HoSpanky wrote on Feb 14, 2025, 10:09:
I'm a little bummed that everyone in the comments focused entirely on Ubisoft's idiocy, yet didn't mention the article about Hazelight, who makes games that have no online component, no microtransactions, and focus on changing the game constantly rather than a repetitive slog.

The only place I could say "maybe this won't be for you" is that their games require two players.

Don't be bummed - I pumped my fist when I read what that loveable psycho said. I didn't comment because this is how reasonable people should think, i.e. to me it warranted less comment than what the mind-boggingly obtuse, educated idiots of the industry are prone to do and say. A 10-car pile-up always garners more comment than a perfect hand-over-hand left turn.

Former Ubisoft customers say the plan is to focus on not buying Ubisoft games ‘year after year’

Live service isn't an automatic "don't buy" for me. There have been great, well-done live service games. Deep Rock Galactic is an example. But those well-done live service games? None have been by YouBeShaft.

I think this is because EA is what we have been horse kicking for years. They are already an accepted crap group. Ubi wasn't ALWAYS this bad, but the toilet is spinning quite rapidly these days.

Shiny ball gets the attention

I'm a little bummed that everyone in the comments focused entirely on Ubisoft's idiocy, yet didn't mention the article about Hazelight, who makes games that have no online component, no microtransactions, and focus on changing the game constantly rather than a repetitive slog.

The only place I could say "maybe this won't be for you" is that their games require two players.

In the words of Sterling: "Oh Ubiiiiisoooooooft"

Beamer wrote on Feb 14, 2025, 09:02:

Coalfax wrote on Feb 14, 2025, 08:39:
At what point will the Board and/or shareholders of Ubi realize their CEO is a nitwit and eject them?

Howe for future.. zilch.

They cannot. Similar to how Facebook is structured, the family retains full control.

It's sort of institutionalized nepotism if you think about if.

Coalfax wrote on Feb 14, 2025, 08:39:
At what point will the Board and/or shareholders of Ubi realize their CEO is a nitwit and eject them?

Howe for future.. zilch.

They cannot. Similar to how Facebook is structured, the family retains full control.

At what point will the Board and/or shareholders of Ubi realize their CEO is a nitwit and eject them?

Howe for future.. zilch.

Here is an idea. How about they make and publish a great game...for once....Hey it doesn't even have to be great, let it be....good. Anything but the same mediocre boring shit they keep recycling year in year out, just in different skins. These guys even managed to ruin an open world star wars game....fucking hell....it's like they don't want to make money.

Prez wrote on Feb 14, 2025, 05:59:

El Pit wrote on Feb 14, 2025, 04:46:
Dear Mr. President, we need a better deal for gaming companies. I think you should forbid offline games, so that the companies can easily take away games the customers bought. This way, the customers will have to buy the remake or sequel. This would make America even greater. Also, there's a nice little welcome bonus check in for you.
Yours truly,
Guillemot

Dude be quiet!!! What if they hear you??

Prez, it will be fine. It will make America greater! Like everything that harms the millions of consumers but puts money in the pockets of the very few super rich Trump buddies.

Oh, also, dear Mr. President, could you please sign an order to turn Steam into a stock company? We superrich could buy it and turn it into a cashcow for a few years by raising prices, recalling licenses at will, and so on. Please don't take a pass on this amazing deal, Mr. President. Make billionaires richer... sorry, Make America even greater!
Yours truly,
Elon M., Mark Z., Jeff B., Warren B., and your other great fans

El Pit wrote on Feb 14, 2025, 04:46:
Dear Mr. President, we need a better deal for gaming companies. I think you should forbid offline games, so that the companies can easily take away games the customers bought. This way, the customers will have to buy the remake or sequel. This would make America even greater. Also, there's a nice little welcome bonus check in for you.
Yours truly,
Guillemot

Dude be quiet!!! What if they hear you??

Dear Mr. President, we need a better deal for gaming companies. I think you should forbid offline games, so that the companies can easily take away games the customers bought. This way, the customers will have to buy the remake or sequel. This would make America even greater. Also, there's a nice little welcome bonus check in for you.
Yours truly,
Guillemot

I've already been staying away from Ubisoft games for several years, thanks for repeatedly confirming my decision to do so.

At this point I envision Ubisoft as an immature pre-teen, with his arms crossed and pouting, saying that you can't tell him what do; who does the opposite of what you suggest just to spite you.

Ubisoft:
1. Telling us that the Mario+Rabbids games didn't sell well enough to continue
2. Telling us that Prince of Persia: The Lost Crown didn't sell well enough to keep the studio open (it sold 1.3 million!)
3. Telling us that they're focusing on open-world and live service

I think that they're telling me that anything good/interesting doesn't have a place at their company and I should look elsewhere.

Not news to us but maybe the news is in what's not being said. They said they are going all-in, Sony style, on just 2 types of games. One being, "live service" which, well...ask Sony how that's been working out for them. Not having a diverse game genre portfolio is just asking for trouble. They should be able to see the signs because they are working on an extraction shooter, the new hotness bullshit in games lately that people are sick of already that is going to die on the vine. Ubiwank needs to get rid of their top management yesterday, especially Yves, if they want to stop sucking more ass than an airplane toilet seat. At least the other article is the opposite of this nonsense which is a nice breath of fresh air.

I don't have a problem with a live service game if it's F2P or free client and a nominal fee of like $5 per month - max. Otherwise it's a hard pass. Damned if I'm paying $100 for a client only to have it shut down in a year or two.

is this old news for Ubisuck (tm)?

Burrito of Peace wrote on Feb 13, 2025, 19:17:
Nothing will get me to not buy a game faster than the words "live service". I know that means the game will disappear at some point forever.

^^^^ THIS! But this is the direction of all software these days it seems. Not only games, but all software, all movies, all music. All of society it seems want to keep the blue collar "person" working forever and only rent people things that they can never own.

"Sad but true-ewwww,ewwww"....(que up James Hetfield's guitar)!!!

Ubisoft will be also treated as a live service and it'll fade to oblivion soon enough.
R.I.P.