What happened to Wildlands? | Forums

[Sp--pyBrown]

VICTIM ROLE!

Anyway... Excuse me for calling you out on your bull-****, and the 'thick-skulled' comment was more in general then personally towards you. You just gave a perfect example for me, is all.

But you clearly get what Ubisoft's idea is behind not giving out too much information to everybody. Next time at a gamescom go over to a Ubi booth and ask for that Silver-Platter, they will probably give you plenty of info. But they can't do that for everybody because that will just take way too much time. People would have so much to read they wouldn't get to play the games.
So yeah, you should be able to 'read between the lines' and be sort of a 'psychic' to figure out what's going on with a game at a gamescom like that.
All I'm hearing once again is 'I'm not seeing what I want to be seeing so *insert game name* is bad and *insert developer* is screwing us."
So what DO you want? Info about a game they might not have figured out 100% themselves so you can complain about that? They clearly don't want to show us more yet for whatever reason and I'm kind of sick and tired of people constantly bashing on Ubisoft for a few mistakes in the past that almost all got rectified

-Not everyone has the chance to go to a game conference

-It would take the same amount of time to make a video of the developers vision as it did to make one of them "Intel" videos.

-I'd have enough time to read over all of their memos and concept art. Trust me.

It seems like they're withholding info in order to milk the most out of the pre-order cow. If they say no multiplayer or no tactical play or no pink skins for guns and no clown clothing, they'll get less orders.

[AI BLUEFOX]

There has been marketing material put out that suggests the authenticity the old school fan base wants, the video with the original Red Storm team for instance and Richard Dansky at E3 hosting the Wildlands masterclass. However, although I take the optimistic view that the classic style of gameplay will be there even if not shown yet, I do think it's about time it was being seen and described. As March approaches we will find out more but I expect the info to be low key and infrequent until we get through the pre Christmas release programme and all the hype that will accompany that.

[ES-Ulukai]

Let's calm down everybody please ^^ Keep the talking friendly, everyone has it's point of view.

I stil don't understand people saying that the devs don't show stealth, to much action rambo things etc... Guys since the first trailer the devs has showed you that you can choose the way you want to do your mission, 3 times you see them doing the same mission with White Hat !!!

Are people blind and forget that so easely when they see another trailer with plenty of action that is to appeal another kind of audiance to the game saying it's not only stealth but also action if you want it to be.

I know that with my friends we are gonna do the game in stealth mode cause it's how we like to play. You can play the way you wants it and don't understand how people still don't get it.

[Sp--pyBrown]

Fair enough. But then it's still the pre-orderer that's to blame. I already like what I've seen and am pretty confident I'll spend plenty of hours in this game. But if it doesn't appeal to you in that way, don't pre-order it. And ultimately it's up to a developer to decide wether they will honor a series or not with its follow-up game.
But honestly, I just think there's no aim for Multiplayer yet(as they mentioned themselves) and that makes a lot of stuff not worth checking with a beta or releasing as bait. They may be vague about a lot of stuff, but the one thing that prevents is hyping. Ubisoft is trying to not make a total hype out of something that's not worth a hype.
That's what happens a lot of the time. Developers release a lot of stuff, people get hyped and pre-order for the wrong reasons, and get disappointed after release. So who's to blame here? People overhyping stuff getting released, or the developer for releasing stuff? 'Cause it seems to me that the developers can never do anything good then. It's either releasing content about a game pre-release and getting people hyped up, making stuff up on the spot(which always happens) and then scolded after release because 'it's not what got promised', where as a developer barely promised anything. OR they don't release the content for the game pre-release and get *****ed at for not releasing content pre-release.
To add to that, from what I read on these forums, a lot of content releases that do get given out are met with people saying the game should have 'insert feature' or else.

So no matter what a developer like Ubisoft does, they will do it wrong because people don't realize how the process works.

They're already riding the hype train. Their entire marketing campaign is based on the hype of non-gameplay trailers. Most of them just showcase different characters nonchalantly firing automatic weapons... I wonder how that is supposed to represent the final product...

IMO they should be open with the development. I'm using this one statement as an example, but if they aren't "going back to what made the original GR great", they shouldn't have released a trailer stating such. Bad example, I know, but personally I'm getting ready to scold the f*ck out of them for f*cking up yet another classic franchise "to entertain a larger audience".


What I'm asking for is one of them "Intel" videos with the devs explaining what their goals are for this title. Will this title be a casual shooter, is it going to be a tactical shooter, or will they even add options to suit both styles of gaming? What are their plans for multiplayer? What level of definition will the AI have and what kind of depth will the players have in the interactions with the NPCs?

I know they are not going to release such a video because people are swallowing the full-auto-firing-hype-train trailers along with the hook, the line and the sinkers and I'm just one voice on the entire interwebs calling for some openness. Besides, they are already making a whole b_utt-load of money with just trailers. What kind of a businessman would shut off the flow of money in the name of integrity and transparency? Lol.

Let's calm down everybody please ^^ Keep the talking friendly, everyone has it's point of view.

I stil don't understand people saying that the devs don't show stealth, to much action rambo things etc... Guys since the first trailer the devs has showed you that you can choose the way you want to do your mission, 3 times you see them doing the same mission with White Hat !!!

Are people blind and forget that so easely when they see another trailer with plenty of action that is to appeal another kind of audiance to the game saying it's not only stealth but also action if you want it to be.

I know that with my friends we are gonna do the game in stealth mode cause it's how we like to play. You can play the way you wants it and don't understand how people still don't get it.

We haven't even seen actual gameplay featuring stealth tactics. We have no idea how bad the AI is gonna be. Understand now?

[ES-Ulukai]

Bro we did at the TBC and we already told it, you don't want to mess with the AI but when say things about we are call liars, Ubisoft paid you etc...

[Sp--pyBrown]

Bro we did at the TBC and we already told it, you don't want to mess with the AI but when say things about we are call liars, Ubisoft paid you etc...

You did, I haven't. That's not a "we".

[GiveMeTactical]

Didn't a couple of the original Red Storm guy, you know the ones who came up with the original GR games, left when UBIsoft bought them? Isn't 1 or 2 of them running BlackFoot Studios now?

We haven't even seen actual gameplay featuring stealth tactics. We have no idea how bad the AI is gonna be. Understand now?

For a guy who does not care about MP or even Co-Op, I have been saying this for the longest time. I understand that perhaps the people who will buy the game solely for Campaign Play are in the minority but dang... throw us a bone.

Also, many people don't care to wait in line for hours just to have what it seems like 2 seconds of gameplay, let alone a gameplay that is not what the game will have anyway. To each his own though, if you love to hang up with a bunch of people and crowds, more power to you but don't think for a second that because we don't we don't understand either.

Oh and with Social Media being what it is, you mean to say that UBI is not capable of letting people know what they are doing? or is it because they rather spend money with hype than bother with giving real info.

[ES-Ulukai]

We means the TBC group and we talked about the game since last year.

[AI BLUEFOX]

What Sp--pyBrown means, I think, is that gamers haven't seen something that shows you have to play tactically. Choosing to play in a stealthy and tactical like way loses meaning if you make a mistake and don't get punished for it. If you can just go in guns blazing in a Rambo style anyway then the tactical, hardcore experience is an illusion. It's like pretending you're a daredevil trapeze artist, but the rope is slung a foot above the ground; you're fooling yourself, there are no consequences.

[GiveMeTactical]

Also, Ulukai... you guys did it with 4 other guys and it is not that we don't trust you, as stated before... we don't trust UBI so cut us some slack.

What we are wondering is... why so many trailers of Co-Op and ZERO trailers or even a few seconds of gameplay on the actual Campaign? it does not have to be a new map or different city but show 1 guy telling the teammate ai what to do... why do we have to wait until game is release to see it? I mean, if we have to we have to but don't you think that if it was not as good as they say, people could help fix it with some good feedback? isn't that what they are asking us to do?