Poll: AC:Unity MACROTRANSACTIONS

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

Reddit thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/2m00gs/assassins_creed_unity_microtransactions_range/

Yes, you read that right. Apparently, this game that doesn't work properly on any system it's on, is also filled with macrotransactions. Things that used to be unlockable with cheats can now be accessed for hilarious amounts of money in a full priced single player game.

Am I insane or is this not in any way OK? They can't be arsed to make their game run properly on any system, with game breaking bugs and framerate issues even on the consoles, they hide the transaction prices from review copies, they put a review embargo until the game is released, they claim that making female characters takes too long, they talk down to their entire audience with claims that 30 fps is better than 60, and they still have the time to devote to trying to milk you for all you're worth.

It never even occurred to them to at least delay the game until they can get it to work properly. Even EA does it from time to time. That's how much Ubisoft gives a shit about the costumers.

Well done Ubisoft. You hit a new low.

I don't know how it happened
It all turned to shit so quick
But all I can do is hand it to you
And your latest tricks​

 

[Danny Dowling]

Remember when Ubisoft made PoP Sands of Time and it was the shit? Ahh, how the times have changed.

gg, Ubisoft, gg.

 

[G00N3R7883]

Most of my thoughts are related to gaming in general more than Assassins Creed (since I gave up on that franchise after AC5 anyway).

I don't like microtransactions. I can just about accept them in a Free to Play game, because that's the only way the developers will make any money. But your traditional $60 (or whatever) game shouldn't include them. I guess there are probably examples of developers that have used them in an okay way, but I think most developers go too far and exploit the customer.

I know some people will say "you don't HAVE to pay it, you can unlock this stuff for free in game". But my worry is always that the developer controls how much time it will take to unlock. The longer and more boring they can make the grind, the more pressure is put on players to just say "fuck it, I'll pay real money". It can also upset the difficulty balance. Why should the developers worry about making sure you're earning enough XP to succeed in combat? "Game is too hard? Buy the uber weapon".

I don't want to be constantly weighing up in my mind "is this thing worth this price?" I just want to pay one fee and unlock all the content, then focus on enjoying the game.

 

[CrazyBlaze]

Le sigh. Come on Ubisoft. For real. Get your shit together. I miss the good old days, The Sands of Times, the original AC and its sequel. You used to make amazing games and you treated your fans well. When did you become so sick, so putrid that the very thought of handing money over to you for your games makes me sick to my stomach. Kill the disease please, we all want you back to the days of old.

 

[Zhukov]

Yes, actually, I am mostly okay with this.

They can't be arsed to make their game run properly on any system, with game breaking bugs and framerate issues even on the consoles

I expect games to gave the occasional bug. It would be nice if they didn't of course, but they always do.

Kinda depends on exactly what you mean by "game breaking".

they hide the transaction prices from review copies

Meh. Skeezy, sure, and says something about how they view their own business model, but the information is still readily available if I want it.

they put a review embargo until the game is released

Once again, says something about how they view their own product, but I can't feel much sympathy for people who buy a product without information then complain about it.

If the game has a review embargo and you don't want to buy it without reading reviews first then try, ohhh I don't know... waiting a few bloody days until the reviews come out?

they claim that making female characters takes too long

This was talked to death back then. In short, while I'm generally on the more-diversity-in-game-please crowd, I feel the anger in this case was a bit misplaced.

they talk down to their entire audience with claims that 30 fps is better than 60

Meh. Marketing speak. Vaguely annoying, as marketing speak often is, but I can only laugh at people who get genuinely angry about this sort of thing.

and they still have the time to devote to trying to milk you for all you're worth.

If the products they are offering are overpriced then people will not buy them, Ubisoft will not profit and the problem will solve itself.

If people prove willing to pay the prices they are asking then those prices are evidently not excessive.

...


All that said, I have no intention of buying the game. But that's because it's from a pitifully stale series that went down the toilet... ohhhh... three quarters of the way through the second game?

Maybe I'll end up picking it up cheap during a dry spell about two years from now.

 

[Shamanic Rhythm]

Hahaha. Oh boy, I like how you pay them money so that you can 'hack' yourself better items. It's like a reverse version of Diablo II.

Is there even $100 of content to buy? What the hell do you need in AC beyond a decent weapon and some armour?

 

[Ambient_Malice]

Ubisoft hid nothing. The servers which gave prices and allowed purchases just weren't online when some of the reviews were made. Ubisoft mentioned them before release. Repeatedly.

 

[black_knight1337]

Personally, I've got no problem with this provided it's the same kind of thing, although more expensive, as what they did with the "time saving" dlc for the previous titles. Having a 'pay to win' aspect in a single player game, provided the game doesn't become excessively grindy, isn't an issue because it has no impact on me whatsoever. If someone wants to spend a bit extra to get through the game quicker then they should be allowed to do so. No-one, at least in this case, is being negatively impacted by it so it shouldn't really be an issue. And besides, there's plenty of tools around for editing saves and the game's memory that if you wanted to do it you could with no issues at all.

 

[Smooth Operator]

I think this is so awful it loops back around to great, because they will burn away any customer that isn't just completely bat shit nuts for Ubisoft and leave a perfect harmonious relationship of awful corporate practices and a community that will never leave their side, no matter how many doors they run into.

This is perfection in the making right here.

 

[mxc2012]

haha

Press X to buy Respects ($9.99)

 

[Atmos Duality]

I think this is so awful it loops back around to great, because they will burn away any customer that isn't just completely bat shit nuts for Ubisoft and leave a perfect harmonious relationship of awful corporate practices and a community that will never leave their side, no matter how many doors they run into.

This is perfection in the making right here.

Given the stretches I've seen to rationalize such obvious price-gouging thus far, there is probably more truth to what you say than you think, sadly.

Ubisoft is charging hilariously high premiums for content that is literally just leftover debug code from the devkit.
(that's what most cheat codes are; debug tools)

Every year, AAA seems less like the proverbial Moses leading gaming to the promised land, and more the Moses that's leading gaming to wander aimlessly in a wasteland for 40 years. Given enough time, gaming will hopefully reach paradise, if only by accident. But until then, it seems they will have to content themselves with mirages; delusions that paradise lies just over the next dune.

 

[Erttheking]

No. No no no no no, fuck that shit. I wasn't going to buy Unity after Ubisoft spent half the time talking about it with their foot in their mouths, for fuck's sake!

EDIT: And I just looked it up, it looks like the Assassin Order in this game is going to be OPPOSING the revolution. Christ, I like this game less and less with every passing second!

 

[Alex Baas]

I am actually going to think that this is the work of a dev so frustrated with the direction the game was taking towards shit that he decided to go all in.

 

[Jandau]

No, I'm not OK with this. And as a result, I'm not going to buy it or play it in any way.

I don't think full priced releases like this should include expensive micro(or macro)transactions. DLC is one thing (and also a thing I'm not a fan of, but that's another topic), but this is just atrocious. Now, I can hear the apologists already: "Just don't buy it, it doesn't affect you!". But it does, it does...

If this is allowed to stand, if the customers just swallow this up, then we'll see more of it. And then it's only a matter of time before games start being designed in such a way as to encourage people to buy microtransaction shortcuts. If you think that's me being paranoid, you are forgetting the mobile market and F2P games in general. This is how 99% of terrible business practices in the industry got rolling - someone would put it in a game, people would choke it down, figuring "Eh, it's not so bad, not like it'll catch on or anything" and before you know it, it's the new standard.

Granted, this is Ubisoft, the Wile E. Coyote of the games industry..

 

[Ambient_Malice]

No. No no no no no, fuck that shit. I wasn't going to buy Unity after Ubisoft spent half the time talking about it with their foot in their mouths, for fuck's sake!

EDIT: And I just looked it up, it looks like the Assassin Order in this game is going to be OPPOSING the revolution. Christ, I like this game less and less with every passing second!

Why would the Assassins back a group of people who deliberately lied lo the French public to whip them up into a genocidal frenzy?

 

[L. Declis]

Eh, my family already pre-ordered for me, and it's my grandparent's yearly birthday present to get me Assassin's Creed, and I've enjoyed nearly all of them so far (seriously, 3, seriously?), so I shall give these guys the benefit of the doubt.

Ass Creed has still burnt me less than Total War or Final Fantasy, so we shall see

No. No no no no no, fuck that shit. I wasn't going to buy Unity after Ubisoft spent half the time talking about it with their foot in their mouths, for fuck's sake!

EDIT: And I just looked it up, it looks like the Assassin Order in this game is going to be OPPOSING the revolution. Christ, I like this game less and less with every passing second!

Why would the Assassins back a group of people who deliberately lied lo the French public to whip them up into a genocidal frenzy?

Remove the kings, install an easily controlled Templar government instead. A king MAY be a Templar, but like the Crusades and such showed, a King can turn on the Templars and if you can remove such a powerful piece which may dislike you, you take it.

 

[Dalisclock]

No. No no no no no, fuck that shit. I wasn't going to buy Unity after Ubisoft spent half the time talking about it with their foot in their mouths, for fuck's sake!

EDIT: And I just looked it up, it looks like the Assassin Order in this game is going to be OPPOSING the revolution. Christ, I like this game less and less with every passing second!

Why would the Assassins back a group of people who deliberately lied lo the French public to whip them up into a genocidal frenzy?

I haven't played the game or read the reviews, but I imagine that the Assasins would be more likely to support the revolution BEFORE the Reign of Terror begins. Their reaction to the reign of terror could provide much needed nuance to the game.

 

[Gethsemani_v1legacy]

Personally, I've got no problem with this provided it's the same kind of thing, although more expensive, as what they did with the "time saving" dlc for the previous titles. Having a 'pay to win' aspect in a single player game, provided the game doesn't become excessively grindy, isn't an issue because it has no impact on me whatsoever. If someone wants to spend a bit extra to get through the game quicker then they should be allowed to do so. No-one, at least in this case, is being negatively impacted by it so it shouldn't really be an issue. And besides, there's plenty of tools around for editing saves and the game's memory that if you wanted to do it you could with no issues at all.

I think this is the right stance to take. I have far more issues with Company of Heroes 2 being a full cost release and then asking for 5 euros per DLC commander, some of which were so blatantly OP that you basically had to get them to stay even remotely competitive in the multiplayer scene. Oh and every month or so they released a new pair of OP commanders, so you continuously had to keep paying to stay competitive in the meta. But I never see CoH2, Relic or Sega chewed out for that insane decision.

In a single player game? If someone prefers to pay instead of play, that's their business not mine.

 

[Something Amyss]

Man, people are going to great lengths to avoid linking to Kotaku.

Eh. I'm not sure I can be bothered with consumer advocacy anymore. If you don't like it, don't buy it. But since this trend is not new, I expect it's popular enough with the desired audience to justify it.

And after all, who are we to complain if they like it?

 

[sageoftruth]

Once again, says something about how they view their own product, but I can't feel much sympathy for people who buy a product without information then complain about it.

Agreed there. I'm surprised people haven't caught on yet. Then again, their bad decisions and angry responses do make excellent cautionary tales for when I'm considering getting the product.