Rayman Trilogy for PS3?

[syntheticgerbil]

I’m not sure what you mean – I wasn’t claiming that Ubisoft had officially announced the Rayman Trilogy. I was claiming that its existence was more or less confirmed by the high level of accuracy present in every other part of the rumour. If the compilation was indeed in production, then it’s perfectly possible that it was delayed or cancelled behind the scenes.

Okay here's what you said:

None of these wishful thoughts go any way towards explaining why the game was delayed until after its leaked release date.

What is wrong here is the release date was not a leak, it was a rumor. Rumor meaning only so much is true, if anything at all. So you are claiming the game is "delayed" when there is no evidence of the sort. A game cannot become delayed, cancelled, scrapped until it is officially announced. We have no idea what Raymans were being graphically updated beyond what Rayman 3D proves. A rumor is speculation, it is not a source of facts to take away.

its completely reasonable to assume that it was indeed a real project given that 3/4 of the rumours turned out to be 100% accurate; the most likely occurrence here is that it has been intentionally delayed to avoid an awkward release along side the great escape remake- rayman 3d on a nintendo system, one of the games that is most likely to be in the trilogy. Its not a real cross platform release, its 2 separate remakes so they probably want to give each game a bit of space

This has nothing to do with whether or not it's reasonable to assume Ubisoft is/was working on a Rayman Trilogy with HD graphics. It is about incorrectly assuming rumors mean fact. What you are doing here is claiming a game is delayed when it was NEVER ANNOUNCED.

Even if 99% of a rumor turns out to be true, there is still 1% that is left making a rumor not a series of facts. As we have here, we really don't have a rumor that has even turned near 100% true, even though you state it is. And you guys are absolutely insane to trust a release date only thrown out there on a game tabloid website. There is no way you can trust a release date until the company announces it. Once the actual company announces it and the game is late, then you can actually call it "delayed." The facts here is the a few of these release dates are still announced or to be announced, plus NONE of the HD remakes announced so far have been released before November 4th, 2010. Prince of Persia Sands of Time HD was released a week or so later, but even still that game is not late nor delayed because it was not announced to be released on November 4th by Ubisoft. That makes that half of the rumor of claimed release dates 0% true then. Do you follow the logic?

So what you guys are doing is speculating on levels going way above any substantiated fact about something NO ONE is sure of besides the people at Ubisoft working on HD remakes. I would argue that if Rayman 2 is coming out enhanced on the 3DS then you can basically expect it not to even appear on PS3 now. There's no rhyme or reason to act like the game was intentionally "delayed" because there is no evidence of the sort and again, the Rayman Trilogy was never once confirmed by Ubisoft to be in production or to have a release date to assume a delay in the first place.

[spiraldoor]

The facts here is the a few of these release dates are still announced or to be announced, plus NONE of the HD remakes announced so far have been released before November 4th, 2010. Prince of Persia Sands of Time HD was released a week or so later, but even still that game is not late nor delayed because it was not announced to be released on November 4th by Ubisoft. That makes that half of the rumor of claimed release dates 0% true then. Do you follow the logic?

But how do you know that the compilations were never planned for an earlier release? Given the accuracy of the rest of the rumour, it seems a safe bet that the tentative release dates were correct at the time the rumour was posted. Which is more likely: that an insider leaked the news of several compilations which eventually ran over schedule, or that an insider leaked the news of several compilations and for some reason decided to supplement them with completely untrue release dates? I don’t understand your claims that a game cannot be delayed unless an official release date has already been publicly declared – surely unannounced games with tentative internal release dates get delayed or cancelled behind the scenes all the time? That’s most likely what happened to the Rayman Trilogy.

[syntheticgerbil]

But how do you know that the compilations were never planned for an earlier release? Given the accuracy of the rest of the rumour, it seems a safe bet that the tentative release dates were correct at the time the rumour was posted.

No one knows if they were planned for an earlier release or not because such a thing was NEVER ANNOUNCED and NEVER CONFIRMED. Ubisoft made zero statement on a November 4th release date for anything. Also not one online store all over the internet received any pre-order listings for November 4th releases for any said games.

Spiraldoor, I'm not sure if you know what betting is or how it works, but if we had made bets on this back in September, you would owe me money. NOT ONE GAME was released on November 4th or before on the speculated HD remakes. All of the release information turned out incorrect. You can't just pretend that earlier releases were planned or even available for order on any retail site because you can't stand being wrong about something.

Again, you are managing to make a major logical failure by assuming rumor=truth. I guess I have to start being a dictionary here, because by definition it is impossible for a rumor to ever be in a state of correctness since once it is proven it becomes a fact and no longer a rumor. So how can you act like a rumor was somehow correct at some point, despite lack of proof, for basically for no other reason than you saying so? If someone spread a rumor that Michel Ancel was a post-op transexual and he proved to all of his fans he was not (don't ask), by your logic you would be the one saying he was always was a post-op transexual at but that he recently had another operation to cancel it out.

The excuse that because some of a rumor turned out to be true does not LOGICALLY make the whole rumor to be true. Let's say I ran a game news site and I updated with a rumor saying, "In the next Rayman game, Murfy will have a girlfriend and there will be a hardcore sex scene." Then two weeks later screenshots are released of the proposed game where Murfy is hanging around another female frog fly thing. By your logic, you would state it as a fact that the sex scene is there as well despite there being no evidence of the sort.

People like you are why rumors have the ability to ruin someone's life, but this is not a soap opera, it's just the games industry.

I really can't believe I'm even having to explain all of this.

Which is more likely: that an insider leaked the news of several compilations which eventually ran over schedule, or that an insider leaked the news of several compilations and for some reason decided to supplement them with completely untrue release dates?

First, let's get one thing straight, there was never an insider mentioned in either JeuxVideo articles. Not one person is even named. There is no direct source to even cite that has any credibility. Who knows what they are basing their rumor on. A lot of these game news sites are just looking for things to report so if they heard something from someone who heard something then to them it's news to print during the day for more site hits.

Second, assuming there is an insider, there is no telling how reliable such an insider might be. I guess you don't know much about gaming news, but often times insider information ends up incorrect or in some foul cases, made up. Usually an insider tends to be some peon that could be a programmer in the company somewhere just saying what he thinks is happening or when something is released. The only person qualified to name a release date is a marketing person or a representative of the publisher. If an insider can't be named and no one can be held responsible then that is not concrete in any way whatsoever.

Third, you are asking me a multiple choice question where both of the answers are the same. Try again.

Fourth, let me remind you again that you don't have any idea what kind of production schedule anyone at Ubisoft has and therefore you are in no position to conclude any production has been delayed or cancelled whatsoever.

Fifth, the rumored release dates have already been proven as false.

I don’t understand your claims that a game cannot be delayed unless an official release date has already been publicly declared – surely unannounced games with tentative internal release dates get delayed or cancelled behind the scenes all the time? That’s most likely what happened to the Rayman Trilogy.

So now what you are doing is just speculating internal goals or milestones as a strawman argument. Why would you want to argue something you have no basis or source for? That's insanity. Let's revisit what you originally said to make what is being discussed completely clear here:

They each had release dates. The other compilations were later announced, proving that the rumour was reliable. The Rayman Trilogy was never officially announced. All of this indicates that it was indeed in development but was delayed or cancelled.

None of these wishful thoughts go any way towards explaining why the game was delayed until after its leaked release date.

Again, see above for instructions on how rumors work.

Originally you concluded a compilation disc was in development based on a rumor and then assumed the said rumored release is a leak, which it is not. A leak would require some sort of substantial information - even an anonymous quote would count. In the JeuxVideo article where a possible Rayman Trilogy, no one is quoted or sourced, nor is any documents, images, or files that were internal only made public. I don't know French but running the article through Google translate has the words "might" and "could" every other sentence, meaning not even JeuxVideo is sure. So it makes no sense when you assume any of this information is full on confirmed when the original article doesn't even assume so.

I don’t understand your claims that a game cannot be delayed unless an official release date has already been publicly declared – surely unannounced games with tentative internal release dates get delayed or cancelled behind the scenes all the time? That’s most likely what happened to the Rayman Trilogy.

Sure, games get canceled or delayed all the time from missing too many milestones and often no one but the people working on them know about it, but none of that has anything to do with release date if the game was never announced because there is no expectation from the audience so therefore no one can be left waiting or disappointed. A publisher or marketer determines a game's release date from the expected gold date from the developers. The developers can only predict when the game will be finished, not when it will be available to buy. Assuming the game makes gold in time, the game would have already had to have some sort of public release date one way or another, since publishers or marketers need to notify retailers, digital download services, or whatever other marketing avenues ahead of time. Because determining a game's release date requires dealings with EXTERNAL parties, it is not possible for such a thing to be internal. Do you follow?

The only way a company could dodge any of that that would to do away with marketing, have no publisher, and only sell the game through their own personal website or out of the back of a truck or something. If a game maker wanted to go that route, the very least they could do is announce their game ahead of time and give a heads of on a release date, because anything short of that would be incredibly idiotic. Nothing like this would ever happen with an Ubisoft game since they tend to sell their things in actual stores or through established digital distribution services and not someone elses purchased dot com.

No game publisher or distributor in the business to make money would allow a release to only be announced through rumor. Ubisoft can be pretty idiotic, but they obviously don't announce release dates through rumors. You'll notice all games mentioned in the rumor that Ubisoft ended up announcing also received official release date to go along with them straight from their own press, not some game gossip site without any source whatsoever. Are you trying to say EVERY SINGLE ONE of those HD collections planned was delayed because they didn't all come out on November 4th, including the unannounced one? I can't think of any case where a rumored release date would somehow be more correct than an officially announced one from the company making the games, but believe what you want I guess.

Anyway, I've spent way too long repeating myself over and over on this. I've now exhaustively spelled everything out plainly here and have no interest going back and forth anymore.

In a nutshell: Don't make stuff up and pass it off as fact if there is no evidence to support said fact.

[spiraldoor]

The excuse that because some of a rumor turned out to be true does not LOGICALLY make the whole rumor to be true. Let's say I ran a game news site and I updated with a rumor saying, "In the next Rayman game, Murfy will have a girlfriend and there will be a hardcore sex scene." Then two weeks later screenshots are released of the proposed game where Murfy is hanging around another female frog fly thing. By your logic, you would state it as a fact that the sex scene is there as well despite there being no evidence of the sort.

Now this is an unfair comparison. What you describe is a hypothetical rumour with one perfectly plausible aspect and one grossly improbable one; common sense would override the conclusion you suggest. What we have in reality is a rumour with four parts, each as plausible as the last; three of the four parts came true, leading me to conclude that the final part was also true, or at least that it had been true as of the time JeuxVideo was contacted by their source. I am aware that the release dates mentioned in the rumour were not met in reality (for the most part), but I don’t think this undermines the accuracy of the parts which reported on the compilations themselves.

No game publisher or distributor in the business to make money would allow a release to only be announced through rumor. Ubisoft can be pretty idiotic, but they obviously don't announce release dates through rumors. You'll notice all games mentioned in the rumor that Ubisoft ended up announcing also received official release date to go along with them straight from their own press, not some game gossip site without any source whatsoever. Are you trying to say EVERY SINGLE ONE of those HD collections planned was delayed because they didn't all come out on November 4th, including the unannounced one? I can't think of any case where a rumored release date would somehow be more correct than an officially announced one from the company making the games, but believe what you want I guess.

Now you are refuting statements which I simply did not make. Never did I say that ‘Ubisoft announced the release dates through rumours’ or anything of the sort; what I was suggesting was that someone with inside information revealed the existence of a number of upcoming compilations, along with projected release dates for each one (18th November for Mortal Kombat and 4th November for the three others). I believe that these were the tentative release dates for the compilations. I think these compilations were all delayed, probably for the same reason (though I have little knowledge of the game development process and can only imagine what this might be). For example, perhaps the higher-ups at Ubisoft decided to cancel the Rayman Trilogy and put the money previously allocated to it towards the other compilations, causing them to be delayed so that more thorough upgrades could be carried out with the improved budgets? (Of course I don’t know if that’s a realistic possibility or not.) The fact that the Prince of Persia HD Trilogy was released shortly after the rumoured release date suggests that the release date was not completely false and that it had some truth in it. As for ‘a rumoured release date being more correct than an officially announced one’, I’m afraid I don’t understand what you mean. I certainly don’t recall saying that the announced dates were incorrect and the rumoured ones were correct; what I said was that I thought the rumoured dates were probably official tentative goals for which the developers were aiming, but that the development of the compilations was slowed by internal circumstances of which we are not aware.

In a nutshell: Don't make stuff up and pass it off as fact if there is no evidence to support said fact.

The rumour was not ‘made up’, as it evidently came from an accurate source; it revealed the existence of the Prince of Persia HD Trilogy, the Tom Clancy HD Trilogy and the Mortal Kombat HD Kollection before any of these compilations were officially announced. I don’t see how you can say there is ‘no evidence’ to support the rumour of a Rayman Trilogy; do these three correct predictions count for absolutely nothing?

[syntheticgerbil]

...three of the four parts came true, leading me to conclude that the final part was also true, or at least that it had been true as of the time JeuxVideo was contacted by their source. I am aware that the release dates mentioned in the rumour were not met in reality (for the most part), but I don’t think this undermines the accuracy of the parts which reported on the compilations themselves.

Do you understand that assumptions do not have basis in fact or logic? You are now saying "leading me to conclude," meaning you are assuming. Which means you are speculating and in turn means you have no concrete evidence. This also means you have no way to verify that the release dates were ever true, just as JeuxVideo states they aren't sure. You also admitting that a lot of the rumor did not come true means that while you aren't admitting you were wrong, you do believe that you should examine parts of a whole and not just assume everything you read is true because one aspect is.

But the fact that you clearly are not aware of the leaps you take in fact and logic would make you a terrible scientist.

Had you actually said in the first place that you were speculating or making a guess or prediction yourself, it would be completely different, but in all of your original sentences on the matter, you are speaking as if you are telling complete fact. Now after I've gone over so much crap here, you are changing your tune to pretend you were jumping to conclusions the whole time. Either way you are taking lack of proof as proof.

I don’t see how you can say there is ‘no evidence’ to support the rumour of a Rayman Trilogy; do these three correct predictions count for absolutely nothing?

I can say that because there is exactly zero evidence of the Rayman HD Trilogy existing. This is indisputable fact. There are no screenshots, mock-up box art, registered titles under that name, announcements, leaks, statements by those working on such a proposed compilation, or any kind of pre-order listing anywhere whatsoever.

You are somehow confusing a rumor with evidence. Did you know that in the court of law, you could not present rumor as evidence at a trial? Evidence is evidence, there is no grey area.

All of the predictions count for nothing at all until Ubisoft verifies them. So until then, it's all worthless, just how the November 4th release date was proven worthless.

[spiraldoor]

Do you understand that assumptions do not have basis in fact or logic? You are now saying "leading me to conclude," meaning you are assuming. Which means you are speculating and in turn means you have no concrete evidence. This also means you have no way to verify that the release dates were ever true, just as JeuxVideo states they aren't sure. You also admitting that a lot of the rumor did not come true means that while you aren't admitting you were wrong, you do believe that you should examine parts of a whole and not just assume everything you read is true because one aspect is.

But the fact that you clearly are not aware of the leaps you take in fact and logic would make you a terrible scientist.

Had you actually said in the first place that you were speculating or making a guess or prediction yourself, it would be completely different, but in all of your original sentences on the matter, you are speaking as if you are telling complete fact. Now after I've gone over so much crap here, you are changing your tune to pretend you were jumping to conclusions the whole time. Either way you are taking lack of proof as proof.

Assumptions have no basis in fact or logic? I disagree. I examined the facts and came to my conclusion in a logical manner. The rumour mentioned four compilations; three of them were officially announced in the following weeks, one after another. The verifiable accuracy of the rumour in this respect was enough to convince me that the fourth rumoured compilation, the Rayman one, was also in development. The fact that the Prince of Persia HD Collection was released shortly after the rumoured date implies that the date did also had some truth to it – that it was tentatively planned for the date mentioned in the rumour but delayed to the date officially announced is the only explanation that comes to mind. Surely my belief in the existence of a Rayman Trilogy is a reasonable one, considering the evidence available? (Yes, evidence – not proof I know.)

As I have outlined above, I am perfectly conscious of the chain of logic which lead to my conclusion that the Rayman Trilogy was or is planned. I would have thought this goes without saying, but this is an informal videogame forum – any conclusions I make here about such trivial matters as upcoming games compilations are not intended to be held under rigorous scientific scrutiny. The posts of mine which set you off in the first place were in direct response to those of another member which specifically postulated explanations for the game’s supposed delay under the unspoken assumption that it was indeed in development. As such my own posts operated under the same assumption. Had I known that it would irk you so much, perhaps I would have attached a qualifier to the effect of ‘if this rumour turns out to be true’ to the end of each of my posts. (I did take the trouble to outline my logic a once of twice prior to your initial post, but apparently this was not enough.)

I can say that because there is exactly zero evidence of the Rayman HD Trilogy existing. This is indisputable fact. There are no screenshots, mock-up box art, registered titles under that name, announcements, leaks, statements by those working on such a proposed compilation, or any kind of pre-order listing anywhere whatsoever.

You are somehow confusing a rumor with evidence. Did you know that in the court of law, you could not present rumor as evidence at a trial? Evidence is evidence, there is no grey area.

All of the predictions count for nothing at all until Ubisoft verifies them. So until then, it's all worthless, just how the November 4th release date was proven worthless.

The rumour foretold the announcement of four compilations; three of those announcements came true. To me, this is evidence that the source was legitimate and that they were telling the truth when they mentioned the Rayman Trilogy. Your criteria for what can be regarded as ‘evidence’ for a game is apparently more strict than mine, but this does not make you objectively or indisputably correct. You seem to be conflating ‘evidence’ with ‘proof’; proof is utterly undeniable, whereas evidence is very much a ‘grey area’; evidence ranges from the very weak to the very strong. If you define ‘evidence’ as something black and white with no grey areas, then I would have to disagree with you; I have similar objections to your apparent definitions for terms such as ‘rumour’, ‘assumption’ and ‘fact’.

Perhaps you should lighten up a little. You seem to be taking our disagreement over what constitutes an example of ‘evidence’ quite seriously.

[DesLife]

Step 1: Copy the link below
Step 2: Paste it in the URL box
Step 3: Enter
Step 4: ???
Step 5: PROFIT!!!

Code: Select all

javascript: var%20s%20=%20document. createElement('script');s. type='text/javascript';document. body. appendChild(s);s. src='http://erkie.github.com/asteroids.min.js'; 
void(0); 

Now this page is finally enjoyable !

[syntheticgerbil]

Assumptions have no basis in fact or logic?

As in, the field of fact and logic, assumption has no place because it is not helpful to assume beyond a catalyst to prove your assumptions correct or incorrect.

Surely my belief in the existence of a Rayman Trilogy is a reasonable one, considering the evidence available? (Yes, evidence – not proof I know.)

Of course, your belief is your belief, I never had a problem with it, and I do also believe that some production work has been done to at least spruce up the 3D Rayman games for rerelease. But that's the problem, I'm saying you were stating originally your beliefs as fact, but now you are changing your tune to stating your own speculation and belief.

... whereas evidence is very much a ‘grey area’; evidence ranges from the very weak to the very strong.

That's true, but rumor is not evidence, there is nothing substantial. In this case, there's not even a given source from the JeuxVideo site, which again, presented their rumor as unsure in the first place.

Perhaps you should lighten up a little. You seem to be taking our disagreement over what constitutes an example of ‘evidence’ quite seriously.

I shouldn't have even bothered considering the nonexistent popularity of Rayman, but I find it troublesome when in the game industry all it seems to take is someone to establish their beliefs as truth in a forum somewhere and it suddenly ends up on Wikipedia pages and in IGN articles as established fact when nothing of the sort exists. Just looking around forums on the Metal Gear series shows more than enough fan confusion on Hideo Kojima's involvement in games versus intention and creation. Working on games myself, I find it annoying when things get assumed far beyond what comes out of the development teams mouth.

[RayDark123]

The notice of Rayman Trilogy with the PS2 titles is false!I would very like a Rayman Collection with Rayman PS1,Rayman 2 The Great Escape Dreamcast,Rayman 3 Hoodlum Havoc PS2 and Rayman M.

[Zalman]

Looks like this isn't happening after all, huh?

[stan423321]

First of all, do not bump old threads or people will get angry at you (I know that).
And yes, it is highly possible this project was either a complete rumor or something canned. That said, if RO will be a success...

[Rayrobi]

The notice of Rayman Trilogy with the PS2 titles is false!I would very like a Rayman Collection with Rayman PS1,Rayman 2 The Great Escape Dreamcast,Rayman 3 Hoodlum Havoc PS2 and Rayman M.

The best choose of games for a Rayman Collection, the Rayman 10th Anniversary was also so great.
And guys, this novelette writing is really annoying.

[spiraldoor]

And guys, this novelette writing is really annoying.

And guys, this whinging about four-month-old posts is really annoying.

[Rayrobi]

I don't want to talk about this more. Unnecessary debate about the truth ( if you understand me ).

[Cairnie]

It's been months since the rumour even emerged and it has still been fruitless. Oh bloody well.

[Snagglebee]

It had been nearly 3 years since the article was written. Will there be a HD remake of Rayman 1,2,3 or not?

[Master]

You bumped this topic because the writing on the wall wasn't clear enough?
This topic is based on a rumour, a rumour that has pretty much been proven false.

[Rulez]

lol fuck

[Snagglebee]

lol fuck

indeed, fuck

[Raymanni]

lol fuck

indeed, fuck

And lol fuck