Dec 3, 2007

A New York Times essential hardware guide makes some major videogame blunders, lauding a game that has yet to be released, knocking down the price of the PS3, and giving the Xbox 360 a multicore Cell processor

We all make mistakes. That's why we have erasers, whiteout, the backspace button and copyeditors (thank goodness); all things specifically designed to fix our lousy jobs, little boo-boos and shameful blunders. So where were these super handy tools when the New York Times published an article detailing a guide for "Some Essential Hardware?"

Today in the Technology section of the New York Times, several gross mistakes were made in the area of videogames hardware. Despite clearing the Nintendo Wii hurdle without a scratch and giving it a pretty decent description, where the article really falls to pieces is its account of Sony's PlayStation 3 and the Xbox 360.

Following is the error filled paragraph in question. See if you can pick out the three mistakes. Go on, it'll be fun!

"Those who have spent the day trading carbon credits have another opportunity to save the planet, this time from aliens in Halo 3, the third edition of the Xbox 360 game. The PlayStation 3 game Gran Turismo 5, a hyper-realistic, high-speed journey, is one of the best sellers for that Sony console, which starts at $299. Microsoft's Xbox starts at $280. Both are built around the multicore Cell processor, which allows numerous tasks to be done simultaneously."

Did you find them?

1. Gran Turismo 5 is "one of the best sellers" for the PS3. Oh really? That's pretty impressive since the game isn't even out yet.

2. The PS3 costs $299. Nope. No it does not. Lowest price is actually $399, but go ahead and keep the hope alive.

3. Both the Xbox 360 and the PS3 are "built around the multicore Cell processor." Sorry, they are actually quite different, particularly in that whole Cell processor area.

So yes, there are a few easily recognizable blunders in this NYTimes article. But then, catching details about gaming is pretty easy when you, you know, game. Ask me a question about that fancy feature laden wristwatch that's also on that list and you'd be lucky to get the time. So maybe (maybe) NYTimes gets a pass on this one, but let's just hope no one goes running out to by a $299 PS3. That'd be a sad, sad walk home.


The way i see it , its not a HUGE mistake, but if gamers do read the NEW YORK TIMES for gaming news.......*which i doubt they do* then it could be huge

what do you guys think?