UBIsoft in potential financial trouble

London Geezer said:
Well... the last movie did make $2.3 BILLION while the first one got close to $3B so yeah, not sure why but a lot of people seem to care.
Click to expand...

I wonder if the people who care about it are the same people who like to far cry style open world FPS games. I know women generations apart who loved the first movie. None of them are into videogames, and especially not shooters.
I generally like those kinds of games, but the whole avatar thing means I have zero interrest in the game. I think it was the wrong IP for that kind of game.
 
ZebMacahan said:
I can only speak for myself of course, but I like their games done after that formula when they are done right. They game design of both Far Cry has been going downhill for some time now.
Click to expand...
In case of Far Cry they didn't actually fully follow their formula in FC5 and screwed up the gameplay/experience at least for me. I could get into why I think that if you want. I actually enjoyed New Dawn far more than FC5 because it had a spark. Not really sophisticated but they tried something.

I did play FC6 for <10h perhaps and it just doesn't click. It just feels stale. The engine/graphics/game mechanics just is too old with still the same UI weapon wheel design I really disliked. Like a game without a soul probably because they lacked the vision/vibe of the original FC3-4 team.

P.S. I had never really a problem with the Tower design but thought it would have been better if Towers wouldn't give you a map of an area but allowed you to actually fill up a map with details to keep the exploration alive.
 
Nisaaru said:
In case of Far Cry they didn't actually fully follow their formula in FC5 and screwed up the gameplay/experience at least for me. I could get into why I think that if you want. I actually enjoyed New Dawn far more than FC5 because it had a spark. Not really sophisticated but they tried something.

I did play FC6 for <10h perhaps and it just doesn't click. It just feels stale. The engine/graphics/game mechanics just is too old with still the same UI weapon wheel design I really disliked. Like a game without a soul probably because they lacked the vision/vibe of the original FC3-4 team.

P.S. I had never really a problem with the Tower design but thought it would have been better if Towers wouldn't give you a map of an area but allowed you to actually fill up a map with details to keep the exploration alive.
Click to expand...

I though FC3 was great, much better than FC2 which I mostly found anoying. I really liked the story and the amount of freedom you had in taking over bases, the unpredictibility of it all. FC4 I felt was very similar, but as I remember the story missions where much better.

FC5 was a step back in so many ways. For example, when taking over bases in FC4, even if you had a sniper with silences you could only take out so many guards like that before they would beginn shoting grenades at you or sending out patrols. Each base was like a carefully crafted puzzle with many different solutions. In FC5 as soon as you got a sniper you could just snipe everybody with no repercussions. The weapon progression system were basically missing.

FC6 kept the bad parts from 5, and added a bunch of fluff which made the game worse. Endless loot with different armours with different perks, different ammo types etc. Just overdesigned but still missing the mark where it matters.
 
ZebMacahan said:
FC6 kept the bad parts from 5, and added a bunch of fluff which made the game worse. Endless loot with different armours with different perks, different ammo types etc. Just overdesigned but still missing the mark where it matters.
Click to expand...

OT, but this is a common problem in "modern" games. Lik GoW 2018 with bracelets you can modify etc.
 
Shifty Geezer said:
If there's a formula, why has no-one discovered it in 40+ years of video gaming? And why is it the same in every creative industry, with content being made that performs far better than expected and far worse?

Harry Potter is a good example. It's a mammoth franchise. When Rowling wrote it, she was rejected time and again because no-one in the industry thought there was scope for that sort of story. Chicken House gave it a go as something different and they were just gunning for diverse and original. It launched into the market with no particular interest. Consumers weren't going gaga over it. Then it released in the US where it got more attention, particularly because a movie mogul’s daughter liked it IIRC and he saw scope for movies, and with added marketing it blew up. Now consumers who had no interest in HP are besotted by it thanks to the creative work of the artist being supported by big marketing and PR dollars.

The children's literature market had no idea what would make a huge franchise. Neither did consumers until they were encouraged to adopt it.

But you can't just throw marketing money at a project and expect it succeed, as Concord shows, which was Sony/Firesprite's cynical conceit.

You will find any number of such examples in movies, books, art (works rejected in their time only for attitudes to completely change), and video games, both ways. That should be evidence enough that no-one knows the formula for creative success, and indeed, there isn't one because people are fickle and random. Hence bandwagoning because the moment someone has stumbled on something that works, there's a new market for that which you need to get on early enough to be a success and not a me-too also-ran.
Click to expand...
Not a formula in the sense of a list of things to check off, but the ability to distinguish between good and bad ideas and having people technically competent enough to properly execute them.

I can't offer any opinion on Harry potter because I haven't read any of them.

In virtually all games/movies that turn out bad it is quite easy to pinpoint lots of decisions that quite honestly never should have been made. There are pillars of good game design that stand the test of time that developers should not be failing at IMO.
 
Last edited:
Johnny Awesome said:
MS should buy Splinter Cell. Then hand it over to The Coalition, since they have experience with 3rd person cover systems in Gears.
Click to expand...
While I do hope someone gets Splinter Cell who would make some new games, I'm not sure if they could detangle it from the other Clancy IP. I don't think Ubisoft would give up Rainbow Six, because that's one of the things that still makes them money. If I were Microsoft/EA/Whoever and the rights couldn't be released completely, I would at least try to get a licensing deal. Microsoft could give Ubi a cash injection in exchange for making a Splinter Cell game with maybe a timed exclusivity and day one Gamepass, plus the ability to add all of the older Splinter Cell games to Gamepass.
 
If MS have a studio that has a great idea for a military stealth-action game then they should just make it. Throwing money at an IP then handing it over to a studio and saying, "here. make game." sounds like a recipe for more mediocre gamepass content.
 
I've been locked out of my ubisoft connect account for about 2 weeks now. It just stopped accepting my password claiming it was wrong (it wasn't) , their pw reset function isn't sending me the reset link to my email, and my support tickets been open for over a week 😞
 
tuna said:
How does the new AC game thrash Japanese culture?
Click to expand...

Let's start with the whole concept of a black man wearing a samurai outfit running through the streets of ancient Japan killing Japanese people while a hip-hop inspired soundtrack plays.

In Japan, Japanese culture and tradition say women are very much banned from Sumo. Women are considered evil and banned from participating in Sumo to the point where once a sumo wrestler was injured in the ring and two female paramedics went in the ring to give him medical treatment. After the wrestler was removed the ring had to be cleared and repurified with salt to remove all traces of evil womanhood before the sumo matches could continue. So naturally Ubisoft makes a big fat (suspiciously non-binary looking) female character and names her Sumo.

They include entering and destroying at least two Japanese temples despite Japanese law making this content inclusion illegal since they didn't obtain permission from those temples to include them, much less destroy them, in the game first,

One Armed Tori. Don't know what it is, look it up. REALLY bad item to use to promote your game about a black man killing Japanese people.

Releasing their game about a black man killing Japanese people on the 30th anniversary of the worst terrorist attack in Japans history.

And did I mention the game is centered around a black man killing Asians? Did we forget what black people did to Koreatown during the Rodney King riots? There's a history here. Could you imagine if Ubisoft made the game with a white Southern US man in a police uniform running around Africa killing black people and destroying black people's religious sites while a country music inspired soundtrack played in the background? How is this any different?



Shall I go on? I can list at least another 10-15 items like this. So much so that it's impossible to claim it was all accident or coincidence. It's deliberate.
 
I don’t think there was any deliberate malice towards Asian people or culture. This is just extreme ignorance and stupidity IMO.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top