Tag Archives: Unity

A snag in the process

That is how I see it, Ubisoft is in trouble and even after I basically handed them a key worth billions and they merely had to adjust what they already had in a new product, but here (at https://www.gamerbraves.com/ubisoft-and-the-fall-from-grace-how-one-of-gamings-biggest-names-lost-its-way/) we see ‘Ubisoft and the Fall From Grace: How One of Gaming’s Biggest Names Lost Its Way’ and I believe that the fall started when someone at Ubisoft gave us “an Assassin’s Creed every year”, which refers to Ubisoft’s famous and polarizing “annualized” release strategy. For nearly a decade, the franchise pumped out a massive new mainline title almost every single calendar year, and it might sound nice, but the bugs were not so nice and the stage was seen from AC Unity onwards and the bugs were the worst and a lot of them were not fixed as such the consumers did not trust the AC brand any longer. Unity (2014) started it all and it did not get better. I personally believe that AC Origin has one flaw (not a bug) but the game was really good, the setting was near perfect and it was a decent stealth game, they then copied it in AC Odysee and they made a good game a lot worse. After that the bugs in Valhalla were one would say hilarious, others would dump the game. But the biggest mistake was to ignore the one rule I live by “When you try to appease everyone, you merely please no one” and we got to see this again and again. Then we get to the weird setting, as I see it AC Shadows is magnificent, the Japanese style is great and there is a rather large setting, the one flaw is the boss games, still veering away from the AC setting and we are given “Market analysis firms estimate the base game generated upwards of $180 million to $200 million in gross revenue, with up to 4 million copies reportedly sold across the PS5, Xbox, and Steam.” All whilst some sources give us that up to 38 million copies were made from AC Origins from 2017 onwards. I believe that AC Shadows got a raw deal, but it is not up to us. It was up to Ubisoft to create a safe atmosphere for gamers and that was not done, as such the Ubisoft empire was dropped like a bad habit and by trying to “appease everyone, you merely please no one” and that is seen again and again. Even now the world is holding its breath for AC Hexe, there is no clear release date (as far as I know), but the larger audience is waiting for the release and the review before they will bite. And leaks (through reddit) with lines like “Assassin’s Creed Hexe got leaked and it’s fu**** incredible” people have bumped their nose into bad materials a little too often. So when we see “To understand how far Ubisoft has fallen, you first have to appreciate how high it once stood. At its peak, the scale was staggering. Assassin’s Creed alone has sold over 230 million units across the franchise and accumulated 155 million unique players. Far Cry has sold over 60 million copies, while Just Dance has moved over 80 million units and attracted over 120 million players. Rainbow Six Siege, launched in 2015 as a tactical shooter that many initially wrote off, quietly became one of the most played games in the world, with over 85 million registered users at its peak.” Then we get the ‘numbers’ giving us “Ubisoft just recently published its full financial results for fiscal year 2026, covering the 12 months ending March 31, 2026, and the numbers are stark. Revenue came in at €1.4 billion, down 21.8% compared to the previous year. Net bookings fell 17.4% year-over-year to €1.5 billion. Digital net bookings dropped 16% to €1.33 billion. The final quarter of the fiscal year, covering January to March 2026, was the worst of it: revenue collapsed 47.3% in those three months alone, while net bookings fell 54% to €415 million. Operating losses widened from €196.5 million the prior year to €1.3 billion, a figure that reflects the full cost of the company’s restructuring, including write-downs tied to seven cancelled projects and six delayed games.” We then get “Star Wars Outlaws was supposed to be a statement. Released in August 2024 with a massive development budget and a lengthy, widespread marketing campaign behind it, the open-world Star Wars adventure was exactly the kind of high-profile, licensed blockbuster Ubisoft needed to deliver. Instead, it seriously struggled for sales. Players pointed to uninspired gameplay and technical problems at launch, and the reviews reflected that disappointment. Following its release, Ubisoft’s revenue in the first half of fiscal year 2025 fell nearly 20% compared to the same period the year before.” So why these reminders? I believe that Ubisoft spread itself too much, too many projects, too many people and we see seven cancelations? That is the other side of appeasement, it comes through a lack of focus and as we saw going forward from AC Unity, there was plenty of focus lost. Then we get the delays, six of them? What were those costs? As I see it, Ubisoft spread itself too thin (or perhaps better stated over too many projects) and there is a cost for that, take that towards appeasing too many people and the losses start making sense. And I am not stepping on the legal problems they had, perhaps that is the price of not educating your staff, I have no idea, but we then see “One of the more painful stories to come out of this period involves Prince of Persia: The Lost Crown. The game received positive reviews from critics but failed to meet the sales expectations of Ubisoft, leading to the development team being disbanded and a planned sequel being scrapped.” It is the second stage of a problem. You see, who were those critics? And how were these sales expectations set? I am a simple man a game is either good or it is not. And there is then the setting if it is a game I like playing or not. I was never a GTA5 fan, I see its excellence, but it is not for me and that is not on the maker, it is merely on me. The simple setting that most forget is that a game is made for a type of player. So whilst we see “Ubisoft reported a €159 million loss for fiscal year 2024-2025, with a 20.5% drop in net bookings. Poor performances from other titles offset the strong sales from Assassin’s Creed Shadows.” I personally see that Ubisoft spread itself too thin, but I could be wrong, I merely see this and saw a few more articles and that is the conclusion I am making. Perhaps the inner circle of Ubisoft needs a reset, an overhaul. The gaming audience changed and the true gamers do not care too much for system oriented influencers, no matter how good they are. If I like a game there is every chance I will replay it, I played AC Origin twice completely and I loved every moment of it. I might not be a standard gamer, but I replay what I really like. The games of Bethesda for example and some go the Ubisoft games. But I am not one of those ‘quick play for the achievements and then sell the game for another game’ Perhaps there is a misalignment between Ubisoft and me and what we think gamers are. But still I believe that one rule “When you try to appease everyone, you merely please no one” and there is the setting that I am a fan of “Those who use a formula to get a decent game, will never produce a great game” I believe this to be true and that clashes directly with the stage of creating a franchise game every year. I might be wrong, but it is what I believe and the results of Ubisoft are proving my version to be likely right. But then the article gives us a gem “Forgetting What Players Actually Want” and that is the larger setting I have been pouring over. And with “Its market capitalization has fallen by approximately 85% since January 2021. Dozens of studios have been closed or downsized, hundreds of developers have lost their jobs, and several long-awaited projects have been quietly killed off.” as I see it, both rules I live by seems to have been lost on Ubisoft and as I see it, it costed them 85% of their business. This is not a small thing, this means that management requires a massive overhaul, because 85% loss means that it is a lot more then the employees, management failed to a large degree. Is there an easy option? I think that Ubisoft needs to reinvent themselves and try to safe their products one at a time. How? I have no idea, I am a designer of IP and a re-engineer. I am not management, we are different life forms.

Have a great day, my weekend almost started and my Saturday is a mere 148 minutes away.

Leave a comment

Filed under Gaming, IT

Feel free to disagree

I stumbled upon an article bashing Ubisoft this morning, it was an article that got published by CCN on January 18th (at https://www.ccn.com/ubisoft-finally-realises-how-bad-most-of-their-games-are/), yet as I was reading it, there was also this nagging feeling that I did not agree and I felt, especially after all the bashing (which was fun mind you) to partially disagree with this article. 

Even as today is all about ‘Ubisoft has acquired a majority stake in Kolibri Games‘, the people behind all the idle click games, we need to see that there are two sides in all this and even as bashing Ubisoft is high entertainment, it should be done for the right reasons.

It starts with the headline ‘Ubisoft Finally Realises How Bad (Most Of) Their Games Are‘, they aren’t that bad, even some of the franchises that are hit with all kinds of issues, I see that their basic problem is the lack of proper testing, in addition to that, I fear that marketing within Ubisoft is too powerful forcing release of software before it is ready (like the day one patches that are 7GB or larger), it is at times a time management issue and as we see that CD Projekt Red is stating that Cyberpunk 2077 is delayed, the gamers do not mind (they are a little upset) that is because they know that the final product of CD Projekt Red delivers, they always have. 

Then we get 

  • Ubisoft’s most recent games have suffered from some pretty bad reception.
  • Their editorial team is getting a much-needed shakeup to help fix the lack of variety in their line-up.

The first is very true, bugs glitches and a total iterative way of playing has that effect on people (Ubisoft buying Kolibri) implies that iterative gameplay will continue for some time. Then we get the second part ‘the lack of variety‘, I cannot agree to that, we can see that there is a repetition within a franchise, yet For Honor, Assassins Creed, Far Cry, Watchdogs and the Division are different. If it is about lack of variety because the Division, Ghost Recon and Rainbow Six are shooting games, then we need to see that this is what buying consumers wants.

When we look at Assassin’s Creed and that in the past there was too much ‘Prince of Persia’ chase sequences than I would to some degree agree and other games have this crossover to some degree. Yet I feel that ‘lack of variety‘ is a bit of a stretch.

This is easiest seen in Far Cry, when Primal came, it was a larger surprise, and yes we know that it was based to some degree on the Far Cry 4 map, but I did not have an issue with that part (and the game is different enough to not notice it to the degree that some claim. The game (as many others) is largely repetitive and preventing that is a big issue, yet in Far Cry Primal getting a bird fly over going ‘Squeek Squeek Squaaa’ and then attacking almost every 5 minutes gets to be tiring real fast (Far Cry 4 had that down the road as well). Such an event was also the case in Far Cry 4. Then there is the collection part, I like to get an almost complete set of achievements, having to empty loot boxes in Assassin’s Creed Syndicate is nice in the beginning when you have nothing, but consider, if this is the Victoria age, would you really find a £50-£500 in almost every chest out and abounds? You gotta be kidding me, I think that there are around 25 per region and there are 13 districts? (I forgot how many there are) but it amounts to running to 300+ chests for the achievement. And lets not forget that this game was an improvement to AC Unity and the Guardian still gave it only 2/5. That is the behemoth that Ubisoft fights, that and to some extent massively shody testing (see Breakpoint for that).

Then we get: “The fact that 100 Parisians basically controlled their entire output for years in the first place seems like a poor move“, I completely disagree with that, Ubisoft has had great achievements (AC2, AC Brotherhood, Far Cry 3, AC Origins, For Honor, Ghost Recon, and Splinter Cell Blacklist), for the most decent games, if only that pesky part ‘testing’ was properly done and a testing division that can override the word of Ubisoft Marketing that would be nice too.

Then we get “Ubisoft games are pretty rubbish these days. You might think that a blanket statement like that needs qualifying. Honestly, their games are all so similar that it barely feels like I’m talking about multiple games. Over the past decade, they’ve managed to homogenize their entire catalog into the same murky paste” in the first they are not rubbish, but they are at times too much below average. then we get the one statement that is true as I see it “they’ve managed to homogenize their entire catalog into the same murky paste“, I believe it comes from a feeling that they imbued during one of their E3 events ‘This game will please everyone!‘, I believe that this expressed feeling is their greatest flaw. If you create a game that pleases all, you end up with a game that pleases no one. I believe that to be true. I can see the brilliance of For Honor, but I personally dislike multiplayer games and their single game campaign was lousy. So it is not a game for me, do I care? No, they had other franchises, and I did recognise the brilliance that For Honor delivered. They also reinvigorated the AC franchise with Origins (and then screwed it up with Odyssey, for me that is), yet Origins is a piece of brilliance and the differences to the previous AC line makes you want to play the game. also the first game in 4K was overwhelming too.

This is a stage we recognise and to see other games become the ‘same murky paste’ is to some degree true when we see Far Cry, Ghost Recon and the Division as one (they are not) but they have too much of each other and that gives a consideration to a larger degree (especially when you have all these franchises). a Franchise needs to distinguish itself from all others, not hand out to each other. That is perhaps the larger flaw at Ubisoft, iteration never goes anywhere, it merely holds you in place. 

Personally I agree with “While we’re at it maybe follow Sony’s lead and do a game without any online elements either“, although for the most many games allow for that, you do not need to play AC online (unless you want 100% achievements), in Black Flag I never needed the online element, but for the blue chests it was essential, I had mixed feelings but not one of pure negativity. However, having strangers jump into my game of Watchdogs 2 and screwing up my stealth part by shooting all the cops in the neighbourhood is something I could have done without.

I am not certain whether shaking their editorial team fixes things, As I stated, it is the testing that is a larger problem and even as we accept that the editorial team will come up with the story and adjusts the programmers perception, the issue of repetition needs to be adjusted as well, I believe that too many fans have complained about those parts in the past, as such I hope Ubisoft listens. We see Watchdogs:Legion and what we got to see is a huge step in another direction, yet that is optionally not a bad thing, I merely hope that it gets properly tested and in the second part, I hope that Marketing does not push it before it is ready, a hype on a flawed game is a lot worse then an early hype on a delayed game for all the right reasons. CD Project RED showed us that part.

If Ubisoft does go under, it is by embracing the flaws they had and not taking a larger effort in fixing things, when we consider that the AC III, AC Black Flag, AC Unity, and AC Syndicate have certain issues that repeated over the games (like the AI, the control glitches you face and the repetitiveness) all whilst there was no real fix until AC Origin, we see a much larger failing and I have always stated that it was on the desk of Yves Guillemot (that is why he gets the big bucks).

And AC is only one of a few franchises that had issues. And for a gamer I have the weirdest mindset, when I see a 60% game that could have been an easy 80%+ game by fixing the issues I feel sad, because if I saw it, the bigger wigs at Ubisoft saw it too and they did not speak out when they could. It was a sad state of affairs!

So as such, Ubisoft might be in a predicament, yet I had some issues with the CCN article and I just could not resist taking it into a corner and bashing it a little.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized