Um.. summer release?

[Catapult]

Comparing 1.0 and 2.0 may be a really bad idea, but comparing 1.23 and 2.0 has some circumstantial merit.

[Solace]

Comparing 1.0 and 2.0 may be a really bad idea, but comparing 1.23 and 2.0 has some circumstantial merit.

Somebody gets it. :P

You do realize 2.0 still isn't out yet, right? For someone who keeps going on about how you were there for THE TIME OF YORE WHEN SURPLUS WAS ABOUND EVERYWHERE I would have thought you'd know that, but...eh. Whatever.

Nice caps.. Good touch. It really shows how mature and level headed you are.
Have fun ranting and flaming.. You do know that's what you just did right?
FFS who cares this much? 1.23 or 2.0.. You could of just called it an oops but you'd rather rant like an infant..

((What I meant was:
You realize of course the game was 1.0 then went to 1.23 right?))

I'll send the wambulance over for you ASAP.
He always brings the drama Lama, just in case so we've got you covered.

Comparing 1.0 and 2.0 may be a really bad idea, but comparing 1.23 and 2.0 has some circumstantial merit.

That's what I was trying to point out.

[Twiddle]

Am thinking:
Phase 3, 6th of June start
Phase 4, 4th of July start
Launch End/Start of July/August

[Cendres]

I think the game will be ready by end of August, however I'm giving them until September just in case. It's nothing to rage thread about certainly though. Push backs happen all the time and I'd rather that then a launch that could have been better.

[Solace]

I think the game will be ready by end of August, however I'm giving them until September just in case. It's nothing to rage thread about certainly though. Push backs happen all the time and I'd rather that then a launch that could have been better.

My sentiments exactly Mrs Esterhouuusssee.
1k interweb points, to whoever knows where that line comes from.. :P

[Alhanelem]

People should be happy, not worried, that it's coming out when it is. It was a long time coming, and definitely a fair bit longer than they expected, so when they give a release date, I think they're more confident about this one.

[Kallera]

People should be happy, not worried, that it's coming out when it is. It was a long time coming, and definitely a fair bit longer than they expected, so when they give a release date, I think they're more confident about this one.

Indeed, I remember the time when people were seriously suggesting that SE install cameras so that we can see(and by extension, approve) whatever the dev team was coming up with.

I'm sure they want us to be playing just as soon as we do, us playing is going to be the culmination of their efforts, and far more than this crowd will be watching.

To quote another game franchise:

"Heavy risk...but the PRIIIIZE..."

[Catapult]

Having a release date is a marketing tool. It's kind of essential.

They've given us a ball-park time frame. An actual date will probably follow once things like physical disk production and shipping dates are organised - you don't want to ask stores to hold disks back indefinitely for lack of a date or they'll just break the street date, spoiling all your marketing efforts.

[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.