Around a 70 isn’t typically a great score, no, not as it tends to affect copies sold.
There are soft thresholds around mid 80s and around 90 where review scores have tangible effects on sales, which is part of how Baldur’s Gate 3 and Clair Obscur go on to sell multiple millions of copies despite a fraction of the marketing budget that Ubisoft commands.
I don’t care if you like Ubisoft games. They just spent a lot of money making games that not enough people bought to justify those budgets.
Yeah but we weren’t talking about the games costing more than they made, we were talking about the general online opinion that Ubisoft makes shitty games when they consistently make quality games. You’re on to something with your point about the Ubisoft open world formula having generally lost favor among the masses. It seems like modern gamers that want single player experiences are looking for more focused and innovative narratives over curated playgrounds, though most of the money seems to be in online competitive games. Anyway I’m just pushing back on the assertion that Ubisoft makes bad games because that’s nonsense. They make good games.
Your first question was “Didn’t both those games review and sell well?” The answer is no. That’s what we were talking about, in this thread about Ubisoft laying off thousands of people.
For what it’s worth, I think they made a number of good games, but there’s far too much that’s far too similar between them. By the time Black Flag came out the first time, I was tired of the checklist open world format, and it’s why something like Breath of the Wild or Elden Ring will pop off when it addresses what people like me find lacking in the Ubisoft format. These days when I get into an open world game that adheres to the same principles as Ubisoft (like Final Fantasy VII Rebirth, for instance), it’s often despite the format, not because of it.
I mean, they did review well. I guess not according to your unquestionable criteria but you don’t get to say in the seventies is bad. And it’s funny that people always mention botw and elden ring like they don’t do exactly the same thing but with their own gimmicks (and intentionally bad design) attached.
Ubisoft games put a tower on your map and then reveal other activity icons on your map once you climb it that it expects you to clear. Breath of the Wild asks you to use your eyes to decide what you find interesting from the top of the tower. Elden Ring has different types of rewards tied to certain types of locations, but it expects you to put together what those rules are on your own. There’s a huge difference there.
I guess not according to your unquestionable criteria but you don’t get to say in the seventies is bad.
I said reviewing in the 70s tends to not result in a sales bump. In order to average in the 70s, you’ve got far more negative reviews in the mix than a game that reviews in the mid 80s or low 90s. It doesn’t end up so unanimously praised that people can’t shut up about how much they love it, which drives sales, generally. I’m not here to talk you out of a game you enjoy. I really enjoyed Screamer and Invincible VS this year, and I’d call them both great games, both rated 77 on OpenCritic. Neither sold phenomenally well. If they’re lucky, those projects were scoped accordingly so that they were able to turn a profit and continue employing those developers.
There are soft thresholds around mid 80s and around 90 where review scores have tangible effects on sales, which is part of how Baldur’s Gate 3 and Clair Obscur go on to sell multiple millions of copies despite a fraction of the marketing budget that Ubisoft commands.
I don’t care if you like Ubisoft games. They just spent a lot of money making games that not enough people bought to justify those budgets.
Yeah but we weren’t talking about the games costing more than they made, we were talking about the general online opinion that Ubisoft makes shitty games when they consistently make quality games. You’re on to something with your point about the Ubisoft open world formula having generally lost favor among the masses. It seems like modern gamers that want single player experiences are looking for more focused and innovative narratives over curated playgrounds, though most of the money seems to be in online competitive games. Anyway I’m just pushing back on the assertion that Ubisoft makes bad games because that’s nonsense. They make good games.
Your first question was “Didn’t both those games review and sell well?” The answer is no. That’s what we were talking about, in this thread about Ubisoft laying off thousands of people.
For what it’s worth, I think they made a number of good games, but there’s far too much that’s far too similar between them. By the time Black Flag came out the first time, I was tired of the checklist open world format, and it’s why something like Breath of the Wild or Elden Ring will pop off when it addresses what people like me find lacking in the Ubisoft format. These days when I get into an open world game that adheres to the same principles as Ubisoft (like Final Fantasy VII Rebirth, for instance), it’s often despite the format, not because of it.
I mean, they did review well. I guess not according to your unquestionable criteria but you don’t get to say in the seventies is bad. And it’s funny that people always mention botw and elden ring like they don’t do exactly the same thing but with their own gimmicks (and intentionally bad design) attached.
Ubisoft games put a tower on your map and then reveal other activity icons on your map once you climb it that it expects you to clear. Breath of the Wild asks you to use your eyes to decide what you find interesting from the top of the tower. Elden Ring has different types of rewards tied to certain types of locations, but it expects you to put together what those rules are on your own. There’s a huge difference there.
I said reviewing in the 70s tends to not result in a sales bump. In order to average in the 70s, you’ve got far more negative reviews in the mix than a game that reviews in the mid 80s or low 90s. It doesn’t end up so unanimously praised that people can’t shut up about how much they love it, which drives sales, generally. I’m not here to talk you out of a game you enjoy. I really enjoyed Screamer and Invincible VS this year, and I’d call them both great games, both rated 77 on OpenCritic. Neither sold phenomenally well. If they’re lucky, those projects were scoped accordingly so that they were able to turn a profit and continue employing those developers.