do a search for the phrase "Project Stealth" on UBI.....
notice anything?
:'(
If you search for ProjectStealth in the ConViction forum, you'll see my posts :p
ahh....i didnt search as 1 word. Looks like the mods did not think of that either. 2 of my threads have been deleted already, and i am betting a few posts as well.
Looking into it now.
It's nothing big. I think the forum software is just screwing up. It'll fix itself in a week or two probably.
Oh hey, looky here.
nvm
Noobisoft is censoring it.
Evidently PS is a big thread to Noobi.
http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/3651075192/m/7951084295
F You Ubi!
Yeah of course they're concerned about it... DA's multiplayer was a catastrophic failure.
you know Ubi at times is stupid but if it wasnt for themwe wouldn't be here talking about how to make a better game of this genra. so give them some credit and plus ther sponsering thes forms from waht i read I belive (correct me if im wrong please)
So to all thos working hard at Ubi Thank you
ubi sponsoring us??? rofl lol
its worth a try, Jinx has already mentioned it to UBI.
What does that mean? Does it mean they control our direction and we suddenly get...*gulp*...deadlines...?
hah....worry about that if they are actually interested.
What it entails is being treated like an actual product released by UBI.
i was answering to deathcow, but whatever XD
i think it's worth a try, even with ubi going in a totally other direction.
ahhh....
DeathCow....these forums are independant of Ubisoft. They, if anything despise this forum and Sclamers.
Getting sponsorship from UBI wouldn't be all that bad. I mean look at it this way. We are big fans of the Splinter Cell mulitplayer, so much so we want to make it better our selves. Any company would want this. The problems, is that some find UBI's decision to unsupport the game riddiculous and have attacked UBI. But If we were to get the blessing from UBI and maybe even some help, why wouldn't we agree?
As I recall, this project began because of a couple reasons. 1) was the fear that CT was going to be shut down. 2) We felt that the multiplayer was too unique and fun to let go. It wasn't to win a competition, be recognized, or make money. It was all about to play a game that we loved and the fear that we were no longer going to be able to do so. The results of which might be that we are recognized and make some money, but our intentions are true to gaming. We are not out to screw anyone, we just want to play.
A game made by the players, for the players.
The odds are totally against us to get UBI to partner with us. But IF it was a possibility, PS would have to make compromises depending on what is negotiated.
At Ubi forum!
TFS_Jackie:
"Ubisoft is concerned about Project Stealth due to the questionable nature of its attempt to clone the multiplayer aspect of Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory. Until Ubisoft has addressed these concerns about the project to our satisfaction, we cannot allow discussion about it to take place on the official Ubisoft forums."
Source: http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/3651075192/m/8611015295?r=8611015295#8611015295
I agree with you Goodkebabe, but on our own we should be fine. Our problems stems from using the words clone and copy. Project stealth will be trying to emulate the same feel and game play as splinter cell while trying to add it's own flavor.
This is what healthy competition is. As you said, well have to see what they say untill we can figure out what we can, or can't do. In the mean time, I think we should keep going and keep thinking about the new ways to improve the game.
Quote from: goodkebab on September 25, 2007, 04:12:57 PM
The odds are totally against us to get UBI to partner with us. But IF it was a possibility, PS would have to make compromises depending on what is negotiated.
While I know that your heart is in the right place by trying to get funded, I ultimately don't think this is a good idea. You don't want to have Ubisoft telling you how to make the game, particularly once you want to take it further after the original build.
I prefer staying independent in this case.
Yea it's like any sponsorship, really. Once you accept someone's money, they can tell you what to do. I think artistic freedom trumps money in this case.
Funding from ubisoft would only be acceptable if it was a donation to our cause with no restrictions. Otherwise we would be restrained to doing things the way they want them done and on the time schedule they want them done.
I would be happy with just a good blessing from Ubisoft.
Quote from: element54 on September 25, 2007, 06:44:38 PM
I would be happy with just a good blessing from Ubisoft.
Yea, f they just stay out of our way and don't make things complicated, it is already enough.
Basically, it'll come down to it can play like their multiplayer, and it may have similarities but it can't be exactly the same. Which is what we are trying to accomplish.
Maybe we can get feed back from the UT3 mod community as it's already growing. Rather than posting on UBI forums.
Sponsorship usually means paying for the costs to produce the game. Thats $500,000 +, they handle distribution, and marketing.
The price is it has to meet their standards, which are going to be very high. Game concept and design is negotiable, they have the right to request or deny features, and there are monthly deadlines which they can deny paying if we do not meet the contract.
These forums would have to be closed down, all development would be top secret, and UBI would own the rights to our work.
A mod team cannot do that, but if there is money involved, we can hire independant contractors.
Again, all of this is negotiable.
but I do consider it highly unlikely that this will happen.
Quote
The price is it has to meet their standards, which are going to be very high. Game concept and design is negotiable, they have the right to request or deny features, and there are monthly deadlines which they can deny paying if we do not meet the contract.
Which means we'll get the same buggy, pos QA game we have now. And it'll cost us money to buy it. No thanks.
would still have to buy UT to play our game, and we will have our own bugs to worry about.
Yes, but the difference is that you won't need authorization from ubisoft to release a patch. Plus UT3 will probably be a good game. I'll be honest with you: if I have to pay Ubi for this project, I will not buy it.
Quote from: Spekkio on September 25, 2007, 09:46:22 PM
Yes, but the difference is that you won't need authorization from ubisoft to release a patch. Plus UT3 will probably be a good game. I'll be honest with you: if I have to pay Ubi for this project, I will not buy it.
I'm not to interested in the idea of giving money to Ubisoft either.
Yep. I refuse to pay someone to play a MOD.
not just a mod but in any form whatsoever. since i got screwed over on Double Agent i won't ever be buying another of their products.
It's not just Double Agent. All their recent products suck. They have mediocre single player campaigns that still have bugs up the wazoo, they're just less noticeable. Their multiplayer games come out barely playable, and then they patch them to get them as far as beta stability. I refuse to support a company that does business like this. Ubi hasn't had an original idea in about 3 years (since PT came out). They're just riding the money train on butchered sequels. Slap the name "Splinter Cell" on the box and people will buy it, even if it barely resembles the original game in any shape or form. There's a certain irony to Ubisoft having their legal team 'investigate' this project. First, Ubi has been copying ideas from other games for a long time now. SC is a spinoff of MGS, paired with Tom Clancy style high-tech military gear. Second, Ubi has clearly abandoned the PT/CT style SvM in favor of something else.
Actually, I got to about the 2nd mission in DA. Then I couldn't get any longer: The game was literally unplayable due to bugs. I'm not talking about minor stuff, there was no way to complete the missions.
Quote from: Aj on September 26, 2007, 07:16:58 PM
Yep. I refuse to pay someone to play a MOD.
It's not just a mod! It's a Total Conversion! That's basically the same as a full featured game!
Quote from: Spekkio on September 26, 2007, 07:54:52 PM
Ubi hasn't had an original idea in about 3 years (since PT came out). They're just riding the money train on butchered sequels. Slap the name "Splinter Cell" on the box and people will buy it, even if it barely resembles the original game in any shape or form.
Well, DA was original. It just totally sucked.
Half their problem is that they keep trying to change things too much. They get too creative with sequels. Instead of just sticking with the premise that got them there, they feel the need to totally remake everything. And we're not just talking about a few graphical changes or balance tweaks, they totally recreate the concept of their games (I mean hell, look at SC:Conviction, wtf is that??!)
Have you guys played Halo 3? It is the exact same formula of gameplay, same everything. They just tweaked some things, added new features, upgraded graphics and textures and it freaking totally rocks!! If only Ubi did this with CT's sequel we wouldn't even be here right now! ;D
Quote from: Papa Skull on September 27, 2007, 07:22:15 AM
Have you guys played Halo 3? It is the exact same formula of gameplay, same everything. They just tweaked some things, added new features, upgraded graphics and textures and it freaking totally rocks!! If only Ubi did this with CT's sequel we wouldn't even be here right now! ;D
I think it was bound to happen. Theres modding for every other game type, why not S.A.M.?
funny thing is... im listening to Name of the Game, the song with the intro of the first SC :D/
Ubi was non-noobi then. now they are pathetic.
GO THIRD-PARTYS!!