ubisoft discussions

Quick Suggestions

  • FcAc-No-Moe
    1286 posts

    @eagle-eyezx

    Well, I am not but I rather go back and do another run of OGR than a new run of Breakpoint:Over bringing the same thing with a new backdrop!

    But I am glad that this will make 2 of us at least. I am sure there will be more but I am not going to count them in w/o their consent. Hell, this way if we sound off here, Ubi can have an idea of how many of the few that remain in this new and pitiful forum they won't count on.

  • MajicNomad
    13 posts

    I'm hopeful that Ubisoft has, as they claimed in the Breakpoint final announcement, taken the community's feedback to heart and that it will help shape the future of the franchise, but hope, as the saying goes, is the first step on the road to disappointment.

    So instead I'm bracing myself for Ghost Recon Mark II: Jazz Odyssey, a free-form jazz exploration in front of a festival crowd featuring Derek Smalls.



    That way, if the next Ghost Recon title turns out to be another self-indulgent vanity project instead of a team-focused tactical operations title, I won't feel quite as heartbroken.

    My bottom-line message to Ubisoft is simple: impress me.

  • El_Cuervacho
    56 posts

    I'm personally convinced that, there's enough power in the previous generation of consoles to run something as ambitious and complex as ARMA 2 at the very least.
    The thing's how that power and resources are employed. Tactical games have never been "lookers" traditionally, but rather put those resources to practical ends that would benefit the core gameplay experience; be it furthering draw distances, AI, etc.
    I fear that when it comes to next gen consoles, companies such as Ubibland here will keep draw distances, AI and other core gameplay aspects that could be (AND SHOULD be) improved upon as they are, and instead put every ounce of that power towards getting the game to look "next gen" enough, for it to be more easily marketable to "normies". More easily made too.

  • FcAc-No-Moe
    1286 posts
    I'm personally convinced that, there's enough power in the previous generation of consoles to run something as ambitious and complex as ARMA 2 at the very least.
    The thing's how that power and resources are employed. Tactical games have never been "lookers" traditionally, but rather put those resources to practical ends that would benefit the core gameplay experience; be it furthering draw distances, AI, etc.
    I fear that when it comes to next gen consoles, companies such as Ubibland here will keep draw distances, AI and other core gameplay aspects that could be (AND SHOULD be) improved upon as they are, and instead put every ounce of that power towards getting the game to look "next gen" enough, for it to be more easily marketable to "normies". More easily made too.

    Exactly and 100% on point... nailed it!

    Until they come out and prove otherwise (prove it not just say it since their word and zeros to the left means the same) I will continue to believe the above.

  • Eagleyezx
    Original poster 138 posts

    @fcac-no-moe With these points said, I was dropping in Bullet Catchers podcast last night on the discord last night and it's been rumoured that Socom 5 has had 5 years in development.

    I know Socom has been rumoured to be in development, but if the game really is in development, I only expect the best squad based tactical shooter with Sonys name on it.

    Personally, if it doesn't come on PC I would consider buying a PS5 for it.

    But my point is that it's good to see that there are squad based tactical shooters being released or rumoured to be released the same time as Ghost Recon Over. Examples such as Socom 5, Arma Reforger, Arma 4, Caliber has improved a lot, Safeguard is turning a few heads, Zero Six behind enemy lines has been extremely quiet but interested to see where it is now.

    Eagle-eyezx

  • FcAc-No-Moe
    1286 posts

    I don't know if I will buy a PS5 if Socom 5 comes out.

    One because with this scarce of product I am not going to be willing to pay 1K or more for a PS5.

    Two because even if they go back to their original price, I have yet to found a Console device worth its money that allows me to play the games with Keyboard & Mouse and I can't be bothered to relearn how to play with a controller. And No, I am not being a snob, mainly because I am getting old and I wouldn't get on with it as fast as I would want.

    I have found devices for it but Jesus H. Christ, they are expensive and so far the reviews are not great. Then again, if I am wrong and they are worth it, I just might.

    I have been waiting for a GR game for such a long time that I am just holding on purely for Nostalgia at this point.

  • Hugo-FOU
    174 posts

    @bigrexxx This is how I’d go with it. Think of it like the series Seal Team where they get deployed to different areas. The maps could be anything from a single mission, (perhaps monthly or bi-monthly), to a more protracted campaign every few months. They could even leave many of the storylines open ended so they can expand later.

  • Eagleyezx
    Original poster 138 posts

    @hugo-fou Better yet, allow us to mod the game, give us a map editor and mission creator. Give us a hub where we can share maps and missions.

    There's a reason why Arma 3 is the king of tactical simulators/games because of things like this.

  • FcAc-No-Moe
    1286 posts
    @Hugo-FOU This is how I’d go with it. Think of it like the series Seal Team where they get deployed to different areas. The maps could be anything from a single mission, (perhaps monthly or bi-monthly), to a more protracted campaign every few months. They could even leave many of the storylines open ended so they can expand later.

    Hugo, the sky is the limit as they say and I for one like the idea of mini expansions so to speak but they need to be OffLine and Online ala WL.

    $4.99 for the first map and the first mission, open areas but closed enough to create the proper environment, structures, explorations, patrols, NPC, enemies & teammates, sistemic, different approaches, multiple weapons but enough with the gimmicky skins, make the most popular and stick the other skins for mtx purpose, sale the exotics or whatever customs but leave the STDs for daily uses.

    $4.99 may not be much but multiply it by a lot of people and you'll make the cost of production at launch time no doubt if not even more then the rest is gravy and the better you make it the next map and next mission the more you'll sell in MTX, get greedy and well, BP is the best you can hope to make and then 2 years of support throwing good money into burnt money.

    @Eagle-eyezx At this stage where UBI is still the Greedy Co I doubt if they will see this as a good business, perhaps once they come down from their stupor and/or someone buys them we can hope for what you are asking but hey, I'm witcha in the fact that it could on only help.

  • Eagleyezx
    Original poster 138 posts

    @fcac-no-moe It baffles me as to why Ubiflop won't take our money by milking the crap out of Wildlands and even Breakpoint.

    GTA 5 is a great example of giving value to customers, and gaining a substantial profit. Although Arma 3 has map and mission editors, they still have loyal fans that purchase DLCs.

    I think the main issue is that Ubiflop caters mainly to the console gamer and doesn't consider the PC crowd. Their games could be relevant for years to come and still be a good business model, if they provided these things.

    With this said, the Arma games allow many of us to itch that tactical squad based need that we don't get from Ghost Recon. And it's a shame because Ghost Recon does somethings that are just fantastic for gaming.



  • Hugo-FOU
    174 posts

    @fcac-no-moe Totally agree. This is a way to make MTX work for both the company and the customers. Give us something to buy that’s of real value. And definitely with an offline option!

  • Hugo-FOU
    174 posts

    @eagle-eyezx Hell yeah. Let the customers do most of the work for them. We pay a small subscription. They get a constant stream of revenue. We get a constant stream of content. Win win!

  • FcAc-No-Moe
    1286 posts

    Are we that stupid or far off from business reality that we can't, won't or see their vision and their way of doing business as a good or sane way?

    I mean, I may not be the brightest bulb in the chandelier (God forbid!) but we do have some very intelligent people here and I just can't fathom why we are, well, most of us are in agreement that their vision is blurry as hell and that there are more favorable ways of making money than what they are using and doing so far?

  • Hugo-FOU
    174 posts

    @fcac-no-moe I really don’t know. Maybe it’s a suits vs reality situation. The people in power at the business end are too detached? 😕

  • FcAc-No-Moe
    1286 posts
    @fcac-no-moe I really don’t know. Maybe it’s a suits vs reality situation. The people in power at the business end are too detached? 😕

    I could very well believe that but at the other side of the token, not making the forecasted amount of money can't be making them happy either. At some point the CEO and whomever else has the power must step in and prioritize if he wants to sell the Company or if he wants to keep it and make good games and toss a few cancerous investors out .

Suggested Topics