Over at the Game Developers Conference in San Francisco, a developer has confirmed that PlayStation 3 firmware v2.70 will be releasing this week, saying that developers have just gotten it in their hands yesterday.

“PS3 Firmware 2.70 definitely this week. Developers got it yesterday.”

Expect an announcement within the next few days.

Source

Great news, Sony fans. According to Kaz Hirai, President and CEO of Sony Computer Entertainment America*, Sony is officially leading the console market with the PS3, disregarding silly things like sales numbers and market share.

So how exactly is Sony “officially” leading? In an interview found in the latest issue of Official PlayStation Magazine, Kaz Hirai made the following statement:

“This is not meant in terms of numbers, or who’s got the biggest install base, or who’s selling most in any particular week or month, but I’d like to think that we continue official leadership in this industry.”

Okay… barring all of that, how do you discount the massive success of the Wii?

“It’s difficult to talk about Nintendo, because we don’t look at their console as being a competitor. They’re a different world, and we operate in our world – that’s the kind of way I look at things.”

And what about Microsoft? Are they not a competitor either?

“With the Xbox – again, I can’t come up with one word to fit. You need a word that describes something that lacks longevity.”

What? So basically, Kaz Hirai feels that Sony is leading the gaming industry because the consoles that are beating it don’t count. I suppose he’s right if you follow that logic (which fanboys always do), but I still think he’s a bit delusional. I guess we can’t expect the fanboys (not regular “fans”, you guys are alright) to live in the real world if the PlayStation boss doesn’t, so I blame Kaz for all this Internet hate and douchebaggery.

Oh, guess what else? I am the father of Jessica Alba’s baby. That paternity test saying I’m not? Doesn’t count. We totally had lots of sex and stuff.

*UPDATE: His official title (according to playstation.com) is President and Group Chief Operating Officer of Sony Computer Entertainment. My B, but even kotaku finds these titles confusing.

Many of us believed that the recent delay of Media Molecule’s LittleBigPlanet was meant to allow for a recall, reprinting, and redistribution of the game after what some deemed to be offensive lyrics were brought to the attention of Sony.

While this may still be the case, it is also possible that the move to recall the game was nothing more than Sony’s way to ensure the impending LBP patch would be approved and accessible on PSN before the exclusive PlayStation 3 title hit stores.

Assuming you are one of the foolish fortunate individuals who bid their bi-weekly paycheck on Ebay for a copy of Sackboy’s debut IP, you can log into PSN and download the 57MB patch right now. Everyone else will benefit from the automatic update on November 5th.

Source: Neogaff (via CVG)

[UPDATE] – After speaking with our own Patrick Steen, who is playing the US release of the game, we have confirmation that the patch currently only applies to the EU version and that a US patch has yet to be released.

[UPDATE 10/26/08] – The US patch is now available for download.

After reading about the suspiciously low Metacritic user score of 6.3 for Media Molecule’s LittleBigPlanet, I decided to dig into the story a little deeper. For those unfamiliar with the situation, allow me to fill you in.

Metacritic, who by and large is considered the main source for aggregated scoring on the web, offers two score flavors (one for critics and one for users). This is the case across most sites. The problem is, when you are considered the “go to” resource for pretty much anything, there’s a chance that people will make a big deal out of something on your site that they would normally overlook on another.

That said, this specific instance pertains to the scores currently presented on Metacritic for the LittleBigPlanet game. The first, a 9.5 at the time of this article, represents the aggregated score based on several well accepted gaming review sites such as GamePro, IGN, and EuroGamer. The second, more controversial score, is a 6.3, and is compiled via the average score given by a pool of 2,225 user votes.

Gaming news site N4G, which pulls related news from various websites around the web, features a blog post titled “Fanboys pull LittleBigPlanet’s Metacritic score down”, discussing this very topic. Reading some of the furious responses to the score piqued my interest, so I visited the Metacritic site to see first hand what all the fuss was about. Clicking on the “Read user comments” link near the overall user score brings you to the bottom of the page, where the following statement by Marc Doyle, the sites founder, awaits:

“My advice for our faithful users is to focus your attention on the Metascore for this game and not the thousands of user votes, most of which have been submitted before said users have played the game. This is a gaming community, and if people want to stuff the ballot box, there’s not much I can do at this point. When we upgrade the registration requirements for participation on the site in the near future, this type of thing won’t happen. We’ll post the full legitimate user reviews upon the game’s release. As always, thanks for using the site.”

This prompted me to contact Marc directly in order to get a more complete picture of the situation from his end. Specifically, I felt that gamers would want some clarity regarding the portion of his comment stating that most of the user reviews submitted for LBP were made “before said users [had] played the game.”

Firstly, I wanted to know if he would consider eliminating user reviews submitted before the full release of the game, i.e. reviews clearly submitted based on the open beta alone, or even worse, no experience with the game at all, to which he responded:

” … we won’t be clearing those old scores from LBP when it launches, but we will only post reviews from people who have clearly played the game. All the reviews from fanboys and haters who haven’t played it will just be left out. That is true for all products on Metacritic. Humans actually read all of those user reviews (so we can delete profanity, spoilers, etc.), and those humans are told not to post reviews from people who clearly haven’t played the game.”

He then added that the burden of proof they demand from users submitting reviews prior to a game’s release date is be much higher than those doing so after the fact.

Slightly confused, I asked Marc for some clarification as to how the game could have such a low score, if his team was manually looking over each user review submitted. He stated:

“All the [numeric] scores “count” in the overall user average and total votes tally, but we only post a subset of those as [written] user reviews.”

When talking about the future of the site, as well as other things they are doing to help eliminate this type of fanboy nonsense in the future, Marc had the following to say:

“There will be a Metacritic re-design in the future (can’t say exactly when), and as a part of that process, we’re going to beef up our user registration and community functions so that “stuffing the ballot box” won’t be nearly as easy.

The original idea behind allowing users to write user reviews (and vote on them) was to allow those people (like me) who see advanced screenings of movies and sometimes play games ahead of their true release date to write reviews and have them posted on Metcritic. That’s still the case now.

Over the years, people have, by and large, not exploited the fact that you can vote early. Only recently have people started voting en masse for (and against) games like they’ve done with LBP.

Metacritic’s primary “product” is the Metascore, which is the weighted average of scores from professional critics. We include user reviews for obvious reasons, but because that score can never be 100% reliable, it’s given secondary importance on the site. For example, you can’t sort or search by user scores for any products. That will likely change with the redesign.”

Marc obviously has a solid understanding of the space, its evolution, and the challenges that lie ahead. The fact of matter though, is that currently, anyone can visit Metacritic and leave an abnormally low user score, skewing the average, without necessarily saying anything of value at all. I asked him if this was something the site would be revisiting in the immediate future.

” … nothing should change in this regard until we do the redesign. That tally will remain a raw tally, and only the printed user reviews will be “vetted” as useful reviews from people that we think actually played the game … “

He closed the topic by adding that the specifics of “whatever [they] do with the voting system moving forward [have] yet to be established.”

With October 27th just around the corner, LittleBigPlanet is four LittleBigDays away from being officially released. So while the current 6.3 Metacritic user score has been getting most of the attention on the net, I (like Marc himself), kindly ask that you shift your focus to the 95 out of a 100 Metacritic score the game is receiving from the mainstream media. Everything else will sort itself out in due time.

Media Molecule’s LittleBigPlanet is proving that little is not only the new big (as the mini billboard shown above cleverly states), it’s also the new entrepreneurial cash cow.

While early copies of the game have been selling on Ebay for upwards of $150, the demand for everything Sackboy doesn’t end there. Miniature LittleBigPlanet billboards (which I must admit look pretty cool) are surfacing on Ebay with starting bids of around $35.

This is not good people. I’m afraid that the rush of attention may eventually overwhelm a young Sackboy, causing him to become emotionally withdrawn in his later years. Do you really want to see a reality TV show thirty years from now staring an overweight and drug addicted Sackman, sitting on a couch, sharing child star stories with Gary Coleman and Corey Haim? I didn’t think so.

Check out a few more of the LBP billboards after the jump.

LittleBigResistance: Delay of Sackboy

The recent controversy surrounding Sony’s decision to delay the release of LittleBigPlanet, over a Qur’an reference made in one of the tracks, has many gamers flexing their memory muscle in an attempt to illustrate a double standard.

The belief is that Sony’s 2006 decision to essentially ignore the Church of England’s request asking for the removal of the Manchester Cathedral from their Resistance: Fall of man game, paired with the company’s recent willingness to comply to the perceived wishes of a Muslim community, demonstrates favoritism.

Several prime examples appear as comments appended to Kotaku’s recent post regarding the recall. Here are excerpts from a few of my favorites:

“Where’s the balls you had when it came to standing up to the Church of England, Sony?? Fuck you and your double standard, you bastards.” - Lachoy

“Sony, clearly, not willing to lift a finger to defend Western values or preserve our sensibilities, but willing to bend over backward to appease Islamic twits. They take our market for granted.” - rateoforange

To all those bringing up the Church of Manchester incident as a valid analogy: where the fuck have you been for the past 15 years? Stop thinking in absolute terms: “Christians are OK with it, so Muslims should be too.” Yes, there is a double standard here, and no, it’s not the end of the world. - Antiterra

This got me thinking about the two scenarios from a pure business standpoint. Armed with only an opinion, my belief is that Sony isn’t demonstrating favoritism, rather they are making what they believe to be sound business decisions based on a bottom line mentality.

While opinions are nice, I realized that any level of convincing was going to require more than a hunch. I needed proof that the cost of a potential Cathedral replacement would drastically exceed those associated with the recent LittleBigPlanet delay.

Our own Dan Landis, who followed the 2006 Cathedral incident closer than I, was quick to point out one glaring difference: the Church’s complaint was brought to the attention of Sony after the game had already been released for several months. However, for the sake of illustrating my point, we’ll assume both concerns were voiced prior to each game’s release.

The first thing I wanted to figure out was how much it would cost for a team of developers, in terms of salary, to make a new level to replace the Cathedral, had Sony decided to pull it from the game. In order to do that, I needed a rough development time frame. The best answer I found appeared in a June 2006 GameSpot interview with Insomniac CEO, Ted Price.

GameSpot: How long has the game been in development?

Ted Price: We’ve been in production on Resistance: Fall of Man for several months now and were in preproduction for a long time before that. How’s that for a vague answer?

Alright Ted, I’ll go with it. Let’s assume “several months” adds up to six, and “a long time before that” represents about two years. Combine those numbers with the six months time separating the interview and the game’s release and you get three years.

Next, I needed to get some gaming related salary information. I came across a website which outlined ballpark salaries for the most common gaming industry positions utilizing data submitted via a Game Makers Salary Survey. Insomniac’s official site lists the company at one hundred and eighty plus employees strong, so I took a reasonable chunk of that head count and created decent sized team with the basic structure and pay scale outlined in the survey.

The estimate I reached for one month of development time, from a pure salary perspective, totaled $250,000. Taking that number and multiplying it by three years time adds up to $9 million in total cost. Whether this number is accurate or not, it is in line with the quote given by Epic VP, Mark Rein, in a 2007 Wired Game|Life interview regarding the estimated cost to produce Gears of War.

“We spent less than $10 million to make Gears of War. Somewhere between nine and ten million dollars.”

Granted, this may be a low estimate, but it will serve its purpose. Compiling everything I gathered, the hypothetical Resistance replacement level would cost $500,000 with a two month cap on development time.

Assuming the Cathedral itself took about the same time to create, that would be a total loss of $1 million to appease the Church of England. Therefore, had the request been made one week prior to the game’s release, it’s my belief, based on the business reality outlined above, that the change would not have been made.

LittleBigPlanet’s delay consists of an audio track modification, recalled product, and a reprint of the game. Using a baseline of one million copies, at a printing rate of 10 cents per unit (estimated and discounted based on a rate offered to consumers for a similar service), brings the total cost for reprinting to $100,000. Adding a generous amount for product recall and audio rework yields a result less than one-fifth the amount predicted for Resistance.

So while the LittleBigPlanet delay is complex in its own right, I hope the information provided here helps at least a few gamers consider business logic, not favoritism, as a deciding factor.

Afterthought: Do you think that Sony is at fault for playing favorites here, or do you think the entire thing is getting blow out of proportion? Does the game’s delay effect your decision to buy/not buy the game? Share your thoughts below.