It's no opinion. What SE says (or doesn't say) on the issue is the only thing that matters.
Printable View
Haven't seen enough for people to rave about it and claim it's going to be awesome, either. But I don't see anyone calling people out when they make those claims.
Funny how that works.
Critical? "You haven't seen enough to form an opinion"
Praising? "You haven't seen any more than the critical people, but that's okay. Your assumptions and hopes of how it's going to be is more than enough to go on"
It's the ultimate double-standard.
Not fully. SE was very clear that the NDA had been lifted for all testers with regards Character Creation, Old Gridania and New Gridania. I'd quote the post, but I think by doing so I'd be in breach of the NDA...
Granted that's not relevant to the thread at hand which is discussing the battle systems, but for the sake of correctness!
lol... is this what we have to do now when we choose to criticize something about ARR's direction?
What, is the new tactic to silence opinions people don't like to threaten them with "NDA breach"? We have to start pre-emptively proving we're not breaking NDA because we're voicing an unpopular opinion?
Folks, between the Live Letters, screenshots, videos, articles, interviews and clarifications made via SE community managers, there has been tons of information released about how things are intended to be in ARR, covering a wide spectrum of categories.
That seems to be the new thing on forums, though, from what I'm seeing - here and elsewhere. Someone posts information that has already been officially released, and you see a bunch of self-appointed forum police crying "NDA Breach!!!" trying to shut the person up, even though it isn't.
Dealing with real NDA breaches is the domain of the mods, and they read/monitor these forums. How about we let them do the job they're actually hired/paid to do, and stop using "NDA Breach!" to try and stifle dissenting opinion? It's pretty lame.
Or maybe people say it's an NDA breach just because it is, and your conspiracy theory doesn't hold much water.
There's a place to discuss NDA-covered mechanics, where it also has a much bigger chance to catch the attention of the developers. It's called "beta forums". They exist for a reason.
No... see... A 'Conspiracy Theory' is when you believe something is happening that actually isn't, outside someone's imagination, due to paranoia, etc.
When I go on various forums and see people crying "NDA Breach!" - and only in response to negative or critical opinions - only to be proven wrong when someone links to the very public article discussing what they're speaking about... that's not conspiracy theory. That's actual fact. And I'm seeing it a lot.
So my "theory" is perfectly sound, thank you.
But I'm sure you'll come back with one of your characteristically condescending/arrogant retorts telling me how I'm wrong. That's fine. I trust my eyes far more than I do the self-righteous rhetoric of someone on a forum.
"my theory is sound because I say it is" doesn't really hold much water.
Your limited personal experience of "various forums" doesn't hold any statistical value (no matter how much you paint it as "fact"), and in any case doesn't justify breaching the NDA just because you agree or disagree with it. There's a place to talk about NDA-covered mechanics (where it's actually useful), and this isn't that place. The same goes for the other "various forums" that aren't that place.
The fact that "OMG it's old!" is a ridiculous and meaningless way to describe or criticize any game mechanic is completely separate from that point.
You can "trust your eyes" as much as you want, but you're doing exactly what you accuse others of doing: trying to silence a valid statement (there is an NDA in place and should be respected) by artificially associating it with some kind of hidden agenda that you can't in any way prove.