• Due to datamining of the demo files, substantial leaks are now everywhere. As a reminder, some of these are in-development screenshots and may point to events that aren't going to be in the final game. Some of them are clearly going to be in the game. The TLS stance is this: Any thread which will contain discussion on the leaked images/ details must clearly contain [SPOILERS] within the title. Anything within those threads does not need to be spoiler tagged. Any POST anywhere on the board containing spoilers must be spoiler tagged or it will be removed and warned. Please report this where you see it. Let's try to make sure everyone can still freely post until everyone has a chance to play this game please!

Remake Demo Listed on PSN (UPDATE: The Full Intro is on YouTube)

Well, the Demo does say "Select a version to purchase" at the end and not "Select a version to preorder"...

Could that be a hint towards it really coming out on March 3rd?
 

Ryuman

Pro Adventurer
AKA
Pointlessname, Pointer
It would conveniently take most of the responsibility off of Square if it was meant to release on launch day lol
 
They aren't taking the demo from the final build though, so of course they're going to have to state that the demo represents something that's still in development. If nothing else, it seems like a good idea to say that in any demo, just to cover your bases.

Apparently they don't mention the release date anywhere in the demo? If that's true, maybe they really did mean for it to be available at launch. I'd imagine pre-release marketing is most effective when you actually mention the release date.
 

oty

Pro Adventurer
AKA
ex-soldier boy
As shady as famous sites can be, the ongoing theory that the Demo will be launched with the game due to the "Purchase" thingy is going strong. Maybe the guy just got the wrong impression.
 

Lex

Administrator
As shady as famous sites can be, the ongoing theory that the Demo will be launched with the game due to the "Purchase" thingy is going strong. Maybe the guy just got the wrong impression.
I'm not out to toot my own horn, but I'm just a random dude running a niche fansite. We aren't professionals and we don't even really have article editors (beyond me when someone else happens to write for the front page). We would never allow something like that to be posted without solid evidence, so I can't understand it when big sites do this kind of thing. I really don't get it. I mean I know - "clicks" - but is it really worth it to the person who wrote the article to dismantle their integrity as a writer? It's a very minor increase in ad revenue.
 
From having worked and still working within the journalism industry - yes, it seems to be worth to everyone. The companies justify it by saying it's a mino increase in ad revenue in that article but pin their hopes in trying to make people stay with your website, which may mean further revenue in further pieces you post.

I hate the practice, don't get me wrong. I think journalism (whichever branch it may be) has the responsability of informing people. But I've since realized that the best way is to actually try to play a bit with your headlines so that people will want to click them, while still offering the same quality content. It's the only thing I can do and I'm still not where I'd like to be regarding views. Likely I'll never be (so I'm lucky to have branched out towards other stuff).

Unfortunately, information has become another source of entertainment. People often look at news not just to have information but for entertainment value (seriously), so in the end they choose to read what they want to read. In this case, a GameSpot reader would prefer reading some news, even if it turns out to be fake in the end. Stupid, I know.

And that's why I don't have faith in people. :monster:
 

Pandemonium

Pro Adventurer
AKA
Nate
From having worked and still working within the journalism industry - yes, it seems to be worth to everyone. The companies justify it by saying it's a mino increase in ad revenue in that article but pin their hopes in trying to make people stay with your website, which may mean further revenue in further pieces you post.

I hate the practice, don't get me wrong. I think journalism (whichever branch it may be) has the responsability of informing people. But I've since realized that the best way is to actually try to play a bit with your headlines so that people will want to click them, while still offering the same quality content. It's the only thing I can do and I'm still not where I'd like to be regarding views. Likely I'll never be (so I'm lucky to have branched out towards other stuff).

Unfortunately, information has become another source of entertainment. People often look at news not just to have information but for entertainment value (seriously), so in the end they choose to read what they want to read. In this case, a GameSpot reader would prefer reading some news, even if it turns out to be fake in the end. Stupid, I know.

And that's why I don't have faith in people. :monster:
Which is exactly why I change the channel once they start giving their opinions. I don't watch the news to be entertained
 
Top Bottom