1. #191
    LuckyBide's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    France
    Posts
    2,730
    Originally Posted by generalbrown02 Go to original post
    The Vivendi threat last several years, Ubisoft began buying back shares in 2018ish to mitigate the threat, but that's just my guess about things.

    My opinion about collaboration isn't just based on the past experience with Splinter Cell, as I said I've been heavily involved in product development for the last ten years (outside of video games, but inside of tech). I've seen lot's positive and trendy talk about it, and lot's of negative by-product from it. The guy who popularized this mode of thinking was named Eric Reis. He wrote the book (The Lean Startup) and coined the phrase "Minimum Viable Product" (MVP) in 2011. It's derived from the broader disciplines of LEAN development/process improvement, and SIx Sigma, that focuses on using the Voice of the Customer (VOC) to guide product improvement. In the 2011 period, the idea of VOC was advanced through talk of MVP development that further proposed a methodology for finding the shortest path towards getting a product (an MVP) into the customers hands in order to obtain the VOC for continuous development/improvement. This development philosophy took over everything, particularly tech industries. It then became bastardized, as all good things are, by lots of businesses that began to confuse MVP as finished goods (albeit minimum viable) in the hands of consumer, to premature user testing, consumer opinion surveys, focus groups, etc. That latter part is where things go off the rails. A truer MVP model of development would be the Hitman example of episodic content. That model failed simply because it was jarring for consumers to get an "uncompleted game" even though they were getting a complete mission. Finessing that model would probably take time, but if Ubisoft wanted some kind of a feedback loop, that's how it would work. Trickling out videos of gameplay or assets to a community forum to ask for some kind of "approval" (discretionary or otherwise) is not the right way to do things, and I'm not confident that this model has been tested to great effect.
    I understand your concerns about the collaboration model and many bad practices can indeed derive from it.
    Though for Hitman I think that people didn't accept the fact that a rich AAA studio like Square Enix could sell an episodic game, especially in a franchise that used to sell traditional complete games.

    And what about demos ? We used to have tons of them back then, and they were a way for studios to have a first feedback and tweak or modify some gameplay elements, or even remove some.
    There would be nothing wrong to have a demo for this remake, even on one level. We would see the direction the team wants to take and we would give them productive feedback.

    And once again giving some feedback to a development team is not an "approval", the team will always have the final decision.
    Share this post

  2. #192
    generalbrown02's Avatar Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2021
    Posts
    33
    Originally Posted by NoviceGuy Go to original post
    Okay, I think I'm understanding your point more clearly now. If I'm still missing something, do correct me.
    You're saying that the idea of a collaboration or even feedback will detrimentally impact the direction of the game because the developers are going to be more concern about appeasing a group of people rather than creating their own version.


    That's an understandable argument and one that I can see from a business perspective. Again, I agree with you that it's Ubisoft's duty to appoint a creative lead who is passionate about stealth and Splinter Cell in order to truly make the remake a faithful adaptation. So, I can see why a 'collaboration' probably wouldn't be viable in that regard.
    The thing is I'm just not sure who would qualify for that position. LuckyBide suggested Clint Hocking but he's out of the equation.

    What you have in Ubisoft Toronto are a group of developers who (for the most part) seem to have never made a Splinter Cell game, or if they did it was Blacklist, at the very least. The résumé of Chris Auty, the creative director of the remake, shows that he had worked on Counter Strike, two Crysis games, Hunt: Showdown, and two Far Cry games. Most of those games have bare minimum stealth mechanics at best. I know those games aren't focused on stealth, but I thought it's something worth noting.

    Now, that doesn't mean that they can't do a Splinter Cell game justice or are incapable of making a stealth game. Ubisoft Montreal was working on all kinds of games before they developed the original Splinter Cell, so it's possible. It also seems like they're receiving some tips from the original developers if the video announcement was any indication of that.
    However, that's not a guarantee that the game will be a faithful remake.

    That's why I'm of the position of having feedback. What you described as 'good feedback' is what we're aiming for. If the letter appeared to be demanding the developers to have fans be an active part of the creative process within the studio, then I believe you missed the point. The intention was to simply ask for an open line of feedback. Maybe this is where you could have some form of 'community council' where you have a group of representatives who can talk to the developers and work through some decisions. I certainly don't want a flood of player feedback because, at that point, it would be too much of a hassle for them.

    I know you're still going to disagree with me, but I'm of that opinion simply because you just can't trust most developers in face value nowadays. That's especially truer with modern Ubisoft and their recent games. They'll say things to tickle and soothe your ears while they do the very things that you don't want them to do behind your back without knowing it. By then, it'd be too late for anything to be done. It also doesn't help that Splinter Cell as a franchise has undergone major changes since the release of Double Agent.

    To make it succinct: What I'm saying is that they shouldn't ignore feedback or criticism from fans if they find something wrong.


    With that being said, I'm not sure what else to add in this discussion.
    As I've said before, it's a wait and see situation. Hopefully Ubisoft Toronto delivers on this one, but we need to point things out and voice our concerns when things go awry.

    One final note, I don't want to make it seem like I'm berating you or anything like that. I know my posts may come across like that, but I just wanted to make my arguments clear.
    I'll admit that I have no experience in video game development; I'm not even a part of the business side of anything. So maybe you're correct about all of this.

    I would say that we are more or less understanding each other. I don't take the letter to be a "demand". I think it's well intended and there is valuable information in it. I disagree with wanting a community collaboration, but like you I have no disrespect in that opinion for the people who support that idea.

    I don't think I have the role or luxury to "trust" Ubisoft to make this game right, they either will or won't. Their recent track record on Splinter Cell (especially), but even games like Ghost Recon, Rainbow Six, AC (to a lesser degree) or Watchdogs, suggests that they have a tendency to pander to social politics in order to try and guess what people want rather than having the independent courage to just make a game because they have a great idea/concept. My response to that has been, and will continue with Splinter Cell, to participate as in my true role as a consumer. I will vote with my dollars. I'm encouraged enough to say that I would be willing to buy this game if it lives up to what has most recently been promised. I have great memories with the first entries into this franchise, and would love to pick up where those experiences ended. But I am also happy enough with everything else in life and in the market to spend my money elsewhere if this game starts to go down the old tired paths of Conviction and Blacklist.

    I've probably mentioned this before in the years of conversation. One vivid memory of my experience with Splinter Cell was walking into a gamestop years ago and seeing some guy playing Chaos Theory on the demo machine. I had played and loved SAR and PT. I had no idea a new game was out. All I did was ask "what game is that", and he said "it's the new Splinter Cell". That was it, that was all the advertising I needed, I walked over bought the game and weekend was planned. Splinter Cell used to have that place for me, today it doesn't. I love the memories, and would love to have the product back in that place for me. I am very interested, and may be a day two buyer...and maybe in the future it'll be day one for the next game? But, that's my role, to buy or withhold my money.
    Share this post

  3. #193
    generalbrown02's Avatar Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2021
    Posts
    33
    Originally Posted by LuckyBide Go to original post
    I understand your concerns about the collaboration model and many bad practices can indeed derive from it.
    Though for Hitman I think that people didn't accept the fact that a rich AAA studio like Square Enix could sell an episodic game, especially in a franchise that used to sell traditional complete games.

    And what about demos ? We used to have tons of them back then, and they were a way for studios to have a first feedback and tweak or modify some gameplay elements, or even remove some.
    There would be nothing wrong to have a demo for this remake, even on one level. We would see the direction the team wants to take and we would give them productive feedback.

    And once again giving some feedback to a development team is not an "approval", the team will always have the final decision.

    I think demos could work. If I made a suggestion on that it would be that they have a cost, and that the feedback was mostly under the hood observation. But, yes, I think demos are more in line with the kind of things that generate useful consumer feedback data.

    I understand that you aren't being demanding, and that the approval isn't official. But, that's how people behave. The developers will have a tendency to either reject the community feedback and participate only as a matter of form to act as though they are in good faith, or to become overly reliant on it. I don't think you are trying to be a dictator in this, I'm just trying to envision how this whole thing would look from 30,000 feet.
    Share this post

  4. #194
    Originally Posted by generalbrown02 Go to original post
    I would say that we are more or less understanding each other. I don't take the letter to be a "demand". I think it's well intended and there is valuable information in it. I disagree with wanting a community collaboration, but like you I have no disrespect in that opinion for the people who support that idea.

    I don't think I have the role or luxury to "trust" Ubisoft to make this game right, they either will or won't. Their recent track record on Splinter Cell (especially), but even games like Ghost Recon, Rainbow Six, AC (to a lesser degree) or Watchdogs, suggests that they have a tendency to pander to social politics in order to try and guess what people want rather than having the independent courage to just make a game because they have a great idea/concept. My response to that has been, and will continue with Splinter Cell, to participate as in my true role as a consumer. I will vote with my dollars. I'm encouraged enough to say that I would be willing to buy this game if it lives up to what has most recently been promised. I have great memories with the first entries into this franchise, and would love to pick up where those experiences ended. But I am also happy enough with everything else in life and in the market to spend my money elsewhere if this game starts to go down the old tired paths of Conviction and Blacklist.

    I've probably mentioned this before in the years of conversation. My vivid memory of Splinter Cell was walking into a gamestop years ago and seeing some guy playing Chaos Theory on the demo machine. I had played and loved SAR and PT. I had no idea a new game was out, and all I did was ask "what game is that", and he said "it's the new Splinter Cell". That was it, that was all the advertising I needed, I walked over bought the game and weekend was planned. Splinter Cell used to have that place for me, today it doesn't. I love the memories, and would love to have the product back in that place for me. I am very interested, and may be a day two buyer...and maybe in the future it'll be day one for the next game? But, that's my role, to buy or withhold my money.
    Yeah, I think we understand one another. At the end of the day, we want a Splinter Cell that is on par, if not better, than the original games.

    I certainly don't want Ubisoft to be pandering to all of the social justice politics and placing them into the remake. That is certainly a concern that I know others also share.
    It doesn't help that they just announced a 'Diversity & Inclusion Director' last week.
    https://montreal.ubisoft.com/en/welc...adian-studios/

    It's true that we should vote with our money in order to show Ubisoft if we're invested.
    In fact, I haven't bought a new Ubisoft game in years. This franchise is the only thing that's keeping me interested in Ubisoft since they've ruined Ghost Recon and Rainbow Six to the point where it's unlikely that they'll ever return to their respective original roots. Splinter Cell still has a glimmer of hope - no matter how small it is.

    It would be ideal if Ubisoft Toronto could release a demo. The original games did it, so it wouldn't hurt the remake to do the same.
    The issue would likely be on the cost of making a demo, so there's that to address.
     2 people found this helpful
    Share this post

  5. #195
    generalbrown02's Avatar Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2021
    Posts
    33
    Originally Posted by NoviceGuy Go to original post
    Yeah, I think we understand one another. At the end of the day, we want a Splinter Cell that is on par, if not better, than the original games.

    I certainly don't want Ubisoft to be pandering to all of the social justice politics and placing them into the remake. That is certainly a concern that I know others also share.
    It doesn't help that they just announced a 'Diversity & Inclusion Director' last week.
    https://montreal.ubisoft.com/en/welc...adian-studios/

    It's true that we should vote with our money in order to show Ubisoft if we're invested.
    In fact, I haven't bought a Ubisoft game in years. This franchise is the only thing that's keeping me interested in Ubisoft since they've ruined Ghost Recon and Rainbow Six to the point where it's unlikely that they'll ever return to their respective original roots. Splinter Cell still has a glimmer of hope - no matter how small it is.

    It would be ideal if Ubisoft Toronto could release a demo. The original games did it, so it wouldn't hurt the remake to do the same.
    The issue would likely be on the cost of making a demo, so there's that to address.
    We completely agree
    Share this post

  6. #196
    Originally Posted by generalbrown02 Go to original post
    I share a lot of your sentiment here. I've just been in charge of making product decisions (still am), and when somebody brings me a "what if", it becomes my job to consider all of the other "what if's" not asked but contained within the same probability space.
    I understand. I think it's just a bit different here because of the history of the series, and what resulted from various changes in direction. The "brand" is in a somewhat fragile state at this point, and I'd like the opportunity to show continuous support (which it needs, IMO).

    Originally Posted by NoviceGuy Go to original post
    What you have in Ubisoft Toronto are a group of developers who (for the most part) seem to have never made a Splinter Cell game, or if they did it was Blacklist, at the very least. The résumé of Chris Auty, the creative director of the remake, shows that he had worked on Counter Strike, two Crysis games, Hunt: Showdown, and two Far Cry games. Most of those games have bare minimum stealth mechanics at best. I know those games aren't focused on stealth, but I thought it's something worth noting.
    I wouldn't worry too much about that - many devs work on a variety of projects. It doesn't mean he doesn't like/understand stealth, and I wouldn't hold it against him. At least they're all talking positively about the early SCs. That's definitely a step in the right direction.
    Share this post

  7. #197
    generalbrown02's Avatar Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2021
    Posts
    33
    Originally Posted by CoastalGirl Go to original post
    I understand. I think it's just a bit different here because of the history of the series, and what resulted from various changes in direction. The "brand" is in a somewhat fragile state at this point, and I'd like the opportunity to show continuous support (which it needs, IMO).

    I agree on all of those points - The community has a place and function, we are actually participating in that right now. It's just not to be directly involved in the development. Not as an approval committee, some kind of adjunct quality control, or even as a type of consultant. Our job is to talk among ourselves, and discuss our opinions here. I promise you, with some experience going to market, Ubisoft pays attention to the discussions here. Maybe not to the degree that we "want", but they are not ignoring these conversations. So, that's our role, simply to give Ubisoft a window into some fan discussion.
    Share this post

  8. #198
    Originally Posted by CoastalGirl Go to original post
    I wouldn't worry too much about that - many devs work on a variety of projects. It doesn't mean he doesn't like/understand stealth, and I wouldn't hold it against him. At least they're all talking positively about the early SCs. That's definitely a step in the right direction.
    Oh, I understand that. I'm not saying that they don't appreciate/understand stealth or anything like that.
    It's more so from an experience perspective. A stealth game seems to be an uncharted territory for a lot of these developers in Toronto. That's why I'm a little concern since they're doing a remake of the original - a lot of things could go wrong.
    Share this post

  9. #199
    LuckyBide's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    France
    Posts
    2,730
    Originally Posted by generalbrown02 Go to original post
    I think demos could work. If I made a suggestion on that it would be that they have a cost, and that the feedback was mostly under the hood observation. But, yes, I think demos are more in line with the kind of things that generate useful consumer feedback data.

    I understand that you aren't being demanding, and that the approval isn't official. But, that's how people behave. The developers will have a tendency to either reject the community feedback and participate only as a matter of form to act as though they are in good faith, or to become overly reliant on it. I don't think you are trying to be a dictator in this, I'm just trying to envision how this whole thing would look from 30,000 feet.
    I understand that demos cost money but after all it would make sense to have one for Splinter Cell since it's been a dormant franchise for so long. And after all we remember those demos of Conviction and Blacklist at E3 presentations. They could show the first glimpses of the game at E3 2023 or later and then release a demo right behind.

    I understand your concerns, I know players feedback can be either good or bad for a project. But as I already said this project is lead by veteran developers so I think they know how to interpret fan requests and what to take and not take.
     1 people found this helpful
    Share this post

  10. #200
    LuckyBide's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    France
    Posts
    2,730
    Anyway I just wrote a small "update" around the letter and that idea of collaboration. Let me know what you think, if it's a good idea, if there are things to modify or to delete.

    Dear developers of the Splinter Cell remake,

    The announcement made on December 15th, 2021 regarding the Splinter Cell remake has been a surprise that gave hope to many fans. After reading your interview on the Ubisoft blog post, the reactions on the Splinter Cell subreddit and the official forum has been overwhelmingly positive. And we are glad that you decided to not make an open-world, this evacuates one of our numerous fears.
    Though most of us remain cautious and will wait to see gameplay to judge if this remake is heading in a way that will be respectful of the original game, satisfy both long-time fans while being accessible and appealing to a newer audience.

    This is the reason why we are writing you this letter. We would love you to consider one of our requests regarding a close collaboration between developers and fans. Some other videogame studios made that choice recently and what IO Interactive did with Hitman fans in 2016 while building a solid base for the future of the franchise is one successful example. Ironically, that request already was in an open letter written by us and published a few weeks ago. This letter is available here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1...TFF7IqT7zm5wM/

    So far that letter collected more than 400 signatures from fans and we were planning to collect more before sending it to Ubisoft in a few weeks or months. Now, the announcement of the remake made the letter a bit unsuitable but its main ideas remain valid, and the most important of them is about that collaboration.

    Obviously, the form that this collaboration would take would be at your discretion. It could be through the form of an active discussion between you and us, or anything that you consider to be the most appropriate. By the way another AAA studio, EA Motive, decided to create a few months ago a community council involving fans to help build the Dead Space remake.
    We are aware that the game is still at a very early stage of development and that the team is still in the process of being built. Therefore you may think that our request is premature but we estimate that it is the right time for us to do this request, before the game development enters in full production.

    To end, we want to assure you that we don’t want to dictate you anything. We won't come with a specific list of demands, we are open to constructive and positive discussions and want the future team to have and keep total creative freedom on the project.

    We welcome you in the Splinter Cell world and we wish you the best in this long journey !

    Thank you.
    Splinter Cell fans from the official Ubisoft forum.
    Find us here : https://forums.ubisoft.com/forumdisp...Cell-Blacklist
    Share this post