That’s not my favorite AAA company, it’s my favorite AAAA company!
Also, the bit on the right is from a rather shitty looking, “anti woke” site.
Ubisoft Executives need to get comfortable not eating food anymore.
I’m sure they can wipe their tears with hundred dollar bills.
which they got before running the company into bankruptcy?
Exactly
How much do the Ubisoft executives earn annually? Exactly, f-them. Cliffs Over Dover may have been the last Ubisoft game I purchased.
I took their advice and got comfortable not owning Ubisoft games.
i quit after AC4. kept up with the news and reviews, seems I never really missed anything good.
They make it so easy: anything they release I’ve already played years ago already.
extaticly clapping hands
I hope someone good gets the Might and Magic license. Ubisoft just used it as a logo.
They will probably will get bought by a chinese company or Microsoft
Ubisoft is clearly a tone-deaf company. But that doesn’t change that this comment has been frequently cited in some very out-of-context ways.
For those who don’t know, the not-owning games comment was in reply to an investor asking why people were reticent to try out Ubisoft+, their monthly service that lets people play pretty much all their games. He was suggesting many people are not used to the option of mass rental as opposed to ownership. But, many Game Pass subscribers (at least before their price increase) can attest that when the value proposition is good enough, it is an appealing option, wherein you accept impermanent access to get more games. In that sense, he was right.
So far as I can see, the intent of the comment had nothing to do with people who buy “lifetime” copies of their games. There’s separate criticisms to make about poor online implementations leading games like The Crew to be yoinked, and I’m in favor of that regulation. But Ubisoft is hardly alone in the way they’ve mishandled that, and the quote had nothing to do with it. I feel like most people pointing to it have only a vague idea of what corporate greed it represents, as though CEOs just want a way to delete your library and somehow make money from it.
The opinion isn’t even incorrect. I have the XBOX game pass and the value is pretty great for pc users.
I usually pick up a game and play a while then drop it when I get bored, so having a lot of options is great.
My steam and backloggd descriptions have been “fuck ubisoft” for a while.
Hehe, BoobiSoft …
Do better Ubisoft
Stop fucking outsourcing and actually fund your devs, consider firing from the top down as your managers aren’t doing shit for the company
I’m legitimately at the point where I hope they don’t pivot and are just forced to sell off their IP. There’s just too many reasons to not like them.
Selling IP can go both ways. It could be picked up by someone wanting to do better, or it could be picked up by someone just after a quick buck by doing the bare minimum.
And then there’s Rocketwerkz - They originally bid to develop Kerbal Space Program 2 for Take2, but they lost the bid because the winners showed up fancy concept art while rocketwerkz focused on a solid technical foundation. And then Take2 severely botched KSP2 and the franchise is now considered dead. Rocketwerkz is now building something relevamt from scratch, with their own IP, and it looks really promising. I hope this happens to a lot more AAA titles and IP holders.
KSP2 is such a sad situation all around. The guys working on it had the same idea and were going to build a brand new engine for it to fix the tech debt of the original, but management demanded that they use the original engine “to speed up development time.”
My understanding was that KSP2 was originally going to be just a slightly cleaned up re-release of KSP1. A remaster if you will. Buy up some existing mods, bundle them in, clean up the UI a bit and enjoy the fruits of this new definitive edition of the game. But the team was able to convince Take2 to try to replace the game engine as part of that remaster and truly make it worth while (hence the 4 year delay from the original release date)
The original idea that was sold to the public was essentially “Kerbal Space Program, but bigger.” I couldn’t tell you all of the details or the timetable, but there were a lot of new features planned from the start (a number of which were mods of the first game) including fixing issues that were present in the original and adding things far outside the scope of the first game like multiplayer, colonies, and FTL travel to a new solar system. The dev team openly talked about creating a new engine to fix the physics bugs and such, at least.
I don’t know what happened along the way, but it’s pretty clear that the KSP2 that we have has the engine of the first game in it, as to this day it has many of the same bugs.
My guess is that the team originally planned on a new engine, but at some point, management stepped in and demanded that they use the old engine. IIRC, there was some restructuring that happened during the development - both in taking the project away from the original dev studio working on it, and then restructuring the team that was working on it, so it could’ve happened at some point during that.
Guess they better start feeling comfortable with not owning their company.
Microsoft will buy it. Don’t worry.
Ubisoft is owned and run by a family who are super old French aristocrats who trace their family wealth back generations. The Guillemots have zero idea what their customers want or how to make a good game. They want to make money and don’t care what the poor have to say in criticism or frustration. They are too insulated to feel like they have to improve - it’s the children who are wrong.
It’s hilarious that they are trying to condition the sale of the company on letting the guillemots retaining control.
Let it burn.
I was never very into Ubisoft or their titles, so I’m perfectly content with everything burning to the ground, hoping it’ll send a signal to franchises I actually care about:
Stop developing games for focus panels, and try to innovate instead.
consider firing from the top down as your managers aren’t doing shit for the company
I disagree. Because of his… “antics,” I know the name Bobby Kotik, and he’s done nothing but good things for the company. Really uplifted them from a dark place.
What does Bobby Kotick have to do with Ubisoft? He worked for Activision/Blizzard.
I thought he was ubisoft. Sorry, getting my rapists mixed up…
I genuinely can’t tell if this is sarcasm.
It absolutely is. I’m just kinda over the /s at this point.
You’re right Ubisoft, I am pretty comfortable not owning your games 🥰
They ran Ass cRee into the ground and launched Uplay with privacy violations.
I boycotted them after thinking they were one of the few good AAA companies.
Now they’re going to die.
Great. Maybe a better studio can reboot Ass cRee and make it wothwhile. Or you know, just leave it the fuck alone.
Same with Far Cry which is a shame because it used to be a really fun dumbshooter series. I got FC6 on sale last month and had to slog through it, I swore off the franchise after finishing the game and haven’t touched it since, even though there’s plenty of post-game content left for me.
If you want a stupid fun “kill infinite number of baddies working for an insane BBEG” style game, Just Cause is a blast. 2 and 3 were both fantastic (3 smartly gave you infinite explosives) and the amount of silly chaos you can cause (and are rewarded for causing too!) is brilliant.
For an example, in JC2 there’s a mission where you have to destroy a rocket which is launching using a fighter jet and blow up the rocket before it reaches orbit. The ongoing challenge was simply that I’d shoot it until I got too close, not start maneuvering for a second pass until it was too late and instead crash into the rocket dying in a fiery explosion, followed by the rebel leader telling me over the radio that I’d failed and to try again. Then one of the time, I shot the rocket until I got too close, started maneuvering too late, exploded as the plane crashed into the rocket and the rebel leader started saying something over the radio, except it was a congratulatory statement, and I realized I’d instinctively ejected from the plane at impact, and was now falling down to the ground with only my parachute and lots of enemy aircraft trying to kill me. So I grappled to a helicopter, persuaded the crew to let me in (aka beat them up and threw them out) then got shot to hell by another helicopter, which I conveniently would grapple to, persuade its crew to let me in, and keep repeating the process until I finally was close enough to the ground to grapple down to the ground and steal a fast car to evade the enemy army.
JC3 one-ups this by instead of having you blow up a rocket (an ICBM in this case) but instead catch up to and ride the ICBM so you can redirect it to save a major city.
Far Cry 6 made some decisions that didn’t make sense to me. I was always running out of ammo, which is something you shouldn’t have to worry about in a Far Cry game. Having essentially just 4 magazines doesn’t go far in a protracted firefight, and the Supremo is inconsistent to use. In Far Cry 5, the amount of ammo you could carry was roughly double the amount.
You could also change your weapons at any time through the menu (so you’re essentially carrying like 50 weapons) but you can’t change your ammo type unless you’re at a workbench (although I think they fixed this later on), which is the opposite of the previous games.
The game map is nice and large but it suffers from generic Point of Interest syndrome that is common in Ubisoft games.
At least the plot was zany at times, particularly the side missions.
Sad to see our resident AAAA game developer not doing well, but it was largely of their own making here.
I haven’t played FC5 nor 6, but the running out of ammo really feels like FC2. Having to scavenge for weapons in the middle of fights or using mounted guns and grenades to kill enemies. Wich I think really improves the game, but it could not be as good in these other releases.
Well you can’t pick up enemy’s weapons for one. Running out of ammo just means going to the loadout menu and selecting a different weapon
FC2 is the only good Farcry as far as I’m concerned.
I’m not a fan of the current trend of remakes, but a re-release of Far Cry 2 might be the only thing Ubisoft could make that I’d still be interested in.
The degrading weapons, fire physics, and stealth* were leagues better than anything in the later games. If they fixed the instant enemy respawning, added more fast travel stations, and toned down the OP DLC guns that made scavenging weapons pointless it’d be a nearly perfect game.
* YMMV. It had “fire from the brush and reposition while the enemy searches for you” stealth rather than the “crouch behind someone and you’re completely invisible” stealth of later games. I liked it but a lot of people hated FC2’s stealth gameplay.
gets attacked by a huge eagle and drops to low health
Heals himself by removing a bullet from of his arm
Im honnestly impressed by how much of a slog FC6 was. God at launch the people delivering your cars were so painfully slow everyone just resorted to shooting the driver once they showed up. I don’t even know if they’ve fixed that.
I didn’t play it at launch but can attest that I was just shooting the delivery driver because it took so long for him to get out
I got a lot of early Assassins Creed vibes from Ghost of Tsushima.
It’s the best AC game in years. I can’t wait for the next one.
Honestly, it wasn’t even Assassin’s Creed anymore, it was more like Warrior’s Creed starting from Odyssey to Valhalla, and then they backtracked to more assassin like gameplay with Mirage. I stopped buying their games when I realized how bad Far Cry 5 and Odyssey were.
I like the concept of Origins and Odyssey (I only played some of Odyssey and haven’t cared about AC in ages). You’re right that it shouldn’t have been an AC game though. They could have set it in the same universe and just called it something else, but we can’t have new IPs. Honestly, if they wanted to do the same thing but make more sense for the gameplay, I think you playing a Templar would have been an interesting way to do it. I don’t remember much of the lore, but that seems like it’d work.
Make stupid choices, suffer stupid consequences.
I really enjoyed Driver: San Francisco. Then Ubisoft introduced UPlay and I couldn’t play it anymore. That was the last time I installed anything from Ubisoft.
I tried to reinstall it recently and it complained that you can’t install 32bit software from Steam anymore. I guess I’ll never play another Ubisoft game.
Love this game and that is why I have a pirate copy that doesn’t do any of that crap. I completed it again last year and it was good fun still!
it complained that you can’t install 32bit software from Steam anymore
Like 32 bit installers for C++ don’t work or 32 bit games in general? I don’t think I’ve ever seen that error before on windows.
It’s a Ubisoft broken DRM thing
I entirely stopped playing Ubisoft games because they require me to sign in to play.
I tried Anno 1800 because it was free on PS+ and immediately ran into a login wall.
Same thing when I tried Assassin’s Creed.
They’re not even online games. I get needing to log in to CoD because you’re playing online, but blocking the offline mode is asinine.
So why would I bother buying an Ubisoft title when I know I’m going to open it up and hit that stupid login wall and privacy policy.
The rest can burn, but man, Anno 1800 really is/was the best in its series, mandatory logins or not. It’s the only game I still hold on to my ubi account for, and I dread the day they’ll go under, because they’ll take the Mainz team and the Anno games down with them.
I get needing to log in to CoD because you’re playing online
That shouldn’t be needed either. A PSN or Steam account should be enough.
It used to be enough. I played so much COD4 back in the day on Xbox and the only login I ever needed was my Xbox account.
But nowadays, they want more data from you than the platform is willing or allowed to share, so you need to log in to their service.
This is why I stopped buying Sony games on Steam. Requiring a PS account for a singlellayer game is absurd.
It fucking dropped my Far Cry game because THEIR servers had an issue, not my internet connection.
Lost progress, replayed it, it happened again, never bought anything from them again.
I entirely stopped playing Ubisoft games because they require me to sign in to play.
I straight up can’t play half of their games on PlayStation because of this. I had a different PSN account 15 years ago that my Ubisoft account is associated with and apparently your Ubisoft account can only be tied to one PSN account EVER. I’m not creating a new email just to sign up for Ubisoft play. So I don’t buy their games 🤷
fwiw you can reach out to support and they’ll change the link for you.
And that’s the kind of thing their metrics will never reveal to them.
I think if you just asked players you’d get an overwhelming pushback on the account issues.
That’s why I only buy from the fitgirl store.
Gamers need to get comfortable with not owning games
- Man who sells games
Sells licenses.
Well, he tried, but they clearly didn’t sell.
