This is going to be one of those “Ubisoft investigates Ubisoft and found that Ubisoft did nothing wrong at Ubisoft”-situations, isn’t it?

  • kerthale@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    89
    ·
    1 month ago

    How about just the completely entitled attitude of the execs that think they can tell us how to enjoy something. Only to then whine that nobody wants to buy their 70 euro no better than mid game

    • Delphia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      ·
      1 month ago

      They do damn near 10/10 work when they give a fuck, Thats probably the worst part.

      Siege was damn near perfect as a tactical competitive shooter for the first few years. The Division was great, Just Cause was enormous fun and so on.

      The problem is they hit a winner, and then milk it and milk it and milk it until we hate it or them.

      • WalnutLum@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 month ago

        I love the division 1 and 2 but the first game had some MAJOR bullet soak issues for the first half-year of the game’s lifetime.

        Massive always does good work despite Ubisoft, in my opinion.

        • Katana314@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 month ago

          Massive are the ones that made Star Wars Outlaws - so it seems the world disagrees with you.

          I wasn’t so interested in Outlaws, but I’ve sometimes thought the criticism was slightly overblown. It looks a lot better than some other Ubi games.

          • garretble@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 month ago

            Honestly, Outlaws has flaws, BUUUUT it’s fun as hell. It’s a 7/10 game, but it’s fun. I enjoy my time with it even though I see some glitches here or there, or that the lip sync is a little jank.

            It’s a big ass Star Wars game (with no AC towers hooray!) where you get to rub shoulders with scoundrels and play Sabacc and visit honestly cool locations that are visually impressive.

            I feel like most of the issues it has is probably a function of “we need this game out by X date” versus the devs’ ability.

            • brenticus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 month ago

              I finished the main story last night and I basically agree with you. It’s got plenty of issues, but overall it’s fun. It is neither the 9/10 game of most reviews I saw nor the 4/10 game that people want it to be.

              I think my main issue is that it wants to have a story about the underworld and how you can’t trust anyone and you’re a huge underdog just trying to survive but it doesn’t want to commit to it. It feels thematically janky in places and ways that feel design-by-committee. It fills the shoes of Shadows of the Empire decently enough, but it feels like it was trying to be 1313 and failed.

              • garretble@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 month ago

                I have this feeling that once it starts going on more sales and more people play it the general consensus will be that’s it’s a pretty solid game. I also imagine like a lot of these games there will be a patch in the next month that fixes a litany of issues.

                You’re right it’s kind of interesting that the factions don’t really add a lot of meaningful gameplay mechanics, but oh well. At first I was like, “I’m not working with the Pykes AT ALL because I know what happens in your spice mines.” But you end up just being friends with all of them as needed (to get their rewards).

                Just having this big coat of Star Wars paint over this otherwise fairly standard action/shooter/open world game really does make it more fun, though. I still have a bit to go in the story, but I’m just basting around cleaning up side quests right now because it’s fun to do.

          • WalnutLum@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 month ago

            It seems like a very polarizing game, you either really enjoy it or not at all.

      • Suburbanl3g3nd@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 month ago

        My god Siege was good for the first few years. Intoxicatingly good multiplayer. Too bad they fucked it up trying to make it more CoD like. For example, I used to play with a completely hidden hud because it was so immersive and fun. Now it’s like rainbow six and Roblox had a baby and the weird game popped out. I can’t even hide my hud or crosshair any longer

  • slazer2au@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    60
    ·
    1 month ago

    Clearly what they need is more management layers and SCRUM masters to streamline the game creation process.

    • 100@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      1 month ago

      and a dozen more external contractors will def make their games better

    • Kit
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      1 month ago

      Don’t forget AGILE. That should solve all of their problems, right?

      • DudeDudenson@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        1 month ago

        They’re going lean so they’re firing half their workforce so the rest can produce more work. Don’t worry though middle management is safe

      • slazer2au@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 month ago

        How else do we foster a sense of team if all the devs are not in the office 5 days a week?

        • Janovich@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 month ago

          Also to promote a sense of community and close cooperation we’re moving to an open office plan. (I.e. packed in like sardines to glorified picnic tables with hot seating and noise everywhere.)

  • FISHNETS
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    1 month ago

    Finally, let me address some of the polarized comments around Ubisoft lately. I want to reaffirm that we are an entertainment-first company, creating games for the broadest possible audience, and our goal is not to push any specific agenda. We remain committed to creating games for fans and players that everyone can enjoy.”

    Creating games for the broadest possible audience is what has made Ubisoft games so lackluster in recent years, and I think players are tired of games not targeting a specific niche. It feels these games are full time jobs in themselves with how much needs to be done to complete/100% it, and I think that formula is now stale.

    I’ll be interested to see what results of this investigation. Hopefully better art, but I am cynical

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 month ago

      . . . our goal is not to push any specific agenda

      This is the part they’re actually getting at. Not that the fundamental game design is for everyone (which, yes, is what they try and fail at), but rather they’re responding to people who think they’re failing because they put a woman as the protagonist in some game or another.

    • Katana314@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      100% is itself a bit of a misleading target.

      I think I remember Just Cause 2 had it so the top achievement in the game was only for 70% completion because they knew they had such a ridiculously huge map.

      Breath of the Wild aims the same way - they like having you come across a bunch of Korok seeds while traveling, but not scouring the land with a magnifying glass looking for them.

  • dinckel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    1 month ago

    I can’t name you a single Ubisoft game that i’ve had any interest in buying, in the last decade

  • Encrypt-Keeper@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    What it really comes down to is that this type of “safe” game design where you rehash the same game over and over again for 20 years thing used to make a shitload of money, that’s why they all do it, and now it doesn’t. Or at least, they’re discovering that there’s a mathematical maximum amount of times you can rehash something without innovating. And not doing that is too huge a pivot for a huge lumbering company like Ubsioft to make on a reasonable timescale.

    This is what’s supposed to happen though. When not enough people buy games to make them profitable, the games have to change, or Ubisoft goes under. Either is fine.

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      And I feel like half of that 20 years was based on FOMO. “I better get the next Assassin’s Creed or I’ll miss out”, and then it’s all the same crap but they still sold a million of them. People do eventually wise up to FOMO.

      • delitomatoes@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 month ago

        Miss out on what? Unity was a buggy mess on launch, skip, the British one was a snorefest. By the time of the reboots, Ghost of Tsushima, Elden Ring and BotW already came out

    • P03 Locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Well, it also doesn’t help how much they are “accidentally” insulting multiple racial groups trying to make an Assassins’ Creed game.

    • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 month ago

      Nah in this case this is real. The board is investigating the executive leadership, two separate entities. It’s like corporate investigating stores management, in a way. This could mean executives getting fired

  • hdnsmbt@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    1 month ago

    Nah, this is about money. They’ll definitely find a group of underpaid employees to fire.

    • RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 month ago

      They’ll fire the developers that implemented the unpopular features (that they didn’t want to build in the first place but were forced upon them from executives, who, by the way, are due for their end of year bonuses!!)

  • Bakkoda@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    1 month ago

    Management has decided that the real issue is the lack of employee involvement. Mandatory beatings will commence.

  • parpol@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 month ago

    I want to reaffirm that we are an entertainment-first company, creating games for the broadest possible audience, and our goal is not to push any specific agenda.

    Press X to doubt

  • olicvb@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Always suprised when I remember that WatchDogs 2 is from Ubisoft. Such a well made game, i played the crap out of it twice

    Edit: awe man Steep was super fun too

      • olicvb@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Maybe they fixed it? I didn’t play day 1 so I’m not sure how it was then (played maybe 2-3 years after it’s release)

        • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          I just found it soul less and unbalanced. But then again I was going into it early when they where still calling it the “GTA killer”.

        • lud@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          I played it a few months after launch due to the gaming being included with my GPU and I really enjoyed it.

        • Zahille7@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          That was my experience. Got it at GameStop in sale after it had released, played through the whole thing, then I went and played the first one.

          I think I like the second better, but the first one is good for what it is.

          I never played Legion.

    • bitwolf@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      I wanted to like Steep but the Controller experience, even on the Steam deck is so horrible I didn’t last a full hour

      • olicvb@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        I know there are some changes you can do in settings. I mostly did snowboarding and since I snowboard irl I found the controls were close to how you’d control your feet on an actual board. So that probably helped ^ ^

        But rider’s republic mixed it all up so I get what you mean

  • Hugin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 month ago

    Ubisoft isn’t making money. That’s something wrong as far as the board is concerned.

  • Lad@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 month ago

    Maybe they should try not making crap games. All that money and they can’t get decent voice actors or writers.

  • Phegan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Absolutely not. When the board is looking into it, it’s because they are not returning shareholder value and they are pissed about it. This will likely end with the C-suite being butchered.

    • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Ah yes, I hate being butchered that way, too. It sucks hard to be paid to leave before you get paid extra to start your next job elsewhere.

      And don’t get me wrong, if the C-suites actually ever had to take actual responsibility for their fuck-ups, I’d be all for those board investigations. But they don’t. They get paid enough to not care about interims between jobs - just look at the CEO who said people can just spend a year on the beach or so if they’ve been laid off - plus they get paid extra both on the leaving and on the re-hiring.

      If they had to pay all non-salary money back on fucking up, even retroactively, no matter how many Porsches they’d have to liquidate to get the money from X years of fucking up the company back, sure. Do it. But that’s just sadly not the case. For a C-suite, this just means changing what name is written under your name, and moving on to the next place you can grift.