| curl-6 said: The fact they've gone more than 5 years without having anything to show for it is in itself proof that they're failing to manage development well. Well run studios who have things under control simply don't go dark for so long. Add to that the rumors of projects stuck in limbo (which historically has happened with Retro before) and the allegations from ex-employees and I simply don't see any reason to have faith in Retro's abilities any more. |
Ok, but that's not what we were discussing, was it? The reason why track records are important is because they allow us to look at consistent trends which happen over an entire portfolio. If you are just going to mention the last few years of Retro's existence, then don't bring up the entire track record.
It doesn't even make sense, because you even comment on how Retro's ex-employees are talking bad about the studio after they left, but don't make the connection to your own example - that most of the people who might have made Retro a chaotic studio in it's early years aren't even there anymore. The phrase "it goes both ways" means something when you bring up slippery slope points like that.
And again it hasn't happened "historically" with Retro. Projects which get cancelled in their early stages are not "historically" similar to being stuck on one or two projects for the span of years. That's a fault that Retro won't live down to those who are weary of them, but it's also one that has only happened once, albeit recently. So citing it as if it's happened multiple times is just trying to make your case sound better than it actually is.
It's ok to not have faith in Retro, but at least be honest in your justification of it. The best reason to be weary of them is the one which is undeniable: they haven't released any new projects in years. That should be enough, really.
Essay Pro