What Would Matt Do

This is our example today: " Is the Console War Good for Gaming?" on a site called Game World Network.

Here's two things you can do to really bother me when you're writing articles. One, come up with a half assed not well thought out point. Two, do it on a site that is more adds than article. Lets cover each of these points seperately.

Point #1:

I'm sure our good author, Seleeke Flingai, believes what he's saying… Here's his point, summed pretty nicely:

The console war brings with it great competition, which has created some of the best consoles around. But the console war has also had its share of casualties - some of which were some of the best consoles around. And that is why I think the console war, despite all of its good intentions, is not good for gaming.

So, if I'm reading this correctly, he doesn't like it that some companies don't make it when they compete… Ok, that's an interesting point of view. Except that it's completely silly. What does he want? Not to have companies compete? To nominate one company and let them be the only console maker? Competition is good. We get better consoles because of it. We get better games because of it and we getter prices because of it (can anyone say Wii?). Sure, some companies and consoles fall by the way side, but that's the beauty of competition, the strong survive. Duh.

Point #2:

Did you see that site? It's about 20 words of article and the rest is ads and links and junk. Who thinks that's a good idea? Is the plan for me to accidentally click on a link that will make them money? If the title of the article hadn't been so ludicrous in the first place, I wouldn't have even bothered past the first page. This is a note to ALL websites that think you'll make money if you your ad to content ration is about 90% ad, 10% content, STOP IT! Really. Or, just add some blink tags and be done with it. For the love of all.

What Would Matt Do: Give the designer of the site a fine and sit down poor Seleeke and explain the nature of competition to him.