People have multiple different sets of talents and can work on different types of projects. It was clear that he was brought in to try to get the game out the door within a reasonable timeframe, not to totally change the core nature of the game.Īnd besides- even if he was going to do that, even if the game was so broken that it needed to basically be restarted, he’s probably capable of doing other stuff too. He wasn’t just going to come in and turn it into something totally new- that would take way more time and money than Paradox wanted to put into it at the time. We don’t know exactly how much was there, but the game wasn’t exactly in prototyping either. The game was already well under development from what we know, with most of the story being written and many of the core mechanics being put into place. The Ubisoft guy was brought in as a fixer- this is a common thing in corporations when a project isn’t going to plan.įind someone with experience to solve a problem- that doesn’t mean that he’s going to completely change the core identity of the game. That’s why we had so many delays, so many layoffs, so much restructuring, and eventually, their complete removal from the project. It’s clear that Hardsuit’s failings were, in large part, organizational. The guy has experience working on games for a company that, for better and for worse, excels at consistently releasing games in a reasonable timeframe. That does not mean that he’s going to turn it into a Ubisoft game. He’s a consultant who was essentially brought on as a project lead. I’m really not sure why people keep whining about the Ubisoft guy being brought on. Let’s get one thing out of the way first: this game has the potential to be really terrible, I don’t disagree, but the Ubisoft complaint is weird and unfounded.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |