Oh, this is a LEAK!?!?!?
LOL pretty perfect timing no? Not pointing any fingers but there's no way this wasn't in some way on purpose on Ubi's PR part. Stock prices don't lie.
How are four unfinished screenshots saving the Ubisoft stock prices?
Oh, this is a LEAK!?!?!?
LOL pretty perfect timing no? Not pointing any fingers but there's no way this wasn't in some way on purpose on Ubi's PR part. Stock prices don't lie.
How are four unfinished screenshots saving the Ubisoft stock prices?
You guys drive me crazy. I'll probably be blacklisted by Ubisoft PR forever, yet here people are thinking this was an intentional leak. Do you really think that Stephen Totilo or I would ever participate in something like that?
In terms of blacklisting: I don't think it matters. Kotaku is one of the biggest gaming news sites so publishers have to "play ball" with you to get the coverage they need. For the games I have worked on, any time we got a Kotaku news story our site hits (and subsequently preorders/sales) would spike way above our daily/weekly normal. Even if it was less-than-great coverage (such as reporting on a major bug) we still got a sales spike.
Once again for emphasis:
Ubisoft stock prices don't need to be saved, they're higher now than right before Unity came out :<
I'm really disappointed at the amount of people here hyped and excited about this. When will we learn¿
That's what the poster I quoted implied if I understood him/her correctly, not me.
Just trying to point out the ridiculous lengths people go to trying to make this look like a controlled leak.
Sadly, despite that, we have been blacklisted by more than one major publisher who believe that the press's role is to serve as their marketing puppets. I wish video game publishers wouldn't get mad at us for doing our jobs, but hey.In terms of blacklisting: I don't think it matters. Kotaku is one of the biggest gaming news sites so publishers have to "play ball" with you to get the coverage they need. For the games I have worked on, any time we got a Kotaku news story our site hits (and subsequently preorders/sales) would spike way above our daily/weekly normal. Even if it was less-than-great coverage (such as reporting on a major bug) we still got a sales spike.
Sadly, despite that, we have been blacklisted by more than one major publisher who believe that the press's role is to serve as their marketing puppets. I wish video game publishers wouldn't get mad at us for doing our jobs, but hey.
Which ones?
Maybe four is Dishonored II hopefully releases next year.
^ lol "Checks in the mail"
yeah Kotaku has made a pretty good change from being a site I would never visit (way back in the day) to one I no longer have issues clicking links to anymore
so ya'll did good
Why would they want people to forget a game they just spent tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars making? What they want is to fix Unity and get more people buying it, hence their angry statement yesterday. They didn't want people to know about next year's game because it might take sales away from the disappointing one they just released. (Which is one of the reasons I'm glad we were able to get this scoop -- so people can make more educated purchasing decisions.)
Thanks! Don't get me wrong: we're in a good place right now. Our readership is bigger than ever, thanks at least in part to the fact that we're moving further and further away from the PR cycles that have influenced video game coverage for the past three decades. (More and more we're focusing on games that are already out rather than PR bullshit.)I know it isn't much, but there are plenty of us who laud you for doing your jobs ethically and well. You are appreciated.
Same for me except that I just can'T stand the site's design... I don't know why but it just doesn't click with my brain, I can't navigate it.
I know, I was emphasizing the point with images that his argument was wrong in the first place because the stock doesn't even need help
This makes so much sense it hurts. I think people are looking for drama where there is none. They want a narrative
1866 and this Assassin Creed game... I don't know what the third one is.
Well if you were to ask Schenmu, the game doesn't look as detailed as GTAV. Not even remotely.
Despite GTAV not using PBR, having ridiculously meticulously detailed interiors, and also still showing it's last gen roots with some aspects of the character models, like the hair and cloth simulation.
There are millions of dollars and probably plenty of jobs on the line when it comes to a game's success. If this early leak leads to people not buying Unity because they'd rather wait for this one, I can understand why that would upset Ubisoft and the people who work there.
They've only just released Unity, a game which, in contrast to the ridiculous levels of sandbaggery that went on in the press, is actually a pretty impressive game in a lot of respects. I can fully understand them still wanting to focus on that game and they've done a lot to rectify its problems. There's really nothing ethical about the person who decided to leak this to Kotaku or the site deciding to print it.
If I was making a game, I would like to think I could decide when to unveil it, when I was happy with what had been created, and how the reveal fit into my business plans.
I'm not down with trying to palm it off as a service to the consumer, and not a scoop for clicks.
Thanks! Don't get me wrong: we're in a good place right now. Our readership is bigger than ever, thanks at least in part to the fact that we're moving further and further away from the PR cycles that have influenced video game coverage for the past three decades. (More and more we're focusing on games that are already out rather than PR bullshit.)
It's a bummer when publishers get angry and refuse to work with us because we posted leaks or ran investigations about them, but I think we'll be OK. Really cool stuff coming on the horizon for us. 2015 is gonna be a good year!
What part of "news" don't you understand? I would be livid if Kotaku got their hands on this and decided not to run it because it could hurt Ubisoft. That is grade-a corporate stoogery and has no place in any legitimate news outfit.
The funny thing is that even with all the games with bugs Unity was the one to be scrutinized
Gta V came out on PS4 has frame drops to the mid 20s when coming to an intersection with more than 4 cars, and even lower if anything starts getting insane
Game has bugs from killer gates to dropping through the world to NPCs repeating animations, you know the types of bugs Ubisoft is currently fixing in Assassins creed Unity and yet you hear almost nothing about them
Why would they want people to forget a game they just spent tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars making? What they want is to fix Unity and get more people buying it, hence their angry statement yesterday. They didn't want people to know about next year's game because it might take sales away from the disappointing one they just released. (Which is one of the reasons I'm glad we were able to get this scoop -- so people can make more educated purchasing decisions.)
Thanks! Don't get me wrong: we're in a good place right now. Our readership is bigger than ever, thanks at least in part to the fact that we're moving further and further away from the PR cycles that have influenced video game coverage for the past three decades. (More and more we're focusing on games that are already out rather than PR bullshit.)
You're right in some ways, and these are things we discuss quite a bit whenever this sort of thing happens at Kotaku. There are a lot of reasons we chose to handle this leak in the way we handled it, but ultimately it comes down to one main factor: our job is to report the news, and this is news that was sent to us.Nonsense. Any business has the right to decide when it wants to publicly unveil its own projects. And it's not just hurting Ubisoft, the corporate giant. I'm sure many of the creative people - artists and designers - are also unhappy with having their work leaked early.
There's a difference between leaking sensitive information to the public or consumers because it is in their specific interest or because the business is itself acting unethically by not supplying that information, and this kind of leak. I'm surprised you don't see a difference.
Sadly, despite that, we have been blacklisted by more than one major publisher who believe that the press's role is to serve as their marketing puppets. I wish video game publishers wouldn't get mad at us for doing our jobs, but hey.
Nonsense. Any business has the right to decide when it wants to publicly unveil its own projects. And it's not just hurting Ubisoft, the corporate giant. I'm sure many of the creative people - artists and designers - are also unhappy with having their work leaked early.
There's a difference between leaking sensitive information to the public or consumers because it is in their specific interest or because the business is itself acting unethically by not supplying that information, and this kind of leak. I'm surprised you don't see a difference.
Thanks! Don't get me wrong: we're in a good place right now. Our readership is bigger than ever, thanks at least in part to the fact that we're moving further and further away from the PR cycles that have influenced video game coverage for the past three decades. (More and more we're focusing on games that are already out rather than PR bullshit.)
It's a bummer when publishers get angry and refuse to work with us because we posted leaks or ran investigations about them, but I think we'll be OK. Really cool stuff coming on the horizon for us. 2015 is gonna be a good year!
Nonsense. Any business has the right to decide when it wants to publicly unveil its own projects. And it's not just hurting Ubisoft, the corporate giant. I'm sure many of the creative people - artists and designers - are also unhappy with having their work leaked early.
There's a difference between leaking sensitive information to the public or consumers because it is in their specific interest or because the business is itself acting unethically by not supplying that information, and this kind of leak. I'm surprised you don't see a difference.
Bullshit. Ubisoft is in the entertainment business, thrusting itself in the public eye year round in hopes of making million / billions of dollars per year. If it wants to put itself out there, beg for attention of gamers and gaming press periodically throughout the year, make ungodly amounts of money publishing the same game year over year, then it has no right to cry that the people whose attention it craved and begged for won't stop from peeking behind a fictional privacy curtain designed only to avoid loss of sales of an existing game.
So just because Ubisoft is in the business of making (entertainment) products, which they occasionally market and sell to customers/consumers, they do not have the right to privacy or the right to complain if that privacy gets violated?
Did I get that right?
You're right in some ways, and these are things we discuss quite a bit whenever this sort of thing happens at Kotaku. There are a lot of reasons we chose to handle this leak in the way we handled it, but ultimately it comes down to one main factor: our job is to report the news, and this is news that was sent to us.
So just because Ubisoft is in the business of making (entertainment) products, which they occasionally market and sell to customers/consumers, they do not have the right to privacy or the right to complain if that privacy gets violated?
Did I get that right?