Adventure Gamers - Forums

Quest1 - 22 April 2013 09:35 AM

No, I distinctly remember Phoenix Online saying that they lost to some kind of fan license because they didn’t turn in the forms on time or sign the proper forms. They claimed to be very embarrassed about it, as I remember. This was years ago and I haven’t been following it much since then. You shouldn’t call people trolls just because you don’t like their opinions or don’t understand what they’re saying.

No, that’s not true in the slightest.  Do your homework, troll.  hahaha

Lambonius - 22 April 2013 09:37 AM

No, that’s not true in the slightest.  Do your homework, troll.  hahaha

Not very nice of you to respond that way when someone asks a genuine question, but I’ll move on. Have no desire to engage in a name-calling match with the adventure game forum king of name-calling.

UPtimist - 22 April 2013 09:32 AM

If that’s the same comment you’re thinking about. There’s naturally a good possibility that it isn’t.

(Edit): What I was thinking about was November’s Studio Update. She says approximately what I said, only elaborates on it a bit more (can’t quote ‘cause it’s a video and I don’t have the time or interest to start transcribing it)

This was after the announcement that POS would be taking over Moebius?

You know what I would like to see? I think that would be great to have some kind of timeline of all the different MGX mentions and clues that we have been given.

Sort of like what was done here for TTG’s ill-fated KQ project:
http://www.telltalegames.com/forums/showthread.php?s=3a21690525d7e0bb0e13cab27f8c5ed2&t=43746

Would be great to have all the clues and facts summarized and in one place.

To defend my good screen name and to show I wasn’t making up stuff, here is what AGDI’s Erpy posted a few years ago. I believe I had read similar things from others.

The Activision C&D was triggered by mutual miscommunications in the past when VU was still in charge. As part of the license, all contributors had to sign a contract that stated they accepted the terms and send that over to VU. The POS team tried to make do with virtual signatures instead of physical copies mailed all from over the world and apparantly were never rebuked for it, but when they tried to submit their game for approval to Activision (who took over in 2008) in late 2009, it turned out the physical contracts were very much needed (or maybe the virtual copies got lost somewhere) and since they weren’t there, the fan license wasn’t considered legit. (the signed contracts were needed to finish and validate the license) Activision had no interest in supporting fan games, so instead of taking the time to get the fan license validated after all, they sent another C&D. I don’t really know about the exact nature of the negotiations that led to it being recinded…I find it hard to believe any concessions had to be made because frankly, the original license terms from VU already gave the IP holder all the control they could ever ask for. I’m not certain if the fan license was completely redrafted or if they simply had their original agreement validated under Activision’s name.

Sorry to go off on a slight tangent, but I thought it was necessary to answer some nasty comments directed my way. I admit that I can’t be right all the time and I don’t always remember things exactly right, but I don’t just make up random stuff.

Erpy has never been a part of the POS team, so I’m not sure how his unsubstantiated comments can be taken as a rock-solid source.  In any case, it had less to do with paperwork, and everything to do with the fact that the Vivendi fan-license was more of a gentleman’s agreement than anything else, and when the company ceased to exist and the properties moved to Activision, pretty much all record of that was lost.

And again, none of this has anything to do with the original point of my rebuke of your comments, which was the fact that you were spewing unsubstantiated bullshit about POS getting a C&D from Activision because their game wasn’t of high enough quality.

GOD!  I AM SO PISSED THAT YOU ARE ACTUALLY PUTTING ME IN A POSITION WHERE I AM HAVING TO DEFEND THE QUALITY OF TSL!!!  THAT REALLY BURNS ME!!!!!!!!!  ARRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You guys, Mystery Game X isn’t any of these things.  It’s EcoQuest 3, you bumbling morons!  Jane Jensen’s lost masterpiece!  The announcement is coming later today, in honor of Earth Day, which is what Activision was waiting for.

This is all 100% truthish.

Bt

Lambonius - 22 April 2013 12:05 PM

GOD!  I AM SO PISSED THAT YOU ARE ACTUALLY PUTTING ME IN A POSITION WHERE I AM HAVING TO DEFEND THE QUALITY OF TSL!!!  THAT REALLY BURNS ME!!!!!!!!!  ARRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

i feel your pain!!!!!!!

Here’s an interesting theory from hrthgar of the Pinkerton Forum:

Iv presented before il present it again.
#1: vicarious visions has “mystery projects” they havnt announced.
#2: jane tweeted an exiciting business meeting in albany shortly before mgx was announced. Vicarious visions has offices in albany.
#3: vicarious visions works closely with activison
#4: vicarious visions has a policy of not hyping their releases until theyr about to be released.

im not saying its definite. But its a compelling case.

Here’s their website: http://www.vvisions.com/

This would be welcome news (as almost any developer, including Signus, other than Phoenix Online for MGX would be good news, of course), and hopefully an announcement is coming soon. Gabriel Knight fans who worry about POS doing to GK remastered (if that’s what MGX is) what they did to KQ would finally be able to rest easy after months of waiting for news.

The thing about POS and MGX is this: we can respect the effort POS is making, but would we support handing over to them a series like GK? It would be like giving your 9-year-old the keys to your new Porsche to take it for a spin. Don’t be surprised if both come back severely damaged. It doesn’t mean we are “bashing” or “hate” the 9-year-old; we just recognize it would be irresponsible to give them such control. Let’s let POS grow up and prove themselves before we start talking about potentially supporting handing over to them development of classic adventure game franchises.

To Timovieman: but don’t you think POS is relevant here since they have been mentioned as a possible MGX developer? Seems like questions surrounding their fitness to be the MGX developer relate to the topic.

So what do you all think of the Vicarious Visions theory?

Oooh Vicarious Visions, I remember them making a pretty good Crash Bandicoot game. I think it was Nitro Kart.

Just to add… Timovieman, you are right in trying to keep this thread on topic. I apologize for my part going off topic a bit earlier, and will watch myself better in the future.

Quest1 - 22 April 2013 07:48 PM

The thing about POS and MGX is this: we can respect the effort POS is making, but would we support handing over to them a series like GK? It would be like giving your 9-year-old the keys to your new Porsche to take it for a spin. Don’t be surprised if both come back severely damaged. It doesn’t mean we are “bashing” or “hate” the 9-year-old; we just recognize it would be irresponsible to give them such control. Let’s let POS grow up and prove themselves before we start talking about potentially supporting handing over to them development of classic adventure game franchises.

I don’t get it.  Jane Jensen is still the head mechanic and driver, correct? 

...

You’ve lost me.

Lambonius - 22 April 2013 08:12 PM

I don’t get it.  Jane Jensen is still the head mechanic and driver, correct? 

...

You’ve lost me.

Maybe another way to say it would be to liken POS to the car’s manufacturer. In that case it would be like putting a seasoned race car diver (Jensen) behind the wheel of a Ford Pinto in a hugely important race.

But now I’m a little worried. Do you think there is any chance POS is doing MGX? You seem like a knowledgable person who “hears things” in the adventure game development world, and I know that my mind would be put at ease if you revealed that you heard POS is not doing MGX. But the fact that you haven’t done that, unless I missed something, and instead act a bit defensive about POS in this regard, has me slightly concerned. You usually scream “BS@*#**” at people when you think something is wrong. So, how about it, Lambonius, would you please allay the fears of a loyal Gabriel Knight fan?

Quest1 - 22 April 2013 08:46 PM

Maybe another way to say it would be to liken POS to the car’s manufacturer. In that case it would be like putting a seasoned race car diver (Jensen) behind the wheel of a Ford Pinto in a hugely important race.

But now I’m a little worried. Do you think there is any chance POS is doing MGX? You seem like a knowledgable person who “hears things” in the adventure game development world, and I know that my mind would be put at ease if you revealed that you heard POS is not doing MGX. But the fact that you haven’t done that, unless I missed something, and instead act a bit defensive about POS in this regard, has me slightly concerned. You usually scream “BS@*#**” at people when you think something is wrong. So, how about it, Lambonius, would you please allay the fears of a loyal Gabriel Knight fan?

Its extremely extremely unlikely that POS would head mgx. It doesnt make sense for many reasons, and you shouldnt worry about it.
What is frustrating about your approach is that it comes off very much like: “tell me if POS is involved or im jumping over this cliff! and im especially jumping over if POS is involved!!!!!”

I do hear things, from time to time.