We are not going to post this on N4G because we don’t want people to call this flamebait, so we are linking to it from the original post space. Yesterday we thought it would be an interesting experiment to post an article on N4G that really wasn’t that pertinent and that contained both accurate and inaccurate information. The article was about downloads pausing during gameplay which is true for games that have an online component, but not for all games. Then there were other things that were not true, such as there used to be the capability to download more than one thing at a time, that is not true. The bottom line is that we wanted to see a couple of things and we found those things out but boy was it rough.
Ok, back on point. We wanted to see if an article that was really not that big of news, even though downloads do pause during gameplay is true, would gain that much attention. Before we pulled the article this morning it was at 310 degrees. So people not only clicked it, they commented and then they made us wonder what makes them click and comment. Could it be to leave a comment simply stating that the article is not completely accurate or to bash the writer of the article and the people who might disagree on the board. Unfortunately, it was the latter. Even the comments left on our board were just down right mean I am talking brutal, its amazing the things people will say behind an online ID isn’t it?
Now we take what we do really seriously here at ZKG, but we wanted to know. This gets me to the meat of what we were looking for and that is to ask the question why does a lot of really well written stuff barely even make 20 degrees while someone posting something like “why ps3 sucks and xbox rules” which is clearly flamebait will get over 300 degrees fairly easily? It’s like with all the noise, the good stuff get squished out and lots of people never see it. I mean I don’t knock anyone for writing what they want, but we don’t do flamebait at ZKG. My question is not with the writer of articles though, its with the readers of them. Why do you even validate those types of articles when there is so much good stuff being written that deserves more attention?
Note: To our regular readers, sorry for the ruse :)