The company, in exchange for generous subsidies, is required to hit a certain hiring quota and launch original IPs in the next few years, making it imperative that the title gets shipped by hook or by crook – final look notwithstanding.
Right, but they should have just released it knowing it was going to die, unless they continue to receieve funding if they keep delaying it? Its just a money pit by this point and the faster they dump it the faster they can stop sinking money into it.
I mean … If you can delay the game and actually make a hit, why not?
Gamers are so ridiculous “how dare you not release this game that’s clearly not ready!” one day “how dare you delay this game multiple times! Just give up or launch it already!”
And you know maybe you’re not in the former group ever, but it’s just wild to me how people can have such wildly different takes on this.
This will not be a hit. This game has been delayed how many times already and its still in a worse state than Star Citizen. This game had a chance to be mediocre like 5 years ago, but by now its got zero chances.
This game has been delayed how many times already and its still in a worse state than Star Citizen.
Literally who cares, it’s not released and that’s the point. This is like saying the lightbulb is doomed to fail because they didn’t get it working as soon as they’d hoped.
Literally who cares, it’s not released and that’s the point.
You care apparently since you’re defending it so hard.
This game has set itself up to fail in a similar way that Metal Gear Survive set itself up to fail. Viewer reactions have been across the board pretty negative to footage released. Most people have said they do not plan to play the game. When a development studio sees a lot of negative feedback for early content, they make a choice of delaying and reworking what they have to hopefully get more positive reception, or releasing anyways to largely expected negative reception. The problem is Skull and Bones has been delayed multiple times, and every time it has had content shown the reception has been mostly negative. That’s generally a sign to a studio to drop development completely, because releasing will cost the company more money than dropping the game. This game has a legal requirement to release. So they either release and damage their reputation again, or they delay and rework. But they can only delay and rework so many times, their funding is not infinite.
This is like saying the lightbulb is doomed to fail because they didn’t get it working as soon as they’d hoped.
If the company making the lightbulb was going bankrupt, had numerous reports of unethical and illegal activity, had made only mid-at-best lightbulbs before, was cancelling other more promising lightbulb designs, and looked like a bootleg of another company’s lightbulb, maybe.
Alright, you make a compelling argument. We’ll see, but I do have friends that are still optimistic about this game when it eventually launches, they mostly just grovel about it not being done yet.
Maybe the broader circles are more informed and more negative. I’m projecting a bit in that I’ve loosely followed this game after learning it was even a planned thing a few months ago from the friend that still carries some optimism for it.
I don’t think the “mass market” follows prerelease content in the way you’re suggesting basically. If it releases as a polished game, and I hadn’t had this conversation, I would never have known or cared about early reception of the gameplay/gameplay footage.
had numerous reports of unethical and illegal activity
(While I think generative AI is an amazing and useful tool, I dont think it should be used in this way by a company that should be able to afford paying an artist. Therefore I along with many consider this unethical, but it is debatable).
Hopefully conditions inside the company have improved, but it’s hard to get that kind of “positive” insight even if it does exist.
(While I think generative AI is an amazing and useful tool, I dont think it should be used in this way by a company that should be able to afford paying an artist. Therefore I along with many consider this unethical, but it is debatable).
From what I understand, Ubisoft received a grant from the Singapore government that basically mandates this game be published, as opposed to the recent Hyenas cancelation.
Relevant quote;
Right, but they should have just released it knowing it was going to die, unless they continue to receieve funding if they keep delaying it? Its just a money pit by this point and the faster they dump it the faster they can stop sinking money into it.
I mean … If you can delay the game and actually make a hit, why not?
Gamers are so ridiculous “how dare you not release this game that’s clearly not ready!” one day “how dare you delay this game multiple times! Just give up or launch it already!”
And you know maybe you’re not in the former group ever, but it’s just wild to me how people can have such wildly different takes on this.
This will not be a hit. This game has been delayed how many times already and its still in a worse state than Star Citizen. This game had a chance to be mediocre like 5 years ago, but by now its got zero chances.
Literally who cares, it’s not released and that’s the point. This is like saying the lightbulb is doomed to fail because they didn’t get it working as soon as they’d hoped.
You care apparently since you’re defending it so hard.
This game has set itself up to fail in a similar way that Metal Gear Survive set itself up to fail. Viewer reactions have been across the board pretty negative to footage released. Most people have said they do not plan to play the game. When a development studio sees a lot of negative feedback for early content, they make a choice of delaying and reworking what they have to hopefully get more positive reception, or releasing anyways to largely expected negative reception. The problem is Skull and Bones has been delayed multiple times, and every time it has had content shown the reception has been mostly negative. That’s generally a sign to a studio to drop development completely, because releasing will cost the company more money than dropping the game. This game has a legal requirement to release. So they either release and damage their reputation again, or they delay and rework. But they can only delay and rework so many times, their funding is not infinite.
If the company making the lightbulb was going bankrupt, had numerous reports of unethical and illegal activity, had made only mid-at-best lightbulbs before, was cancelling other more promising lightbulb designs, and looked like a bootleg of another company’s lightbulb, maybe.
Alright, you make a compelling argument. We’ll see, but I do have friends that are still optimistic about this game when it eventually launches, they mostly just grovel about it not being done yet.
Maybe the broader circles are more informed and more negative. I’m projecting a bit in that I’ve loosely followed this game after learning it was even a planned thing a few months ago from the friend that still carries some optimism for it.
I don’t think the “mass market” follows prerelease content in the way you’re suggesting basically. If it releases as a polished game, and I hadn’t had this conversation, I would never have known or cared about early reception of the gameplay/gameplay footage.
I am curious about this though?
Regarding Ubisoft’s unethical/illegal activity:
Executives arrested for questioning in sexual misconduct probe: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-53391689
Ubisoft is a Toxic Workplace: https://www.ign.com/articles/almost-a-year-after-toxic-workplace-allegations-ubisoft-employees-reportedly-say-nothing-has-changed
Ubisoft using generative AI for promotional artwork for Assassin’s Creed: https://www.pcgamer.com/ubisofts-using-hideous-ai-generated-assassins-creed-art-on-social-media-and-everyone-hates-it/
(While I think generative AI is an amazing and useful tool, I dont think it should be used in this way by a company that should be able to afford paying an artist. Therefore I along with many consider this unethical, but it is debatable).
Interesting… Looks like those folks are still going through the system https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2023/10/former-ubisoft-executives-reportedly-arrested-over-sexual-harassment-allegations/
Hopefully conditions inside the company have improved, but it’s hard to get that kind of “positive” insight even if it does exist.
Very fair.
Thanks