Suddenly I ,see this: http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/08...nt page)&utm_content=11&utm_campaign=Blogroll The overall 'article' left a negative impression on me. Almost deliberate. Then fail comment after failcomment. Does BE have a spokesperson or PR-related person?
yeah i saw that too. the comments there are not happy. http://forum.eternalcrusade.com/thr...irector-of-the-eternal-crusade-leaving.46834/
it's also on nassively and soon basically every single site about videogame (because they copypaste IGN and massively). nathay explained (again like in the other cases) that was david decision to say goodbye on the forum or not. and i imagine that also bE permit to do that (instead of censuring their employers). so it's transparency. or alternatively we can take pitchfork and torch and burn every news site that spread the info.
Or we can assume people on the internet shitpost and not worry about it. What's going to happen? Let's allow the devs to just move forward and put out their game and then pass judgement on it after.
either way is fine with me grig. its just they have ignored EC for some time now, yet with Ghozland leaving its suddenly back on their radar, and they sorta bring it like one bombshell: Ghozland left, after the lead programmer, designer, narrative.. you know what I mean? If you're not on the forums here, I can totally understand that people think this game is as good as dead already.
yeah I think thats the only good course of action. but still its an unlucky sorta timing for this article to come out, and i wonder why this is suddenly worthy of an article, when they remained silent on every other event, such as changes of server/open world to instances or other members of team leaving etc.
yes the majority of "gamejournalist"write sensationistic article created as clickbait, instead of actually ask to bE about that or simply read the topic until they found the senior producer explanation. nope it's better to slap some negativity add link to the other news that talk about other dev that have leaved. writing a neutral news that give the reader a complete information a permit him to create a personal opinion? nope that don't generate news and don't generate comment. the best part of the article? the subtitle "alpha will come soon" and barely nothing in the article
A lot of people have had a hate-boner for Eternal Crusade ever since the Founder's Program launched, so regardless of whether or not David's leaving is a super common-place thing or indicative of the game's failure, this is just confirmation bias for them. Even if there was good news being posted on IGN, it'd be the same people voicing their skepticism. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but the only way we'll be able to see if the game is doodoo or not is to play it, and hopefully these negative comments will just give the devs more drive to prove them wrong.
For clarity, having worked closely with a number of PR teams, Behaviour weren't invited to comment, making it remarkably difficult for a PR team to get involved. Anything they put in the comments would be seen as self-serving, and asking the writer to correct the original article can backfire in interesting ways if any notice is taken at all - journalists are egotistic creatures who HATE being told that they're wrong, and don't as a general rule like amending their articles to point out to their readers how poorly researched they are, as it doesn't reflect well on the journalist or their publication. The article writer merely lifted some of Ghozland's leaving announcement, pointed out that other creative leads have left (no secret to this community), and quietly showed a misunderstanding both of the Founders programme and the current development state of the game. The commenters, as far as I read, then fell into three camps. 1) The "Doom, doom I say, DOOOOOOM!" group who predict a failure based on any development team lead moving on, or that it's a WH40k game, or that they didn't like it that Behaviour hit technical issues on their original idea, or didn't like Miguel, or just that it's a video game and therefore inevitably going to fail hard. Evidence for these views appeared sketchy. 2) The "Meh, I'm actually more interested in Vermintide or Mordheim" group, who are perfectly entitled to air their views at random wherever they see fit, but added little to the progress of the comments and discussion. 3) The "FFS, since when was this a death sentence? It's not *that* bad" group who may or may not be made up of community members of EC but who seemed compelled out of the woodwork in response to the doom-mongers. Probably not the PR disaster it seems at first glance. In any case, until we're closer to launch, I'd say it's not critically important what Average Joe's current and fleeting impression of the game is. It's just too far away for most people to have it as anything more than a vague blip on the radar. Yes, Grig, we do completely disagree on this point.
