-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Is Vehemently denying a games existence despite it being all but confirmed wrong?
- Thread starter Thorgal
- Start date
Brock Reiher
Banned
The issue is the difference between "we refuse to comment on rumors" and "that person is a liar". I don't like the latter.I don't see any issue with that. What is inherently "wrong" about a company not committing to a leak? I would honestly rather see the reveal of the game from the company as opposed to reading about it in a leak.
Mario + Rabbids made me do a complete 180 but I can only imagine how I would have felt seeing Miyamoto and Yves on the Ubisoft stage presenting me a Mario + Rabbids collaboration that I'd never heard of. I think I would have been blown away with that presentation moreso than I was.
Delusibeta
Banned
No, but there is harm in Laura Kate Dale's reputation when Beyond Good and Evil turns out to not be a Switch exclusive. For some reason, that's the hill both Laura and (with this video) Jim want to die on, despite the vast majority of Laura's Switch software rumours proving incorrect.Is there any inherent 'harm' to the consumer at play by this issue?
Not really sure how it could ever be wrong. Fans don't have a right to a press release just because rumours are doing the rounds, and a company doesn't have an obligation to undermine a marketing campaign and various NDAs just because a few leaks mean that dedicated fans suspect something is up. Also, because a handful of fans know some things doesn't mean that the wider customer base does, not everyone is plugged into games media 24/7. That's some kind of delusions of self-importance on behalf of a tiny minority there.
Depends. If you care about being taken seriously, don't lie. It becomes an issue if a company is willing to throw a journalist under the bus, just for the sake of marketing. In todays fucked up world, that can lead to all kinds of issues, especially if said journalist happens to be female.
Brock Reiher
Banned
Again, saying "we have not announced this at this time" or "we don't want to comment on rumors" is very different than "that person is wrong. There are no plans"Not really sure how it could ever be wrong. Customers don't have a right to a press release just because rumours are doing the rounds, and a company doesn't have an obligation to undermine a marketing campaign and various NDAs just because customers suspect something.
Neither ruins any marketing or NDAs
It's just as morally reprehensible as vehemently denying that you are preparing a surprise party for anyone when you are, in fact, doing so. People that do that should go to jail. So horrible. Disgusting.
Are you permanently hurting someone's career reputation if people say they're lying about a party, though?
This analogy doesn't really work for me because the fallout of a journalist being accused of lying can be a really big deal for that person. People will come out of the woodwork to harass that person because they're being accused of being a liar.
Again, just say "no comment" or "we don't comment on rumors or speculaiton" or whatever. It's that easy.
Sword Of Doom
Member
Im sure many people worked on the planning of these things so Im sure theyd like to stick to the plan.
I mean who gives a shit if they do or dont in the end? Is this even an issue to worry about?
I mean who gives a shit if they do or dont in the end? Is this even an issue to worry about?
Spyder_Monkey
Banned
Are you permanently hurting someone's career reputation if people say they're lying about a party, though?
This analogy doesn't really work for me because the fallout of a journalist being accused of lying can be a really big deal for that person. People will come out of the woodwork to harass that person because they're being accused of being a liar.
Abuse is a shitty thing among game fandom but if that person turned out to be right all along wouldn't that not harm their reputation. I mean Schreier seems to be doing well for himself.
Very true. The movie industry lets you know every stage of the process from pitch>script>production>done. Same with music and basically any other creative industry. I think with games though, what they look like is more important than what they sound like or just the thought of them. Unless it's a really known IP like Spider-Man or God of War, people won't know what to get hyped about. So, the devs decide to wait until they have something proper to show.The game industry's inane secrecy makes no sense to me. no other entertainment industry does this. I don't know why they can't simply say "yeah we're working on this game".
Then again we've seen how gamers react when companies don't do exactly what they want.
Fair enough. Saying 'that person is wrong' is a statement that could be proven incorrect later, I think companys should avoid saying that, that's why most of them go with 'nothing to announce at this time' etc.Again, saying "we have not announced this at this time" or "we don't want to comment on rumors" is very different than "that person is wrong. There are no plans"
Neither ruins any marketing or NDAs
Basically, outright calling a leaker (if correct) a liar is wrong, but I have no idea why they would choose to enter into that kind of oppositional dialogue when surely it's easier to just keep their cards close to their chest and say 'we have nothing to announce right now'.
samurai1226
Member
Sorry I have to step in. After an interview with Mike Colter, where he said he's the main character of Halo 5 and you stepped in that Chief is still the main character and hero. 3/15 missions is not really the main character I guess.I like this analogy.
BTW I often get accused of denying games exist or claiming falsehoods but outside of actual mistakes I can't lie about a public company's business. So I deflect or change the subject but I have never knowingly lied about something despite what my pms and Twitter responses claim. I've certainly fudge answers but I'd never say "game x is not coming out" if I knew it actually was.
"A" primary character,
Chief is the main character and hero.
Also you denied that CA or anybody else is working on H2A, even though they build the H2A MP.
And why hasn't Stinkles been in here to deny it yet? Oh wait, here he is, denying it.
I have no idea what the project he is tweeting about is, but CA works on more than just Halo stuff for companies other than just 343, but it is absolutely NOT H2A and nobody is currently working on any such thing
This on the other hand is and has always been a cool idea and you never know, it could happen one day. The code still works (albeit crazy buggy).
Again, just say "no comment" or "we don't comment on rumors or speculaiton" or whatever. It's that easy.
The catch-22 issue here is that you can't ever really start doing that; it only works if you've always done it.
To what extent can gaming PR explicitly state to journalists they they're going to refuse to answer such a question on the record? It'll implicitly confirm it to the journalist - fair enough - but it should mean that they can't really do much with the confirmation.
OP, you wouldn't happen to be acting under the pretense of "wrong" being synonymous with "stupid" would you?
no ,altough i think saying "Wrong" might have been the wrong word to use.
personally i understand why they do it because there is a lot of planning ,Money and contracts involved in these things .
that being said , you can't deny you look kind of silly when you keep denying a games existence even after screenshots or even worse , playable footage of it leaks .
it would be like me denying there's a brand new car standing outside ,despite the fact that the tarp covering it isn't helping in hiding that it is a car.
hence i agree that "No Comment " would be a better way to handle this .
Edit and double post, sorry. Checked the dates.
I half expected this post, so just to break these down (which I've done before multiple times on gaf in precisely this argument):
Colter is NOT the central character of H5, Chief (arguably Chief and Cortana) is, the story is fundamentally about them, with barely even backstory on Locke (Colter's character) and yes, that's separate from the perfectly valid complaint that you don't get to play as chief enough - and further, this interview happened in the middle of testing and development when that balance wasn't actually finished. So you can put that one down as either "wrong" or "argument" but it certainly wasn't a deliberate lie.
I could look it up if I had some time, but on the H2A doesn't exist, I can't tell from that quote if I was deliberately obfuscating MCC by stating that H2A didn't exist as a product (which I did several times to hide the bigger surprise of MCC) or (just as likely since I had to do it several times) this was before we greenlit that aspect of MCC (the switchable H2 anniversary graphics) and it literally wasn't true at that time no matter how you sliced it.
And you can also look at the more recent and vehemently clear H3 denials, where there was no surprise to obfuscate so we were super literal.
SECOND EDIT: I think the CA thing was literally before MCC was greenlit, so there's no mystery there at all. CA did work on some H4 stuff. Maybe that was what the original news item was?
Sorry I have to step in. After an interview with Mike Colter, where he said he's the main character of Halo 5 and you stepped in that Chief is still the main character and hero. 3/15 missions is not really the main character I guess.
Also you denied that CA or anybody else is working on H2A, even though they build the H2A MP.
I half expected this post, so just to break these down (which I've done before multiple times on gaf in precisely this argument):
Colter is NOT the central character of H5, Chief (arguably Chief and Cortana) is, the story is fundamentally about them, with barely even backstory on Locke (Colter's character) and yes, that's separate from the perfectly valid complaint that you don't get to play as chief enough - and further, this interview happened in the middle of testing and development when that balance wasn't actually finished. So you can put that one down as either "wrong" or "argument" but it certainly wasn't a deliberate lie.
I could look it up if I had some time, but on the H2A doesn't exist, I can't tell from that quote if I was deliberately obfuscating MCC by stating that H2A didn't exist as a product (which I did several times to hide the bigger surprise of MCC) or (just as likely since I had to do it several times) this was before we greenlit that aspect of MCC (the switchable H2 anniversary graphics) and it literally wasn't true at that time no matter how you sliced it.
And you can also look at the more recent and vehemently clear H3 denials, where there was no surprise to obfuscate so we were super literal.
SECOND EDIT: I think the CA thing was literally before MCC was greenlit, so there's no mystery there at all. CA did work on some H4 stuff. Maybe that was what the original news item was?
I actually think many do that or say "we have nothing to announce at this time." It still gets treated the same as a flat "no" by a lot of people who would accuse them of lying."We don't comment on rumors and speculation." Congrats no lying required.
So I think it's fine if they're not being blatantly dishonest, they have a planned reveal and depending on that plan it's too disruptive to break from it. And they may yet have surprises anyway that DIDN'T leak.
inpHilltr8r
Member
Entertainment company lies to audience for reasons of entertainment.
ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED?
ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED?
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
Yes because THEY WANT IT NOW1!1 /sIs there any inherent 'harm' to the consumer at play by this issue?
It's just as morally reprehensible as vehemently denying that you are preparing a surprise party for anyone when you are, in fact, doing so. People that do that should go to jail. So horrible. Disgusting.
This is exactly what i was thinking when i watched the Jimquistion on the topic. really just sounding like a grown man being a big baby over something that really cant be made into a big deal.
hey_it's_that_dog
benevolent sexism
It's real shitty when there's going to be a PC version (or any unannounced platform, really) that they don't reveal until much later so that consumers can't make a fully informed choice about which version they'd like to buy. That is perhaps slightly immoral on the grounds that it's deceptive and deliberately interferes with consumer autonomy for the benefit of the publisher.
Denying a game's existence, period, isn't immoral and doesn't fall anywhere in the moral domain. No one is being hurt or having their autonomy infringed upon. It's not unfair to anyone. Sharing information about in-development consumer products isn't a moral issue.
Denying a game's existence, period, isn't immoral and doesn't fall anywhere in the moral domain. No one is being hurt or having their autonomy infringed upon. It's not unfair to anyone. Sharing information about in-development consumer products isn't a moral issue.
SiegfriedFM
Member
Yes, it's totally wrong. In fact, when someone calls out a game that is in production, a company should have to reveal it within an hour. And then we get to harass them for everything that changes between then and the release because they lied about it being in the game.
Let's start right now. Soul Calibur 6! Namco, I'm waiting!
Let's start right now. Soul Calibur 6! Namco, I'm waiting!
The Albatross
Member
Until a game gets announced or teased it does not exist to PR teams, expecting them to do anything but deny its existence is expecting too much. Sure, they could say no comment, but that creates expectations; it's like saying "maybe" to a person if they're asking whether you'll get them x for Christmas, that person isn't going to take that as a no because it isn't a no. "No comment" says a lot more than a simple denial because we're stupid human beings and can't let go of superstitions and feelings. Hell, even Jim in his own video (and other people) twisted Ancel's comment:
"Not sure that E3 would be the best place to showcase Bg&e2,"
Into a flat denial that it won't be at E3 when it wasn't that at all (no, Jim's video saying that argument in a whiny voice doesn't make it wrong). People just aren't trusting of the gaming industry (I know I'm not!), so better to remove all ability for them to seriously think it might be coming even if it means those same non-trusting people will just not trust you even harder.
Is there any evidence that LKD's journalistic integrity was seriously, in the long term, ruined by that 6 days in between Supermassive's statement and Rush of Blood being revealed? Most people seem to look at the multitude of much more highly publicised NX/Switch leaks (of which many proved to be false) when regarding her integrity as a journalist, not that. That and the original leak/denial was about Until Dawn DLC:
"We are not currently working on any DLC for Until Dawn at the moment."
There was no literal lie there, we only knew what the case actually was after Rush of Blood had been revealed and LKD had been proven to be correct, just a little off-the-mark.
Before you say it, I'm not saying that LKD deserved any abuse she might have received because of that comment nor am I condoning said abuse in any way. However, it wasn't Supermassive's fault either; they were asked about the existence of UD DLC and they denied it because there was no UD DLC. It's not like they said "Until Dawn is over forever and Laura Kate Dale is wrong about everything."
You mean the entertainment industry where you're forced to watch a low-quality potato-cam version of a trailer because they only let those lucky/rich enough to attend Comic Con watch it properly? I mean, film companies especially are great about simply announcing things but being frustratingly obtuse about what they want to show isn't exclusive to the gaming industry.
"Not sure that E3 would be the best place to showcase Bg&e2,"
Into a flat denial that it won't be at E3 when it wasn't that at all (no, Jim's video saying that argument in a whiny voice doesn't make it wrong). People just aren't trusting of the gaming industry (I know I'm not!), so better to remove all ability for them to seriously think it might be coming even if it means those same non-trusting people will just not trust you even harder.
As mentioned in the Jimquisition ep you reference, companies acting in this way can have unforeseen negative consequences for innocent people, as shown with what happened to Laura Kate Dale after she reported on an Until Dawn: Rush of Blood leak which Supermassive then denied the existence of, leading to people accusing LKD of being a liar and lowering her reputation, before the game was then confirmed to be real about 6 days later. Is it really worth potentially ruining a journalists reputation just so you can reveal your game a few days later??
Are you permanently hurting someone's career reputation if people say they're lying about a party, though?
Is there any evidence that LKD's journalistic integrity was seriously, in the long term, ruined by that 6 days in between Supermassive's statement and Rush of Blood being revealed? Most people seem to look at the multitude of much more highly publicised NX/Switch leaks (of which many proved to be false) when regarding her integrity as a journalist, not that. That and the original leak/denial was about Until Dawn DLC:
"We are not currently working on any DLC for Until Dawn at the moment."
There was no literal lie there, we only knew what the case actually was after Rush of Blood had been revealed and LKD had been proven to be correct, just a little off-the-mark.
Before you say it, I'm not saying that LKD deserved any abuse she might have received because of that comment nor am I condoning said abuse in any way. However, it wasn't Supermassive's fault either; they were asked about the existence of UD DLC and they denied it because there was no UD DLC. It's not like they said "Until Dawn is over forever and Laura Kate Dale is wrong about everything."
The game industry's inane secrecy makes no sense to me. no other entertainment industry does this. I don't know why they can't simply say "yeah we're working on this game".
Then again we've seen how gamers react when companies don't do exactly what they want.
You mean the entertainment industry where you're forced to watch a low-quality potato-cam version of a trailer because they only let those lucky/rich enough to attend Comic Con watch it properly? I mean, film companies especially are great about simply announcing things but being frustratingly obtuse about what they want to show isn't exclusive to the gaming industry.
This is a great point actually that I didn't thought of, agreed on the rest too.It's real shitty when there's going to be a PC version (or any unannounced platform, really) that they don't reveal until much later so that consumers can't make a fully informed choice about which version they'd like to buy. That is perhaps slightly immoral on the grounds that it's deceptive and deliberately interferes with consumer autonomy for the benefit of the publisher.
Denying a game's existence, period, isn't immoral and doesn't fall anywhere in the moral domain. No one is being hurt or having their autonomy infringed upon. It's not unfair to anyone. Sharing information about in-development consumer products isn't a moral issue.
lifetimeofnot
Member
Is it really worth potentially ruining a journalists reputation just so you can reveal your game a few days later??
Is it really worth a journalists reputation to leak a game six days early? Game devs owe journalists nothing.
Conciliator
Banned
I mean, they can do it if they want to, but it just adds to the ever-more eye-rolling AAA stew of nonsense. Lot of these guys talk a big game about speaking directly to gamers. But either we're stupid as fuck or they think we are.
I'm actually open to either option on that one.
pretty much
I'm actually open to either option on that one.
It's not wrong, it's just really dumb.
pretty much
Stormblessed
Member
It seems kind of weird to give a moral dimension to this question.
For individual developers (a number were called out by Jim) it's part of their contract, and in a choice between telling you something you kinda already know and keeping their job, the latter point naturally wins out. There is no complex moral calculus here. Your life and wellbeing are not at risk if you don't get confirmation a video game is being made.
For publishers, it's silly, but they're not exactly obliged to tell you. They should be smarter in dismissing rumours, and that's where the problem kinda lies - they'll make some journalist look a tool instead of defaulting to "we don't comment on rumours and speculation". But given how common false rumours and stories are in games media, most are taken with a grain of salt so even reputational damage is limited.
For individual developers (a number were called out by Jim) it's part of their contract, and in a choice between telling you something you kinda already know and keeping their job, the latter point naturally wins out. There is no complex moral calculus here. Your life and wellbeing are not at risk if you don't get confirmation a video game is being made.
For publishers, it's silly, but they're not exactly obliged to tell you. They should be smarter in dismissing rumours, and that's where the problem kinda lies - they'll make some journalist look a tool instead of defaulting to "we don't comment on rumours and speculation". But given how common false rumours and stories are in games media, most are taken with a grain of salt so even reputational damage is limited.
Outright denying seems weird to me and can potentially throw a journalist under the bus like described in the Jimquisition (then again, the real issue there is the toxic community, not the dev denying the rumor), but I don't see an issue if they're just all "no comment" on any rumors.
A games first reveal is a very big deal and often the thing people remember most about a games marketing.
It really sucks when details leak early. No I dont think its wrong to flat out lie about a games existence for any reason. We are not entitled to that info. We arent investors.
Even though it may seem like the secret is all out of the bag, a large majority of people who dont follow games like we do are still out of the loop and will get the full experience planned from the reveal.
Funny that you should mention investors.
http://www.investopedia.com/exam-gu...-standards/standard-nonpublic-information.asp
Does the existence of new gaming projects count as a "Major development specific to that industry"? If a big project leaks and people buy or sell shares based on this information, would it be a breach of disclosure rules to deny it?
Sure, spoiling a surprise for gamers is one thing, denying the existence of potential multi million dollar product, only to announce it as if the leak didn't happen is another.
Obviously only applies to publicly traded companies.
Of course its not wrong and thinking that it should just reeks of entitlement. Businesses have plans and schedules for how and when they want information released.
If a journalist finds out about an unannounced game and wants to write about it then fine whatever. But devs dont have to respond to anything if it does not correspond to their plan and its not wrong for them to deny the existence of
something until theyre ready to talk about it. Using wrong in this scenario is just bizarre because it implies that gamers are being mistreated whenever devs dont acquiesce to their demands for info.
If a journalist finds out about an unannounced game and wants to write about it then fine whatever. But devs dont have to respond to anything if it does not correspond to their plan and its not wrong for them to deny the existence of
something until theyre ready to talk about it. Using wrong in this scenario is just bizarre because it implies that gamers are being mistreated whenever devs dont acquiesce to their demands for info.
There is a difference between saying "no comment", "no plans to talk about that" etc. and saying "what that person said is false, we are doing no such thing and will not be doing that"
frankly, I agree with jim. its not that I want repentance, or even that damage has been done... its just a shame that no one seems interested in being trusted, because lying makes me not trust you.
i don't even need to make a moral argument... but hey why not. sure, it is also wrong.
frankly, I agree with jim. its not that I want repentance, or even that damage has been done... its just a shame that no one seems interested in being trusted, because lying makes me not trust you.
i don't even need to make a moral argument... but hey why not. sure, it is also wrong.
Tali'Zorah
Member
Is it really worth a journalists reputation to leak a game six days early? Game devs owe journalists nothing.
A journalist's job is to report these kinds of things. In no other medium would a company just come out and deny the existence of an unannounced product that exists and insinuate the journalist reporting the story is a liar
Lord of Ostia
Member
It's not wrong for them to deny the existence or decline to comment on rumors. It's also not wrong for journalists to report on what they know exists even if it hasn't been officially announced. The journalists aren't (and shouldn't be) beholden to the marketing plans of a corporation, and a corporation doesn't need to abandon it's marketing plans because a small segment of the enthusiast community knows something possibly exists. This isn't that hard to understand, and you shouldn't take it personally that a company is 'lying' to you about something they aren't ready to announce. They don't owe you an announcement.
Is it really? Leaks usually offer very little actual information, it's mostly about the headline. If you can't say something substantial about it, why say anything at all. To fuel the hype culture?A journalist's job is to report these kinds of things. In no other medium would a company just come out and deny the existence of an unannounced product that exists and insinuate the journalist reporting the story is a liar
Inkvoterad
Member
This is a weird thing to try to have a moral discussion about
who's hurt by this
who
who's hurt by this
who
Tali'Zorah
Member
Is it really? Leaks usually offer very little actual information, it's mostly about the headline. If you can't say something substantial about it, why say anything at all. To fuel the hype culture?
The job of a journalist is to find and report on newsworthy happenings. In the video game industry, are you saying that the existence of a new, unannounced video game from a major publisher isn't newsworthy? I'm pretty sure it is.
Lord of Ostia
Member
The fact that something exists that no one knew about previously is substantial news. What is more substantial than that, from a gaming news perspective? Don't say reviews, reviews are not news.Is it really? Leaks usually offer very little actual information, it's mostly about the headline. If you can't say something substantial about it, why say anything at all. To fuel the hype culture?
This is a weird thing to try to have a moral discussion about
who's hurt by this
who
Well companies can be. Marketing campaigns cost money. If the campaign relies on surprise it can be seriously damaged or rethought. Shareholders can see leaks as inherently problematic and affect values. It's certainly not victimless but usually not a crime either. And if the leak is from a fellow employee it is both an ethical and moral issue.
Publishers publish new video games is something that tends to happen. No I don't think it in itself is newsworthy. If there's substantial information about the game, then sure. But if the article is "this is a thing" or can be covered in a Tweet, then I think it's pretty pointless. And the information ofcourse needs to be correct too, rumours have very little value.The job of a journalist is to find and report on newsworthy happenings. In the video game industry, are you saying that the existence of a new, unannounced video game from a major publisher isn't newsworthy? I'm pretty sure it is.