I don't see what happened with Conviction as being anything like a collaborative effort.
The first version was a surprise to players, and immediately became a mess. One could say that they didn't show that much, but if what they showed wasn't representative of the game, then they shouldn't have shown it. Considering what happened next, though, I think it was representative. Hence the need to redo it.
The second version was still done behind closed doors. I believe that it was modified because of the feedback, but a lot lost was in translation. Ultimately it still suffered due to (IMO) misunderstandings that could have been avoided had there been better communication between the players and the team. I know the team was considering the hardcore sneaky crowd, but playing the game I never felt that style properly represented (in the campaign, specifically). If someone was pulling for us, they were definitely outvoted.
If there needs to be communication between the team nad the players it's a massive concession that the team is too disconnected from the product. In which case your problem isn't collaboration, it's that you need a new team. But, yes, they showed the original assets way too early. They were changing the formula, I don't think that was ever a secret. Conviction was a change of formula too. I wouldn't have recommended changing the formula, but I think given that was the decision they made, they would have been better off seeing that original vision through and waiting until the game was more fleshed out before they started showing things off and having knee-jerk reactions to public opinion. People don't like change, so change has to be handeled carefully.Ultimately it still suffered due to (IMO) misunderstandings that could have been avoided had there been better communication between the players and the team.
I would say Blacklist had more involvement from the community.
But in any case, when the people making the product stop caring about the product, it tends to suffer. It's pretty logical.
You've now made two posts where you suggest that I should silence myself because you don't like what I am saying:Originally Posted by LuckyBide Go to original post
You can keep your negativity and your wrong interpretations for yourself.If I had been speaking to you directly then maybe you'd have a point. The reason I keep pointing out that I am not roping you into the discussion is because you are agressively addressing me as though I am. Which is the most generous perspective, a less generous perspective would suppose that you believe that you hold a right on this forum to decide who may speak regardless of your own involvement in a discussion. You may in fact engage, or not engage, how you see fit, but it's weak to tell a person that you have heard enough of them in a public forum. I don't care how non-constructive or "negative" you see me in terms of your agenda. The authoritarian hammer I was referencing was the belief that you can tell other members of this board to stop speaking. It wasn't in reference to your vision of a community QC group, it was simply your statements to me. Feel free to disengage. I've lost respect for your effort, here's a tip - go apply for a job with Ubisoft if you want to work on the game, and join the team in earnest.We already talked about this on the other thread so we won't restart this discussion
Come on, don't start acting like a victim. We're not on Twitter here...Originally Posted by generalbrown02 Go to original post
As I was saying in my previous post, you're having wrong interpretations of what I wrote. I never suggested anyone to silence themselves and will never do. The best way to reply effectively to someone with whom we disagree is to do it with arguments, which I always did and will continue to do. I ain't scared of debates.
And by the way I wouldn't take some of my precious time to write all these long posts to you if I didn't want you to reply, that makes no sense.
But if I was trying to act viciously and like a victim as you do, I would say that you repeating that you were not addressing to me several times is your implied way of telling me to shut up. See how this is stupid and not making the discussion move forward at all ? Yeah, you're just making the same thing to me right now.
Telling you to "keep your negativity and your wrong interpretations for yourself" is a way to make you understand that bringing negative vibes around is not making the discussion progress the right way. Only thing it shows is that deep down you just want for this collaboration to not happen. And you would have the right to want that.
As for the other sentence saying that there's no need to restart this discussion, that's because I felt that your message was pointed at me and you and I know that we've already discussed this topic some time ago and had a complete and pleasant discussion around it. But even if you claim that it wasn't, I still have the freedom to reply just like you do. So I don't disengage in anything.
So now stop trying to manipulate my words with the aim of giving you the good role and making me look bad, that doesn't work and only you believe it.
Oh and I'm the one who is agressive ? Really ? Who is making personal attacks and trying to discredit me by twisting my words ? What a joke...
But anyway I'm not surprised, it's always the same thing on the internet. People starting to make personal attacks when they run out of arguments is a classic.
Because yeah I've seen your previous post a few hours ago about you comparing me to a dictator and so on. I was planning to reply it later but it seems that it's gone. If you deleted it yourself then you did good because that post was really weak. But if it has been deleted by a moderator then don't come here after that and talk about respect.
And so that you know, I don't care about your lost of respect for my effort since I've already seen how disrespectful and dishonest is your attitude towards me.
PS: Oh I wish I had enough talent to work in a videogame studio but don't worry, I know where my place is. For now![]()
Oh brother. Nobody is claiming to be a victim. I did pull my previous post, it was more vindictive than wish I had been. But there is no "claim" in saying that I wasn't speaking directly to you with my initial comment. I was participating on a forum with the expectation that there are many readers. When I'm referring to a specific person I try to address them.Originally Posted by LuckyBide Go to original post
The only way my "vibes" can be seen as negative is if agreeing with you is the only appropriate position...Telling you to "keep your negativity and your wrong interpretations for yourself" is a way to make you understand that bringing negative vibes around is not making the discussion progress the right way.
Outside of that, I would say the respect has been lost. So conversation isn't worthwhile.
You're not claiming to be a victim, you're acting like one.Originally Posted by generalbrown02 Go to original post
And I gave you my answer as one of many readers but you took it the wrong way.
Originally Posted by generalbrown02 Go to original post
Here we go again with your personal attacks... You definitely don't understand what I write, huh ?
I respect and always respected anyone who has a contrary opinion and good arguments to defend it, but I always hate to lose my time with people who don't have any or end up twisting up my words and making personal attacks. Because these people are nothing else than negative, and you are in this second category right now while last time we spoke you were in the first one.
Hope you get it now...
The respect hasn't been lost, you killed it yourself without realizing it. But you're right, conversation isn't worthwhile. We both have better things to do with our time. Goodbye.Originally Posted by generalbrown02 Go to original post
I never knew that Chaos Theory was supposed to have a jungle bonus level on PS2
(shoutout to aj_thenoob on reddit for talking about it)
https://www.artstation.com/artwork/QzNP9E
![]()