.

[BallGum]

Is Ubisoft doing this on purpose?

Is an embittered employee putting things in everyone's tea?

 

Let's break it down. The point of saying what he did was to try and appease PC gamers, but for f**ks sake, did it backfire or what?

[mr moose]

Is Ubisoft doing this on purpose?

Is an embittered employee putting things in everyone's tea?

 

Let's break it down. The point of saying what he did was to try and appease PC gamers, but for f**ks sake, did it backfire or what?

 

But the question is, why did it backfire?  Is it because they didn't think it through and they made a grievous mistake, or is because pc gamers are an entitled bunch that don't understand the game development process and how the market place dictates the direction?

[Gigaguy777]

.

Edited July 1, 2019 by Gigaguy777
please delete

[mr moose]

It's not entitlement to demand that a game that was developed both on, and for your platform take full advantage of the power behind your platform. We're not asking for a bunch of extra content or bonuses, we're asking for Ubisoft's development teams to meet the standard that PC gamers should, and do expect out of modern games brought to PC.

Is that not the definition of entitlement? 

[SixtyDashOne]

This is getting ridiculous. Do they really hold us for completely retarded? Even "pure" console gamers who haven't tried the goodies the pc master race offers should know that this is a plain lie. If consoles really can run it at ultra settings at an acceptable resolution, ultra settings aren't freaking high enough and it wsn't developed with pc in mind. Or maybe they'll pull a crysis 2 and make "very high" the lowest setting available and go up to "very ultra" and "much ultra" with "wow" being the best preset...

 

LOL  :lol:

 

Thank you sir, that is the best laugh I've had in weeks.

[Gigaguy777]

.

Edited July 1, 2019 by Gigaguy777
please delete

[mr moose]

Is it entitlement to expect a AAA developer and publisher to meet the standards that other AAA developers and publishers are meeting this very second? Because if so, then I think we're confusing "entitled" with "having standards, and not stooping to pathetic levels".

Getting angry and demanding someone manufacture a product to meet your expectations especially when you are not their primary income stream is entitlement.

[Redheadsrule13]

-.- No. As long as it looks better than FC3 though, it can't be all bad.

[Gigaguy777]

.

Edited July 1, 2019 by Gigaguy777
please delete

[mr moose]

Well thank god that's not what I'm asking. I'm not demanding they meet my expectations, I'm saying they should be up to the standard of PC development. Take something like Metro: Last Light, which was arguably a bad port thanks to several graphics options bundled together as "Quality Options." It pushed GPUs hard on PC, hell even on my 270x I can't max it out and hit 60 FPS, it's a gorgeous game, and its also very pretty on consoles, because it pushed the limit of their GPUs as well. The fact that 4A could do it, and Ubisoft can't, is pathetic. Ubisoft has the talent (I hope), budget, and time to deliver a proper PC version, they've done it in the past, so not doing it here, is failing a standard that they themselves have met in the past.

 

So your not demanding they meet your expectations but you expect them to make a better game because other games are better?  Yeah I see the difference :rolleyes:

[Gigaguy777]

.

Edited July 1, 2019 by Gigaguy777
please delete

[mr moose]

Well no, I'm just saying that as a AAA developer and publisher, they should deliver a product that isn't mediocre, and is a technological failure compared to other titles they have made.

 

Why should they?  is it because you want it? expect it? deserve it?  What is their motivation to give you what you think they "should" be delivering?

[Gigaguy777]

.

Edited July 1, 2019 by Gigaguy777
please delete

[mr moose]

Because they've done it in the past, multiple times, and they have the resources to do it in time, manpower, and money. Not only that, but delivering a product that is at least average, like what I'm asking, would make them more money by getting players who were turned off by the lies about Watch Dogs to buy this title, as well as being a fantastic act of good faith towards the PC community, who have been thrown under the bus by Ubisoft.

what if they don't make enough profit or won't make enough projected profit from pc to justify the production hours?  What if they are at a crucial juncture and need to decide which platform they are going to favor and by offering a watered down version for the pc is their way of hedging bets?  For we know they are about to go arse up like so many developers before them.

[Gigaguy777]

.

Edited July 1, 2019 by Gigaguy777
please delete

[Albatross]

ultra* 

 

*at 792p

 

:lol:

[SSL]

They will make enough profit from the PC version if they put the time into making it good. Just look at Crysis, or Metro, or Splinter Cell, or Assassin's Creed IV. If they are at a "critical Juncture" and need to decide which platform to half-ass to better serve the others, then they need to delay the game and take the time to make it good.

 

I have a question for you, why are you advocating that a company that has shown they have the power and resources to make quality PC versions, just completely go back on what they've done before and half-ass it like they did with Watch Dogs? Do you honestly believe that we should accept mediocrity and low-quality versions of games from a AAA developer and publisher?

 

Being a AAA developer in itself brings in an expectation of quality by the consumer, and separates the developer from the indie status. If Ubi was an indie studio, then I wouldn't expect them to take full advantage of every platform, or even hit the average in some aspects. Just look at Insurgency, or Marlow Briggs. They have bad, and/or dated graphics, but they are indie, so it's perfectly okay. Compare that to something like Assassin's Creed IV, or Splinter Cell: Blacklist. They have fantastic graphics, and a plethora of graphics options. They are AAA games, from a AAA developer. They have delivered these titles in the past, so we should expect similar fidelity and quality from future titles.

 

As for whether or not they'll go belly up, Ubisoft has made slightly over $720M in profits this year, and it isn't even over yet. They are not going out of business any time soon.

 

What if they just don't care? The expectations of a certain market don't matter to a company if they don't have a significant effect on their bottom line.

[mr moose]

They will make enough profit from the PC version if they put the time into making it good. Just look at Crysis, or Metro, or Splinter Cell, or Assassin's Creed IV. If they are at a "critical Juncture" and need to decide which platform to half-ass to better serve the others, then they need to delay the game and take the time to make it good.

 

I have a question for you, why are you advocating that a company that has shown they have the power and resources to make quality PC versions, just completely go back on what they've done before and half-ass it like they did with Watch Dogs? Do you honestly believe that we should accept mediocrity and low-quality versions of games from a AAA developer and publisher?

 

Being a AAA developer in itself brings in an expectation of quality by the consumer, and separates the developer from the indie status. If Ubi was an indie studio, then I wouldn't expect them to take full advantage of every platform, or even hit the average in some aspects. Just look at Insurgency, or Marlow Briggs. They have bad, and/or dated graphics, but they are indie, so it's perfectly okay. Compare that to something like Assassin's Creed IV, or Splinter Cell: Blacklist. They have fantastic graphics, and a plethora of graphics options. They are AAA games, from a AAA developer. They have delivered these titles in the past, so we should expect similar fidelity and quality from future titles.

 

As for whether or not they'll go belly up, Ubisoft has made slightly over $720M in profits this year, and it isn't even over yet. They are not going out of business any time soon.

 

Well, for one I don't care whether they make a great game and become the worlds premier game developer or if they stop producing for pc and end up a washed up has been company.  However what interests me is the known facts and what the drive is behind it.  We know that they can make a better game, yet they are choosing not to, we know they can stop talking to the press about resolution, frame rates, console experience etc, yet the choose not to.  Unlike most other people in this thread, I am actually interested in the reason for this rather than just writing them off as stupid, selfish or ignorant etc. 

 

Firstly it is possible that they are being disingenuous, which renders all assumptions made in this thread moot. 

secondly money is the driver for all corporate discussions so assuming that pissing of pc gamers it will cost them money is counter logical to their motives. and

thirdly  720M is scary a small profit.  If I had a company and it was only at that I would be considering a major change in direction, Alas I am not in charge and per the about statements I don't know what they know.

 

So in conclusion,  with the only real knowledge we have at hand being they want to make all game platforms the same and that  they want to nerf resolution on any system that can possibly be pushed harder in order to do this plus they make more money from consoles, expecting them to do the opposite to benefit a part of the market that generate less income seems irrational. Again it is totally possible that the pc market does not make enough profit for them to viably produce for.

[Gigaguy777]

.

Edited July 1, 2019 by Gigaguy777
please delete

[mr moose]

Then that's fair, if they don't care, then they should just come out and say it, and stop trying to hide and lie. Then we'll know that we just shouldn't buy the game, period.

 

 

 

Firstly, what could they possibly be pretending not to know? I don't know, that's why if they are it renders all our assumptions moot. IF they know something we don't, but aren't telling us, we can't begin to understand why this is happening.

 

Second, they have already pissed of PC gamers, they have already costed themselves sales as a result of shoddy PC ports. Really? you know what they've earned and what they've lost? do you have their running costs and income revenue statements for the pc division? We have no idea what the impact is. 

 

Third, 720M is not a scary small profit for Ubisoft. We know this because this is very close to the profit of previous years, including years in which quality PC ports were released by Ubisoft. If 720M is for some reason, a scary small profit, then Ubisoft has lived off of "scary small profits" for years, which is highly unlikely.

 

Again we don't have access to projected running costs, projected revenue, current running costs or income stream data. Because if this article is any accurate then their profits are down, they are not meeting internal sales targets and are banking on WD and Farcry4 to give them double digit profit again.  That's including the success of the southpark game.  So again, I would be scared if the market was unstable and profits weren't high enough to sustain through another downturn. 

 

Now if this is the case you'd think that pissing of pc gamers would be a big nono right about now, but they don't seem to perturbed by it. why?

 

EDIT: this graph is a little more revealing:

https://europeanequities.nyx.com/en/products/equities/FR0000054470-XPAR

 

shows just how up and down the market can be, the fact that they are looking down when they are not at the top is something to consider.

[FakezZ]

It's all about the gameplay guys!

Not really. It never is all about gameplay. The whole reason behind a new console generation/pc upgrade etc is better graphics. If it was about gameplay we'd be stuck with 2d graphics(well that's an exaggeration, probably like 3d with like 10x10 textures ).

[ericlee30]

What a load of crap. I will not buy another ubisoft related games tell they stop being so one sided.