Am I the only one who would [i]love[/i] to play games like that? Get a group of friends and run around trying to sound all try-hard and tacticool.
I honestly have to disagree with him on, like, every point here.
"Developers leave nothing to chance when showcasing their games." [B]No shit.[/B] It's in their best interests. Why, when you're revealing a game to thousands upon thousands of people, would you want there to be a chance that you fuck something up, the game looks shitty, and sells significantly worse because of it? Would you want something you put [B]years[/B] of hard work into to be known as "that game that broke spectacularly on stage"? Or your game whose success literally decides whether you'll still have a job in a few months or whether your development studio gets shut down to be "that game that looked super unimpressive because nothing was scripted and the player we were watching died a ton so we never got to see what gameplay was actually like"?
Also he talks about how it's as bad as graphical downgrades or running console games on PC. What? Those things are essentially lies - showing the viewer something that is [B]not possible[/B]. Now I know that most people won't play the game like these guys do in the trailer - many won't communicate or will micspam or will be squeekers or whatever - but seriously, he doesn't expect that shit to go on stage does he? And besides, this is at least [B]possible[/B] if you have the right group of friends, however unlikely it may be.
I normally agree with Jim on most stuff but here it seems like he's getting worked up about developers, what, moderating what gets shown in PR? Advertising well? (He even lauds how effective it is.) Really?
If anything, the so called "mic trick" that's used in trailers puts me off the game even more than boring gameplay footage would. Mostly because it shows me that the publishers behind it have absolutely no idea how gamers generally are and act in online situations.
It's like how Ubisoft has just now realized that memes were a thing, so they hammered that fact in their previous press conference at E3, as well as in games like WATCH_DOGS.
Stop trying to be hip, and stop trying to show us how you think we would be in a game. Instead, just show us a fucking game and don't deviate from that vision. If you have to (like with WATCH_DOGS), let us know in advance. We'll be upset, sure, but we will be less upset than if you didn't tell us at all.
[QUOTE=MedicWine;48259032]That's not at all what he was saying. He's saying that by hiring voice actors to read scripts you're making the game give the impression the game is more playable than it is.
[/QUOTE]
That's not a problem. Why would you not script your trailer? Even if it is gameplay, there's no reason not to layout what you want to be shown in the trailer.
I've always thought that the chat in the rainbow six trailer was players talking. Can't see how you'd assume its the in-game characters.
[QUOTE=Chaotic Lord;48259465][video=youtube;oBHZcWDbchs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBHZcWDbchs[/video]
Planetside 2 did something similar with their announcement trailer for the game coming to PlayStation 4.[/QUOTE]
I miss my Planetside 2 outfit, I remember we were assaulting some shithole and some random Australian member started micspamming porn over Outfit chat.
At least I think he was Australian.
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;48263431]I've always thought that the chat in the rainbow six trailer was players talking. Can't see how you'd assume its the in-game characters.[/QUOTE]
That's still not the point. May I refer you and agree'ers to this post that nails it:
[QUOTE=MedicWine;48259032]That's not at all what he was saying. He's saying that by hiring voice actors to read scripts you're making the game give the impression the game is more playable than it is.
The Division is a good example of this. You might watch that trailer and think that game looks fun, but there's no way of knowing that. Imagine the game is still unplayable, its just extremely well animated and scripted for its stage of development. E3 demos are always rushed, but in this case the core gamplay isnt even there yet (in this hypothetical). The mic trick helps sell the idea that somebody is responsible for the actions on screen, and that they had a choice to do something different because its a game. In reality we know this to not be true, and that most demos like this require scripting from the player because everything has to fall in line in line perfectly and to use Jim's word, hide the [I]illusion[/I] its capable of being played in the way that it is.
He's saying that the mic trick blurs that line, making not-games appear as games and allowing a developer to sell you anything. In other words, scripted (both in action and by scripting players voices) trailers might as well be pre-rendered trailers because they show you nothing about the game besides its assets.
I cant say if I agree or not that this having a malicious effect, but the premise is basically the same as any E3 demo that can be shown on-screen but you couldn't just hand the controller over to player.[/QUOTE]
One addendum though: I don't think the problem he focuses on is that the product itself isn't as playable as it's showcased as, but rather that the actual player interaction will be nowhere good as advertised. The reason this would be a particular problem is because you can objectively compare if a singleplayer game is as it has been advertised, but whether your co-players will be shriekish yokels or not is highly subjective and not guaranteeable.
That being said I disagree. The player interaction is one more thing you should investigate for yourself before buying the game, rather than believing scripted demos. As far as false advertising goes it's not really different from how scripted the demos are in the first place.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.