Sam and Max 2 Cancelled! (Not Anymore)

Started by magintz, Wed 03/03/2004 19:13:20

Previous topic - Next topic

Czar

btw, for all you saying those mails wont be read, they will (the pr@.. mail), they will be used for senior staff consideration....
Roses are #FF0000
Violets are #0000FF
All my base
are belong to you

Barcik

#101
Quote from: remixor on Sun 07/03/2004 11:46:09
So you think the sales department should have the final say in anything, because anything contradicting what they say is "doing the exact opposite" and should not be considered, even if that sales department has a terrible, terrible track record and can't even justify their own decisions?  What?  Do you have a vested interest in this?  Are you planning on working for a sales department later in life?

What I am saying is that the sales department isn't there for the company to do the opposite of what it says. If the sales department has a history of bad decisions, then I agree with you - it needs a change of staff. But if the manager decides to trust them, then he should, in most cases, listen to them.

QuoteI still don't understand why you can't just admit that sometimes companies do stupid things without sufficient reason.  History has proven this countless times.  We often look back at failed companies and say things like "Man, they REALLY shouldn't have made that completely ridiculous decision."  We can ALSO, at DIFFERENT times, say things like "That was a great decision, too bad the odds were stacked against them."  This, however, is almost certainly not a case of the second situation.

Says who I won't admit companies don't do stupid things? Of course they do. I didn't even say that (although I asume it to highly possible) Sam & Max 2 would be a flop. I am just protecting a company's right to act according to its market evaluation.

Quote
A LucasArts game has to be a hit?  So... Gladius: hit?  I wouldn't say so.  Armed and Dangerous: hit?  Ha, ha.  RTX: Red Rock: Hit?  BWA, HA HA HA HA HA!  Those are all examples just from the past few months.  Coincidentally (or possibly not coincidentally at all), the general concensus of quality from the gaming public on those games is pretty much in line with how well they sold.  Considering how highly everybody who actually was involved with or was shown Sam and Max 2 thought of the game, it easily had the potential to outsell any of those games.  By the way, the sales of RTX were in the low thousands.  Yes, it sold a couple thousand copies, that's it.  And LucasArts' sales department pushed it out the door.  Pardon me if I do have even the SLIGHTEST bit of respect for the scumbags in that department, who couldn't analyze gaming trends if faced with the threat of a rabid bunny biting off their balls.

"A Lucasarts product has to be a hit" means that for a Lucasarts product to be regarded a success, being a hit among 40-to-60 years old gypsies in Europe (no offense intended) isn't enough, it has to sell well in all target markets. Yes, Lucasarts have released their share of failures of the years. And unfortunately, quality isn't all that matters, as shows the sad case of Grim Fandango (and thank you, whatever boss of Lucasarts  who decided to release it).

QuoteBasically, the vibe I'm getting from your post is "If someone makes a decision, the verdict is automatically acceptable, even if they don't have any good reason."  I mean, you're saying (quote) "Whether their reasons to do so are valid or not is irrelevent."  Why is that irrelevant?  You think we shouldn't have standards of accountability?  I feel kind of bad for you, because with that kind of attitude people are just going to walk all over you in life.  Of course, this is just a game, but your overall attitude is somewhat worrying.

I am saying that beyond the point where a decision is takes, the reasons become irrelevant. For their own reasons, Lucasarts has decided Sam & Max 2 won't sell well. I am positive they believe they are right, and I see no reason why their evaluation weighs less then that of the public, despite their poor reputation. Thus, they should act according to their decision.

To put it as bluntly as I can: I cannot criticize a company's decision to act according to what they deem right.
Currently Working On: Monkey Island 1.5

remixor

Quote from: Barcik on Sun 07/03/2004 19:11:25
To put it as bluntly as I can: I cannot criticize a company's decision to act according to what they deem right.

I cannot continue this conversation, because I find the above statement, which is your entire point, so ludicrous that there's no way for me to argue it without just saying "I think that's completely wrong."  Maybe YOU can't criticize a company's decision even if they have no reason for it, but I sure can.
Writer, Idle Thumbs!! - "We're probably all about video games!"
News Editor, Adventure Gamers

Pumaman

First Sierra, now Lucasarts. It's a shame to see the two pioneers of the adventure game abandon it now.

Czar

And I think someone mentioned MI4 (yeah, i'm turning the topic in another direction).
You said that if They changed the name of the game and people, and sold us as a regular adventure game, we would praise them.

Well that is the point!
Monkey Island 4 is not a decent MONKEY ISLAND sequel, it ruined everything MI stood for ( good humour, piraty atmosphere, etc. etc.), tho not ruined it completley, but yes, if it were a different game, a non MI, then it could have passed as a good game.
Roses are #FF0000
Violets are #0000FF
All my base
are belong to you

modgeulator

Quote from: Czar on Sun 07/03/2004 22:12:24
Monkey Island 4 is not a decent MONKEY ISLAND sequel, it ruined everything MI stood for ( good humour, piraty atmosphere, etc. etc.), tho not ruined it completley, but yes, if it were a different game, a non MI, then it could have passed as a good game.
Definitely agree, I think if LucasArts cut the Monkey Island 4 team loose to create an original adventure game they could come up with some great stuff.

OK, here's what I'm really posting about. Is anyone here able to get to San Rafael, CA? Check this thread out:

http://www.lucasforums.com/showthread.php?s=hreadid=124504

For anyone interested, this guys trying to organize a protest outside LucasArts' offices.

DragonRose

I only started playing LucasArts games recently.  I was starting to become a fan.

I haven't played Sam & Max Hit the Road, yet, but I was still going to buy SM2.  I was starting to trust LucasArts, thinking that they wouldn't do something so underhanded.

A while ago, I said that LucasArts was more icky than Sierra, because they weren't as personable with their gamers.  I then retracted that statement after playing some more LucasArts games.

It's back in effect.  Sierra at least didn't get our hopes up.
Sssshhhh!!! No sex please, we're British!!- Pumaman

BerserkerTails

<Reminds DragonRose of the TWO Space Quest 7s they began, and cancelled>
I make music.

jetxl

Most Game reporters are at least 25 years old. They are in an age categorie that doesnt buy games. The age categorie that does buy a lot of games are teenagers.
25 year old gamers have grown up with adventure games and know sam and max was a great game, while a 15 year old has not.
Also Game reporters are hardcore games. They can see the diffrence between overhyped crap and an original underdog game. But casual games just buy EA games. Electronic Arts is THE biggest publisher in the biz for a reazon, they play is safe. They only make games based on films/sports and a populair online game like Battlefield.
LA is playing it safe. Because casual gamers buy SW games.

Another thing: I dont copy games, I buy the original. But most of you dont. You burn them on cd after Harry the hacker made a crack for it.
I think its hard to believe that everybody would BUY sam&max2.

Barcik

Quote from: remixor on Sun 07/03/2004 20:35:09
Quote from: Barcik on Sun 07/03/2004 19:11:25
To put it as bluntly as I can: I cannot criticize a company's decision to act according to what they deem right.

I cannot continue this conversation, because I find the above statement, which is your entire point, so ludicrous that there's no way for me to argue it without just saying "I think that's completely wrong."  Maybe YOU can't criticize a company's decision even if they have no reason for it, but I sure can.

The problem with your line of arguments is that you are sure you are right on a subject where every prediction is a guess.
Currently Working On: Monkey Island 1.5

remixor

Quote from: Barcik on Mon 08/03/2004 09:23:51
Quote from: remixor on Sun 07/03/2004 20:35:09
Quote from: Barcik on Sun 07/03/2004 19:11:25
To put it as bluntly as I can: I cannot criticize a company's decision to act according to what they deem right.

I cannot continue this conversation, because I find the above statement, which is your entire point, so ludicrous that there's no way for me to argue it without just saying "I think that's completely wrong."  Maybe YOU can't criticize a company's decision even if they have no reason for it, but I sure can.

The problem with your line of arguments is that you are sure you are right on a subject where every prediction is a guess.

I never said that.  I cannot know Sam and Max would have succeeded, but I think it would have done a lot better than LEC's sales department thinks it would (and my opinions are similar to those of many others at LEC).  Our fundamental disagreement is that while you have said many times that their decision shouldn't be criticized whether it has a good reason or not, I believe that a company can indeed be criticized if they make a poor or unfounded decision.   I don't claim to be able to predict the future of the industry, but I also have pretty much no confidence in LEC's sales department based on their past and present performance.
Writer, Idle Thumbs!! - "We're probably all about video games!"
News Editor, Adventure Gamers

modgeulator

I think Barcik just likes talking out of his ass. Why are you so hellbent on protecting LucasArts right to act according to their market evaluation? What's so wrong with trying to prove to them that their little market evaluation was a bit off? It's one of these occasions where you made some flippant statements and then started building up some crazed argument from there that just went further and further askew and now you just don't know what to do. Actually now that I think about it, I've done that sometimes in forums in the past too, yeah. Right, so, maybe the best thing you could do is just stop talking.

Peder 🚀

this is verry sad even thinking about that i actually almost only like 2d adventure games, it would be fun to meet sam and max again in a 3d adventure.,, or am i wrong now??? it was a 3d adventure right??

Kinoko

Quote
To put it as bluntly as I can: I cannot criticize a company's decision to act according to what they deem right.

I just have to say this ^_^ remixor was right about that being a ludicrous statement. It may very well be true about you, but it's still pretty stupid. I'm not trying to make fun of you or anything, but... well here.

"I believe killing babies is ok." I can assure you I don't, but by your logic, you wouldn't criticize me for that belief. I believe I'm right, and so therefore, you won't give me any grief over my opinion/decision.

A company can be wrong, just like anyone. We may not be able to change their minds, but what's wrong with criticizing them for what we believe to be a terrible decision? If we don't criticize people when we believe they think the wrong thing, everyone will run around doing stupid things.

The fact that they "deemed it right" means nothing apart from the fact that maybe they weren't doing it out of evil malice for their fans. It still doesn't make their decision any better, and it doesn't mean they shouldn't learn from the experience. This is how good decisions are eventually made in life. One person says "blah", another person says "Bleah!" and they argue/debate until they come to a happy medium.

Kinoko

Quote from: Malcom X.L. on Mon 08/03/2004 08:54:25
Most Game reporters are at least 25 years old. They are in an age categorie that doesnt buy games. The age categorie that does buy a lot of games are teenagers.
25 year old gamers have grown up with adventure games and know sam and max was a great game, while a 15 year old has not.
Also Game reporters are hardcore games. They can see the diffrence between overhyped crap and an original underdog game. But casual games just buy EA games. Electronic Arts is THE biggest publisher in the biz for a reazon, they play is safe. They only make games based on films/sports and a populair online game like Battlefield.
LA is playing it safe. Because casual gamers buy SW games.

All very true. Full of spelling and grammatical errors, but true. I don't think anyone is disputing it but your tone gives the impression that you think along the lines of "This is the way it is so shut up about it".

I think most people here would argue that while what you described is a perfect description of the way things are, that doesn't make it completely 'right'. By fighting about this issue so passionately (start playing the triumphant music, people!), I would hope that we're in some small way standing up for quality and creativity in gaming once more. That we're trying to change the industry just enough as to allow some real gems through the cracks and thusly, actually expose casual gamers to a higher standard of games. Maybe they'd then gain an interest in them and the market, instead of being shitty to cater to these innocent casual gamers, would be full of wonders and magic once more and everyone could come out winning.

QuoteAnother thing: I dont copy games, I buy the original. But most of you dont. You burn them on cd after Harry the hacker made a crack for it.
I think its hard to believe that everybody would BUY sam&max2.

That sounds really self righteousness. I'm sure plenty of people here pay for the games they really think deserve the support.

SSH

As they say in Spain, "saltado el tiburón"

Some points:

1. It is sad that Sam & Max 2 has been cancelled. It could have been good.
2. Companies make unwise decisions all the time. My company spent a fortune preparing to spin  my division off under a new name, then two years later spend another fortune re-integrating it into the company again.
3. The idea that "we've spent X on something already, therefore we must carry on with it or that money will be wasted" is a fallacy if Y < Z , where Y is the further cost required to complete the project and Z is the return on the investment. In other words, if you spend 1 million already and a project would require another half a million to complete but would likely only return a quarter of a million then its stupid to continue. See also "Millenium Dome", "Scottish Parliament building", etc.
4. Barcik is maybe trying to make the point that someone in Lucasarts made a decision based on the information available to them, and balanced risk against costs. Maybe their market research was wrong, but opinion in an adventure gaming forums is hardly likely to be representative of the real world market. They probably have a better idea of the future costs involved than any of us, so none of us are in a postion to judge on that info. On the other hand, the decision may have been made on "gut feel" or "buzz" of one guy who happened to be manager who had to find some people for a new project with no hiring budget. So, if Lucasarts are politely presented with protest of support for S&M2 then they may look at the decision again and change their minds on the point. Which brings me to...
5. Insults and threats will only make the manager who made the decision more defensive and likely to stick to his decision
6. No one gets fired from a large company because some internet gamers happen to send some insulting emails about them to their boss.
12

jetxl

Quote from: Kinoko on Mon 08/03/2004 14:40:39
QuoteAnother thing: I dont copy games, I buy the original. But most of you dont. You burn them on cd after Harry the hacker made a crack for it.
I think its hard to believe that everybody would BUY sam&max2.

That sounds really self righteousness. I'm sure plenty of people here pay for the games they really think deserve the support.

HAHAHA, you're saying that you only copy bad games and buy good games. HAHAHA
I know you copy the good games and don't even bother to copy bad games.
Say that I'm wrong and that you dont copy games if they're good.
Come on, lie to me.

point two: I hate the casual gamer and so do you. They dont see the pigshit they buy because there is a terminator picture on the boxcover.

ps to barcik: remixor is winning this discussion. I suggest that you think up a new arguement instead of using your old one over and over and over and over again. That or just shut the hell up.

D · Y · D · O

Quote from: Malcom X.L. on Mon 08/03/2004 15:35:59HAHAHA, you're saying that you only copy bad games and buy good games. HAHAHA
I know you copy the good games and don't even bother to copy bad games.
Say that I'm wrong and that you dont copy games if they're good.
Come on, lie to me.

That's what I do. I bought Half-Life, Monkey Island 3, Grim Fandango, Outcast and Medal of Honour. Those were games that were really good, and that's exactly why I bought them. The brilliant people responsible fot those need to be paid... a lot.

I do the same with music. I buy old jazz albums, classical music, the newest Counting Crows, St. Germain or Morcheeba album to name a few. Crap like Britney Spears or 50 Cents is good enough to listen a couple of times, but I don't think it's worth the money. That's why I download it and delete it after a week or two.
We are number one! All others are number two, or lower. - The Sphinx
Pain heals. Chicks dig scars. Glory... lasts forever. - Shane Falco
Instagame (FREE resources for your games!)

MrColossal

I haven't played a stolen game in a long time. Am I lying to you?

also hasn't the idea of casual gamer been radically changed lately because of online games like Yahoo Games and The Sims [offline]?

and also:

Quoteps to barcik: remixor is winning this discussion. I suggest that you think up a new arguement instead of using your old one over and over and over and over again. That or just shut the hell up.

doesn't he have the freedom to say what he wants on these forums? stop impeding on his freedom of speech...
"This must be a good time to live in, since Eric bothers to stay here at all"-CJ also: ACHTUNG FRANZ!

modgeulator

#119
Quote from: Kinoko on Mon 08/03/2004 14:21:11
"I believe killing babies is ok."

Haha, actually I think there's quite a few companies out there who'd agree with that statement if killing babies were in some way profitable for them

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk