ubisoft discussions

Quick Suggestions

  • FcAc-No-Moe
    1229 posts
    @flanker1six
    Good point. How do companies let this happen? Get something so right, only to follow it with something so wrong.

    It only takes 1000 people and less than 1 year. 😁

    But I kid, I kid of course!

    It takes 2 years.

  • Ice-Quinn
    56 posts

    God, I miss all you birches… this place’s gotten so boring after the move. Ubi is like, on a roll, honey (down a hill). >.<

  • MikeWeeks
    311 posts

    @ice-quinn --

    Yup, Ubisoft has not gotten better with age. A fine wine it ain't ...

  • Steven527
    381 posts

    @mikeweeks two buck chuck!

  • Steven527
    381 posts

    @church367a
    "Or they could be trying to make something so ambitious that it is ultimately impossible in the given timeframe due to a shortcoming of existing technology or just simply lack of time to complete the work necessary and an inability/refusal to delay the game further. "

    rotflmao I stopped dropping acid a long time ago There is no way that is Ubi's problem.

  • Church367A
    147 posts

    @steven527 Indeed, I was mostly thinking of CDPR's Cyberpunk in your quote, whereas the first remark is what I think of in regards to Ubi. How else do you end up at Breakpoint, Flatline, or even Extraction except by a disregard of the fanbase?

  • Rootimus
    57 posts

    @hugo-fou - in a word: money. You get loads more by appealing to the lowest common denominator (see: Call of Derpy: Open World Edition, or as Ubisuck call it "Wildlands").

  • AI.BLUEFOX
    Original poster 201 posts
    @hugo-fou - in a word: money. You get loads more by appealing to the lowest common denominator (see: Call of Derpy: Open World Edition, or as Ubisuck call it "Wildlands").


    Or a spectacular failure, because you try and sell into a bigger market by abandoning your core brand/franchise features. The new market isn't interested, your loyal fan base feel betrayed. Breakpoint, we're looking at you.

    No matter what the outcome of any interest or battles for Ubisoft, which will depend more on the Guillemot's being fed up or not with the company they created, one thing seems certain. Ubisoft has once again become disconnected from their fan base.

  • Hugo-FOU
    174 posts

    @bigrexxx You’re right. Just wishful thinking I guess.

  • Hugo-FOU
    174 posts

    @rootimus I don’t see Wildlands that way. Now, I will admit that from the original concept interview held with the devs it was simplified, (dumbed down some would say), but the gameplay, animations, game world, dialogue, and simple yet compelling story carried it and made it a great game and a success.

    And it’s far from a COD experience, imo.

  • LateNiteDelight
    1040 posts

    @hugo-fou Ubisoft was sitting on almost $1B in cash when I last looked in November.. they don't need money, they need a leadership change.

    Google might be another answer, as folding Ubi+ into Stadia would give them a boost. Also offering it as an add on to games you buy on PC/Xbox/PS so you can keep playing when away from your machine..

  • LateNiteDelight
    1040 posts

    @newfool7 Microsoft is worth almost $2 Trillion.

    $68.7 Billion dollars is less than half of the cash they were sitting on prior to this announcement. It is not a lot of money for Microsoft. You are thinking about this like a person.

    For perspective, Ubisoft would probably only sell for about $6B to $8B.

  • Kean_1
    155 posts
    @rootimus I don’t see Wildlands that way. Now, I will admit that from the original concept interview held with the devs it was simplified, (dumbed down some would say), but the gameplay, animations, game world, dialogue, and simple yet compelling story carried it and made it a great game and a success.

    And it’s far from a COD experience, imo.


    Agreed. Something else to consider is that WL was still a big success for Ubisoft and resonated with a lot of fans and newcomers alike. It was a good foundation IMO introducing the series into an open world, distancing itself from the sci-fi nature of the path the franchise had took and ripe for improvements to make the game a more enjoyable experience for a variety of player types. ....but they threw out that special formula vs trying to expand / improve on it and came up with Breakpoint instead.

  • Hugo-FOU
    174 posts

    @kean_1 And now, hearing that Ubisoft are planning on pushing forward with frontnite/fortline, I can’t help thinking the only hope we really have is a takeover.

  • Steven527
    381 posts

    @hugo-fou yeah hopefully these new options they have chosen to go ahead with tank so bad that selling becomes a clearer option. I don't think MS could do worse... then again I could be totally wrong about that. Not that it would matter. If they do worse we really aren't in a position to want the status quo. If the Clancy IP really is dead there are other games coming up to fill the space.

  • Kean_1
    155 posts
    @kean_1 And now, hearing that Ubisoft are planning on pushing forward with frontnite/fortline, I can’t help thinking the only hope we really have is a takeover.


    Yeah, it's become abundantly clear that Ubisoft is dead set on going forward with their business model(s) regardless of how their ideas are received by fans / customers. Sure, they may tweak them a bit here and there but they are assuming that they can still get enough people on board to make it successful over time. I'm not sure how many failures or how much backlash they can take before they realize that maybe, just maybe they need to rethink some things but obviously they are not there yet.

    Personally, my sights are currently set on some of the smaller studios bringing over their tactical shooter titles to console now and in the future. I head a couple weeks back that Team 17 bought the rights to Hell Let loose from Black Matter who they collaborated with on the game. They spent $60 million after the console release which apparently is doing quite well. They are looking to use HLL to launch new like-titles and of course, expand on the HLL game itself. They (and Black Matter) have said that Team 17 has no interest in deviating from the formula that makes HLL what it is so I suspect new releases will likely be cut from the same cloth so to speak. ......would love to see their next project in a modern setting.

    Anyhow, I said it numerous times before but I really do think there is a renaissance of sorts coming (particularly on console) of more mature tactical shooters leaning much more toward authenticity than what the rest of industry has been leaning toward in more recent years. I know there is a relatively untapped market out there for these kinds of games and perhaps it will take one or two titles becoming big successes before the likes of Ubi, EA, etc. realize that. ......realize that the opportunity had always been there within their own IPs if they had simply listened to their fans.

  • FcAc-No-Moe
    1229 posts

    I am still at an AWE at UBI's position and insistence on keeping up with those projects, more so when we all know that they will not be willing to put the effort and time it takes to hit, say CoD, where it hurts and are happy enough to not innovate but copy the competition and we all know the copy is not going to be as good as the other ones are but still a few people will buy into it for a few weeks or month, which will only bamboozle the new guy, the guy who tends to forget or doesn't know that 6 months in development is not much if nothing for major fixes or changes and will pay for the thing he hated 6 months ago because the video trailer said it would be fix.

    Oh well, I guess a Takeover is the best they can muster at this time.

  • LateNiteDelight
    1040 posts

    @fcac-no-moe They already spent 80% of the development costs, why would they pull the plug before finding out if any stick?

    I'll be playing Heartland when it releases. I won't be playing XDefiant. Likely won't be playing Frontline either, but waiting to see what the alternate modes are.

  • Steven527
    381 posts

    @latenitedelight it is called throwing good money after bad. There comes a point where you CAN make the decision to cut your losses if you are pretty certain the effort is going to fail.

  • FcAc-No-Moe
    1229 posts
    @fcac-no-moe They already spent 80% of the development costs, why would they pull the plug before finding out if any stick?

    I'll be playing Heartland when it releases. I won't be playing XDefiant. Likely won't be playing Frontline either, but waiting to see what the alternate modes are.


    I would argue that they had already spent the money they wanted to spend minus a few bucks for the final eye candy or marketing video trailers BUT, because of the spectacular Shellacking they received when announced, now, like Steven said, they may just be looking to spend (ie: throw away) good money over bad, pretty much like they did with Breakpoint and as we know it, they never really decided whether they were going to be jumping into the lake head or butt first. Hell, they still are in Limbo it appears.

    What is worse is if, just like they did with Breakpoint, they decide to take things out of the game and put something else in it and now, what will happen is that the Casuals that Love the Miracle Towers Falling from the sky (that they took out) will now start to moan and the Hardcore will not fully like the other childish gadgets they left in and the Casuals will not like the Mature & Grounded stuff they did put in (if they do) so a whole merry-go-round of crap will just be slinging up and down and every one will be smelling and stinking out the place.

    Or I could be wrong and they will make Billions after Billions and the whole world will live happily ever after.

    The End.

    The truth is, you and I don't know but it is fun to project and forecast isn't it? 🤠

    Now, I have stated that money they will make but the question is... will it be enough to please the Shareholders or will it be another Breakpoint and backpedaling.

Suggested Topics