Why do ubisoft get hate but rockstar get free pass for releasing same type of games?
- Thread starter B-Cell_v1legacy
- Start date
This. Same thing with Nintendo and its franchises that usually release one per console gen.Casual Shinji said:
Plus, several of Ubisoft's series all feel same-y. I remember a friend asking me if I was going to get Farcry 4 back in 2014 and I was like 'I just played Watch Dogs earlier this year, I think I've had my fill for awhile.'
Rockstar releases a big open world game about once every 4-5 years. Ubisoft release 4-5 big open world games every year. Result - familiarity breeds contempt.
Black Flag was a great pirate game ruined by trying to be an Assassin's Creed game. If someone could mod out all the Assassin's Creed bits from that game I could play it for weeks.
Uplay was the first nail in Ubisoft's coffin, AC Unity and its terribad launch was the last. Aside for the ship combat AC 3 was out and out terrible.
Never played Rockstar games aside from the ambitious and clunky LA Noir. No opinion. If any of them play at all like Noir though, fuck 'em all.
Uplay was the first nail in Ubisoft's coffin, AC Unity and its terribad launch was the last. Aside for the ship combat AC 3 was out and out terrible.
Never played Rockstar games aside from the ambitious and clunky LA Noir. No opinion. If any of them play at all like Noir though, fuck 'em all.
If you go back a few years, Ubisoft did get pretty bad rep at least in the pc market. They pretty much started always online DRM in single player games with assassins creed 2, Introduced Uplay which was pretty clunky and overall annoying on top of steam and what have you. The pc support became pretty bad i remember for a while anyway. Then there are the numerous times ubisoft was dangling the promise of Beyond good and evil 2 if remaster of beyond good and evil sold well, and then if the rayman games sold well.Hawki said:
Then there is the preorder collector's edition culture thing which I'm not that offended by, mildly annoyed that there does not seem to be a "complete" collector's edition for their games because some are gamespot exclusive or something like that. And then there is the oversaturation of open world genre. I boycotted them for about 5 years i think starting with ACII, but lately have been letting go of that. There probably is/was other stuff that i don't remember right now.
The simplest answer I'd give you is that Rockstar do a better job of it. Story telling, character building, and the tasks that they set you out to do. They've been doing it longer, and are more comfortable in trying new things, so they are less carbon copy sellouts of the previous iteration that Ubisoft games tend to be. I too, got bored of AC after 3. My fav was AC2, but the current games are nothing like it.
Red Dead and GTA feel more fresh, and not just because they're spaced out wider. AC and Far Cry feel stale pretty quick. Primal was probably the only departure from the formula, but either you're into it or you're not. In fact, I'm more inclined to play the next iteration set in Montana because it looks more like what I enjoy about Far Cry games than Primal is.
Max Payne 3 was actually pretty well received. I loved it personally, apart from the Social Club which caused more problems than the game was worth in the end (I barely managed to finish it the first time round, but crippling bugs regarding sign-in ruined my second playthrough).
I didn't follow the hype of Watchdogs 1 so much, which is probably why I had an okay time with it. A bit cringy, but still rather playable and fun at times. Not fun enough that I needed to get Watchdogs 2 though, seeing Ubisoft's track record with dull-ish repetition.
The other reason is also because Ubisoft are some of the biggest douches in the gaming industry, that should need no introduction by now.
Red Dead and GTA feel more fresh, and not just because they're spaced out wider. AC and Far Cry feel stale pretty quick. Primal was probably the only departure from the formula, but either you're into it or you're not. In fact, I'm more inclined to play the next iteration set in Montana because it looks more like what I enjoy about Far Cry games than Primal is.
Max Payne 3 was actually pretty well received. I loved it personally, apart from the Social Club which caused more problems than the game was worth in the end (I barely managed to finish it the first time round, but crippling bugs regarding sign-in ruined my second playthrough).
I didn't follow the hype of Watchdogs 1 so much, which is probably why I had an okay time with it. A bit cringy, but still rather playable and fun at times. Not fun enough that I needed to get Watchdogs 2 though, seeing Ubisoft's track record with dull-ish repetition.
The other reason is also because Ubisoft are some of the biggest douches in the gaming industry, that should need no introduction by now.
LA Noir is not a typical Rockstar game. I'd even make the argument that is it completely different from most others - it's certainly the most restrictive and has the most left field mechanics (the lying thing). Their Flagship franchise, GTA, is all about exploring and committing crimes, with hardly any restrictions.jklinders said:
Red Dead Redemption, probably the 2nd most popular, is sparse in terms of the environment because it's set in the Wild West, but it's essentially about being a cowboy, so lots of killing, kidnapping etc.
Bully - you are a bully and beat people up.
Personally, I really enjoyed LA Noir's story and gameplay, but if you are taking that as your benchmark for what a Rockstar game is like, you are dead wrong. You'd see what I mean if you played the original GTA, which sort of shows the spirit of most of their games in a really stripped down sort of way.
Either way the stories and worlds are of consistently high quality.
Ubisoft hate and the attempt to shift it to Rockstar in this thread both constitute false-flag diversionary tactics to draw attention away from the company actually deserving hate: Bioware.
As everybody else has said in one way or another, it all comes down to Rockstar making better games in general and avoiding some of the more scummy business practices, or at least not being so blatant about them, compared to Ubisoft. I don't even play that many of Rockstar's games and there's quite a few Ubisoft games I have played, though none recently released from either company, and even so I can see the massive increase in game quality and customer support that Rockstar has compared to Ubisoft (well, except Max Payne 3 of course, that game is really REALLY terrible).
I'll sum it up like this. I play what Ubisoft wants me to play.
GTA 5?
There's Tron Bike Racing [https://www.gamespot.com/articles/gta-5-online-adds-tron-like-racing-mode-watch-the-/1100-6445234/], tiny Racers [http://gta.wikia.com/wiki/Tiny_Racers]... Oh, God, I was going to list all of them, but I really don't have that type of patience.
Just click here [http://gta.wikia.com/wiki/Adversary_Modes]
Hate the Core GTA game all you want. I think a lot of people aren't happy with it. But the Core GTA game has little to do with it's actual value.
GTA 5?
There's Tron Bike Racing [https://www.gamespot.com/articles/gta-5-online-adds-tron-like-racing-mode-watch-the-/1100-6445234/], tiny Racers [http://gta.wikia.com/wiki/Tiny_Racers]... Oh, God, I was going to list all of them, but I really don't have that type of patience.
Just click here [http://gta.wikia.com/wiki/Adversary_Modes]
Hate the Core GTA game all you want. I think a lot of people aren't happy with it. But the Core GTA game has little to do with it's actual value.
I guess I've been lucky. I happen to play Skyrim originally on console and never got a major bug. Played it again on PC, no major bug. Played Fallout 4, on release, got one crash to desktop and one floating bear.altnameJag said:
Played Witcher 3 a couple of months late, because I heard it was so buggy. Crashed to desktop at least 20 times. In fact, all these Bethesda games had less bugs combined than my experience of Witcher 3. Even though they are three separate copies. I can understand if you get a game breaking bug, that your cranky. I don't have any personal anecdotal evidence.
Bethesda, I don't think, has ever got a free pass. People got angry at Daggerfall for being so buggy. It generate impossible dungeons that you couldn't get out of. Since then, I think Bethesda has been gradually getting better at debugging. Bethesda has also been doing shady things lately - creation club, no review embargos
I don't know if its like GTA. I haven't played enough GTA, so take this as a sweeping statement. GTA is get mission, drive, shoot, return. Watch Dogs does things similar. But the shoot part is different - more sneaking, it can be a puzzle if you chose as you can eliminate all threats with environmental traps without taking a shot, call in police or a gang, hijack vehicle for distractions or placing bomb or run them over. Then you have a large range of skills to deal with vehicular combat.dscross said:
I don't know if GTA 5 has caught up to this amount of options. I'd doubt it but tell me otherwise
Many people are pissed we haven't had a single player DLC and GTA online seems like a shitty free to play game. That being said Rock star usually only releases a game every three years. Rock star is only going to fuck up once every three years, compared to ubisoft who can fuck up multiple times in a year.
It was just hearsay. I haven't played Watchdogs 2 yet, I've only played the first one (that's my only frame of reference). It really depends what you are looking for in a game but GTA has always felt more immersive to me - like I said I haven't played the 2nd game yet. I found Rockstar to be very different from Ubisoft in general, so it wouldn't surprise me if Watchdogs 2 was more of the same. Ubisoft have probably always been bigger on stealth.trunkage said:
Get on it if you've never played a GTA. That's something all gamers should do at least once. Play the first one. It's old school.
Less frequency so that you're kinda anticipating one of Rockstars games, more refined with bugs at least beeing fun to watch and they kind of made that genre to what it is, so Grandfather clause in full effect.
And at least Rockstar listens to their fans, even if it takes them the same time as Ubisoft (that Buddy date buisness from GTA SA and GTA4 comes to mind).
And at least Rockstar listens to their fans, even if it takes them the same time as Ubisoft (that Buddy date buisness from GTA SA and GTA4 comes to mind).
It is to B-Cell. And he's completely oblivious to the fact that he could apply his "logic" to every FPS game ever made.Rangaman said:
I'm not a fan of either companies, but I'll readily admit Rockstar generallly puts more time and effort in its games than Ubisoft. They also seem somewhat less prone to scummy business practices.
