DualShock Nexus: David Jaffe recently took to Twitter to voice his concerns over an article that called him a "Sell-out" for allowing Twisted Metal to have an Online Pass.
":Fucking stupid, poorly educated write- dude should be ashamed of himself for sucking so much at his job." Gotta love Jaffe
buying this first day thank you sony for supporting the core fans that made you who you are today with playstation. i dont care if this and every game in the future has online pass because if i want a game ill buy it. im a tech fanatic and i want next gen games to look amazing graphically and increase all techs in game. game development will be increasing by millions so i want the devs and companies to make as much money as possible.
me too, ah the nostalgia of drinking a beer after a hard days work, having the wife gon (atleast for a while) and playing twisted metal black. this game bring alot back.
As am I Jaffe is responding to how writers are taking his quotes and things he says out of context. He had said it many times before that he doesn't want an online pass but it's up to Sony since they are funding his game. The site that called him a sell-out. Pretty sure Jaffe is referring to this article: hp://gametaffy.com/2012/01/29 /david-jaffe-sold-out/ Broke the link so if you want to see it fix it yourself, no need to send them accidental hits though. He has explained that he doesn't support online pass because he wants Twisted metal to be treated as a new IP. New IP need to gain a fanbase, online pass discourage that since when you buy used your just playing half the game, which isn't what Twisted metal is about.
^ Nitro I went to the site but my adblock is running The website knows that Jaffe never promised that TM wouldn't online pass-- they themselves quote Jaffe for saying "It's not my call" in a separate article entitled "Jaffe for President!" In the same article that they praise Jaffe, they knowingly admit that the call is Sony's and he has no choice in it Calling HIM a sellout is ironic, they make him sound like he is going back on his word, when in reality Jaffe has always made it clear that it wasn't his call.
yep most def talking about these guys https://twitter.com/#!/davi...
I don't think Jaffe is a sell-out, but Colwyn seems to be working very hard for that PR check.
Leave it to the bitter, jaded internet trolls who cowardly trash people behind their keyboards and screens. This goes to all of you "game journalists" who give game journalism the trashy name that it has - GET A LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!!
@gaming 101 ...are you a fan of irony?
Twisted Metal is day one for me for sure but honestly, the 44 people that agreed with Colwyn really need to get their heads checked. He has completely missed the point and his fanboyism is severe to the point of complete ridicule. Shame on you guys!!! You know who you are.
i don't like online passes. I buy new all the time, and believe the devs deserve the money. I however lend my games to friends when I'm done with them and online passes ruin it for them cause they can't go online. If someone's opinion/experience on a game is solely on the single player which he finished already. Its doubtful they will get the game for multiplayer.
"If the wanna be journalist had actually done their job " Thats all that need to be said. 1 of the main reasons im barely on this site anymore.Anybody with spare time and a computer can create an article and call themselves journalist and post their crap on this site.
I'm a fan, Jaffe, but I'm not buying a game with a pass.
OK, I'm calling you out then. Why? Answer that so I can see what kind of logic is behind this "stand" you're taking. WHat exactly are you trying to jump on a bandwagon and rebel against? Because as I see it online passes are only good for the gaming industry and gamers. They don't affect you or me negatively in any way, unless you feel you saving $5 off retail is more important than game developers getting paid for their work. As long as you buy games new, you aren't affected in ANY way. Even if you wait for the retail price to drop to $20, you're still getting that online pass in the box because you bought at retail, ensuring the people that brought their games into being, get a piece of that money you paid for said game. ANd also ensuring more games get made. And for the people who after I explained to them that they aren't negatively affected by online passes, in fact it benefits them, realise they have no argument there, they go on to try and say "well, it's bad for rentals and letting friends borrow games"............*buuuzz zzzz* WRONG!!!! Online passes have trial periods, usually 3 days, sometimes a week for rentals and borrowings. So........ any other reasons people care to make up to make online passes seems bad for gamers? I'm listening. Because I have yet to hear any logic on the internet that makes me think online passes are anything but good for the gaming industry and gamers alike.
1) It makes my purchase more inconvenient. I want to use MY COPY of MY $60 game on ANY system I choose without going through several extra steps or being limited to a number of systems. Harming MY experience when I pay such a premium is not justified to stop a few used copies. It's like worrying that VHS piracy in Bangbok is going to destroy your DVD company back in the states.....those people were NEVER going to buy a new DVD anyway. 2) Our $60+ (depending on region) should go TOWARDS that seat in the online servers. A used copy does NOT disturb servers and make them more expensive to maintain as devs/pubs always try to suggest; it's still ONE person on the servers per copy. 3) It cheapens my purchase. I can't use it one too many different systems (some of us still play AT friend's/family's homes), my copy is worth even less as a used game, and renting (something the renters DO pay extra for the right to do) becomes worthless in this online-focused generation. 4) The online portion is clearly becoming the dominant in so many games these days, so why is the online portion propagated as a treat? An inconvenience to publishers? An added expense? A side note that requires a code "worth" $10? ...Would I pay $50 for that crappy campaign in Battlefield 3? Heck no. I would pay $50 for the multiplayer, but apparently, it's just a $10 sideshow. But I pay $60 anyway. In a nutshell..... Unnecessary inconvenience (SOME customers don't put up with poor treatment), assertions that used copies harm servers is a lark, my copy becomes worthless and I still pay the same amount, and it represents a serious contradiction in multiplayer worth and what I pay. I don't give a crap if some kid who could never afford a new copy refills a seat on the online servers with a used copy. Publishers can't own the same copy of a game twice.
Larry, it's the publishers who benefit most from online passes, not the developers. Go ahead and fall for their sob stories about not having profited enough already. It's a disgusting system that we can all thank EA for.
I don't really care either way but, the reason these passes are made is to stop used sells. Think of it like this. If you buy a book, a dvd movie or even a car. If you decide to sell these down the road or even trade them does that mean the manufacturers have a right to make those products less functional? For instance you buy a blu-ray movie then sell it. You bought it so it's yours to sell and trade however you want. In this setup the special features and online experience is reserved only for the original owners. The product was already bought for full price. The money was already made. The developers didn't lose a penny on the product The developers think they should get paid every time someone experiences their product even if was already paid for once. To help make this a reality they give incentives to original owners. This is exactly why online passes are made. Its an incentive to make people buy new so the developer sells more new copies and more profit. It's all about making more first time sells. I don't think this will work down the road when used sellers get smart. You see they can drastically drop the used prices. This would make the online passes + used copies significantly less then new copies. I assume this would cause the used market to grow. In his case it wasn't his call or so he says.
"The product was already bought for full price. The money was already made. The developers didn't lose a penny on the product" If one person bought a game, made a copies, and then gave copies to 300,000 friends it's all good right? The money was already made, yes? This is how PC games have been for ages. You can't compare video games to cars and other physical merchandise. You may trade your car with a guy/gal, but you won't be making copies of it and giving it to all your friends. You won't be lending your car to more than a select few people. You won't make copies of your new jeans to distribute freely. Video games (and all other digital media for that matter) are easily duplicated in their original form and given away for nothing at all. You didn't purchase the right to give away copies of the game. Online passes weren't made to force people to buy new, full price copies of the game. PC games have online passes. It basically ended the used PC game market. However, no one is forced to buy PC games for $60. Every PC game made these days ends up on sale within a few months of release. The developers and publishers know that everyone can't spend $50 on every game. They also know that they don't want people making money off of their work. Notice how there is no legal action being taken against developers/publishers right now? What they're doing is perfectly legal and makes complete sense.
You're not a fan, if you were a fan nothing would stop you to buy Twisted Metal new. Stop being a cheapazz and stop pretending to be a fan, how the FK are u a fan if u buy this game 2nd hand somewhere down the road lmao?
I don't like online passes because they kill off the lifespan of a lot of good games online. Try playing DeadSpace 2 online now... nobody about (it was fairly average) but had those second hand sales allowed people to play online, there would still be a few people logging on and giving it a go... which would make it more enjoyable for me, who did pay for it new. Online passes are a scam, they were never needed previously to sell games.... All they are is a detriment to the players.
@Biggest: Your argument would only hold weight if A)Anyone was talking about piracy, and B)The publishers and developers largest concern was piracy. Every publisher and developer in support of online passes has made it VERY clear that it's because of the used game market, not because of piracy. There is nothing stopping piracy and the developers and publishers know this, but the used game market is an easier target for them. And the way they are going about this is literally to get more money off the same copy of a game, not combating the copying and free distribution of pirated games. Plus, the PC market is hardly a good example for you to use since there are all manner of ways around anything PC devs try to put in place to curb anyone from piracy or access to online portions of games. Pure and simple, it's about greed. As SilentNegotiator said, there are no new members on the server, no additional costs incurred, so where is the justification that a used game takes money away? It doesn't. At the worst it prevents new money from coming in but it is no worse than the gamble every dev takes that someone may or may not buy the game in the first place. Used or not. Take iTunes for example. You buy a song off their for .99 and the mp3 is on your PC. Can Apple charge you another .99 for every single time you copy that song onto any multimedia product you have and for sending it to friends? Hell no they can't. Nothing is stopping you from doing it, they know it, but they can't get away with charging you a fee if you copy it. They can't deny you access to the last 30 seconds of the track. So what's the difference? Nothing. It's greed.
@ kurt russel "Try playing DeadSpace 2 online now... nobody about (it was fairly average) but had those second hand sales allowed people to play online, there would still be a few people logging on and giving it a go... which would make it more enjoyable for me, who did pay for it new. " This really points out the exact spot where that online pass money is geared towards. THE PROLONGED NEED FOR SERVERS. Buy new and play all you want. Buy used and you don't deserve to stress the servers without a level cap or something. To me this is common sense and it was bound to happen since online is so effing big these days.
Insomnium 2, That rationale makes no sense. Whether online passes are good for the consumers, or the publishers, or not is beside the point. The point is I HAVE A RIGHT TO SELL MY PROPERTY TO WHOMEVER I CHOSE. When I buy a game its mine. I can do what I want with it. I can sell it, I can give it to you. I can break it, melt it, play frisbee with, or whatever else I can think of. When a publisher tells me that I can't sell my license to play my game online, then he is taking something from me. I bought the game; I bought the license, so it's my right to sell it if I want to. They should give me my property.
All I have to say is, all you online pass supporters enjoy this: "Online Passes, which started as a way to pay for continuing online operating costs, are now used to lock used players out of small portions of the single-player game. As time goes on, what's to stop publishers from expanding the concept further, locking ever larger portions of a game behind a downloadable pass? Will we soon see a game that prevents used purchasers from finishing the single-player quest unless they pay to download a required mission? Where's the cut-off?" http://arstechnica.com/gami... I'm sure there will be more to come!
I'd agree with you but having a voice and belief on here is dangerous if you want bubbles >.>
@Darrius Cole It's their servers. You don't buy a piece of those servers. All you buy is a license to use those servers. You still DO have the option to sell your games and even break them if you want to. The resale value just is not as big anymore. That's it. They are NOT stopping you are they? I really do NOT get what's the reason for all this foaming...
my ? is , if they sre chargeing $10 for online ,will they sell me the game for $10 cheaper if i dont care for online, hell if its like that then sell 2 versions at launch $59.99 for 1 with online and $49.99 for offline version . if they want to be like that then cut the cost of offline players .
did any body catch jaffe going off on racists they talk about it on this vid,.... i love how jaffe just comes out guns blazing when idiots talk shit
Jaffe is ABSOLUTELY RIGHT to be angry. Too many gaming "journalists" are pimply faced losers who are nothing more than crappy bloggers with a dog-eared thesaurus. If you're gonna pretend to be a journalist, GET YOUR SH** STRAIGHT. I can't wait for one of these toolbags to get sued for defamation. Journalism comes with responsibility...
@ thedude44 Lmao... priceless comment of the day.. .____........___...____ |____||......||.......____|| ||.........___||.......____||
your ps3 sig is slightly off, halfway
Thank you kind sir... I will indeed try to fix it .____........___...____ .____||......||.......____|| ||.........___||.......____||
It's only the Hipsters who care.....
So Jaffe is in favor of Online Passes. Ha, now he's even a bigger asshole.
This is their response "After publishing an admittedly poorly-titled editorial about David Jaffe and listening to the anger of many Twisted Metal fans, I would like to apologize for comments made about David Jaffe, Sony, and Twisted Metal. GameTaffy.com is strongly opposed to Online Passes in any shape or form, as they are a way to fight piracy by attacking those who are not pirates. At the writing of the article, my intention was to draw attention to another situation where gamers are punished for trying to save money. However, calling David Jaffe a sell-out creator was wrong. As a fan of God of War, I know the creative genius of Jaffe. His job is to make games that are awesome and enjoyable. Sony’s job is to be sure to follow their policy for any game they publish. If Sony wants an Online Pass, they are the wrongdoers, not Jaffe. I never contacted Jaffe before writing and publishing my editorial. In the future, I will contact the subject of the author to get all sides of a story and avoid opinionated claims. GameTaffy.com firmly stands behind its opinion that Online Passes are criminal and will continue to report and encourage discussion about this issue. However, the Online Pass is something created by and for the benefit of publishers. Calling developers sell outs for following orders is wrong, and I accept that. We hope that Jaffe and his fans will forgive us, and I hope that we can get past this issue in the future." Jaffe's response "F*ck you, no I won't do an interview to 'clear things up and set the record strait'.Record IS very clear:UR a dick." Man... I love Jaffe
Sell out? Jaffe didn't want online passes in the first place and even fought to take them off of the game. It's Sony who forced it, not Jaffe. Smh.
It's kind of sad someone would say that because sell outs don't spend their time shooting the shit with common gamers and having in depth conversations with them. Jaffe's a real stand up guy.
damn skippy treezy.
Here I thought the article was going to talk about how he went back to Twisted Metal after failing with Calling All Cars and getting away from big titles like God Of War. David Jaffe doesn't call the shots, he basically works for Sony.
Nicely said-- and this works for probably all developers-- they aren't in total control of their games because publishers push BS like "widening the target audience" or shoving online passes and withholding content to squeeze out more dollars. They control when the game comes out, how much time it gets, and developers work within the framework. I feel sorry for some of them who are forced to put in things like 3D or work on a tacked on multiplayer that will help "widen the audience" when what they may want to do is put all the effort into single player instead Jaffe is not a hypocrite for expressing how he feels and then having his product contradict that-- it has always been known that he is not in total control and must comply with what the company wants. I feel sorry for developers because they make games and have a vision in mind, and I don't think some of them want to do what they do, but I question how much a publisher pulls the leash and paves the path for how a game turns out. We tend to blame developers most of the time, but it's important to keep in mind that they aren't entirely free to do or completely responsible, they are just the face we associate and direct frustration to.
its usually the publishers fault. what is? everything.
Welcome to the sad state of gaming journalism, Jaffe. A lot of them doesn't do proper research anymore. Kudos to the rest that do. @Baka-akaB (below) Hahaha nice one bro~ XD
well the cynic in me says they never did proper research . But i'll reach a compromise and say that they do even less or dont even bother pretending to be journalists anymore :p
Not only don't they do proper research, they never had a proper education or any education probably. Gaming journalism = children writing things about games when they get bored of playing WoW.
anyone calling him a sell-out for the online pass should really get a job... might be that they would learn that not everything you want can be done, especially if you want to keep working
What a bunch of dumbasses. The dude fought against the online pass.
Its not his fault he just makes the game Sony has final say over the game and they chose the online pass. In my eyes online pass or no online pass still gonna buy the game and enjoy it.
I don't see how you can blame him for this, just as I doubt Naughty Dog were the ones that wanted the online pass for Uncharted 3.
Here's the retarded article: http://gametaffy.com/2012/0...
jaffe is the man, i'm picking up TM day 1. fuck the haterz
that fucking stupid - poorly educated write dude is messing with the wrong guy , lets see what he comes up with now
LOL this guy is awesome. He's right though and accusing him of being a sellout because of that is just straight up ignorant. Seems to me like that journalist didn't have anything to write about so they dug something out of their ass and plastered it on paper.
He turned 2012's "Twisted Metal" into a politically correct version of Twisted Metal. He made Mr. Grimm some mortal black Voodoo Witch Doctor and he changed the name of "Kamikaze" to "Spectre" (even though the Kamikaze car's look will stay the same). He did it to try and not offend anyone. Kamikaze's car had a picture of the rising sun on it which is why he had the name change. He also wanted a recognizable black person for the story mode that was a popular character so instead of using someone like Thumper he chose to butcher Mr. Grimms character instead. I won't even bother renting this garbage. The PS1 games are still better than this shit.
You again? You keep spouting this bullshit in every TM article and you always get bombarded with disagrees and 0 agrees. Spectre is not in the game, he's still called Kamikaze. Get your facts straight. I'm glad you're not buying it because I don't want to play online with people like you.
I don't think there is anything politically correct about this game lol
You are officially irrelevant now, Ignored.
Um, if you listened to his video post a few days ago, you would have heard that his name is actually "Kamikaze" in the game. Good, don't buy it. I honestly wouldn't want to play with someone with your attitude anyway. Go away.
Umm. Okay so I think kamikazee was changed to spectre at least thats what i read on MP1st. That has nothing to do with race it has to do with WHY WAS THERE NO SPECTRE this would have been the first TM without him. Let me guess you are of color and think the whole world against you or that there is always some underlying Racial reason for everything. Grow up stop spreading your hate and maybe others will stop catching it.
What were they thinking calling David Jaffe a sellout? He's one of the last people in this industry who deserves to be called a sellout.
you could imagine the conversations going on at that loser website staff. "awesome we got attention from a well respected industry vet, any hits are good hits, we're gonna be a popular site now."
He's talking a bit too much these days... Reminds me of Carmack..
Difference is: Jaffe isn't full of himself and riding on the success of previous games. Jaffe's actually a down-to-earth dude, and it's VERY obvious he cares a lot about what fans of his games think, and about the games, themselves. Carmack sometimes just sounds like he likes hearing himself talk.
I didn't mean it as an insult thing. I'm just stating that he's shown up a lot in these articles these days like Carmack was.
Well the thing with Carmack was, it's not like he was just going out looking for interviews actively. People kept going to him, and he just spoke his mind about things. I also dunno why everyone put 100% of the blame on HIM, he's just a programmer, id is a collective team, not just Carmack.
'Difference is: Jaffe isn't full of himself and riding on the success of previous games.' May not be full of himself but he is very opinionated and he is in fact riding on the success of previous games but then so do most development studios. Difference being that Carmack is a clever f*cker and mostly lets his technology speak for him, he helped revolutionise the FPS years ago so with Carmack its more to do with introducing technologies rather than stroking out a new IP.
He's not talking too much, his game is right around the corner, its normal for him to talk about it and to his fans.
If I ever decide to sell the game I won't be able to get as much out of it.
Don't fuck with Jaffe
"David Jaffe Responds to Being Called a Hobbit" Jokes aside, Jaffe is a drama queen.