I'm just going to flat out disagree with you here when it comes to CC2 and what they're known for.
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).
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:
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.
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.
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.
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.
2.) CC2 had a lot of stuff riding on their involvement in the remake.
CyberConnect 2 reveals they have 3 current gen console games in development said:
This week's Famitsu has a huge article on CyberConnect2 as a developer, and mostly covers their upcoming announced titles. There's also an interview with the CEO about the future of the developer, including the cryptic "new challenge" recruitment ad they recently put up.
Apparently the new challenge is not just one game but there are 3 current-gen console games they're developing at the moment. The keywords in the ad refer to the different titles, with the text in the largest font size referring to the first title, and the medium and smaller font text referring to the other two projects.
The first unannounced title they're working on will be on Unreal Engine 4 targeting a worldwide audience. Other keywords associated with it are "large scale development", "photo real", and "physically based rendering". The second unannounced title will be an open world game, and the third unannounced title is a VR title.
He also goes on to say in the interview that up until now, CC2 has split the number of titles they worked on between console and smartphones evenly, but moving forward, they're looking at a ratio of 70% consoles, 30% smartphones. He feels that this is the time for console development to fight on.
Edit: For reference, here is the ad:
http://www.cc2.co.jp/recruit/new_challenge/
And this is the background where you can see all the text:
http://www.cc2.co.jp/recruit/new_challenge/img/bg.jpg
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.
Also, if that's not satisfying to you, let's read the very next couple of paragraphs of what I wrote:
"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..."
And
"...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."
(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.
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.
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.
– 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:
What thing's specifically are you refering to, and where did I say anything was riding on them developing the remake?
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.
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.
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