Remake Interviews: Catch-all Thread
- Thread starter Lex
- Start date
I think it's just becoming very difficult to not have the (admittedly pessimistic) douchebag thoughts that it's all going a bit tits up because of SE meddling haha. You won't find many VII fans who didn't like what they (visually) saw in both of those trailers, and if CC2 were just there as an asset machine well... I see where it's going. And I don't want to be right, I swear I don't. But I think I am *shrugs*
tres gets it
tres gets it
SeaDragon
Pro Adventurer
- AKA
- Sjödraken
Shooting glasses provide eye protection. For example, when spent cartridges are ejected from the firearm. So it makes sense.
Last edited:
^It was more that firing an automatic weapon in the dark is libel to blind you (that is, kill your night vision) with all the muzzle-flashes. Wearing sunglasses would help mitigate that. (they're usually amber rather than dark, but tweaking that a little bit isn't that bad, imo)
Last edited:
- AKA
- X
hian
Purist
Tried, but appears impossible due to the fact that the site's info is hidden behind that annoying flash intro, which the wayback machine refuses to load.
I'm definite about it (G-bike that is), because I've visited the site frequently since the reveal on the odd chance it might feature news. I'm sure that won't be enough to satisfy anyone else, but it is what it is =P
I'd say the same thing, except for
1.) If I remember correctly the game was advertized on the site long after it was dead.
2.) CC2 had a lot of stuff riding on their involvement in the remake.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1007503
The fact that CC2, regardless of whether they were credited before or not, are not credited now, is still an issue when the remake itself would be a flagship title for them to work on I.E a huge boost in recognition, reputation and by exention market/business confidence.
Think of it this way - if this was an amicable split, on par for the course of the development of the game, there would be no reason to keep radio silence on it.
When you consider that on top of the massive rammifications of having spent countless man-hours on a project that you'll see no recognition for down the line (as apparent from the fact they're already not getting any) it's difficult to imagine that CC2 management is happy with this move.
In that context, something as little as striking G-Bike from the FFVII remake does (EDIT : could) say something.
Just to create a contrast, look at this -
http://www.jp.square-enix.com/ffvii_remake/index_2.html
The top news on the marketing surrounding the remake is the snowfest sculpture event. It ended in February, yet nobody's bothered to remove that from the site. Yet, they've taken the extra step removing G-bike?
That both trailer's are up means very little I think, given that the trailers are ultimately not "CC2's trailers". They're just FFVII Remake trailers. Neither of the trailers ever included any mention of CC2, nor do they include anything that CC2 would have creative or lisence control over.
As for me making it sound like a big deal - that wasn't my intent.
I'm not saying the removal of G-Bike is a big deal. In fact, that's the very reason I gave the caveat it could just as easily just be an update to reflect that G-Bike is no longer an active game.
However, that argument, as I showed above could pan either way. I simply wanted to chime in and say that there are reasons to think SE and CC2 might now be having a falling out.
Whether that will effect development time much above and beyond the time it will take for SE to transfer the assets, and build a team - I don't know, but doubt.
Ultimately, everything we saw was made with Nomura and Kitase and the SE team's direction, under their lisences. CC2 were only contractors.
There's absolutely no reason to suppose that SE would have to rework any assets simply because the ceased control of primary production.
However, from a direction-minded perspective - there might have been differences of opinion on creative direction that sparked this move to begin with, in which case Kitase and Co. might want to change things regardless.
In either case, the nugget on the cake I tried pointing out isn't that the move will necessarily damage production, but rather that there might be (and is pretty likely) some bad blood now, between SE and CC2 as a result of it.
On that note though, about lisences ett :
I quite liked the assets in the gameplay trailerwell except for Barret's impractical sunglasses, CC2 can keep those.
This the thing. Barret's design is not CC2. He was designed by Nomura.
CC2 only produce assets, and resources, they were not designing them, and they do not have creative lisence over them.
And as an aside :
I did. Others did too probably, but I was pretty early on that horse =P
Muzzle flashes interfering with night vision, and just vision in general is a pretty well documented thing, hence why many soldiers and bodyguards etc. wear sunglasses.
Last edited:
- AKA
- X
I don't think anyone has any doubt that there was SOME kind of disagreement between SE & CC2 that made them oh so dramatically pull their work in-house. That being said, while they're not showcasing any old content from CC2 on the Remake site like G-Bike and are being incredibly silent on the whole matter, the fact that Nomura stated that the Remake is ahead of KHIII in cutscenes suggests that they're still using a LOT of what CC2 developed, so I wouldn't start to say that there's any evidence that they're not going to be credited for their work in the end product. That's still a bit of a stretch to assume based on what we know.
Also, while it was a big part of what they were working on, I wouldn't say that that link you provided ( http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1007503 ) even remotely suggests that those things were somehow riding on their involvement in the Remake. They've got a solid track record for making games and while it would've been a big positive for them, it's not really clear how, if at all, it's impacted anything other than just their work on the Remake.
X
Also, while it was a big part of what they were working on, I wouldn't say that that link you provided ( http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1007503 ) even remotely suggests that those things were somehow riding on their involvement in the Remake. They've got a solid track record for making games and while it would've been a big positive for them, it's not really clear how, if at all, it's impacted anything other than just their work on the Remake.
X
- AKA
- TresDias
I'm not sure how much to really take from the cutscene comment. Obviously KHIII as a whole is further along, so is the cutscene thing an irrelevant measure? Is basically none of the game aspect (i.e. environment maps, combat programming, etc.) done?
And does that mean KHIII and FFVIIR were basically made in the opposite manner?
And does that mean KHIII and FFVIIR were basically made in the opposite manner?
- AKA
- TresDias
I've got your headline --
Nomura: Outlook Unclear; Ask Again Later
Nomura: Outlook Unclear; Ask Again Later
hian
Purist
First thing's first - Nomura's statements about cutscenes is not necessarily related specifically to CC2s work, given that we know that other companies and sections like Visual Works have been involved in that as well.
More to the point though, the thing that is kinda off about it is that they were hardly credited for their work in the first place. In a lot of interviews, especially recent ones, touching on the outsourcing of the remake, no names of external companies are mentioned.
The game's industry has a long and bad track record of not crediting contracters. In fact, many games close to the finish line, has entire outside polish teams run through their games, which will never be mentioned or credited for their work.
The G-Bike thing to me, simply seems as another indicator that little is different with this game.
What thing's specifically are you refering to, and where did I say anything was riding on them developing the remake?
I'm making the argument that having a massive project like FFVIIR, a remake of the most iconic and loved games ever made, taken out of your hands after you've undoubtedly spent a lot of time and resources on it, basically means that as a company, except for whatever pay you received up front, is a waste of time.
I'm not saying that it will tank their company. I'm saying it's grounds for getting upset at SE.
When you're diverting time and resources to a huge project like that, it goes without saying that's time and resources you won't be spending elswhere, growing other brands or IPs for your company.
If CC2 leadership was planning on using the remake for their portifolio strengthening their position in the industry, and SE comes in after year(s) of work and says "sorry mac, I don't think this is working out after all", that's grounds to be severally annoyed.
Pretty simple math. Every man and man-hour spent working on the remake, is a man and a man hour not spent working on something else, which would actually help your brand down the line.
If CC2's contribution to the remake is going to be largely sweeped under the rug, then that will have had in impact in terms of that.
I'd argue that is pretty clear.
The point of the link I provided was to highlight how CC2 only seemed to have two major next gen AAA titles in the pipeline at the time, with the remake being a "large scale development" project.
Getting your hands slapped away from such a project year(s) into it, is never a good thing, simply by virtue of the fact that it means you've been wasting time and resources.
Of course, again, it hinges on what SE plans to do with the assets, and what sort of lisencing agreements the two companies were working under.
If the remake launches with a splash screen that says CC2, then no problem. If it doesn't, that is a problem from the perspective of a company that has done major work on the game.
Again though X, I'm not making the argument that CC2 is teethering on the edge of bankruptcy, simply that given the context of this move -
that CC2's work is not referenced anywhere in SE's comments on the shift, nor in FFVIIR promo material, and - suggests we're looking at a bad break, and that Claymore may be justified to think this might negatively impact development to some extent.
I'm not saying I necessarily believe that. I'm not making an argument either way. I'm saying it's possible for this to pan out either way.
It's very difficult to know what Nomura means by this. Is he refering to FMVs? Is he referring to in-engine cut-scenes, dialogue etc. which is by far the majority of the story delivery in most SE rpgs?
What's more interesting is what is left out, and sorta tying this back into recent news based on the kind of positions they've listed for hiring etc.
It is possibly that FFVIIR, as I've argued before, is very far along in development. Maybe, even up until the shift, it was further along than KHIII.
Maybe the issue here is that SE did not feel the game-play elements were coming together properly, and decided to go back to the drawing board on certain integral elements.
Thing about cut-scenes, is that you don't really need to have the game-play down to make the non-interactive portions of the game.
However, you do need a lot of assets though.
So for instance, you want Cloud and Aerith running through wall-market, conversing with people etc. you don't really need much in ways of game-play.
You do need the assets for Wallmarket, and all the characters in it etc. which of course to some degree, you also need for the game-play as well, since you can't design encounters in wallmarket, before you have the basic design of wallmarket pegged down.
For that reason it's not at all unreasonable for a company to have a section working primarily on asset production, another one on cut-scenes, and for those two to advance out of step with the people working on system design AKA game-play.
That can pan out either way, with systems coming into place before most of the assets are complete, or for a lot of assets being complete prior to systems being in place.
It's not necessary for the most part for the two to be done in lock-step with one another.
Last edited:
- AKA
- X
It's not specifically related to ONLY CC2's work, but given the history of what CC2 does as a studio, what the majority of their games primarily consist of, and that we know that they were involved in making the trailer – having them working on cutscenes makes sense given that we know that they were working on cinematic content. If that part of the game is specifically farther along than KHIII, it's a pretty clear indication that that's where at least some of their work was happening. There're obviously other studios doing work those things, too but if they're ahead on that part specifically, it seems likely that it would be connected to CC2's previous work on the Remake because they're INCREDIBLY efficient at that sort of work specifically.
(Also, if they'd scrapped CC2 and others' work when bringing it in-house, they definitely wouldn't be ahead of the curve on that, so I think that's basically the biggest bit of psuedo-news to come out on the Remake from the mainly KHIII interview).
...It is literally exactly what you said right here:
No one's saying that SE bringing everything in house is a good thing, or that that happening isn't generally a shitty thing for CC2 – it is.
I was just stating that I don't see their other projects being directly impacted, because they weren't "riding on their involvement in the Remake." Again, while SE pulling everything in-house sucks for them – We don't have the faintest idea about whether or not their work on the Remake is gonna be credited in the final game or not ~AND~ even if they're not credited – we don't know that it's for any reason any different than how shitty game companies generally are about crediting work from contractors like you mentioned earlier.
Your posts keep drawing lines between G-Bike not being on the site anymore, and that indicating that SE won't be crediting CC2 for any of the work they did on the Remake, and I'm just pointing out that that's WAY over-speculating, on top of the fact that, even if they're not credited, that's not even really anything other than par for the course with a lot of contacted work ...so it's basically a non-factor either way.
tl;dr – No one's saying SE bringing things in house and being ultra-tight-lipped about why they suddenly did so isn't a negative for those companies who were previously involved. You just seem to be pointing to removal of a link for an outdated game being indicative of a dramatic severing of ties destined to impact the final product and further impact CC2 with very little supporting evidence that – even IF they're true – are hardly significant beyond everything we already actually know for certain.
X
- AKA
- TresDias
I don't know, X. I personally find it more alarming to go from calling attention to a dev partner to then pretending they don't exist (and using descriptions like "external development" without even referencing where it was before) than if they were just never mentioned in the first place.
To me, it's pretty harsh.
As for the kind of impact it may have on CC2, who knows? It's probably not something that can be measured in obvious numbers. I guess that will mostly come down to whether other companies who may have wanted to work with them look at this as their fault.
To me, it's pretty harsh.
As for the kind of impact it may have on CC2, who knows? It's probably not something that can be measured in obvious numbers. I guess that will mostly come down to whether other companies who may have wanted to work with them look at this as their fault.
- AKA
- X
Oh, it's definitely harsh. I'm still not arguing that, but again – that's something we already knew as soon as things went radio silent and SE pulled development in-house. What we still absolutely don't know or have any real hints about is any fallout of what's happening with them legally in the finished product (like if they'll be credited in the final game) since nothing's been said. Realistically, Japanese companies aren't upfront about this stuff NEARLY as often as US-based companies (see: Konami & Hideo Kojima), so I think that sitting within the land of the unknown until the game is out for this is gonna be a significant possibility.
Again – the only psuedo-evidence that we really have of anything resembling news is that the Remake is ahead of KHIII on cutscenes, and it's almost certainly because of the existing content that CC2 was previously doing for them. Whether or not all of that gets tweaked and reworked at this point is anyone's guess, but it's unlikely that it's gonna be scrapped or it likely wouldn't've been mentioned like it was part of progress towards the finished product of the Remake.
X
Again – the only psuedo-evidence that we really have of anything resembling news is that the Remake is ahead of KHIII on cutscenes, and it's almost certainly because of the existing content that CC2 was previously doing for them. Whether or not all of that gets tweaked and reworked at this point is anyone's guess, but it's unlikely that it's gonna be scrapped or it likely wouldn't've been mentioned like it was part of progress towards the finished product of the Remake.
X
hian
Purist
I'm not entirely sure I'm on the same page with you in terms of what CC2's development history is - The majority of their games consist of more gameplay than cut-scenes I'd say. Azura's wrath was published by Capcom and as such, you can bet they had some say on the nature and direction of the game.
CC2's forte the last decade has been animation, and fast paced action - which I would argue is, and of course their expression of interest in working on a remake, is why they were chosen - not because of their ability to make cut-scenes.
It's also worth noting that we only know that CC2 was involved in making the trailer by virtue of the fact that the trailer contained game-play footage, which is what we know CC2 was working on.
CC2 is not, and never was credited in the trailer.
If we "know" anything it's that they were working on pretty much anything and everything except creative direction.
I wasn't making that argument. I was making the argument that man-hours and resources gone into development on the remake which they will no longer be making, will have gone largely to waste if they can't cash in on the success of the game down the line (if a success it becomes), which in turn detracts from the future market plans and long term revenue.
Nowhere did I say that their other projects would be effected by this, nor did I say their "other projects" where riding on their involvement in the remake.
Certainly. Again, my argument is not one of causality. It's an argument of circumstantial evidence - where the G-Bike thing is just another straw in the mix. There's an ocean of difference between the two.
Except that's not the argument I'm making. I'm not saying "pulling G-bike means they won't be credited". I'm saying there are indications that CC2 might not be credited, and that G-bike being pulled from the site might be another expression of that. You're turning my argument backwards.
This is my second post expressly telling you that's not what I'm saying. I'm not sure what more you could want from me at this point.
I'm saying the removal of G-Bike might be another sign that CC2 is getting shafted, added on top of the fact that they've not been credited properly in any of the other work they've supposedly been involved with, and the fact that their name is carefully kept out of any interview that's been done on the shift (SE interviewees only using the general term "outside contractors" or "external companies").
I'm saying that is grounds for CC2 and SE relationships worsening, on the basis that it cuts CC2 off from whatever long term benefits they might have projected as being primary developers on the remake, and that the reason SE took it out of their hands in the first place MIGHT be creative differences that MIGHT impact development time to SOME degree.
Even as contractors, if CC2 were to be doing primary development on the game from start to finish, SE would be legally bound to credit them properly. Now, as far as I know, they won't.
I am not saying the removal of G-bike in and of itself is grounds to think CC2 won't be recieving any credit, or that losing the remake will negatively impact whatever other projects they might have in the pipe-line, and I don't think anything in my original post implied I said any of this, given all the caveats I took care to put in it to qualify the nature of what I was actually saying.
Are we clear?
Some days it almost feels like it.
- AKA
- X
I'm just going to flat out disagree with you here when it comes to CC2 and what they're known for. I've played all of their Naruto Ultimate Ninja Storm games & being as Asura's Wrath is one of my favourite games ever (and their games represent the majority of the Platinum trophies that I have on my PS4), I'm incredibly familiar with them and used to follow updates on their studio for a good while back between 2008 - 2014.
• The Naruto Ultimate Ninja Storm games DO have some sort of action combat at their core, but the end of basically every character's Combo Attack, as well as every Justu, Ultimate Jutsu, Team Ultimate Justu, Grab, and Victory Post involve recreating cinematic moments of the anime & manga with a cutscene or short camera shot on the characters heavily focusing on the character-specific animation and adherence to the original source material, and some of which change based on the context of the characters they're used against. In addition to that, their story modes have often been a closer recreation of the events from the manga than the anime managed to do, and they were exceptionally well-praised for it.
• Asura's Wrath was basically inspired from all of their close work on the Naruto story (with their CEO Piroshi Matsuyama being an absolutely massive fan of Naruto). They crafted similar emotional beats and rivalry into their own IP which comes out as a lightly playable cinematic, and nearly the entire game is like a playable 3D anime of cutscenes with bits of gameplay – which was the source of a great deal of praise and criticism about the game.
In-game cutscenes and animation are their forte here, and they have a real emphasis on capturing and engaging cinematic quality with the in-game assets that they'd also done with the FFVII characters in G-Bike:
While they focus on action elements and simple but engaging gameplay – cutscenes like this are the bread & butter of their games.
I'm willing to tl;dr your view on the argument you meant to make, but I'm gonna bold that last line of yours and re-quote what I already quoted in my previous post, because you literally said the EXACT WORDS that you are STILL claiming to have never said.
That right there.
That quoted text above these words.
That ONE PART of my post that you didn't quote in your last reply.
That is the thing is that I disagreed with, and was why I was deconstructing your argument the way I did.
Stop claiming that you never said that their other projects were riding on their involvement in the Remake, because it is literally, word-for-word, exactly what you said, right fucking there.
If that's not the argument you meant to make, and you're attempting to clarify – that's fine. I've been explicitly clear that the situation CC2 is in isn't a good one by any measure, and that the stuff with G-Bike not being on the site isn't any surprise, but nor is it anything to read into at this point.
Are YOU clear on what you ACTUALLY said there?
X
hian
Purist
Fine. I concede that both Asura's Wrath and the Naruto games contain many cut-scene elements, and respect your opinion on that.
However, CC2's history of development stretches far beyond that - on top of which, as you said, Naruto is at its a core an action game.
In the words of Kitase though -
"Not only does CC2 have a wealth of experience and know-how concerning action games, we also felt that they had something of a shine in regards to their sense of video production. "
This seems to indicate that CC2 was chosen for more than their cutscenes - if anything it seems that indicate that their cutscene production skills are icing on the cake, not the primary reason they were chosen.
When you also consider that the only trailer we have featuring CC2's work on the remake, is primarily a game-play trailer, I don't think it's reasonable to think that CC2's primary task was making cut-scenes (not saying you've claimed this).
This is starting to piss me off X.
That quote specifically says "stuff". It does not say other projects, nor does it imply anything of the sort.
That's all your reading of that one fetching word, despite multiple clarifications that this is not what was intended, yet you keep pressing the point.
I could have sworn I did, but for some reason it's not in my reply anymore, which means I might have screwed something up in editing.
To borrow your flowery language - I didn't fucking say that, and stop claiming I fucking did "word for word", when those words don't fucking appear in the fucking sentence you quote. Fuck.
"CC2 had a lot of stuff riding on their involvement in the remake."
Where in that sentence does it say that CC2 had other projects riding on the success of the remake?
I'll tell you where - Nowhere.
If you're talking about the context given the link provided -
The point of providing the link in the first place, was to show that CC2 only had two big next gen titles in the work, one of them being the remake - meaning that literally half of their primary future line-up was that specific title.
It was not to suggest that the other title would be effected by losing the remake, but to suggest that when a single title make up half of your future line-up, the loss of that title is, simply put, a major loss.
Also, if that's not satisfying to you, let's read the very next couple of paragraphs of what I wrote :
And
(of course I complete accept the criticism that we cannot know for certain whether CC2 won't be credited or not, but in the context of what we're talking about now, that's neither here nor there. This is about whether or not your interpretation of what I said is reasonable or not)
I have a very hard time seeing how you can justify your interpretation of the one sentence you quoted, riding your entire interpretation on one vague word, when the very next couple of paragraphs go on to expand specifically on the point of the costs of the project in terms of man-power, time and resources - not on how or if it might impact other projects, now or in the future.
If you want to understand somebody's position, you don't read single sentences in a vacuum, and then project a specific meaning on to a purposefully vague word completely ignoring following statements. And you surely don't get to get riled up and accuse me of falsely construing my own statements.
Stop doubling down on this now please.
As an aside,
also according to this
https://www.technobuffalo.com/2015/...ii-remake-being-outsourced-to-cyberconnect-2/
G-Bike was already off-line by this time. This literally mean that G-Bike was off-line for over a year and still featured on the Japanese remake site as promo material for the remake.
This decreases the likelihood of the removal being due to the game being off-line.
Last edited:
- AKA
- X
Yes, Naruto is a 3D fighting game, because that's the delivery mechanism for all of the cutscenes to be able to be engaged by the player, and you know... it has to be a GAME to sell as a game.
Also, don't make a seemingly counter-argumentative point that isn't with a "(not saying you've claimed this)" because its disingenuous to the discussion that's being had, and steers things off track.
To clarify again, this entire thing about cut-scenes is only being mentioned because THE ONLY PSEUDO-INFORMATION WE HAVE ON THE REMAKE FROM THE LAST INTERVIEW. That is that the Remake is farther along than KHIII on its cut scenes, which is specifically why I was mentioning this point in regards to CC2's previous exceptional work with cut scenes in their games being likely related, because:
1) It's highly likely CC2 was involved with making cut-scenes for the Remake the game because of all of their previous experience in doing so, especially in teams (which I have listed in detail).
2) The cut scenes being mentioned means that they're likely from the contracted work that CC2 was a part of, and those things will be kept in the game from the now-ended contracted work that was done, and not scrapping everything when SE took development in-house.
Essentially, that's reasonable circumstantial evidence that it's likely that SE are not scrapping the work done by CC2 and others, and starting over (since we don't have a damn clue what they're doing, regardless of crediting previous studios or otherwise, this is the best evidence that we have that the preexisting work is being kept).
That's literally it.
That's the whole statement I made, and the only thing that has any relevance to that interview.
On to this other bit, which is important for different reasons:
Let's look at this solely in THE INITIAL context:
You say "CC2 had a lot of stuff riding on their involvement in the remake." where you then include a link to a thread that is called, "CyberConnect 2 reveals they have 3 current gen console games in development" that literally talks about their other projects – that are games – that they have in development as the things that are apparently riding on their involvement in the Remake. It is ABSOLUTELY 100% the implied message of that statement, regardless of whether or not you meant it that way. Hell, I'll even quote the linked article for easy-to-read-in-this-thread context.
CyberConnect 2 reveals they have 3 current gen console games in development said:
Again, there is a painfully apparent implication that the other "lots of stuff" that is "riding on their involvement in the Remake" is the other two next gen games that they're working on, which is my point, but you're still just flat out saying that you didn't say that. I'll get to that in full detail in a second after I address this next bit.
Whether or not that was the argument that you were INTENDING TO MAKE AND HAVE ATTEMPTED TO CLARIFY AND RETCON IN YOUR LATER REPLIES wasn't the point here.
I'm pointing out what your statement said when you made it, and why I deconstructed your argument the way that I did, because of what it said, and that I was EXPLICITLY CLEAR ON THIS in my first reply to you SIX DAYS AGO before any of the other additionally provided context.
– To which your reply was an attempt to dismiss the argument ENTIRELY as something you'd never said, not that you'd never used the exact words:
So you said, "CC2 had a lot of stuff riding on their involvement in the remake." and when I pointed that out, your reply was, "Where did I say anything was riding on them developing the remake?" which started this whole chain of discussion.
You have just kept claiming never to have said what you said, despite the fact that I literally clarified the connection between the statement and the link in my initial reply about what I meant to you in plain text, and had to keep calling you out on it over and over before you mentioned it at which point you're starting to get pissed off and even more defensive.
If you're going to make a solid argument, you HAVE to be able to concede points where they weren't well made before and own up to them, not trying to just hand wave them away. It's fine if you admit it was unclear and clarify, but you don't. You just claim that whatever it was didn't happen and make additional points to your current argument, such that all I've gotten from you is essentially just a wave of, "I never said that" and "technically I didn't use this exact work there, so you're still wrong" and "there's no link between that statement and the link immediately after it despite how they're arranged and you're wrong for interpreting it that way despite the layout" and "everything that I said was right, and you're just wrong for not knowing exactly what I meant even before I clarified the point indirectly in my later replies" and "your whole argument is flawed because of how it's constructed on what I said and not what I meant" and "stop fucking bringing this up, I still never fucking said that" – which is to say that the common theme in every single one of your replies is ALWAYS, "I'm still right and you're still wrong, though."
If you've ever wondered why discussing things with you is exasperatingly frustrating for people here a huge amount of the time here, this is why. Instead of just owning up to or addressing the connection that I called out, you've just locked down and refused to acknowledge it in any capacity whatsoever until I wouldn't stop mentioning it, and even then you're still not getting the fact that I'm pointing out that HOW WHAT YOU INITIALLY STATED AND LATER YOUR CLARIFICATION ARE STILL INCONSISTENT. Your every reply is a constant 1up to show how you were actually right the whole time, and it's exhausting because it's not just limited to this one thing – you do it everywhere.
Even when you concede that CC2's past history of games that I listed does involve an overwhelmingly vast amount of cutscenes as their content like I mentioned, you immediately flip back to the general tone of, "but they're also primarily games, and they have other games too aside from the ones you mentioned (that are listed as action games and even though I'm not explicitly stating it, I'm implying that all of these games are counter-points to the ones you showed and actually support my argument), and this quote here says they were hired by SE for making games and not only cutscenes (which I'm not saying you were trying to say but I'm still presenting it like a counter-argument), so really I'm still right in everything that I initially said and all the points that you made are just a minor detail that I overlooked and don't have any real implications on the main issue I'm talking about because I'm still right."
I'm calling this out publicly in this thread, because it's something that has come up to the Mods from other members a number of times when discussing things with you in the past. I'm using this particular example with me as a point of calling it out, because your arguments are VERY frequently (but likely unintentionally) belittling and dismissive in a way that's extremely aggravating to anyone attempting to have any even remotely contradictory view to yours, which is is counter-productive to reaching any consensus in the actual discussion. This is why I want you to look at what you're actually saying & how it's said vs. what you're intending to say and feel that you mean, because the delivery of your points is often incendiary in ways that you're very dismissive of, and I'd really like that to NOT be the case, because you clearly have a lot of opinions and insight into things, but when you bring them up, they're not always constructive when they ought to be because of this general issue.
I'm trying to be as plainly straightforward as I can here with all of this, so hopefully that makes a point for future discussions being more productive, as well as my point getting across for this specifically.
Again, just as I mentioned before – if SE & CC2 are no longer partnered, they're not going to keep a link to an outdated game on their site developed by their former partner. That's solely related to SE pulling their development in-house, and is entirely unrelated to any indication of whether or not CC2 is or is not going to be properly credited in the final product, so it can't be used as evidence for anything other than they're no longer partnered, which we already know.
X