Exactly. I'm not sure why people are so accepting of flat out lying. There's no reason to lie and it's wrong to lie...especially about something not worth lying about. Just say, "No comment." It's easy and simple. I think we should stop the lying in the games business and just not say anything at all. I don't agree with Jim that often, but in this case, I do. I don't believe anything any company has to say because they lie about so much stuff. A non answer is better than lying about it.
-
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.
Is Vehemently denying a games existence despite it being all but confirmed wrong?
- Thread starter Thorgal
- Start date
Exactly. I'm not sure why people are so accepting of flat out lying. There's no reason to lie and it's wrong to lie...especially about something not worth lying about. Just say, "No comment." It's easy and simple. I think we should stop the lying in the games business and just not say anything at all. I don't agree with Jim that often, but in this case, I do. I don't believe anything any company has to say because they lie about so much stuff. A non answer is better than lying about it.
Crantius_Colto
Member
Kant was against lying seeing it as morally wrong in any circumstance because it diminishes the value of truth. Anyway, I don't think you have to be a Kantian to dislike lying even when noone's hurt.
Fourmyle of Ceres
Member
I don't see why it's a matter of right or wrong.
Head.spawn
Junior Member
I feel like if it were your money on the line, you financing and meticulously planning the marketing around a product, pitching ideas back and forth, contracting art, licensing music and doing all the logistics around making sure your product is best presented while arranging previews, media spots, commercials, interviews, putting in tons of hours with a team to make sure everything is just right and marketed as well as it should be... you'd probably have a different take on things.
Then someone leaks your shit to Kotaku.... you just throw it all away? Eat all the money spent?
They want their products presented in the best way possible, not some limp toss out on a page for a few clicks with no details behind it by someone who really doesn't know wtf they're talking about.
Don't get me wrong, I personally like reading the stuff that gets leaked but I totally get why the companies aren't fond of it.
Then someone leaks your shit to Kotaku.... you just throw it all away? Eat all the money spent?
They want their products presented in the best way possible, not some limp toss out on a page for a few clicks with no details behind it by someone who really doesn't know wtf they're talking about.
Don't get me wrong, I personally like reading the stuff that gets leaked but I totally get why the companies aren't fond of it.
Forsaken82
Member
The problem more often than not is that the company has an exclusive deal with whoever is expected to make the initial launch announcement and leaking the information or acknowledging leaked info affects that exclusivity.
People pay good money to ensure they are the ones that get the reveal... it's kind of a big deal, so it makes a lot of sense to deny it until an official announcement just from the business side of things.
People pay good money to ensure they are the ones that get the reveal... it's kind of a big deal, so it makes a lot of sense to deny it until an official announcement just from the business side of things.
AntraxSuicide
Banned
The problem with "no comment" is that these days, that gets read into as a tacit confirmation by enough people that various marketing deals lose their full value, especially if the project is real and close by.
If someone at Bioware gave a "no comment" on them making Kotor 3 after a rumor came out that they were working on it, then you know damn well there'd be a 5 page thread up within the day.
If someone at Bioware gave a "no comment" on them making Kotor 3 after a rumor came out that they were working on it, then you know damn well there'd be a 5 page thread up within the day.
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
Because for a medium that has an audience as big as gaming, way too few in that audience seems to ever take a step back and think about real life things like marketing schedules, it's always about anthropomorphized studios who're evil because reasons.
This is also true.
It's really stupid that there's so much secrecy. Like, we know movies are coming years in advance, whether or not they actually end up being filmed. The title being out there isn't going to keep people from buying your game.
Not if you give the exact same answer to all rumors, whether they're true or not.
Don't say "no" to false ones and "no comment" for true ones. That's super dumb.
"We don't comment on rumors or speculation" is good enough to cover all situations.
Not if you give the exact same answer to all rumors, whether they're true or not.
Don't say "no" to false ones and "no comment" for true ones. That's super dumb.
"We don't comment on rumors or speculation" is good enough to cover all situations.
The Omega Man
Member
Does this happen often? I only remember 2 cases where the developers said "No, not happening" only do be real and indeed happening. one was PlatinumGames denying working on Metal Gear Raiden and the other one was Jaffe denying he was working on whatever game he was indeed working at that time.
"Say that I laughed" is my favorite no comment, especially since it preceded the announcement of MM3D by well over a year.
http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/09/12/zelda-producer-on-majoras-mask-remake-say-that-i-laughed
As that article mentions, at the preceding E3 a few months before Aonuma's comment, Miyamoto had mentioned MM fans were "still in [his] memory." This was in response to a question about what happened to the potential MM remake, as back in 06/2012 (a year prior), Miyamoto had said Zelda 3DS would be either a MM remake or something involving LTTP. (Then in 04/2013, LBW was announced.) So us MM fans were teased for a looong time before the game was finally announced in 11/2014 (and thankfully released just a few short months later in 02/2015).
http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/06/20/nintendo-still-thinking-about-majoras-mask-remake
http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/06/12/zelda-3ds-its-majoras-mask-vs-link-to-the-past
Fake edit: in brushing up on MM3D's development history on its Wiki page, I learned fans were teased even longer than I'd realized:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Legend_of_Zelda:_Majora's_Mask_3D
http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/09/12/zelda-producer-on-majoras-mask-remake-say-that-i-laughed
As that article mentions, at the preceding E3 a few months before Aonuma's comment, Miyamoto had mentioned MM fans were "still in [his] memory." This was in response to a question about what happened to the potential MM remake, as back in 06/2012 (a year prior), Miyamoto had said Zelda 3DS would be either a MM remake or something involving LTTP. (Then in 04/2013, LBW was announced.) So us MM fans were teased for a looong time before the game was finally announced in 11/2014 (and thankfully released just a few short months later in 02/2015).
http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/06/20/nintendo-still-thinking-about-majoras-mask-remake
http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/06/12/zelda-3ds-its-majoras-mask-vs-link-to-the-past
Fake edit: in brushing up on MM3D's development history on its Wiki page, I learned fans were teased even longer than I'd realized:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Legend_of_Zelda:_Majora's_Mask_3D
AntraxSuicide
Banned
This was actually a really long thread a while ago, so someone else should go find it lol.
The difference between those two forms of media is that when movie buffs here about changes made during production, they don't throw the same tantrums that gaming fans do. A developer on Twitter talked about how all the developers swap stories about what they're working on, but they never comment publicly because if gamers ever found out about a project, they'd stir up enough crap about various features that the project would either end up overhyped or prematurely vilified.
I found the tweet that started that thread.
People did do this. But honestly, what do you think the ratio of BS rumors to real ones is these days? Most of the time, write-ups are closer to accurate than not (even the inaccurate ones are just working on slightly older builds that have since changed).
If there were more "RUMOR: Mario to appear in Halo 6" articles, then sure, people could point to that as a time when "no comment" was attached to a false story. But those articles are rare.
Again, most people these days hear "no comment" and assume what that means. It isn't correct (logically or otherwise), but them's the breaks.
DavionStriker
Member
Well, if its a public company, commenting on a rumor may have a material impact on the stock price. That could go south of some SEC laws.
The reveal, marketing, hype and all the related work that goes into those things means a company likes to control the information. There is nothing inherently wrong with that. Calling them out on that is silly. We don't have rights to private information, no matter how much we might love a publisher/dev or property.
Yup.
You in the habit of being friends with companies?
Either it's a business and there's journalism or it's all just PR and we're mugs.
It's exactly the same as investigating films, TV shows, music, sports - ultimately these are things people want to know about as soon as the information is available but knowing early is utterly useless unless there's a direct impact to your purchasing decisions.
This obsession with reveals is weird, though not as much as the people defending companies' PR.
I very strongly disagree with Jim Sterling on this one... The game company is NOT obligated to confirm ANYTHING. They get to release information at their own pace, based on their own strategy. There is no moral obligation whatsoever. It isn't their fault if a journalist gets criticized for something they write, even if that criticism is unjust. The game company is not obligated to save that journalist from themselves. Personally, I think Jim is way to close to the subject and completely incapable of being impartial here.
I am quick to cynicism when it comes to big companies. However, I am not going to criticize them when they aren't functionally doing anything wrong. I will save my criticism for the many actual injustices.
I am quick to cynicism when it comes to big companies. However, I am not going to criticize them when they aren't functionally doing anything wrong. I will save my criticism for the many actual injustices.
AntraxSuicide
Banned
Those PR firms are staffed by workers though, not fat cats. And leaks can hurt their chances at landing these contracts.
"Here's our resume of all the PR we've worked on."
"Ah, I remember how everyone found out about this one way before you guys actually did anything. Leaky ship, eh?"
That's not a question people want to deal with. Tight ships and impactful trailers still get talked about, and that helps those workers who put it together.
Ultimately, I'm sympathetic to Dale, but she's in the business of leaks, and that means you'll take some punches until the reveals come out.
samurai1226
Member
Thanks for clearing that. I didn't want to say you lied if that seemed so, but I think it's valid to say that some statements were "misleading", which actually was you point. I'm totally on board that there no need to confirm every leak or blind guess that comes up. Having this big first announcement is pretty important for creating a hype fora game. In general it's great that 343i is pretty active on reddit, neogaf, etc. In the end it just felt disappointing if the community understood a statement in a plausible different way than it was meant to.
Before I proposed, my (now) fiancee was eager to figure out what my plan was. She knew that something was up and kept asking me but I kept denying anything was going on. I put way too much effort into my proposal to simply tell her just because she was interested.
If I'm okay with "lying" to my fiancee, I'm okay with video game companies "lying" to me about their upcoming projects. They don't need to tell me anything until they're ready.
If I'm okay with "lying" to my fiancee, I'm okay with video game companies "lying" to me about their upcoming projects. They don't need to tell me anything until they're ready.
This may not have been the greatest analogy lol
or be like Retro where they tease people with just BBQ pics.
HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
This is such a ridiculously entitled stance in the first place.
Apart from when they hang out journalists to dry?
Eh? I'm talking about normal people defending really bad PR like lying just to claw a few days worth of plausible deniability.
I don't see why they are obligated to do anything but answer a journalists answers in any way they see fit. People being shitty sucks, but a company has no obligation to protect that journalist. I just don't think there is any moral obligation there.
The focus there should be the people being awful. Not on a company having some kind of moral obligation to come out and say "you got us, all the information that you dug up, that we had strategically attempted to hide, is correct".
deltatheta
Member
When a game is announced the developers are staking their reputation that the game will be completed and its content will be consistent with the details that are included in the announcement. Before the game is announced it's important that the developers have the freedom to cut features, cancel the whole project, or entirely change creative directions without having to worry about a fan backlash (and many gamer subphylums have the well-earned reputation of being incredibly toxic).
I believe that, "We don't comment on rumors and speculation", "We have no comment", "we have nothing to announce", or even "(laughter) we have no such project under development" are entirely fair and true statements to give in response to rumors about games that are under development but haven't yet been officially announced. It's not fair to expect developers to pre-announce projects before they're ready and then have to endure toxicity when the actual announcement or released game doesn't conform to what people were expecting.
To boil away everything and get to the underlying ethical issue, I consider a false denial to be "ethical lying" if it's in response to someone prying into private details they are not entitled to and where disclosure could cause problems.
Things are different from a PR point of view, but that discussion is much less interesting to me.
I believe that, "We don't comment on rumors and speculation", "We have no comment", "we have nothing to announce", or even "(laughter) we have no such project under development" are entirely fair and true statements to give in response to rumors about games that are under development but haven't yet been officially announced. It's not fair to expect developers to pre-announce projects before they're ready and then have to endure toxicity when the actual announcement or released game doesn't conform to what people were expecting.
To boil away everything and get to the underlying ethical issue, I consider a false denial to be "ethical lying" if it's in response to someone prying into private details they are not entitled to and where disclosure could cause problems.
Things are different from a PR point of view, but that discussion is much less interesting to me.
flatearthpandas
Member
Devs don't owe anyone shit in this case. They have a marketing plan. They don't owe journalists who publish leaks anything and consumers are not entitled to know about projects under development. Hell, even investors aren't always informed about what is in development.
No problem with leaks but thinking it is wrong for devs to deny them is just crazy
No problem with leaks but thinking it is wrong for devs to deny them is just crazy
isaacnukem
Member
Nope. If someone's life depended on it, yep. But nope.
Yes, I think vehemently denying is wrong. Being silent is perfectly acceptable. "We have nothing to announce atm" is perfectly fine. A company has to be able to deal with things as leaks professionally and I don't consider vehemently denying very professional if you know you're vehemently lying. Just do company speech, PR speech, leaks happen, deal with it professionally, don't act out of spite. You will look like a Jackass and especially viewed in the context of Jim's argument (which I found as most of the time presented too one sided to completely agree with him, but) I find it fair to point out how the little white lie is really only the tip of the iceberg when companies open their mouths... so yeah, a little "neither confirm nor deny" would be preferred to the lie in my eyes.
And to everyone comig up with clever analogies: big companies do not view you as their beloved or best friends and their games as the betrothal surprise or secret parties!
Even vehemently denying such a thing for the benefit of a person you're close to probably comes off as endearing, you trying your hardest to make them happy. If you instead vehemently deny the suspicion of your friend that you hope you can get him to do something for you (aka give you 60$) and are just waiting for the perfectly planned out sequence of events to play out so that he will be more likely to do that something for you, even if you offer him a service in return... you're not endearing, you'd be a scammer. Think through your analogies people
And to everyone comig up with clever analogies: big companies do not view you as their beloved or best friends and their games as the betrothal surprise or secret parties!
Even vehemently denying such a thing for the benefit of a person you're close to probably comes off as endearing, you trying your hardest to make them happy. If you instead vehemently deny the suspicion of your friend that you hope you can get him to do something for you (aka give you 60$) and are just waiting for the perfectly planned out sequence of events to play out so that he will be more likely to do that something for you, even if you offer him a service in return... you're not endearing, you'd be a scammer. Think through your analogies people
I understand why companies "stick to the plan", lie and deny the existence of something that clearly exists. I also understand that for the time between that denial and the ultimate announcement, the journalist who claimed it's existence is made to look like a fool.
And while I agree that Laura Kate Dale and others who report on unannounced products are just doing their jobs, I don't think the studios and publishers behind the games are morally obligated to respect that. Just like it's her job to root out any news or announcements (potentially furthering her career) at their expense of their plans, it's their job to maximize the PR of the game and often that means timely reveals and announcements.
So I choose to see the many idiots who rush to social media to attack journalists or prematurely slash at their credibility as the villain here. These are the only people without a point.
And while I agree that Laura Kate Dale and others who report on unannounced products are just doing their jobs, I don't think the studios and publishers behind the games are morally obligated to respect that. Just like it's her job to root out any news or announcements (potentially furthering her career) at their expense of their plans, it's their job to maximize the PR of the game and often that means timely reveals and announcements.
So I choose to see the many idiots who rush to social media to attack journalists or prematurely slash at their credibility as the villain here. These are the only people without a point.
flatearthpandas
Member
Devs lying about what game they are working equals them scamming you?If you instead vehemently deny the suspicion of your friend that you hope you can get him to do something for you (aka give you 60$) and are just waiting for the perfectly planned out sequence of events to play out so that he will be more likely to do that something for you, even if you offer him a service in return... you're not endearing, you'd be a scammer. Think through your analogies people
hooijdonk17
Member
They can simply say we do not comment on rumours and be done. Saying No it doesnt exist is a lie and wrong.
Trigonometrize.
Member
It's their product, so I feel they should get to reveal it how they want to. And if that includes lying, that's fine by me; I don't really have a sound reason to compel a company to just stick to "no comment" — a limp response compared to denial of existence — if I can't prove harm is done otherwise. As long as the product doesn't officially exist, I don't think there's any moral or ethical compulsion to be honest about it exactly because it doesn't exist. No consumer has a consumer-producer relationship through a product that doesn't officially exist. So naturally, this doesn't apply the moment it's announced, but otherwise, seems like fair game to me.
Well that's the discussion then, isn't it. Is a denial of existence egregious enough to be critical or to go as far as to not purchase the game.
Well that's the discussion then, isn't it. Is a denial of existence egregious enough to be critical or to go as far as to not purchase the game.
Blam
Member
Because unlike a movie these things are going to be able to be enjoyed much longer then a 1-3 hour movie.
Trigonometrize.
Member
I don't see the logic there.
MHWilliams
Member
I honestly don't find anything wrong with it.
Here's the trade-off: that company's statements become bunk. If you've proven that you'll lie in an official statement once—and openly stating something is untrue even though you know it is true is lying—then there's nothing stopping you from doing so again in the future. You give up trust and credibility.
You're better off simply saying "No Comment". I'm sympathetic to companies, because there are contracts and significant amounts of money involved in announcements, but I don't think an outright denial if you know something is true is the correct way.
Here's the trade-off: that company's statements become bunk. If you've proven that you'll lie in an official statement once—and openly stating something is untrue even though you know it is true is lying—then there's nothing stopping you from doing so again in the future. You give up trust and credibility.
You're better off simply saying "No Comment". I'm sympathetic to companies, because there are contracts and significant amounts of money involved in announcements, but I don't think an outright denial if you know something is true is the correct way.
hooijdonk17
Member
They owe us nothing but this behaviour also implies they have no respect for our faith in their word; customer goodwill is really expendable in this industry. This speaks volumes about gamers and how terrible consumers they are too of course.
Blam
Member
It's mainly for spoiling certain surprises or even just hype not being as big if they were more indie dev open about it givvijg daily blog posts. I mean sure movies don't do that but not everyone is gonna be looking at a leak for a set compared to a leak for a game.
I thought Jim was really off base with this one, and I usually agree with him. Like others have mentioned, it came across as though he's looking out for LKD. The harassment leveled at her is awful, but you can't fault the PR reps (or Michel Ancel) when they refuse to confirm whether a game is in development. In the cases mentioned here, it doesn't sound like anything is being denied outright.
A game like BG&E2 obviously needed a strong E3 showing, considering both the situation with Vivendi and the on and off development of the game itself. I'm sure Ancel and Ubi were nervous about info coming out ahead of time, because they needed to come out guns blazing.
Companies have no obligation to confirm anything that they're working on. I'd imagine that answers like the ones given by Supermassive and Ancel are common in a semi-casual interview setting. A "no comment" will lead to more questions, so the developer or PR rep will do their best to redirect the conversation without completely discrediting the information. Whatever the case, we aren't owed anything if a journalist happens to uncover something.
No, because i assume anyone involved in a project is under an NDA to not acknowledge it exists until Marketing says it exists. If there is a leak in a dam, you don't bomb the whole thing, you try to patch the hole.
I say try, because at that point, they are no longer in control of the title's discussion anyways, and are practically applying duck tape till the scheduled explosion. Saying "No Comment" or "It doesn't exist" is like saying there is no war is Ba Sing Se, you've basically confirmed it for anyone speculating on the subject.
I say try, because at that point, they are no longer in control of the title's discussion anyways, and are practically applying duck tape till the scheduled explosion. Saying "No Comment" or "It doesn't exist" is like saying there is no war is Ba Sing Se, you've basically confirmed it for anyone speculating on the subject.