Assassin's Creed: Unity's Microtransactions Won't "Compromise" The Game

[Fanghawk]

Assassin's Creed: Unity's Microtransactions Won't "Compromise" The Game

Ubisoft is willing to consider microtransactions and other monetization methods that would fit with Assassin's Creed: Unity's gameplay.

<a href=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/tag/view/assassins%20creed%20unity>Assassin's Creed: Unity looks pretty engaging so far, despite <a href=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/135443-From-BioWares-Problem-with-Scope-to-Ubisofts-Problem-with-Women>the unexpected post-reveal criticisms. Now Ubisoft is throwing one more controversial element into the mix: Featuring microtransactions within the core game. According to senior producer Vincent Pontbriand, Unity will include optional real-world purchases for in-game items, although he assured players this wouldn't compromise the core game.

Unity's microtransaction system hasn't been fully detailed just yet, so the full extent of purchases isn't quite clear. What we do know is that Unity uses a fast track approach of exchanging real-world money for gear and items that could otherwise be obtained through play. Pontbriand stated this was "pretty much" the extent of microtransactions for Unity, and that monetization methods would only be considered if they fit the gameplay.

"There's a couple of things like that we'll always have to be on the lookout for," Pontbriand said when asked about the pressure to monetize. "Companion apps, monetization, other business models, digital only... We have to be reactive to these things, but not necessarily fundamentally change what we're trying to do ... It depends. If we think it fits the gameplay, or the brand itself, the core values, we're willing to take those risks. If not, then not. We're not going to make any compromises."

This wouldn't be the first time the Assassin's Creed franchise featured microstransactions, <a href=http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-10-29-assassins-creed-3-fuelled-by-in-game-micro-transactions>such as when Assassin's Creed 3 included them in multiplayer. Given that most of Assassin's Creed: Unity's microtransactions sound like they could be safely ignored, I expect this is simply Ubisoft's way of testing the waters in a single-player/co-op environment. Whatever form these microtransactions take, hopefully they won't be too obtrusive and get in the way of <a href=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/video-games/editorials/reviews/previews/12100-Assassin-s-Creed-Unity-Preview-Hands-On-With-Co-Op>murderous plots and aerial acrobatics. We'll find out when it launches on October 28, 2014.

Source: VG247

Permalink

 

[erbkaiser]

If I understand it right, this is really no different than those silly "unlock" DLCs you can get for AC:IV, to get the in-game ship customization and Edward costumes that you otherwise have to search the game for.
If that is really all this will come down to, I'm okay with it. Let lazy people with money to burn get their stuff early, as long as I can still get it without shilling out more money.

 

[CaptainMarvelous]

This is one of those things where if it involves actively sealing off content so you can ONLY obtain it via micro-transactions then I may have to be done with the franchise. If its a fast-track I can cope, but actively gating material via a credit card is too shitty a move for words. Free-to-Play games only get away with it because they're FREE.

 

[hazabaza1]

I'm really happy that Uplay is fucking awful, otherwise I might still be buying Ubisoft games.
Jesus this is stupid.

 

[William Fleming]

From what it sounds like, its basically just one of those "time savers" DLC packs that has split into multiple pieces and sold individually. It its just that for people who literally do not have the time to unlock every little bit of content, I can live with it.

 

[Jupiter065]

The implicit admission is that they're making getting items and weapons more boring and labourious to encourage you to part with your money.

Remember when people made games that were, like, fun? Like, being fun was the whole point of the game, not boring you out of your dollars?

 

[Louzerman102]

I'm going to pull a page out of The Onion's and Play4real's playbook here:

I'm other news Ubisoft defended it's Jeep© Grand Cherokee© DLC. The downloadable content which replaces the Main Character's horse with the previously mentioned car was vigorously defended by the Ubisoft spokesperson. "A Grand Cherokee© fits perfectly with the tone and era of the French Revolution. If I was French and alive during that period of history I would have been proud to own such a high quality Jeep© product" the individual is quoted to have said. He went on to state that the uproar over the Jeep© Grand Cherokee© inclusion is by a "vocal minority" and was over-reported by mainstream news sources.

 

[Ratty]

"You should not fear those DLCs, games with nothing inside them." I said, and said, and said those words. I said them. But I lied them." - Ubisoft Marketing/Dr. Seuss

 

[Shuu]

That's what I love about my PC. I can (AND WILL) just mod them out of my experience;D

Really, the only way I accept the "It won't effect the core experience" line is if I'm given the option right at the start to just turn them all off and not even see a single goddamn graphic to remind me that microtransactions were even there. But what they actually mean to say is "We feel the amount that their presence will effect your experience is acceptable. For us anyway."

 

[Metalrocks]

if its mainly for MP, then i dont care at all. if its some small stuff for the SP that doenst really matter, i dont care either. but i do agree that it is still stupid to charge extra money for small stuff that should be in the game or at least being able to unlock them.

 

[Naqel]

Assassin's Creed: Unity's Microtransactions Won't Compromise With The Game.

Fixed that for ya.

 

[Nurb]

microtransactions for a single player game with DLC, oh a gaming collapse can't happen soon enough.

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

I get the feeling that AC is on its way out at Ubisoft with something like this. I wouldn't be surprised to see the series shelved and then rebooted as while I could see the series lowering in popularity there's no way Ubi would let go of a cashcow, especially since Watch Dogs has gotten a far more lukewarm reception than they had been expecting critically.

 

[shrekfan246]

Let lazy people with money to burn get their stuff early, as long as I can still get it without shilling out more money.

It its just that for people who literally do not have the time to unlock every little bit of content, I can live with it.

The thing about that is that when a game is built around the idea of having micro-transactions implemented, the developers need to create an incentive to get the player to spend their money. Otherwise, what's the point, right? So unlocking items gets more and more tedious, more and more frustrating, takes longer and longer to do because you have to gather more and more bear asses before you can pass the arbitrary gate, and then we're tumbling down along that slippery slope where content in full-price single-player games is being treated the same way as online free-to-play games.

Maybe it's an extreme ending I'm looking at here, but if there's anything I've learned in the past few months, it's that big game publishers are giving us all the cause in the world to be increasingly skeptical of their actions, even despite how much I've been trying to believe that they aren't bullheadedly racing towards bankruptcy.

 

[Gethsemani_v1legacy]

The thing about that is that when a game is built around the idea of having micro-transactions implemented, the developers need to create an incentive to get the player to spend their money. Otherwise, what's the point, right? So unlocking items gets more and more tedious, more and more frustrating, takes longer and longer to do because you have to gather more and more bear asses before you can pass the arbitrary gate, and then we're tumbling down along that slippery slope where content in full-price single-player games is being treated the same way as online free-to-play games.

Maybe it's an extreme ending I'm looking at here, but if there's anything I've learned in the past few months, it's that big game publishers are giving us all the cause in the world to be increasingly skeptical of their actions, even despite how much I've been trying to believe that they aren't bullheadedly racing towards bankruptcy.

Fast track DLC is not necessarily bad though. It serves a purpose for those that want to enjoy the game but don't have the time to complete every side mission in order to unlock the coolest weapon, costume, horse or whatever else can be unlocked. Instead they can still get to use the cool stuff if they are ready to fork over some cash. So far I haven't used it myself, but as someone who will be a parent in two months I can totally see myself using it down the line when I have maybe four or five hours a week to play but still want to see some of all that cool content I just don't have time to grind for.

 

[Racecarlock]

Maybe it's an extreme ending I'm looking at here

Nah, to unlock the extreme ending you need to juggle three skateboarders while surfing and wearing sunglasses.

Gnarly, dude!

 

[Belaam]

Unity is just one thing after another. I love the AC games. Have bought them all and my only two platinum achievements are AC 2 and 3. But I'm really starting to feel like I'm done.

If, oh 7 or so, features a female protagonist in a setting where guns are non-existent or rare (feudal Japan, ancient Egypt, Ancient Greece, etc.), I'm sure I'll be back, but the mix of being terrified of female protagonists, simple set ups to snipe your targets, cutscene chases/kills, and frankly some really ugly architecture to climb (looking at you Colonial/Revolutionary America) has just been too much. I'm just burned out.

 

[RandV80]

Fast track DLC is not necessarily bad though. It serves a purpose for those that want to enjoy the game but don't have the time to complete every side mission in order to unlock the coolest weapon, costume, horse or whatever else can be unlocked. Instead they can still get to use the cool stuff if they are ready to fork over some cash. So far I haven't used it myself, but as someone who will be a parent in two months I can totally see myself using it down the line when I have maybe four or five hours a week to play but still want to see some of all that cool content I just don't have time to grind for.

Well that's kind of the point isn't it? Is Assassins Creed in the MMO genre where you have to 'grind' for 'gear'?

I've always felt that extended play elements have their use in games for teenagers with limited budgets and lots of time. Then stuff like new game+, extra content, collectables & achievements, etc when the game you have needs to last you a potentially a few months until you can get your next one. For people more our age however with less time and more expendable cash, you should be able to get an enjoyable experience from a single play through without worrying about all those extra time wasters.

That's how I play games anyways. I'll usually give a game a pretty thorough run through but I'm going to avoid any major time sinks and only play the game once.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

How can this possibly make sense in a full priced single player game? It would totally compromise the immersion. How are we supposed to take the setting of the game seriously if the game tells us that if we pay X amount of dollars we could have that cool sword that we'd otherwise have to grind for? This is bullshit.