Assassin's Creed 2 to be held back to build anticipation

Steve Dark

New member
Oct 23, 2008
468
0
0
Why is it that the people in charge of the big Gaming companies are so very VERY out of touch with the people they're trying to sell stuff to? Surely they'd at least have the sense to do a little market research and actually find out what we want?

Or maybe it's that their market research just shows up the views the loud minority of 13 year olds gamers...
 

MrGFunk

New member
Oct 29, 2008
1,350
0
0
Shiuz91 said:
... I have to go lay down for a while and listen to some Neil Young so my brain will stop hurting.
I think I'm going to do this too, probably On the beach.

I think they should delay the game until everyone forgets what a failure the first game was to play. Boring. Sold for graphics was never a franchise maker.

Vanguard1219 said:
So Ubisoft is using the "Cartman" approach to marketing. "This game is super awesome, but you can't have it!" The theory is that by not letting the customer have it, they want it more.
"but mum, I want Assassin's Creed 2"
 

Doctor Panda

New member
Apr 17, 2008
244
0
0
You know, I'm not convinced this is a case of 'let's finish it, then sit on it until people want it'. I think it's far more likely that they decided to go with a 'let's work on other stuff, and finish this when people actually feel like playing it it, because i think they've all had just about assassin's creed for now.'

If that's the case, they're just doing what everone else does - if they reach market saturation they make something their top priority. Hell, i *don't* really care if assassin's creed 2 didn't come out for another year, because it wasn't *that* long ago i finished the first one. It sounds more reasonable because it means that the technology involved is less likely to become outdated, and they can work on other projects that will become profitable sooner. And you know what? It *is* true that if people aren't interested in buying something as soon as it comes out it's far less likely to be profitable in the long run.
 

Sennz0r

New member
May 25, 2008
1,353
0
0
I don't think you're buildign anticipation within the already existing fanbase by postponing a release. What you will do hoewever is make more people aware of the game before it comes out, draw them in with shiny ads and sneak peeks to get more people's attention.

For people already anticipating the game and who'd buy it regardless, this is just infuriating.
 

_daxter_

New member
Jan 12, 2008
48
0
0
maybe the guys from ubisoft need to be inventive in their pr department... how about telling people the game was nearly finished, but then some design genius decided to scrap everything just to rebuild and make a better game!! well... nobody would believe those stories, right!? xD

ah crap, it is a shame the next zelda is like three years or something away... :(
 
Aug 30, 2008
135
0
0
not exactly a good idea, like tv shows that they put on hold, only the die hard fans will be back. i believe they're over optimistic on how important this game is to people, is was a "kind of" fun game, but i doubt they'll get any kind of gta 4 or halo 3 hype.
 

Ace of Spades

New member
Jul 12, 2008
3,303
0
0
Pushing a game back time after time makes me less and less likely to actually buy a game when it comes out.
 

Fightgarr

Concept Artist
Dec 3, 2008
2,913
0
0
Why would they actually RELEASE that statement. Its like Disney saying: "We're gonna release a bunch of sequels to out movies to milk you for your money."
 

Blayze

New member
Dec 19, 2007
666
0
0
This is like Peter Molyneux begging us to find people who might give his game a good review, and telling us to start looking among the people who aren't interested in games.

The longer it's unreleased, the more chance there will be of a leaked torrent if it's actually complete at any point during this lack of release.
 

Voltano

New member
Dec 11, 2008
374
0
0
Well, regardless of whether the first one was "good" or "bad" (I never played it, or have any interest in), it is their game and they can release it whenever they want.

Though this idea is based upon getting more money by making the gamers who want the game to enter a sort of frenzy, in my opinion.

It would be pretty ironic if they do release the game and it doesn't sell because people found something else to entertain themselves with while surviving the "anticipation hunger strike", or whatever it should be called.
 

Grampy_bone

New member
Mar 12, 2008
797
0
0
This is funny to me. Did it ever occur to the devs that PoP Warrior Within and Two Thrones didn't sell because they weren't very good? Once again yet another marketing moron makes the mistake that people are somehow incapable of telling quality from trash.
 

Nurb

Cynical bastard
Dec 9, 2008
3,078
0
0
Ultrajoe said:
Nurb said:
KissofKetchup said:
At least they're not rushing it. That's about the only positive here...
you don't understand, the game would be finished, but they wouldn't release because they think it builds the desire to purchase it.
It doesn't. Threads and discussions like this however, build publicity... and hence the number of potential buyers.

Its rather evil, really, this entire thread is just the sort of exposure they want.
I think the people in this thread getting angry and saying they won't buy it hint that this isn't the kind of publicity they wanted and a good measure of what other gamers would think too. Even if not everyone follows through with their personal boycott, even one is a lost sale because of this stupid strategy. I'm not going to be buying it either.

D_987 said:
Nurb said:
EA is nearly bankrupt so its a start
How is that a good thing?
-They buy up small developers for IP and release new games of poor quality
-openly admited quality isn't a big factor in their game strategy
-withold content from a full priced game so they can sell it to you 2 weeks later (mirrors edge)
-abuse the microtransaction system by nickle and diming gamers that actually pay (think horse armor)
-Brutal DRM that PC Gamer has shown to affect PC performance
-overall sleezy business practices like buying up sports team licenses instead of competing and improving your game.

They need to be brought down one way or another so the smaller developers like those that made so many of the games that pushed the industry from the start (before they were bought up in the 90s by the growing EA behemouth) can put new ideas in the market again instead of safe money makers that drop in quality while the numbers of sequels reach 4 and 6.
 

_daxter_

New member
Jan 12, 2008
48
0
0
Grampy_bone said:
This is funny to me. Did it ever occur to the devs that PoP Warrior Within and Two Thrones didn't sell because they weren't very good? Once again yet another marketing moron makes the mistake that people are somehow incapable of telling quality from trash.
interesting observation... but i really think the problem is that marketing guys tend to not be able to tell quality from trash themselves... that is what their job is about in a way... isn't it!? ;)
 

DirkGently

New member
Oct 22, 2008
966
0
0
Twilight_guy said:
News flash: Game executives are pants-on-head retarded. Details at 8.
Eight o'clock news calls game executives pants-on-head-retarded, film at eleven.
 

SilentHunter7

New member
Nov 21, 2007
1,652
0
0
In trying to see the glass as half-full, maybe Ubisoft actually has a great idea. I think sales will be boosted, but not because of their retarded line of thinking. No, I think sales will be boosted, because their devs will have more time to polish the game, rather than have to half-ass the last 2 months of the dev cycle because of time-constraints. Who knows, maybe if we let them think anticipation sells, producers will stop rushing games, and we'll stop getting KOTOR 2 endings.
 

Stormcloud23

New member
Aug 15, 2008
562
0
0
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I've been waiting for Assassin's Creed 2 since the day the first one came out!!!!!!
 

Twilight_guy

Sight, Sound, and Mind
Nov 24, 2008
7,131
0
0
DirkGently said:
Twilight_guy said:
News flash: Game executives are pants-on-head retarded. Details at 8.
Eight o'clock news calls game executives pants-on-head-retarded, film at eleven.
Film of eight O'clock news calling game executives pants-on-head-retarded released. Game executives refuse to respond on the grounds that it will build the anticipation for when they do respond.
 

DirkGently

New member
Oct 22, 2008
966
0
0
Twilight_guy said:
DirkGently said:
Twilight_guy said:
News flash: Game executives are pants-on-head retarded. Details at 8.
Eight o'clock news calls game executives pants-on-head-retarded, film at eleven.
Film of eight O'clock news calling game executives pants-on-head-retarded released. Game executives refuse to respond on the grounds that it will build the anticipation for when they do respond.
Games executives confirm that they are retarded, film at eleven.