Topic: Matt C. teasing again

[Smash_Brother]

Quote
Originally posted by: Pittbboi I disagree. The GC did poorly because, from the beginning, it had less games, less variety, and a worse image than the competition. All the media did was play off that. That's like saying the PS3 is doing bad because of the media, while disregarding its multitude of problems.

The problems of the GC were NOWHERE NEAR the problems the PS3 has right now.

And the GC didn't START with that image: it was given that image, largely by Sony and MS who actually ran smear campaigns against the GC (seriously) which preyed upon a potential buyer's insecurity by convincing people it was a console for children.

If the fans of the company don't defend it, no one will.

Quote
I think so many people hate Matt because he doesn't make excuses for Nintendo. But I think it's that same quality of his that makes him one of the most industry-respected journalists in the Nintendosphere.

It's not Matt's failure to make excused for Nintendo which bothers me. It's the fact that he was literally advising people to purchase Xboxes instead of GCs.

It's one thing to say, "Yeah, Nintendo could be doing things better." it's another entirely to say, "You should buy a competing console."

Quote
Originally posted by: Pittbboi Wait, so you want Matt to be a dirty journalist? I thought the goal here was honest reporting, not who was better at spin work. I'm personally glad Matt didn't resort to that--it would have been especially hard to with Nintendo tripping over themselves all the time last gen, especially towards the end of the console's life, when just about everything to look forward to on it was pushed to the Wii with some shoddy excuse.

First of all, there is no JOURNALISM going on at IGN. It's one gigantic spinfest. Whatever brings in the clicks for the advertisers is what IGN will do, and that includes starting rumors like "Nintendo is going to buy Sega" or some other such garbage.

Second, I'd have preferred if Matt would have been FAIR to the games he rated, but he was very often overly critical. At the very least, the company should have some consistency in how its reviewers are going to review games. If the Xbox editor is going to review Xbox games as though they're better games just because they're on the Xbox, then they should either can his ass or every reviewer should treat games the same way, and since every other reviewer DOES treat games that way, the only inconsistency I see is Matt.

Unless the PS2/Xbox editors would occasionally pause in their reviews to say things like "_____ is good, but SSBM is a better fighting game.", then I don't see how people can deny that the reporting for Nintendo was coming from a biased source, considering that Matt pulled sh*t like that all the time.

Did the PS2/Xbox editors even own GCs?

[Kairon]

I'll say this... I'd much rather Matt than any of the other deluded shoot-from-the-hip gamers who seem to make up the rest of IGN.

~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[Smash_Brother]

Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
I'll say this... I'd much rather Matt than any of the other deluded shoot-from-the-hip gamers who seem to make up the rest of IGN.

But shoot-from-the-hip delusion is what IGN is all about.

Matt should get a job somewhere else where being a level-headed critic isn't out of place.

[Pittbboi]

Quote
It's one thing to say, "Yeah, Nintendo could be doing things better." it's another entirely to say, "You should buy a competing console."

Well, this may just be personal opinion, but such was the case last gen (and still a minor fear of mine with the Wii).

Don't get me wrong, I loved my Gamecube, but it was truer on the 'Cube than any other console that if you wanted a more well-rounded gaming experience, you pretty much had to go elsewhere. Want great RPGs? The Cube had a few decent ones, but if you wanted to play the cream of the crop and more variety in general you had to go the PS2. Want a decent platformer other than Mario? You're not going to find it on the Cube, try the PS2. Want online Gameplay? Xbox is for you. Want GTA (a gaming entity all its own last gen)? Not going to find it here. Want a wealth of mature titles? Ha, why do you even own a 'Cube?

The Gamecube had some great, industry-leading, games. But, at the end of the day, there just wasn't enough of them. Gamecube sorely lacked in the variety department, so it really wasn't that blasphemous to recommend buying another console. Can't blame Matt for that.

[BigJim]

It is never the job of the media to just be a positive PR mouthpiece for their beat. That's why they're media and not PR.

The GameCube underperformed on its own. It didn't need Matt's help.

Matt is a fan and an editorialist before he is a journalist. There is hardly any journalism anywhere in video games. But even as a fan/editorialist, it's still not his "job" to do positive PR and damage control either.  

[Kairon]

Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother

Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
I'll say this... I'd much rather Matt than any of the other deluded shoot-from-the-hip gamers who seem to make up the rest of IGN.

But shoot-from-the-hip delusion is what IGN is all about.

Matt should get a job somewhere else where being a level-headed critic isn't out of place.

We hate Matt because he's sticking to some level of decency in a den of sin, and making Nintendo look bad because of his principles???

~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[Adrock]

Quote
Smash_Brother wrote:
And the GC didn't START with that image

I agree with Pittiboi. Nintendo failed the Gamecube first and foremost. They chose to market a purple, lunchbox shaped console. Gamecube started with that image.

With Wii, Nintendo had to completely reinvent their gameplan. I'm glad it's working. No one has to defend them if they make wise decisions. Their actions should speak for themselves.

[Smash_Brother]

The problem is, it's the precedent that the "cube doesn't have good games" which became a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The Xbox has absolute sh*t for games, far fewer decent titles than the cube had, and yet it sold better, largely because of image and because people would say good things about while downplaying its faults and failings. The opposite was true of the GC. Instead of playing up its good points, it was ragged on for its failings, and pretty soon, the failings of the GC were just about the only thing spoken about anymore. It became the whipping boy of the gaming industry and I don't think that it deserved such a reputation.

I'm sure the PS3 editor at IGN is doing his level best to play up the good points of the console. He doesn't have to outright lie to people about it, but it's well within his right to point out the positive aspects of it because that's what SPIN is all about, and like it or not, IGN editors are more spin doctors than they'll ever be journalists.

Matt just doesn't GET that fact and that's why I think he shouldn't be working there. He's trying to be a judge when he's supposed to be a defense attorney.

Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
We hate Matt because he's sticking to some level of decency in a den of sin, and making Nintendo look bad because of his principles???

I didn't say he IS a level-headed critic. I mean that if he's going to try and pretend he's one, he should seek employment elsewhere.

[Kairon]

Quote
Originally posted by: Adrock
With Wii, Nintendo had to completely reinvent their gameplan. I'm glad it's working. No one has to defend them if they make wise decisions. Their actions should speak for themselves.

But there are some people who don't like what the actions are saying...

~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com  

[Kairon]

Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
Matt just doesn't GET that fact and that's why I think he shouldn't be working there. He's trying to be a judge when he's supposed to be a defense attorney.

OBJECTION!

Your honor! Defense Attorney was NOT in the witness' job description when he was hired! ... That's MY JOB!!!

~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[Smash_Brother]

Quote
Originally posted by: BigJim Matt is a fan and an editorialist before he is a journalist. There is hardly any journalism anywhere in video games. But even as a fan/editorialist, it's still not his "job" to do positive PR and damage control either.

Then why does EVERY OTHER EDITOR do PR-level damage control for their respective consoles?

I don't know or care if its his "job" or not, to be honest. All I know is that every other editor does it so Matt should be doing it as well, not adding to the problem by turning his back on Nintendo and advising people against purchasing a GC (which, like I said, I never once regretted doing).

And yes, I think the fact that he's more pro-Nintendo right now is because he isn't afraid of looking bad for supporting them anymore, and I will not, CANNOT, respect someone who allows fear to dictate their actions in a situation like that.

[BigJim]

His "job" is to speak his mind.  Be it good, bad or ugly.

Why are other editors doing PR damage control?

Answer: They shouldn't be, IMO. If it's their genuine opinion, then that might be one thing. But if they're doing blind PR then Matt has it more right than they do as far as I see it. That's not a compliment to Matt necessarily or his opinions. But I'll respect genuine opinions over PR anyday.

[Pittbboi]

Quote
The Xbox has absolute sh*t for games, far fewer decent titles than the cube had, and yet it sold better, largely because of image and because people would say good things about while downplaying its faults and failings.

Xbox was the whipping boy at the beginning of last gen. People started to take it seriously when good games actually started being made on it.

Xbox had far fewer titles than the Gamecube did, but I'm pretty sure that if you look at the quality game to Disney-licensed filler crap ratio, it's a lot more favorable on the Xbox. Xbox did a much better job of covering its bases last gen than the Xbox did. There was more than one great game for every genre on that system. That, and the Xbox introduced Xbox Live, which was a MAJOR selling point. Xbox didn't sell better than the Cube because of Spin. At the end of the day, I hate to say it, but the system had less faults.  

[Smash_Brother]

Quote
Originally posted by: BigJim
His "job" is to speak his mind.  Be it good, bad or ugly.

Then IGN should get someone else who fits in with the rest of the spin doctors.

I'm guessing one of the reasons Matt was so pro-Xbox back in the day was because MS probably sent all of the IGN editors free Xboxes, just like they did with the game store clerks when the Xbox first launched. If that's all it took to buy his loyalty, then the guy is an even bigger shmuck than I thought. I hope they at least also "donated" some money to IGN, otherwise the price of his dignity was around $300.  

[Smash_Brother]

Quote
Originally posted by: Pittbboi
Xbox was the whipping boy at the beginning of last gen. People started to take it seriously when good games actually started being made on it.

Xbox had far fewer titles than the Gamecube did, but I'm pretty sure that if you look at the quality game to Disney-licensed filler crap ratio, it's a lot more favorable on the Xbox. Xbox did a much better job of covering its bases last gen than the Xbox did. There was more than one great game for every genre on that system. That, and the Xbox introduced Xbox Live, which was a MAJOR selling point. Xbox didn't sell better than the Cube because of Spin. At the end of the day, I hate to say it, but the system had less faults.

I disagree. The Xbox came in second because both Sony and MS had taken steps to slight the GC's image and IMAGE is quite possibly the biggest contributing factor to the Wii's sales right now.

Does anyone remember the flash animations which used to be on Xbox.com in which a bunch of Nintendo's characters were killed? Or Bill Gates' comments about how Nintendo was going to "have a hard time selling to anyone but the under 10 market"? And does anyone remember that MS was paying 3rd parties to not release multiplatform games on the GC?

People are quick to say, "Oh, Nintendo did it to themselves." but they don't take into consideration how immensely difficult it is to compete in a poker game with a deck that is literally stacked against you. They're competing against two giants with near-infinite piles of money to burn on advertising, moneyhatting, anti-money hatting to keep games off the GC and even smear campaigns.

And yet, assclowns like Matt are more than happy to kick Nintendo when they're losing a battle they couldn't possibly win, where the only thing they were truly guilty of was playing the game and believing it would be played fairly by their competitors as well.

[BigJim]

added a bit more to my post above

[Adrock]

Quote
Smash_Brother wrote:
The Xbox has absolute sh*t for games, far fewer decent titles than the cube had, and yet it sold better

Well, that's subjective. Xbox had Halo and everyone and their mother wanted a piece of that ass. Gamecube, on the other hand, didn't really have a real console defining game. There was no game made people say "I'm buying Gamecube because I want to play..." Don't get me wrong. I loved my Gamecube and I certainly believe that it had some very strong titles, but what defined it as a console was the fact that it was primarily a Nintendo fan's console.

Every console has its failings, but it's the console makers responsibility to get around them as best they can. Nintendo never really did anything about them during the Gamecube's life. They made a few half-assed attempts, but something like Twin Snakes wasn't going to reverse the console's fortunes.

[Luigi Dude]

Quote
Originally posted by: Adrock

Well, that's subjective. Xbox had Halo and everyone and their mother wanted a piece of that ass. Gamecube, on the other hand, didn't really have a real console defining game. There was no game made people say "I'm buying Gamecube because I want to play..."

Have you forgotten about Smash Bros Melee?  That game defined the Gamecube just as much as Halo defined the X-Box.  The game sold over 6.5 million copies worldwide and considering the Gamecube sold around 20 million units, that means 1/3 of all Gamecube owners own Smash Bros.  You can't get any more defining then that.  

[Jin-X]

I'm well aware of how MS did smear BS. I remember in the official Xbox magazine how they were spinning their pos original controller by saying (I'm paraphrasing): "Yeah it's big, because its for a man's hands". Or how they were downplaying Nintendo's innovations by making fun of R.O.B., the power glove and the Virtual Boy; the whole premise being if they were so innovative why did they make this stuff? Of course anybody with a brain knows that when you're a company that's always innovating, you will make some duds along the way.

But SB, you have to admit that Nintendo made it soooooooooo easy for Sony and MS to make them look like a kiddy console by their decisions like: purple box and changing Zelda (regardless of where you stand on WW, the switcheroo from Space World footage to cel-shading did MUCH more damage than people seem to realize).

Also I disagree almost entirely with you on Matt. You just want to some piece of crap editor to run the Nintendo site , just like those worthless guys on the PS and XBX sites. And the way they act like Sony and MS employees is one of the reasons I don't know nearly as much about their games as I do Nintendo's because I just don't visit their respective IGN sites because I know they're a sorry excuse for journalists.  

[Smash_Brother]

Quote
Originally posted by: Jin-X But SB, you have to admit that Nintendo made it soooooooooo easy for Sony and MS to make them look like a kiddy console by their decisions like: purple box and changing Zelda (regardless of where you stand on WW, the switcheroo from Space World footage to cel-shading did MUCH more damage than people seem to realize).

I agree that it did plenty of damage.

Quote
Also I disagree almost entirely with you on Matt. You just want to some piece of crap editor to run the Nintendo site , just like those worthless guys on the PS and XBX sites. And the way they act like Sony and MS employees is one of the reasons I don't know nearly as much about their games as I do Nintendo's because I just don't visit their respective IGN sites because I know they're a sorry excuse for journalists.

I just want him to grow a spine and unless Matt openly calls out the other editors when they try to rag on Nintendo in the middle of one of those podcasts they do (I can't be bothered to listen to them, I just don't care), then he hasn't done that yet.

[Bloodworth]

Blah blah blah.  Matt stands up and speaks his mind most of the time and he did call out the other editors after the best of the year awards.  I don't always agree with the criticisms he chooses to make, but there's no reason for him to defend Nintendo if he doesn't like what they're doing.  

[j_moose]

Just my two cents here...

It's Matt's job to cover the system, not support the system 100%.  It's not his job to be a Nintendo fan.  Just because he isn't sugar coating problems, issues, etc. does not mean he's not a Nintendo fan.  If things are going rough, why not say so?  He's supposed to be an editor at a video game site, not a fanboy.  I enjoy and respect the fact that he's not afraid to say "hey, Nintendo is screwing up on this one" or "for this and this reason, an XBOX might be a better choice".  He wasn't "bashing" Nintendo - but the company faltered with the Cube, and he was not afraid to bring the faults to light and discuss them.  I am glad that I didn't have to visit the IGN Cube site every day only to read nothing but shining praise for Nintendo, when clearly they had made mistakes.  Being a video game company, they know they're under the spotlight (especially with gaming media), which makes the mistakes all the less immune to extreme criticism.  I do not want to go to a video game website and read a bunch of stories that are written for the purpose of "supporting" the system or making it look good - I want to read about the system, what's going good and what's going bad.   Matt isn't jumping on the "I love Nintendo" bandwagon - he's been there all along.  Just because there were problems to point out on the Cube does not mean that he abandoned the company.  It means that there were problems to point out.

I don't think he lacked the spine to defend Nintendo - he gave credit where credit was due, and he criticized where that was due as well.  And of course the media is going to have an effect on the image, etc. of a console - however, in my opinion they bring out the problems with the console/company, not create new ones.  If Matt's influence can sway buyers, that's all the more reason to express the negatives as well as the positives.  If not, then to me it's just like reviewing a terrible game, and saying "the disc comes in a case, and the game runs, plus it's for GameCube so give it a shot!".  Pointing out the negatives is just as important as pointing out the positives.  

Case in point: it's my opinion that the media magnifies the moves that the company makes, and the image that the company creates (whether that image was created on purpose or not).  Therefore, whatever is magnified, started with the company.  I like being able to go to IGN (Cube and Wii, anyway), and hear what is going wrong AND what is going right.  Feed me some negativity - if it's not a lie, then that's what I came there to read in the first place.  And for the record, Matt did acknowledge with the Wii that Nintendo was on to something, but was cautiously optimistic about it.

[Smash_Brother]

Quote
Originally posted by: Bloodworth
Blah blah blah.  Matt stands up and speaks his mind most of the time and he did call out the other editors after the best of the year awards.

Referencing it and calling it wrong while replying to a letter from a fan is just about the most non-confrontational way of dealing with it. He had to wait until some kid sent him a letter about it before he voiced his opinion on the subject? What a b*tch!

Hell, the only more pansy method would have been to write an unsigned letter, leave it up on the IGN company bulletin board and then leave the country due to fear of retaliation.

If he was in the podcast and someone who he KNEW to have only played Zelda for 10 minutes ragged on it, and he didn't put them in their place immediately, then I'm sorry: the man has no spine.

It's the EASIEST and most righteous argument in the WORLD to win:

"Did you play the game for more than 10 minutes?"
"No."
"Then SHUT YER GREASY MOUTH."

The man is a jellyfish, terrified of his peers at the company and incapable of any real confrontation to defend his views and tastes, and until he actually stands up for Nintendo in the face of one of the mouth-breating 360 or PS3 editors, then my opinion of him will...not...change.

[NWR_pap64]

OK, guys this is how I picture S_B's claims...

Imagine that Nintendo is your best friend. You've been together since childhood, you trust each other and greatly enjoy each other's company. But then one day something happens, your friend makes some mistakes (does some drugs one night, gets arrested) or is framed by someone else (a bitter rival, girlfriend etc.). Because of that your friend's reputation has been tarnished severely and people don't want to associate with him or her. The rep is so strong that you don't want to be associated with your friend. You even go as far as to diss them completely when they seek your company and act as if that person never existed.

Then all of a sudden, the friend does something so great that people acknowledge them as being a great person. Because of that now you go back to them and say that you are friends once more.

This is what happened with Matt and Nintendo.

Forgive my bluntness, but you are not getting it. Yes, he did call out some of Nintendo's mistakes and frankly some of those mistakes are too obvious to be ignored. But it's VERY hard to deny that Matt was painfully unfair with Nintendo and the GC, never giving credit where credit was due. What S_B is talking about is that Matt didn't defend Nintendo when they needed them and turned his back on them after the end of the GC, but now that Nintendo is the darling of the industry he goes back and sings his praises like they were always full of great ideas.

Yes, we all know Nintendo did many mistakes during the N64 and GC eras that caused them great failures. But we are not talking about THAT. We are talking about loyal to the company, especially when everyone else decides to mock them for the hell of it.

So S_B is not talking about pointing out mistakes in a company's lifetime or blindly supporting them, he is talking about being loyal to your company, even if they are the most picked on of them all, especially if they are still good at what they do.  

[Ian Sane]

"Matt isn't like you or me: he's a part of the media. His influence is capable of swaying many potential buyers and that includes encouraging people to stick with their Nintendo systems instead of buying other consoles which is what he spent most of his time insisting people do."

I think it's better for someone in the media to give an honest opinion.  Too often I see the media trying to trick us into supporting inferior products or sway us into forming a specific opinion.  Honesty in the media is rare and we should always be supportive of it.

If the media had any affect on the Cube's performance Matt isn't the sole person to blame.  He could never make or break a console on his own.

And Nintendo sunk the Cube before it was even released.  Nintendo had an negative k!ddy image and they responded by releasing a purple lunchbox and taking their most respected franchise and turning it into a cartoon.  That just demonstrated how incredibly clueless they were regarding marketing and that would have sealed the Cube's fate alone, regardless of lying about non-existent online plans or any questionable methods of doing routine stuff.  The actual goof-ups just made things worse.  Who would push Luigi's Mansion as the flagship title over Rogue Leader?  One game is "k!ddy" and has about a weekend's worth of playtime while the other has a strong brand that is suitable for kids but appeals to teenagers and adults and the is also a better game with more replay.  To anyone but Nintendo the choice was obvious.

Plus people like Matt are largely unknown to the general public anyway.  People finding out the Cube didn't have DVD support when the other consoles did probably lost more sales than Matt not giving game higher scores than they should have.

And I don't think Matt was that down on Nintendo until the Cube became a barren wasteland with whole months going by with literally no games released.  The Cube was already abandoned by Nintendo by the time Matt finally started really ragging on Nintendo.