Post by: Les Thomas on December 14, 2007, 01:28:04 PM
http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/newsArt.cfm?artid=14991
The "Greenpeace vs. the video game industry" saga grows nastier by the day. Greenpeace recently launched a "Clash of the Consoles" site that pastes the Big 3's mascots next to bar graphs that account for: toxic use, toxic policy, recycling credits, and energy use. Their clip-art Mario, with his satanic gleam, stares down Nintendo's ratings: red and more red across the board. But the Wii wins big with its low energy use of 15 Watts. Microsoft apparently has a toxic policy, but doesn't follow it with the Xbox 360 running at 97 W. It seems Sony has the same policy but also recycles while the PS3 console runs at 128 W. Noble but misguided, Greenpeace is not ranking these companies' practices. Instead it becomes a test of the companies' willingness to comply with the requests and demands of the environmental company.
Here's what Greenpeace had to say, officially:
Mario might be super but he's no hero when it comes to avoiding toxic chemicals. He gets zero recycling credits.
At least Mario uses small amount of energy, as long as you don't leave him running all day long!
Comparison: Mario is on a different level when it comes to energy efficiency, with use that matches his diminutive size.
Greenpeace released its quarterly "Guide to Greener Electronics" in late November. It was a surprise hit to the video game industry and Nintendo especially – with the company's earth-shattering, history-making score of zero. But that was just the beginning.
Almost immediately, Ars Technica, the technocrat watchdog, faulted Greenpeace for "flawed" and "lazy" research. They uncovered that Greenpeace made their ratings on information from press materials and not through serious investigation into company practices.
Nintendo UK commented first and was surprised. They stated: "We do not know the basis or methodology used by Greenpeace to produce this report, and therefore cannot comment on it." Greenpeace was quick to counter and released the following: out of the 18 companies rated, Nintendo was the only one not to respond. Greenpeace added: "We hope this [score] is the impetus for Nintendo to be more transparent, progressive and proactive in addressing the problems of toxic chemicals and e-waste."
What next in the saga? It's anyone's guess.
Post by: NWR_pap64 on December 14, 2007, 01:42:52 PM
Frankly, I don't know who to believe anymore. Both companies claim that they are righteous but both are making each other look bad. So I just watch and enjoy the show.
Post by: Crimm on December 14, 2007, 01:45:34 PM
Post by: that Baby guy on December 14, 2007, 04:23:24 PM
Why hasn't Greenpeace actually analyzed the products sold by Nintendo? Isn't their PVC use plan irrelevant if they don't use PVC? I don't know if they do or not, but as far as Greenpeace knows, they don't know either. I haven't seen evidence either way, and since GP hasn't actually looked for evidence, I know that they know as much as I do.
Post by: SOAD is the best on December 14, 2007, 05:22:08 PM
Post by: bubicus on December 14, 2007, 06:30:01 PM
Post by: nickmitch on December 14, 2007, 06:51:31 PM
Post by: that Baby guy on December 14, 2007, 07:00:47 PM
Post by: Tanookisuit on December 15, 2007, 12:46:02 AM
Post by: 18 Days on December 15, 2007, 01:56:47 AM
Post by: TheFleece on December 15, 2007, 04:51:30 AM
Post by: Nick DiMola on December 15, 2007, 06:18:33 AM
Post by: Madcat221 on December 15, 2007, 01:21:11 PM
Post by: MegaByte on December 15, 2007, 01:26:07 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: SOAD is the best
If you watch the video at the very end it looks like they take a little extra jab at nintendo when it says "Jump in tell your tell your game console company Wii would like to live and play in a greener world. Besides who would throw away a Wii?
No, this was an extra jab at all three companies.
"Jump in." was an Xbox 360 catchphrase.
"Wii would like to play." was obviously Wii's.
"Live in your world. Play in ours." was a PlayStation catchphrase.
Post by: Podings on December 16, 2007, 03:32:36 PM
We could all be self-righteous vigilantes like Greenpeace, but then again, we could also just be nice.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on December 16, 2007, 04:37:27 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: TheFleece
*psh* Rarely anyone ever talks about Sony's contribution to the US military. I understand companies have to try a lot harder to reduce the pollution they generate, but it really seems that Greenpeace didn't do enough research for their study, if it could be called that to begin with.
Your overly large avatar is polluting the boards! Soon we won't be able to breath!
Post by: ThePerm on December 17, 2007, 09:15:17 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WPteMFkI2k
also if nintendo or microsoft wanted to they could sue Greenpeace for trademark infringement, mario's design is trademarked.
wow, did some research and they really are buhlshit
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Greenpeace
the whole press release goof thing just proves their owned by dr robotnik
http://www.ping.be/~ping5859/Eng/answ/PVCToys.html
http://www.ping.be/~ping5859/index2.html
and apparently pvc levels in such things are so low that they have no effect
Post by: vudu on December 18, 2007, 08:36:03 AM
QuoteI had no idea Greenpeace was so clever. Thanks for enlightening me!
Originally posted by: MegaByte
No, this was an extra jab at all three companies.
"Jump in." was an Xbox 360 catchphrase.
"Wii would like to play." was obviously Wii's.
"Live in your world. Play in ours." was a PlayStation catchphrase.
Post by: UERD on December 18, 2007, 08:43:12 AM
Post by: Nick DiMola on December 18, 2007, 08:51:58 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenixQuote
Originally posted by: TheFleece
*psh* Rarely anyone ever talks about Sony's contribution to the US military. I understand companies have to try a lot harder to reduce the pollution they generate, but it really seems that Greenpeace didn't do enough research for their study, if it could be called that to begin with.
Your overly large avatar is polluting the boards! Soon we won't be able to breath!
**cough**cough** Too **cough** late. **cough**
/dead
