Support NeoGAF

[Thorgal]

this is thread in response about one particular topic of this weeks Jimquisition so if someone wants to make a another thread about the episode proper feel free to do so .


the topic for this thread though is :

is it wrong for company's to vehemently deny or refuse to confirm that a game /product is in actual development even mere days before it's actual planned announcement even tough the slew of incoming leaks and rumors are all but confirming it's existence ?

basically ,is it wrong for a company to "Stick to the plan " and wait until the scheduled time to reveal the surprise even though the curtain that is hidding the surprise has been torn to shreds ?

 

[th4tguy]

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 don’t think it’s wrong to flat out lie about a games existence for any reason. We are not entitled to that info. We aren’t investors.
Even though it may seem like the secret is all out of the bag, a large majority of people who don’t follow games like we do are still out of the loop and will get the full experience planned from the reveal.

 

[Niceguydan8]

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.

 

[Guevara]

This is why we have: No Comment

 

[Crossing Eden]

NDAs exist for a reason. And you don't wanna be the one breaking one. Also marketing schedules are incredibly specific.

 

[Currygan]

Nope, it's not wrong. Not sure why is this even an issue

 

[TC McQueen]

I dunno if it's "wrong," per se, but it's fucking pointless and wastes everyone's time. Yes, it sucks that whatever clever/planned reveal you had planned got screwed, but I don't think the stockholders care that your marketing crap got slightly derailed and in this day and age, you should really have contingency plans for leaks anyway.

 

[DrArchon]

Again, all they have to say is:

"We don't comment on rumors and speculation"

That's all it would take. Can't be called a liar if you don't comment.

 

[Nev]

Who even decides what's "wrong"? You should rely on your own judgement more frequently.

 

[shaneo632]

I don't think so. If a journalist's reputation is built on something like inside information it seems a bit rich to expect companies who don't want these leaks to happen to play ball.

Sterling sticking up for Laura K. Dale just seemed like a bit of cronyism on his part to be honest.

I agree with his overall point about publishers being untrustworthy but that should really be a given at this point. I don't expect shit from publishers to be true and I always wait until reviews come out before I give them my money.

They should absolutely be held accountable for misrepresenting a game, but lying about a game being in development to protect their marketing strategy? Absolutely not.

 

[Lunar15]

It's not wrong, and more importantly, why do people care so much?

A ton of shit goes into marketing a campaign. Just working in the advertising side, there's deadlines we have to hit for creative and it's not like those can be magically shortened because a journalist leaked.

There's a whole separate argument about whether or not these marketing campaigns are worth the money, but not what this thread is about.

 

[Tohsaka]

Oftentimes they legally aren't allowed to.

 

[perfectsil]

It’s their product, they dont owe you any information

 

[Ninja Scooter]

This is not an issue of right and wrong.

 

[Javier23]

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.

 

[HellforLeather]

The only time Ive ever heard a game dev publicly deny that a game was being made was David Jaffe when he flat out said that Twisted Metal for PS3 was not what he was working on before they officially revealed it at E3. I didnt really have a problem with it as the announcement was great.

All other times Ive only heard devs use some variation of "no comment"

 

[Geeky]

This is why we have: No Comment

I don't have time to watch the linked video, but "No Comment" is a great phrase that should be used more.

As far as denying a game until existence. I imagine that reveals have multiple hurdles to them sometimes. Like someone has bought exclusive coverage to the reveal (like IGN or game informer, which in itself could be a problem).

Then maybe the whole advertising campaign could be built around an event like a Comic Con.

I am sure leaks hurt build hype. I think the character leaks for MvCI hurt what was already an anemic advertising campaign.

 

[Tali'Zorah]

I don't get why companies don't just say "we don't comment on rumours" and be done with it instead of lying. I hate when companies lie about these things, it lowers my ability to trust them. You can just not talk about a game without having to lie about it. 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??

 

[Sulik2]

"We don't comment on rumors and speculation." Congrats no lying required.

 

[emperor_ing]

Any publisher or developer should have a right to decline comment when things get leaked ahead of schedule. Announcing a new game is a huge part of the marketing strategy so they should ultimately call the shots. If a game is leaked just stick to the schedule and brush it off. If a leak is true in the end credit to the journalist getting it right, if not let's move on.

 

[autoduelist]

What? No. It's not 'wrong' to choose when to talk about what you're working on.

 

[horkrux]

Straight up denying? Yes, absolutely.

 

[Hobbes211]

Do you have a particular example of this? The closest thing I can think of is the leaks of Fallout 4 being in Boston and Bethesda kinda stumbling while trying to navigate the rumours and news, but I can't think of a time where they just flat out said "Fallout 4 doesn't exist, let alone is it in Boston."

If a company has invested time and money into a reveal, it's within their right to move along as if rumours don't exist.

 

[Rambaldi]

I dunno if it's "wrong," per se, but it's fucking pointless and wastes everyone's time. Yes, it sucks that whatever clever/planned reveal you had planned got screwed, but I don't think the stockholders care that your marketing crap got slightly derailed and in this day and age, you should really have contingency plans for leaks anyway.

Yeah it’s “fucking pointless” to just let all that money they put into a reveal or marketing be used for the purpose it was meant for. It’s MUCH BETTER to just go “oh some ass on the internet leaked our game. Please buy it. Bye.” with as little fanfare as possible.

I would a) love to know more about your dealings with stockholders and B) love to know your experience with marketing and “contingency plans” since you seem to be so well versed. Obviously you know more about how to properly handle these situations than the actual companies launching the games.

And for the record: no. It’s not wrong. Games aren’t political or affecting the cultural landscape in any sort of critical way. Companies have every right to continue in their “business as usual” ways until they’re ready to announce something. They don’t care if a handful of forum users are upset they won’t confirm a games existence a few days early.

 

[Kamina]

Is it happening often that Devs/Publishers outright deny a games existance previous to the reveal? I only ever rember statements like:
“We dont comment on rumors”
“We have nothing to announce at this time”
“We cant confirm anything”

 

[Patryn]

I don't get why companies don't just say "we don't comment on rumours" and be done with it instead of lying. I hate when companies lie about these things, it lowers my ability to trust them. You can just not talk about a game without having to lie about it. 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??

Some companies do. If you recall, Bethesda for the most part used that line for all the Fallout 4 rumors for the longest time. I think the only time they didn't is when the Survivor 2249 stuff got really big and they did come out and officially deny that.

 

[Thorrgal]

Nice name OP

 

[GodofWine]

They should just reply, "We can't comment on this, because there is a good chance that project is being cancelled"..it would just stir up more shit, and when they do announce it people will go nuts like the dev defeated an evil publisher and still managed to come through for the fans.



Actually, what's even more wrong is working somewhere, on a project that is 'dark', and leaking it through a friend on twitter. I'd totally keep a list of 'mis-truths' I'd tell to only 1 certain person at a time, to ferret out the loud mouth.

 

[Crossing Eden]

Yeah it’s “fucking pointless” to just let all that money they put into a reveal or marketing be used for the purpose it was meant for. It’s MUCH BETTER to just go “oh some ass on the internet leaked our game. Please buy it. Bye.” with as little fanfare as possible.

I would a) love to know more about your dealings with stockholders and B) love to know your experience with marketing and “contingency plans” since you seem to be so well versed. Obviously you know more about how to properly handle these situations than the actual companies launching the games.

And for the record: no. It’s not wrong. Games aren’t political or affecting the cultural landscape in any sort of critical way. Companies have every right to continue in their “business as usual” ways until they’re ready to announce something. They don’t care if a handful of forum users are upset they won’t confirm a games existence a few days early.

^^^^

 

[Budi]

No, it's not wrong. Why would it be wrong? Because "lying" is wrong?

 

[Hyun Sai]

We denied preparing anything for a friend birthday. He sued our asses and we had to pay a substancial ammount of money for the psychological damage.

 

[KJRS_1993]

Straight up denying? Yes, absolutely.

Some of you people can't be for real.

Is it becoming a thing now where if it exists, some edgelord will claim it's anti-consumer lies?

 

[Triggerhappytel]

Of course it's not wrong. Employees will be bound by contracts and can't just talk about an unannounced game willy-nilly, and marketing schedules for 'AAA' releases are probably mapped out months ahead of time and a big deal.

 

[Mike Golf]

No, I don’t think it is.

I usually like Jim’s videos and can agree with a lot of his arguments, but this one is just out in left field for me.

So we have insiders leaking info about a potential upcoming game, why should a developer or publisher feel beholden to reveal their work when they’re not ready to because someone internally gave out info?

I understand his personal feelings on the matter as Luara Kate is a friend of his, but leakers take the burden of being criticized or disbelieved until an official announcement occurs from the dev/pub in question when they put out information.

How is it, for example, Nintendo’s responsibility to validate a leak when they’re not ready to? Not to mention maybe even if they wanted to there would likely need to be agreement on all sides involved to do so; i.e. Nintendo and Ubisoft with Mario Rabbids.

That being said, I simply wouldn’t comment on leaks period as a development team or publisher, but I can see how in the eyes of many saying “we have no response” or “we can’t confirm or deny” essentially means they’re verifying the leaks validity.

 

[est1992]

I always loved it when new games would leak and then we'd get an official reveal later. Felt like it added to the hype.

Besides that, no, it isn't morally wrong. If someone spilled the beans to your SO that you were planning to propose, would you scrap the whole date you've been planning for months/years just because your friend got too drunk at a get together and told them? Nah, you wouldn't.

 

[kaioshade]

Wrong? Absolutely not.

Kind of silly? Possibly.

After a certain amount of leaks come to light, as unfortunate as it is, companies really are not fooling anyone when they say "no comment", "rumors and speculation" or whatever variation thereof. I think it would even be fine if they said "yes we are working on this, and information has gotten out earlier than we would like. Please look forward to our proper reveal soon"

 

[Wulfram]

Companies should try not to lie to or mislead their custumers. Even over trivial things that don't do any harm to the customer, its a bad habit to get into.

No commenting is fine, sometimes it can be a bit silly but I don't have a problem with it.

 

[BiggNife]

This is why we have: No Comment

This.

If you cannot confirm a product, you say "no comment." That is literally why that term exists. Don't blatantly lie and make the journalist look like a fraud.

Randy Pitchford attacking journalists for "blatantly false" claims and then announcing Borderlands 2 a week later is just plain shitty.

Do I get why companies do it? Yeah, of course. Do I think they should do it? Personally, no.

 

[Triggerhappytel]

Straight up denying? Yes, absolutely.

So it's 'absolutely' wrong for a company to reveal the $100 million product it's developing to its own schedule?!

The fuck are some of you guys smoking??

 

[Tali'Zorah]

Some companies do. If you recall, Bethesda for the most part used that line for all the Fallout 4 rumors for the longest time. I think the only time they didn't is when the Survivor 2249 stuff got really big and they did come out and officially deny that.

Oh, for certain, I'm not saying that all companies are guilty of this. Bethesda are definitely great with this, I can't remember them in recent years at all straight up denying a game's existence then revealing it afterwards. Even when things like Evil Within 2 or Prey were fully expected to be revealed at their respective E3's Bethesda didn't try to lie about them for their reveal, just didn't acknowledge the rumours, which is the correct way to approach these things. More companies should follow that approach

 

[Human Trashcan]

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.

 

[LordKasual]

basically ,is it wrong for a company to "Stick to the plan " and wait until the scheduled time to reveal the surprise even though the curtain that is hidding the surprise has been torn to shreds ?

The curtain that's hiding the surprise is never supposed to be torn in the first place

so no

 

[Kneefoil]

I would prefer if they just said "no comment", but I pretty much agree with the quote below.

No, I don’t think it is.

I usually like Jim’s videos and can agree with a lot of his arguments, but this one is just out in left field for me.

So we have insiders leaking info about a potential upcoming game, why should a developer or publisher feel beholden to reveal their work when they’re not ready to because someone internally gave out info?

I understand his personal feelings on the matter as Luara Kate is a friend of his, but leakers take the burden of being criticized or disbelieved until an official announcement occurs from the dev/pub in question when they put out information.

How is it, for example, Nintendo’s responsibility to validate a leak when they’re not ready to? Not to mention maybe even if they wanted to there would likely need to be agreement on all sides involved to do so; i.e. Nintendo and Ubisoft with Mario Rabbids.

That being said, I simply wouldn’t comment on leaks period as a development team or publisher, but I can see how in the eyes of many saying “we have no response” or “we can’t confirm or deny” essentially means they’re verifying the leaks validity.

 

[Brandon F]

Is there any inherent 'harm' to the consumer at play by this issue?

 

[BiggNife]

So it's 'absolutely' wrong for a company to reveal the $100 million product it's developing to its own schedule?!

The fuck are some of you guys smoking??

Genuine question: Why can't they just say "no comment?"

It lets them announce the game on their own schedule and it doesn't make the journalist look like a liar

Isn't that a win-win scenario as opposed to denying?

 

[SomedayTheFire]

No.

 

[Spyder_Monkey]

This is why we have: No Comment

The problem with that is that it doesn't do a good job controlling expectations.

Honestly Jim's overall point is solid, if very obvious (people shouldn't lie!) but his examples besides the LKD one suck.

 

[astrogamer]

So it's 'absolutely' wrong for a company to reveal the $100 million product it's developing to its own schedule?!

The fuck are some of you guys smoking??

There's always the option of "No Comment". Only time a company should deny a rumor is when the rumor gets too big and isn't true at all

 

[old manatee]

I'm still vehemently denying Fallout 4's existence, and that was already released.

 

[Stinkles]

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.

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.