Weekend Confirmed 136 - Medal of Honor: Warfighter, Forza Horizon

By Andrew Yoon, Oct 26, 2012 11:00am PDT

Host Garnett Lee is back this week, with some disappointing revelations about Forza Horizon. But before that, Jeff Cannata "turns a corner" on the Wii U, talking up the possibilities of Nintendo TVii. Andrew Yoon rants about Medal of Honor: Warfighter, while special guest Andrea Rene gets passionate in this week's Tailgate.

Weekend Confirmed Ep. 136: 10/26/2012

Subscription Links:

Here's a handy pop-up player so you can listen from right here on the page. Let us know how it works for you.

If you're viewing this in the GameFly application, you can play Weekend Confirmed Episode 136 directly.

Weekend Confirmed comes in four segments to make it easy to listen to in segments or all at once. Here's the timing for this week's episode:

    Show Breakdown:

    Round 1, Part 1 - 00:00:27 - 00:15:44

    Round 1, Part 2 - 00:16:12 - 00:29:53

    Whatcha Been Playin Part 1 - 00:30:42 - 01:01:41

    Whatcha Been Playin Part 2 - 01:02:47 - 01:31:45

    Listener Feedback/Front Page News - 01:32:15 - 02:03:55

    Tailgate - 02:04:31 - 02:14:24

Follow the Weekend Confirmed crew on Twitter, too!

Weekend Confirmed @WeekendConfirmd

Garnett Lee @GarnettLee

Jeff Cannata @jeffcannata

Andrew Yoon @scxzor

Andrea Rene @AndreaRene

Remember to join the Official Facebook Weekend Confirmed Page and add us to your Facebook routine. We'll be keeping you up with the latest on the show there as well.

Original music in the show by Del Rio. Get his latest Album, Club Tipsy on iTunes. Check out more, including the Super Mega Worm mix and other mash-ups on his ReverbNation page or Facebook page, and follow him on twitter @delriomusic.

Click here to comment...

Comments

  • On the subject of the PR-media editorial on Eurogamer, we used the image from that story as a starting off point for our discussion.

    The editorial subsequently caused even greater fallout as events unfolded over its core content about the participation by media members in a twitter contest to give away a PS3.

    That wasn't what we talked about, and I'm reluctant to get back into the subject this week though we can.

    But to those interested, if you have not already, read Robert Florence's follow up http://botherer.org/2012/10/26/guest-post-robert-florence-on-the-last-few-days/ on how things spiraled.

    Thread Truncated. Click to see all 3 replies.

    • I think you should, if nothing else but to clarify your own editorial stance when it comes to maintaining unbiased coverage.

      I think that most games writers who are not behind Robert have somewhat misunderstood this entire thing. This isn't about individual gaming journalists being on the take, its about an endemic issue in the games writer - PR relationship.

      Andrea said that it was silly that you should not have personal relationships with PR. I feel that it is clear that you should not, you should have a professional relationship with PR.


      As always, former CGW, GFW, 1UP editor, Shawn Elliot cuts right to the heart of the matter in two of his posts on neogaf.
      http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=43615161&postcount=2028
      "Corporations like Coca Cola spend $10 billion a year or more on advertising campaigns with messages that college undergrads -- here I'm speaking from experience as a former instructor -- unfailingly insist they're uniquely insusceptible to.

      Either these corporations are somehow recklessly burning revenue by the billions and somehow raking in unprecedented profit despite the sheer stupidity of their business practices or people are prone to maintain flattering though entirely unrealistic images of themselves. Unfortunately for us, replicated psychology experiments point to pervasive self-deception. Fortunately for us, while it's practically impossible for us to accurately monitor our own self-interest, we're marvelous at pointing it out in others. And this is the why the appearance of impropriety matters so much.

      Tomes of research on the topic are out there and anyone remotely interested in cognition will encounter the experiments again and again. For those unfamiliar with it I recommend starting here: http://www.amazon.com/Honest-Truth-D...ally+Ourselves"

      and
      http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=43641254&postcount=3019
      "It's interesting that your defense is to dismiss the notion that influence works in subtle ways that we aren't always aware of (as opposed to the popular notion of blatant bribery and "money hats") as generalization, and then use as your argument the assumption that any PR interaction at all would have to guarantee a good review if in fact the psychological research was right. That is gross generalization... or you just aren't getting the argument. I can't offer a crash course on the topic at the moment as I'm at work, so instead imagine it from the "appearance of impropriety" angle.

      You're publishing a review. Pretend you're willing to include a sidebar with the subhead "Things that can have no influence at all on my perspective." In this sidebar are photos of you sharing single malt Scotch and haute cuisine with PR people. There are photos of the array of tchotchkes you received at the assorted press events for the title that you attended. There are also photos taken from your night out with your hosts. Despite your confidence in you being the rare exception to rules about human behavior, how likely is your audience to come to the same conclusion?

      Apparently, judges' glucose levels affect their rulings: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/no...ons-of-judges/
      And yet you expect your audience to regard you as a Randian ubermensch rational above your biology. "