LOL When did a blogger become serious media?darthogre

"Publications: Games for Windows, Sci Fi Channel, Variety, GameSpy, Yahoo!, the late great Computer Games Magazine."

He's had a rather successful career with many larger publications.

Avatar image for Ontain
Ontain

25501

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#12 Ontain
Member since 2005 • 25501 Posts
[QUOTE="darthogre"]lol, so a blogger is complaining they didn't get the red carpet treatment? What is the world coming too.....LOL When did a blogger become serious media?

red carpet? they had an appointment and they didn't even inform him it was canceled. thats just rude anyway you look at it. very unprofessional as well.
Avatar image for asylumni
asylumni

3304

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#13 asylumni
Member since 2003 • 3304 Posts

this is just like the news. Journalist and their companies are forced to say nice things or at least avoid saying bad things or else they could lose an exclusive interview or ads. Ontain

Or perhaps it means that if you want to be taken seriously as a journalist, you have to put out quality, professional work; irregardless of the positive/negative aspects of that work. This is something Tom Chick is clearly incapable of, so it's no surprise that a developer had more important things to do. In other words, if you write like it's for a high school newsletter, you'll be treated as such.

Avatar image for deactivated-63f6895020e66
deactivated-63f6895020e66

21177

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#14 deactivated-63f6895020e66
Member since 2004 • 21177 Posts
It's rude and unprofessional? Yes. Nonetheless, the article is making too much drama. They had an appointment and he didn't come. Big deal (not really).
Avatar image for After_Math
After_Math

975

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#15 After_Math
Member since 2007 • 975 Posts


About two weeks late on this news.

CajunShooter

Oh crap, your right. Still, I never heard of this OP, so thanks for the information? I'm actually surpraised Sony did this.

Avatar image for clembo1990
clembo1990

9976

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#16 clembo1990
Member since 2005 • 9976 Posts
I'm with Sony on this, no need to deal with haters.
Avatar image for heretrix
heretrix

37881

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

#17 heretrix
Member since 2004 • 37881 Posts

[QUOTE="Ontain"]this is just like the news. Journalist and their companies are forced to say nice things or at least avoid saying bad things or else they could lose an exclusive interview or ads. asylumni

Or perhaps it means that if you want to be taken seriously as a journalist, you have to put out quality, professional work; irregardless of the positive/negative aspects of that work. This is something Tom Chick is clearly incapable of, so it's no surprise that a developer had more important things to do. In other words, if you write like it's for a high school newsletter, you'll be treated as such.

That's crap. If you make an appointment with someone for an interview you honor it. If you clearly know in advance that you don't want to speak to them you could at least be mature enough not to waste someone's time.

Avatar image for After_Math
After_Math

975

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#18 After_Math
Member since 2007 • 975 Posts
I'm with Sony on this, no need to deal with haters.clembo1990
How was Tom Chick or w/e a hater? He said that InFamous is a solid action game. He doesn't sound like a hater.
Avatar image for PBSnipes
PBSnipes

14621

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#19 PBSnipes
Member since 2007 • 14621 Posts

[QUOTE="Ontain"]this is just like the news. Journalist and their companies are forced to say nice things or at least avoid saying bad things or else they could lose an exclusive interview or ads. asylumni

Or perhaps it means that if you want to be taken seriously as a journalist, you have to put out quality, professional work; irregardless of the positive/negative aspects of that work. This is something Tom Chick is clearly incapable of, so it's no surprise that a developer had more important things to do. In other words, if you write like it's for a high school newsletter, you'll be treated as such.

Oh please. Not only had he already set up an interview (and if the gaming industry only gave interviews to top-quality journalists, the gaming media would consist of maybe 10 people), but the "coverage" that lead to the interview being canceled was a fair take on the game. This is nothing but Sony trying to bully lesser-known sources into toeing the company line.

Avatar image for clembo1990
clembo1990

9976

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#20 clembo1990
Member since 2005 • 9976 Posts
[QUOTE="clembo1990"]I'm with Sony on this, no need to deal with haters.After_Math
How was Tom Chick or w/e a hater? He said that InFamous is a solid action game. He doesn't sound like a hater.

Stop hating on me! :cry: I'm tha luis vuitton don! I ain't no gay fish!
Avatar image for therealnerdd
therealnerdd

578

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#21 therealnerdd
Member since 2009 • 578 Posts
[QUOTE="clembo1990"]I'm with Sony on this, no need to deal with haters.After_Math
How was Tom Chick or w/e a hater? He said that InFamous is a solid action game. He doesn't sound like a hater.

Tom chick listed 10 things good about infamous and 10 stupid things about infamous just to get afew laughs, he was basically clowing sucker punch and their product.
Avatar image for asylumni
asylumni

3304

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#22 asylumni
Member since 2003 • 3304 Posts

[QUOTE="asylumni"]

Or perhaps it means that if you want to be taken seriously as a journalist, you have to put out quality, professional work; irregardless of the positive/negative aspects of that work. This is something Tom Chick is clearly incapable of, so it's no surprise that a developer had more important things to do. In other words, if you write like it's for a high school newsletter, you'll be treated as such.

heretrix

That's crap. If you make an appointment with someone for an interview you honor it. If you clearly know in advance that you don't want to speak to them you could at least be mature enough not to waste someone's time.

**** happens, especially during the last few weeks of a game's development. For all we know he could've had the appointment set up as from Sci-Fi channel, giving the impression it was for a show, not an article on the net. Perhaps the director told his secretary to call him and that person forgot. There are a thousand different reasonable explanations for how this happened. There's no reason this should automatically make Sony or Naughty Dog maliciously culpable. All these articles and posters are trying way too hard to cast a negative light on Sony.

Avatar image for After_Math
After_Math

975

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#23 After_Math
Member since 2007 • 975 Posts

[QUOTE="After_Math"][QUOTE="clembo1990"]I'm with Sony on this, no need to deal with haters.therealnerdd
How was Tom Chick or w/e a hater? He said that InFamous is a solid action game. He doesn't sound like a hater.

Tom chick listed 10 things good about infamous and 10 stupid things about infamous just to get afew laughs, he was basically clowing sucker punch and their product.

The Pros - Almost all if not all were good points. Graphics are good, gameplay is fun, powers are cool, some sweet missions, SuckerPunch took their time in crafting this game. Thats what I get from reading it.

10) Awesome opening. Your first view of the game when Infamous boots up, and then the brief introductory sequence when you press the start button, is remarkably effective.

9) The checkpoints within missions made dying and retrying painless, even during traditionally annoying missions like "escort the target" and "protect the target". There was no mission that couldn't be completed with minimal persistence. Infamous can be challenging, but it's never punishing.

8) You might not remember a 1977 movie called The Gauntlet in which Clint Eastwood drives a tricked-out armored bus through several city blocks of sustained gunfire. But I do. And so does Infamous.

7) The electricity theme might feel a bit forced - couldn't they have gone with "gamma energy" or "bioflux lifeforce" or "blue crackle"? - but Sucker Punch knows how to commit and see it through. Cole's powers, how he replenishes them, and even how he interacts with the environments and the inhabitants all make for a great example of creative unity. It might not make sense, but it's nothing if not consistent.

6) The graphics look soupy at times, but they serve the gameplay perfectly. Infamous does not suffer from slowdown, or a lack of detail, or bad wonky physics. Saints Row 2 might have better gameplay and Grand Theft Auto IV might have better graphics, but both of those games are lacking in graphics and gameplay, respectively. Infamous, on the other hand, is the "just right" compromise where the technology and gameplay are a perfect tuned to each other.

5) As you choose to do good things, people snap your picture. Cute, but I already saw that trick in the last Spider-Man game, so it doesn't count as one of the cool things in Infamous. However, the one I liked was seeing the citizens throw rocks at the evil gangs once you've cleaned up the streets a bit. Go, bystanders! Let he who is without themed gang garb throw the first stone!

4) No multiplayer. You might think this would go under the "ten stupid things" list. But I admire a developer that doesn't feel the need to waste resources shoehorning in some sort of obligatory multiplayer support. Co-op would make no sense in Infamous and competitive games would just be a quickly forgotten side show. Whatever time Sucker Punch didn't spend on multiplayer was probably time well spent.

3) The powers in Infamous are spectacular. It's better to let them unfold for you as you play rather than read about them in a review, so I'll refrain from specifics. They're central to how Infamous is superbly paced. As it progresses, the gameplay evolves along with Cole's powers, which keeps thing fresh throughout, even if the city itself is pretty dull.

2) The cover system is flexible enough to let you switch hands when you're slinging superpowers, which makes a difference based on how you're looking around a corner or over a ledge. What's more, you can easily fight bad guys on top of a building while you're dangling from the edge of the roof. It's even easy to fight while clinging to the side of a building. I might have accidentally stuck to a low ledge or rail on occasion, but when it came to fighting bad guys, I never once felt the geometry of the city was a liability instead of an asset.

1) "You are powerful. As Infamous progresses, you get more powerful." Those ten words are Infamous in a nutshell. Never mind the godawful story, bad writing, shallow characterization, and mostly uninspired world building. The bottom line is that Infamous is a game about wielding superpowers (I never once wished I had a gun). It accomplishes this goal admirably, gradually scaling up your power in gratifying increments until, finally and literally, the sky is the limit.

Top Ten Stupid Things - besides the ones I deleted and maybe I missed, are actually decent things.:

8) Just when you think Infamous isn't going to pull any of Sony's mandatory Sixaxis shenanigans, you get your final power. Because it wouldn't be a PS3 game without a Sixaxis controller gimmick!

6) The following is an actual approximation of the way "karma" decisions are presented in Infamous, each accompanied by a short monologue delivered in grave and thoughtful tones:

"Hmm, I've discovered a hungry puppy. It's whimpering pitifully and looking at me with its big puppy dog eyes. Do I kick it, which might turn the people of Empire City against me? Or do I pet it, which will ingratiate me to the citizenry but might make me look weak and girlish?"

Press the X button to kick the puppy.
Press the triangle button to pet the puppy.

5) Infamous is great about not letting you accidentally run off a ledge. Thanks for that, Sucker Punch! However, there is no easy way to go from standing on a ledge to dangling from it. Which wouldn't be a big deal if Infamous didn't constantly position collectibles in such a way that you have to jump off a ledge and then quickly turn around and grab it. This is worst when it's over water, which is instantly fatal to Coll.

4) Coal's powers unfold without any meaningful choice. He'll get a new power at exactly the scripted moment he's supposed to get it. So what are you supposed to do with your hard-earned xp? You get to buy incremental and mostly superficial upgrades. Do you boost your melee damage by 10% or your damage reduction by 10%? Do you improve your lightning bolt or your shock wave? Even the powers that supposedly distinguish good from evil are only marginally different. It's like a game of Jedi Knight in which your choice of Force powers is a red lightsaber or a green lightsaber.

3) The city is repetitive and mostly uninteresting, with only a couple of memorable landmarks that are memorable because the missions where you have to climb them are such a pain in the butt. After a whole game of letting you scale nearly any structure by spazzing out on the X button - there is little finesse in the way Koal climbs - you have to hunt and peck and aim your jumps and look for the grabbable bits. But at least the view from the top is - oh, that's it? A bunch of distant soupy silhouettes?

2) You know that terrible hackneyed moment in a comic book when the villain strings up the superhero's girlfriend on one side of town, and six doctors who might one day cure cancer on the other side of town? Then he sets a timer so that the superhero will only have time to save one of them? Then he spells out the moral dilemma in very careful terms so that even little kids reading the comic book will understand? You know how stupid those moments are? Well, Infamous doesn't.

1) For a historical accounting of how long it takes the social order to fall apart, we need look no father than the 1987 documentary Escape from New York. When Manhattan was closed off into a maximum security prison after the crime rate had risen 400%, it took years for the social order to break down and rebuild itself under the aegis of a themed gang led by Isaac Hayes. However, Infamous is on an accelerated timeline. After a cataclysmic event, society falls apart and rebuilds around themed gangs within a few days. A massive junk skyscraper is erected almost instantaneously, which just goes to show how much you can get done without unions. Various supervillains with fiendish plots spring up within a week. Plagues and mind control toxins and government conspiracies and sidekick betrayals and sidekick redemptions all happen in the first fortnight. And the whole thing is wrapped up in three weeks. New Orleans should be so lucky.

1a) With perhaps three exceptions, the missions are on par with what you'd expect in a throwaway GTA clone with a Spider-Man or Hulk license. The same is true with how you interact with and affect the city, which is peppered with meaningless side missions that do little more than satisfy completionists while leaving the rest of us unimpressed. Sometimes Coll uses his electric power to literally herd shuffling compliant bad guys from point A to point B. These sheepdog missions are the silliest thing you'll do in Infamous, short of sitting through the comic book cut scenes.

1b) Part of the appeal of an open-world game is navigating the world, but there should be shortcuts for long distances. Infamous doesn't do a good job of providing this, which isn't a big deal. For short distances, you can grind elevated rails or power lines. But then the last third of the game comes along and you've got to traipse back and forth across the city. Oh, and in case you're wondering why Cull can't ride in cars, there's a bit of throwaway exposition about this early on; if he sits in a car, it explodes.

1c) It's a shame a game with this much potential has such an insultingly bad story. The guys at Sucker Punch have left behind the kiddie vibe of their excellent Sly Cooper games, but they haven't left behind the cartoon superficiality. The plot of Infamous makes zero sense, even after the laughably bad resolution. There isn't a single likable character here. The villains just seem to appear from time to time. Sometimes you fight them in a bad boss battle. Sometimes the game seems to simply forget about them.. And the dialogue is uniformly horrible, from the growling hero to the funny [sic] sidekick to the conflicted romantic interest to the villain who suddenly appears at some point as if the game almost forgot it needed a villain. In fact, one character whose significance isn't clear unless you bother digging up B-side audio recordings scattered around the city is randomly blown up at the end of the game. Infamous may very well be one of the worst written big-budget games since Too Human.

Avatar image for BZSIN
BZSIN

7889

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#24 BZSIN
Member since 2005 • 7889 Posts

I didn't turn up to a doctors appointment once, I wonder if it'll make the news? Maybe my doctor should contact Destructoid.

Avatar image for PvtGump8
PvtGump8

739

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#25 PvtGump8
Member since 2005 • 739 Posts

who is Tom Chick?

Avatar image for asylumni
asylumni

3304

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#26 asylumni
Member since 2003 • 3304 Posts

[QUOTE="asylumni"]

[QUOTE="Ontain"]this is just like the news. Journalist and their companies are forced to say nice things or at least avoid saying bad things or else they could lose an exclusive interview or ads. PBSnipes

Or perhaps it means that if you want to be taken seriously as a journalist, you have to put out quality, professional work; irregardless of the positive/negative aspects of that work. This is something Tom Chick is clearly incapable of, so it's no surprise that a developer had more important things to do. In other words, if you write like it's for a high school newsletter, you'll be treated as such.

Oh please. Not only had he already set up an interview (and if the gaming industry only gave interviews to top-quality journalists, the gaming media would consist of maybe 10 people), but the "coverage" that lead to the interview being canceled was a fair take on the game. This is nothing but Sony trying to bully lesser-known sources into toeing the company line.

Please, the articles were garbage. This could just as easily be explained by a forgotten to make phone call and not some grand conspiracy.

Avatar image for After_Math
After_Math

975

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27 After_Math
Member since 2007 • 975 Posts

[QUOTE="heretrix"]

[QUOTE="asylumni"]

Or perhaps it means that if you want to be taken seriously as a journalist, you have to put out quality, professional work; irregardless of the positive/negative aspects of that work. This is something Tom Chick is clearly incapable of, so it's no surprise that a developer had more important things to do. In other words, if you write like it's for a high school newsletter, you'll be treated as such.

asylumni

That's crap. If you make an appointment with someone for an interview you honor it. If you clearly know in advance that you don't want to speak to them you could at least be mature enough not to waste someone's time.

**** happens, especially during the last few weeks of a game's development. For all we know he could've had the appointment set up as from Sci-Fi channel, giving the impression it was for a show, not an article on the net. Perhaps the director told his secretary to call him and that person forgot. There are a thousand different reasonable explanations for how this happened. There's no reason this should automatically make Sony or Naughty Dog maliciously culpable. All these articles and posters are trying way too hard to cast a negative light on Sony.

Where did you get Naughtydog from all this? Do you mean Suckerpunch? And the reason it was canceled is this: asked Sony what the deal was. The answer was formal and to-the-point, claiming that it felt "an interview wasn't appropriate considering last week's coverage of the game." Maybe an assistant did forget, but all we know is Sony didn't want to interview someone because they didn't like their game as much as everyone else. Great Reason Sony!
Avatar image for After_Math
After_Math

975

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#28 After_Math
Member since 2007 • 975 Posts

[QUOTE="PBSnipes"]

[QUOTE="asylumni"]

Or perhaps it means that if you want to be taken seriously as a journalist, you have to put out quality, professional work; irregardless of the positive/negative aspects of that work. This is something Tom Chick is clearly incapable of, so it's no surprise that a developer had more important things to do. In other words, if you write like it's for a high school newsletter, you'll be treated as such.

asylumni

Oh please. Not only had he already set up an interview (and if the gaming industry only gave interviews to top-quality journalists, the gaming media would consist of maybe 10 people), but the "coverage" that lead to the interview being canceled was a fair take on the game. This is nothing but Sony trying to bully lesser-known sources into toeing the company line.

Please, the articles were garbage. This could just as easily be explained by a forgotten to make phone call and not some grand conspiracy.

How were the articles garbage?
Avatar image for W1NGMAN-
W1NGMAN-

10109

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#29 W1NGMAN-
Member since 2008 • 10109 Posts

That article is sad and pathetic...."look at us we got stood up :cry::cry::cry:"

Avatar image for sikanderahmed
sikanderahmed

5444

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#30 sikanderahmed
Member since 2007 • 5444 Posts

no wonder infamous has been get overrated reviews

Avatar image for BioShockOwnz
BioShockOwnz

52901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#31 BioShockOwnz
Member since 2006 • 52901 Posts

That article is sad and pathetic...."look at us we got stood up :cry::cry::cry:"

W1NGMAN-

Or the fact that someone at Sony can't do their job and honor their promise. Yeah, let's honor lazyness. It seems like that's quickly becoming the status quo in this sad world.

Avatar image for Ontain
Ontain

25501

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#32 Ontain
Member since 2005 • 25501 Posts

That article is sad and pathetic...."look at us we got stood up :cry::cry::cry:"

W1NGMAN-
yeah put no importance on the reason why he was stood up. next time you see a positive review and a developer interview on a gaming site think twice about why they got a positive review.
Avatar image for After_Math
After_Math

975

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#33 After_Math
Member since 2007 • 975 Posts

That article is sad and pathetic...."look at us we got stood up :cry::cry::cry:"

W1NGMAN-
Seems like Sonys Pathetic... "waaah you said our game isn't amazing so were going to ignore you." Reminds me of the time Sony got mad at Kotaku and then banned them from all their events. (But then reinvited them later on)
Avatar image for asylumni
asylumni

3304

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#34 asylumni
Member since 2003 • 3304 Posts

[QUOTE="asylumni"]

[QUOTE="PBSnipes"] Oh please. Not only had he already set up an interview (and if the gaming industry only gave interviews to top-quality journalists, the gaming media would consist of maybe 10 people), but the "coverage" that lead to the interview being canceled was a fair take on the game. This is nothing but Sony trying to bully lesser-known sources into toeing the company line.

After_Math

Please, the articles were garbage. This could just as easily be explained by a forgotten to make phone call and not some grand conspiracy.

How were the articles garbage?

They were immature and poorly written. Heck, one of the top 10 lists had 13 items! Grammatically, they are both a mess and his word choices are very poor. In other words, garbage. That's not even considering accuracy.

Avatar image for Baranga
Baranga

14217

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#35 Baranga
Member since 2005 • 14217 Posts

They were immature and poorly written. Heck, one of the top 10 lists had 13 items!

asylumni

Oh noez he made a funneh! How dare he?!

Avatar image for asylumni
asylumni

3304

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#36 asylumni
Member since 2003 • 3304 Posts

[QUOTE="asylumni"]

[QUOTE="heretrix"]That's crap. If you make an appointment with someone for an interview you honor it. If you clearly know in advance that you don't want to speak to them you could at least be mature enough not to waste someone's time.

After_Math

**** happens, especially during the last few weeks of a game's development. For all we know he could've had the appointment set up as from Sci-Fi channel, giving the impression it was for a show, not an article on the net. Perhaps the director told his secretary to call him and that person forgot. There are a thousand different reasonable explanations for how this happened. There's no reason this should automatically make Sony or Naughty Dog maliciously culpable. All these articles and posters are trying way too hard to cast a negative light on Sony.

Where did you get Naughtydog from all this? Do you mean Suckerpunch? And the reason it was canceled is this: asked Sony what the deal was. The answer was formal and to-the-point, claiming that it felt "an interview wasn't appropriate considering last week's coverage of the game." Maybe an assistant did forget, but all we know is Sony didn't want to interview someone because they didn't like their game as much as everyone else. Great Reason Sony!

Yes, I meant Suckerpunch. My bad (brain fart).

Interviews get cancelled all the time for any number of reasons. The only reason this is getting any traction at all is because he wasn't notified in advance.

Avatar image for carljohnson3456
carljohnson3456

12489

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#37 carljohnson3456
Member since 2007 • 12489 Posts
It's rude, but people are acting like Sony just really boned somebody. Journalists are slaves to access, that's how the business works. Sure, it's rude... but Sony isnt the devil because of it. You can say Sony is the devil for alot of reasons, but this isnt really one of 'em.
Avatar image for PBSnipes
PBSnipes

14621

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#38 PBSnipes
Member since 2007 • 14621 Posts

They were immature and poorly written. Heck, one of the top 10 lists had 13 items! Grammatically, they are both a mess and his word choices are very poor. In other words, garbage. That's not even considering accuracy.

asylumni

You're joking, right? From a grammatical and stylistic standpoint, the article in question (since I'm sure Sony didn't have a problem with the "Ten Good Things About InFamous" article) is on par with anything IGN, GS, GT, 1Up etc. produce. And ignoring the jokes and quirky observations (ie how quickly InFamous' world devolves into total anarchy and the useless messenger bag Cole takes everywhere), it's the most accurate "review" (for lack of a better term) of InFamous I've seen yet.

Avatar image for BioShockOwnz
BioShockOwnz

52901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#39 BioShockOwnz
Member since 2006 • 52901 Posts

It's rude, but people are acting like Sony just really boned somebody. Journalists are slaves to access, that's how the business works. Sure, it's rude... but Sony isnt the devil because of it. You can say Sony is the devil for alot of reasons, but this isnt really one of 'em.carljohnson3456

Yeah, they're just not very dependable, that's all. It only hurts their image with journalists in the end, though. And those are the people they need on their side, especially when sitting in last place this gen.

Avatar image for Ibacai
Ibacai

14459

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#40 Ibacai
Member since 2006 • 14459 Posts

[QUOTE="carljohnson3456"]It's rude, but people are acting like Sony just really boned somebody. Journalists are slaves to access, that's how the business works. Sure, it's rude... but Sony isnt the devil because of it. You can say Sony is the devil for alot of reasons, but this isnt really one of 'em.BioShockOwnz

Yeah, they're just not very dependable, that's all. It only hurts their image with journalists in the end, though. And those are the people they need on their side, especially when sitting in last place this gen.

None of the three have been the smartest when it comes to journalism. All of them have there foibles.
Avatar image for W1NGMAN-
W1NGMAN-

10109

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#41 W1NGMAN-
Member since 2008 • 10109 Posts

It's rude, but people are acting like Sony just really boned somebody. Journalists are slaves to access, that's how the business works. Sure, it's rude... but Sony isnt the devil because of it. You can say Sony is the devil for alot of reasons, but this isnt really one of 'em.carljohnson3456

Tell em, the funny thing is people are so quick to jump on Sony for it yet we only have one side of the story. Also can I get a link to the article they posted that made Sony change their mind about the interview?

Avatar image for PBSnipes
PBSnipes

14621

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#42 PBSnipes
Member since 2007 • 14621 Posts

It's rude, but people are acting like Sony just really boned somebody. Journalists are slaves to access, that's how the business works. Sure, it's rude... but Sony isnt the devil because of it. You can say Sony is the devil for alot of reasons, but this isnt really one of 'em.carljohnson3456
The problem isn't that Sony canceled the interview and failed to notify Chick (although that certainly doesn't help their case), it's their reasoning that saying anything remotely negative about InFamous is enough to warrant cancelling an interview.

Avatar image for Ontain
Ontain

25501

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#43 Ontain
Member since 2005 • 25501 Posts

[QUOTE="carljohnson3456"]It's rude, but people are acting like Sony just really boned somebody. Journalists are slaves to access, that's how the business works. Sure, it's rude... but Sony isnt the devil because of it. You can say Sony is the devil for alot of reasons, but this isnt really one of 'em.BioShockOwnz

Yeah, they're just not very dependable, that's all. It only hurts their image with journalists in the end, though. And those are the people they need on their side, especially when sitting in last place this gen.

well seeing them use tactics like this makes them lose a bit of credibility with me. it makes me sense that they use these tactics to get more favorable reviews than they might otherwise get.
Avatar image for bdum_pshhh
bdum_pshhh

1456

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#44 bdum_pshhh
Member since 2009 • 1456 Posts
How is this any different from what most companies do. Companies do this all the time. Say something bad about them and you're on their "hate list" for months.
Avatar image for carljohnson3456
carljohnson3456

12489

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#45 carljohnson3456
Member since 2007 • 12489 Posts
it makes me sense that they use these tactics to get more favorable reviews than they might otherwise get. Ontain
All of 'em do that though in one way or another. They're all big business greedy companies. Heck, look up all the free stuff MS sent reviewers for the Halo 3 launch.
Avatar image for Chutebox
Chutebox

51568

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#46 Chutebox
Member since 2007 • 51568 Posts

This was posted at least a week ago.

Avatar image for MegajerkNYC
MegajerkNYC

505

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#47 MegajerkNYC
Member since 2009 • 505 Posts

If you look at Mr. Chicks so called non biased review, he says a few nice things about the game before ragging on it for twice as long with some of the most whimsical and childish complaints ever written. Add that to the fact that he writes for Games for Windows and Yahoo (hint, hint, wink wink) he's lucky Sucker Punch only stood him up. I would have kicked him down a flight of stairs.

Avatar image for Ontain
Ontain

25501

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#48 Ontain
Member since 2005 • 25501 Posts
How is this any different from what most companies do. Companies do this all the time. Say something bad about them and you're on their "hate list" for months.bdum_pshhh
well it's system wars so this would be relevant. if MS or Nin did that to someone in the media i'd be upset at them too. weren't we all upset about how Jeff got canned for a bad review. well this is just a milder form of pressuring game journalists but same principal.
Avatar image for carljohnson3456
carljohnson3456

12489

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#49 carljohnson3456
Member since 2007 • 12489 Posts

[QUOTE="carljohnson3456"]It's rude, but people are acting like Sony just really boned somebody. Journalists are slaves to access, that's how the business works. Sure, it's rude... but Sony isnt the devil because of it. You can say Sony is the devil for alot of reasons, but this isnt really one of 'em.BioShockOwnz

Yeah, they're just not very dependable, that's all .

But you compared this to the Eidos paid Kane and Lynch controversy. That's a far cry from "just not very dependable".
Avatar image for heretrix
heretrix

37881

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

#50 heretrix
Member since 2004 • 37881 Posts

[QUOTE="heretrix"]

[QUOTE="asylumni"]

Or perhaps it means that if you want to be taken seriously as a journalist, you have to put out quality, professional work; irregardless of the positive/negative aspects of that work. This is something Tom Chick is clearly incapable of, so it's no surprise that a developer had more important things to do. In other words, if you write like it's for a high school newsletter, you'll be treated as such.

asylumni

That's crap. If you make an appointment with someone for an interview you honor it. If you clearly know in advance that you don't want to speak to them you could at least be mature enough not to waste someone's time.

**** happens, especially during the last few weeks of a game's development. For all we know he could've had the appointment set up as from Sci-Fi channel, giving the impression it was for a show, not an article on the net. Perhaps the director told his secretary to call him and that person forgot. There are a thousand different reasonable explanations for how this happened. There's no reason this should automatically make Sony or Naughty Dog maliciously culpable. All these articles and posters are trying way too hard to cast a negative light on Sony.

Stop making excuses. It isn't professional no matter how you spin it. You don't make an appointment and not show up. Especially in business it's just crappy business etiquette.