WATCH_DOGS 2 (November 15 2016)
- Thread starter JR98
- 127 comments
- 6,315 views
- 9,232
- Solid Gone
- MeanElf
No indeed, all they'd need to do is shrug and move on, I'd have thought. My comment about gaming prices being similar for a decade was made with reason, that very few games got a demo and yet people went ahead and bought them anyway. Whether or not they were upset by those games, is hard to quantify - what I have seen though is that gaming continued and grew regardless.
I know I've posted this link before elsewhere on the forum, but I truly feel that it is worth the read as it takes a deeper look at what is wrong with many of the gaming community members terminology and expectations: http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2016/05/30/fandom-is-broken
Anyway, I'm back to playing Far Cry Primal for a while and then I'm off to work.
- 14,436
- Los Angeles, CA
- Lma_robot
- lImaRobotl
What's common in the industry is to release pre-release footage and purposely tart it up to draw in the crowd. It's marketing. It being common, doesn't really mean people have to accept it as if it's the right thing.
Expecting what most likely what will happen, as been showing from their past history, is perfectly acceptable. It's not like the worries are unwarranted. To voice a concern about a problem that has plagued this company for so long is perfectly acceptable. It is in fact, their own fault that they have such an image.Fair enough and I can respect such choices - my exasperation (and I know I won't become popular as a result) is with those who go wibbling off about how a game they haven't even played yet will be like
Shrug and move on? Sure.. Or we could just expect to get some sort of accurate representation to what is actually going to be happening so that way we can shrug on move on before we blow money. We shouldn't have to find out that the game was crapped out after we bought it, they should be able to accurately show us gameplay trailers at least sometime around release. Hell, I'm sure most things are finalized even months before that, so it could have been done at that point. However, they wont do that, because like I said, they purposely tart it up for the sole purpose of marketing. They are deceiving on purpose. Common? Sure. Pushing it as if we have to accept it? No, not so much.
On top of that, their release of most games recently have bugs up the backside. So that just adds to the the list of of things people are upset about when things don't look remotely like how they looked on pre-release footage.
Gaming moves on regardless, because for every crap game that releases, there is a savior somewhere on the horizon for most people. That, Or they'll just go back to previously loved games while they wait for something.
Last edited:
- 9,232
- Solid Gone
- MeanElf
I told you my viewpoint wouldn't be popular
Whilst I can't claim to have played all of their games, I can honestly say that I have encountered no bugs in the ones that I have. I will qualify that comment by stating that I don't tend to play online, which can be far more prone to 'bugs' (often due to the complainants own connection speeds, it seems - though of course, not always) so I don't share this history of suffering that seems to afflict so many. Nor do a number of others whose comments I have read in the past on various forums; this leads me to ask the question: what could cause problems on some people's games and not on others? Outside of corrupted patches, it is likely to be environmental disparity.
The other thing, the beefed up graphics in trailers thing - well, like I said, it happens and whilst you don't accept that, I am pragmatic and don't really see that sort of behaviour going away, not just because a bunch of people find it bad, so I compensate my expectations accordingly. I find that works wonderfully.
- 14,436
- Los Angeles, CA
- Lma_robot
- lImaRobotl
Being popular or not is irrelevant.I told you my viewpoint wouldn't be popular
I always find the "well I don't have problems with it so it must not be the case" a bit amusing. That's fine that you haven't experienced the problems, but they didn't get their rep out of thin air. You haven't experienced it? lucky you, however, they are horrible with pre-release footage, and there releases haven't been that great either.
We dont know do we, so I find it odd that you're being so dismissive of it. Either way, Like I said, they have that rep for a reason.
And like I said, it being common doesn't mean it has to be accepted. It not going away doesn't mean we should just accept it as well. It's a shady practice, and one they use very often, so that's the reason they get the disdain they do. I for one will be weary of a company based on past practices, and if there is change with current practice, then I will take it into consideration. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me sorta situation.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertc...ations-ubisoft-youre-the-new-ea/#262f92e85462
This article does a good job at explaining why the company is met with such skepticism now adays.
Last edited:
- 9,232
- Solid Gone
- MeanElf
Amusing, maybe, but you really should be asking why instead of taking any number of 'randoms' word for it. You unfortunately split the quote into two, but my following comment about environment isn't just a randomly made supposition, it is a tried and tested IT bit of methodology; so whilst "we don't know, do we" is one way of addressing the situation, I do rather feel that trying to divine from amongst all of the various reasons, is a more productive way of approaching this whole situation.
Just to let you know that the expression is actually: fool me once...etc.
I will read tomorrow. Did you read the article that I linked to?
- 14,436
- Los Angeles, CA
- Lma_robot
- lImaRobotl
I'm not taking any one randoms word for it. I'm going off experience, as well as relatable articles. Ghost recon Future Soldier was so far from what they showed that it actually didn't even resemble the same game at all.
Got the message all the same. Thanks for the spelling correction.
Honestly, no, because I didn't feel it necessary to do so just because you feel that it is unnecessary for people to have this much warranted skepticism. I don't need to know what's wrong with the community as, if it'll disprove any of our opinions about the horrible track record Ubisoft has and the way I approach their products in the future.
- 15,532
- Cairo, Egypt
- GTP_SEMS
I know Ubi always so these demos that get downgraded eventually but from what they've soon this seems to be running on consoles (pop in issues, etc) same story was with Syndicate, they've learned their lesson.
- 14,436
- Los Angeles, CA
- Lma_robot
- lImaRobotl
Yet you feel the need to come in and act like these comments are unfounded? They are perfectly reasonable. If you actually do see the complete picture, than you would be ok with the negatives being said as the big picture will involve both aspects. Let it be, as what is being said, is perfectly reasonable. Its fine that you're ok with everything, and don't feel the need to be weary, but don't come around and pretend that it's not ok to be a skeptic either, and continue to undermine people with an article that will supposedly show them whats wrong with them. There is nothing wrong with them, there is a lot wrong with the way the company works, though.
It's when you say things like this, that actually make it seem that you haven't seen the big picture at all. If you're so quick to dismiss opinions because you haven't encountered problems, one of the lucky few, it actually seems like quite the opposite of what you seem to be saying. You haven't encountered them, but a good amount of people have. Here you have people, on a forum, talking about it(the same way you found out that there apparently isn't a problem right?) yet you won't take in this information? I'm not sure why.
Last edited:
- 9,295
- Duisburg
Err... To me, this article seems to deal with an entirely different issue altogether. We haven't been criticising Ubisoft for an artistic decision but for false advertising and the quality of their "finished" products.
Complete picture = includes context. Context = previous experience. In this case: Previous experience = negative experience.
- 2,998
- England
- Peasantslayer
The big guys have the experience and the money to create fantastic games time after time so they really don't have an excuse other than greed/laziness for bug-ridden downgraded games that fail to hit the mark. Not all of the big guys are slated, Rockstar have a good reputation amongst most gamers because most of their games have been fantastic.
Last edited:
- 14,436
- Los Angeles, CA
- Lma_robot
- lImaRobotl
Who are these people? I dont think any of those are here in this thread. I give no one passes, in fact I'm very vocal about my distaste for SMS' practices whenever I've been in a discussion about them.
I know what you're saying, but that is literally not what's going on here, so I don't see the point of it even being brought up, really.
- 9,232
- Solid Gone
- MeanElf
Games are a creative process, others who rely on creativity for what they do, bands authors and artists get a lot more slack if their current work isn't perhaps as creative as the previous ones - that's pretty much what I'm saying, give them a chance.
Now some clearly don't want to, and that's up to them - it wasn't my intention to tell people how to think, although some seem to have interpreted what I said in that way.
Like you, I came in here and I explained my experiences after apparently making the mistake of asking why everyone is so cynical...
It's not just about artistic decisions though, the article is concerned also with the levels of expectations that have led to vehemence and over-entitled behaviour.
- 14,436
- Los Angeles, CA
- Lma_robot
- lImaRobotl
Except that you didn't ask why people are being cynical, you mentioned it with a tone of aggression and made it as a statement as if people are just pulling on these strings unwarranted. You then followed that up with basically just dismissing any comments here because you felt that they where following a trend and not speaking for themselves, and when pointed out why people feel the way they do, you dismiss it again, posting an article as if to show how "wrong" our way of thinking was.
No one is confused or thinking that, more so that you're insistence on our opinions being invalid in some sort of way because you haven't experienced the many, many, many problems that plague UBIsoft, and that we're apparently over-entitled, linking us in with the negative user base that your article is speaking of.
All I expect is for the things that are shown to us to be the things that we get, and If things had to change down the line, it would be nice for us to be atleast informed. I don't expect perfect launches, things happen, but I also expect to not have a company leave an embargo up 12 hours AFTER releasing a buggy mess of a game, in order to keep potential(and there would have been) negative reviews of a game a safe distance away so then can get some sales before that. I don't expect much, honest answers is what I'd prefer, and if I get them, then I can give the benefit of the doubt.
Last edited:
- 9,232
- Solid Gone
- MeanElf
What? You really should take a step back and chill out fella - it seems that you are the only one to take that much exception to my posts. I appreciate that the tone of words can be misinterpreted over 'the internet' but aggression? Trust me, there would be no doubt in the mind of anyone if I were actually being aggressive.
- 14,436
- Los Angeles, CA
- Lma_robot
- lImaRobotl
Not just the tone, but it was also the continued dismissal of points, and the article that topped it off. If you weren't being aggressive, passive or otherwise, that's fine. However, that doesn't make it any more correct how you approached the situation. Either way, like I said, you asked no question and instead made a direct statement. You weren't curious because you had already bunched it all up to the very rightful negative posts to being over-entitled apparently, since you felt your article was somehow relevant to our disdain.
Last edited:
- 9,295
- Duisburg
This is up for debate, but personally, I don't see how any of what has been displayed in this threat can be compared to the vehemence discussed in the article - I have yet to see death threats directed at Ubisoft by a GTP member
The bolded part is more important, I suppose: Expecting a product to a) work and b) look as advertised is considered "over-entitled behaviour" now? Are we really at the point where someone gets looked down upon because one doesn't appreciate false advertising and the whole switch-and-bait shtick?
Really? Well, call me over-entitled, then.
On the other hand, the only publishers that have failed my oh so high expectations often enough for me to be instantly critical of anything they bring forth are Ubisoft and EA. I guess we're all just over-entitled for not being okay with how two huge players in the industry just can't (or more realistically, are unwilling to) deliver the same level of quality as a small Polish developer like CD Project Red, for example (no DRM, huge amount of polish and content, DLC that amounts to more than just a couple MP maps, proper post launch support and no BS marketing).
dopedog
(Banned)
- 880
- United Kingdom
I've been ripped into on here (not by you) for daring to suggest PCars has faults and that SMS have been naughty with some promises and out right lies.
Frankly there's a lot of dodgy stuff in the industry not least paying reviewers (look at metacritic the 'experts' review scores then the customer review scores). Where there is serious money to be made there is short cuts and dodgy practices.
Way I deal with it is to just hang back and be about 3 weeks behind the releases in some cases longer then grab a bargain.
For example watchdogs 1 for £9 well it was worth that for the mech spider sub game!!
I think large or small there's no reason to excuse lies and such and broken elements of games that don't get a fix, so I am agreeing with you, but its more acceptable to slag off EA and Ubisoft, i ge that.
- 9,232
- Solid Gone
- MeanElf
That was just one point in the article, I only mentioned it as that was a part of what the article was discussing, not as a direct correlation to anything said here.This is up for debate, but personally, I don't see how any of what has been displayed in this threat can be compared to the vehemence discussed in the article - I have yet to see death threats directed at Ubisoft by a GTP member
Like I suggested earlier, if anyone was acting over-entitled, I'd definitely tell them.
