It does because it is singling out a game product with the same faults that are inherent in all electric goods - the probability of failure and (if true) a bad batch. The way watchdog portray things will most likely give the average viewer another negative point about games.C=Style wrote:
But this one article on Watchdog pointing out dissatisfaction (rightfully imo) from PS3 gamers who have faulty consoles does not paint the whole industry in a bad light, I do not for the life of me understand where you are getting this idea from?? Have you actually seen the program in question yet? Because it is a total overreaction on your part.
I have seen the program now, and I believe my original point is still valid - I mean was the stupid song at the end necessary? It just strengthens the fact that they dont care about the facts, they just want a bit of sensationalism, and games are an easy target.
It means, for the last time, that I dont agree that someone writing in a games magazine should participate in such a report, I think you are all blinded by the idea that I'm a bit of a censored now, and cant see that whether you agree or not (mostly not), my point is valid.C=Style wrote:You mentioned earlier in the thread that this man obviously has no loyalty. What does this mean exactly? Is it some kind of secret society that you have ties to and must obey certain rules when within it? Again, this one article bears no reflection on the games industry and certainly not the actual games, your earlier rant about censorship was completely unrelated, I think a few people here are failing to see the link from this one article.
My censorship rant was an example of how reports like this are potentially another nail in the coffin of the games industry, and if all these people have their way, that is what could become. No its not directly relevent, but it only takes one more straw to break a camels back.
I'm not saying he has done anything wrong, I just dont respect him as a games columnist any more after his participation in the report, regardless of his input into the report. To me its the equivalent of a columnist for Empire (for example) jumping on the videonasty bandwagon.C=Style wrote:I'm not a fan of Iain Lee, but he has done nothing wrong here at all, yet you sit there calling him fan boy and all other childish insulting names, when really you should be looking in the mirror perhaps?
I pointed out that his being a 360 fanboy probably biased his decision to participate. and yes I did call him a childish insult, but dont sit there all high and mighty throwing that back in my face like you have never insulted someone in the heat of the moment.
So there you go, we've dealt with my original points. Has it changed anything, considering I havent really said anything different, or are you still determined to make me change my opinion and see how wrong I am and how right you are?