We, as gamers, are always eager for the latest breaking news on new consoles and new games to the point that we will accept and absorb almost any information that comes along. We can sometimes be obsessed with news that we ignore rumour and supposition and claim it as fact and it is this trait of ours that "journalists" and forums feed off of.
In case any of you haven't already heard, there was recently a big stink between the not-so-popular (but thinks he is) youtube channel, ReviewTechUSA, and pretty much all gamers everywhere but mostly dualshockers.com. I'm not going to go into the details of that, you can just read the following blog here to find that out for yourself...
http://n4g.com/user/blogpos...
Today Rich of ReviewTechUSA just proved not only how colossal a dumbass he really is, but he also proved again how stupid it is to use anonymous sources. How? With this brand new video which you can see here.
http://www.youtube.com/watc...
The title of the video? "The PS4...It Does 1080p. Sorry Microsoft."
That's right. The idiot that said that Call of Duty Ghosts wouldn't be 1080p on the PS4, and instead be 720p, due to NETWORKING ISSUES (emphasised for maximum hilarity) posted a video talking about how Infinity Ward confirmed that the PS4 version of CoD Ghosts would be native 1080p and the Xbox One version would be 720p.
At the 2:05 mark he casually and dismissively says about his previous 2 videos and sources "so I guess that insider information I got on that went to sh*t." All of 4 seconds. We all know his info came from MisterXMedia, but this guy made some serious accusations against the Xbox One and PS4 based on anonymous sources, and when he was called out for it he acted like a supreme douchebag about it, and now that he's proven wrong he spends 4 seconds just going "ah well?"
See, this is why all of us need to stop listening to these clowns using anonymous sources. Even if it's fun to get the fanboy war out and use them, idiots like Rich just make everyone miserable, and the jobs of so many people that much harder.
Anonymous sources can literally be anything, or anyone, or nothing, or no one. This is just a small example of the kind of B.S. that "journalists" cause using anonymous sources. Rich may sit there and say he doesn't consider himself a journalist, but he once said that he does too and the fact remains that he does have enough of a viewer ship that what he says can create an impact, if even just a small one.
Dualshockers shouldn't have wasted their time on such stupidity. Everyone with 1 I.Q. point could tell you that resolution and networking are completely unrelated (though I had quite the comment argument with someone who though that because they both use system memory, they are related and networking could reduce resolution) and that that alone was enough to completely discredit Rich and his "sources." I understand why Dualshockers made the article, but it's like Albert Einstein trying teach to math to a goldfish.
Anonymous sources aren't reliable no matter how many times someone says they are. If a source is reliable, then it won't have a problem coming forth (EXCEPTION: Life or death situations are exempt from this rule for obvious reasons) and letting his/her information speak for itself. Every time I see "anonymous sources" I hear "coward who won't come forward."
We need to ignore these fools. They're just ruining things for everyone and making legitimate news take a back seat.
Microsoft announced its financial results for Q3 of fiscal year 2026, including an update on its gaming Xbox business and more.
Not looking good. Hopefully Asha Sharma is able to turn Phil’s disaster around.
To me it's still quite remarkable how they can cash-in 5.3bn in revenue in a single quarter, since their hardware is basically dead.
The stock mark is what makes Microsoft remarkable, They have convinced every institutional and retail investor to just keep piling money into them. Like many big tech giants they are just a big growing pyramid scheme. As long as people keep dropping money into ETF's that cover the market Microsoft will always be liquid. At the same time it is completely stifling innovation and competition. People need to start being more discreet in how they invest their money as it's killing the system.
Riiiiight because people will just flock back to them for one or two games per year.
15+ years of bad performance is what they call irreparable in business. It is time for them to sell off the assets and get out of entertainment.
These declines are on the back of extra revenue received from releasing games like Forza horizon 5 on PlayStation. So I’m being sarcastic here when I said they should go back to exclusives. Killing off a revenue stream from Ps5 sales will only make things worse
The charity event will be streamed live from Gamescom in August.
Thanks to the slip-up of an artist working on the title, we now have more evidence that a new Injustice game is in the works.
Can't say I agree or disagree entirely. Rich's videos have been perfectly sound and have always included the source of the news up until this point. Rich made a naive call to use anonymous sources in that video (especially considering the following day it was debunked), but it isn't the first time it's happened with game news. I wouldn't call him stupid, but he definitely should not have done this video, especially if he didn't want the backlash he took.
Anonymous sources claimed the Wii U was technologically inferior to the 360/PS3 which simply wasn't true. It goes to show that anonymous sources are never a good thing to cite. In Rich's case, he's learned a harsh lesson and hopefully it will reflect in his future videos.
What I think you mean to say is ignore posts that cite "anonymous sources," because it's nothing more than a shield for what can very be a completely bogus rumor. And in both of these situations it most certainly was.
In journalism, anonymous sources from respectable news organizations are verified, and typically, the information they provide is investigated further to find corraborating evidence to support the claim of the source. A respectable news organization does not just post what an anonymous source says, because realistically, there are no facts to back it up. If facts are provided by the source itself, they can more often than not be independantly verified through research.
Unfortunately, in gaming journalism, that research part is often left out. This makes it so that the better news sites out there that have reliable sources, and could post a quick tidbit about something come under scrutiny because of all the people that will just post something and hide behind the "anonymous source" tag-line.
To those types of people I say, "using an anonymous source doesn't make you special, and it doesn't make you a journalist. It makes you a gossiper." That's right. All they're doing is spreading information, albeit sometimes factual, but not doing it in any sort of journalistic way. No information is researched. No real implications are explored. No facts are backed up with evidence outside of what some guy may have told them.
I'm not suggesting that anonymous sources go away, they actually are an important part of journalism as a whole. However, I am suggesting that instead of running to the keyboards to post something to get hits, dig a little deeper and see what they can find to make the story something that can't be disputed or dismissed. Doing so WILL get you a response from the companies you are reporting on when you tell them what you have.
I know it's hard in gaming, because in general, the industry is very insular. Naming a source can ruin a person's career, because the publishers, developers, and console makers, and everyone involved in game making takes NDA's VERY seriously. However, no matter how obscure the source may be, there is almost always secondary evidence to provide substantial merit to the story.
On a side note, one pet peeve of mine is that stories are written up and then end with, "We contacted X company for comment, we will update IF they respond". No, just no. You write your article after you get the response. If you give it 24-48 hours and nothing, fine, say they didn't respond, but I'd wager many game journalist would rather get the hits in as soon as possible.
Rainslacker I couldn't agree more with basically everything you said.
As a fellow reviewer myself (thought not much of anything recently) I can verify your sound advice most of which I and people I worked with on a previous site learned the hard way.
I think a lot of the smaller sites are worried maybe about not being taken seriously by the developer's and publishers, but I can confirm (again from my own experience) this is not the case. A company doesn't care if you are IGN, or Gamespot or JoeSchmoGames.com (Unless they have some kind of exclusive deal worked out with said online publications (Which they often do)
They care about getting as much information out about their title to as many people, sources, platforms, in as many languages as possible. As long as you write a good article/review/preview/opinion piece about whatever information it is they provide you or you discover and they confirm You can make lasting information exchange parterships with companies the world over. You have to stay current and credible though.
So though you may think the "hits" are what it is all about. It isn't worth sacrificing your integrity in the long run. Piss off the wrong company and you may find your site closed down or sued.
It's probably best to let it go at this point. I'm sure he's plenty aware that making BS up is getting him lots of hits. We should just ignore him to stop him from getting more hits, like we should have with Anita Sar-OH HELL I ALMOST SAID HER NAME!
I have just one thing to say.............
People like anonymous sources and rumors when it suits their console of choice, no matter how outrageous.
Oh, and I agree with you. I also wish that rumor blogs with no credible sources stop getting posted on N4G, but everyone needs ad revenue so I know that isn't happening.