"I quit. Seriously The you didn’t love the PS4 presentation so therefore you’re an asshole crowd make me hate that I wasted my time on a show"
"For the record, not that anyone will get it right, I think the PS4 looks awesome."
"And that a box that rad warranted a far more aspirational presentation. So shoot me for wanting more and not just cheerleading."
First of all, people saying that Garnett is an asshole for his opinion are jerks.
But second, I think that Garnett's outrage at people thinking that he had a negative impression of the PS4 is more than a little bit unfair. Yes, he had a few nice things to say about the hardware. He said that Cerny's involvement had him "optimistic" and that it was "juicy." After that, I would say that the show was dominated by some pretty harsh criticism.
This goes back to what I was saying about Jeff's Fire Emblem comments from the previous show. When you spend 90% of your time talking about things that are bad about something, people are going to get the impression that your overall impression was negative unless you make a serious effort to emphasize the contrary.
I listened to the show again just to make sure that my memory of it wasn't colored, but no - it was very negative. Basically, things that might have been positive either got glossed over and set aside or turned into speculation about how it probably wouldn't be executed well, and things that were negative were dwelt on and joked about at length.
For example, I get the impression that Garnett thought that the Infamous trailer was really good. But it wasn't discussed at all except to say that it was a mistake not to show it first.
So to Garnett: I like the show and I think that you are probably the best show host in the world of video game coverage. But the PS4 episode was overwhelmingly negative and you can't blame people for coming away with the impression that you had a negative impression of it. People react to the amount of time you spend saying negative vs. positive things.