Noilly Prat wrote...
Well, as I said before, that user comment from the supposed Obsidian developer references certain things that somebody who was posing as somebody they are not would probably not bother mentioning. That doesn't make it necessarily true, but in all honesty, it doesn't much bother me that it's being reported by gaming sites. A lot of "professional" news outlets, including major television news networks, don't bother verifying much of what they report either, or have fairly lax standards in doing so. That just comes with the territory in news reporting, and a lot of people are given voice who have no credibility whatsoever. For all we know, this guy actually could be an Obsidian employee, in which case his comment merits consideration. And, if it is just some random person trying to destroy Obsidian's reputation (and going about it rather oddly, considering he says that New Vegas and Obsidian's unannounced project are looking great), then that's unfortunate, but there are much more serious lapses of journalistic integrity taking place practically on a constant basis.
I've seen Christina Norman leaving comments about ME2 DLC and other related stuff on Destructoid articles. Sure, it could have been some imposter, I suppose, but most other commenters seemed to take her at her word, presumably because she was making positive rather than inflammatory statements. This "tired dev" guy could be a phony, but if he isn't, I say good on him for calling attention to the project's mismanagement. If I had worked hard on something which I felt was ruined due to the ineptitude of others, I might do the same. If, on the other hand, he is a phony... I dunno, bad troll, I guess.
For all we know the post he is replying to was made by himself to set up this post. Lying well involves including enough details to murky things up while not getting too detailed that you can be caught out, which is what he has done with his post: we have no idea who he is, and has posted anonymously, but references another post to make things seem plausible. If you think companies would not do things like this think again: Sony set up a website posing as a couple of fans, companies hire shills to go on forums, befriend the people there and post around a bit to gain a bit of rep and then start using that to convince people to buy games (for all you know I could be an Obsidian employee, been here a few months before APs release to insert myself in, and then start spreading good word about AP when it releases), companies have entire departments set up to edit wikipedia entries to make themselves look good (and to attack the entries of rivals), etc. Hell, I ignore the first batch of "Great review, I will/will not buy this game based on this review" comments since they are likely to have been posted by the website itself.
This may seem paranoid, but really we have no clue who people are on websites. Christina posts as herself, she identifies herself as Christina, this 'dev' does not identify himself, he just refers to himself as someone who worked there, which means that no one can come out and say "That's not me!" like Christina could do if it wasn't her posting. And really, calling attention for the project's mismanagement? We only have his word on this, for all we know even if he is genuine he could just be po'd that his ideas were sidelined for being rubbish or has a personal vendetta, and if it was mismanaged then all he has done is ensured a bad rep for his company, instead he should have reported it higher if possible, sounds to me that he's trying to ensure it doesn't do well so he can say "I told you so".
I'm sorry but this 'dev post' is just triggering my bull****-O-meter something chronic, and the fact that it has even received an article about it just shows how pathetic the games media truly is.