Update: Activision "Might Have to Stop Supporting Sony"

[murphy7801]

I think it's time for me to get a xbox 360 soon. I believe my PS3 is gonna start gathering dust because of all the lazy developers complaining about the programing.

Well at least there are some pretty cheap second-hand xbox360 s to find.

if its laziness just stops them going out of business I'm all for it.

 

[murphy7801]

While Kotick does have a good point, this is a little too far. If Activision did stop releasing games for Sony, it could be a critical hit with no Guitar Hero, or Call of Duty. I don't believe that they have the balls to go through with it though, the fanboys will go even more batshit insane over it than FF13 coming to 360.

And the metal gear 360 release.

 

[Anton P. Nym]

Maybe that was a poor choice of words, and if so, I apologize, but its not that rare to see a story reported in the forums before the news room

Forum posters don't have to do fact-checking with second sources, nor do they have to go through other forms of editing. Forum posters can slap up any ol' rumour they wish and not have to consider things like libel law and journalistic best practices, either.

I'd be greatly surprised if Escapist staff were yanking news from the forums, seeing as forums in general are lousy sources. It wouldn't surprise me in the least, though, if the Escapist got an item, worked up a story, sent it in for proofing, and then by the time the final item hits the site someone else has posted a shorter or less-verified version in the forums.

It's the difference between journalism and blogging; blogging's faster, but journalism (done properly) makes fewer mistakes.

-- Steve

 

[Superlordbasil]

If it makes the PS3 cut its price tag I'm happy

 

[Rigs83]

Reminds of how EA refused to support the Dreamcast back in the day.

 

[garfoldsomeoneelse]

Now that is what I call a shit-eating grin.

 

[murphy7801]

Now that is what I call a shit-eating grin.

wow and you never looked bad in a photo, have got suddenly insult someone for no reason.

 

[Go on]

Now that is what I call a shit-eating grin.

couldn't have said it any better

 

[Susan Arendt]

Maybe that was a poor choice of words, and if so, I apologize, but its not that rare to see a story reported in the forums before the news room

Forum posters don't have to do fact-checking with second sources, nor do they have to go through other forms of editing. Forum posters can slap up any ol' rumour they wish and not have to consider things like libel law and journalistic best practices, either.

I'd be greatly surprised if Escapist staff were yanking news from the forums, seeing as forums in general are lousy sources. It wouldn't surprise me in the least, though, if the Escapist got an item, worked up a story, sent it in for proofing, and then by the time the final item hits the site someone else has posted a shorter or less-verified version in the forums.

It's the difference between journalism and blogging; blogging's faster, but journalism (done properly) makes fewer mistakes.

-- Steve

Indeed. The members of our news team adhere to strict guidelines of both quality and accuracy. It's not unusual for them to take an hour or more to properly research and verify a story -- I'm quite certain the same can't be said for someone slapping a link into a thread. I certainly don't suggest that someone wanting to share an item of interest with the forum should go to the trouble to write it up as a proper news post, complete with sources, imagery, and a classic inverted pyramid -- that's just plain silly. (Though if they do it well enough, I just might hire them.) But some respect for the news team would be appreciated. Yes, sometimes stories appear in the forums before they hit the news river, but as Funk indicated, we trawl a vast array of sources for information, and we offer far more in the news than just what appears in the forums.

 

[murphy7801]

Oh great we have ps3 fanboys in here now might as well end this thread.

 

[John Funk]

My deepest apologies for interfering with your argument but. "Making a quick buck" there is no need whatsoever Blizzard is raking in umpteen millions a month from WoW. This was greed by either Bliz or Activision, either or it doesn't really matter.

...yes, I know. That was my point. There is no need to "make a quick buck" in this situation, because A.) it would hurt their reputation, and B.) they have a money-printing machine.

Again, having spoken with the people who made this decision and having it explained to me, I completely understand the (non-financial) reasons they decided to make it a trilogy. It lets them expand on the single-player campaigns, lets them divorce single-player from multiplayer balance, and actually lets them get the game out sometime before 2012. Are you going to say that, say, Valve is being greedy with the Half-Life 2 episodes?

Activision has effectively no pull at Blizzard.