Jim Sterling Does Classic Mistakes About "Sony Fanboys"

NOTE: This is an article that I posted on GameNewser in response to Jim Sterling's ridiculous article. I had tried to get it on N4G, though it failed it (conspiracy theorists commence attack now). Thus, here is the original article. You can also view the article and comment on it without restrictions here.

Recently, Destructoid did a rather damning editorial (or at least its lightning rod of controversy and hate that is Jim Sterling) about Sony fanboys being the worst bunch of fanboys. We disagree with him on a practical point (they're all annoying). However, Jim seems to want to do the classic mistakes that actually made us cringe worse than the BBC's Watchdog piece on the PS3 "YLoD". He made it seem as though no one was ever allowed to call him out on any of his opinions, he mistakes the reasons behind some outrages of the "fanboys", and finally...

...he uses the term "Sony Defense Force" to describe them (the biggest mistake he has made yet).

First, let's start out with this: he has every right to his opinions, and we're not ever going to say that he doesn't have any right to express it. But at least do it in a way that shows that you know what it is you're talking about, even when you're parodying the viewpoint (which, from his follow up comments in the comment section, we doubt he's just joking about these opinions).

We first examine that Jim said that Sony fanboys rage the most about things. In fact, this is the entire basis of the opinion. They petitioned about losing once-exclusive franchises, and whine about subpar reviews of hyped games, something that is claimed to be untrue about the other sides, and that 360 fanboys didn't get as upset about losing exclusivity towards games like Bioshock and Castle Crashers.

However, the thing about the exclusivity that he never did mention is how 360 fanboys tend to use the "loss" as a weapon. Where do you think the "have fun playing the sloppy seconds" saying came from? You know they are already going to say this about Star Ocean: The Last Hope. In fact, on N4G, they have already done so. Oh, and they suddenly have criticisms about the game. They suddenly use the "multiplatforms are better on the 360" argument. How is this, to Jim Sterling, NOT worthy to be brought up? Maybe because he didn't think it fit what he was talking about.

And about the petitions: Does anyone have any idea just what they were concerned about? For one, does anyone remember the controversy about just HOW Microsoft were scoring these exclusives? After the whole thing about how they scored the GTA4 episodes, it became a concern that Microsoft were not getting any of the game legitimately. Fair or not, they were being accused (and probably rightfully so) of taking "give it to us, only/too" money that Microsoft was giving. Capcom was also taken to task for the 20-minute install that it gave the PS3 version of DMC4 that has yet to be resolved (something that Jim doesn't bring up). As for SE and FF13, Jim never remembers the promises that SE made about wanting to keep the game a PS3 exclusive, do they? The issue was that Square Enix was giving the 36o (among other consoles) game after game after game (and the 360 being the testing grounds for new games) while not releasing a PS3 game until 2009. The FF13 announcement angered many on the PS3 side because of the many broken promises, and then lying about things time after time again.

Which brings up another point that Jim never brought up: the "gimping" of the games. Many are not as angry about the game going multiplat from only PS3 to the 360-also as they are about the fear that the PS3 version would suffer as a result of the multiplatform bug. Graphics, sound, and some things about the gameplay may suffer because quality "needs" to be identical on both platforms, and since some gamers have accused the 360's mediums of holding technical progress back, there are legit concerns about if the PS3 version, to make sure that they don't get any better of a version than the 360 gamers will, hold that back tech-wise, as well. Jim fails to bring this up, either.

He also brings up the Prototype vs. Infamous battle. Jim said:

"For a more home-grown example, let's look at the notorious Prototype versus inFAMOUS debate. This debate was not about which game was better. Sure, that's how it started, but it somehow managed to turn into yet another battlefield of the console war, through some serious leaps in logic instigated by the Sony crowd. Apparently, if you like Prototype more than inFAMOUS, you like the Xbox 360 more than the PS3."

Actually, while we haven't played Prototype, we can say that those that have played inFAMOUS have reasons to brag. It's an all around good game that delivers on almost every aspect, and we hope that Sucker Punch will not forget to expand the experience in some way.

Now, as far as we can remember, there wasn't as much of an issue about this as Sterling would like for us to believe. However, some animosity that may have come from the Sony crowd about Prototype wasn't so much about the game itself as it was who published it: Activision. If you remember, it was a few weeks or so prior to the launch of Prototype that Activision's main man Bobby Kotick made those now infamous (pun unintended) remarks saying that he would pull support from Sony unless the PS3's price was reduced (and then never said a word after it). That and some that were praising Prototype were only praising it because they were being 360 fanboys who were trying to give praise to Kotick for his comments. While there are clearly many of those that think Prototype is better (and they have every right to like it better), there were also a few select people to want to use Kotick's words as reasons to go about "supporting" him by buying and praising a game they wouldn't otherwise play.

While we do somewhat agree that 8/10 is hardly a bad score, and some Sony fanboys DO take those reviews too much to heart, let's once more bring up a VERY controversial review: GameDaily's review of Metal Gear Solid 4 and Chris Buffa's later "explanation" that only added fuel to the fire. If anyone remembers that, they will see why some PS3 fans are skeptical about these 8/10 reviews. There are some outlets who can get away with giving that score while showing bias without showing it (if you get what we mean). They also have every right to express their opinions about the reviews.

Which brings up to the second mistake Sterling makes in this: calling out blogs for simpily calling him out:

"As a matter of fact, that PlayStation Lifestyle article is not the only fan site to ever respond to my work. PSX Extreme and PSU are among other Sony-oriented blogs that have felt the need to accuse me of "bias" or question me for questioning the unquestionable Sony. So far I am yet to see a Microsoft fan site pull a similar stunt. It simply doesn't seem to happen, does it?"

 In case anyone is wondering WHICH PSLS article Jim was referring to, here it is, and here is the "PS3-shipping" article that Sterling is trying to pass off as such (according to the PSLS article).

Another mistake. Just calling out someone on their mistakes don't make you any kind of fanboy. Why do Microsoft fanboys not do this as much? Because we don't see them being called a fanboy for the littlest things as they do with anyone calling out any anti-Sony article. It seems like the conditions of being a fanboy widen 200 percent for the Sony fans. Trust us, Microsoft fans DO do this. They just don't get called out as much as Sony ones have been. Maybe instead of questioning the fanboys, we should narrow the definition of who a "fanboy" really is. Also, Jim, you really shouldn't be saying that no one has any right to call you out. After all, you're the one that's starting all of these things with your tired parodies of issues. At some point, they stop becoming funny.

By the way, this:

"I'm not telling you anything you don't already know, and if you're reading this and are currently angry or offended by any of the statements, you're only going to prove just how correct I am."

This only PROVES our point. Why are we not allowed to express criticism to
anything Jim says? This contradicts the editor note at the beginning of the article:

[Editor's Note: We're not just a (rad) news site -- we also publish opinions/editorials from our community & employees like this one, though be aware it may not jive with the opinions of Destructoid as a whole, or how our moms raised us. Want to post your own article in response? Publish it now on our community blogs.]

But if you disagree with the article in any way, you prove him right? How fair is that?

But those things bring us to the worst mistake that Jim makes:

There is only one answer: The Sony Defense Force is by far the most aggressive, the most obnoxious and, of course, the most defensive. Let's look at some evidence.

This is what WE'RE offended at, and no, us being offended does NOT make him right, but rather a damned fool. You 360 fanboys who use this, too, should also take note.

The Sony Defense Force? Really, Jim? And this wasn't the last time you used the term, either:

"Positive reviews were criticized just as much as negative ones by the Sony Defense Force..."

Once more, the term Sony Defense Force (SDF), which many 360 fanboys on N4G use to insult those that call them out in the Gamer Zone of the comment sections without consequence despite it being ruled against the GZ rules, is used. If none of you remember, and it's apparent that Jim Sterling needs a reminder, the term SDF was made by a site that was actually proven to be run by Rob Foor, the owner of Wii60. Foor apparently has too much time on his hands, and created a site which, despite the Whois records for both domains showing VERY similar listings, he still, to this day, even after two YEARS of us knowing, denies having anything to do with the site. It was a site made to make fun of anyone who likes the PS3, and it was HIS view of what PS3 gamers thought about the games and the systems. It is fueled by the most ridiculous claims ever, and made to look like that PS3 fanboys even MADE any of the claims. 360 fanboys took the bait (whether or not they knew the truth, we don't think they cared) and ran with it.

Either Jim doesn't know, or doesn't care. We hope it's the former, because if it is the latter, then Jim needs to explain something to us, like what in the hell possessed Jim to even go there. Why use that phrase to begin with? We have seen no other media outlet ever use that term to describe fanboys. Not even Chris Buffa (as far as we know) has used the term. Hell, even Kotaku hasn't gone there, and despite all their PS3 and PS3 fanboy bashing we usually see on their site, Analoghype hasn't done this, either. This is EXTREMELY unprofessional of Jim to make. Is he in cahoots with Rob Foor or something? This is very shameful, and it should be grounds enough for those on the PS3 side to call for Jim's head. This is not a joke, Jim. You should be fired for that ALONE...IMMEDIATELY! This shows that you are not a gamer, and that you are not a journalist! Yes, we are offended, and yes, we are sickened that you would use SDF as a weapon here. How dare you? And no, this doesn't make you right. This just makes you (and any other 360 fanboy who goes to that insult) a coward.

We were hoping that this was another joke article (which the jokes are, despite what he says, not that easy to decipher that they ARE just jokes, so this time, we wanted to make sure this wasn't one). But his comments later on just threw that out the window:

""360 doesnt draw me in with their exclusives. I'm no fanboy but the ps3 exclusives do seem more interesting to me. plus the cost of the system and all the features it has are definitely an advantage for me."

I agree with you. My favorite system is dictated by which has the better looking games at any given time. Right now my favorite system is the PS3. This article certainly isn't about the PlayStation 3. I love the physical products themselves, I just have a problem with the dips in charge of the systems, and the rabid fanboys surrounding them."

The second:

""Ugh.... does this guy EVER get tired of shitting on the PS3?"

Proven right within the first four comments.

New world record GET!"

And the third, lengthy one:

"You bring up an interesting point about the "level" of exclusives, but I really wouldn't argue that Devil May Cry is quite on the same level as Final Fantasy or even Gears of War. It was a case of people worried that their one big exclusive at the time was going multiplat. Just look at the fear Sony fanboys have of "losing" MGS4 as well. The denial and rage that happens when you even *suggest* the possibility of MGS4 on a 360, even a year on, is huge.

As for this point: "Also you mention people buying 360s to play Tales of Vesperia and then getting slapped in the face, but you don't mention people buying PS3s to play FFXIII and then getting slapped in the face. "

There is a MASSIVE difference between the two. Tales of Vesperia PS3 was announced AFTER people had bought their Xbox 360s. They bought the 360, bought an inferior version of the game, and then got screwed over. The 360 version of FFXIII was announced before either version released, so people have time to make a decision. They've not been screwed as badly as they would've been if the 360 version was announced AFTER the PS3 release, with additional content added.

What's more, if you bought a PS3 purely for FF XIII *before* E3 2008, you're officially a f*cking idiot. Who'd do that? Who'd buy a system for a game that was four years away from release? No sympathy at all for someone like that."

The last one is the worst one, because not only does he call someone an idiot, but he gets the fact wrong: Square Enix kept delaying the game. Jim acts as though the release date was ALWAYS 2010. And it doesn't sound like he was joking about that, either.

Basically put, it's Jim who isn't just acting like the idiot, he's just like Watchdog: rather be the loud one than the right one. All fanboys are annoying, but that doesn't give Jim (a man who should just shut the hell up at this point) the right to call everyone out without all the facts straight, or show that he doesn't care about the actual facts by using the old "SDF" line.