Unbiased? I'm afraid not... - Counter

It's all in the games

To determine whether or not everyone in the ring of console vide games is biased, we have to first look at the definition:

biased adj 1: favoring one person or side over another; "a biased account of the trial"; "a decision that was partial to the defendant" [syn: colored, one-sided, slanted] 2: excessively devoted to one faction [syn: one-sided]

I think that in relation to most arguments about bias in video games, we are arguing about the second definition (hence the bold text). Now, can you truly say that everyone is "excessively devoted" to one system or company? I think not. Case in point. My first system ever was a Sega master system (yes, I owned one), which I received as a Christmas present at the tender age of five. I played it and enjoyed it, however I soon wanted a NES. 2 years later, me wishes were answered, and a NES was hooked up to my TV. For the next few years I enjoyed my NES more then my master system; all the way until 1991, the year in which the Snes was launched. However, I did not buy a Snes based on my previous experience with Nintendo. I looked at the games, I rented the systems, and decided that a Genesis was a better bet. So I enjoyed my genesis for many years (I did eventually get a Snes too, but that was a few years later). Then came the dawn of the 32-bit era. Sony and Sega came up to bat, and again I threw out all preconceptions about the systems and looked at the facts. Come September, I had decided that a Playstation was a better choice.

What's my point you ask? Well, the point is two fold. First, it is possible to buy a system with a clear mind. You can "switch sides" rather easily. We buy systems to play games, not to see a logo on the top of the unit. I will buy a Dreamcast because it has a very impressive line up of games, right now I am not convinced to buy a PS2, regardless of my pleasant experience with the PS, because I have yet to see any games for the system. My second point deals with cold, hard facts. IF everyone bought systems based on bias, the Genesis would have failed, due to the failure of the Master system, and the Playstation would have failed, due to the fact that Sony had never launched a system before. Obviously this didn't happen. But these systems didn't fail because casual gamers hopped on the boat later and they hadn't owned a previous system, you say? Well, look at the launch statistics. The Saturn had a poor launch, despite many Genesis fans, and the PS had a good launch, despite the fact that there was no previous Sony system. As you can see, the bottom line is games.

Does that mean a companies past has nothing to due with its future success? No, people will look into purchasing a system based on their past relationship with "X" company, but that won't be the deciding factor in any case. We all have biases when it comes to games, but not extreme ones that will drastically effect whether or not we purchase a certain system.

If you wish to submit an editorial of your own, or make a counterpoint of an editorial, please review the submissions page for guidelines.


Featured Content
Broken Age: Act II Review
Broken Age: Act II
Final Fantasy Type-0 HD PC Review
Final Fantasy Type-0 HD
PC Review
PAX Prime 2015: Eon Altar Hands-On Preview
PAX Prime 2015: Eon Altar
Hands-On Preview
PAX Prime 2015: Shadowrun: Hong Kong Hands-On Preview
PAX Prime 2015: Shadowrun: Hong Kong
Hands-On Preview
Random Encounter Episode 4-2
Retro Encounter 4-2
Before the Fall: Final Fantasy XIV OST Review
Before the Fall: Final Fantasy XIV OST
Epanalepsis Review
RSS Feeds & More
Complete Feed
Reviews Feed
Media Feed
Random Encounter
Random on iTunes
Rhythm Encounter
Rhythm on iTunes