Since we all have been wondering about how the game has been influnced by fans, is there any sign that it has ?

It has had feedback from fans via focus group testing who have actually played the game, which Ferland has said has happened. So yes it has been influenced in that regards to development by fans.

The chance of a hardcore old-skool Splinter Cell fan being in a focus group is close to 0.
I think they get random gamers out of some sort of pool, and then observe their reactions. Random gamers are not necessarily fans.

quote:

Originally posted by scworld:
The chance of a hardcore old-skool Splinter Cell fan being in a focus group is close to 0.
I think they get random gamers out of some sort of pool, and then observe their reactions. Random gamers are not necessarily fans.

This is untrue, actually they did the focus group testing with fans of the franchise, to which they expressed their shock at the loss at Light and Shadow not being there, quite a few liked the idea of the new premise. Focus group testing covers many demographics, casual, hardcore, different ages from 18+ different sexes etc, to not get a wide-range of data would make the entire test flawed. The whole idea of focus testing is to get feedback on what your customer base will like in a board sence, not specificly targeted, is it fun? is it ituitive enough that a game can pick up and play? They will get feedback on how gamers play the game, is it hard, is such section of the game too difficult to understand? How many people experience this difficulty? The game from this feedback can be tweaked to improve the overall gameplay experience, no matter the demographic. But as developers they will be looking to make their game to a wide audience as possible, as they have said many times before.

If this true then, why havent they released a demo of some sort, or a new trailer? my idea is that they will not change the game, although I just hope they do

quote:

Originally posted by Splinterfactor8:
If this true then, why havent they released a demo of some sort, or a new trailer? my idea is that they will not change the game, although I just hope they do

It all depends on the stage of development, this is what many don't seem to grasp. While a pre-alpha demo maybe used internally for focus testing to tweak and change the game based upon play testing, this is to find the 'sweet spot'. It wouldn't make sence to release that game externally in the wild, it simply isn't productive in the typical sence. As you will not get the level of feedback a usability manager will require to help developers tweak the game. If you release such a demo to the public, they will focus on trivial irrelevant issues, which aren't related to playing the game.

For example, they will put you into a section of a level and want to see how well you get through it, and ask questions, why are stuck? You would provide a reason to why, I dunno what to do, i don't understand the puzzle etc. They need to know if it is fun or not and which areas provide the most fun, or why you found it difficult. How do the controls feel? Does the combat feel natural or cumbersome? Does it provide challenge, or is it too easy? How does the game make you feel, and a vast range of other emotions and feelings. Things like this won't generally be expressed by someone playing a alpha/beta of a game thats released on xboxlive or PC. Other then the obvious such as, "OMG there are glitches", "animation problems" we need light and shadows etc etc. While this is feedback, it isnt the feedback they need to tweak a level or an objective for the gamer to play. Play testers generally ignore bugs and other issues and concentrate on the overall gameplay, as many of the issues will be fixed later on in the development cycle.

I don't see them changing the concept this late in development not with the time and budget they have had, it would be an awful waste. Many things will have changed "feature" wise due to the build you seeing in the trailer was an alpha, when you see the later version beta, I think many more people will be impressed in the amount of content and options for stealth or agressional options, even some nay sayers.

Well they have been delaying the game for a while and as you see still no new news, i think its because there changing it

quote:

Originally posted by DixieWolf:

quote:

Originally posted by scworld:
The chance of a hardcore old-skool Splinter Cell fan being in a focus group is close to 0.
I think they get random gamers out of some sort of pool, and then observe their reactions. Random gamers are not necessarily fans.

This is untrue, actually they did the focus group testing with fans of the franchise, to which they expressed their shock at the loss at Light and Shadow not being there, quite a few liked the idea of the new premise. Focus group testing covers many demographics, casual, hardcore, different ages from 18+ different sexes etc, to not get a wide-range of data would make the entire test flawed. The whole idea of focus testing is to get feedback on what your customer base will like in a board sence, not specificly targeted, is it fun? is it ituitive enough that a game can pick up and play? They will get feedback on how gamers play the game, is it hard, is such section of the game too difficult to understand? How many people experience this difficulty? The game from this feedback can be tweaked to improve the overall gameplay experience, no matter the demographic. But as developers they will be looking to make their game to a wide audience as possible, as they have said many times before.

Did I miss something? Where is this info coming from?

quote:

Did I miss something? Where is this info coming from?

I guess you must have missed something, like I said earlier. Mathieu Ferland has said in publications, and cannot be misinterpreted. That gamers have played the game, and at first they didn't like the concept without light and shadow, till they saw how they could use the new concept, utilising the enviroment and blending in. The only way gamers can play such an early build is through focus group testing. This is where gamers in the local area will be picked out to trial the game with a broad variety of gamers. To test the game in a variety of ways, many I already listed for you.

quote:

Originally posted by DixieWolf:

quote:

Did I miss something? Where is this info coming from?

I guess you must have missed something, like I said earlier. Mathieu Ferland has said in publications, and cannot be misinterpreted. That gamers have played the game, and at first they didn't like the concept without light and shadow, till they saw how they could use the new concept, utilising the enviroment and blending in. The only way gamers can play such an early build is through focus group testing. This is where gamers in the local area will be picked out to trial the game with a broad variety of gamers. To test the game in a variety of ways, many I already listed for you.

LoL Said what earlier? That was my first post in this thread.

Anyway, what publications? The only thing that's sort of close to that is this:

quote:

Speaking with GI.biz, Splinter Cell producer Mathieu Ferland says, "We've been working very closely with the fans from the beginning ... Their first reaction was, 'What's going on? Where's Sam?' And then they discovered these new possibilities, this new mechanic and they said, 'That looks awesome. I want to play it."

But, that doesn't say they've used focus groups, and that doesn't say that fans actually played the game. My interpretation was that they'd showed the game (because he said that when they were showing stuff), and those were people's reactions to what was shown.

BTW, I have zero doubt that people have tested the game. But, hardcore SC fans that have nothing to lose by being honest (i.e., those not associated with Ubi )...I'm a little skeptical.

quote:

But, hardcore SC fans that have nothing to lose by being honest (i.e., those not associated with Ubi Wink)...I'm a little skeptical.

Are you suggesting, that these hardcore gamers would tell you what they saw? Because if that's what you're implying, they would have a lot to lose. They would of all agreed to NDA agreements prior to testing, and would be in serious trouble if they where to talk about what they saw before that NDA expires. I forget the publication I read, but I know that some testing had been done, it was the one reason why i didn't understand the complaints on this forum.

quote:

Originally posted by DixieWolf:

quote:

But, hardcore SC fans that have nothing to lose by being honest (i.e., those not associated with Ubi Wink)...I'm a little skeptical.

Are you suggesting, that these hardcore gamers would tell you what they saw? Because if that's what you're implying, they would have a lot to lose. They would of all agreed to NDA agreements prior to testing, and would be in serious trouble if they where to talk about what they saw before that NDA expires. I forget the publication I read, but I know that some testing had been done, it was the one reason why i didn't understand the complaints on this forum.

No, I would not expect any testers to tell us what they'd seen (hardcore fans or not). I was talking about them being honest to Ubi.

As far as Ferland's comments go, the way he said what he said implied, to me, that they'd merely showed the game and that fans, while initially not pleased, were won over by the new stuff. I think this forum is proof that that isn't the case. The percentage of people here that saw what they did and said WTF, and have kept saying it, is plenty large enough that a statement like that would obviously be false.

Anyway, find the article, because I searched and couldn't find anything about testing that had been done.

quote:

Originally posted by CoastalGirl:

quote:

Originally posted by DixieWolf:

quote:

But, hardcore SC fans that have nothing to lose by being honest (i.e., those not associated with Ubi Wink)...I'm a little skeptical.

Are you suggesting, that these hardcore gamers would tell you what they saw? Because if that's what you're implying, they would have a lot to lose. They would of all agreed to NDA agreements prior to testing, and would be in serious trouble if they where to talk about what they saw before that NDA expires. I forget the publication I read, but I know that some testing had been done, it was the one reason why i didn't understand the complaints on this forum.

No, I would not expect any testers to tell us what they'd seen (hardcore fans or not). I was talking about them being honest to Ubi.

As far as Ferland's comments go, the way he said what he said implied, to me, that they'd merely showed the game and that fans, while initially not pleased, were won over by the new stuff. I think this forum is proof that that isn't the case. The percentage of people here that saw what they did and said WTF, and have kept saying it, is plenty large enough that a statement like that would obviously be false.

Anyway, find the article, because I searched and couldn't find anything about testing that had been done.

It is a magazine publication not one that is online, honestly it couldn't be misinterpreted he has said people had played it, only place that happens... focus groups, it's not hard to believe really. Vegas 1 and Vegas 2 where tested this was and confirmed by community managers, and hardcore gamers of the Rainbow Six forum couldn't understand how any hardcore gamer agreed to it, this isn't the point nor how focus groups work. You could say you don'e like the new look thats not what they're looking for specifically from testing. I think the forum is proof that many don't like it on a very, very small scale.

There are more then 3 million Splinter Cell fans world wide, and this forum has around about 100 or so posters around about. It is the pebble in the sea compared to the overall number of fans and only represents a handful. I have been to other forums, where some have said they dunno about how the game will play, while others can't wait, but not this doom and gloom attitude here. Why are those outside forums more important for feedback? Because there are more samples of opinions then the same rehashed ones from the same users and intimidation from those who cannot express themselves here. Those who speak the loudest may not be the gamers the developers necessarily want to develop for if what they want cannot be accommodated into the game. As Mathieu had said, if the game doesn't do well they will go back to the old concept.

This makes sence from a development stand point that if you're going to make a new game with new mechanics, you're going have to make that game consistent. Some feedback simply will contradict the gameplay they're making and will make it inconsistent/unbalanced or out of place. With the old formula back again they can use prior feedback to craft the now back to the roots formula to make a game that's targeting those fans, you cannot really do two formulas in one it kinda contradicts itself.

quote:

Originally posted by DixieWolf:
It is a magazine publication not one that is online, honestly it couldn't be misinterpreted he has said people had played it, only place that happens... focus groups, it's not hard to believe really.

I actually did say I don't doubt that people have played the game. Who those people are, OTOH... Anyway, if you can't point me to an article that says that, well, I don't know.

quote:

Vegas 1 and Vegas 2 where tested this was and confirmed by community managers, and hardcore gamers of the Rainbow Six forum couldn't understand how any hardcore gamer agreed to it, this isn't the point nor how focus groups work. You could say you don'e like the new look thats not what they're looking for specifically from testing. I think the forum is proof that many don't like it on a very, very small scale.

I don't think it proves that at all.

quote:

There are more then 3 million Splinter Cell fans world wide, and this forum has around about 100 or so posters around about. It is the pebble in the sea compared to the overall number of fans and only represents a handful.

This forum is representative of all SC fans to a certain extent. For example, the only reason I really joined was because of some DA issues. I wouldn't have joined, yet my feelings about the games are what they are, and my opinion about what was shown of SCC is what it is. Think statistics - one percent here may not equal one percent out there, but that doesn't mean it's dismissible based on numbers.

quote:

I have been to other forums, where some have said they dunno about how the game will play, while others can't wait, but not this doom and gloom attitude here. Why are those outside forums more important for feedback? Because there are more samples of opinions then the same rehashed ones from the same users and intimidation from those who cannot express themselves here.

LoL Doom and gloom? Intimidation? Don't take it so seriously...it's just a forum.

quote:

Those who speak the loudest may not be the gamers the developers necessarily want to develop for if what they want cannot be accommodated into the game. As Mathieu had said, if the game doesn't do well they will go back to the old concept.

"Ubi" has asked the fans said to trust them with the change...either they want us (or, more accurately, our money LoL) or they don't.

quote:

This makes sence from a development stand point that if you're going to make a new game with new mechanics, you're going have to make that game consistent. Some feedback simply will contradict the gameplay they're making and will make it inconsistent/unbalanced or out of place. With the old formula back again they can use prior feedback to craft the now back to the roots formula to make a game that's targeting those fans, you cannot really do two formulas in one it kinda contradicts itself.

I could see two options for stealth working very well. Just because it may not be the easiest thing to do (though, I personally don't think it would be difficult), doesn't mean it's not worth doing.

quote:

I don't think it proves that at all.

You don't? When the sample of people suggesting is really small compared to say a site like gametrailers where millions visit, gamespot, 1up, IGN, Kotaku, Joystiq etc.. which get unique comments. If you count up the number of people who are rehashing the same comments here, exclude them for a second now count up new samples, the number is really small. Now add the most vocal poster again and it seems like it's more vocal then it really is, due to them rehashing and rehashing some more, as i said the ones who scream the loudest aren't necessarily the people developers should be aiming at.

Now If I go to a sites like the ones I listed the chances of rehashing comments are limited, why? Because it's not an official site where comments are dedicated for that game, there are many discussions from many different games in many different genre's, then the discussion moves on to a new game. This makes great places to get feedback from, as the feedback isn't quite as serious, there isn't as much intimidation. I think the worst I've personally seen in those topics is, Sam Fisher own Solid Snake or vice versa. Some of the comments on why people like the new direction and those who don't like the new direction, are far more detailed then just the basic ones presented here but the best thing? There are a bigger sample of users.

quote:

LoL Doom and gloom? Intimidation? Don't take it so seriously...it's just a forum.

I dunno how you've missed those comments, but they are there. If we shouldn't be serious to some extent why should the developers? If only one type of feedback can be given because many people feel intimidated, then you're going to have to look elsewhere for feedback because the source is biased and not objectable. If I wanted to prove to the developers that my way of thinking could be used, I will use pictures and text to back up my idea, no matter if the idea is rough with stick men, but so to make the developers understand in a clear precise message. All I see is Ubisoft are alienating the fans by not having Light and Shadow, or I don't mind a hybrid etc... The problem with both comments is one probably isn't possible and the latter can be taken 101 ways, light and shadow could be limited, but they did what you asked by making a hybrid, they aren't mind readers, not enough detail doesn't work. No one takes this into consideration, it simply my suggestion works and puts down thier basic idea.

quote:

"Ubi" has asked the fans said to trust them with the change...either they want us (or, more accurately, our money LoL) or they don't.

You're are going to have to trust them to an extent aren't you? There is nothing more you can do unless you want to work there as a developer. Did you trust them on prior projects such as Splinter Cell and Chaos Theory when you saw previews? They could be using the formula Light and Shadow that you like, and change the entire game mechanics in what you do in the game, to a point that may alienate you again, because they want to try something new, and you would still have complaints. Since these are the people who designed the game originally, if you cannot trust them on this new project, what chance have you got trusting them on an old one? Simply because it uses Light and Shadow? That doesn't cut it in my honest opinion, and is a poor reason.

quote:

I could see two options for stealth working very well. Just because it may not be the easiest thing to do (though, I personally don't think it would be difficult), doesn't mean it's not worth doing.

Then, I would honestly suggest you write down your idea, back it up with lots of text, and pictures so people have a 3D perspective of how your idea will work, or what you're trying to say. Your idea may be worth doing, but if you don't talk about it from a basic idea to a very detailed and intricate and robust system of interaction, how am i mean't to know what you mean? It simply an idea in ice. If you write down a great idea no matter how long it is I would be the first to click on your thread and give it a long read while sipping on some tea and giving you my own constructive feedback on your great idea. I'm sure many people who appreciate such a valued idea would do the same. Maybe food for thought?

quote:

Originally posted by DixieWolf:

quote:

I don't think it proves that at all.

You don't? When the sample of people suggesting is really small compared to say a site like gametrailers where millions visit, gamespot, 1up, IGN, Kotaku, Joystiq etc.. which get unique comments. If you count up the number of people who are rehashing the same comments here, exclude them for a second now count up new samples, the number is really small. Now add the most vocal poster again and it seems like it's more vocal then it really is, due to them rehashing and rehashing some more, as i said the ones who scream the loudest aren't necessarily the people developers should be aiming at.

Now If I go to a sites like the ones I listed the chances of rehashing comments are limited, why? Because it's not an official site where comments are dedicated for that game, there are many discussions from many different games in many different genre's, then the discussion moves on to a new game. This makes great places to get feedback from, as the feedback isn't quite as serious, there isn't as much intimidation. I think the worst I've personally seen in those topics is, Sam Fisher own Solid Snake or vice versa. Some of the comments on why people like the new direction and those who don't like the new direction, are far more detailed then just the basic ones presented here but the best thing? There are a bigger sample of users.

The thing is, you really haven't been here that long. Sure, there are a lot of the same people posting, but many come and go. From both "sides".

quote:

quote:

LoL Doom and gloom? Intimidation? Don't take it so seriously...it's just a forum.

I dunno how you've missed those comments, but they are there. If we shouldn't be serious to some extent why should the developers? If only one type of feedback can be given because many people feel intimidated, then you're going to have to look elsewhere for feedback because the source is biased and not objectable. If I wanted to prove to the developers that my way of thinking could be used, I will use pictures and text to back up my idea, no matter if the idea is rough with stick men, but so to make the developers understand in a clear precise message. All I see is Ubisoft are alienating the fans by not having Light and Shadow, or I don't mind a hybrid etc... The problem with both comments is one probably isn't possible and the latter can be taken 101 ways, light and shadow could be limited, but they did what you asked by making a hybrid, they aren't mind readers, not enough detail doesn't work. No one takes this into consideration, it simply my suggestion works and puts down thier basic idea.

Again, you haven't been here that long. We've had drama from people on both sides of the fence. It would seem, however, that some have more longevity than others...

quote:

quote:

"Ubi" has asked the fans said to trust them with the change...either they want us (or, more accurately, our money LoL) or they don't.

You're are going to have to trust them to an extent aren't you? There is nothing more you can do unless you want to work there as a developer. Did you trust them on prior projects such as Splinter Cell and Chaos Theory when you saw previews? They could be using the formula Light and Shadow that you like, and change the entire game mechanics in what you do in the game, to a point that may alienate you again, because they want to try something new, and you would still have complaints. Since these are the people who designed the game originally, if you cannot trust them on this new project, what chance have you got trusting them on an old one? Simply because it uses Light and Shadow? That doesn't cut it in my honest opinion, and is a poor reason.

Simple answer is no, I don't trust them. They're a business, not my friends.

Complex answer would be yes and no, because I trust them as a developer to make a good game. I do not, however, trust that they can take Splinter Cell in a new direction and end up with a game that will satisfy my needs as a player.

quote:

quote:

I could see two options for stealth working very well. Just because it may not be the easiest thing to do (though, I personally don't think it would be difficult), doesn't mean it's not worth doing.

Then, I would honestly suggest you write down your idea, back it up with lots of text, and pictures so people have a 3D perspective of how your idea will work, or what you're trying to say. Your idea may be worth doing, but if you don't talk about it from a basic idea to a very detailed and intricate and robust system of interaction, how am i mean't to know what you mean? It simply an idea in ice. If you write down a great idea no matter how long it is I would be the first to click on your thread and give it a long read while sipping on some tea and giving you my own constructive feedback on your great idea. I'm sure many people who appreciate such a valued idea would do the same. Maybe food for thought?

LoL As a matter of fact, I have a 234 (yes, 234) page outline for a game I want to do. And, if you think I should post anything about it, you're crazy. I might as well wave goodbye to all my work, because it would be useless. Not gonna happen.

If this whole idea of a focos group has happend and feed back has been givin, i dont think it still explains the delays, no info whats so ever or a release date

quote:

There is nothing more you can do unless you want to work there as a developer.

I wanted, until I saw SCDA. Now I am looking into career opportunities as Tester, Junior Programmer, Marketing or Management at Guerilla Games (Killzone), Triumph Studios (Age of Wonders/Overlord) and even *gasp* EA.

To kill time I am the producer of another game, but I refer you to the Off-Topic forum for more info about that. http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/393107431/m/3661028436

So I guess Ubi blew it on that part.

Your turn

quote:

ply

quote:

The thing is, you really haven't been here that long. Sure, there are a lot of the same people posting, but many come and go. From both "sides".

Please don't judge me because my sign up date says Registered: Sun February 24 2008, I mainly read these forums and have done since they moved from the old forum infopop to this Groupee forum more then some 5 years ago. So my sign up date does not reflect my time reading these boards. Usually If I want to give Ubisoft my 2p feedback, I travel to their branch, which thankfully is not too far where I live in England, about a 20min trip. It is only now I signed up to this forum.

quote:

Again, you haven't been here that long. We've had drama from people on both sides of the fence. It would seem, however, that some have more longevity than others...

But that is the thing, like my above comment has said I have been reading, and I have seen both sides, but they suffer the same problem, they rehash and rehash the same rebutals. Either this way is wrong or that way, there cannot be no compromise. I have seen such extreme logic such as, it isn't Splinter Cell the name should be removed, or Ubisoft should end the franchise as if these people speak facts, when it is personal opinion. I cannot understand this thinking from a logical stand point. If you're that upset about the change "personally" get some fresh air, and if the game truely isn't for you, it may be time to move on to newer and better games, there isn't just Splinter Cell to play. When EA changed Command and Conquer, I didn't sit in their forum all the time and complain. It just wasn't a direction that appealed to me others it did, I repect them trying something new, if thats involves me or not, I can find another game that is compelling to play in the vast soup of developed games.

quote:

Simple answer is no, I don't trust them. They're a business, not my friends.

Complex answer would be yes and no, because I trust them as a developer to make a good game. I do not, however, trust that they can take Splinter Cell in a new direction and end up with a game that will satisfy my needs as a player.

Exactly. Your second point holds true aswell, since Ubisoft is a PLC business, they're going to have to go with the market flow, that usually means changing the games t