Dygz wrote: » Wandering Mist wrote: » I'm voicing my concerns, as someone who has read through the steam reviews, the youtube comments and various forum threads. The general consensus I'm getting is that a lot of people are confused about Intrepid's intentions. When you have new people coming in saying "I paid for this game, where can I download it to play it" to me, that is a big problem. I disagree that a lot of people are getting confused by the video. Most of the confusion on the IGN channel are confused because the IGN title says it's a gameplay video and it obviously isn't gameplay. Some people who are upset about the BR are still upset about the BR. Some people who are upset about the BR being monetized are still upset about the BR being monetized. And some people don't like the character animations. Tons of people ask daily where they can download and play Ashes. That's not going to change any time soon. Regardless. Because the devs definitely don't care that that's happening.
Wandering Mist wrote: » I'm voicing my concerns, as someone who has read through the steam reviews, the youtube comments and various forum threads. The general consensus I'm getting is that a lot of people are confused about Intrepid's intentions. When you have new people coming in saying "I paid for this game, where can I download it to play it" to me, that is a big problem.
Wandering Mist wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » Wandering Mist wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » Wandering Mist wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » Idk but to me, by asking them to improve their PR, you are basically telling them to stop releasing stuff because I don't think they can give what people want....yet. While I agree the teaser wasn't the best, this seems to happen every time they try to release something new. It's never enough and people use it as an excuse bash the game. If you want to blame them for not meeting their deadlines then cool but it's kind of like crying over spilled milk. At this point, the best PR move is them doing what No Man Sky did and cut communication to focus on the product. Do we really want that? It's not so much about giving people what they want, but sending a clear message. The kickstarter campaign had a very clear message. The aim was to create an mmorpg with a constantly changing world. But now that message is very muddied and confused. Are they making an mmorpg or a battle royal game? The teaser trailer they released just adds to this confusion, as does the monetization of the game. Also, I disagree about the videos they are releasing. The dev diaries videos they put out were really good, as they give us a glimpse of what we will see in the mmorpg. The result is they have generally been positively received by the community.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4m480ManhzQ Just look at the comments of this video compared to the comments on the teaser trailer:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eg5qrykjgNc The difference is night and day. So no, I don't believe shutting down all communication would be a good thing, they just need to think a little bit on how their game is perceived. Sometimes they get it right, with the dev diaries series, but then other times they really do make a mess of things. EDIT: Here's a little experiment. Show the teaser trailer to someone who knows nothing about Ashes of Creation and see what they have to say about it. Then show them the Quarrier creation video and I guarantee you'll get a completely different impression. Is your post really just about the teaser? I'm not going to argue the teaser missed the mark and I agree with what you saying in regards to it. I'm sorry if I interpreted your post wrong but to me, it seemed to be about more then that which is why i commented. I'm not sure what you think of as damage control besides doing better which isn't really constructive. Once again, if the main message of this post was to just point out the flaws of the teaser then I could get behind it but it seems like you are trying to make it about more then that. I am talking about more than just the teaser trailer. The decision to make APOC a stand-alone monetized product, the decision to put it on steam and now this teaser trailer all add up to a very confused message. It's sad but the actions of other game companies have an impact on the impression people have for Intrepid. Monetization on "early access" or "beta" tests comes across as a very scumbag thing, because it is associated with scumbag companies like EA, Ubisoft and Activision. The reasons why Intrepid are monetizing don't matter in the eyes of the players. The same goes for APOC as a concept. If they had kept it as purely a testing platform I doubt anyone would have any problems with it, but as soon as they make it a stand-alone product, players immediately think you are just jumping on the battle royal bandwagon like everyone else. Again, Intrepid could have perfectly good reasons for making APOC a stand-alone product, but that doesn't matter. What matters is the impression the players have of the company and the game. Let's not forget that this is a brand new company making their first game, which means the players don't know what to expect from them. They have no reputation for producing good games. All we have to go on is what they have done so far, and so far their monetization techniques are very similar to companies like EA, Ubisoft, etc who all have terrible reputations. If someone like FromSoftware or Platinum Games were making this it would probably be fine, because those companies have reputations for producing very good games. Intrepid doesn't have that yet and that's why their decisions regarding APOC cause people to have doubts. You might say it's unfair to compare Intrepid to those other big companies and you are right, it is unfair. But that is the reality of it. I have shown a few of my friends the teaser trailer and then told them that it is already monetized and they immediately dismissed Intrepid as a scumbag company on par with EPIC Games. This comes across as an excuse to me. I've heard other members of the community use this argument that they know better but some random person might not because of xyz. If you have concerns then voice them and we can debate it but please don't hide behind the "nameless masses" and assume their perception. I'm only one person and I'm sure some might think the way you claim but from my experience, most people don't care. If they like the game when it comes out, they will play it. Yes, EA and ubisoft have a bad reputation for micro transactions but from what i have seen, that's because they release a fully priced game and then heavily monetize it. On top of that, there are other games that release with micro transactions and are fine because it's perceived as fair. People also love to hate them because they are big companies with large audiences and lots of resources. I'd think anyone who looks at APOCs monetization should think it's fair for the most part. It's a free game with no content locked behind a paywall. It has a $10 battle pass that ends up giving you back more cash shop currency then it costs. Only thing is the item in the cash shop are a little much but even they are priced similar to competitors. On top of all of this, the cosmetics you get in apoc transfer to the MMO. Attempting to make it a stand alone is an obvious choice. Yes, they made it to test but throwing it out afterwards would be a silly waste if others could enjoy it. I don't know how people outside of the community could hold this against them or say they are bad for doing this. If anything, it would be shittier if they took it away just because made it for testing. I don't think people who are not emotionally attached to the project could look at these things and assume Intrepid is a bad company. How is it an excuse? I'm voicing my concerns, as someone who has read through the steam reviews, the youtube comments and various forum threads. The general consensus I'm getting is that a lot of people are confused about Intrepid's intentions. When you have new people coming in saying "I paid for this game, where can I download it to play it" to me, that is a big problem.
mcstackerson wrote: » Wandering Mist wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » Wandering Mist wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » Idk but to me, by asking them to improve their PR, you are basically telling them to stop releasing stuff because I don't think they can give what people want....yet. While I agree the teaser wasn't the best, this seems to happen every time they try to release something new. It's never enough and people use it as an excuse bash the game. If you want to blame them for not meeting their deadlines then cool but it's kind of like crying over spilled milk. At this point, the best PR move is them doing what No Man Sky did and cut communication to focus on the product. Do we really want that? It's not so much about giving people what they want, but sending a clear message. The kickstarter campaign had a very clear message. The aim was to create an mmorpg with a constantly changing world. But now that message is very muddied and confused. Are they making an mmorpg or a battle royal game? The teaser trailer they released just adds to this confusion, as does the monetization of the game. Also, I disagree about the videos they are releasing. The dev diaries videos they put out were really good, as they give us a glimpse of what we will see in the mmorpg. The result is they have generally been positively received by the community.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4m480ManhzQ Just look at the comments of this video compared to the comments on the teaser trailer:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eg5qrykjgNc The difference is night and day. So no, I don't believe shutting down all communication would be a good thing, they just need to think a little bit on how their game is perceived. Sometimes they get it right, with the dev diaries series, but then other times they really do make a mess of things. EDIT: Here's a little experiment. Show the teaser trailer to someone who knows nothing about Ashes of Creation and see what they have to say about it. Then show them the Quarrier creation video and I guarantee you'll get a completely different impression. Is your post really just about the teaser? I'm not going to argue the teaser missed the mark and I agree with what you saying in regards to it. I'm sorry if I interpreted your post wrong but to me, it seemed to be about more then that which is why i commented. I'm not sure what you think of as damage control besides doing better which isn't really constructive. Once again, if the main message of this post was to just point out the flaws of the teaser then I could get behind it but it seems like you are trying to make it about more then that. I am talking about more than just the teaser trailer. The decision to make APOC a stand-alone monetized product, the decision to put it on steam and now this teaser trailer all add up to a very confused message. It's sad but the actions of other game companies have an impact on the impression people have for Intrepid. Monetization on "early access" or "beta" tests comes across as a very scumbag thing, because it is associated with scumbag companies like EA, Ubisoft and Activision. The reasons why Intrepid are monetizing don't matter in the eyes of the players. The same goes for APOC as a concept. If they had kept it as purely a testing platform I doubt anyone would have any problems with it, but as soon as they make it a stand-alone product, players immediately think you are just jumping on the battle royal bandwagon like everyone else. Again, Intrepid could have perfectly good reasons for making APOC a stand-alone product, but that doesn't matter. What matters is the impression the players have of the company and the game. Let's not forget that this is a brand new company making their first game, which means the players don't know what to expect from them. They have no reputation for producing good games. All we have to go on is what they have done so far, and so far their monetization techniques are very similar to companies like EA, Ubisoft, etc who all have terrible reputations. If someone like FromSoftware or Platinum Games were making this it would probably be fine, because those companies have reputations for producing very good games. Intrepid doesn't have that yet and that's why their decisions regarding APOC cause people to have doubts. You might say it's unfair to compare Intrepid to those other big companies and you are right, it is unfair. But that is the reality of it. I have shown a few of my friends the teaser trailer and then told them that it is already monetized and they immediately dismissed Intrepid as a scumbag company on par with EPIC Games. This comes across as an excuse to me. I've heard other members of the community use this argument that they know better but some random person might not because of xyz. If you have concerns then voice them and we can debate it but please don't hide behind the "nameless masses" and assume their perception. I'm only one person and I'm sure some might think the way you claim but from my experience, most people don't care. If they like the game when it comes out, they will play it. Yes, EA and ubisoft have a bad reputation for micro transactions but from what i have seen, that's because they release a fully priced game and then heavily monetize it. On top of that, there are other games that release with micro transactions and are fine because it's perceived as fair. People also love to hate them because they are big companies with large audiences and lots of resources. I'd think anyone who looks at APOCs monetization should think it's fair for the most part. It's a free game with no content locked behind a paywall. It has a $10 battle pass that ends up giving you back more cash shop currency then it costs. Only thing is the item in the cash shop are a little much but even they are priced similar to competitors. On top of all of this, the cosmetics you get in apoc transfer to the MMO. Attempting to make it a stand alone is an obvious choice. Yes, they made it to test but throwing it out afterwards would be a silly waste if others could enjoy it. I don't know how people outside of the community could hold this against them or say they are bad for doing this. If anything, it would be shittier if they took it away just because made it for testing. I don't think people who are not emotionally attached to the project could look at these things and assume Intrepid is a bad company.
Wandering Mist wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » Wandering Mist wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » Idk but to me, by asking them to improve their PR, you are basically telling them to stop releasing stuff because I don't think they can give what people want....yet. While I agree the teaser wasn't the best, this seems to happen every time they try to release something new. It's never enough and people use it as an excuse bash the game. If you want to blame them for not meeting their deadlines then cool but it's kind of like crying over spilled milk. At this point, the best PR move is them doing what No Man Sky did and cut communication to focus on the product. Do we really want that? It's not so much about giving people what they want, but sending a clear message. The kickstarter campaign had a very clear message. The aim was to create an mmorpg with a constantly changing world. But now that message is very muddied and confused. Are they making an mmorpg or a battle royal game? The teaser trailer they released just adds to this confusion, as does the monetization of the game. Also, I disagree about the videos they are releasing. The dev diaries videos they put out were really good, as they give us a glimpse of what we will see in the mmorpg. The result is they have generally been positively received by the community.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4m480ManhzQ Just look at the comments of this video compared to the comments on the teaser trailer:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eg5qrykjgNc The difference is night and day. So no, I don't believe shutting down all communication would be a good thing, they just need to think a little bit on how their game is perceived. Sometimes they get it right, with the dev diaries series, but then other times they really do make a mess of things. EDIT: Here's a little experiment. Show the teaser trailer to someone who knows nothing about Ashes of Creation and see what they have to say about it. Then show them the Quarrier creation video and I guarantee you'll get a completely different impression. Is your post really just about the teaser? I'm not going to argue the teaser missed the mark and I agree with what you saying in regards to it. I'm sorry if I interpreted your post wrong but to me, it seemed to be about more then that which is why i commented. I'm not sure what you think of as damage control besides doing better which isn't really constructive. Once again, if the main message of this post was to just point out the flaws of the teaser then I could get behind it but it seems like you are trying to make it about more then that. I am talking about more than just the teaser trailer. The decision to make APOC a stand-alone monetized product, the decision to put it on steam and now this teaser trailer all add up to a very confused message. It's sad but the actions of other game companies have an impact on the impression people have for Intrepid. Monetization on "early access" or "beta" tests comes across as a very scumbag thing, because it is associated with scumbag companies like EA, Ubisoft and Activision. The reasons why Intrepid are monetizing don't matter in the eyes of the players. The same goes for APOC as a concept. If they had kept it as purely a testing platform I doubt anyone would have any problems with it, but as soon as they make it a stand-alone product, players immediately think you are just jumping on the battle royal bandwagon like everyone else. Again, Intrepid could have perfectly good reasons for making APOC a stand-alone product, but that doesn't matter. What matters is the impression the players have of the company and the game. Let's not forget that this is a brand new company making their first game, which means the players don't know what to expect from them. They have no reputation for producing good games. All we have to go on is what they have done so far, and so far their monetization techniques are very similar to companies like EA, Ubisoft, etc who all have terrible reputations. If someone like FromSoftware or Platinum Games were making this it would probably be fine, because those companies have reputations for producing very good games. Intrepid doesn't have that yet and that's why their decisions regarding APOC cause people to have doubts. You might say it's unfair to compare Intrepid to those other big companies and you are right, it is unfair. But that is the reality of it. I have shown a few of my friends the teaser trailer and then told them that it is already monetized and they immediately dismissed Intrepid as a scumbag company on par with EPIC Games.
mcstackerson wrote: » Wandering Mist wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » Idk but to me, by asking them to improve their PR, you are basically telling them to stop releasing stuff because I don't think they can give what people want....yet. While I agree the teaser wasn't the best, this seems to happen every time they try to release something new. It's never enough and people use it as an excuse bash the game. If you want to blame them for not meeting their deadlines then cool but it's kind of like crying over spilled milk. At this point, the best PR move is them doing what No Man Sky did and cut communication to focus on the product. Do we really want that? It's not so much about giving people what they want, but sending a clear message. The kickstarter campaign had a very clear message. The aim was to create an mmorpg with a constantly changing world. But now that message is very muddied and confused. Are they making an mmorpg or a battle royal game? The teaser trailer they released just adds to this confusion, as does the monetization of the game. Also, I disagree about the videos they are releasing. The dev diaries videos they put out were really good, as they give us a glimpse of what we will see in the mmorpg. The result is they have generally been positively received by the community.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4m480ManhzQ Just look at the comments of this video compared to the comments on the teaser trailer:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eg5qrykjgNc The difference is night and day. So no, I don't believe shutting down all communication would be a good thing, they just need to think a little bit on how their game is perceived. Sometimes they get it right, with the dev diaries series, but then other times they really do make a mess of things. EDIT: Here's a little experiment. Show the teaser trailer to someone who knows nothing about Ashes of Creation and see what they have to say about it. Then show them the Quarrier creation video and I guarantee you'll get a completely different impression. Is your post really just about the teaser? I'm not going to argue the teaser missed the mark and I agree with what you saying in regards to it. I'm sorry if I interpreted your post wrong but to me, it seemed to be about more then that which is why i commented. I'm not sure what you think of as damage control besides doing better which isn't really constructive. Once again, if the main message of this post was to just point out the flaws of the teaser then I could get behind it but it seems like you are trying to make it about more then that.
Wandering Mist wrote: » mcstackerson wrote: » Idk but to me, by asking them to improve their PR, you are basically telling them to stop releasing stuff because I don't think they can give what people want....yet. While I agree the teaser wasn't the best, this seems to happen every time they try to release something new. It's never enough and people use it as an excuse bash the game. If you want to blame them for not meeting their deadlines then cool but it's kind of like crying over spilled milk. At this point, the best PR move is them doing what No Man Sky did and cut communication to focus on the product. Do we really want that? It's not so much about giving people what they want, but sending a clear message. The kickstarter campaign had a very clear message. The aim was to create an mmorpg with a constantly changing world. But now that message is very muddied and confused. Are they making an mmorpg or a battle royal game? The teaser trailer they released just adds to this confusion, as does the monetization of the game. Also, I disagree about the videos they are releasing. The dev diaries videos they put out were really good, as they give us a glimpse of what we will see in the mmorpg. The result is they have generally been positively received by the community.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4m480ManhzQ Just look at the comments of this video compared to the comments on the teaser trailer:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eg5qrykjgNc The difference is night and day. So no, I don't believe shutting down all communication would be a good thing, they just need to think a little bit on how their game is perceived. Sometimes they get it right, with the dev diaries series, but then other times they really do make a mess of things. EDIT: Here's a little experiment. Show the teaser trailer to someone who knows nothing about Ashes of Creation and see what they have to say about it. Then show them the Quarrier creation video and I guarantee you'll get a completely different impression.
mcstackerson wrote: » Idk but to me, by asking them to improve their PR, you are basically telling them to stop releasing stuff because I don't think they can give what people want....yet. While I agree the teaser wasn't the best, this seems to happen every time they try to release something new. It's never enough and people use it as an excuse bash the game. If you want to blame them for not meeting their deadlines then cool but it's kind of like crying over spilled milk. At this point, the best PR move is them doing what No Man Sky did and cut communication to focus on the product. Do we really want that?
Makinoji wrote: » I agree it's a bit confusing seeing an official teaser for the MMO when it was just a few scenes slapped together that were unpolished and kind of reminded me of the Bless teaser from back when. The only difference is that Bless actually had an MMO to showcase a teaser for. The PR has always been a bit off for IS, unless they double down on that I think we will continue to see negative reviews.
flatline wrote: » Wandering Mist wrote: » flatline wrote: » I might or might not agree with what you are saying, only because it may or may not be considered as Trolling.... What i can say is good job at articulating your point... If providing honest and constructive feedback is considered trolling then I will have lost all hope for this world..... Historical data would suggest something slightly differant...
Wandering Mist wrote: » flatline wrote: » I might or might not agree with what you are saying, only because it may or may not be considered as Trolling.... What i can say is good job at articulating your point... If providing honest and constructive feedback is considered trolling then I will have lost all hope for this world.....
flatline wrote: » I might or might not agree with what you are saying, only because it may or may not be considered as Trolling.... What i can say is good job at articulating your point...
grisu wrote: » All this player vs dev crap. This opening post itself just shows how you can't please people all around. On the one hand, you(a general you, noone specifically throughout the post) want them to make a great mmo. So they make a public testing ground to have a good launch and working mechanics as intended, but at the same time the exact thing giving them the opportunity to make that great game, muddles wuddles the waters somehow. Like yeah, we want it all but we dont want this specific thing. "We want to see mmo stuff" <mmostuff is shown> "No we want other mmo stuff/this isn't mmo stuff" <more mmo stuff is shown> "this is bad pr because >>I<< don't like the composition" "mimimi microtransactions" Microtransactions was always going to be a thing in Ashes, they have been upfront with it. What's the big deal that they are in Apoc? Was anyone actually surprised? If you are upset now that they are there because of shitty MTX in the industry you are like...5 years to late on that. Yes I am fully aware that there have been some recent upsetting things, but then again 12 € for a horse armor skin was upsetting like 8 years ago. EA is still a thing despite it all and still rakes in billions while seemingly EVERYONE is talking about it. (Hello Battlefront 2 that was still bought in the millions digit even tho it's just a rerelease at best with ea having a long track record of lies and empty promises and oh so be my witness, did the same thing for the 6th time over. What a joke.) BE free to play but don't do anything to be commercially successful please, it's bad pr. I can't describe on how hard I am rolling my eyes on this one. Also please don't have a plan to secure and sustain the jobs you built . Just, I duno, be another telltales company or something and have bad pr after you already sunk or something. Why wouldn't they make apoc it's own thing. If you aren't an mmo player having those modes standalone is like Left4dead castle defense mod. You like that mod you play it and nothing else. You aren't in the mood to log on for mmo stuff? Just do some standalone castle siege/horde mode. When people dont have options they always want more options but when the options are there they find something else to complain about because mimimi. Trailers hu? Yeah those trailers, damned remember that game that was this amazing thing with big umpf trailers? Yeah that one, totally reflective of what to expect, but they were so damned flashy and interesting. So many colours and explosions and they showed so much. (I'm sure everyone can name at least 3 instantly and together we would probably have a list of around I duno all % of all releases that had trailers, ever) I'll say it, I liked the teaser, it showed stuff. Good teaser but apparently just bad pr. I suppose opinions vary on that one. Oh gosh that's a thing? My point of this? None really(revised), just an observation and general giggling on entitlement. Granted sometimes it would be nice if devs listened to the community, but at the same time sometimes it's just another gigabear being paranoid and spouting concpiracy theories threatening to shittalk the game all day long because of entitlement. Actually reading over the last part there is one, since I'm already reminding everyone why I'm unlikeable. This whole thing is just strong arming them into doing something that may not be their vision. You can dress it up as nicely as you want and be as "concerned" as you want. At the end of the day you are just another variation of an offended peasant who thinks he doesn't get what he wants.
grisu wrote: » Appendix to my post Since I got a message I will clarify the last part I wrote. No the opening post is NOT criticism. It lacks every important and constructive part criticism offers. All it does is say, I don't like this, change/remove it (to what is not something I will bother with) or bad things will happen. Hence the strong arming, hence the variation of an offended peasant. You can call it an essay I suppose, but that would also strech it. Edit: Saw your response here to late @Wandering Mist Your intentions may be good, but your execution is horrible.
Wandering Mist wrote: » grisu wrote: » Appendix to my post Since I got a message I will clarify the last part I wrote. No the opening post is NOT criticism. It lacks every important and constructive part criticism offers. All it does is say, I don't like this, change/remove it (to what is not something I will bother with) or bad things will happen. Hence the strong arming, hence the variation of an offended peasant. You can call it an essay I suppose, but that would also strech it. Edit: Saw your response here to late @Wandering Mist Your intentions may be good, but your execution is horrible. Sounds a lot like what Intrepid have been doing lately.... (Sorry, couldn't resist)
grisu wrote: » @Viymir You do realize that this test specifically looked at the changes they made to the netcode. Masses of people was the purpose of thetest.
Wandering Mist wrote: » grisu wrote: » All this player vs dev crap. This opening post itself just shows how you can't please people all around. On the one hand, you(a general you, noone specifically throughout the post) want them to make a great mmo. So they make a public testing ground to have a good launch and working mechanics as intended, but at the same time the exact thing giving them the opportunity to make that great game, muddles wuddles the waters somehow. Like yeah, we want it all but we dont want this specific thing. "We want to see mmo stuff" <mmostuff is shown> "No we want other mmo stuff/this isn't mmo stuff" <more mmo stuff is shown> "this is bad pr because >>I<< don't like the composition" "mimimi microtransactions" Microtransactions was always going to be a thing in Ashes, they have been upfront with it. What's the big deal that they are in Apoc? Was anyone actually surprised? If you are upset now that they are there because of shitty MTX in the industry you are like...5 years to late on that. Yes I am fully aware that there have been some recent upsetting things, but then again 12 € for a horse armor skin was upsetting like 8 years ago. EA is still a thing despite it all and still rakes in billions while seemingly EVERYONE is talking about it. (Hello Battlefront 2 that was still bought in the millions digit even tho it's just a rerelease at best with ea having a long track record of lies and empty promises and oh so be my witness, did the same thing for the 6th time over. What a joke.) BE free to play but don't do anything to be commercially successful please, it's bad pr. I can't describe on how hard I am rolling my eyes on this one. Also please don't have a plan to secure and sustain the jobs you built . Just, I duno, be another telltales company or something and have bad pr after you already sunk or something. Why wouldn't they make apoc it's own thing. If you aren't an mmo player having those modes standalone is like Left4dead castle defense mod. You like that mod you play it and nothing else. You aren't in the mood to log on for mmo stuff? Just do some standalone castle siege/horde mode. When people dont have options they always want more options but when the options are there they find something else to complain about because mimimi. Trailers hu? Yeah those trailers, damned remember that game that was this amazing thing with big umpf trailers? Yeah that one, totally reflective of what to expect, but they were so damned flashy and interesting. So many colours and explosions and they showed so much. (I'm sure everyone can name at least 3 instantly and together we would probably have a list of around I duno all % of all releases that had trailers, ever) I'll say it, I liked the teaser, it showed stuff. Good teaser but apparently just bad pr. I suppose opinions vary on that one. Oh gosh that's a thing? My point of this? None really(revised), just an observation and general giggling on entitlement. Granted sometimes it would be nice if devs listened to the community, but at the same time sometimes it's just another gigabear being paranoid and spouting concpiracy theories threatening to shittalk the game all day long because of entitlement. Actually reading over the last part there is one, since I'm already reminding everyone why I'm unlikeable. This whole thing is just strong arming them into doing something that may not be their vision. You can dress it up as nicely as you want and be as "concerned" as you want. At the end of the day you are just another variation of an offended peasant who thinks he doesn't get what he wants. I might not have been entirely clear about my intentions in the OP. I'm not trying to "strong arm" Intrepid into anything, just asking them to consider how their game and their company will be viewed by the wider audience. The main reason why I am so critical of Intrepid's recent PR stutters is because I believe in them as a company and in the game they are creating. My fear is that if they keep doing stuff like this they will be compared to the scumbag AAA companies like Activision, EA, EPIC, etc. I want Intrepid to succeed but if they gain a bad reputation before they have even released the game, the project could fail. I am more than happy to wait for Intrepid to release their end product before judging them, but sadly that is not how modern society works, especially in the gaming industry. Companies are judged based on their actions outside of the game as well as the game itself. Capcom have made some amazing games over the years (street fighter, Resident Evil, Devil May Cry, etc) but their shady business practices and actions outside of those games make a lot of players want to avoid their games completely, purely because of the company. The same can be true of other companies. I refuse to have anything to do with EPIC or EA because I hate them as a company, regardless of what games they bring out. Company image is very important and I fear that things like this will ruin Intrepid's image.
