psycopathicteen wrote:
UncleSporky wrote:
Who was being interviewed? The actual programmer, or some guy who represented the company and didn't know anything about programming? How do you know? I don't think two examples (which we haven't even seen for ourselves) are enough to condemn all developers of having over-inflated egos.
They just wanted a series of quick quotes to get kids excited. Everyone still does that nowadays too. These people are paid to embellish and always look on the bright side of things. This generation, Sony has made dumb decision after dumb decision and paid the price, and yet every press release and interview is overwhelmingly positive and dismissive of complaints. It's how the world works.
That's exactly what I thought. The problem is nobody takes me seriously as a homebrewer. I say I could do one thing, somebody posts a link from some interview and say something like "no you idiot, do your research, the Snes can't do that because this guy says it can't." I try to explain to them how advertising works, and how just because somebody programmed a game doesn't mean they always tell the truth, but they never beleive me. I have to go out of my way just to make a freaking demo just to back up my argument, while other people could back up their argument just by posting a link.
Is this topic about developers having big egos, or was it just a carefully constructed trap to have someone say what you wanted so you could jump to a tangent about a person who hurt your feelings? If somebody upset you because they trust a magazine over you, that's not our concern. Frankly I'd say you should laugh it off.
Stop arguing with people who have no idea what they're talking about, because even if you produce something to contradict them they likely won't believe it.
tepples wrote:
Wikipedia editors, for one, will trust inaccurate information spread by the mainstream media over a first-hand account that debunks it simply because mainstream media are more widely believed reliable. See
policy on self-published sources and the
blanket ban on original research.
Even so, I do think it's a necessary policy, given the nature of free editing on a wiki. How else could they dispute incorrect information? I could claim to be the White House cook and I know for a fact that Obama's marriage is falling apart. As original research, who could dispute this? I suppose it could be refuted by another user who claims they're the president's limo driver.