In the upcoming MMO shooter “The Division“, there are rumors that the game world has been “reduced”. But why are only German sites reporting on this?
Recently, we found news titled “The Division – Game world reduced” on some prominent German gaming sites in the “Top Shelf” category. In a comment, an author from Chip.de expressed outrage that Ubisoft has now removed crucial elements of the game world, citing ridiculous reasons.
Ubisoft has cut the game world under outrageous pretenses
The news goes something like this: The Division has overextended itself and is now rolling back, making the world smaller. Additionally, there are plans for DLCs, as Ubisoft is looking for “monetization specialists.”
The reader gets the impression: “The folks at Ubisoft are nasty types who deliberately cut out the most exciting areas and then sell them as DLC for extra cash.” An image that certainly fits what players might now think of Triple-A publishers.
Cool news, huh? There’s just one catch. We cannot find any source for this quote in the current articles or the fuming Chip comment. They are all “rumors”, “Ubisoft is supposed to do this”, they are “current news.” Oh really?
Shitstorm made in Germany
We wonder: Why have we not read about this on English sites? Why is the active community on reddit unaware of this? Why does even the usually well-informed German fan site Mydivision not report on this? Why does it seem that only the German gaming press is upset about this? Wouldn’t it be a topic for the big US sites?
If we continue to investigate and refer back to the earliest mention of “The game world is getting smaller,” we come across an online news article from the largest German gaming magazine, which takes a video from a Youtuber as an occasion and draws all these conclusions.
Is bigger always better?
Did the Youtuber conduct an interview with important managers at Ubisoft and present new facts? Who is the Youtuber’s source?
No, the Youtuber has no new facts about “The Division”. Because regarding the game, there has been a significant lack of information for months. The individual content providers, including Youtubers, try to establish themselves as important sources of information in the lead-up to such an important release with “particularly strong reporting.” And so a Youtuber combines 10 minutes of “Exciting things” from a month of drought.
News was pieced together from an old interview
But where did the Youtuber get the idea of the “smaller game world” from? Well, the basis is from an interview that is now a month old and which Craveonline conducted with the Managing Director of Massive Entertainment, David Polfeldt. He said: “We will not represent New York 1:1. Because that would be boring. The city blocks are too similar.”
Polfeldt in the original:
In our game you’re on foot, which means that you have a lot of distance to cover and if you tried walking in Manhattan like we have in our research, you realize it’s a huge place. We’re trying to modify the size by cutting out the fat of Manhattan. There are a lot of places that are repetitive with blocks that have the same type of buildings and that is not the perfect scenario for a game, so we’re adapting it to fit the fun factor for gameplay.
It is pretty clear from the answer: It was never planned any differently. The game world has not been reduced, and no completed areas have been removed. They just do not want to create a 1:1 model of New York because that would be authentic but boring.
Of course, they did not replicate New York with all its millions of alleys and streets. That would be crazy. It would not be fun to navigate in “real” New York. Just as an action movie does not show that the hero has to pass 18 city blocks to get somewhere, players should not have to run past 18 city blocks.
The statement has been public for a month now, and no one has raised any objection during that time. Why would they? What Polfeldt explains is completely logical and reasonable. Every game does this: Who really believes that you could walk from Orgrimmar to the Barrens in 3 minutes? Or ride from one corner of Tamriel to the next in 5 minutes? No world in a video game mirrors the real one 1:1.
We summarized the interview a few weeks ago, without recognizing the enormous shit-storm potential that it entails for Massive to shrink New York so significantly, and its reluctance to recreate the eight million inhabitant city in minute detail.
So is the Youtuber the villain?
Are we at the end of the error chain? Is the Youtuber the culprit who made a mountain out of a molehill to generate clicks? No, the Youtube video had no consequences. No one was outraged about it. Because the Youtuber does not speak of “the game world getting smaller”, but just of map size. The outrage only occurred due to the “The Division reduces game world” headline and a strategically important misunderstanding. Because suddenly we Germans read exclusively on the biggest German gaming site:
Ubisoft has apparently realized that the originally planned size of the game world in The Division is exaggerated. Because they fear boring foot marches, the game world is now being reduced again.
And why did the shitstorm not work?
And exactly this news is picked up by other sites, carried further, and ultimately leads to outraged, indignant articles from writers and to malicious comments in the comment sections under these articles. And everyone believes they are right, having seen through Ubisoft and its machinations.
How much does the original statement by Polfeldt have to do with the fact that sites are now reporting: Ubisoft has “reduced the game world” or “removed areas”? With the note: By the way, they are also looking for DLC experts *wink wink*? Frankly: Nothing, not a thing. Completely different construction site.
Now one wonders: If such a shitstorm was triggered, why did it not make bigger waves, why was there not more discussion about it? There’s a pretty funny explanation for this: The articles came just before the announcement that “The Division” would be postponed to early 2016. And the actual shitstorm then swallowed the others.
