532 réponses à ce sujet

[Dean_the_Young]

BasilKarlo wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

BasilKarlo wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

BasilKarlo wrote...
Then you, Laidlaw and Darrah should get on the same page. They've said several times that the game will be revealed when it's ready.

When it's at the stage we feel it's ready to show, then we'll be ready to show it.

You (or some people here, at any rate) seem to be taking us saying we're not ready to show it as in the game is at some early stage where we can't possibly get it ready by our planned release... whenever that is. Honestly, I'd just suggest you let us worry about that. When we reveal, there will be plenty of information.

All due respect, that's just doublespeak. Laidlaw and Darrah have said that the game will be unveiled when it's, but then you said that the game will be unveiled when you all feel ready, but now you're saying that you will feel ready to unveil it when it's ready to be unveiled.

Double speak is when two statements are mutually incompatible yet both accepted as true. What you just described is nuance, which is the expectation of explanation.

Doublespeak- noun- language used to deceive usually through concealment or misrepresentation of truth; see also: goddledygook

Or we could go with 1984. You know, the book that invented the term.

Of course, your definition is even further from the truth, since you're not exactly showing deceit or misrepresentation of the truth by citing three different attempts at describing a point with marginal overlap and minimal conflict.

Dean_the_Young wrote...

BasilKarlo wrote...

David Gaider wrote...

Where did I suggest that you're not doing anything? Please don't put words in my mouth.

Some people on this thread have clearly said that. If you're not one of them, then what is the concern? That we won't be able to sell enough copies? That our advertising can't gain the attention of enough people? That's incredibly gracious of you, but if you're already paying attention I doubt you'll miss the news once it comes out.

I am concerned that not enough people will buy the game. I want the series to continue as long as possible. I was not a big fan of DA2, but DA2 is IMO better than 95% of modern RPGs. I would rather have more mediocre Dragon Age than no Dragon Age at all. If that's somehow out of bounds then excuse me all to hell.

Where did he say it was out of bounds?

Perhaps you shouldn't put words in his mouth.

His last sentence there, the one where he gets sarcastic and essentially tells me to mind my own business.

That's not sarcasm, dawg. He told you that you'd know it when it comes out, not mind your beeswax. Don't be paranoid.

[Steppenwolf]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Or we could go with 1984. You know, the book that invented the term.

Of course, your definition is even further from the truth, since you're not exactly showing deceit or misrepresentation of the truth by citing three different attempts at describing a point with marginal overlap and minimal conflict.

The term doublespeak was around before that book. It was often used by FDR.
And the claim by Gaider was contradictory, then explained with a claim that confirmed the claim he originally denied but said was contradictory.
I said Laidlaw and have said the game will be shown when it is ready.
Gaider said that the game will be ready the team is ready to show it.
I said that that's contrary to what Laidlaw and Darrah said.
Gaider said that the team will feel ready to show it when it is ready to be shown, which is the same thing as saying that it will be shown when it is ready. Gaider confirmed Laidlaw and Darrah were accurate but still felt the need to say I was somehow wrong. It was doublespeak.

Dean_the_Young wrote...That's not sarcasm, dawg. He told you that you'd know it when it comes out, not mind your beeswax. Don't be paranoid.

He established that the reason for concern might be that others could miss the advertising, but then goes on to tell me that it's fine because I'm sure see it.

[Conduit0]

BasilKarlo wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Or we could go with 1984. You know, the book that invented the term.

Of course, your definition is even further from the truth, since you're not exactly showing deceit or misrepresentation of the truth by citing three different attempts at describing a point with marginal overlap and minimal conflict.

The term doublespeak was around before that book. It was often used by FDR.
And the claim by Gaider was contradictory, then explained with a claim that confirmed the claim he originally denied but said was contradictory.
I said Laidlaw and have said the game will be shown when it is ready.
Gaider said that the game will be ready the team is ready to show it.
I said that that's contrary to what Laidlaw and Darrah said.
Gaider said that the team will feel ready to show it when it is ready to be shown, which is the same thing as saying that it will be shown when it is ready. Gaider confirmed Laidlaw and Darrah were accurate but still felt the need to say I was somehow wrong. It was doublespeak.

Dean_the_Young wrote...That's not sarcasm, dawg. He told you that you'd know it when it comes out, not mind your beeswax. Don't be paranoid.

He established that the reason for concern might be that others could miss the advertising, but then goes on to tell me that it's fine because I'm sure see it.

Your taking his statements out of context, you implied that the game was at such an unfinished state that they have nothing to show. Gaider corrected you, effectively saying that the game is at a state where they could show it, but are choosing to hold off and put more polish into it.

[Steppenwolf]

Conduit0 wrote...

Your taking his statements out of context, you implied that the game was at such an unfinished state that they have nothing to show. Gaider corrected you, effectively saying that the game is at a state where they could show it, but are choosing to hold off and put more polish into it.

I didn't take any statements out of context. Laidlaw, the guy in charge, said that the game will be shown when it is ready to be shown. Then Gaider confirmed that statement through his contrived doublespeak.

[Icinix]

Volus Warlord wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Pardon me if I am skeptical of an employee of EA saying that an EA game has been successful. I seem to recall that many Bioware reps still claim that DA2 was a sucessful game too.

Pardon me if I'm skeptical of a fan that really wants the game to not be successful being skeptical at my statements. You're welcome to not believe my statements if you want, but it's up to you to decide whether or not your motivations are influenced by a want of the game to be less successful simply because you didn't care for it.

You are correct, however, in that success was not really defined. The original poster specifically stated "profitable." So I'll elaborate: ME3 was profitable (so was DA2). So, stating that ME3 is profitable is neither naive, nor wrong.

Can you understand why I HATE that viewpoint though?  I know the bills must be paid, yadda yadda, but still.  It just seems to suck the soul of out gaming. The whole "money is the ultimate view of success" view is pretty much the polar opposite to "the game must be polished and show attention to detail and be something we take pride in."  It is viewing your work from primarily a shareholder's perspective rather than a fan's perspective. 

I don't want any more "shareholder first" studios. 

Indeed. The shareholder first problem is becoming increasingly applied to just about every business world wide - and increasingly good consumer ideas, products and service is falling by the way side in favour of keeping shareholders happy.

We're not in the consumer age anymore - its the shareholder age - and it sucks. Hard.

[Steppenwolf]

Filament wrote...

Just because you interpreted their initial statements incorrectly doesn't mean that their clarification now is "doublespeak." You just don't know when to quit with this.

Dude, go white-knight somewhere else.

[John Epler]

And I think we're long past the point where there's any useful discussion to be had with this thread.

As David said, we'll show something when we feel it's ready for primetime. There really is only one chance to make a first impression, and we want to make sure we can knock the socks off everyone.

Read into that as you will, we certainly can't stop you.