"Nikoms565;c-1782972" wrote:
"Kyno;c-1782934" wrote:
"Nikoms565;c-1782895" wrote:
"Kyno;c-1782865" wrote:
"Nikoms565;c-1782784" wrote:
"Kyno;c-1782692" wrote:
@Nikoms565
Honest question, I don't watch many videos, and almost never when they first come out, but they presented a clip provided by CG? Not made by themselves on the test server? Was this stated in the video?
On Ahnald's channel in the video in question, he specifically thanks "EA_Carrie" and having the developers "sit down with him" and explain and teach him about the kit. He also says several times in the video that a GG lead team should "easily be able to defeat a Revan team" based on how the kit was detailed by the developers - and as witnessed by the numerous runs on both defense and offense. Clearly that is not the case.
Where the videos playing in the background came from, he doesn't say. But it's clear that the GG in the videos and the GG we all have are not working the same way. Whether that is CG's attempt to mislead people or bugs in-game that don't, for some reason show up in the video, we'll find out.
Honestly, if your question is intended to suggest that CG can wash their collective hands of the under performance of GG compared to the GG teams in the video, I don't think it matters. CG can't use the Game Changers and Youtube test accounts to promote content - then turn around and weaken the actual in-game content and pin the blame on "third party promotional accounts".
Perception is reality - and the perception by most intelligent people is that CG uses GC and Youtube test account players to promote new content. If they are baiting people into investing resources into content, then switching that content to a lesser content, even if CG can "technically" avoid any legal issues by pawning it off on the GC's (and leaving them out to dry), from a perception stand point, it's CG that is culpable. At least in most intelligent people's minds.
We can agree to disagree, but reality is reality.
I'm just wondering why you would specifically be stating a video made by CG, when no one is saying who made the video. The perception ( and reality) of a video playing in the background of a game changers video, would normally be that it is of thier own making, the intent to promote the game and working with the dev team wouldnt normally change that.
Game play is a different story, I am not disputing what was said is not meeting up with what we are seeing. As I said I never get to watch videos early on and almost go out of my way to avoid any promotion of what is coming, until i can see it first hand or from a less biased source, but that is just me.
Honestly, the source of the video is irrelevant. Primarily because CG provided the GC's with the test accounts for doing exactly that - testing out new content (with changes applied to the account by CG) so really, the only question regarding where the video came from is, whose computer recorded the video? Why is that important?
The fact of the matter is, CG seems to have provided the test accounts with content that was not the same as the content changes they released in game - regardless as to who actually recorded the video.
The source does matter, if the GC had no hand in making the video and it appears as is that is way worse IMO, than if the GC was using a test account that was on a server and should have the same content as was released.
It also lends itself to figuring out where the disconnect was that is causing the differences in game play we are seeing vs the video.
Once again, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. Either way CG provided misleading content (either the video itself or the content on the test server not being the same as the content in game) with the intention and full knowledge that it would be promulgated to the masses through the videos.
I do agree that in can be helpful to figure out where the disconnect is - but obviously only CG knows if the "disconnect" is due to bugs or due to intention. And the executive team has never been known for their willingness to be forthcoming - or timely in their communication. As is clearly the case today.
That again is a broad assumption, them providing it meaning they made it and handed it to them is different then a build that could have an issue in it and being shared.
One implies an intent to mislead, the other is misleading without intent. I know many wont care about that distinction but there is a difference.
"withallduerespect;c-1782966" wrote:
The source does matter, if the GC had no hand in making the video and it appears as is that is way worse IMO, than if the GC was using a test account that was on a server and should have the same content as was released.
It also lends itself to figuring out where the disconnect was that is causing the differences in game play we are seeing vs the video.
Kyno In the video of Ahnaldt101 showing Grievous' kit reveal, the battles are being fought with a 30 minute timer. Normal arena, as we all are aware, is a 5 minute timer as are other areas of PVP. This must be a test build. Plus, the GC do not have the same test accounts as they did about 4 months ago when the leak came out. Back then, they were able to test out new characters before release. This is not the case any more. Chances are, with these facts in mind, the shown gameplay was at the minimum approved by CG, if not directly from them. The GC are under NDAs and in this video, CG gave Ahnaldt101 exclusivity in showing the kit reveal of GG. I watch his content regularly, as well as other GC, and they all have complained to some extent that they do not have any access any more. Anyhow, I thought I would bring this up.
Yes test account, I'm not disputing that.
The statement was that CG made the content, making sound like they just handed it out with a bow on it. I'm just trying to get clarification, as statements are being made that seem to imply an intent that may not be there.
