Oh I still think it was intentional, just not out of place. Watching it again convinced me even more as it shows the poster center-frame, in clear view, then cuts away just as someone is about to stand in front of it. If they'd wanted a nice safe clip that gave nothing away, they could have easily used footage from literally a second later
I am like 80% sure they intended to record some "filler" in their design room where they knew the leader portraits were all on the wall as either an easter egg or to tease us. However I am also sure that they didn’t think viewers would realise what it was in the background and/or viewers were able to identify what or who they were. But because of the huge scale of people searching for these irl portraits which just so happened to be very easy to search for on Google images (provided you knew who to search for in the first place) and the fact that they were all in alphabetical order meant that it seemed pathetically easy. Becoming one of the biggest and/or misjudged teasers/leaks in probably the history of Firaxis Games.
I am like 80% sure they intended to record some "filler" in their design room where they knew the leader portraits were all on the wall as either an easter egg or to tease us. However I am also sure that they didn’t think viewers would realise what it was in the background and/or viewers were able to identify what or who they were. But because of the huge scale of people searching for these irl portraits which just so happened to be very easy to search for on Google images (provided you knew who to search for in the first place) and the fact that they were all in alphabetical order meant that it seemed pathetically easy. Becoming one of the biggest and/or misjudged teasers/leaks in probably the history of Firaxis Games.
For the record, this thread still has a long ways to go before beating the number of posts in the thread analysing that leader portrait image - it had 4,034 posts. It also had well over 300,000 views.
For the record, this thread still has a long ways to go before beating the number of posts in the thread analysing that leader portrait image - it had 4,034 posts. It also had well over 300,000 views.
I just thought of something which might help us to eliminate possible DLC civs. Prior to the release of the Poland, Australia, Macedon, and Persia DLCs, had there been any cities from those civs that were city-states when the game was originally released? Because if not, then that would technically eliminate the possibility of having Indonesia as a DLC civ. Maybe they're saving it for the first expansion. Just some food for thought...
I just thought of something which might help us to eliminate possible DLC civs. Prior to the release of the Poland, Australia, Macedon, and Persia DLCs, had there been any cities from those civs that were city-states when the game was originally released? Because if not, then that would technically eliminate the possibility of having Indonesia as a DLC civ. Maybe they're saving it for the first expansion. Just some food for thought...
Well, there are some conspiciously missing city-states that one would assume be there, given there size/historic importance. I'm thinking almost all of Italy (Venice, Genoa, Florence), some African (i.e. Ife), etc. Now, they could be introduced as later city-states in future DLCs, like Armagh and Granada, but who knows? Maybe a future civ?
I just thought of something which might help us to eliminate possible DLC civs. Prior to the release of the Poland, Australia, Macedon, and Persia DLCs, had there been any cities from those civs that were city-states when the game was originally released? Because if not, then that would technically eliminate the possibility of having Indonesia as a DLC civ. Maybe they're saving it for the first expansion. Just some food for thought...
Did anyone for Firaxis ever comment on that? I always just assumed that "revealing" the poster in the background was an intentional thing intended to provoke debate, considering that it would be hard to miss if they spent some time editing and prepping that video before putting it up.
Leadergate though, that is still the most hilariously awkward and unintentional videogame-related leak I have ever seen in my life
They were playing as Germany I think, because it was just after that civ was revealed - in fact IIRC the reason Ed opened the civlopedia was to show off the harmless historical flavour text for Frederick
So that would mean it was a livestream from last august time? Actually, now that I think about it, didn't they conspicuously never add it on youtube for replaying as a result of the leak? It might be lost for all time
They were playing as Germany I think, because it was just after that civ was revealed - in fact IIRC the reason Ed opened the civlopedia was to show off the harmless historical flavour text for Frederick
So that would mean it was a livestream from last august time? Actually, now that I think about it, didn't they conspicuously never add it on youtube for replaying as a result of the leak? It might be lost for all time
I seem to recall that that stream was the only one that they didn't post on their YouTube channel soon afterwards; fortunately some people got screenshots during the live stream. I don't recall if they ever posted the video.
For the record, this thread still has a long ways to go before beating the number of posts in the thread analysing that leader portrait image - it had 4,034 posts. It also had well over 300,000 views.
Just to add, glancing through this thread, Leadergate occurs on page 174, so @Leyrann, someone might have linked to clip of the livestream around there.
Just to add, glancing through this thread, Leadergate occurs on page 174, so @Leyrann, someone might have linked to clip of the livestream around there.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
