Um.. summer release?

[Yrusama]

That's like saying that FFXIII is the same game as FFXIII-2 to be honest.

I'd normally agree with you, but in this case I must clarify what Amherst meant. 1.0 and ARR are comparable because ARR is a reattempt at XIV. The story might be a continuation, but ultimately it's an updated version of the same thing, whether it uses the same client or not. We keep our characters and items, though the rest changes.

Indeed it's more analogous to that 4-part .hack series released on PS2. I never did get to play past the first

[Abriael]

I'd normally agree with you, but in this case I must clarify what Amherst meant. 1.0 and ARR are comparable because ARR is a reattempt at XIV. The story might be a continuation, but ultimately it's an updated version of the same thing, whether it uses the same client or not. We keep our characters and items, though the rest changes.

Indeed it's more analogous to that 4-part .hack series released on PS2. I never did get to play past the first

Keeping the same characters doesn't make it less of a new game. It's very comparable to a sequel.

Balur's Gate 2 is not the same game as Baldur's Gate, yet you get to keep your character. Same for the Mass Effect trilogy and many others.

New engine, new client, new assets, new gameplay mechanics, new environment. It's literally and by all means and purposes a new game. It shares the setting and reuses a few models, but that's as far as it goes, and many sequels do that as well.

[Neptune]

Welcome back Neptune, I was starting to worry after you disappeared in January.

Also you do know they delayed the phase 3 beta to early June to apply the feedback from phases 1 and 2, right?

~Nyaa

Thanks. I've been reading here and there, but nothing to post about until now. I'm aware of the date for phase 3 but if you take it all in context I think it's more because they had work to do and less because they stopped in their tracks to implement feedback.

Restate: i trust better an insider then someone responding to him "Oh really? Tell me more." in a sarcastic behavor

Then you are a

Oh no, you tell us more. Do you have any evidence of what you say, or all you have is "the previews disagree with my doomsaying, so they must obviously be dishonest!"?

Evidence? Of what? That you agreed to an NDA? You already said you did. I'm not sure if you really don't understand what a contract is or if you're just too belligerent to read my post without coloring it with your own bias. I also didn't say anyone's reporting was dishonest, I said it wasn't honest, because to be honest there would have to be no NDA thus no restriction on what could be written. Do I really need to explain that to you? Surely you are capable of understanding that on your own. Also people (blind fanboys?) knocked "doomsayers" in 1.0 beta testing too. So things go without critical thinking and prebaked agendas.

So to sum up if you were a better journalist you would understand what a contract is without it being broken down for you, you would understand the effect of the NDA on your reporting, you would understand the kind of rosy scenario Square has painted for themselves with glowing (but notably restricted) press, and perhaps if you were a better person overall you would understand that I'm not doomsaying because I do enjoy the idea of the game and I posted to encourage it to be a success instead of having a rough launch.

[Spectre]

Oh really? Tell me more.

Done and done.

Let's be a better journalist next time.

...

Well you opened my eyes to something with that exercise, given your A + B = C conclusion, my only possible realization is:

• You don't have any semblance of a logical thought process.
• You have no deductive skills.
• You may have a critically damaged decision making paradigm.

Seek help. Honestly, I don't mean that as an insult in any way. If you really came to the conclusion you did from reading Abriael's response, then you have much bigger problems then a paranoid belief of corporate scandal.

[yoshikwalla]

So far, sites have posted in-depth impressions of the Beta (while following the NDA, something that you clearly don't understand). When it comes to information on the various game systems, Yoshi-P and his entourage have been more transparent than other developers on their respective games. The game will be at E3, the largest gaming press conference for upcoming games, to be tested by the press.

So please explain to me how the gaming press - people who are paid to write about any game-related thing shortly after it happens - won't have time to write their impressions of Realm Reborn before it launches. Your logic here is ridiculous.

The biggest difference between the original game's development and ARR's development is that with 1.0, Square was releasing a shitty game to begin with. Almost everything inside and out, from its engine to its server architecture, was a broken mess. All that Yoshi-P did was make the game's faults easier to deal with - they still existed, but in a lesser form - while working on the product Square should have released in the first place. Suggestions from players and the press couldn't stop a disaster of such magnitude from happening back during 1.0's launch simply because it would have required Square to scrap the entire game and start from scratch - something the producer and CEO adamantly didn't want to happen.

And the mainstream gaming press's complete lack of journalistic integrity? Congratulations - you finally understand how sites like IGN keep food on their contributors' plates. But not for the reason you think.

There are plenty of reasons, but the NDA is not one of them. A game journalists's impressions of a game are as simple as this: I like this part, I do not like this part. Any of the extra details are just ways for the writer to prove his point. There is no need to explain it in NDA-breaking detail - that's for later, when the game launches. Plus, anything that is released at E3 the journalists can write about - NDA doesn't apply there.

If you think the NDA will stop journalists from posting their general impressions on Final Fantasy XIV before it launches, then you are clearly wrong.

[yukikaze_yanagi]

cut

There was an NDA in place to not write about any area outside Gridania or things wasn't in place of phase 2 beta (the same NDA got lifted about Gridania). Because you know, they were the parts still under heavy development. What they should wrote, about an area with missing textures, monsters, half the skill still under revision ?
Is this the kind of publicity you think they should do ? Your post is an insult

[Neptune]

All you guys talking about the NDA as it relates to journalism, pretending as if it doesn't have an impact: you are delusional about that. More than that, none of you seem to care because very likely you are self-interested in the game and you can't see the bigger picture. The point of discussion you are failing to grasp is whether a restriction on reporting created an overpositive effect on feedback which had a delusional effect on the dev team's perception of the game's future reception. Have you considered that? If you want to discuss it let's be sure we're discussing the right topic and not talking about E3 like someone whose mind helplessly wanders.

On the subject of E3 I'm happily looking forward to the game's reception there. I think any critical response will lead to a better game.

[Spectre]

All you guys talking about the NDA as it relates to journalism, pretending as if it doesn't have an impact: you are delusional about that.

No, you are trying to use the NDA as the "contract" from your first post to try and support your off-the-wall claim to save face. It's making you look silly, and infantile the more you try and back yourself up with faulty logic.

More than that, none of you seem to care because very likely you are self-interested in the game and you can't see the bigger picture.

For someone that talks about the bigger picture, you seem to only see your own. You have your desires for the game, your narrow view of what you remember happened last time. Through those blinders is how you see everything happening. Your arguments drawn out to conclusion would lead to companies never having NDA's in place, therefore no way to protect their intellectual property during development. You insist upon complete transparency from the company standpoint but ignore that the rest of the industry, community, and world would not share that moral high-ground.

You also assume that every word put out by anyone under the "NDA" is going to have to be positive because of the NDA, which has already been demonstrated false. Your argument has already broken down, your points make no sense, and anyone that uses a normal thought process would have a hard time trying to follow yours.

The point of discussion you are failing to grasp is whether a restriction on reporting created an overpositive effect on feedback which had a delusional effect on the dev team's perception of the game's future reception.

No, the point of the "discussion" is that you made an unfounded claim:

Every news outlet has been under a contract to not give honest feedback about FFXIV

THEN you go on to say that Square should "take temperature" before releasing information". So first you say every media outlet has lied. Yes lied. being "not honest" and "dis-honest" is the same thing. Look it up. That's one of those other things that leads me to believe that you have a critically damaged thought process, and honestly wonder how you function if you really perceive things this way.

By that statement, it also follows, that since every news outlet has been giving "not honest" feedback then nothing we have heard about the game is accurate. so all the negative reviews can't be trusted along with the positive. Now what?

No No, you said "every". Works both ways, there have been some invited to the private events that gave pretty negative reviews. So that must have been "not honest" as well right? SE must be playing mind games with us!

So is SE is purposely making media outlets release conflicting information by putting them under contract, how are they supposed to take temperature again?

Oh I know, this is where you come back and say "That's right! that's the point they can't!" Except you are forgetting where most of the feedback is being collected. From the same place where the people under the NDA can actually talk about things controlled by the NDA without breaking it.

Your argument holds no water. At all. It doesn't make any sense. Non-sense. ( dis-sense?)

Have you considered that? If you want to discuss it let's be sure we're discussing the right topic and not talking about E3 like someone whose mind helplessly wanders.

Seems you are the one trying to change gears and re-direct the focus away from yourself. You fail to address the points that call out the blatant holes in your arguments.

The only thing left to consider is why you are continuing to post at all? You didn't think your original post though. You tried to recover it with baseless insults and just made yourself look silly, you then attempted to try and recover with some kind of logical foundation and without understanding logic made yourself look incompetent.

You've dug yourself deep enough. You are 'helplessly' outgunned here, and I'm not even talking about me. I'm fairly confident that given the desire that most of the journalist that you insulted offhand could burn you to the ground much more thoroughly, if you were actually worth their time.

I'm not sure why I bothered to respond, perhaps I really am worried that you actually believe some of what you write. If you do then you really have a ...unique perception of reality, one that may not function well in society. It is possible you are trolling, and getting a good laugh out of all this. If that's the case, then good form, you got quite the talent there for getting the "bites".

On the subject of E3 I'm happily looking forward to the game's reception there. I think any critical response will lead to a better game.

Well, at least we have common ground on the looking forward to the game at E3.

[Colino]

The point of discussion you are failing to grasp is whether a restriction on reporting created an overpositive effect on feedback which had a delusional effect on the dev team's perception of the game's future reception. Have you considered that?

I'm pretty sure the devs play the game themselves and don't rely on a handful of "journalists" to gauge the game's quality.

[Abriael]

I'm pretty sure the devs play the game themselves and don't rely on a handful of "journalists" to gauge the game's quality.

That's without a doubt true. They surely rely more on beta testers anyway.