Recent content by mattpeckham

Sorry, I meant, literally, that you're welcome to, not that you were. And I share your displeasure with the press. See my post here: http://blogs.pcworld.com/gameon/archives/005202.html And check the link at the top to the Gamasutra piece. I inspired that piece nearly a year ago, and...

Fair enough, but you got your coverage and you got your 10,000 words, and you're more than welcome to take shots at me, but I'm allowed my grousing too. I'm sure you're just fine, and I wouldn't call you "bad guys," and no doubt we'd have plenty to gab about (Fallout, etc.) over a beer. But...

Wait -- how does Russ Pitts and The Escapist come into this?

Now I'm trolling? What are you reading from, the Forums for Dummies playbook? ;)

Of course not, but that slippery slope's a non sequitur. They knew Bethesda didn't want them there, and they did it anyway. That's a problem, regardless of their otherwise terrific coverage. (Hello McFly, anyone getting that I dug their coverage?) Of course not, but if I know something...

Uhhhh... Okay... You can't be "deceitful" and not break the rules, okay? Sheesh. What is it with all the bizarre wriggling here? It's like watching O.J. Simpson try on a glove... Not to turn this into a referendum on Bethesda PR, but to put you on the spot, just what "practices" are you...

They're on, and I'm not sure what's up, because every time I post it assigns me a name that isn't mine. You should be able to post, it just may list you as anon. Opinion noted. "Of my ilk"? Who talks like that? Watch out, or "you'll rue the day" or something. ;) Jealousy, yes...

And if I was making "false, negative accusations about the characters of" whoever, then it would be slander. But since I'm not, it isn't. They admitted breaking the rules, not me. And I was expressing an opinion about their blow-by-blow direct-quote coverage. Your disagreement's noted...

No, no, no, I'm not taking issue with your fannish-ness. Go NMA, rah rah Fallout fans and all that. The only slander here's coming from across the aisle, sorry to say. There's nothing false in my post (I don't lay claim to anything as absolute fact). You're obviously welcome to disagree with...

Well there you go. And if I was just an NMA reader, I'd be pouncing too, because readers could frankly care less about anything as long as the info-IV's tapped to full.

You're the only one mentioning legality. Let's lose the semantic ambivalence. The book in this case was Bethesda's, not some imaginary lawyer's. Their rules, not yours or mine. Forums as a source for investigative journalism? There's never been a less credible source for anything in modern...

Right, but look BN, let's stop dancing around the core issue. I know its 2007 and go postmodernism and everyone's decided they get to apply their own personal interpretation of what "is" is, but in reality, by your own admission, you purposefully excluded your NMA creds because you knew you...

Oh come on now. You can't do everything "by the book" and be "deceitful" at the same time. :P Look, your preview was great. Personally and off the record, good for you. It's just that annoying little hangover everyone's blithely ignoring about how deception empowers the public relations cloud...