DOESN'T MAKE YOU LESS A FILTHY TRAITOR THOUGH! BRING FORTH THE CYBER PYRE! TO THE NANO SPIT WITH YOU! YOUR FLESH SHALL TASTE AS PUMPKIN AND PEPPERMINT! Etc.
And you wonder why nobody trusts you.
DOESN'T MAKE YOU LESS A FILTHY TRAITOR THOUGH! BRING FORTH THE CYBER PYRE! TO THE NANO SPIT WITH YOU! YOUR FLESH SHALL TASTE AS PUMPKIN AND PEPPERMINT! Etc.
Yeah, but believe me, life outside of these forums kinda... sux! I still have to live through it though. lol I'll be around anyway! =))RageGT? Whoa, talk about a blast from the past. Where did you disappear to? Don't you know that forum members aren't allowed to have lives outside of the forum?
Rage is a long time friend of mine, glad to see him around. Hope all is well.
There are people who show their games and development process more or less openly (EA or YouTube) and to be honest this convinces me more than what CDPR does with TW3, releasing teasers or E3 videos and interviews. Because teasers aren't showing how the game is being made, what the game really is and how it plays once you're running it on your own PC. That's why I don't think "it's early development" is convincing argument not to show something anymore. It's just policy (and their right at the same time) how they make games.
I watched video with some combat - something of interest to me that I could evaluate - and I didn't feel combat in TW3 to be interesting enough, despite claims. Maybe I need to watch more than combat on easy difficulty, but it's up to CDPR to disclose more videos about specific gameplay mechanics. To be frank TW3 isn't even on my to-buy list (big question mark hovers above it), while games like LT made it to convince me in a very short period of time after getting to know them. LT is also supposed to have a demo for those who want to try it before committing to buying game. All this despite a lot of YouTube development videos, dev logs on forums and detailed descriptions what game is supposed to offer. CDPR is the friendliest big developer out there I know of, but they has been outclassed by a one man, who isn't wasting his energy to make teasers to build hype around his game.
My point is this teaser doesn't even look like it's part of the game. It might be showing people what game is supposed to look like and give some clues to those who know the setting, but just as in great cinematics in TW3's teaser - there is no substance. Because we won't play the game with cinematic-like graphic. Ultimately we will play outside of Hollywood-like style of teasers and this is my biggest objection. We aren't playing a movie. We don't even want a movie. We want a game.
I have CP77 on my list, because I am interested in their promises and know that they do make good games. In short, I have hope and they hold promise (even with all my skepticism). However, I am not going to make a blind buy on teasers, fame, convictions or promises alone. I am waiting for them to show that what they cook is really good and suits my taste. Then I will buy it for full price and won't regret it.
You're guessing wrong. What gave you that idea?
There are people who show their games and development process more or less openly (EA or YouTube) and to be honest this convinces me more than what CDPR does with TW3, releasing teasers or E3 videos and interviews. Because teasers aren't showing how the game is being made, what the game really is and how it plays once you're running it on your own PC. That's why I don't think "it's early development" is convincing argument not to show something anymore. It's just policy (and their right at the same time) how they make games.
I read what happened to monster hunting feature. It basically went back to bombs and oils in combat and "disable some monster abilities by detective work/reading books". In light of these changes I find my skepticism in promises validated. It's sad, because I was interested in expanding monster hunter part of the game.Those of us who've played Witcher 2 typically have more faith in CDPR promises than that paragraph would indicate.
REDs are people. People aren't infallible, so my faith in them is limited.We don't need more info or open development process to convince us that the REDs know what they are doing [...]
I think you've missed the point. Teasers might "be pretty representative of the quality of the final game" - not really sure what you mean by this... that final game will look the same as teasers? I am placing bet on the cape - but they aren't showing gameplay in the works and that's ultimately more important.[...] and that their trailers are pretty representative of the quality of the final game.
I thought the discussion was about trailers not showing the actual gameplay? E3 demos were what allowed me to get a peek of combat and monster hunting parts of the game (trailers and teasers were simply not concrete enough for me to get the idea how it works) and no amount of faith or craftmanship changes the fact that it ain't to my liking, so I am not buying the same argument about CP77, because no trailer is going to show us how gameplay works in practice until we see video showing us how gameplay works. That's what I wanted to say.The E3 demos were very much gameplay in progress footage as is the upcoming SDCC 30 minute footage.
Craftmanship alone does not indicate anything.
Craftmanship alone does not indicate anything.
I thought the discussion was about trailers not showing the actual gameplay? E3 demos were what allowed me to get a peek of combat and monster hunting parts of the game (trailers and teasers were simply not concrete enough for me to get the idea how it works) and no amount of faith or craftmanship changes the fact that it ain't to my liking, so I am not buying the same argument about CP77, because no trailer is going to show us how gameplay works in practice until we see video showing us how gameplay works. That's what I wanted to say.
You're missing out the most important part - the crafted thing. I am really not interested in their skill as much as I am interested in how they'll put these skills to use. They can create a good game, but it might not suit me, meaning it'll be of less value to me than a good game that suits me. There is an important difference between the two, because it allows me to prioritize my purchases.Yes, yes it totally does. Quite a lot of things. Maybe all of the things, when it comes to,you know, crafting things.
I think I was precise enough when I described why I consider faith baseless in this particular argument. It has nothing to do with economic system nor with pre-orders. You're talking about something entirely different than I.The concept of faith has very much a function. Our entire economic system as it is currently rendered depends on it. Yes. So there's that. And in the case of CDPR, things like preorders and stock value depend on it.
You mean you don't need gameplay trailers.Gameplay trailers are not that useful either, frankly. Lot of disappointed Thief and Watch Dogs players will tell you that.
In summary, no, we don't need gameplay trailers. That's a facet of some kinds of modern media. You've become accustomed to a particular advertising approach and now consider it necessary before making a decision. It's really not.
Grin as much as you like. It's telling more about you than it's saying about me.Heh. I'm gonna be grinning about that line for awhile. Thanks!
...which is exactly the reason why I am waiting for something more concrete - like gameplay - to be presented.So TEASER trailers are as they say just teasers, I never take teasers as any indication of what the product will be like but more of a confirmation that said game is in the works, you can get the idea of themes and story elements from the teasers but that's about it.
...which is exactly the reason why I am waiting for something more concrete - like gameplay - to be presented.