Corrinne Yu leaves Halo team for Naughty Dog
posted on 11.23.13 at 04:20 PM EDT by (@salromano)
Halo engine programmer "loving" PS4 graphics coding.

Corrinne Yu, who worked as a principle engine programmer at 343 Industries—Microsoft’s Halo team—since 2008, has left the company for PlayStation 4 graphics coding at Naughty Dog.

In a now deleted tweet, Yu seemed happy in her new position. “I am loving PS4 graphics coding. No more Windows 8 for me. So happy!”

Before joining Microsoft, Yu was also a lead technology programmer at 3D Realms, and a director of technology at Gearbox Software. She was a founding member of Microsoft’s Direct 3D advisory board, and participated in CUDA and GPU simulation at Nvidia. At 343, Yu developed new lighting technology for Halo 4 using dynamic radiosity algorithms, which Microsoft later patented.

Find Yu on LinkedIn here.

Thanks, NeoGAF.

Play-Asia
  • pekot

    Nice boobs … I mean news
    Nice news

    • Nhiroz

      I thought i was the only one who noticed :-D I’m guessing she didn’t like working on Windows 8? gurarara

    • HighBrowDrifter

      “Naughty” Dog seems more befitting than Microballs……*snicker, snicker*

      -Naughty_Puss

      • Budgiecat

        But she didn’t join Square-Anus….

        • Budgiecat

          and she didnt join Wacktivision and Numbco and Crapcom

          • HighBrowDrifter

            Well, I know one thing is certain…..this fine lady is in for an Uncharted treat! She may have to Jak some people off…..but that shouldn’t be an issue.

            She could always take a Crash course if she wanted to, but she would be The Last Of Us to do that…..

            All I am saying is, I wish her all the best…..NOW TAKE THAT TOP OFF!!! (ノಠ益ಠ)ノ彡┻━┻

            -BANZAI!!!_Puss

            • DrForbidden

              Lay off the passive-aggressive sexism, dude. It’s not funny or whatever you seem to think it is.

              • HighBrowDrifter

                My my!….DrForbidden, heed your prejudice tongue, I was simply amusing myself, no harm intended. It was not my intent to use “passive-aggressive sexism”.

                Where are my manners…right…..I show you to the door. It’s right over there, next to the French cedar table with the chill pill on top. Don’t forget to take it on your way out! Also, if you don’t mind closing the door….it gets quite cold at night. Thank you.

                -Passive-Aggressive_Puss

                • DrForbidden

                  Thanks, but you couldn’t find the door even if it was jammed up your kittykat anus like a thermometer during your vet visit.

                  You wouldn’t make jokes like that if the programmer in question was a straight male, but it’s somehow ok to make them because it’s a woman? Because it’s somehow fun to imply that she jacks people off to get her job and that she should take her top off for your amusement for no other reason than because she is female? Really? Make no mistake: your jokes literally hinge on the fact that she is female; not her skills or personality or attitude, but simply the fact that she is a woman. And you see nothing wrong with that, apparently.

                  When told to knock it off your response is to tell others to take a ‘chill pill’, which is a transparent, universal code for ‘You are not able to justify or defend your frowned-upon action without seeming like an even bigger douche and thus attempt to imply that other people are blowing things out of proportion’.

                  Yeah, classy. Have a nice weekend

                  • Budgiecat

                    Your white knight armor shines so luminously…what’s the secret……..Armor All?

                    • DrForbidden

                      Nah, I just use the tears from the women you beat on a regular basis.

                    • HeatPhoenix

                      HAHAHA fighting immature joke with ad hominem. Two wrongs don’t make a right, friend.

                    • DrForbidden

                      I wasn’t looking to make a right, friend. There is no making right here. And to be fair, it’s fighting an ad hominem with an ad hominem. Make no mistake, accusing someone of being a ‘white knight’ in a derogatory fashion is also an ad hominem attack.

      • Budgiecat

        and she didnt join SNK Suckmore

    • EX+

      Haha! I laughed harder than I should have.

  • Articuno76

    Wow, the lighting in Halo 4 is one of the most striking parts of it’s visual design.

  • KingKellogg The Waffle Haggler

    So the person responsible for the best part of halo 4 is leaving D:

  • http://youtube.com/miyabigaming 武神水樹

    Converted!

  • Impressionnant

    Wish she could’ve joined a company that focused on gameplay. Not saying Naughty Dog are bad, but they haven’t focused on gameplay since the PS2.

    • Dasher1572

      Bullshit

      • jujubee88

        You are not making yourself look a master of rhetoric.

        But there’s more facts to be countered to what OP said (as seen by other more thought out replies below).

        • Dasher1572

          I called it as it was, and it was bullshit.

    • $30632660

      Jak 2 was just a sign that Naughty Dog was going to make shooter after shooter. I died a little inside when they went from Jak and Daxter to Jak 2. I couldn’t figure out if they was just trying to copy Ratchet and Clank or if they wanted to add guns because Halo was popular.

      I never thought they would continue making shooters ;/

      • Kevadu

        Describing a game like The Last of Us as a shooter completely misses the point. Yes, it has shooting, but that is not even remotely the focus of the game.

        • Crossbones (Prodigy-X)

          Don’t bother with him. He just likes to troll. Just look at his comments in the Xbox selling 1 million units article.

        • $30632660

          When you make a game where the gameplay, that’s the part that matters the most, has a combat system where guns have more of a focus than anything else, it’s a shooter.

          I just think you’re missing the point of why we as gamers play games for the gameplay, not the story.

          • GhostNomad

            ‘We’ as gamers play games. That part of your statement is true. The rest, I disagree with.

            Some people play for the gameplay, others play for the graphics and art style, then there’s the group that plays for the story, etc. There’s always people who play the kind of games that have a terrible story, funky gameplay, and weird visuals, but there’s just a certain charm to the game that makes it enjoyable.

            It’s good that you’re into games solely for the gameplay, but don’t assume everyone else is the same :P

            • $30632660

              I can understand about people playing games for the story with games like Beyond 2 Souls where it’s practically a movie anyway.

              I can see people playing games like Journey for the graphics and art style too.

              I just meant in general the first thing people look for in a game is the gameplay, they may be hooked with just the graphics, but gamers will still wait to see the gameplay first.

              • GhostNomad

                Way I see it, the first thing that people want out of a game is fun and entertainment. Whether that’s brought by solid gameplay or a creative story, I suppose that depends on the game itself.

                Don’t misunderstand, I’m not saying your view is wrong. Gameplay is a big part of games, it’s just not what makes all games shine in my opinion.

                • $30632660

                  I still agree with you, I should’ve just explained it better

                  • GhostNomad

                    No worries, we got our points across :D

          • Kevadu

            Except I was talking about the gameplay…

            You can get through most of The Last of US without firing a single shot. Yeah, there are some forced shooting sections (which are generally the weakest part of the game in my opinion), but for the majority of the game stealth rules. So no, guns do not “have more of a focus than anything else”. For one thing the scarcity of ammo makes running and gunning a poor choice most of the time. Pretty sure I killed more people with shivs, melee weapons, and good old fashioned strangling than I ever did with guns.

            Did you even play the game?

            • $30632660

              As i said above, you can easily find ammo by exploring. You can take the ammo from some enemies too.

          • http://Xcite79.1up.com/ Keegs79

            The focus is sneaking. Not shooting. Your stupid if you go around shooting. Shooting won’t even get you out of all the difficult situations. You clearly haven’t played the game. There are clickers that are better left alone or at least killed with a sheave, otherwise your going to waste ammo trying to kill just one when ammo is scarce. Ammo isn’t just laying around everywhere.

            • $30632660

              If you actually explored you’d find ammo if you wanted to. You obviously can’t just run up to a clicker expecting to gun it down or else you’ll just suffer and instant kill unless you have a shiv.

              The Ai in the Last of Us is terrible , it is not hard to shoot all you want to, so don’t give me that.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gC-1GfTRA0A

      • EX+

        Ok, can we stop this? It’s stupid.
        If you’re gonna troll, Gematsu isn’t the place for you.

        • $30632660

          Giving my honest opinion about N D ruining Jak and Daxter equals trolling now

          Sounds legit

          • dead_bones

            They didn’t ruin Jak and Daxter, nor was Jak 2 and Jak 3 shooters. Therefore your comments equate to trolling.

            • $30632660

              Tell me, where was that last gen Jak and Daxter game on the PS3? Exactly, there wasn’t one because Jak and Daxter got killed by Naughty Dog just like how Capcom killed so many franchises besides Megaman like Breath of Fire and Onimusha.

              Hmm, Jak’s main weapon in Jak 2 and 3 was a.. oh my god, a gun! I loved the Dark Eco powers and the other eco powers, but guess what took most of the combat gameplay up? Bang Bang third person shooting

      • Warboss Aohd

        Jak 2 woz GREAT Jak 3 woz GREAT.

        an’ dey woz NOT shooterz, dey just had gunz in dem.

    • adhesive

      There’s always multiplayer I guess. I don’t know how anyone can deny how story focused Naughty Dog’s games are though.

  • $30632660

    Windows 8 is definitely bad, but going to Naughty Dog doesn’t seem much better. You leave one company dedicated to making shooters for another company dedicated to making shooters.

    What happened to you Naughty Dog ;/?

    • Crossbones (Prodigy-X)

      O_o

    • KingKellogg The Waffle Haggler

      maybe its just a job to her? Or maybe she likes shooters?

      • $30632660

        One thing she does like according to the article is pS4’s graphics coding.

        nothing wrong with liking shooters, unless that’s all you play…

        • KingKellogg The Waffle Haggler

          ps4 is really simple when it comes to coding.

    • EX+

      Naughty Dog is an awesome dev.

      • $30632660

        Awesome to you, but not to me, not anymore ;/

        • http://Xcite79.1up.com/ Keegs79

          Not anymore? Ha! Naughty Dog is getting better and better. Not worse.

          • $30632660

            I didn’t say worse, I just don’t see Naughty Dog getting better, in my opinion of course.

    • Bobby Jennings

      She said she loves the PS4 graphics coding. Had nothing to do with the game obviously.

      • $30632660

        Doesn’t change the fact that all Naughty Dog makes is shooters nowadays, obviously.

        • dead_bones

          Shooters? The Last of Us is a survival horror game. And 3 Uncharted games doesn’t constitute a solely shooter developer.

          • Guest

            The Last of us is no more survival horror than a game like Dead Rising 3 or Resident Evil 6. That tacked on multiplayer sure was all about survival horror wasn’t it? wasn’t it?!

            Also, I never said ND was a shooter developer, I said that’s all they make nowadays if you actually read the comment you replied to.

          • $30632660

            The Last of Us’s tacked on multiplayer sure was a prime example of the Last of Us being a survival horror game right? right?! The story was survival horror, sure, but the gameplay sure as heck wasn’t. Yer just shooting people and the spore infected people with the occasional fist to the face unless you’re up against something like a clicker

            Also, I believe i said all Naughty Dog makes nowadays is shooters, not them being a solely shooter developer.

            • HighBrowDrifter

              I’ll be more inclined to call Naughty Dog a “shooter developer” if the games they established would be solely be based on shooting……they are not. It is one element that formulates the structure of the game itself…..but is not limited by that aspect alone. You solve puzzles, you discover, you interact, you progress…..I am not saying shooters don’t include some of these features….but Uncharted (IMO) balances this formula.
              Well….gots to bang me lady! Cya

              -El_Pussus

            • http://twitter.com/RaiuLyn Raiu

              You’re telling me that Naughty Dog’s goal is to define the shooter genre with the Last of Us? The one thing barely worth mentioning from people and critics? As long as there are Weapons, aiming and shooting mechanics, it is considered as a shooter? What is Minecraft when I grab bow and arrows?

              I would like to see the phrase “The Last of Us has the best shooting mechanics of any game” then I believe you…

              • $30632660

                As long as the combat mainly consists of shooting mechanics, then yes it is considered a shooter. In minecraft there are so many different weapons alongside different ways to kill enemies besides projectiles.

                You will probably never see that phrase, just like how you won’t see the phrase “The Last of Us has the best Ai of any game” because if you saw this particular phrase, you are definitely being lied to.

                • http://twitter.com/RaiuLyn Raiu

                  What about 80% sword play and 20% shooting(ex. Metal Gear Rising)? If you consider MGR in the same league on shooting mechanics as Metal Gear Solid, then I don’t know what to say to you…

                  If I saw that particular phrase, which I don’t. The AI in the game is not the best out there but it’s a darn good one compared to most games….

            • dead_bones

              The gameplay wasn’t? managing the very scarce supplies you had to find and thinking before you act isn’t survival horror now? Nowhere in this game could you go storming around shooting everything. smh. You fail so much in life.

          • Elvick

            To be fair, Jak II and Jak III are loosely shooters. :P

            (but in the same vein as Ratchet and Clank)

        • Bobby Jennings

          Yeah, but that’s not the point of this topic.

          • $30632660

            You are correct

        • http://Xcite79.1up.com/ Keegs79

          Technically Uncharted can easily be called an action or a platformer. Shooters are pretty straight-forward, Uncharted isn’t. The same can be said about The Last of Us which tends more as a survival horror title or can be called an action title. Since when did all games that have shooting be defined simply as shooters?

          • $30632660

            Since last gen when developers oversaturated the market with shooter after shooter after shooter

  • Gholizadeh

    It’s a trap!

    • HighBrowDrifter

      Hey hey hey hey!…..Let’s check first
      *Puss checks*
      Yup, it’s a trap….dammit!

    • DrForbidden

      Wow. Are you 13? Because implying that a woman is transgendered based on their appearance is something I expect from 13 year-olds or ‘frat bros’ with the emotional maturity of 13-year-olds.

      • FucSh1a

        Beware Thailand…. But jokes aside, there will always be people who’d make a post on someone’s appearance.

      • Elvick

        I thought it was about a MS employee going to Sony… ie; it’s a spy. That’s how I saw it…

        Unless there was something else there that was edited out.

        • DrForbidden

          “It’s a trap!” is usually used as a meme to imply that the person being discusssed is transgendered and apparently luring poor, unsuspecting straight men into a relationshihp or sexual encounter.

          Your explanation is possible, but probably not a common one on the internets. Also, you need only check out the comments by a Sup-Puss way below to see where the topic was heading.

      • Gholizadeh

        Obviously you should question your own age or maturity since you jumped the gun assuming my comment had anything to do with her gender (dude wtf?!).

        Just to be clear, so that even someone one sided like you get it, I was Implying her joining a Sony owned studio, when she she’s been so involved with Microsoft in the past, sounds iffy. Therefore it’s a trap. Kind of like the jokes about Phil Harrison leaving Sony for MS.

        • DrForbidden

          In that case, I owe you an unreserved apology. My mistake. I’ve just seen too, too many of such comments intended with a disgusting slant towards the person’s orientation. My apologies.

          • Gholizadeh

            No harm feelings dude!

  • Crossbones (Prodigy-X)

    Welcome to the good side.

    • miyamoto

      exactly!
      ND is the top dog dev too

  • Warboss Aohd

    stop wit da fanboyism in da commentz humies.

  • bloodiOS

    So, just out of curiosity, but was she given any important position at ND?

    P.S. Shits here sure have been ugly as of late…

    • http://youtube.com/miyabigaming 武神水樹

      We wouldn’t know

    • $30632660

      I would hope she did get hired at a better position and makes more money.

    • GhostNomad

      Whatever her position is, I’m hoping it’ll give her plenty of opportunities to make the best of her talent.

      I’m also curious about the nature of her change between devs.

      • miyamoto

        simple no more Windows 8

  • https://www.youtube.com/user/GamingHeroTetsuya TetsuyaHikari

    Who?

    • http://youtube.com/miyabigaming 武神水樹

      She’s well known in the industry per LinkedIn

  • http://youtube.com/miyabigaming 武神水樹

    She’s hot

    • https://www.youtube.com/user/GamingHeroTetsuya TetsuyaHikari

      Hrm… I can’t agree. There’s just something about that face. It looks too CG-ish for some reason, lol.

    • Bobby Jennings

      Yeah she’s pretty.

    • LordKaiser

      She’s ugly

    • ayb_91

      She is fine. But the fact that she is working in gaming field makes her sexier :D

    • ギャビン

      Indeed! Pretty and super smart woman!

  • BigDix

    I’m a little surprised no one’s yet said what I’m about to say. I hope this doesn’t come off the wrong way. This is just my honest feeling on the matter.

    But I believe, in a sense, that this is the “worst” article/update (just off the top of my head) to appear on Gematsu. Again, don’t mean to fire off “worst” as a flame or unnecessary putdown; I’m simply putting the problem as I see it here very generally. So to go into detail… I’ve seen this article on gaming news sites/blogs recently. I don’t really know anything about the pace of their operation and what they consider newsworthy, so it isn’t my place to comment on whether I think they need to make articles or updates about it. But Gematsu is a pretty good news source, which I confidently feel doesn’t as a policy latch onto senseless noise out there for articles. Which is…why this article is so out of place.

    Not to make light of her work — she’s obviously very skilled at what she does and actually has been at this awhile, but if we’re being honest, don’t we KNOW this doesn’t belong here? It’s obvious just about no one here knows who she is — she is in no way a terribly prominent figure in the industry, not to such a degree that it really warrants posting about her here on Gematsu. See, someone in her position is really more relevant to say…a Gamasutra interview or feature, or any sort of more technical commentary/dialogue on whatever site. There’s no reason why this would be newsworthy through the lens of a site like Gematsu other than to stoke people putting down Microsoft and the Xbox.

    I know several people might want to come at this from different angles to try and justify why it’s perfectly fine to have an article about this “development” on Gematsu, but there’s actually a very simple way to break this down: if Gematsu does not think they should post up anything about the death of Hiroshi Yamauchi, then why in God’s name should there be an article on a mostly unknown graphics coder leaving Microsoft for Naughty Dog? I don’t mean to bag on Gematsu for the Yamauchi issue (I found out recently), although it is legitimately a very big oversight on Gematsu’s part I feel (please correct me if I’m wrong and lost the Yamauchi article in the shuffle), and it’s not at all a “WELL YOU REPORT ON SONY STUFF WHY NOT NINTENDO STUFF” thing. I think we can all agree… If you know who Hiroshi Yamauchi is, then I don’t think anyone is going to say largely-unknown graphics coder going from job x to job y is more newsworthy than that man’s death.

    I’m not looking to have an argument, but I just wanted to honestly point this out to you, Sal, if you’re reading. Obviously it’s not my decision what goes up on Gematsu, ultimately — that’s your call. As a reader though, I think anyone who is reasonable and wanting to avoid the sort of sensationalist culture that generally plagues video gaming news, will know where I’m coming from. Just saying.

    • DrForbidden

      I’m not sure I understand your objections to this article. If you look under the ‘Industry’ keyword, you’ll find that Sal regularly reports on developers leaving studios or changing jobs. Half the time I have no clue who those people are, but it’s not something I consider worthwhile objecting to.

      If you’re objecting to this news simply because she left a MS studio to work in a Sony one, I’m not sure what to say to that, other than that perhaps you should consider the problem lies with you rather than Sal? Sal is simply reporting what Yu herself has publicly announced regarding leaving 343 for ND.

      No offense intended, BTW. I just find your opinion on the matter a little curious.

      • BigDix

        None taken. Now if you’ll bear with me, as I always try my best to satisfy others’ curiosity, and am happy to have others satisfy my own….

        I can’t recall Gematsu actually reporting on anything, industry-wise, that is quite as peculiarly random and trifling as this. I’m not saying there’s NO instances of coverage which could elicit the same kind of reaction from me… There may well be one or more pieces mixed up somewhere in there, throughout the years. By and large? I really don’t think so. I think most of what you might be referencing usually concerns either individuals who are at least fairly well known (e.g., Carmack’s departure) or industry/career shifts with more immediately meaningful implications (e.g., so-and-so leaves Studio A to head new division of Studio B).

        The thrust of my objection is that this is in my honest summation, extremely negligible news for a general video gaming news site, which begets anxiety that my main resource for news could possibly be stooping to sensationalist notions of reporting and operation which literally plague virtually all of news media, gaming “journalism” included.

        I saw this story first during a chance visit to a PlayStation-exclusive blog, I think yesterday… It was one of their headlines. It was eyeroll-worthy material, more or less a big, chest-thumping show… “Someone none of you know has just left Microsoft for our beloved Naughty Dog! CHALK UP ANOTHER POINT FOR SONY!” It’s not actually about Yu’s work or skill, which shouldn’t be minimized; it’s about how the fact no one knows who she is betrays a certain segment’s ridiculous pettiness in perpetuating the so-called console wars. For most, it’s not actually meaningful news, nor is it about rectifying her relative obscurity, so all it can be otherwise is something to seize on as the pissing match goes on and on and on…. And bear in mind, this is coming from someone who intends to buy a PS4, someone for whom there is also virtually a 0% chance of ever owning an Xbox One.

        Then when I saw it on Gematsu later that day, I was legitimately shocked — not at all in the same way when I see unexpected news, but because my intuition told me this just shouldn’t be here. So what am I saying? Am I saying that when Sal made this post, he was beating his chest because he is a hardcore hater of Microsoft and the Xbox (which is demonstrably untrue)? That he was really desperate for some reason to throw up an article, so much so that he compromised a tacit “Gematsu standard” for newsworthy material? Or that he was thinking with his dick on account of Corrinne being an attractive woman? None of these suppositions are true as standalone explanations, but combined, perhaps with others still… I think they do probably make up a very questionable, subconscious impetus to this news posting.

        Does Sal mean to stick it to Microsoft? No, but I believe the fact of exactly who Points A & B are artificially inflates interest in this story beyond random news of some skilled programmer’s new job, by way of providing something otherwise super mundane with a “juicier” angle. Does Sal trump up crap out of nothing just to have content for the site? No, but it was posted during a slow news day as people anticipated with bated breath big Persona news over the next 24 hours. Did Sal’s boner write this article? I imagine not, nor do I imagine it gave him one at all. Unfortunately, there is no doubt that interest in this story was again artificially heightened because she is a woman, and in turn, what most would agree to be an attractive woman. I’m not saying anyone whacked it to the article (though who really knows???), but there’s no two ways about it: sex entices and excites, no matter how thin a margin it’s working in. I am telling you right now that if Corrinne Yu was Corey Yu, with all the same credentials, and the same level of exposure, this story would not have appeared in half as many places as it did, if at all. That’s not her fault of course — that’s the fault of the human male at large.

        BASICALLY… What I’m saying is, I think Sal was taken in by the moment. It’s not him wanting to stick it to Microsoft, him just tossing whatever the fuck up because he can, or him having the hots for her. But 1 and 3 are legitimate angles to the draw of a “story” that is otherwise not newsworthy at all contra the rest of Gematsu’s content, and 2 explains the inconvenient truth of running a website with a decent audience, which would like to maintain that audience.

        Although, as much as I’ve wracked myself trying to explain this, I can see how it can still fail to satisfy the question, “What’s the big deal!? She’s a really good game programmer! She’s now working over there at that place we know! That’s relevant, and that’s enough!” Maybe it’d help if I pointed this out: there has been a grand total of 0 articles about Corrinne Yu on Gematsu prior to this. In spite of her skill. In spite of her contributions to other high-profile games we all know. Funny then that she pops up now, only when the most sensational angle can manifest, here at the launch of the new Xbox and PlayStation — effectively, “Sony poaches hot Asian chick genius programmer from Microsoft!” That’s the reality of what’s out there in the ether in terms of how people perceive a story like this and build it up. “But dude, she’s a game programmer, and we like industry news, so what’s the problem?” I’ll say it again… How is it that the death of the man who single-handedly created the modern industry, in more ways than one, gets lost in the daily shuffle of news, but generally unknown programmer gets new job somehow finds its way to the top? I’m not saying Sal sat there and made some bullshit call (I certainly hope not anyway) saying, “That’s not important; this is important.” I’m saying when you realize the situation, you hit on the dishonesty and sensationalism that drives the hype, fascination and interest in certain stories. Gematsu, I think, just happened to fall victim to that nebulous and problematic hype at least this once.

        Anyway, sorry if you actually read that. Unpacking intuition and paradigms of subconscious is liable to demand lots of ‘splaining.

        • $18114340

          Maybe it’d help if I pointed this out: there has been a grand total of 0 articles about Corrinne Yu on Gematsu prior to this. In spite of her skill. In spite of her contributions to other high-profile games we all know. Funny then that she pops up now, only when the most sensational angle can manifest, here at the launch of the new Xbox and PlayStation — effectively, “Sony poaches hot Asian chick genius programmer from Microsoft!”

          Hit the nail on the head so hard I chuckled pretty loudly. That’s exactly the way I saw this. I’d also like to point out that I had never heard of this person before (despite her roles in companies such as 3DRealms and Gearbox) — not on Gematsu or anywhere else for that matter. Maybe I wasn’t paying enough attention, or maybe the reality is she isn’t exactly a prominent industry figure and as such her departure from 343 isn’t really deserving of high-profile status — unless someone, somewhere, probably in some PR department, wanted to stir up a fuss. It’s a perfect storm.

          • MogCakes

            She was somewhat known by some users on NeoGAF before, but it’s only now that her accomplishments have come out to the public. I don’t find it sensationalist to report that a high profile dev that was previously not very well known until now is moving from one high profile studio to another.

            • $18114340

              Why is it “only now” that her accomplishments are being made known? She was director of technology at both 3D Realms and Gearbox — at one point, both prominent developers, the former in particular being a driving force in technology for PC games. Her Wikipedia article credits her with work on Anachronox (admittedly a more niche title), Brothers in Arms, Borderlands, and she has worked extensively with the Quake 2 and Unreal 3 code bases. She’s a founding member of the Direct3D advisory board. All in all, Yu has a stellar pedigree. She isn’t some greenhorn graphics coder.

              Having been primarily a PC gamer for over 15 years, I am a little ashamed to admit that I’ve never heard of Yu. This, despite her playing a crucial part in the development of several games that I enjoyed and very much thought I knew. Apparently her only notable accomplishment is developing a technology that Microsoft patented for Halo 4, and now she’s at Sony. The news isn’t that she’s now at Sony, the news is that she left Microsoft to join Sony.

              Of course, the article isn’t about this individual, her accomplishments, or what she can bring to the table for her new benefactors — it’s about her “leaving Halo for Naughty Dog”, and about her being happy to leave Windows 8 for PS4 graphics coding.

              I mean, it’s right in there in the headline. What else would the headline be? Well, if Yu is really as important as her accomplishments, then why aren’t those being emphasized? Why, instead, is the fact that she is moving from one high-profile studio to another and “loving” it? Even if this isn’t expressly meant to stir up conflict, it still invites it. It feels careless and irresponsible to me to report on the event this way, which is the exact opposite of what I consider “journalism” and consequently what would personally fall under the definition of “sensationalism”. It’s celebrity gossip. Kanye cheated on Kim! Gasp!

              Essentially, it’s the fact that this is being reported as “she is moving from one high profile studio to another” rather than, “she is now at a high profile studio, and she was previously at another, which is no more important than any of her other credentials”, that bothers me. There is implied emphasis on competition here, whether intentional or malicious or not. Of course, YMMV, that’s a subjective interpretation, and it’s clear that most people aren’t particularly bothered by this. It won’t stop any of the ridiculous, “Yay Sony! Boo Microsoft!” comments, after all. Carry on, nothing to see here.

              • MogCakes

                Why does it bother you? Of course there is emphasis on competition, Sony and Microsoft are direct competitors. There is no playing nice in the game of business where hundreds of millions of dollars in long term profit are at stake. The important distinction to make here is that Gematsu is NOT doing anything wrong by reporting what’s going on. This news is completely neutral, any agenda or bias derived from it is on you, the user, who is already invested in the topic of console wars.

                • $18114340

                  It bothers me because the article should be about Corrinne Yu, but instead she is being used to further this competitive image. I am not saying that this competitive image shouldn’t exist, because as you’ve pointed out, Sony and Microsoft are direct competitors. But why are we keeping score? Why is such an apparently brilliant graphics coder being demoted to the status of being a victory in this competition, instead of being newsworthy on the merits of her accomplishments alone? It certainly isn’t solely the fault of readers who create a fan war. The article didn’t just pop onto the internet; it was written by an individual with a certain intent and this reflects in how the article was written as well as the fact that the article was published at all. Whether you might call this an “agenda” (which has a decidedly negative connotation and is thus meaningless in vernacular) is up to you, but the fact is that bias does exist because we are by nature subjective.

                  I for one do not agree that the news is completely neutral. The news is never completely neutral, and it’s also a matter of how easily the reader/viewer is swayed by what’s reported. But there’s a delicate balance there and it’s a reciprocating relationship.

                  • MogCakes

                    It is neutral if the author’s words do not imply persuasive intent. Which is the case here. It is not the industry’s job to maintain an absolutely equal mindshare in the minds of the readers, nor are people that stupid. It IS their job to cover what happens in the industry, and Yu’s departure is one of them.

                    Further no one is ‘keeping score’ here as far as the Gematsu staff is concerned. Nor is such a mindset encouraged by Sal’s post. The only ones encouraging it are Xbox/PS fanboys who are in the comments. They are the ones you should attack, not Sal and not the posting of this news. You and BigDix are essentially asking for a form of censorship by protesting the coverage of this.

                    • $18114340

                      Once again, the issue isn’t that Gematsu has or doesn’t have persuasive intent in their writing of the article. But the action of reporting itself has an intent, it ALWAYS has an intent because Sal is not a robot and journalism is not automatic machine. The news always comes from someone with a point of view, and is always reported by someone with a point of view. The idea of completely neutral reporting is a red herring and a fantastic pipe dream.

                      There are developers leaving one studio for another every day. Why do we not hear about them? Why is Corrinne Yu’s departure more important than anybody else’s in this industry?

                      This is not a rhetorical question. Write down your answer, read it and re-read it again, and consider what it is.

                      As far as “keeping score” goes, I meant it metaphorically. As you’ve mentioned, Sony and Microsoft are in direct competition with each other. As you’ve agreed, there is emphasis on this competition (here in this article). But why is there this emphasis? Just because the nature of these companies is competitive doesn’t mean it is automatically relevant. It is included in the article because the intent behind the article is not to highlight Corrinne Yu, the individual, the developer. It is to highlight her specific transit from Microsoft’s studio to Sony’s. And this in of itself is indicative of the intent of the article, and it is what I take particular objection to. Not because it is never appropriate, but for the reasons that I’ve already mentioned multiple times (that you choose to dismiss on the merit of your mere disapproval of them).

                      I am not asking for censorship. I am not saying that the article should be taken down after the fact. I am questioning the rationale of the writer in posting this article in the first place and I am (hopefully) encouraging a discussion on what makes this news important/unimportant. You are blowing things out of proportion, and misapprehending the concept of “censorship”. If anything, your flagrant misuse of the term confirms to me the sensationalism behind this article — because apparently anybody who questions it is an advocate of denying free speech. Utterly ridiculous.

                    • MogCakes

                      Wait, so simply posting the news of her move denotes questionable intent? You’re reaching pretty hard. The rationale of posting this news in a nutshell: this dev isn’t well known at all, but her accomplishments are telling that she’s no ordinary dev and she’s moving from an MS 1st party studio to a Sony 1st party studio. Posting this information would lead to wider public knowledge of what she’s done and her role in game development, as well as shed light on some of the tech that went into Halo 4.

                      No, I don’t think what I said is ridiculous at all. If you’re trying to discourage Sal from posting information like this in the future, that is censorship.

                      http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/censorship

                      Censorship

                      The suppression or proscription of speech or writing that is deemed obscene, indecent, or unduly controversial.

                    • $18114340

                      That is not what I’m saying. I am saying that posting news of her move in the context of all the other possible news Gematsu could be posting but doesn’t, denotes intent. And again, intent is not inherently harmful. This isn’t black-and-white, good versus evil. Stop oversimplifying things just so you can make an extremist argument.

                      And I’m not trying to discourage Sal from posting information such as this, but at least to consider the context in which these events occur instead of blindly regurgitating press releases like every other news site. Every other site I have read this story on (Eurogamer, Gamasutra, GamesIndustry) has reported on this story in the exact same Sony vs. MS bent, and I cannot see how you can argue that doesn’t display bias when the story could be about Corrinne Yu herself instead.

                      That is clearly not censorship, and the only person who is reaching in this argument is you by virtue of pushing a ridiculous idea to extremes in order to discredit my argument.

                      And yes, Corrinne Yu is “an ordinary dev”. She has no public personality and any attempts to create one on her part without her own efforts to earn one are completely artificial. John Carmack has a reputation because he created one by giving public speeches and talks and making himself visible in the public sphere. Corrinne Yu has a public personality because some people on GAF like her enough, because games media sites think to report on it at a MS vs. Sony angle, and because the commenters of Gematsu think she’s hot.

                      There have been multiple high-profile studio departures in the past few days. Those people are apparently not “ordinary devs” either

                      And why would a non-“ordinary” dev get any more attention for their transit when they haven’t actually done anything for the “benefitting” party yet? This is all gossip. It is not news because it is relevant to nobody except the two parties involved, unless you already take a special interest in Yu’s activities in particular which is… bias. Back to square one.

                      For example, why didn’t Gematsu report on this?

                      http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2013-11-27-fallout-new-vegas-writer-joins-guerrilla-games

                      Clearly, it’s because despite this writer’s pedigree, he has not won the favor of an internet fanship like Yu has. There is no bias in his favor; he does not have the chops because a bunch of forum viewers haven’t deemed him important enough to be more than merely “ordinary”. I have not yet seen this story on any other site, and yet, you would agree, this is a high-profile dev moving from one high-profile studio to another?

                      What about all the other high-profile departures? What about this?

                      http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2013-11-28-lead-systems-designer-departs-blizzard

                      Or anything else? Why does Corrinne Yu get special treatment on Gematsu?

                      Furthermore, even if you somehow believe that posting information in order to make Corrinne Yu more well-known without any actual effort on her own part to earn a public reputation is somehow respectable and legitimate, then why do we pick now as the time to talk about Yu, instead of before, when she actually worked on Halo 4, or any other high-profile title for that matter? And we aren’t even talking about Yu, we are talking about Sony vs. Microsoft because that is clearly what the article is about. If we wanted to truly “shed light” on the technology she developed, we would be talking about that technology and Microsoft’s patent on it in detail. But we aren’t. We are instead talking about how she moved from Halo to Naughty Dog and then tweeted about how much she likes the PS4. And then we link her LinkedIn so as to artificially inflate the credibility she already has. Celebrity gossip.

                      Now please stop trying to turn me into a strawman by completely twisting my words to fit into your sick, simple-minded definition of “censorship” from a merely literal point of view just as it suits you.

                      Questioning Gematsu reporting of this news isn’t censorship, it’s criticism. You don’t even seem to understand the definition you yourself posted.

                    • MogCakes

                      Nah, I understand it perfectly well thanks, unlike you who have attempted to side step it. If your criticism of Sal posting this implies not posting news like this in the future, then yeah, that’s advocacy of censorship, I don’t care how you try to spin it. “Considering the context” in your usage implies not posting it.

                      The news is relevant because her work has an effect on the games we play, or at the very least, Halo 4, which MS may use on future games. That’s exciting! Is it not? We would never have known this otherwise unless we were already part of the industry and knew of her. Simply because now is a period of high ‘tension’ between Sony and Microsoft fanboys is no reason not to post this info. Now was a good time to give her some exposure since she’s in transition.

                      Where I do agree with you is Gematsu needs to start posting more about other things happening in the industry. I already knew about Gonzalez and Street, but you’re right that Gematsu should have made note of them if they are going to post this type of information.

                      You can try to call my counter argument to yours ridiculous and other colorful descriptors as much as you like, insulting me is not going to win you the point. I doubt we’ll reach an agreed upon point other than that Gematsu needs to step up its coverage, you seem intent that this article and every other article about it is biased and hell-bent on slamming Microsoft.

                    • $18114340

                      Your “counter-argument” is ridiculous is not a personal insult towards you, but towards your argument. Your so-called argument is ridiculous because instead of addressing the matter at hand, you merely deny any opposing assertions on the basis of your own subjectivity rather than on a logical basis, and you constantly attempt to discredit me by asserting that what I am doing is censorship, and therefore an extreme. Which it is not.

                      I have not side-stepped the argument. Show me exactly where I advocated that Sal should not have posted the news, because I never implied it. It is something you inferred for whatever reason ON YOUR OWN.

                      My stance has ALWAYS BEEN (and you would understand this if you had actually been responding to my arguments instead of ignoring them and rewording them simply to suit your accusations) that the manner in which Gematsu posted this news was indicative of a lack of journalistic process. This was supported by the fact that every single news outlet that reported on the “news” did so from the exact same viewpoint and tried to put a MS vs. Sony spin on it, rather than letting Corrinne Yu’s accomplishments speak for themselves. Furthermore, I questioned the purpose of reporting on this event given that Yu has not actually done anything at Naughty Dog yet, and also that her public credibility was manufactured by her fans, rather than created by her own effort in the form of action such as speeches, interviews, etc.

                      The news is relevant to YOU because Yu’s accomplishments have an effect on the games you are interested in — but this is a useless point because EVERYTHING that ANY game developer does has an effect on the games we play. Corrinne Yu should not get a free pass just because she happened to work on a few high-profile games.

                      On the contrary, now is the WORST time to give Corrinne Yu “exposure” because the Microsoft vs. Sony narrative detracts from the actual subject of the article. Instead of talking about Corrinne Yu, we are talking about team Halo vs. team Naughty Dog.

                      My point in providing those examples was NOT to suggest that Gematsu should do more of these articles, because that is an unrealistic expectation and none of it is really relevant to this site (as was pointed out, Corrinne Yu has had ZERO articles on Gematsu before this, and while Gematsu does post these kinds of articles from time to time they are, again, not subject to any sort of journalistic process and merely regurgitated press releases). Leave that sort of news to GamesIndustry, Gamasutra, outlets that actually have connections to the inner-workings of the industry and are actually qualified to speak on that behalf.

                      Furthermore, I am not intent that this article is “biased” (you continue to misuse that word) and “hell-bent” on slamming Microsoft. In fact, that’s exactly what I was NOT saying, which you would, again, understand if you had ACTUALLY READ my arguments instead of assuming what you were reading. My point has always been that this article shouldn’t need to mention Microsoft and Sony in the context of competition at all. It’s not relevant. The article is about Corrinne Yu, not the console wars.

                    • MogCakes

                      So after all of that, in the end you state that the article should only mention Yu as a dev profile and nothing about what has happened in her career recently. Welp. Stating that she is shifting studios =/= fanning console wars, no matter what the reader may imply from their own investment in corporate fanboy warfare. You may read it as 343 vs Naughty Dog, but I don’t.

                    • $18114340

                      No, that is very clearly NOT what I am stating and it is frustrating that you insist on drawing these inane conclusions from your own baseless assumptions of my position.

                      Go back, actually read what I am saying (since I have articulated my position numerous times, and each time you have failed to understand it), and instead of posting your kneejerk reactions, please actually take the time to think about what my position is before responding, because arguing with your completely incorrect assertions of my positions is long beyond the point of a frustrating exercise in futility.

                    • MogCakes

                      If i’m misunderstanding where you’re coming from it’s because you’re doing a terrible job of explaining just what the hell you’re trying to say. The majority of what I’ve read from you so far is just you saying ‘NO THAT’S NOT WHAT I’M SAYING’, and then the rest goes on to imply that my impressions were right. For the record, I don’t believe this small repost of info counts as journalism, and that’s fine. Sal doesn’t have to go full journalist mode for every bit of news that happens. Given that, I find your criticism of ‘lack of journalistic process’ to be lacking in perspective of what Sal was actually trying to do here.

                    • $18114340

                      The majority of what I’ve actually been posting is me trying to explain to you my position and then having to defend it from your fallacious accusations. If you truly believe that the majority of what you’ve been reading from me is me saying “that’s not what I’m saying”, then you aren’t reading enough of what I’m actually posting. Stop putting words in my mouth and READ.

                      And again, you’re missing the point entirely, but it’s clear you wouldn’t agree anyway even if you did see what I was talking about.

                    • MogCakes

                      Of course I wouldn’t, half the reason I’m posting is because I already disagree. This isn’t about trying to convince me otherwise, it’s a debate to convince readers that come across this. I’ve read everything you’ve typed, I got what you were attempting to convey, but it sure took you a while to explain it fully.

                    • $18114340

                      This is disingenuous; I highly doubt “future readers” will actually be interested in the subject at hand after all that’s been done to derail and completely destroy any semblance of logical argument with your baseless attacks.

                      It didn’t take me a while to explain my position fully, because I’ve been repeating myself this whole time while you just vehemently deny that anything I say exists. I sincerely, truly doubt that you’ve read everything I typed because if you did the discussion would never have gotten this far out in the first place, since for the most part I have only been repeating myself while you refuse to and continue to refuse to understand what I’m actually getting at.

                    • MogCakes

                      You really haven’t. You’ve stated ‘based on journalistic principle’ a lot without explaining for a while until the last few days. I do know what you’re getting at now and I still disagree and will argue it until either you post evidence enough to convince me that Sal is lacking in ‘journalistic principle’ by posting this or you agree that we’ve hit the bottom of where we can debate.

                      Further, as odd as it may sound to you, people do come across these articles every once in a while and read the comments. To me, providing a debate that even one person would read partially through is worth continuing it until there are no points to discuss.

                    • $18114340

                      You really haven’t. You’ve stated ‘based on journalistic principle’ a lot without explaining for a while until the last few days.

                      I beg to differ. I tried to quantify “journalistic principle” multiple times by explaining why I feel that logically speaking, what Sal did was sensationalist and therefore not journalistic. And you just kept crossing your arms going, “nuh-uh”.

                      I do know what you’re getting at now and I still disagree and will argue it until either you post evidence enough to convince me that Sal is lacking in ‘journalistic principle’ by posting this or you agree that we’ve hit the bottom of where we can debate.

                      But… BUT YOU FUCKING SAID THAT YOU WEREN’T DOING THIS TO BE CONVINCED! And I ALREADY SAID THAT WE’VE HIT THE BOTTOM OF WHERE WE CAN DEBATE!! For the past two days I’ve only been clarifying the things that I’ve already said because you OBVIOUSLY DIDN’T READ THEM THE FIRST TWO TIMES.

                      AAAAAAAAAARRRRRRGHHHHHHHHHHHHHAKJDFKASFJASKLDJSAJFLASJDFLAS

                      I bet you’re fucking lying and you DON’T actually know what I’m getting at despite claiming that you do.

                      Further, as odd as it may sound to you, people do come across these articles every once in a while and read the comments. To me, providing a debate that even one person would read partially through is worth continuing it until there are no points to discuss.

                      But this isn’t actually what you’re doing here. All you’re doing is making me repeat myself by conveniently ignoring things that I have already said. Some things twice already. It’s not a debate because you’re not fucking reading what I’m writing.

                    • MogCakes

                      Your justifications for Sal being sensationalist here are flawed, that’s why I cross my arms and say ‘nuh-uh’. You’re basing your entire argument off your own personal feeling of this post being ‘not news’, by which you have no objective metric to measure whether it is or isn’t news. I slipped up on the ‘convince me’ part. But yeah, in truth, having considered what you’re actually getting at, if you can prove it, I’ll concede.

                    • $18114340

                      Your justifications for Sal being sensationalist here are flawed, that’s why I cross my arms and say ‘nuh-uh’.

                      How are they flawed? Sal included information that I don’t feel was relevant to the news. He included things that were NOT NEWS in a NEWS ARTICLE. Therefore he was being sensationalist by regurgitating a press release and not posting carefully and with better discretion. That’s not an objective assertion. Those are my personal feelings on the matter. For you to call them “flawed” instead of merely disagreeing with them is an attack on my character rather than analyzing why I actually feel the way I do.

                      You’re basing your entire argument off your own personal feeling of this post being ‘not news’, by which you have no objective metric to measure whether it is or isn’t news.

                      See my other post on why this isn’t news. You’re getting mixed up again and putting words in my mouth. I will NOT be spun on another one of your stupid tangents of semantics. You are misunderstanding what I am writing. Go back and fucking read it again.

                      And yes, I’m basing an argument of opinion (that is to say, CRITICISM) based off of my personal feelings. Big fucking surprise, Sherlock.

                      But yeah, in truth, having considered what you’re actually getting at, if you can prove it, I’ll concede.

                      AND IT ONLY TOOK YOU TWO FUCKING WEEKS OF ME REPEATING THINGS

                    • MogCakes

                      If you can prove it. Now prove it. Because ‘Sal included information I don’t feel was relevant to the news’ is not proof. Prove that it isn’t news. None of your posts have been able to thus far.

                    • $18114340

                      Because ‘Sal included information I don’t feel was relevant to the news’ is not proof. Prove that it isn’t news.

                      Every time I have attempted to prove that it isn’t news to you, you have responded with, “well *I* don’t agree”.

                      There is literally no way for me to prove to you that this isn’t news objectively. That doesn’t even make sense.

                      That’s not even what I’m trying to do.

                      Criticism is subjective. You don’t have to agree. But you are constantly trying to disprove an opinion, which is absurd.

                      I am saying, “this is why I feel that this isn’t news”. And you are saying, “that’s not objective enough”. So I use logical equations to quantify what equals what. The news here is ‘Corrinne Yu has moved’, correct?

                      Okay, what information does not fall into that set?

                      Let’s see, a dumb twitter post. Her life story.

                      These are NOT equivalent to, “Corrinne Yu has moved”. THIS IS NOT UP TO DEBATE. YOU ASKED ME TO QUANTIFY OBJECTIVELY. I DID.

                      YOU CAN’T TELL ME THAT EQUATIONS ARE OPINIONS. “1+1 = 2″ IS NOT AN OPINION.

                      Oh, I see what you’re getting at.

                      You’re spinning me on another tangent.

                      I got you.

                    • MogCakes

                      Exactly. There is no objective way for you to prove that it isn’t news. Hence you stating ‘this isn’t news!’ is a false statement. Criticism can be objective or subjective. Had you stated outright that this was all your opinion, I’d leave you alone. You attempting to actually say ‘this objectively is not news and not worth posting’ is the bullshit I’m calling you out on. If that ISN’T what you’re saying (despite that being the impression I’ve gotten for the last few days), then there’s nothing left to argue.

                    • $18114340

                      I posted a very long reply to this with detailed examples and arguments, and it was marked as spam and apparently deleted. I don’t expect you to take my word for it, and I don’t want to write it all up again either, so in short I will just say this:

                      Criticism is not censorship, and to continuously characterize my criticism of this article as censorship is hypocrisy on your part.

                    • BigDix

                      Must’ve been a minor hiccup, as it seems it wasn’t deleted after all… Thankfully so, as it’s another perfectly pertinent comment that in addition to the Sony v. MS angle, deftly illustrates the sex meme at play.

                      Those men, despite their material work at high-profile developers, and movement to OTHER high-profile developers, are NOT HIGH-PROFILE THEMSELVES. Why then Corrinne Yu? Could it be because NeoGAF and other sites/communities that perpetuated the news don’t actually comprise very many people who are sincerely invested in Yu’s career and projects, but are rather drawn to the story by the basest, most reptilian aspects of their minds exalting the gossipy goodness of Sony v. Microsoft and the undeniable appeal that any story suddenly has in the collective conscious when the subject of the story is an attractive woman?

                      If a fat guy and a “hot chick” come out of the woods at the same time, in different parts of the country, after a decade-long existence living off the grid, to create a blog chronicling their lives and experiences during that time, which blog do you think is going to be more popular? Which do you think is most likely to catch on and beckon every cog and gear in the Internet-Moron-Machine to it? The one run by the “hot chick” obviously. Because no fanship, as gold put it, can be founded in anything other than dumb, wide-eyed salivation. Corrinne Yu’s impressive pedigree takes a backseat to her pretty face on the Internet, and the relevance of all other accomplished no-names is pending until whichever time they grow a pair of tits or get sucked into the console war.

                      And get this straight, MogCakes… Are you reading? NOBODY IS CALLING SAL A HORNY SONY FANBOY. In the media culture whence this story came, horniness and fanboyism exalted this “story” to its place of prominence now; Sal and Gematsu are just collateral. His only mistake was being careless in his assessment of the story’s significance vis-à-vis the context of Gematsu’s existence and the general flow of gaming news directly impactful for and relevant to the typical reader.

                    • MogCakes

                      It’s hot hypocrisy at all to link the subtext of your criticism to censorship, because that’s what it is and my own criticism of you is not. I’m not saying ‘don’t post things like this’ to you, I am arguing because I disagree with your point of view and am trying to both understand where you come from and, having done that and disagree still, convince you otherwise. On the other hand, you have taken my arguments as a personal attack on yourself (I am not nice though so this is perhaps partly my fault) and have put up a defensive wall about yourself for every post I make to you.

                      Your post was unflagged thankfully so I did read it and respond.

                    • $18114340

                      This is most certainly hypocrisy, because at NO POINT in my arguments have I advocated censorship. The mere thought of that is an exaggeration on your part and a baseless accusation of my principles. You drew assumptions on my intentions with no basis in reality, and that is why they are ridiculous. You clearly have no idea of what censorship is, if you think that the voice of an individual is analogous to the suppression of expression of thought by an arbitrary authority (which is what censorship ACTUALLY is on an institutional level). You are attempting to misuse the term in order to discredit me and I take opposition (as well as offense) to that. It’s an insult towards my intelligence.

                      You are NOT trying to convince me otherwise because you aren’t actually addressing my argument, and instead insist on claiming that I’m wrong without any actual logical reasoning of your own, while also attempting to defame me by painting my ambitions as those of censorship.

                      I have not put up a “defensive wall”. EVERY SINGLE ONE of my posts in response to yours has addressed the argument with a reasoned reply relevant to the actual subject at hand. I am attempting to defend myself NOW because you are attacking me instead of actually arguing your point.

                      If calling my views those of censorship, and trying to present me as subscribing to some sort of radical, extremist thought is not an attack on me, then I don’t know what is.

                    • MogCakes

                      The fact that you’re getting so defensive over what amounts to a complaint of fanning console warfare in an article that only states what a previously unknown dev is doing with their career certainly does come across as odd. I understand that your argument is to consider the context of the situation at hand before posting information, and I disagree with it vehemently in that information should not be bound simply because of this particular context of idiotic fanboy riff. You are being defensive – you are ignoring that I am actually disagreeing with you and not simply discrediting you.

                    • $18114340

                      I’m not getting defensive over a complaint of fanning console warfare, I’m getting defensive because you are trying to circumvent my argument by attacking me personally; and if I truly am ignoring that you are actually disagreeing with me it is BECAUSE you have gone to such great lengths to discredit me, because you insist that we are “at an impasse” and constantly refuse to read what I am actually typing, and because you completely ignored my viewpoints in the first place.

                      We would not have gone so long on a tangent if:

                      1) You had not attempted to misappropriate my argument and misrepresent my ideas in a thinly-veiled attempt to wrongly characterize my position as being that of censorship, which is an attack on my persona rather than actual debate and something I take offense to.

                      2) You had not demonstrated a consistent failure to address nearly every point I’ve brought up, or at the very least a propensity to dismissing them outright merely by virtue of your disagreement.

                      3) You had actually backed up your retorts with logical deductions rather than personal attacks and accusations of the very things you’re guilty of doing yourself — side-stepping the argument, etc.

                      Lastly, my position does NOT amount to one of “fanning console warfare”, in fact as I have stated TIME AND AGAIN that is NOT the point I am trying to make here, and I’m still waiting for you to figure out that I am making a point of what I feel to be journalistic principle. In this regard, “the console wars” are not the actual matter of dispute here, and you continue to fail to recognize that, and you also insist on falsely characterizing my position as being from that standpoint. At this point I would almost assume you are doing it deliberately.

                    • MogCakes

                      Characterizing your position is not an attack on you as a person. Me calling you an idiot would have been an attack on your person. You could have very easily just said ‘No I’m not advocating censorship, let me explain my point of view to you’ and went on to explain that you think Sal has a greater responsibility to dig deeper than simply reposting information, but instead you took it offensively and have consistently failed to actually communicate your point to me. By that mark, what each of us are trying to say doesn’t even properly match up since I’m speaking from a point of view that was at odds with BigDix’s comments and you apparently are speaking from another place entirely.

                    • $18114340

                      It most certainly is an attack on my person, when you are going to such lengths to characterize my position wrongly based on what you are trying to imply are my intentions and beliefs. It is not an attack on my position because you do nothing to actually argue the point and instead insist on telling me my argument is something it isn’t.

                      Failure of communication works both ways. The fact that it took you this long to figure this out while I’ve been repeating myself this entire time, addressing the points you’ve raised with logical reasoning on my part, and even articulating my argument further while you cross your arms and just say, “bullshit, that’s censorship and you’re wrong”; says something about your lack of willingness to comprehend what I’ve been posting. You could simply say, “I disagree, and let’s leave it at that,” but instead you attempted to silence and defame me by misrepresenting my position to suit your needs.

                      Furthermore, BigDix’s comments are not entirely unaligned with my own feelings on the subject and as such there are common threads. So I am not speaking from another place entirely, you just aren’t getting the message and it’s time for me to give up. I will not be drawn into another one of your absurd tangents.

                    • MogCakes

                      ‘the point’ – this is something you’ve failed to explain until recently. And no, I’m fully willing to put down arms and try to understand, but you went on the defensive immediately. I’m not going to say ‘we’ll agree to disagree’ on something I feel very strongly about. That kind of thinking didn’t make the NoDRM movement successful, for instance. Further, I am not defaming you by saying what’s on my mind about how I interpret the phrase that you both have used; “consider the context”. When I say that implies censorship that isn’t an attack on you, it’s what I interpret the phrase to imply.

                      I got the message and I disagree with it. That me not agreeing with it somehow equates to me not ‘getting it’ is an incorrect assumption. If you and BigDix feel more similarly than I deduced previously then my comments do apply after all. I have already told you, this is not about convincing me or you, it’s a debate that future readers may come across, and hopefully they’ll take what we’ve exchanged and decide for themselves.

                    • $18114340

                      I did NOT go to the defensive immediately, I went on the defensive when you persistently ATTACKED ME and tried to circumvent my argument! I have been explaining my position from the very beginning! Up until your nonsensical fallacious attacks on my argument that was all I was intent on doing.

                      You did NOT get the message, because your posts demonstrated to me that you did not understand what I was actually getting at. Further supporting this suspicion was the fact that you REPEATEDLY tore my argument to pieces by accusing it of censorship and then put words in my mouth to make it seem as if I said things that I never said! And you CONTINUE to misconstrue and falsely deconstruct my argument to make your own points! It is impossible to argue with you because you keep on misinterpreting and lying about the things that I actually said.

                      To say that “this is a debate that future readers will take what we’ve exchanged and decide for themselves” is disingenuous because you didn’t actually confront my ideas for the majority of the argument, you attacked me personally. Lastly, if you TRULY intend to let other people decide for themselves you wouldn’t keep denying the things I’ve said by calling them “bullshit” and such, misappropriating my argument, and then trying to discredit it as censorship. You are trying to win an argument instead of letting the evidence provided stand for itself.

                      And look, I got spun on one of your dumb tangents again. And so begins another fucking WEEK of you trying to make me look stupid instead of actually addressing the argument.

                    • MogCakes

                      I’m not trying to make you look stupid, I’m trying to debate whether this article was worth posting, and I believe it was. You’ve gotten so offended by the censorship remark that I made (with no malice towards you, it was again just my interpretation) that you sound like you’re going to lose your hair soon. In a debate, it’s useless to just stop and say ‘we’ll agree to disagree’ until all points are covered.

                    • $18114340

                      Hey, you’re just like Hitler (Godwin’s). No offense. See what I did there?

                      Why do you think I got so offended by the censorship thing? Because censorship isn’t a fucking light subject that you just throw at people! And it wasn’t a fucking “remark”. A remark is off-handed and meaningless. You tried to press censorship as an angle to disqualify my argument on the basis of what you PERCEIVED to be (or wanted to imply) were my intentions. Don’t give me that shit. Telling me that I’m trying to censor Gematsu isn’t a fucking “interpretation”, it’s an attack on the principles of my post rather than a deconstruction of the post itself and an attempt to circumvent the actual argument. It’s completely underhanded and not actually debate.

                      In a debate, it’s useless to just stop and say ‘we’ll agree to disagree’ until all points are covered.

                      The “debate” (if you can even call it that) ended LONG AGO because it has not progressed. I am just repeating myself for the third time because you’re trying to make me look stupid. And don’t say that you aren’t, because if you weren’t you wouldn’t be fucking ignoring everything I was saying.

                    • MogCakes

                      If you explained in what way I was like Hitler I’d try to see it from that point of view and then respond. No offense. I don’t take offense easily.

                      And no, my interpreting what you said as implying censorship was not an attack on you, it was literally what I interpreted. You’re attempting to read far more into what I said than I actually meant. I’m also not ignoring what you’re saying, you just keep insisting that I’m ignoring you while going on your tirade.

                    • $18114340

                      If you explained in what way I was like Hitler I’d try to see it from that point of view and then respond. No offense. I don’t take offense easily.

                      Maybe I’m trying too hard with that one. Woosh.

                      And no, my interpreting what you said as implying censorship was not an attack on you, it was literally what I interpreted.

                      Then you need to reconsider what you define “censorship” to be, because it’s my interpretation that you were attacking me. Ooh, the shoe’s on the other foot. This is fun!

                      You’re attempting to read far more into what I said than I actually meant. I’m also not ignoring what you’re saying, you just keep insisting that I’m ignoring you while going on your tirade.

                      My “tirade”. Yes, you’re definitely not attacking me personally here, not with such loaded language as that. Sneaky you.

                      By interpreting my words as those calling for censorship, and by completely misappropriating my argument at every turn, you’re attempting to read far more into what I said than I actually meant. Now what?

                      Two of us can play at this stupid game of ambiguity.

                    • MogCakes

                      Your interpretation of me attacking you as a person is wrong. I’m attacking your argument. If my interpretation of ‘consider the context’ implying censorship is wrong, then you need to tell me that it is, which you have. Nonetheless, it is what I interpreted. The shoe’s hardly on the other foot, rather you’ve misconstrued my statements to be personal attacks on you and are having angry reactions. I’m also not using loaded language – I don’t carry with me hidden meanings in my text nor have any sort of agenda to defame and humiliate you. If you want to play ad hominem, then play it outright. You clearly want to.

                    • $18114340

                      Your interpretation of me attacking you as a person is wrong.

                      No, it’s not, because I feel attacked.

                      “Your interpretation that me grabbing your ass is sexual harassment is wrong, because I didn’t mean it”.

                      I’m attacking your argument.

                      Oh bollocks. You’re not attacking my argument, you’re attempting to disregard all of it at once by saying, “that’s censorship, therefore it’s bad and all of it is invalid”. We’ve been over this.

                      The shoe’s hardly on the other foot, rather you’ve misconstrued my statements to be personal attacks on you and are having angry reactions.

                      “Officer, I wasn’t trying to threaten this man, he simply misconstrued me pointing a gun at his face to be a threat.”

                      YOU CALLED MY STATEMENT AN ACT OF CENSORSHIP. YOU MADE AN INCORRECT, SHODDY ASSUMPTION OF MY INTENTIONS BASED SOLELY ON YOUR PERSONAL FEELINGS AND THEN TOLD ME THAT WAS WHAT I WAS DOING. YOU FUCKING LIED TO MY FACE AND TOLD ME I WAS SAYING SOMETHING I WASN’T.

                      I’m also not using loaded language – I don’t carry with me hidden meanings in my text nor have any sort of agenda to defame and humiliate you.

                      Oh, this is just rich. You know that you’re the one who started using “agenda”, right?

                      I’m trying to give you the benefit of the doubt. It’s either that you’re intentionally trying to upset me by deliberately using fallacious arguments, or you’re simply too stupid to comprehend what I’m actually posting and therefore ignoring all of it wholesale.

                      If you want to play ad hominem, then play it outright. You clearly want to.

                      If that’s not loaded, I don’t know what is. Just know that you started it.

                    • MogCakes

                      It’s not loaded because it means exactly what it means. I’m not the one who has been flying off the handle for a week straight. But for what it’s worth (apparently not much to you now), I could have been much less abrasive with my comment on censorship, I was insensitive. Apologies for offending you with that remark. Thinking that I MUST be too stupid to understand if I’m not agreeing with you, however, is laughable.

        • MogCakes

          There is no dishonesty or sensationalism in this article. No bias. Nada. It is very much just reporting the facts. You might see it as “Sony poaches hot asian chick genius programmer from Microsoft!” but the article itself states “High profile developer leaves Microsoft studio for a Sony studio”. You added the “HOT ASIAN CHICK” and “POACHES” part all on your own.

          • $18114340

            There may or may not be bias in the article’s writing itself, but the point (I think) he’s getting at is that there may be bias inherent in the way the event was reported to the public.

            Rather, I don’t see anything wrong with reporting on the event in of itself, but I do think that it exacerbates the pre-existing biases present in the audiences of games news media. At the very least, I feel that the reaction to the article is indicative of this. Look at the majority of the comments in this thread, and you’ll find all manner of comments on Yu’s appearance, her sex, and especially the fact that she has “switched sides”, so to speak (which, depending on how you look at it, is either merely related to the news, or it *IS* the news). And… how much of that really relevant? Is it completely out of the realm of possibility that there is a spin here, if not in the way the event is being reported by individual sites, than in the way the knowledge is being dispersed to the public?

            There is a crucial difference in there, I feel, and that is put into relief by the idea that this particular bit of news is generally negligible information when placed in a neutral context — and I agree with that idea. You may not, depending on your prior knowledge of this individual and her career, and whether you feel that this sort of news is appropriate for this site in particular to be reporting on.

            Although if you were to say, “this isn’t the first time Gematsu has reported on developers ‘jumping ship'”, then yes, I’d be inclined to agree — to an extent. But the context, I feel, is still different here.

            • MogCakes

              I don’t feel the context here is anything to do with Sony vs Microsoft, not in the article itself. It’s all in the user who’s already invested in this idiotic company fan war. The article and Sal has no trace of bias nor context-driven agenda.

              EDIT: Aside from Yu’s deleted tweet, which is her own thoughts and not Gematsu’s.

              • $18114340

                It’s easy to blame the user, and I’m not saying it’s not primarily their fault. I’m also not saying that Gematsu has an “agenda”, because that’s a loaded word and I don’t want to be misconstrued. But it’s not all the user’s fault when the news encourages this kind of thing. Again, my initial response to this was, “must be the doings of some PR department.” Gematsu only has responsibility for this insofar as every other media outlet reporting on it does. It’s pure gossip and you’d expect at least the reputable outlets to be better than that but apparently not. Journalism should operate as a filter for what gets reported, but for the vast majority of topics games journalism really hasn’t made much of an attempt to elevate itself beyond sensationalism and gossip.

                Stuff like this doesn’t really help because it only truly matters to people inside the industry, and the parties involved. To the enthusiast, this should be pretty meaningless, all things considered. Corrinne Yu has credentials but considering how understated her career has been she’s markedly different from a Cliff Blezinski or John Carmack. In that vein to the industry outsider her position as a skilled developer holds no more apparent importance to me than any other anonymous skilled developer. She doesn’t have a public personality so I don’t see why this even merits mention. From my point of view the gist of the article isn’t about Corrinne Yu, but rather a Sony vs. Microsoft angle. And as such I don’t see how the journalist can be entirely absolved of blame for the “idiotic company fan war” since they consciously chose to report on it instead of something else (when, as mentioned, this event is ultimately meaningless without that context as far as I’m concerned).

                I stand by my assertion that Gematsu (among others) is complicit in creating bias simply by virtue of reporting on what I ultimately feel to be negligible news when removed from the radio noise. It’s like hearing celebrity gossip on the local nightly news. It doesn’t make the local news channel a disreputable source but it does harm their integrity even a little bit. Not unheard of but still disappointing.

                • BigDix

                  Exactly. Context tells us that the plain, central information of this event is not standard for something news-cycle X churns out. So when it comes rolling on in, you realize you don’t have to look all that far to find the memetic forces pushing it from behind, out toward us.

                  It’s sensationalism, pure and simple. Part of the reason the world is as fucked up as it is is because people take the concept of “sensationalism” for granted, as if it’s something that can only be defined by the pages of the National Enquirer or people squinting for Bigfoot and Nessie in blurry photographs. They don’t even once doubt or question the actual machinery of news and dissemination of information throughout the culture. “If that is something that really happened, and they told it to me, then good on them.” But did it ever occur to anyone that your news media puts its own furtherance over sincere journalistic endeavor to the point where contextually meaningless information is warped into meaningful news? Apparently not.

                  I’m wary a bit of the word “bias”, since I don’t think Sal is culpable in exactly that way; incidentally, if I had to guess, I would say he prefers the PlayStation to the Xbox. Doesn’t mean I’m second-guessing his every correspondence because he’s suddenly incapable of looking at the situation honestly; I myself prefer the PlayStation ecosystem, but what does that really have to do with anything here? Why should I celebrate it? Why should I defend it as having substance? It’s not about how Naughty Dog’s next game might look/run more impressively for this — it’s about the shoehorning. If the story was inverted and Corrinne went from ND to 343, I’d raise the issue exactly the same. It seems really difficult for people to understand that “juiciness” is not news… At least not the useful, respectable kind.

                  • MogCakes

                    If you’re going to pull the ‘sensationalism’ card here you’d better be combating this on sites where it actually happens too, because Gematsu is hardly the kind of place that posts that bullshit. Do you complain about it on IGN? Polygon? I don’t see where you’re supposed to ‘celebrate’ this news either, you seem to have created that yourself as false justification for your accusation of Gematsu being ‘sensationalist’.

                    • $18114340

                      This is incorrect. Nobody is talking about IGN and Polygon. It could very well be that BigDix feels just as strongly against this kind of content on those sites. How is that relevant? What if he does complain? What if he doesn’t? It doesn’t change anything.

                      You seem to be taking this personally for some reason. The accusation is not that Gematsu in particular is being sensationalist in this specific circumstance or that that would be particularly shameful. The argument is that by participating in what is apparently the mass-dissemination of otherwise negligible news in a questionable context, without any sort of critical judgement thereof, Gematsu is fully conceding to the whims of the source of this information. Which is again, not intrinsically harmful in of itself, but the creation and dissemination of news media never occurs within a vacuum and we should always be vigilant in considering the ramifications.

                      Again, he’s repeatedly made the point that he doesn’t believe Sal is incapable of looking at the situation honestly. So this isn’t an attack on the site or on Sal, but rather a cautioning and reminder of journalistic principles from the point of view of a portion of the readership. You don’t have to agree with this point of view, but you appear to be missing the point entirely.

                    • MogCakes

                      How is Gematsu ‘conceding to the whims’ of ‘the source’, in this case NeoGAF? By simply referencing them? I haven’t missed the point and I most definitely disagree. As a portion of the readership, you should full well expect argument from other portions that won’t feel the same way you do.

                    • $18114340

                      See post above. And I expect argument from other portions of the readership, but I do not expect to be silenced by other readers such as you, nor do I expect those same readers to completely misunderstand the argument and take things personally.

                      This isn’t about NeoGAF as far as I’m concerned. This is about the principles of journalism as I see them on a fundamental level.

                    • MogCakes

                      I’m not silencing you, I’m debating whether or not this is ‘worthy news’ as you put it and I happen to believe the opposite of you – this is within bounds of journalistic integrity. I also fail to see where I’m taking it personally, or misunderstand the argument for that matter.

                    • $18114340

                      You are most certainly silencing me by virtue of falsely characterizing my criticism as “censorship”. The moment you decided to paint this debate in absolutely ridiculous extremes is when you made things personal, and by continuously insisting that GAF has anything to do with the principles being debated other than their mechanical involvement as a source of information you are making this personal.

                      You are most certainly NOT debating whether this is “worthy news”, because you have already decided beforehand that it is, and instead you make your move to falsely discredit those who disagree.

                    • MogCakes

                      It’s not a false characterization if your end goal is to imply to Sal that ‘this is a sensitive time, I’m not saying you shouldn’t post it, but you should consider the context, which means you shouldn’t post it’. You took it personally yourself, I am not the one who started hurling personal insults. GAF was brought into the debate by BigDix, not me. I AM debating that it is worthy news precisely because I believe so – this isn’t a debate to convince ME, it’s a debate to convince readers who may come across this exchange. You seem to love using the word ‘discredit’ as a convenient way of pigeonholing me into your narrative.

                    • $18114340

                      EXCEPT THAT IT’S NOT MY END GOAL TO IMPLY TO SAL THAT HE SHOULDN’T POST THIS CONSIDERING THE CONTEXT.

                      I HAVE REPEATEDLY STATED THAT I HAVE NEVER, EVER SAID THAT SAL SHOULDN’T HAVE POSTED THIS, THAT WAS PURE BASELESS CONJECTURE ON YOUR PART AND YOU INSIST ON THIS LIE.

                      I AM TAKING THIS PERSONALLY BECAUSE YOU INSIST ON TURNING THIS INTO A PERSONAL ATTACK ON ME, AND I MOST CERTAINLY DID NOT START WITH THE PERSONAL INSULTS, YOU DID.

                      NOTHING WOULD HAVE BEEN “PERSONAL” IF YOU HADN’T TRIED TO DERAIL THE CONVERSATION BY ACCUSING ME OF CENSORSHIP, AND IF YOU DID NOT CONSISTENTLY FUCKING LIE ABOUT THE THINGS I’VE ACTUALLY WRITTEN THAT YOU CLEARLY DID NOT READ. I AM USING THE WORD “DISCREDIT” BECAUSE THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO DO HERE.

                      WELL CONGRATULATIONS, BECAUSE YOU HAVE SUCCEEDED. PAT YOURSELF ON THE BACK. YOU HAVE SUCCESSFULLY EVADED THE ACTUAL DISCUSSION TO THE POINT WHERE I’M UNABLE TO CONTINUE WITH YOU.

                      IT IS NOT CONVENIENT, AND I WOULD NOT EVEN BE USING THAT WORD IF YOU HADN’T ATTEMPTED TO DO IT IN THE FIRST PLACE. THAT’S AD HOMINEM. THAT’S AS PERSONAL AS IT GETS.

                      I AM NOT TRYING TO PIGEONHOLE YOU INTO MY NARRATIVE BECAUSE MY ONLY NARRATIVE IS MY ARGUMENT, WHICH YOU REPEATEDLY IGNORE IN ORDER TO ATTEMPT TO DIVERT THE DISCUSSION INTO PERSONAL ATTACKS BY MEANS OF INFERRING THINGS I NEVER ACTUALLY SAID AND ACCUSING ME OF INTENTIONS I DO NOT ACTUALLY HAVE.

                    • MogCakes

                      If your end goal is not to tell Sal that he should essentially not post information of this type, then what is? If ‘consider the context’ doesn’t imply ‘don’t post this’ or ‘omit the details that may cause fanboys to react’, then what? Sal most likely did consider the circumstances he posted this in, and decided it was worth posting because the only people who would be incensed are fanboys. As far as I can tell the conversation is still on the exact point it was when I first started this exchange, you’ve just gotten angrier.

                    • $18114340

                      The conversation is still on the exact point as it was when you first started the exchange because you keep on ignoring anything I have to say or re-appropriating it so you can argue against a point I never made, and I’ve gotten angrier because I’m fed up with having to repeat myself fruitlessly while you just ignore everything I have to say.

                      If ‘consider the context’ doesn’t imply ‘don’t post this’ or ‘omit the details that may cause fanboys to react’, then what?

                      How about next time, instead of fabricating false implications, you actually argue to the points that were actually raised?

                    • MogCakes

                      The only points you actually raised were that there are other devs that could have the spotlight on but Gematsu didn’t (which is a very fair point) and that by reposting this information Sal shows a lack of basic journalistic principle, the meaning of which has been ambiguous until recently by which he should omit information by ‘considering the context’.

                    • $18114340

                      there are other devs that could have the spotlight on but Gematsu didn’t (which is a very fair point)

                      Once again, that was NOT my point. I already said this wasn’t my point!! And here you are again, TELLING ME THAT THIS IS MY POINT WHEN IT’S CLEARLY NOT. Seriously? Screw you.

                      You are taking my words solely for face value. THINK about them for once. Furthermore, the idea that by reposting this info Sal is disregarding journalistic principle is not a POINT, it was my ENTIRE FUCKING ARGUMENT made up of SEVERAL points that you continue to gloss over. Finally, my opinion that Sal should be omitting information by “considering the context” was probably poorly worded, but was not a play at censorship as I’ve repeatedly stated.

                      I already elucidated previously that what I meant by that was that not all the information given was necessary or essential and therefore it hurt the integrity of the article, and you took that to mean that I was calling for censorship. Then you pressed that point as somehow invalidating my position and wouldn’t let go of it, forcing me to defend myself

                      I don’t know why I’m continuing with this when I’ve written extensively to explain my position and you act like none of what I’ve actually written exists.

                    • MogCakes

                      I didn’t say it was THE point/argument you’re trying to make, what I acknowledged was that it is a fair ‘point’ in this debate that you raised and I agree with it. You’ve gone off the deep end if you think I was ‘speaking for you’ or insulting you there.

                      If there is information that pertains to the subject of the article then it is always relevant and never unnecessary. I’d have no qualms about Sal posting a full dev profile on Yu, or had he taken this opportunity to do so, but I also have no problem with him reposting this information. I don’t see any of the info here as unnecessary or excessive, or irrelevant. You’re going to have to prove that it is.

                    • $18114340

                      You most certainly are speaking for me if you think that was the point I was trying to raise and only acknowledge it as such. Because it wasn’t, and I’ve said so at least twice now, but you refuse to listen. And you’re going to continue to think that it was my point when I keep on explicitly saying, “no, fucking stop it, that’s not what I said.”

                      If there is information that pertains to the subject of the article then it is always relevant and never unnecessary.

                      I disagree with this. When the subject of your article is, “Corrinne Yu has moved from the Halo 4 team to Naughty Dog” then I question just how much of the information being provided pertains to the subject. Why would her career prior to Halo 4 be relevant in this case? And yet, the article discusses it, when the extent of the news is, “Corrinne Yu has moved. Also she tweeted that she likes the PS4.” I question just how important ANY of that is, because I didn’t care before and yet the article still gives me no reason to, and also because aside from mentioning her work on Halo 4, I don’t see how anything else is really relevant except to serve as stressing the tension in the console wars. Because otherwise the article holds no value to anybody.

                      I don’t see any of the info here as unnecessary or excessive, or irrelevant. You’re going to have to prove that it is.

                      Except that I did. I explained how none of the MS vs. Sony bent was relevant unless you walked into the article looking specifically to hear it. And you said that, no, it WAS relevant because MS and Sony are competitors. There’s a fucking discrepancy there, and you’re not doing the legwork to make the logical connection to show that it’s relevant.

                      MS vs. Sony is not automatically relevant, and even if it was, thus becoming the purpose of the article rather than to highlight Yu herself and her career, then you’re just asking for trouble because you KNOW that it’s not only a volatile subject where there is no “right answer” per se in a debate between MS vs. Sony. In which case, why even bring it up unless you’re specifically inviting controversy? It’s not news. MS vs. Sony is not news.

                      What the hell am I doing? I posted all this already, and you ignored it the first three fucking times so I don’t expect you to stop denying any of it now. Go back and fucking read what I wrote for once. Jesus.

                      Insisting that the burden of proof is on ME when I’m the one questioning the importance of the article is turning the tables in a way that makes no sense. I am saying, “this news is unimportant/this article is un-journalistic and this is why,” and you are ignoring all of that and saying, “I don’t have to do anything to prove to you that it IS important, because I already think it is.” Which is fucking stupid because at that point it’s just a conflict of opinions and there’s NOTHING TO PROVE for either side.

                    • MogCakes

                      Except I know that wasn’t the only point you were trying to raise. Sony vs MS is not the point of the article, but Yu’s move is from an MS studio to a Sony studio and that should be mentioned because that is part of the information. The history with Halo 4 provides some background on ‘just what does this person do?’, and the tweet sheds light on her personal feelings about moving. You may not see it as relevant, but it pertains to her move and in fact is relevant because of it. You’ve yet to prove that your assertions of this article being ‘not news’, ‘unimportant’ are objective truths.

                    • $18114340

                      You may not see it as relevant, but it pertains to her move and in fact is relevant because of it.

                      Prove that it’s relevant. Because I read everything you wrote and I disagree. I don’t agree that it pertains to her move. Yu’s background is not objectively relevant. Yu’s personal feelings are not objectively relevant. You’re going to have to prove those assertions to me.

                      This is fun.

                      You’ve yet to prove that your assertions of this article being ‘not news’, ‘unimportant’ are objective truths.

                      Holy shit, did you actually read any of what I wrote?

                    • MogCakes

                      It’s relevant because it relates to her move from one company to another. It is peripheral information about her switching studios. Her background with Halo 4 provides information on just what the hell she actually does. Objectively, all of this information is relevant. The connection is blatantly obvious, the onus is on you to prove otherwise, not me.

                      Yeah, I read what you wrote, and I call bullshit.

                    • $18114340

                      It’s relevant because it relates to her move from one company to another.

                      You’re going to need to qualify this objectively. Why does it relate? You’re saying, “this is relevant because it relates”. That doesn’t fucking mean anything.

                      It is peripheral information about her switching studios. Her background with Halo 4 provides information on just what the hell she actually does.

                      THAT’S NOT THE BACKGROUND I WAS TALKING ABOUT. YOU ARE PUTTING WORDS IN MY MOUTH. AGAIN.

                      AND “PERIPHERAL” DOESN’T MEAN WHAT YOU THINK IT MEANS.

                      http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/peripheral

                      pe·riph·er·al adjective pə-ˈri-f(ə-)rəl

                      not relating to the main or most important part

                      See, I can use dictionary entries too.

                      Objectively, all of this information is relevant.

                      NO, IT ISN’T. NOTHING IS “OBJECTIVELY” RELEVANT.

                      Relationships are arbitrarily conceived from the viewpoint of “this is a subject of that”! RELATIONSHIPS ARE THE DIRECT RESULT OF SUBJECTIVITY! YOU DON’T EVEN KNOW WHAT YOU’RE ON ABOUT!

                      Who decides what is relevant? Why are you somehow more qualified to define to me what is relevant than the other way around?

                      The connection is blatantly obvious, the onus is on you to prove otherwise, not me.

                      Oh really? Why is the onus on me to prove otherwise? Why isn’t the onus on you to prove otherwise?

                    • MogCakes

                      Yes it does mean something. It is part of the event. It denotes the subject’s thoughts about the event. And her background with Halo 4 isn’t what you were talking about? What other information about her background is noted in the article? And wrong on relationships being purely subjective. Who, What, When, Where, Why. That’s fucking basic information. The onus is on you because you’re the one with the complaint, not me.

                    • BigDix

                      You most certainly have missed the point, again and again. Your oblivion to what gold and myself are actually taking issue with is evinced in every successive instance of you putting the word “bias” and “agenda” in our mouths so as to fabricate your ridiculous narrative where gold and myself are demanding censorship. I at least got argument from another portion of the readership — the part that actually reads what people are saying and displays a capacity to comprehend words and concepts discussed.

                    • MogCakes

                      Look in a mirror. You’ve taken things personally and have reduced yourself to hurling insults my way. I understand what you take issue with but disagree with it. Don’t act like that’s impossible. Your criticism of Gematsu does imply censorship, no matter how cleverly you try to word it. You are the one fabricating a narrative attempting to discredit me by accusing me of not reading your posts and putting words in your mouths – I have never misquoted nor quoted something you didn’t say. When you make a post on a public forum you should expect debate and sometimes fierce debate, as I said.

                    • BigDix

                      Look in a mirror.

                      What blistering irony that you should open things with such a cute line which first, fails to follow on the conversation in any logical manner, and second, addresses your own remarks more perfectly than it does those of anyone else.

                      I get it. You don’t feel complimented when someone tells you you’re not displaying a capacity to understand words and concepts… Makes sense, because it’s not a compliment. And it’s also not a personal insult. If you neither read nor understand what someone is saying to you, while obnoxiously insisting on a censorship conspiracy theory, in spite of many, many attempts made to explain the actualities of the matter at hand, it stands to reason that at some point, someone will tell you that you are not reading and that you are not understanding. I really am sorry that this rubs you the wrong way, but it can’t be helped as all I’m doing is literally describing the situation. I’m not “acting” like anything — so long as you are not listening to what I am saying, there is nothing to what you say. There can be no disagreement in the first place when all you do is talk past me. Rather, did it ever occur to you that it’s not impossible you’re on a serious run of serial misinterpretation and downright confusion? Giving me little to nothing in terms of reciprocal, deliberative conversation, I can only do so much. I already proved, rock-solid, that your reading and understanding left much to be desired when you blatantly blew past one of my comments to say the exact same thing I had already said — you thought you were being very clever indeed, but as a result your facade of good faith and honesty in this “debate” fell flat on its face. When I tell you you’re not reading and comprehending, I’m only stating the reality of the situation.

                      You, on the other hand, have from the word go taken every opportunity in your replies to impugn and maliciously undermine the people with whom you’re talking; all I can say is I won’t venture a guess as to whether that’s calculated insidiousness or reflective of something deeply ingrained in your comportment. Whatever the case, this conversation has seen a mass infusion of out-and-out foolishness ever since the time you began to play fast and loose with the words “bias”, “agenda”, and “censorship”. If you can’t key into what’s being discussed, fine, but you ought to expect to be called on it when you continually answer all efforts at sincere conversation and critically thoughtful scrutiny with brash, asinine accusations. Far from a “fierce debate”, all you’ve given anyone here is less reason to believe in humanity… Let’s not forget that terribly disgusting bit of rhetoric you seem to like bringing out against me, in particular, now: “Oooh, BigDix doesn’t like NeoGAF. ALL DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS DISCARDED THEN!” Hahaha, how the fuck do you figure, bub? Sorry, but that is some seriously bad, dishonest shit right there… If you yourself aren’t dishonest insofar as actively championing the headline that started this all, you certainly are in your communication with others. Did it ever occur to you that there’s a rationale behind my general dislike of NeoGAF, shaped by the experiences of actually going there? And that what I’ve been saying this whole time just evidences again, the accuracy and soundness of my assessment in that respect? And that I also understand that not EVERYONE on NeoGAF is an incredibly awful brat indulging in pretended savvy? I guess not. I guess all we need to know is I’m vaguely “biased” against NeoGAF, making me unreasonable and anything I might say remotely relating to it equally so. Without your worthless and hollow little intimation presuming to instantly discredit me, you have nothing else to say in this regard aside from, “Well they were all about 360 last time around!” …Now THAT says a lot.

                      Anyway, seeing how the one comment of mine you didn’t reply to was the one containing my most blunt and straightforward effort at explaining things, I’m going to take one more crack at dispelling this “censorship” garbage. I’ve gleaned from your ongoing “debate” with gold that you, even now, continue to misunderstand. And to clear up the ambiguity… I’m not exactly sure what the ultimate upshot of gold’s argument is, as I actually think he might’ve directly contradicted himself at least once and is otherwise sending a few mixed signals here and there, no doubt owing to your blowing out his eardrums with endless cries of censorship. But we could probably have a perfectly fine, honest discussion where we come to a point of understanding. I doubt that’ll be happening here with you though, so like I was saying… Let me just speak for myself here, and make this crystal clear: I do not like that this article appeared on Gematsu. I do think it should not have been posted in the first place. Does that mean I’m advocating CENSORSHIP? You talking about this notion of having the article removed? Nothing anyone asked for, and totally missing the point. Talking about this notion of Yu having some bizarre, random “neutral” dev profile on Gematsu? Totally missing the point. Talking about things in terms of who needs moral support? Totally missing the point. Saying the problematic circumstance I’m referencing is the “sensitivity” of the times? Totally missing the point. Let’s take this nice and slow… You be sure to let me know if my wording is getting too clever….

                      • When Sal doesn’t report on Twitter drama between developers, gaming personalities, and the gaming public, is it censorship?

                      • When Sal doesn’t report on a developer engineer calling a console “crap” — something that blazes a path through all major gaming news sites — is it censorship?

                      • When Sal doesn’t report on office politics of notable developers — the in-fighting, working conditions, assorted controversies — is it censorship?

                      • When Sal doesn’t report on some big-wig analyst or executive like Zelnick holding forth on their amazing “vision”, is it censorship?

                      I mean, it’s all objective reality that actually HAPPENED, right? And in the world of gaming, no less! So it’s relevant! I mean, other websites report it! So why does Sal, who as the connected and informed proprietor of a website where the community feverishly discusses all this anyway, insist on CENSORING OUR NEWS!? He knows it happened! He just wants to do everything in his power to make sure WE don’t know! …Right? Chew on this too.

                      • If a local bodega cashier is gunned down some blocks from the office of a major cable news provider, and they don’t make room for it in their daily coverage or preempt anything, is it censorship?

                      • Or if a young historical minority gets gunned down as well as a result of local gang violence? When the local news reports it and the cable network doesn’t, is the cable network guilty of censorship?

                      Nooooo, noooo, nooo. Of course not. No on all counts. As I already explained several days ago, every independent news agency in existence makes their own calls — for better or worse — about what’s relevant to their audience, what they judge to be substantial, impactful news for their viewer/readership. Incidentally, I’m pretty comfortable with Gematsu’s judgment on what their news output should be; Sal and co. already KNOWINGLY filter out information that lights up the wires over at many other sites, because they make critical calls on what they think is meaningful, material news. If you think a news organization choosing to forgo what they perceive to be noise is tantamount to censorship, then I’d hate to burst your bubble, but you’ve never known news that WASN’T censored, by your definition.

                      And then there’s those instances where Sal is not even aware of certain other stories, the situation being such that there isn’t even an opportunity for a judgment call. Street and Gonzalez, for instance… Gematsu didn’t cover the career changes of these talented, capable guys. I wonder why…? That brings me to an important point — you know what the big problem is here? You look at how the gaming hivemind suddenly catapulted Corrinne Yu into prominence, without asking WHY. You offhandedly say, “Oh, well I hope Gematsu gets on that and covers those other people!” which completely misses the point as that is not something that can be reasonably expected of Gematsu and is not reflective of their standard news output. And when it comes to the BIG CORRINNE YU STORY, you say, “Well golly, it’s a good thing we’ve at long last rectified things and shed some light on the brilliant talent that is Corrinne Yu! What could possibly be wrong with that!?” A hell of a lot could be wrong with it when you dare to dig deeper past just the most superficial level of the whole matter and ask the questions that need to be asked: Why is the veil of obscurity lifted on her at this point in time and not other notable, high-profile talents, and even the DEATHS of infinitely more influential individuals in the world of gaming? You just don’t ask the why question, man. You’re content to think about it in as black-and-white a way as possible. You’re either in denial or too naive to face the reality of the driving force behind this.

                      When you defend this as a newsmaking item in the context of our world, you act as an apologist for those who EXPLOIT Corrinne Yu’s distinguished career for Internet-asshole punditry, flame wars, console wars, etc. Nobody who truly respects Corrinne Yu and her accomplishments would turn her career prospects into fodder for angry/delirious armchair-quarterbacks. You and everyone else lapping this up across the community need to honestly appreciate the fact that Yu is a low-profile, accomplished programmer whose career zig and zags are only relevant to her family, friends, respected colleagues, peers and a very small circle of enthusiasts who actually knew of her beforehand, because the moment she is rocketed to the top of news blogs under THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, it is not on the merits of her work, but to pervert her professional life into the gossip of the day.

                      The question is not whether Gematsu “withholds” information for fear of exciting and angering tribalists, the question is whether Gematsu joins in on a story WHICH ONLY EXISTS AS A PROMINENT NEWS ITEM BY VIRTUE OF HOW EXCITING AND ANGERING IT IS FOR TRIBALISTS.

                      GET

                      THIS

                      STRAIGHT

                      SAL AND GEMATSU AS AN ORGANIZATION ARE NOT DIRECTLY INVESTED IN ANY SORT OF CONSOLE BIAS SLICING ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. THEY ARE INVESTED IN THE HYPE CYCLE OF SITES LIKE NEOGAF, FROM WHICH THEY TAKE MANY CUES ON NEWS ITEMS. SAL IS NOT BIASED. SAL DOES NOT HAVE AN AGENDA. I’M SAYING THE CRITICAL THINKING WE KNOW HIM TO BE CAPABLE OF FAILED HIM ON THIS OCCASION, AND I DON’T WANT THAT TO JUST SLIP BY LEST GEMATSU FALL INTO A DISTURBING TREND THAT DISAPPOINTS THEIR OWN STANDARD FOR REPORTING MATERIAL NEWS AND NOT FUCKING USELESS NOISE TAKING ADVANTAGE OF A SKILLED WOMAN’S WORK.

                      This was all entirely constructive criticism from the very beginning, which Gematsu itself was able to appreciate and understand. Sal and Gematsu are in my summation guilty of only the most innocent and slight of oversights and lapses in journalistic judgment. You and others who will apologize for the communities propagating this story are far more guilty for your willful, smiling-ear-to-ear ignorance of the more complex mechanics behind this story’s sudden interest.

                    • MogCakes

                      When Sal doesn’t report on other things, I can’t really guess as to what he’s thinking. I’m not Sal. I will defend his posting of this bit of information however, and I don’t give a shit what you call it, ‘constructive’ or not, if your intent is to alter the way this article was worded or posted, I will call it for what it is.

                    • $18114340

                      if your intent is to alter the way this article was worded or posted, I will call it for what it is.

                      Which is…? It’s criticism. Sal doesn’t HAVE to listen to it, because none of us have authority over Sal. So it’s obviously not censorship because none of us can force him to change the article.

                      So what the fuck are you calling it, then? It’s criticism. What the hell else do you think it is? Fucking hell.

                    • MogCakes

                      Criticism with the aim of telling him what? It’s the intent of the criticism I am getting at, not the criticism itself. Did you think you could just stop me at ‘it’s just criticism!’?

                    • $18114340

                      Did you think you could just stop me at ‘it’s just criticism!’?

                      Boy, I can dream.

                      Criticism with the aim of telling him what? It’s the intent of the criticism I am getting at, not the criticism itself.

                      What the hell does this even mean? Criticism doesn’t ever NOT have an intent. I can’t speak for BigDix in this regard, but my criticism is to say that Sal shouldn’t be regurgitating press releases or forum gossip.

                      It’s to tell him, “I’m not pleased with this and here is why”. That’s the intent of ANY criticism. The intent of criticism is to criticize!

                      At which point you told me what I was calling for was censorship. So if you’re trying to call it “for what it is” you’re clearly not doing your job right.

                      So, with that being said, what do you think I was trying to tell Sal? What is the intent of my criticism that you are getting at? Or are you just extrapolating and making assumptions based on what you *THINK* my intent is?

                    • MogCakes

                      Except this isn’t forum gossip, it actually happened. And no, to criticize has intent. The point of criticism is to criticize, which advocates suggestions and changes. It’s that which I’m getting at. My interpretation of your criticism was that it implied censorship. That’s why I said it. I call things as I see them. If the intent of your criticism is to tell him not to post this (which you have repeatedly said is not the case, and yet here you’re saying he shouldn’t post this because it’s sensationalist), then I will call it as such.

                    • $18114340

                      And no, to criticize has intent. The point of criticism is to criticize,which advocates suggestions and changes. It’s that which I’m getting at.

                      THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I JUST SAID.

                      “Criticism doesn’t ever NOT have an intent. I can’t speak for BigDix in this regard, but my criticism is to say that Sal shouldn’t be regurgitating press releases or forum gossip.

                      It’s to tell him, “I’m not pleased with this and here is why”. That’s the intent of ANY criticism. The intent of criticism is to criticize!”

                      SEE??

                      My interpretation of your criticism was that it implied censorship. That’s why I said it. I call things as I see them.

                      EXCEPT THAT CENSORSHIP IS FORCED BY AUTHORITY. I have no control over what Sal posts. He can just as easily disregard my advice as you have. You don’t even fucking know what censorship is. Under your definition, ANY criticism that effectively says, “I personally don’t want to see this on this site and here’s why” is a call for censorship. Which is nonsensical because that’s not what censorship is! And for you to completely disregard the “why” on the basis that it is “censorship” is in of itself poor argument.

                      If the intent of your criticism is to tell him not to post this (which you have repeatedly said is not the case, and yet here you’re saying he shouldn’t post this because it’s sensationalist), then I will call it as such.

                      But you didn’t do this. You called it “censorship” without clearly comprehending what censorship actually is. And then you said that it wasn’t meant as a personal attack when it’s impossible for it to mean anything else. You attempted to circumvent the argument rather than actually addressing it.

                      So now I’m calling the things that you’re saying for what they are, which is bad argument and fallacy.

                    • MogCakes

                      Well no, that’s not exactly what you said. I mentioned that with said complaint also comes a suggestion for the future. Also, my interpretation was of you advocating censorship, not that you would somehow be able to force Sal to not post information. And again, my interpretation of you implying advocacy of censorship has turned out to be not true, so I’m not hammering it here – I will however maintain that it was not an attack on you. It being a personal attack IS NOT the only possible conclusion, don’t act like any time the word censorship is used that it means someone’s trying to insult you. And the argument is the same as it was, you need to prove that the background info on Yu is irrelevant to this article. ‘Without clearly comprehending’ – wrong. I know what censorship is. Can you prove that you’re being objective by calling this ‘not news’ or are you just going to keep complaining that I’m trolling you?

                    • $18114340

                      I mentioned that with said complaint also comes a suggestion for the future.

                      Uh, excuse me.

                      WHAT THE FUCK DO YOU THINK CRITICISM IS, IF NOT THAT WHICH YOU HAVE JUST DESCRIBED?

                      Also, my interpretation was of you advocating censorship, not that you
                      would somehow be able to force Sal to not post information.

                      THE ACT OF CENSORSHIP IS TO FORCE SOMEONE NOT TO EXPRESS SOMETHING.

                      Me saying, “I don’t like this” is NOT CENSORSHIP. HOLY SHIT.

                      I will however maintain that it was not an attack on you. It being a personal attack IS NOT the only possible conclusion, don’t act like any time the word censorship is used that it means someone’s trying to insult you.

                      The point isn’t that you were trying to insult me, it’s that you were trying to completely disregard my argument by virtue of it being censorship. And you succeeded.

                      And the argument is the same as it was, you need to prove that the background info on Yu is irrelevant to this article.

                      No I DON’T, because fuck you and I’m allowed to think what I want. Which is that Gematsu fucked up by posting this shitty story in the way that they did.

                    • MogCakes

                      You failed to mention that criticism carries suggestion, and you neglected that my interpretation of you advocating censorship came from that. And note, ADVOCATING censorship, not you actually censoring Sal. And LOL, after all of this, when pressed to prove that the information aside from Yu’s move is objectively not part of the news, you pull the ‘fuck you’ card. We’re done here.

                    • BigDix

                      No. I do not complain about it on IGN or Polygon, because I do not go to IGN or Polygon. I haven’t read Polygon — nor do I have any reason to — enough to comment on their operation, but I can say I’d consider IGN a completely lost cause, though that’s really neither here nor there. Your misguided kneejerk defense of Gematsu in this regard is ironic on account of the fact the whole reason I’m “complaining” is because I expect better of Gematsu, because it is better.

                      I also want to note that I never meant to have to conduct giant psychic autopsies on the situation, which could be misconstrued as me wanting to pound Gematsu over and over again; all I did in the beginning was make an earnest appeal while highlighting a particularly telling inconsistency that I think gets through to most reasonable people. That being said, I don’t regret what I have to say when others want to push the issue and contest that earnest appeal. I’m not pissing on Gematsu — I’m doing my best to give a response.

                      As far as celebration goes, I would certainly be right at home here in this comment thread, as well as those of other articles, if I DID choose to keep score and celebrate Sony’s perceived victory on this occasion, since independent of the reporting Sal does, Gematsu’s comment threads are quite often plagued with utterly inane Sony tribalism. The only ones blind to that fact are the tribalists in question. False, my ass.

                    • MogCakes

                      Expect ‘better’? Define what would be ‘better’ for Gematsu to post or not post. Please. And if it’s the community you have a problem with, then address the Sony fanboys directly. I’ll throw you a bone: given MS’s pretty bad year, if they suddenly got a high profile dev who stated they were excited to work with MS, said ‘no more PS for me!’, and MS was getting some much needed moral support, would you be protesting that? Because that would in fact be the same situation, but in a different overall context. Would you still be telling Gematsu to not post news like that?

                    • BigDix

                      given MS’s pretty bad year, if they suddenly got a high profile dev who stated they were excited to work with MS, said ‘no more PS for me!’, and MS was getting some much needed moral support, would you be protesting that? Because that would in fact be the same situation, but in a different overall context. Would you still be telling Gematsu to not post news like that?

                      You’ve GOT to be kidding me. From a comment of mine 3 days ago…

                      If the story was inverted and Corrinne went from ND to 343, I’d raise the issue exactly the same.

                      Based on the way this “conversation” has been going, I was wondering whether or not you actually read anything I said. Guess now I know.

                    • MogCakes

                      I’ve read everything you said, but I really doubt that you’d raise the issue if it were reversed.

                • MogCakes

                  And I stand by the assertion that coverage of this does not imply bias nor does it encourage anything. I feel it’s important to know who the high profile devs are that have a tangible effect on the games we play and the industry in which these games are created. There is no integrity lost by simply reporting news, amidst a storm of other sites constantly pushing Pro-Sony or Pro-Microsoft bullshit. It may be disappointing to you that Gematsu chooses to report news as-is regardless of whether it ‘harms’ MS, but that’s your problem, not Gematsu’s and not Sal’s or anybody else.

                  • $18114340

                    Except that Corrinne Yu is NOT “high-profile”. As far as the mainstream is concerned Yu’s “tangible effect” on games and industry is no more pronounced than the effect that any other developer has. Again, she is not a public figure despite her pedigree. And again, the emphasis of this piece of news is not on Corrinne Yu in the context of her “tangible effect”. It is on how Corrinne Yu feels about Sony and Microsoft. One developer with barely a public personality to speak of moving from one high-profile studio to another is hardly a “tangible effect”, and the best argument you could possibly make in this regard is that Microsoft owns a patent on technology she developed. I’ll believe in the “tangible effect” once I start seeing results. Once something actually happens.

                    Insisting that there is no bias involved in the process of selecting things demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of what bias is. At its core, any news, any journalism, is biased. “Bias” is not inherently good or bad, it’s simply a reflection of humankind’s subjective experiences. To insist that the news is not biased, and to imply that bias is inherently bad, is a display of a fearful ignorance of the concept of bias.

                    If the news truly was neutral, that would actually be worse from a “bias” point of view — it would mean that sites such as Gematsu aren’t consciously being administered and the news that the site reports on isn’t being filtered. In that case, the logical conclusion is that Gematsu serves no other purpose but to regurgitate press releases. Is that what you’re getting at?

                    It’s also strange that you insist that this is “my problem”, when clearly it’s not just my problem. I don’t see why my view on the situation should be deemed any less important by you than any other member of Gematsu’s readership. It’s almost as if you’re trying to single out and discriminate against an opposing point of view. The whole, “don’t like it, go somewhere else” defense is a fallacy and you’re not actually addressing the argument at hand. So far, you haven’t argued against my points with rational analysis, you have simply denied and contradicted them. I say that this thing causes us to think in one way, and you say, “nuh-uh, you’re wrong”.

                    • MogCakes

                      I never said ‘don’t like it, go somewhere else’, I said ‘you having a problem with this news is not Gematsu’s fault’. After reading the whole of your post, you haven’t said anything new that I haven’t already covered. We’ve reached an impasse.

                    • $18114340

                      Not in so many words, at least. Your point of view is that I should not criticize the articles published on Gematsu because Sal should not be responsible or held accountable for the news he decides to post, which is an absurd view to hold in my opinion.

                      Furthermore, your insistence that Gematsu does not need to justify posting this news because they are “neutral” is indicative of your exclusionary view. If I don’t like the way news is reported at Gematsu, then too bad.

                      You even go as far as to call my criticism “censorship” and to try and paint me as some kind of bitter anti-GAF extremist. You are not attacking my argument, you are attacking ME as a person and that is why we are at an impasse. If you would actually respond to my arguments beyond, “you’re wrong and I will disregard your point of view simply because I don’t like it”, we would not be in this situation.

                      You offer no attempts to convince me of anything, only attempts to discredit me independently of my argument, and you completely ignore any evidence I provide to support my argument. I ask you questions, and instead of answering them you wave your hand and they magically disappear. What did you expect would happen? Of course we are at an impasse.

                    • MogCakes

                      Wrong again. My point of view is exactly what I said, you are attempting to twist it to fit your narrative. And counter to your ‘too bad’ point, if you don’t like the way Gematsu posts any one bit of news, you’re free to express it (like here), but I am also free to disagree with and argue it (like here). Don’t like it? Too bad.

                      Point to me where in any of my comments to you I implied that YOU hate NeoGAF. That honor goes to BigDix. No, the reason we are at an impasse is because neither of us will budge on how we view this article. The only ‘evidence’ you have brought that isn’t completely perceived is that Gematsu doesn’t cover everything going on in the industry, which I actually agree with. I have answered your questions, but you’ve argued every answer. Waving my hands? That’s just you attempting to discredit ME. So in light of all that, yeah, I expected as much and am not surprised.

                    • $18114340

                      Incorrect. The only person in this debate with a narrative is you. That narrative being that my criticism is censorship, which the fallacious implication being that by criticizing Gematsu I am advocating that the story be revoked. Meanwhile, I have NEVER said that I feel Gematsu shouldn’t have posted the story, I merely criticized the way in which they did. I have provided evidence in the form of logical argument and actual examples; all you have done is stick your fingers in your ears and deny it. I have attempted to show you why your view on “bias” is incorrect, and you have denied it. I have attempted to show you why Corrinne Yu is not comparable to prominent industry figures and therefore undeserving of this news story, and you have denied it. I have attempted to show you that this story has a Microsoft vs. Sony bent, and you have denied it, but not before changing your tune and saying, “well, of COURSE it would sound that way!”

                      I am not attempting to discredit you; you’re doing a fine job of that yourself.

                    • MogCakes

                      Your narrative is that Gematsu’s posting of this news carries an undertone of Sony vs MS when that is not the case and the only reason one would interpret it that way is that they’re already involved in that rivalry. Your ‘criciticm’ of how they SHOULD post the story is that they should leave out ALL trace of what has happened in Yu’s career recently and just profile her as a developer. That is pure, unadulterated bullshit. You are seeing a Sony vs Microsoft slant where there is none being reported by the site. They are very much just reporting the facts here, no matter how you try to spin it otherwise.

                    • $18114340

                      For fuck’s sake, I am NOT denying that Gematsu is reporting on the facts. I am not even saying that doing anything else would be wrong of them! You clearly don’t even understand my position is before trying to argue against it, if you’re going to go as far as to make shit up and tell me that I said it!

                      I am NOT saying that Gematsu should leave out all trace of Yu’s recent history. I am NOT saying that Gematsu should simply profile Yu as a developer. I am NOT saying that Gematsu is reporting on this from a Sony vs. Microsoft slant in the sense that they are trying to “fan the flames of fanboy war”.

                      What I AM saying is that the way in which Gematsu “reported” on this event was lazy and not actually journalism. From the very beginning, my position was that this smacked of regurgitated press release. From that train of thought, it made sense to me that Gematsu obviously did not actually do any reporting of their own, but simply copy and pasted what was being reported by GAF and numerous other sites. Supporting this conclusion was that every site I’ve seen this story posted on has reported it in exactly the same way.

                      And no, these are NOT “just the facts”, because as I’ve tried to explain to you (yet you refuse to consider, because you don’t clearly remain to be convinced), there is NO SUCH THING as “just reporting the facts”. Journalism is supposed to act as a filter between the source of information, which has its own intents, and what the journalist feels is actually relevant and IMPORTANT to their readers.

                      A tweet talking about how nice the PS4 is? Some auxiliary information about Halo 4’s luminosity algorithms that is never actually given any value or worth by virtue of analysis or even explanation? This is NOT NEWS. It’s gossip. Nothing has actually happened besides Yu moving from one studio to another.

                      So when you ask if the tweet should be omitted, and when you make it seem so absurd that mentioning something irrelevant in the article with otherwise no justification or even further detail besides, “duh, Microsoft and Sony are competitors”, my answer is YES, those things should be omitted, because THEY ARE NOT NEWS. They are not important, they hold absolutely no meaning to anybody who is not already interested in Yu’s career for whatever reason, and I fail to see how mere mention of these things is supposed to have any sort of value by default to the reader.

                      Again, there have been mentions that Yu has worked for NASA, that she’s on a board for open graphics standards… NO SOURCES. Not even a further analysis of Yu’s career beyond a small blurb. Am I supposed to just take everybody’s word for it that this is somehow important, and that this somehow makes Yu important to me? To me, this is the equivalent of taking the “About the Author” paragraph off the sleeve of a book and then printing it in the newspaper anytime that author does something headline-worthy. That’s artificial publicity, and it’s lazy reporting. Yu’s career up to this point has arguably only been defined by her most recent efforts, she has NOT gone on record to speak about them frequently, she is NOT a spokesperson or a public figure. She is a talented developer with a minor fanbase who managed to use their leverage in this case to give her more artificial publicity. Is that “journalism”? That’s not sensationalist to you? Assuming automatically that something is important to the reader without proper justification? Regurgitating press releases?

                      You seem awfully insistent on trying to tell ME what MY point of view is, which is ridiculous considering your repeated failure to understand where I am actually coming from. The only pure, unadulterated bullshit here is your asinine assertions of what my viewpoint is.

                    • MogCakes

                      Not asinine at all. If all you were saying is that Sal is reposting info lazily you wouldn’t have delved into all of the defensive behavior that you have been showing. You would have said outright that you think Sal should have done a full dev profile on Yu instead of simply posting about her move from an MS studio to a Sony studio. In fact, that point doesn’t even intersect with my own point that this is a valid tidbit of info to post and has no connotations of Gematsu attempting to fan console flame wars. Nothing has happened – well, I think her move counts as something happening, whether or not you think it’s important. Seeing that you don’t think it is, you could have easily just moved on to the next article.

                    • $18114340

                      Except that I very clearly have said multiple times that I do NOT think Sal should “do a full dev profile on Yu instead of simply posting about her move”. Sigh. You are just going to believe that I am saying what you want me to say.

                    • MogCakes

                      So you just want him to post ‘Corrinne Yu is an important dev’ sans her move from one studio to another?

                    • $18114340

                      omfg.

                      Again, you pull out these ridiculous dichotomies on me in some irrational attempt to form a scarecrow. Because obviously if I don’t believe Sal should do a “full dev profile” he should just be posting “Corrinne Yu is an important dev”. Yes, it can ONLY be one or the other. Come the fuck on, you’re obviously just trolling me now. That’s not even what I’m arguing and you goddamn well know it.

                      Isn’t the move (and ONLY the move) the extent of what happened? What other information do you believe is relevant? What other information do you believe actually adds value to the article? Try to read it from the perspective of someone who otherwise couldn’t care less about Yu.

                      Do you see why I have always believed this piece of news is so unimportant now?

                    • MogCakes

                      You’re characterizing the type of person who wouldn’t care about Yu except that now that she’s moved studios from an MS studio to a Sony studio they’re all over it. Not all readers are like that. What is Sal supposed to do about it, if you agree that posting the info of the news is relevant? Not everyone thinks this news is unimportant, and you CANNOT say that it is objectively unimportant.

                    • $18114340

                      News CAN be “objectively unimportant” if there is not enough justification for posting it. In this case, your justification for posting this news is that there are enough people interested in it, yourself included. Fair enough, in which case all I’m asking is that the news be presented AS NEWS and as nothing else.

                      Trying to shoehorn mention of Yu’s career where it’s not actually relevant to the news of Yu’s move is overreaching and dishonest because that’s not the news. Trying to shoehorn in any sort of MS vs. Sony angle beyond the fact that Yu moved from MS to Sony is sensationalist. So by including Yu’s dumb-ass tweets about nothing, which I’d be hard-pressed to be convinced add anything of value to the article, is sensationalist and not journalistic.

                      At the end of the day, what is the news being conveyed here? “Yu moved from Halo 4’s team to Naughty Dog. Also, she likes the PS4. Also also, she worked on Halo 4’s lighting, and then Microsoft patented it.” Not very interesting, is it? That’s why I didn’t think it was news.

                      In that case, the ONLY way to get people interested in such a boring event is to add stupid trite shit onto it like Yu’s tweets, which happens to underline the console war, and by highlighting her prior career which is at best barely relevant.

                    • MogCakes

                      And how is this not presented ‘as news’? It’s an article, there isn’t much to report but there is enough to warrant a small post. How is the mention of what she’s worked on recently dishonest and overreaching? It ‘not being the news’ isn’t enough justification for what you’re saying there. There is no shoe-horning of Sony vs MS, read it again and try to tell me that with a straight face. Yu’s tweet is hers and does pertain to the information posted. I found the post interesting as did others, and not just fanboys. You may think it’s not news, but that doesn’t mean it objectively isn’t news. Without her tweet it would be just as relevant to post. Further, in what world do we live in that information needs justification for posting?

                    • $18114340

                      And how is this not presented ‘as news’?

                      Are Yu’s trivial personal feelings on Twitter considered “news”? Is Yu’s career history considered “news” when the article is about current events?

                      It’s an article, there isn’t much to report but there is enough to warrant a small post.

                      My entire position has begged to differ. See, you’re just denying my argument again with no evidence of your own. I see what you’re doing.

                      How is the mention of what she’s worked on recently dishonest and overreaching?

                      I wasn’t aware that the news was that Yu worked on something recently. I thought the news here was that Yu moved.

                      There is no shoe-horning of Sony vs MS, read it again and try to tell me that with a straight face.

                      There’s a shoe-horning of Sony vs. MS in that article. You telling me otherwise is not going to convince me so, and me telling you otherwise is obviously not going to convince you so.

                      There, I did it. Oh, I’m sorry, was that rhetorical?

                      Yu’s tweet is hers and does pertain to the information posted.

                      I disagree and I’ve told you why I disagree. You’re ignoring me again. You’re not telling me how her tweet pertains to the information posted. Her tweet isn’t the news here. It’s not relevant by default.

                      I found the post interesting as did others, and not just fanboys.

                      I didn’t. What makes your interest any more important than my disinterest?

                      The idea is not only that I found the post uninteresting, because then I would have simply ignored it like you’re ignoring me.

                      The idea is that I not only found the post uninteresting, but to be in violation of what I consider to be journalistic principles.

                      I already said that it would have been fine if Gematsu posted the news “as-is”, but that I also believe that this is what Sal didn’t do.

                      You may think it’s not news, but that doesn’t mean it objectively isn’t news.

                      NO, GODDAMMIT, I know what you’re saying here and that’s not what I’m getting at.

                      Objectively speaking, what is the news here?

                      Corrinne Yu was at Halo, and now she’s at Naughty Dog.

                      Anything else in that article is, objectively speaking, NOT NEWS. Corrinne Yu’s history is NOT EQUAL TO “Yu was at Halo, now she’s at Naughty Dog.” Corrinne Yu’s tweets are NOT EQUAL TO “Yu was at Halo, now she’s at Naughty Dog.” Corrinne Yu’s tweets ARE EQUAL TO, “Yay, I love PS4 coding! No more Windows 8 for me!”

                      And that’s it.

                      Without her tweet it would be just as relevant to post.

                      EXACTLY. SO WHY IS THE TWEET THERE????

                      Further, in what world do we live in that information needs justification for posting?

                      Are you serious? Let’s try an exercise.

                      Information no longer needs justification for posting. Therefore, all information is justified to post.

                      Let’s just post about EVERYTHING AND ANYTHING with absolutely no discrimination or careful consideration.

                      What happens?

                    • MogCakes

                      Anything besides ‘Corrinne Yu was at 343, and is now at Naughty Dog’ is not news and not relevant? Who the hell are you to decide that? And as far as deciding what to post, if Sal thought this was worth posting then he should do so with all the information involved, which he has. Your entire position is based on your personal feelings of ‘this is not news’ and ‘this violates journalism principles!’ which is hilarious considering this repost of information doesn’t even count as journalism, it is just a repost. If you’re saying ‘he shouldn’t post it because it’s not journalistic!’ that’s even more hilarious. Gematsu does not consist purely of journalistic articles.

                    • $18114340

                      Anything besides ‘Corrinne Yu was at 343, and is now at Naughty Dog’ is not news and not relevant?

                      What is the news here?

                      ‘Corrinne Yu was at 343, and is now at Naughty Dog’

                      Okay, now:

                      What is in the article that isn’t equal to that?

                      Who the hell are you to decide that?

                      I’m not deciding it. That’s a fucking statement of objective truth. You asked me to provide it.

                      YOU ASKED ME FOR OBJECTIVE TRUTH. YOU CAN’T JUST FUCKING TURN AROUND AND TELL ME THAT I’M NOT ALLOWED TO DECIDE WHAT OBJECTIVE TRUTH IS AFTER ASKING ME TO QUALIFY WHAT I BELIEVE TO BE OBJECTIVE TRUTH. HOLY SHIT.

                      And as far as deciding what to post, if Sal thought this was worth posting then he should do so with all the information involved, which he has.

                      And I never said that he didn’t! Just that in my opinion, he shouldn’t. And then you told me I was trying to censor him. Christ.

                      Your entire position is based on your personal feelings of ‘this is not news’ and ‘this violates journalism principles!’

                      Once again:

                      YOU TOLD ME TO PROVIDE PROOF THAT SOMETHING IS OBJECTIVELY NOT NEWS.

                      I DID. YU’S TWEETS ARE NOT OBJECTIVELY NEWS IN THIS CASE BECAUSE THE NEWS IS NOT HER TWEET.

                      YOU TOLD ME THAT SAL SHOULD HAVE THE FREEDOM TO POST WHATEVER THE FUCK HE WANTS BECAUSE I DON’T GET TO DECIDE WHAT OBJECTIVELY QUALIFIES AS NEWS.

                      THEN YOU TURNED AROUND AND TOLD ME I WASN’T ALLOWED TOO FEEL THE WAY I FEEL BECAUSE SUBJECTIVITY IS BAD AND I NEED TO QUALIFY MY CLAIMS OBJECTIVELY.

                      WHAT THE FUCK DO YOU WANT??

                      which is hilarious considering this repost of information doesn’t even count as journalism, it is just a repost.

                      EXACTLY WHAT I WAS GETTING AT!!

                      If you’re saying ‘he shouldn’t post it because it’s not journalistic!’ that’s even more hilarious. Gematsu does not consist purely of journalistic articles.

                      FOR THE LAST FUCKING TIME, I NEVER SAID HE SHOULDN’T POST IT.

                      I’M GOING TO FUCKING REPEAT THIS UNTIL IT GETS THROUGH YOUR HEAD.

                      I NEVER SAID HE SHOULDN’T POST IT.

                      I NEVER SAID HE SHOULDN’T POST IT.

                      I NEVER SAID HE SHOULDN’T POST IT.

                      I NEVER SAID HE SHOULDN’T POST IT.

                      FUCK.

                    • MogCakes

                      So you’ve gone and outright said it. You think any information aside from the actual ‘Corrinne Yu has moved from one studio to another’ is not news and is unimportant, and that that is an objective truth and indisputable. Amazing.

                    • $18114340

                      Yeah, you’re trolling me. I should have known.

                    • MogCakes

                      No, I debated you and have figured out that your claim is bullshit.

                    • http://twitter.com/kazumalynx Zero

                      I’ve been keeping up with the comments in here for a while. I’m pretty stunned the discussion is still going. Don’t you both think it might be best to just move on?

                    • http://twitter.com/kazumalynx Zero

                      I’ve been keeping up with the comments in here for a while. I’m pretty stunned the discussion is still going. Don’t you both think it might be best to just move on??

          • BigDix

            Forgive me if this sounds to you an affront, but I imagine that when you read my use of the words “sensationalism” and “dishonesty”, what comes to your mind is a theoretical concept far more simple than what I mean to invoke, which I also must assert to be closer to reality. The way in which you regard dishonesty and sensationalism may be comparable to how one looks upon a nice, clear picture of a bright red circle, sitting in sharp contrast on a background of pure white — very crisp, readily apprehensible picture. “This is a red circle/dishonest/sensationalistic. It goes in that pile. And nothing else that isn’t a red circle will go in that pile…” However, I look up at dishonesty and sensationalism as a tremendous armada of shapeless, boundless thunderclouds feeding into each other, hanging over humanity in all its aspects…perhaps for all time.

            There’s a simple example that I believe may be useful in communicating what I mean: Have you ever been to a funeral? Or to a school/company assembly because one of your classmates/teachers/colleagues died? Or seen/read a news report about the death of a well-liked individual, maybe even a child, from whatever community? I’m sure you must have at least experienced that last one… Then you’ll also be familiar with turns of phrase such as, “_______ truly had an infectious smile,” or, “________ had an electrifying personality that everyone loved.” These are common phrases, just a few of many, that people tend to use in order to eulogize the deceased… But don’t they seem to be wrong, somehow? I think they are.

            On a very fundamental level, you may have an intuitive revelation much the same as me; I wouldn’t ever describe anyone I’ve known as having an “infectious smile” or an “electrifying personality”. Is that because I’ve never known someone with a lovely and pleasing smile, or someone with a vivacious, lively character? Of course not… Truth be told, to utter such words is to be resoundingly dishonest. No one whoever says these things ever actually knows the individual in question, yet that doesn’t stop them from pretending to with such pretty oratory. So why do they pretend?

            Because a human being is an awkward, confused, and highly social creature. Rather than pay honest respect to the fact that Individual X was in no tangible way a part of their own existence, in no way someone they can say they really knew, they indulge impulses to “participate” in memorialization with sensationalistic proclamations of how infectious and/or electrifying somebody was; these are just empty, pretentious words, delivered with a flat and mechanical affect — words which sharply disgrace the very fact of life and all its vastness, in the name of propriety and procedure. There is a back-and-forth obligation there with the community, and a need to involve oneself — to be a part of this momentous occasion, and to hold forth in some manner on death.

            Frankly, even those ostensibly “close” to a deceased individual will grope around for just the same platitudes… It all belies the reality that people, whether it be the fault of a uniquely human hubris, their fear of confronting the situation, or a mixture thereof, simply can’t bring themselves to honestly face the gravity and incomprehensibility of death. They can’t put what it honestly means for that person to have lived and in turn, what it means for them to now be dead and gone forever, above their need to be a part of something, to say something, to put their reaction out there. If you didn’t know someone, then it is what it is. Don’t pretend to have known them, understood them, or to have appreciated their life. If you did know someone really well… Coping will vary depending on just how much they meant, but I personally cannot accept, and will not abide people putting the immense network of phenomena known as “existence” into a little box, where they can then with relative ease toss it over their shoulder and dismiss it with an utterance of, “They were infectious and electrifying.” There’s no rubric for how one suffers loss, and I’m not saying that societal thought hasn’t at this point been engineered so that a populace is actually expecting, looking for and demanding such glib eulogy. But while death may find ways to operate with extreme facility, we as human beings mustn’t allow ourselves to regard it in such a facile way. I can see my conviction here being viewed as cruel and in fact disrespectful to the dead, but I must insist it’s the exact opposite. Anywho, I certainly ended up going a ways to flesh it out, but I still think it’s a fundamentally simple example. Now for the really relevant part.

            Sal is not himself manifesting a direct bias in posting this article. What he did do though was be a NeoGAFfer. And while I’m glad he’s willing to trawl that place for news, NeoGAF is a horrible place tightly packed with extraordinary idiocy of all degrees. The following never went through Sal’s head, I imagine….

            “Aww, YEAAA-UH! We did it again! TAKE THAT, Microsoft! Mm, fuck yeah!”

            “Damn… She’s pretty fuckin’ hot! Gonna get up a post about this; the Naughty Dog offices just got a whole lot steamier!”

            …But they are knocking about the gaming community as the base and animal instincts which invent the circumstance of this news’ relevance. When Sal identified with that NeoGAF part of himself and got on the high that the rest of them were on over this “development”, I’m gonna say he carelessly caved into a whole bunch of goddamn stupidity.

            Yet another element tying back into my previous example of death and how people react to it… How many talented, highly involved designers and engineers, with resumés filled with impressive works and industry accolades, do you think go uncovered in mainstream gaming news media? Is every prolific developer with a reputation of quality reported on when they move onto other studios, branch out over here and there, or start their next projects? Hell no. But we accept the reality of that situation as one of many human limitations. We are not omniscient; we do not know the names, histories, and methodologies of even one thousandth the people who make our games, and there is no one with the time, resources or knowledge to compose the write-ups that would enlighten us, which probably no one is even willing to read to begin with.

            But same as in music, film and other entertainment, we understand that we will hear about, and ourselves develop conceptions of, the most visible and exposed elements of our entertainment. That’s just what’s going to happen. And when something pops up in media that cannot be consistently understood as a publicly significant event, some of us may begin to key into what other factors contributed to the emergence of said “news”.

            So, my friend… I very much disagree. I did not add the “HOT ASIAN CHICK” and “POACHES” parts. I was cognizant of them as that which simmers beneath the surface of the collective consciousness of the Internet’s echo chamber, where idiot asshole denizens gin up bitter and pointless flame wars, pronounce TOD for Companies/Gaming-proximate-persons X, Y, Z, circle jerk their peers as they hotly anticipate their shamelessly contrived fantasy of choice, respond to people talking to them with cookie-cutter image macros and .gifs badly misusing an awful meme in an attempt to subvert them and win INTERNET POINTS, and keep an eye out for the original memes — the community and society-wide thought patterns which define, inform and engineer their interactions and activities, such as “hot girl” and “CAT FIGHT!”

            Exactly as they did here, which one amateur journalist happened to be swept up in when he once again wandered into the echo chamber.

            • MogCakes

              Wait, so reporting this news and referencing NeoGAF means he’s on board the ‘high’ train of knocking Microsoft? What the hell. You’re blowing a whole lot of hot air.

              • BigDix

                Now see… You’re picking out just the part which is easiest for you to misconstrue. It’s not the literal fact of it being NeoGAF who Sal sourced, nor is it the sole element of “knocking Microsoft.”

                NeoGAF is a microcosm of gaming culture, and overall media culture, where the echo chamber magnifies negligible information for purposes other than substantive awareness and discussion. I’ll say it again: Why not cover everyone then? Everyone who’s really talented, a recipient of accolades, doing interesting and new things in the industry. Because it’s infeasible. Soooo… What is it that thrusts Corrinne Yu’s move to Naughty Dog to the top of the pile? Even past news that is irrefutably of greater significance? How does that happen? It happens because the given culture has a memetic thought process that perverts innocent, substantial information, or gives the illusion of substance to that which has none.

                Sal is a part of that highly representative NeoGAF culture. That culture can be a silly, silly beast. Because he’s part of the culture, he bought into its arbitrary dictation of significance. HE doesn’t have an agenda. GEMATSU doesn’t have an agenda. He made an honest mistake, in my summation, in letting out a useless echo from that echo chamber into this corner of the net.

                • MogCakes

                  Sal is part of the ‘highly representative’ NeoGAF culture? He’s part of it just because he referenced the site? What? And from his history he DOES cover a lot of what’s going on, but obviously he can’t cover every little detail of what happens. Yu’s move is pretty significant because she’s pretty unique in her role and previous experience in the industry, AND because her history includes her having created a new type of lighting for Halo 4 that is now patented by MS. It says a lot that you take issue with her move being reported, and more so that you associate the reporting of said news with ‘pro Sony’ bias and even more so that you write off sites like NeoGAF as a Sony biased ‘echo chamber’ when in the previous generation they were all about the 360.

                  • BigDix

                    If you’re a frequent user of Gematsu, then you know Sal is a longtime NeoGAF reader and familiar with all the various personalities there as well as the general community. I’m not saying, “How dare he be part of such a shit site!?” So far as news content and operation is concerned (the community’s another story), Gematsu is NOT a shit site, so most of the time there’s no reason to bring NeoGAF into it. The point is the NeoGAF element explains directly and microcosmically how even a site like Gematsu could possibly be weak to sensationalizing nonsense now and again.

                    Yu’s move is pretty significant because…

                    I cannot stress this question enough: Why is her MOVE more newsworthy than any of her actual accomplishments? Because that’s what every outlet and community that made news of this, including Gematsu, is essentially saying by reporting on it when they hadn’t ever previously known the person to exist.

                    Also, I don’t give a shit what NeoGAF is “all about”, then or now. Irrespective of which way it just so happens to break at a certain time, stupidity is stupidity.

                    • MogCakes

                      Her move is more newsworthy because it’s recent and it actually highlights and brings her achievements into the public eye whereas she wasn’t that known before. Your bias against NeoGAF says a lot.

                    • $18114340

                      NeoGAF is not the source. They did not create this information, but they did take the information and interpret and disseminate it in a specific way. Go back further and think critically about the trail.

                    • MogCakes

                      There was no ‘specific way’ that GAF disseminated it. Yu’s quote is her own, should that have been omitted?

                    • $18114340

                      Yes, there was. the “story” originated from a Microsoft vs. Sony angle on GAF (though the information did not), and of course this is represented in the way that outlets reported on the story as well, since these stories use GAF as their source.

                      Again, the “story” is not about Yu, it’s about Microsoft vs. Sony. That is not the natural state of the information of Yu’s departure, it is the result of the way in which GAF disseminated the story.

                    • MogCakes

                      BS. The thread on GAF has a heated debate between Sony fanboys, MS fanboys, and more level headed posters. The opening post of that thread does exactly what Gematsu does here, report what happened. There is no collective narrative that GAF has created for Yu’s career move.

                    • $18114340

                      Not BS. The heated debate is a result of the information that the thread reported on and how it was reported (the context). Not directly and deterministically, but to imply that the “reporting” was completely neutral is naive and misses the point I’m trying to make completely.

                    • MogCakes

                      It doesn’t miss the point because the point you’re making is BS. In both the GAF thread and here the info was reported exactly as is. To state that the circumstances automatically makes it non-neutral is the BS.

                    • $18114340

                      And once again, you are missing the point, for the last time. I’ve explained to you why I believe there is no such thing as “reporting exactly as is”, and you have nothing beyond subjectivity to support your dissent, so there is no further course from here. I’m done.

                    • MogCakes

                      I’ve explained to you that there is such a thing and why I believe so, but you’ve also just dismissed them. I already knew we were at an impasse, I said so didn’t I? You chose to try and blame that impasse on me. Your argument for there being no such thing as just reporting the facts is as much subject to subjectivity as my own. That is to say, my argument is not subjective.

                    • $18114340

                      I don’t recall your argument, you should have stated it again for posterity in the face of my own argument instead of trying to divert the conversation. Because I NEVER recall you making any sort of statement of WHY you believe I’m wrong, just that you do.

                      And I’m blaming the impasse on you because IT’S YOUR FAULT that we talked about censorship and other stupid shit for far longer longer than we should have. Because if I had just walked away at that point it would have looked like you were right about me advocating censorship, when you AREN’T and that’s just SHIT YOU MADE UP TO MAKE ME LOOK BAD.

                      From what I can remember the extent of your argument was merely denial of my own. And it’s fine for you to disagree but that doesn’t make you any more right and me any less wrong.

                    • MogCakes

                      I didn’t make it up, it is my interpretation of what your comment and BigDix’s (“consider the context”) implied. You later went on to state that you do think this article should have had information omitted. What, exactly, am I supposed to conclude from that? Later on, you then clarify that your problem with this article comes from ‘journalistic principle’, which from what you’ve typed about it tells me Sal should have dug deeper than simply reposting this from other sites. To which I don’t understand how that relates to omitting information or considering situational context by posting this article. Was Sal supposed to add a clause that he has no stake in either company? My argument is that this article is completely neutral, because Sal is reporting the facts as-is. Part of yours is that there is no such thing as being completely neutral because of the context in which something is posted. Your justification is flawed in that you cannot connect intent just with the posting of an article. What if Sal just wanted to inform people? To which you may argue, that he would be posting other news of dev activity, but then he may have just come across the NeoGAF thread and decided to post it because he found it interesting. I don’t know how Sal operates so I can’t speak for how he chooses what to post or not to post – and neither can you.

                    • $18114340

                      “Your interpretation” is you making things up. I NEVER said that I was advocating censorship; you just drew that conclusion completely on your own and ran with it like it was objective truth. When it wasn’t.

                      I don’t clarify that my problem with the article comes from journalistic principle “later on”, that’s the crux of my argument FROM THE VERY BEGINNING. Go back to my very first post. What do you see? You SHOULD see me sarcastically remarking that the article seems to be the result of some PR department somewhere making a press release (rather than actual journalism).

                      You later went on to state that you do think this article should have had information omitted. What, exactly, am I supposed to conclude from that?

                      You’re NOT supposed to automatically conclude that I was saying the article should not have been posted at all. It means what it means and you were reading far too deep into it just so you could go off on a tangent.

                      which from what you’ve typed about it tells me Sal should have dug deeper than simply reposting this from other sites.

                      No, not that Sal should have “dug deeper”, just that he SHOULDN’T have just shat out the exact same post as a million other sites. Because that’s not journalism.

                      To which I don’t understand how that relates to omitting information or considering situational context by posting this article. Was Sal supposed to add a clause that he has no stake in either company?

                      There you go again, trying to draw these wild conclusions about what I meant and attempting to make me look foolish. I see right through you.

                      Really? You don’t see how “considering the context” would lead to Sal maybe saying to himself, “hm, maybe this article doesn’t need all this extraneous information, and maybe I should just post about what actually happened.” Because the context of the article is that Yu moved, and she previously worked on Halo 4. That’s really it. If you want to include her dumb tweets about how much she loves the PS4 and is glad to be ditching Windows 8, fine, but why would that be important beyond serving sensationalism? Who the fuck cares how much she loves the PS4? Why would that matter to ANYONE, even anybody interested in what Yu can bring to the table for Sony? It’s not actually valuable information, it’s gossip.

                      Your justification is flawed in that you cannot connect intent just with the posting of an article. What if Sal just wanted to inform people?

                      Except that my justification is NOT flawed because as I’ve explained, everything is done with intent. Sal posting one article as opposed to another is demonstration of his intent that one piece of news is more important than another.

                      We went over this already and you chose to completely disregard my rationale on the basis that you don’t agree and therefore it’s flawed. You provide no logical basis or evidence to back up your disagreement, I’m just supposed to take for granted that I’m wrong because you say so.

                      If Sal *just* wanted to inform people he would have thrown up a link to GAF or Yu’s Twitter and be done with it. But he obviously didn’t do that.

                      And I’m not saying that he shouldn’t write posts beyond what information is provided (because I just KNOW that you’re going to fucking draw that stupid conclusion, called it), but I’m saying that IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE Sal was overreaching beyond the bounds of journalistic principle. And therefore I cannot in good faith conclude that he “just wanted to inform people”, because from my standpoint that’s not what he actually did.

                      To which you may argue, that he would be posting other news of dev activity, but then he may have just come across the NeoGAF thread and decided to post it because he found it interesting.

                      Except that NeoGAF is NOT a primary source in this case because the article is not about GAF, it’s a secondary source. And that means that Sal wasn’t actually doing any reporting, he was just passing along information from somewhere else. So at that point he should have stopped himself from including any sort of spin in the article because it’s beyond his responsibilities to write about the event from ANY angle, because that would be modifying the information of the source. And given that the source is not a direct, primary source, at that point it would be like playing a game of Telephone. Which kind of breaks journalistic standards. That’s the very definition of sensationalism.

                      It’s not like Sal got word of this event directly from Yu herself. It’s not like Sal saw Yu’s tweet and decided to extrapolate a MS vs. Sony bent from that, because that would be understandable (but still sensationalist and stupid). Sal probably saw something on NeoGAF and then he posted it with a bunch of other information that wasn’t immediately relevant or justified. And that’s what I’m getting at. MS vs. Sony is not relevant to the article beyond the fact that Yu moved from one to the other.

                      So why did Sal post Yu’s LinkedIn? Why did Sal post Yu’s “now-deleted tweets” if by deleting them she clearly didn’t want anybody else to see them by deleting them?

                      Now please stop trolling me, goddammit.

                    • MogCakes

                      We agree on one thing, Sal wasn’t doing any actual reporting (journalism) with this posting. It was passing along information. My interpretation is exactly that, it’s not me ‘making things up’, it’s what I conclude the intent of whatever phrase I see to mean. I also added the clause ‘IF’ that is your intention, then it is censorship. I’ve already explained this before, Sal does not always have to be in full journalist mode for every bit of information he comes across. For that matter, the inclusion of Yu’s tweet does not denote intent on his part. He posted what he saw, as is. You’re going to have to prove that this post wasn’t ‘immediately relevant or justified’.

                      I’m not trolling, but I sure as hell am not going to back down until you can prove that this post was sensationalist.

                    • $18114340

                      We agree on one thing, Sal wasn’t doing any actual reporting (journalism) with this posting. It was passing along information.

                      If you agree with me on that point then WHY ARE YOU TELLING ME I’M WRONG??

                      My interpretation is exactly that, it’s not me ‘making things up’, it’s what I conclude the intent of whatever phrase I see to mean. I also added the clause ‘IF’ that is your intention, then it is censorship.

                      Oh, this is rich.

                      IF you’re using the definition of censorship that you posted, THEN you’re still absolutely incorrect about what I was doing being censorship.

                      See what I did there? Just adding a clause doesn’t mean that you’re using it properly.

                      I’ve already explained this before, Sal does not always have to be in full journalist mode for every bit of information he comes across.

                      I said that I disagreed and explained why, you continued to deny my explanation, and we could have left it at that but then you made things personal. Clause or not.

                      For that matter, the inclusion of Yu’s tweet does not denote intent on his part. He posted what he saw, as is.

                      I said that I disagreed and explained why, you continued to deny my explanation, and we could have left it at that but then you made things personal. Clause or not.

                      You’re going to have to prove that this post wasn’t ‘immediately relevant or justified’.

                      I did. Then you ignored it, and you continue to ignore it.

                      I DID FUCKING PROVE IT. WHAT DO YOU THINK THIS ENTIRE ARGUMENT HAS BEEN ABOUT?

                      I’m not trolling, but I sure as hell am not going to back down until you can prove that this post was sensationalist.

                      Okay, you’re trolling. I fucking knew it.

                    • MogCakes

                      You didn’t prove it at all. Everything you’ve said in justification for your position is based on your personal feeling of it being ‘not news’ with no proof for it actually being ‘not news’, because you’re operating under your own assumptions of what is news and what isn’t.

                      http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/censorship

                      censorship
                      1. the act or practice of censoring.

                      Yeah, you bet it applies to my interpretation of where you were going with that ‘consider the context’ phrase. If you’re not advocating that Sal not post it, then my interpretation is wrong.

                      I’m not trolling. If you can’t explain the metric by which you determine whether something is or isn’t news, then your entire argument is baseless.

                    • $18114340

                      You didn’t prove it at all. Everything you’ve said in justification for your position is based on your personal feeling of it being ‘not news’ with no proof for it actually being ‘not news’, because you’re operating under your own assumptions of what is news and what isn’t.

                      THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS OBJECTIVITY! THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS NEUTRALITY!!

                      AARGGHHH

                      YOU CAN’T ASK ME TO PROVIDE A SUBJECTIVE ACCOUNT OF OBJECTIVITY AND THEN COMPLAIN THAT IT ISN’T OBJECTIVE ENOUGH FOR YOU. JESUS H. CHRIST.

                      FURTHERMORE, I TRIED PROVING THIS TO YOU THROUGH A LOGICAL EXAMPLE. THIS EQUALS THAT. THIS DOES NOT EQUAL THAT. IT DOESN’T GET ANY MORE FUCKING OBJECTIVE THAN THAT, FOLKS.

                      AND AGAIN YOU BRING UP THIS WHOLE CENSORSHIP THING.

                      “censorship is the act of censoring”

                      YEAH NO SHIT STEVEN FUCKING HAWKING

                      Yeah, you bet it applies to my interpretation of where you were going with that ‘consider the context’ phrase.

                      EXCEPT THAT YOU CLEARLY MISINTERPRETED THAT PHRASE, AND I TOLD YOU SO AND WHY, AND THEN YOU AGREED, AND NOW YOU’RE TELLING ME THAT YOU DISAGREE. MAKE UP YOUR FUCKING MIND.

                      If you can’t explain the metric by which you determine whether something is or isn’t news, then your entire argument is baseless.

                      THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I JUST DID.

                      You asked for my personal metric of what constitutes news.

                      I did. I provided examples. I even used a simple fucking logic equation.

                      Then you told me this wasn’t good enough because my personal metric was too personal.

                      YOU JUST COMPLETELY IGNORED ME AGAIN.

                    • MogCakes

                      I’m not telling you I disagree, I’m telling you I know what censorship means and that in the context I was using it, it applies. Of course my interpretation was wrong, but the way I used the word was not. And no I did not ask for your personal metric of what constitutes news, I asked for the factual objective metric by which you consider information news or not. Objectively, if information pertains to an event, then it is relevant. I don’t care if you personally think the article isn’t newsworthy or worth posting, I do care if you try to justify it as objectively not worth posting.

                    • BigDix

                      So instead of her work being enough to make her a known personality in the wider game industry, her moving to Naughty Dog is the only thing that could’ve rectified matters. Thanks for proving my point.

                      What says a lot to me is how you keep coming back to the word “bias”. It’s another apt demonstration that in spite of how long this has gone on, you literally have no idea what we’re talking about.

                    • MogCakes

                      More like it’s an apt description of your thoughts on NeoGAF. The reality of this industry is that a lot of people who have done amazing work never come to light, so when one does for whatever reason I think it’s pretty neat. I don’t read it as Company A vs Company B like you do.

                    • BigDix

                      Your naiveté has no bearing on the reality of the sordid and inextricable impetuses operative here.

                    • MogCakes

                      And yours has none on the viability of NeoGAF as a news aggregate and discussion forum.

        • DrForbidden

          I see the point you are trying to make. I’m also not trying to second guess Sal, but he’s only one guy, who may have just came across the news and posted it as there was nothing else really newsworthy at that moment. Sal doesn’t make the news, he just reports it.

          What you said does have the ring of truth to it, but what would be the alternative? Not reporting the news because it might be construed by the public as bias? Is that not indicative of bias itself (in a separate dimension, of course). Wouldn’t this be similar to demanding that news outlets stop reporting minor news about individuals of a particular race at a particular time because it can be misinterpreted as making them look bad? Should we then also argue for non-coverage of news on corruption investigations during election period which may make a political party look bad when it’s obvious that an opposing party stands to benefit from said news? It’s a tricky thing to decide on, and in the end, I think it comes down to individual interpretation of what is newsworthy and what is not.

          You are entirely correct about the unwarranted comments, though that’s not really Sal’s fault.

          • BigDix

            No one in this world is above being second-guessed; I know I’m not. Sal does a good job, and is, as far as I can tell, a decent guy. That doesn’t mean though that I won’t voice my feelings should something that perturbs me come along. I’m sure you’ve brought it up to friends/family, or have had it brought up to yourself, when there was a thought that someone was not handling something right or going about some matter the wrong way.

            Seeing how we are talking to each other, I believe it needs to go beyond individual interpretation; we’ve already given away that we’re inquisitive of other thought and wanting to reach greater understanding. So rather than go half-way just to ultimately say, “Yeah, well, opinions,” I want to say that it should come down to each individual situation. For instance… Aren’t you glad Sal doesn’t report on “professional gaming” shit? And glad he didn’t bother with that EA engineer calling the Wii U “crap” on twitter? And whatever melodrama of the day when developers are mudslinging, talking shit, and whispering rumors about former employers? You’re right that maybe there’s people who consider that sort of thing newsworthy. And those people can go to GameSpot or IGN if they want, because we know Gematsu generally doesn’t consider that sort of stuff newsworthy.

            See, Gematsu is already selective. ALL news media, gaming or otherwise, is selective and not ever, ever pumping into our heads things pulled from across the entire spectrum of possible knowledge as judged by an objective standard for knowledge worth knowing… That’s the point, right? There isn’t one. So different places are selective in different ways, and if we’re willing and seek to do so in good faith, we can take a look at things on a case-by-case basis.

            Thank you for understanding.

            • DrForbidden

              No problem, dude. I find your thoughts and insights interesting and enlightening. I absolutely agree with you that ALL news reporting is selective to a degree. I also think it’s perfectly awesome if you want to raise a point with Sal in an honest, respectable fashion. I don’t think Sal’s trying to push and agenda. He was probably just killing time until the Persona announcements. He’s only human, you know, and has lapses as well. ;)

    • http://twitter.com/kazumalynx Zero

      Fair enough comment. Your constructive criticism has been noted. Thanks for the feedback.

    • Dick Mountainjoy

      It’s a prolific programmer leaving Xbox’s A studio for Sony’s A Studio, It’s kind of a big deal, in the same way Camack leaving ID is.

      • BigDix

        She may even be a more skilled engineer than Carmack, but her work and career is not nearly as prolific as his in this field considering how massively influential Carmack’s work has been in building several pillars of the medium which remain today. No matter how skilled she is, she simply is not a known person outside of very particular circles of enthusiasm.

  • http://youtube.com/miyabigaming 武神水樹

    Love the article

  • Rogerrmark

    I wish more programmers looked like her.Because they surely don’t.

    • MogCakes

      Lots of talented, attractive people in programming, just they don’t get enough sleep to put their pretty face on ;P

  • Crossbones (Prodigy-X)

    Zero about to come in here and closed down the thread. I can feel it.

    • http://youtube.com/miyabigaming 武神水樹

      He should just ban you

      • Crossbones (Prodigy-X)

        What’s the point? I’m just going to comeback. He Can’t Kill Me!!!

        • http://youtube.com/miyabigaming 武神水樹

          Yes yes you win

        • MogCakes

          If you cause disruption every time you come back then he’ll kill you multiple times :p though I’m not sure what you’ve done that people want you banned.

  • DaWhiteBrotha

    If 343 Industries is as horrible, crappy, worthless, and poorly run as their Halo forums, i do not blame her leaving that dump one bit. Treat people and fans like garbage on those forums.

    • KingKellogg The Waffle Haggler

      Its odd, I ADORED thebungie forums….343..i left

    • http://youtube.com/miyabigaming 武神水樹

      Programmers love ease of use, the PS4 offered that over the Xbox One

    • James Ellis

      That’s a pretty ridiculous thing to say. Making a AAA game requires serious collaboration and talent from both individuals like artists, programmers, QA etc to a well structured, equally talented management & direction.

      There is absolutely no way that 343 is ‘horrible, crappy and worthless’. If you had any experience working in the real world you’d know this.

      Forums are an entirely different beast, some companies just don’t care about them as much as others and frankly who can blame them, considering halo’s demographic and commercial success I’m guessing those forums are a hellish toxic mess full of people who call the developers horrible, crappy and worthless on a regular basis for no good reason.

      I wouldn’t waste much of my companies resources policing them, I appreciate the few developers who do but I can’t blame those who don’t, its the equivalent of pushing sand uphill.

  • http://twitter.com/kazumalynx Zero

    Can we please stop the flame war stuff? I’d really appreciate it. Also, please try and stay on topic and be civil. Thanks.

    • Bugdiecat

      don’t know why you can’t do your ****** job and mod this thread.

      • http://twitter.com/kazumalynx Zero

        I’m allowing this comment just to respond.

        First things first. I’m not auto blocking the comments you make. I want to make that clear.

        Someone flags them, or the Disqus system auto flags them for some reason.

        I read the other comments you made. I guess that was supposed to be feedback?

        I’ll just say this. I’m well aware and doing my best to keep an eye on all of the comments, along with the people posting them.

        If someone gets a comment removed, or is banned, etc. That decision falls upon the staff. Thanks for understanding.

        • Crossbones (Prodigy-X)

          See this is what I’m talking about. He trolls in the Xbox Article yesterday, he trolls in this article today, and the guy is constantly arguing and picking fights with people.

        • Luna Kazemaru

          Dude just ban him I don’t even know why you keep giving him a chance because clearly he doesn’t know when to shut up or stop it with this keyboard warrior acting of his. He is doing this clearly to upset people and troll them which he said himself clearly he wants no civil conversation even if you give that to them he lashes out like a baby.

          I know you are trying to be nice and all and wanna defuse things without the hammer but this is on of those times.

          • https://www.youtube.com/user/GamingHeroTetsuya TetsuyaHikari

            Yeah, Zero is generally a pretty understanding guy, but after giving someone so much rope and they still refuse to climb out of the well, I’d say just leave them there.

            He has a lot more patience and tolerance than I do though, that’s for sure.

        • Sevyne

          I know a lot of us can stir up a lot of trouble around here, but why you have let this Magolichi person continue on really confuses me. It’s as clear as day from his entire post history here that he wants to be disruptive, offensive, and just generally harmful to the community for no reason at all.

          If these are the kind of folks I have to look forward to here and they get away with it, then I want nothing to do with this place myself. Expect many others to feel the same way if it keeps up. Allowing it to happen is just the same as spitting in everyone else’s faces who have been moderated for much MUCH less and actually having real debates.

          • http://twitter.com/kazumalynx Zero

            @ValkyriaXEdge:disqus @TetsuyaHikari:disqus @prodigy_x:disqus @sevyne:disqus It’s being taken care of. I appreciate the feedback.

            • Sevyne

              Btw, sorry if I seemed a little on edge in the last post. Just frustrating seeing the guy in every article just hardcore trolling. Even mouthing off at both you and Sal for trying to calm him down.

      • https://www.youtube.com/user/GamingHeroTetsuya TetsuyaHikari

        I’m honestly surprised they even let you talk to them in that manner. If I was a mod, you would have got your ass sacked the first time you ever took that tone with me. Talk about being disrespectful.

        Sheesh.

        • Impressionnant

          Mods shouldn’t get a free pass. Either you ban all insults or none.

          • DrForbidden

            Not all insults should result in a ban, IMO. It’s only when certain individuals demonstrate repeated attempts at trolling, flamebaiting, and being generally uncivil that bans should be enforced.

            • https://www.youtube.com/user/GamingHeroTetsuya TetsuyaHikari

              ^ this guy gets it

              I wasn’t talking about simply banning just because of an insult, but banning due to an obvious troll attempt, as well as flamebaiting. You can tell when someone is willing to be civil and when they’re just a keyboard warrior that couldn’t care less about who they are addressing.

      • Crossbones (Prodigy-X)

        You have no respect for anybody but yourself. You disrespectful troll.

        • https://www.youtube.com/user/GamingHeroTetsuya TetsuyaHikari

          If he had any respect for himself, he’d know better.

      • Budgiecat

        Hey Fool!…..I said hey fool! Leave Zero alone! ‘Fore I whoop your ass with a guitar!

        http://charlesfighttime.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/anderson-silva-guitar-hero-fighter.gif

  • Elvick

    A very talented person going to work at one of the best developers in the world?

    Color me excited.

  • ayb_91

    Wow. Could someone just block that magolichi thing? He is so well behaved. Lol

  • miyamoto

    “I am loving PS4 graphics coding. No more Windows 8 for me. So happy!”

    First Bungie
    Now her.
    awesomeness!
    WoW Uncharted Lighting!

    Naughty Dog is the best and the best is going to get better!
    OPEN GL FTW!

  • 罪罰

    “No more Windows 8 for me. So happy!” hehe.

  • http://twitter.com/GNPixie Lynx

    Good for her.

    I’d be really interested to see where this leads.

  • AdamBoy64

    That’s great.

    I hope she likes her new workplace, and there are happy and fufilling times ahead for her there.

  • http://www.hush404.com hush404

    Honestly first time I’ve heard of her, but her track record seems solid. Hope she does wonderful things for ND :)

  • Karl Josef

    WOA O_O she really is a mamaw

  • $18114340

    welp, just saw this news pop up on Eurogamer, reported in pretty much the exact same manner… of course, there’s a shoe-in mention of Uncharted for PS4. Have yet to see if this news appears on sites like Gamasutra and GamesIndustry.

    EDIT: Aaaand, there it is. On both sites. Bah humbug.

    People are talking about her work for NASA, her having gotten a national award from the US department of energy… no citations, of course, and it’s not as if she’d been widely reported on before this point. I guess being popular on GAF means you’ve made it these days.

  • Crossbones (Prodigy-X)

    What are you talking about? I said good job for both Sony and M$ in that Xbox Article.

  • $30632660

    The article was about Xbox point blank period and had nothing to do with Sony.

  • ayb_91

    You are the most moronic person on Earth.

    Congratulations.