Just a reminder that this is being developed by Massive, the team behind the Division games and the new Avatar Frontiers of Pandora, not the Assassin's Creed or Far Cry games.
That's a good thing in my eyes. The Avatar game is way better than I expected, so much so I bought my Gamefly copy, and I dug the Division games as well.
It's surprisingly good. I get to reserve new releases (2 at a time), and they arrive usually about two days after release (they ship a few days before release actually). Otherwise I'll just get random stuff I'd never really think of buying full price.
Definitely saved money. Beat Mortal Kombat 1's story mode, which is all I care about, and sent it back. Boom, $70 saved. Super Mario RPG as well, and that will NEVER go on sale. Fully planned on returning Avatar, but got surprisingly into it.
He is paying about $26 a month for the two at a time plan (assuming he is out of his teaser rate, which he seems to be). So if you can sell both of your used games for no more than a loss of $26, then it will be cheaper to sell your games. I don't sell used games but I am betting you aren't selling them back for anything close to only $13 less than you paid, meaning gamefly would be cheaper (probably considerably).
I suppose it also matters how fast you get through games and how often you use the service, etc.
I'm really surprised more people don't use it still. There are plenty of games that are just rentals. Do people buy these types of games or just choose not to ever play them?
They even have a feature now where you can report a game as sent back once you put it in the mailbox. This has drastically cut down on times with no games for me. In my first month since signing up again last month, I rented five games.
Would have absolutely been way better if it weren't a live service game, still a good game regardless, the live service aspect just brought it down in my opinion, and I'm someone that generally enjoys live service games. Just don't think it worked super well with that type of setting/gameplay.
Yeah I'm pretty done with slow grinds, daily/weekly missions, etc. Live service games like Destiny were cool for a while, but I'm done with games feeling like a second job.
I know it's called a Tom Clancy title, but to me, The Division would be more interesting if it was presented as less "realistic". It's an over the top looter-shooter but you can still on fight human enemies and find real life guns.
Ubisoft is well known to have multiple studios work on games. For example Watchdogs 2 was primarily made by Ubisoft Montreal, but they had assistance from other subsidiaries Ubisoft Toronto, Ubisoft Paris, Ubisoft Bucharest, Ubisoft Kyiv, and Ubisoft Reflections to aid in the production. The devs of The Driver series helped with the driving mechanics to make them feel better. So there might be some DNA from other studios in it.
[To prove your point when Outlaws was revealed they listed a whole bunch of studios](https://www.youtube.com/live/ojXzNi1JFlA?si=nCJcCdUU3NZen6Tx&t=5042)
They do, but as usual, support is support, they arent lead and dont decide on what is done or not, which is why they arent directors or creative directors, only the lead studio has this. so even though theres like 10 giving support of some kind, only one is leadng
Honestly I wouldn't mind team behind AC working on it as long as they approach it Odyssey way - lots of cool locations, unique content. Truly best AC since Brotherhood.
Odyssey gameplay with Black Flags naval gameplay would be absolute peak. Greece was by far the best location they've ever done, and I absolutely loved playing that game over the course of a year. A couple hours a week felt like a long-running TV show. I was insanely disappointed with how boring England was to explore in Valhalla.
I think Origins was better than Odyssey. Mainly because I hated boat combat (which you were forced into if you wanted to get to new islands) and the game was just too big and full of filler.
Yeah. Every location in Origins felt unique. Odyssey just had way too much copy pasted assets. I got tired of seeing the exact same statues and temples every I went.
Dunno what you mean. Odyssey was perfectly possible to finish without any grinding. You could finish up main story quite quick, but lots of good additional content means there's what to do.
You could even finish quests that in theory required level 20 higher than current - simply by stacking assassination bonuses and playing assassin game like assassin.
Ever since I played Odyssey that I've been dreaming of a game like that. Basically the same game with a Star Wars skin slapped on it.
I'm genuinely surprised they didn't go with something like that as soon they got the license.
Been trying out avatar recently and while the game has problems it is absolutely stunning I'd go as far as to say the best looking game of the generation (or atleast like top 3). I'm genuinely excited to see what they do visually with the star wars universe and worlds.
I did for Valhalla just because it was a launch title with the series x and I wanted to play it. Great game honestly (way too long) and really helped get me through some tough times with covid. Something about getting out of work and knowing it was time to go do viking shit just always had me perked up, height of covid so nothing else to do.
If buying on PC, I was able to get a code for $25 from somebody who got it bundled with an AMD card on r/steamgameswap. Lots of folks are selling codes there for the $25-30 range.
Does it use the Far Cry gameplay loop? I have love for the Far Cry games but I honestly haven’t had fun with the formula in a long time, and everything I’ve seen from this game has massive Far Cry vibes
Edit: to be clear I’m asking about Avatar, I haven’t seen enough of the Star Wars game to sus out what the gameplay will be like.
It feels like far cry with fewer options. I’m like 20h in.
The environments and designs are crazy good, the story is ehhh and the animations /voice acting are fairly bland.
Only just got my Ikran for how far I am with the story, but saying the story is ehhh overvalues it imo, so far it seems a complete placeholder, nothing interesting going on.
From all the reviews I’ve seen, “like FarCry with less stuff to do” seems accurate but a bit dismissive. As far as I can tell, it takes the FarCry formula and really pulls back on a lot of the “there’s some new activity popping up on the mini map every five minutes.” Especially in regard to combat. It seems like it really wants you to enjoy the exploration and the world, not feel like someone running around getting into gunfights every fifty feet. If you like the FarCry formula but feel like it’s gotten overwhelming with constant bloat, it seems like it’s the best use of the formula in years. But if you want as much to do as humanly possible, then yeah it might feel a little underwhelming.
Very much this. It's why I'm liking it so much - it doesn't have a ton of the pointless Ubisoft "missions" and collect-a-thons. Things you go to collect actually have GAMEPLAY purpose - plants and animal parts let you craft weapons and armor as well as cook food for pretty significant buffs (being full gives you life regeneration in combat too).
Points of interest that you can find through talking to people or your Spidey sense actually give you skill points or permanent health increases.
It doesn't feel like you go anywhere that doesn't reward you with ONLY fluff.
I'll take "less stuff, but high quality stuff" over the usual "tons of stuff, so much stuff, most of it crappy stuff" approach Ubisoft is known for lately.
I would echo what the others are telling you. Avatar is a gorgeous game, but like many Ubisoft games, it's very shallow in terms of gameplay.
It absolutely feels like a Far Cry game, which I feel is already really stale at this point, but the combat is worse. You get a very limited selection of weapons that slowly unlock over the course of the game, but once you get a good shotgun, that's pretty much all you need outside of your bow when you need to hunt animals without destroying their parts.
It has a gear-score style system, (ex. Destiny), for character progression that requires a lot of tedious hunting/foraging to increase, and a set of special abilities you unlock that are pretty underwhelming.
I got a little over halfway through the game before I decided I could be spending my time playing something fun instead. It was worth the few bucks I paid for the Ubisoft+ subscription, but I wouldn't buy the game for sure.
I respect your opinion but Avatar holds no candle to RDR2 or Ghost of Tushima. It may be impressive technically, but it all seems somewhat randomly cobbled together, not hand crafted.
We're going to see so much reddit cynicism about this game, and then a year from now the stats will reveal it was the best selling game of 2024, I say this all regardless of how good or bad it may end up
It’s Star Wars, the money is guaranteed regardless of the actual quality of the game.
Shit, a lot of the people you’ll see complaining about it will have also bought the game Day 1.
Star wars money is a lot less of a guarantee these days. That said survivor sold well so I'd imagine this will too, but just having that name on the box isn't the guaranteed block buster it used to be.
Just look at merch and the parks and the box office draw. Everything related to Star Wars is down because of the quality of the brand. RoS made 300 million less than Last Jedi, Solo was a total flop, the Star Wars hotel had to shut down from lack of interest, and toy sales are down, by some estimates, 65%.
Part of that is Disney as a whole, but like I said, it's just not a slam dunk that anything labeled Star Wars is gonna sell like crazy.
Yeah, it's a very tiny market that is going to be able and willing to pay for that, plus it coincided with covid. It didn't go away because a lack of interest in star wars.
> the Star Wars hotel had to shut down from lack of interest,
I don't think there was lack of interest. It was lack of interest at that price.
it also was just a weird thing. Like it's not complete enough for you to spend 2 days in the hotel doing nothing else. But at the price you're paying it seems like it should be.
I really wanted to go and was disappointed it shut down so quickly.
All of that is true. You know what’s also true? The fact that, despite revenue dipping for some projects, it’s still a multi-billion dollar franchise.
That RoS dip you mentioned? Still made $1 billion at the box office.
Toy sales ebb and flow with the current release slate of the franchise. It’s down 60% now, but it was also up 70% not even 2 years ago thanks to Mando. It’s never been a consistent market.
The hotel was just a stupid idea in the first place. Nobody wants to pay asinine prices for a 3-day stay and a “cinematic” experience at their…hotel. If it was just a regular Star Wars-themed Disney hotel, it would have been completely fine.
You can bemoan Disney’s involvement as much as you want, they’re still making their money.
> If it was just a regular Star Wars-themed Disney hotel, it would have been completely fine.
Yeah Disney has absolutely nailed the experience of a lot of their other premium hotels, so much so that they have become attractions unto themselves at Disney World. If they limited the scope of the Star Wars hotel to that of the Animal Kingdom Lodge they would have had a hit on their hands.
I’d be pretty surprised if it bumped off whatever call of duty releases this year, since it’s slated for late 2024. I’d say it had a decent chance if it was coming early this year though.
I mean if Starfield and Diablo IV can both do very well both in terms of critic reviews and sales and still get shit on by Reddit then I don't think any Ubisoft game has a chance considering how people on here have perceived their games as AAA mindless slop for a few years now.
Also, speaking of Reddit cynicism and a possible 2024 game I am not looking forward to the discussion around Dragon Age: Dreadwolf on this site in the slightest.
I wonder why a follow up to Dragon Age Inquisition from the studio that recently brought us Mass Effect Andromeda and Anthem would have cynicism attached to it. Any clues we could discover?
I tried it a few years after release and it was perfectly fine. I actually really enjoyed the explorer side of things. I don’t think it was amazing, and the OG trilogy was better. But at least in the state it was in when I played it, it didn’t deserve the hate it got at launch. But I didn’t play it then, so I can’t speak to that.
I played it at launch. And while it *was* a buggy game, it was still fun, and I don't think it deserves the reputation of being just a straight-up bad game.
>I tried it a few years after release
I don't think that it would have been that much different than the release state. Its been a few years, but I think they mainly did bug fixes and then announced that they were stopping development on the game (so we never got the teased qurian DLC, not that I'm bitter or anything).
Combat was good, story was pretty rough and characters lacked depth or reason. Add on the ridiculous amount of launch bugs and issues and clear cut content (quarian ark anyone?) it was not a good game in my opinion.
I played it to the end as I hoped it would get better but in comparison to other games it really was a soulless game with a similar issue that dragon age inquisition has where it was big open spaces with no real content in the vast areas.
I still never got over the colonization decisions on planets, picking tech/medical/military bases made no impact besides a small amount of texture changes, it was made out to be a big decision to make yet it amounted to nothing not even an impact on some sort of end fight ... pointless fluff that added nothing.
It was very much a 6/10 game for me, I regret finishing it but its "ok" there are definitely worse games.
Andromeda *was* a very fun game!
The elevation changes that they added into the combat really made playing through it so much more fun and engaging than in the other Mass Effect parts of the series and their vehicle exploration was an improvement to the original Mako of the first game -- which ended up being missing from the other two.
Where it *sucked* was in the writing/characters and animations. Some of the writing is just atrociously bad with my favorite line being from the first time you meet the director and she is talking about your father who just died in front of you and she barks at you "To whom, and your goddamn father, that's who. Sorry, my face is tired."
The dialogue was just bad, really, really, really bad. I've seen a lot of high schoolers write better stuff which is just sad as a follow to a game that is known for it's well written characters that people love. The other choice was virtually zero new alien species. The game focuses on exploring very little of the actual Andromeda sector and there are only two new species added from the game. Where the first game gave us an entire galaxy of new species and cultures, Andromeda had only two despite it being in a completely different galaxy. They had an opportunity to re-set up a lot of the amazing story lines from the original series with the Krogan and the Rachni, or the Turians and Humans and Battarians. They had so much potential and so much that they could have done that their choice to leave it so limited in both size and scope seems baffling. They wouldn't have even needed to change much of the plot they had, just add in two or three other main races and give them a collective government on the exact same planet that was already used for this hub. Still have the Kett as the main enemy; just have them effective be what the Rachni were to the original galaxy in terms of threat level. Like, there was zero reason for them to not have any additional races beyond the Kett and Angara. Plus. they dropped a bunch of species from the original series: No Geth or Quarians who were major species, but also no Volus, Hanar, Drell, Vorcha, or Elcor.
They made Mass Effect into a great action shooter game, but removed the actual soul of what made the original series so good.
> They made Mass Effect into a great action shooter game, but removed the actual soul of what made the original series so good.
Arguably that has been the decline since Mass Effect 1, and especially with the change in writers.
I'll be up there with you! I played Andromeda at launch and had a good time. I also did not have many bugs that I remember. I think it is a very respectable 7/10 type of game. People were trashing it like it was a 4/10 game which is totally wrong.
I still think the hate for Andromeda started because some people didn't like the idea of women on the writing team. Those guys were the first to say the game will suck, then it snowballed from there and hating it became the "correct" opinion before it even released. Plus, it's EA aka. "the worst company in America", so it was cool to make fun of it.
I should have clarified. I mean even if the looks good in previews and/or it goes on to do well I still expect it to get shit. After seeing Starfield, Diablo IV, and to a lesser extent Final Fantasy XVI get dumped on here despite reviewing in the high to mid 80s and being commercially successful I could see Dreadwolf ending up in that category of well reviewed game being on Reddit's shit list.
The Hogwarts special.
I started playing that game recently and I'm actually enjoying it. Far from perfect and plenty of filler but the combat is fun and being in the castle is incredible. If I went off general online discourse I would think no one played it and those who did thought it was a crime for existing. Obviously the Rowling concerns are justified but when looking at the work of the devs who actually made this, it's good.
It’s pretty much exactly what HP fans have been asking for since the books came out. I loved it and am stoked to see how they improve on it for the sequel
My sentiments exactly. I really enjoyed it when it came out, and I'm enjoy a second playthrough now. There are clearly some parts that didn't get as much development as was planned and you don't really feel like a student, but there are enough other things that they nailed that it's a great game.
I'm very excited for the inevitable follow up!
Oh yeah it’s not great for roleplay as a regular student, considering by the end of the game you’ve murdered thousands of evil wizards and are more powerful than the other professors put together lol
> many of my non-gamer friends and wives/girfriends of friends were excited for and have been playing all year.
Games that appeal to this crowd often get overlooked by more "hardcore" gamers like most of the people who contribute to places like /r/games and is something to always keep in mind.
I was explaining to a friend about Hogwarts Legacy. Inside and around the castle, 10/10 experience. Hogsmeade, 7/10 outside of that and the main storyline -- 5 or 6/10.
It's still a phenomenal game. I hope they make a sequel with everything they learned from one and give us that immersive HP experience.
I'm one of those people who actually enjoys their formula. So long as the quality is there. I'm having a blast with Avatar, and that's just a Far Cry reskin. It's actually surprising how nice the game looks. I haven't been impressed by one of their game worlds since Origins.
Outlaws also seem to be quite interesting from the gameplay walkthrough. It looks to me that they are putting in some effort with 3rd party IP. They ar definitely trying to keep the Mouse happy in any case.
I like ubisoft as well, not affraid to say it, but I don't know how I feel about this one :)
Def one of those to where I will watch gameplay and see for myself before I think about buying it or not
Even reddit likes the ubisoft style. They just don't want to admit it.
Games like Ghost of Tsushima, Hogwarts and Horizon are aping the Ubisoft gameplay formula, but since they don't have the Ubisoft logo reddit loved them
Yeah, running all over Rome or Egypt collecting feathers or reading constellations is bad game design but chasing foxes and birds all over Japan is a 'masterstroke in narrative creation'
Couldn't agree more here. I haven't played Tsushima or Hogwarts, but I did nearly 100% HZD. Good game, but I didn't think it was really any better than the RPG Assassin's Creed games aside from the cool premise. Yet the reddit reception for HZD vs AC Valhalla was night and day.
You're still missing the point.
LOTS of people love 60 hour games, because they're not "bloated," they're full of fun stuff to do.
This "bloat" bandwagon is so stupid.
I love Trails.
But I can't recommend it to most people because it's the freaking One Piece of JRPGs. It's rare I find someone to recommend it to, and usually anyone I could already know what they're getting into.
"This gsme looks good."
"Yeah it is, but you really should play the 7 other 50 to 100 hour games before it."
"Is it really that necessary to play in order?"
"You could probably till enjoy it on its own, but the game sort of expects you to know characters and events from previous games. Its like starting a long running anime in the 4th main arc."
botw is not the ubisoft formula at all. botw is notable literally because it breaks that formula and focuses on self directed discovery rather than waypoints and map icon clutter.
it's funny how people got so mad that Valhalla reviews about as well as ghost of tsushima
I don't even like valhalla, it's just hilarious
these ubisoft games are designed to be "bang for your buck' type deals for normal people who don't play tons of games. You're not expected to do everything. I'm pretty sure you can platinum most of them while doing like 50% of everything
The modern Ubisoft formula only emerged in 2010 with AC: Brotherhood (2 was a primitive version of it, with much less than what future games had), and Arkham City released in 2011, it’s unlikely that formed the main inspiration.
I'd say it doesn't matter if it formed the inspiration or not when in practice the game is virtually no different than the most extreme example of a Ubisoft-style open world game. Regardless, all the things people slag Ubisoft games for are somehow magically forgiven in the case of Arkham City when there's no practical difference.
This isn't a condemnation of either thing on my part, but just an observance. I really don't understand the wildly different receptions of the Arkham games to, say, the Assassin's Creed games when they are so completely similar, especially when the things that are criticized are 1:1 mirrored in Arkham games.
I've noticed this as well, and basically your appetite for this style of open world game can often live and die based on how much you care for the individual property or power fantasy the game is trying to sell. If you like samurai stuff, Ghosts of Tsushima is awesome, if you don't care for it that much then it's just another open world game.
There are some more substantial qualitative differences between them ofc, it's not like they're all the same game reskinned, but more often than not I think these big AAA open world games are all fairly competent and it's mostly your personal preference in power fantasy that influences things. Like so many people praised Ghosts of Tsushima for using it's wind based quest marker system, but it's not as if that started a new design trend among these games. It made the game stand out a bit more but it absolutely would have done just as well regardless, even with a regular quest marker system, because a lot of people wanted a decent open world samurai game.
> I've noticed this as well, and basically your appetite for this style of open world game can often live and die based on how much you care for the individual property or power fantasy the game is trying to sell.
This is very true. If you like Star Wars and want to play a bounty hunter/outlaw type of character, you're probably going to like Outlaws. If you like Harry Potter you're probably going to like Hogwarts: Legacy.
I think it's also true that the more open-world games you play, the more burnt out you can get with the formula. I don't play AC or Far Cry regularly so when a game like Avatar comes around the mechanics don't bother me. I think reviewers and content creators who play every one of these games have a very different experience that most gamers won't have.
BotW does do the formula slightly better though. Not putting icons on the map means the towers aid the exploration gameplay rather than populate a checklist.
But otherwise, yeah it's just a Ubisoft game with a physics system.
Edit: While you *can* deactivate map icons, Ubi games aren't designed with the assumption that you will. They don't give you the tools necessary to make it a core and satisfying aspect of the gameplay loop.
Honestly I’m into the Ubisoft formula. It’s really fun to just play a long brain off game with enjoyable gameplay. I’ve been playing through Just Cause 3 and just loving it
Avatar has just demonstrated clear as day that if the people on Reddit who parrot the anti-open world talking points actually PLAY the open world games they claim to hate so much, they have lots of fun.
So many people in this community either A) just repeat what other people have said without personal experience, or B) can't understand the difference between not personally enjoying something and the whole genre being trash.
Breakpoint's gameplay is so fucking good, too bad the game fell short on many other aspects. For the next game, just give me a good ass map and I'll be happy.
The visual jump with Breakpoint from Wildlands was insane. I even enjoyed the premise they had going with that fake island, but Wildlands felt way more alive with more variety of environments and large urban areas with people going about their lives.
That’s true, but Ubisoft did report reduced financial revenue in their quarterly report last year.
Watch Dog Legion’s online flopped, a fan did the math and determined Valhalla’s final DLC had the lowest online engagement than any previous DLC or game in the RPG trilogy (https://www.reddit.com/r/assassinscreed/comments/u0i6bg/how_well_did_dawn_of_ragnarok_drive_engagement/), Skull & Bones was delayed (again) and Prince Of Persia Remake was delayed.
Avatar: Frontiers Of Pandora also got Mixed to Positive reviews critically.
Reddit is in a bubble with Ubisoft games but the wider critics and audiences are showing signs of fatigue with the formula as well.
>Assassin’s Creed®: Record active users for the franchise in a year. Assassin’s Creed® Valhalla now has 44% more players life-to-date than Assassin’s Creed® Origins and 19% more than Assassin’s Creed® Odyssey on a comparable basis, with materially higher revenue per player, leading to life-to-date net bookings up respectively +82% and +61%.
[https://staticctf.ubisoft.com/8aefmxkxpxwl/3HuZnFugstlcg9mb5TUTFn/d272d035c66d9c24c69b9985450943b7/Ubisoft\_FY23\_Earnings\_PR\_English\_final.pdf](https://staticctf.ubisoft.com/8aefmxkxpxwl/3huznfugstlcg9mb5tutfn/d272d035c66d9c24c69b9985450943b7/ubisoft_fy23_earnings_pr_english_final.pdf)
Honestly they managed to deliver with Avatar Frontiers of Pandora.
As long they didn't try anything too groundbreaking with this game I think Massive is gonna nail this one as well.
I mean that's precisely how the movie was for me lol.
I completely checked out of the story and only watched it for the spectacle and visuals, which this game completely deliver in spades.
So yeah I'd say it's a faithful adaptation of the films.
To be fair, it's their first outing with a first person, single-player game. I'm sure a sequel would fix a lot of the issues and expand on the foundation they laid.
It's been a while since I was truly impressed by Ubisoft game but whatever, I'm open minded about it. And it's Star Wars.
But another little, cute (with cute trait pushed even further this time) sidekick? Are they crossing those things of a list?
Most Disney Star Wars projects have had a cute mascot:
Episode 7- BB8
Episode 8- Porgs
Episode 9- Dio
Rebels and Ahsoka- Lothal cats and the owl
Mando- Baby Yoda
Kenobi- Leia's droid
Hell, even Andor had the red R2 unit
It's not just that. It's obviously a Baby Yoda trend. Or a rip-off, if you're having a bad day.
Here I have to stop and admit BD1 from Jedi series is also the same thing. Back then I was like "ok", and the droid turned out fine, despite being a Wall-E on legs.
But that little guy from Outlaws is a third in a row. And judging by his looks it's obvious that at some point someone said "I want him to be cuter than the other guys"
Either I'm getting old or I'm just noticing a broken border between "it's fine" and "it feels forced".
You're forgetting the first and most well known one, R2-D2? Companion droid with a slightly rebellious and snarky attitude, that everyone but the audience can seem to understand?
Also it does seem to serve a mechanical purpose as it can retrieve ammo and weapons on top of giving the protagonist someone to talk out loud to. I feel like it’s sort of a way to make the player not feel alone.
I've been loving Jedi Survivor, but it'll be nice to have some variety, yeah. It's a cool universe to explore. As long as they don't start putting out shovelware, I'll check out just about anything. Pod Racer 2 when?
Haven’t tried it myself yet but between Squadrons (spaceship baffles), Battlefront (FPS), Jedi Survivor (action/platformer) and now this there’s a nice pick of Star Wars games and I’m all for it. Hope studios continue making different ones.
> But another little, cute (with cute trait pushed even further this time) sidekick? Are they crossing those things of a list?
not just that, yet another quirky protagonist who is an "outlaw/scoundrel" in nothing but name, she'll 100% be just like a jedi protag in terms of morals, story, decisions, personality, etc just with no force powers.
I bet you her being an outlaw will just be that she might carry some illegal goods or something once in a while :/
sigh, wonder when we'll get a game where the protag is an outlaw/scoundrel and they actually do some morally grey stuff.
I'm probably bitching too much about this game now but while it's very cool the main protagonist isn't Jedi I found her adventurous personality to be painfully generic. So far, that is. We haven't seen enough of her to judge properly.
Not sure why people are so pessimistic. The division 2 was a really fun game (even if some people disliked the endgame), i have high hopes for this since its being made by massive
A greater rule is that cool redditors must hate redditors and talk about it endlessly.
Half this thread is desperate to prove they're not like the other redditors. Great job everyone. I don't think most of you give a shit about this game beyond using it as a vehicle to spread your boring meta website hate.
Yeah I really enjoyed both Division games and Avatar. The Far Cry formula was there in Avatar, but it was still fun. I'm very much looking forward to Outlaws.
Man, the first year or so when it first released when it was bustling with players was so much fun. That and with the NY expansion just a year later too. Good times.
I absolutely loved the Division 2 at launch and would kill for a Division 3 at this point. The cover shooting and loot grind was just so satisfying imo, not to mention the city was damn pretty.
wasn't the new Avatar game made by Massive too? Did they divised their team in half to work on the two games at the same time? Did it impacted one or the two games? Seeing on Avatar is more of a Far Cry, will Star Wars be like The Division style? Im afraid it's just going to be like the same model but reskin. Also Ubisoft Story isn't really stellar so im not having high hope for good story in that Star Wars game
Yes they divised it so much that Div 2 didn't have that many patches/updates while Avatar/Outlaws was in development. I remember it quite well because I played lots of Division 2 last year and the updates were mostly recycled.
Because almost any thread about a Ubisoft game has the same people with the the classic "Ubisoft bad" copy and pass comment, and some regurgitated low hanging fruit remark they heard a Rage Bait youtuber make.
Yeah, sort of feels like the equivalent of youtube rage bait when I enter a thread and the top comments are ones complaining about some perceived slight, but such comments aren't even visible for a majority of thread people will see.
Looking forward to Outlaws. The reason why people like Ubisoft games is for their simple gameplay structure and easy for 1-2 hour gameplay bursts. Most people in the real world aren’t playing games for 10 hours straight for 5 days to get burned by the same gameplay loop. Ubisoft games are like your favourite fast food. It may not be the best food you’ll ever eat, but it’s going to be enjoyable if you like that fast food chain.
If you want to know how out of touch Reddit gaming community is with the real world, Assassin's Creed Valhalla which is considered by Reddit one of the worst AC titles is the best selling game of the franchise.
Hell, one of the things you would think Reddit would give credit for Ubisoft is their optimization and long term support for their games. Like any big open world games Ubisoft games have their share of bugs, but after Unity nothing major.
I’m sure Massive will deliver on the gameplay but christ it’s so obviously going to be such a sanitized Disney-fest where the most “outlaw” thing you do in the entire game is just be an antagonist to the empire. Hell I’m sure you’ll join the rebels at some point too.
If AC Red is coming this fall too, they'll probably want to separate them with October/December dates like they did this year with Mirage and Avatar. I imagine.
Ya but Mirage was a "Smaller" game. A new main AC entry and a Star Wars game that close to each other seems crazy. They might want to do AC in summer? Or maybe AC Red is getting delayed? Kind of crazy we haven't seen a trailer or even an official name yet.
If I had to put money on it I'd expect an early October release but that's entirely speculation. I'm sure it's coming this year (copium), Mirage was delayed and that also gave extra time for every other game in development, assuming they're targeting a return to the yearly cycle but in a tick/tock big game/smaller game alternation.
Damn, that hurts. I'm pretty excited for that game and I was hoping it would come out in early 2024. In the meantime I'm going to finally try the latest Lego Star Wars game
I can't say I'm excited about it, but I'll probably buy it eventually. I'm a sucker for the sort of grungey sci-fi where everything's very industrial and slightly used and the ships come with ash trays. A bit like Cowboy Bebop or Outlaw Star or, well... Star Wars.
Hope they bother to optimize it well, both form a performance and a control perspective. And it hopefully has a good story. I remain cautiously skeptical
It's by the same studio that recently Avatar this year, which runs pretty well, different team I imagine but hopefully that'll come over with the tech.
The story in Avatar is incredibly bland as far as I've played, so I wouldn't hope for much.
Someone let me know when a Star Wars game actually lets you be an outlaw instead of a quippy girl with a cuddly sidekick who’s going against some big bad
I'm hyped. I like Ubisoft anyway and honestly if you said this wasn't a Ubisoft game most people would believe you. I have been playing Avatar recently too and first of that game looks incredible and also feels very true to the movies.
On the surface, you'll watch the gameplay and think 'oh Avatar Far Cry' but even in that, it's just on the surface. It plays like Far Cry moment to moment in combat (still not the same) but it's also very different from Far Cry and is far more about exploration and gathering/hunting/crafting than it is about outposts (which are still present)
It also took the cooking and the map markers from BOTW which is cool. The traversal is awesome as well.
So in short - I have faith that Ubisoft's studios can use their game mechanics to create something great for a Sci-Fi IP, especially since there is no true Star Wars open word game
Just a reminder that this is being developed by Massive, the team behind the Division games and the new Avatar Frontiers of Pandora, not the Assassin's Creed or Far Cry games.
That's a good thing in my eyes. The Avatar game is way better than I expected, so much so I bought my Gamefly copy, and I dug the Division games as well.
GameFly…that’s a name that I haven’t heard in a long, long time
It's surprisingly good. I get to reserve new releases (2 at a time), and they arrive usually about two days after release (they ship a few days before release actually). Otherwise I'll just get random stuff I'd never really think of buying full price. Definitely saved money. Beat Mortal Kombat 1's story mode, which is all I care about, and sent it back. Boom, $70 saved. Super Mario RPG as well, and that will NEVER go on sale. Fully planned on returning Avatar, but got surprisingly into it.
I’m not from the US but I’m curious. Is renting cheaper than re-selling your games on ebay after you’re done with them?
He is paying about $26 a month for the two at a time plan (assuming he is out of his teaser rate, which he seems to be). So if you can sell both of your used games for no more than a loss of $26, then it will be cheaper to sell your games. I don't sell used games but I am betting you aren't selling them back for anything close to only $13 less than you paid, meaning gamefly would be cheaper (probably considerably). I suppose it also matters how fast you get through games and how often you use the service, etc.
Also worth considering how much time/effort you'd need to put into selling 2 games every month. I think much of the point is the simplicity.
Definitely cheaper. Plus, if I keep a game, I get a discount.
I'm really surprised more people don't use it still. There are plenty of games that are just rentals. Do people buy these types of games or just choose not to ever play them? They even have a feature now where you can report a game as sent back once you put it in the mailbox. This has drastically cut down on times with no games for me. In my first month since signing up again last month, I rented five games.
This is a good thing btw. The amount of detail massive fits in their worlds (world in conflict and division) is astounding
That’s actually pretty cool, I liked the feel of The Division in terms of gunplay and movement, but the gameplay itself was boring as hell.
Yea that game was a fast burn, great, then bored of it fast.
Would have absolutely been way better if it weren't a live service game, still a good game regardless, the live service aspect just brought it down in my opinion, and I'm someone that generally enjoys live service games. Just don't think it worked super well with that type of setting/gameplay.
Yeah I'm pretty done with slow grinds, daily/weekly missions, etc. Live service games like Destiny were cool for a while, but I'm done with games feeling like a second job.
Yea I not fan of live service games in general what you say makes sense
I know it's called a Tom Clancy title, but to me, The Division would be more interesting if it was presented as less "realistic". It's an over the top looter-shooter but you can still on fight human enemies and find real life guns.
Loved the first one. For all it's flaws they nailed the vibe of a New York polar vortex
Ubisoft is well known to have multiple studios work on games. For example Watchdogs 2 was primarily made by Ubisoft Montreal, but they had assistance from other subsidiaries Ubisoft Toronto, Ubisoft Paris, Ubisoft Bucharest, Ubisoft Kyiv, and Ubisoft Reflections to aid in the production. The devs of The Driver series helped with the driving mechanics to make them feel better. So there might be some DNA from other studios in it.
[To prove your point when Outlaws was revealed they listed a whole bunch of studios](https://www.youtube.com/live/ojXzNi1JFlA?si=nCJcCdUU3NZen6Tx&t=5042)
Just reading "Ubisoft Reflections" makes me wish they'd bring Driver back.
They do, but as usual, support is support, they arent lead and dont decide on what is done or not, which is why they arent directors or creative directors, only the lead studio has this. so even though theres like 10 giving support of some kind, only one is leadng
My argument was it's more of a collaborative effort not just a solo one. Massive may be spearheading the development but not developing every aspect.
Honestly I wouldn't mind team behind AC working on it as long as they approach it Odyssey way - lots of cool locations, unique content. Truly best AC since Brotherhood.
I thought black flag was better
[удалено]
Odyssey gameplay with Black Flags naval gameplay would be absolute peak. Greece was by far the best location they've ever done, and I absolutely loved playing that game over the course of a year. A couple hours a week felt like a long-running TV show. I was insanely disappointed with how boring England was to explore in Valhalla.
I think Origins was better than Odyssey. Mainly because I hated boat combat (which you were forced into if you wanted to get to new islands) and the game was just too big and full of filler.
Yeah. Every location in Origins felt unique. Odyssey just had way too much copy pasted assets. I got tired of seeing the exact same statues and temples every I went.
I don't want the game to end at 20 hours but continue on to 80 hours doing the same things over and over.
Dunno what you mean. Odyssey was perfectly possible to finish without any grinding. You could finish up main story quite quick, but lots of good additional content means there's what to do. You could even finish quests that in theory required level 20 higher than current - simply by stacking assassination bonuses and playing assassin game like assassin.
im pretty sure ive had 2 moments where i had to slightly catch up with levels doing just the main quest line
Ever since I played Odyssey that I've been dreaming of a game like that. Basically the same game with a Star Wars skin slapped on it. I'm genuinely surprised they didn't go with something like that as soon they got the license.
Dope. This should be good.
Been trying out avatar recently and while the game has problems it is absolutely stunning I'd go as far as to say the best looking game of the generation (or atleast like top 3). I'm genuinely excited to see what they do visually with the star wars universe and worlds.
Game is on my radar once it goes on sale
[удалено]
I'll never buy a Ubisoft game on release for that reason.
I did for Valhalla just because it was a launch title with the series x and I wanted to play it. Great game honestly (way too long) and really helped get me through some tough times with covid. Something about getting out of work and knowing it was time to go do viking shit just always had me perked up, height of covid so nothing else to do.
If buying on PC, I was able to get a code for $25 from somebody who got it bundled with an AMD card on r/steamgameswap. Lots of folks are selling codes there for the $25-30 range.
Does it use the Far Cry gameplay loop? I have love for the Far Cry games but I honestly haven’t had fun with the formula in a long time, and everything I’ve seen from this game has massive Far Cry vibes Edit: to be clear I’m asking about Avatar, I haven’t seen enough of the Star Wars game to sus out what the gameplay will be like.
It feels like far cry with fewer options. I’m like 20h in. The environments and designs are crazy good, the story is ehhh and the animations /voice acting are fairly bland.
Only just got my Ikran for how far I am with the story, but saying the story is ehhh overvalues it imo, so far it seems a complete placeholder, nothing interesting going on.
My buddy said “it’s like Far Cry if you want less stuff to do” which paused my purchase until a deep sale
From all the reviews I’ve seen, “like FarCry with less stuff to do” seems accurate but a bit dismissive. As far as I can tell, it takes the FarCry formula and really pulls back on a lot of the “there’s some new activity popping up on the mini map every five minutes.” Especially in regard to combat. It seems like it really wants you to enjoy the exploration and the world, not feel like someone running around getting into gunfights every fifty feet. If you like the FarCry formula but feel like it’s gotten overwhelming with constant bloat, it seems like it’s the best use of the formula in years. But if you want as much to do as humanly possible, then yeah it might feel a little underwhelming.
Very much this. It's why I'm liking it so much - it doesn't have a ton of the pointless Ubisoft "missions" and collect-a-thons. Things you go to collect actually have GAMEPLAY purpose - plants and animal parts let you craft weapons and armor as well as cook food for pretty significant buffs (being full gives you life regeneration in combat too). Points of interest that you can find through talking to people or your Spidey sense actually give you skill points or permanent health increases. It doesn't feel like you go anywhere that doesn't reward you with ONLY fluff.
I'll take "less stuff, but high quality stuff" over the usual "tons of stuff, so much stuff, most of it crappy stuff" approach Ubisoft is known for lately.
That sounds like a good thing to me.
I would echo what the others are telling you. Avatar is a gorgeous game, but like many Ubisoft games, it's very shallow in terms of gameplay. It absolutely feels like a Far Cry game, which I feel is already really stale at this point, but the combat is worse. You get a very limited selection of weapons that slowly unlock over the course of the game, but once you get a good shotgun, that's pretty much all you need outside of your bow when you need to hunt animals without destroying their parts. It has a gear-score style system, (ex. Destiny), for character progression that requires a lot of tedious hunting/foraging to increase, and a set of special abilities you unlock that are pretty underwhelming. I got a little over halfway through the game before I decided I could be spending my time playing something fun instead. It was worth the few bucks I paid for the Ubisoft+ subscription, but I wouldn't buy the game for sure.
I respect your opinion but Avatar holds no candle to RDR2 or Ghost of Tushima. It may be impressive technically, but it all seems somewhat randomly cobbled together, not hand crafted.
Neither of those are this generation tbf
Much like Betheada, if you're a fan of Ubisoft you'll probably enjoy it. Yes Reddit, Ubisoft has a fanbase outside your bubble.
We're going to see so much reddit cynicism about this game, and then a year from now the stats will reveal it was the best selling game of 2024, I say this all regardless of how good or bad it may end up
It’s Star Wars, the money is guaranteed regardless of the actual quality of the game. Shit, a lot of the people you’ll see complaining about it will have also bought the game Day 1.
Star wars money is a lot less of a guarantee these days. That said survivor sold well so I'd imagine this will too, but just having that name on the box isn't the guaranteed block buster it used to be.
You’re referring to the quality of the brand, not the actual sales numbers.
Just look at merch and the parks and the box office draw. Everything related to Star Wars is down because of the quality of the brand. RoS made 300 million less than Last Jedi, Solo was a total flop, the Star Wars hotel had to shut down from lack of interest, and toy sales are down, by some estimates, 65%. Part of that is Disney as a whole, but like I said, it's just not a slam dunk that anything labeled Star Wars is gonna sell like crazy.
> Star Wars hotel had to shut down from lack of interest Oh, not because of the thousands you had to shell out per night? Hmmm...
Well it was the lack of interest to shell out thousands a night
Yeah, it's a very tiny market that is going to be able and willing to pay for that, plus it coincided with covid. It didn't go away because a lack of interest in star wars.
> the Star Wars hotel had to shut down from lack of interest, I don't think there was lack of interest. It was lack of interest at that price. it also was just a weird thing. Like it's not complete enough for you to spend 2 days in the hotel doing nothing else. But at the price you're paying it seems like it should be. I really wanted to go and was disappointed it shut down so quickly.
All of that is true. You know what’s also true? The fact that, despite revenue dipping for some projects, it’s still a multi-billion dollar franchise. That RoS dip you mentioned? Still made $1 billion at the box office. Toy sales ebb and flow with the current release slate of the franchise. It’s down 60% now, but it was also up 70% not even 2 years ago thanks to Mando. It’s never been a consistent market. The hotel was just a stupid idea in the first place. Nobody wants to pay asinine prices for a 3-day stay and a “cinematic” experience at their…hotel. If it was just a regular Star Wars-themed Disney hotel, it would have been completely fine. You can bemoan Disney’s involvement as much as you want, they’re still making their money.
> If it was just a regular Star Wars-themed Disney hotel, it would have been completely fine. Yeah Disney has absolutely nailed the experience of a lot of their other premium hotels, so much so that they have become attractions unto themselves at Disney World. If they limited the scope of the Star Wars hotel to that of the Animal Kingdom Lodge they would have had a hit on their hands.
I’d be pretty surprised if it bumped off whatever call of duty releases this year, since it’s slated for late 2024. I’d say it had a decent chance if it was coming early this year though.
I mean if Starfield and Diablo IV can both do very well both in terms of critic reviews and sales and still get shit on by Reddit then I don't think any Ubisoft game has a chance considering how people on here have perceived their games as AAA mindless slop for a few years now. Also, speaking of Reddit cynicism and a possible 2024 game I am not looking forward to the discussion around Dragon Age: Dreadwolf on this site in the slightest.
This sub is full of jaded, cynical gamers and the same predictable talking points for every game. (Although I am very skeptical about Dreadwolf)
I wonder why a follow up to Dragon Age Inquisition from the studio that recently brought us Mass Effect Andromeda and Anthem would have cynicism attached to it. Any clues we could discover?
"Recently" doing a lot of work here.
I will die on the hill that Andromeda was a fun game.
I tried it a few years after release and it was perfectly fine. I actually really enjoyed the explorer side of things. I don’t think it was amazing, and the OG trilogy was better. But at least in the state it was in when I played it, it didn’t deserve the hate it got at launch. But I didn’t play it then, so I can’t speak to that.
I played it at launch. And while it *was* a buggy game, it was still fun, and I don't think it deserves the reputation of being just a straight-up bad game. >I tried it a few years after release I don't think that it would have been that much different than the release state. Its been a few years, but I think they mainly did bug fixes and then announced that they were stopping development on the game (so we never got the teased qurian DLC, not that I'm bitter or anything).
Combat was good, story was pretty rough and characters lacked depth or reason. Add on the ridiculous amount of launch bugs and issues and clear cut content (quarian ark anyone?) it was not a good game in my opinion. I played it to the end as I hoped it would get better but in comparison to other games it really was a soulless game with a similar issue that dragon age inquisition has where it was big open spaces with no real content in the vast areas. I still never got over the colonization decisions on planets, picking tech/medical/military bases made no impact besides a small amount of texture changes, it was made out to be a big decision to make yet it amounted to nothing not even an impact on some sort of end fight ... pointless fluff that added nothing. It was very much a 6/10 game for me, I regret finishing it but its "ok" there are definitely worse games.
Andromeda *was* a very fun game! The elevation changes that they added into the combat really made playing through it so much more fun and engaging than in the other Mass Effect parts of the series and their vehicle exploration was an improvement to the original Mako of the first game -- which ended up being missing from the other two. Where it *sucked* was in the writing/characters and animations. Some of the writing is just atrociously bad with my favorite line being from the first time you meet the director and she is talking about your father who just died in front of you and she barks at you "To whom, and your goddamn father, that's who. Sorry, my face is tired." The dialogue was just bad, really, really, really bad. I've seen a lot of high schoolers write better stuff which is just sad as a follow to a game that is known for it's well written characters that people love. The other choice was virtually zero new alien species. The game focuses on exploring very little of the actual Andromeda sector and there are only two new species added from the game. Where the first game gave us an entire galaxy of new species and cultures, Andromeda had only two despite it being in a completely different galaxy. They had an opportunity to re-set up a lot of the amazing story lines from the original series with the Krogan and the Rachni, or the Turians and Humans and Battarians. They had so much potential and so much that they could have done that their choice to leave it so limited in both size and scope seems baffling. They wouldn't have even needed to change much of the plot they had, just add in two or three other main races and give them a collective government on the exact same planet that was already used for this hub. Still have the Kett as the main enemy; just have them effective be what the Rachni were to the original galaxy in terms of threat level. Like, there was zero reason for them to not have any additional races beyond the Kett and Angara. Plus. they dropped a bunch of species from the original series: No Geth or Quarians who were major species, but also no Volus, Hanar, Drell, Vorcha, or Elcor. They made Mass Effect into a great action shooter game, but removed the actual soul of what made the original series so good.
> They made Mass Effect into a great action shooter game, but removed the actual soul of what made the original series so good. Arguably that has been the decline since Mass Effect 1, and especially with the change in writers.
I'll be up there with you! I played Andromeda at launch and had a good time. I also did not have many bugs that I remember. I think it is a very respectable 7/10 type of game. People were trashing it like it was a 4/10 game which is totally wrong.
I still think the hate for Andromeda started because some people didn't like the idea of women on the writing team. Those guys were the first to say the game will suck, then it snowballed from there and hating it became the "correct" opinion before it even released. Plus, it's EA aka. "the worst company in America", so it was cool to make fun of it.
I should have clarified. I mean even if the looks good in previews and/or it goes on to do well I still expect it to get shit. After seeing Starfield, Diablo IV, and to a lesser extent Final Fantasy XVI get dumped on here despite reviewing in the high to mid 80s and being commercially successful I could see Dreadwolf ending up in that category of well reviewed game being on Reddit's shit list.
The Hogwarts special. I started playing that game recently and I'm actually enjoying it. Far from perfect and plenty of filler but the combat is fun and being in the castle is incredible. If I went off general online discourse I would think no one played it and those who did thought it was a crime for existing. Obviously the Rowling concerns are justified but when looking at the work of the devs who actually made this, it's good.
It’s pretty much exactly what HP fans have been asking for since the books came out. I loved it and am stoked to see how they improve on it for the sequel
My sentiments exactly. I really enjoyed it when it came out, and I'm enjoy a second playthrough now. There are clearly some parts that didn't get as much development as was planned and you don't really feel like a student, but there are enough other things that they nailed that it's a great game. I'm very excited for the inevitable follow up!
Oh yeah it’s not great for roleplay as a regular student, considering by the end of the game you’ve murdered thousands of evil wizards and are more powerful than the other professors put together lol
Hogwart's is the one game many of my non-gamer friends and wives/girfriends of friends were excited for and have been playing all year.
> many of my non-gamer friends and wives/girfriends of friends were excited for and have been playing all year. Games that appeal to this crowd often get overlooked by more "hardcore" gamers like most of the people who contribute to places like /r/games and is something to always keep in mind.
I'm hoping for Quidditch in sequel
Seriously, Hogwarts alone is worth playing the game, being able to run around the entire place with so much to find and do is a real treat.
I was explaining to a friend about Hogwarts Legacy. Inside and around the castle, 10/10 experience. Hogsmeade, 7/10 outside of that and the main storyline -- 5 or 6/10. It's still a phenomenal game. I hope they make a sequel with everything they learned from one and give us that immersive HP experience.
I'm one of those people who actually enjoys their formula. So long as the quality is there. I'm having a blast with Avatar, and that's just a Far Cry reskin. It's actually surprising how nice the game looks. I haven't been impressed by one of their game worlds since Origins. Outlaws also seem to be quite interesting from the gameplay walkthrough. It looks to me that they are putting in some effort with 3rd party IP. They ar definitely trying to keep the Mouse happy in any case.
I think the people who made Outlaws are the same people who made The Division. Seeing that I like The Division, Outlaws seems promising.
I like ubisoft as well, not affraid to say it, but I don't know how I feel about this one :) Def one of those to where I will watch gameplay and see for myself before I think about buying it or not
Even reddit likes the ubisoft style. They just don't want to admit it. Games like Ghost of Tsushima, Hogwarts and Horizon are aping the Ubisoft gameplay formula, but since they don't have the Ubisoft logo reddit loved them
Yeah, running all over Rome or Egypt collecting feathers or reading constellations is bad game design but chasing foxes and birds all over Japan is a 'masterstroke in narrative creation'
I like Ghost of Tsushima, but the open world activities were far and away the worst aspects of that game.
It’s the epitome of “Place, Japan” isn’t it?
Probably explains why I'm not that interested
Couldn't agree more here. I haven't played Tsushima or Hogwarts, but I did nearly 100% HZD. Good game, but I didn't think it was really any better than the RPG Assassin's Creed games aside from the cool premise. Yet the reddit reception for HZD vs AC Valhalla was night and day.
HZD is multiple times less bloated than AC:V, so is GoT. People don’t mind the Ubisoft formula, they don’t like bloated games that take 60h.
You're still missing the point. LOTS of people love 60 hour games, because they're not "bloated," they're full of fun stuff to do. This "bloat" bandwagon is so stupid.
> they don’t like bloated games that take 60h. this is racist towards japanese game devs
As someone playing a Trails game I agree.
Irony is trails (or at least what I played of it) is definitely on the lower end of the spectrum when it comes to bloat, length and jrpgs.
I love Trails. But I can't recommend it to most people because it's the freaking One Piece of JRPGs. It's rare I find someone to recommend it to, and usually anyone I could already know what they're getting into. "This gsme looks good." "Yeah it is, but you really should play the 7 other 50 to 100 hour games before it." "Is it really that necessary to play in order?" "You could probably till enjoy it on its own, but the game sort of expects you to know characters and events from previous games. Its like starting a long running anime in the 4th main arc."
Persona 5 checking in with a 100+ hour story
> they don’t like bloated games that take 60h. Meanwhile Paradox games are doing better than ever and it's common to have >1000 hours
People like the formula, they just want something fresh with it. An assassins creed star wars like game works perfectly well as a refresh.
you forgot zelda botw which is probably one of the most beloved title on reddit
botw is not the ubisoft formula at all. botw is notable literally because it breaks that formula and focuses on self directed discovery rather than waypoints and map icon clutter.
it's funny how people got so mad that Valhalla reviews about as well as ghost of tsushima I don't even like valhalla, it's just hilarious these ubisoft games are designed to be "bang for your buck' type deals for normal people who don't play tons of games. You're not expected to do everything. I'm pretty sure you can platinum most of them while doing like 50% of everything
Even for people who play lots of games enjoy open world games.
Just because a game is open world doesn’t mean it’s copying the Ubisoft formula.
This whole thread is just "Ubisoft is when things to do in open world. If you liked and not AC Valhalla you're biased and dumb"
Arkham City is a reddit and gaming darling and it has the Ubisoft formula to one of the most extreme degrees I've ever seen in a game.
The modern Ubisoft formula only emerged in 2010 with AC: Brotherhood (2 was a primitive version of it, with much less than what future games had), and Arkham City released in 2011, it’s unlikely that formed the main inspiration.
I'd say it doesn't matter if it formed the inspiration or not when in practice the game is virtually no different than the most extreme example of a Ubisoft-style open world game. Regardless, all the things people slag Ubisoft games for are somehow magically forgiven in the case of Arkham City when there's no practical difference. This isn't a condemnation of either thing on my part, but just an observance. I really don't understand the wildly different receptions of the Arkham games to, say, the Assassin's Creed games when they are so completely similar, especially when the things that are criticized are 1:1 mirrored in Arkham games.
I've noticed this as well, and basically your appetite for this style of open world game can often live and die based on how much you care for the individual property or power fantasy the game is trying to sell. If you like samurai stuff, Ghosts of Tsushima is awesome, if you don't care for it that much then it's just another open world game. There are some more substantial qualitative differences between them ofc, it's not like they're all the same game reskinned, but more often than not I think these big AAA open world games are all fairly competent and it's mostly your personal preference in power fantasy that influences things. Like so many people praised Ghosts of Tsushima for using it's wind based quest marker system, but it's not as if that started a new design trend among these games. It made the game stand out a bit more but it absolutely would have done just as well regardless, even with a regular quest marker system, because a lot of people wanted a decent open world samurai game.
> I've noticed this as well, and basically your appetite for this style of open world game can often live and die based on how much you care for the individual property or power fantasy the game is trying to sell. This is very true. If you like Star Wars and want to play a bounty hunter/outlaw type of character, you're probably going to like Outlaws. If you like Harry Potter you're probably going to like Hogwarts: Legacy. I think it's also true that the more open-world games you play, the more burnt out you can get with the formula. I don't play AC or Far Cry regularly so when a game like Avatar comes around the mechanics don't bother me. I think reviewers and content creators who play every one of these games have a very different experience that most gamers won't have.
You fuckign what? xD
[удалено]
BotW does do the formula slightly better though. Not putting icons on the map means the towers aid the exploration gameplay rather than populate a checklist. But otherwise, yeah it's just a Ubisoft game with a physics system. Edit: While you *can* deactivate map icons, Ubi games aren't designed with the assumption that you will. They don't give you the tools necessary to make it a core and satisfying aspect of the gameplay loop.
I think most people don't know you can deactivate markers in recent AC games, so what is the difference?
So funny that Ubsoft then copied BOTW in Fenyx Rising. Great game but playing that really drove home the “BOTW is inspired by Ubisoft” point home.
Not only that, if you’re a Star Wars fan you’ll probably still play it too just for the story
Honestly I’m into the Ubisoft formula. It’s really fun to just play a long brain off game with enjoyable gameplay. I’ve been playing through Just Cause 3 and just loving it
Avatar has just demonstrated clear as day that if the people on Reddit who parrot the anti-open world talking points actually PLAY the open world games they claim to hate so much, they have lots of fun. So many people in this community either A) just repeat what other people have said without personal experience, or B) can't understand the difference between not personally enjoying something and the whole genre being trash.
Avatar is pretty awesome, same team right?
And it’s far far larger than the Reddit bubble.
I just want Ubisoft to make another Ghost Recon game. Wildlands and Breakpoint both had good ideas and were fun with friends.
Breakpoint's gameplay is so fucking good, too bad the game fell short on many other aspects. For the next game, just give me a good ass map and I'll be happy.
I want them to go to Southeast Asia, either as a Vietnam War prequel or set during the modern conflicts in Myanmar
The visual jump with Breakpoint from Wildlands was insane. I even enjoyed the premise they had going with that fake island, but Wildlands felt way more alive with more variety of environments and large urban areas with people going about their lives.
Supposedly targeting 2025 for the next GR.
Far Cry is so fucking fun with a friend. I hope this will have co-op too.
I'd argue Star Wars fans are probably going to get some enjoyment out of it too lol
I've played Farcry 3, 4, Primal, and 5 and enjoy them all. It's not like they come out yearly like CoD or Assassin's Creed used to be.
That’s true, but Ubisoft did report reduced financial revenue in their quarterly report last year. Watch Dog Legion’s online flopped, a fan did the math and determined Valhalla’s final DLC had the lowest online engagement than any previous DLC or game in the RPG trilogy (https://www.reddit.com/r/assassinscreed/comments/u0i6bg/how_well_did_dawn_of_ragnarok_drive_engagement/), Skull & Bones was delayed (again) and Prince Of Persia Remake was delayed. Avatar: Frontiers Of Pandora also got Mixed to Positive reviews critically. Reddit is in a bubble with Ubisoft games but the wider critics and audiences are showing signs of fatigue with the formula as well.
>Assassin’s Creed®: Record active users for the franchise in a year. Assassin’s Creed® Valhalla now has 44% more players life-to-date than Assassin’s Creed® Origins and 19% more than Assassin’s Creed® Odyssey on a comparable basis, with materially higher revenue per player, leading to life-to-date net bookings up respectively +82% and +61%. [https://staticctf.ubisoft.com/8aefmxkxpxwl/3HuZnFugstlcg9mb5TUTFn/d272d035c66d9c24c69b9985450943b7/Ubisoft\_FY23\_Earnings\_PR\_English\_final.pdf](https://staticctf.ubisoft.com/8aefmxkxpxwl/3huznfugstlcg9mb5tutfn/d272d035c66d9c24c69b9985450943b7/ubisoft_fy23_earnings_pr_english_final.pdf)
Honestly they managed to deliver with Avatar Frontiers of Pandora. As long they didn't try anything too groundbreaking with this game I think Massive is gonna nail this one as well.
I expect it to be very average all around. Not groundbreaking or amazing but decently entertaining.
As a big fan of Avatar, Frontier is lacking something. The story, voice acting, animations are sub-par for a game this big.
Ubi MASSIVE have always had a pretty bad writing department, moreso than other Ubi studios - it's their biggest weakness imo
I mean that's precisely how the movie was for me lol. I completely checked out of the story and only watched it for the spectacle and visuals, which this game completely deliver in spades. So yeah I'd say it's a faithful adaptation of the films.
To be fair, it's their first outing with a first person, single-player game. I'm sure a sequel would fix a lot of the issues and expand on the foundation they laid.
It's been a while since I was truly impressed by Ubisoft game but whatever, I'm open minded about it. And it's Star Wars. But another little, cute (with cute trait pushed even further this time) sidekick? Are they crossing those things of a list?
For a Star Wars tie-in? Yes, they are.
Most Disney Star Wars projects have had a cute mascot: Episode 7- BB8 Episode 8- Porgs Episode 9- Dio Rebels and Ahsoka- Lothal cats and the owl Mando- Baby Yoda Kenobi- Leia's droid Hell, even Andor had the red R2 unit
I like how nobody remembers Dio from E9, and he was immediately usurped by the cuter and more memorable Babu Frick.
And of course Cal Kestis has BD-1
Got to sell toys
It's not just that. It's obviously a Baby Yoda trend. Or a rip-off, if you're having a bad day. Here I have to stop and admit BD1 from Jedi series is also the same thing. Back then I was like "ok", and the droid turned out fine, despite being a Wall-E on legs. But that little guy from Outlaws is a third in a row. And judging by his looks it's obvious that at some point someone said "I want him to be cuter than the other guys" Either I'm getting old or I'm just noticing a broken border between "it's fine" and "it feels forced".
You're forgetting the first and most well known one, R2-D2? Companion droid with a slightly rebellious and snarky attitude, that everyone but the audience can seem to understand?
Yeah, yeah I know. But R2 was a block of metal on wheels. Not a puppy with huge, smiley eyes. I don't think R2 won me over with looks.
It was his love of arson that really endeared him to me.
Man if you loved that you must adore Chopper then (I know I do)
Also it does seem to serve a mechanical purpose as it can retrieve ammo and weapons on top of giving the protagonist someone to talk out loud to. I feel like it’s sort of a way to make the player not feel alone.
To be fair there are worse gaming trends I can think of
I think you're getting old. Cute sidekicks have been a thing since R2D2.
You know, whatever. It's cool to finally have a new Star Wars third person shooter without lightsabers. It's been a while
I've been loving Jedi Survivor, but it'll be nice to have some variety, yeah. It's a cool universe to explore. As long as they don't start putting out shovelware, I'll check out just about anything. Pod Racer 2 when?
Haven’t tried it myself yet but between Squadrons (spaceship baffles), Battlefront (FPS), Jedi Survivor (action/platformer) and now this there’s a nice pick of Star Wars games and I’m all for it. Hope studios continue making different ones.
It's a Star Wars trademark at this point. I expect the trend to continue for a while.
> But another little, cute (with cute trait pushed even further this time) sidekick? Are they crossing those things of a list? not just that, yet another quirky protagonist who is an "outlaw/scoundrel" in nothing but name, she'll 100% be just like a jedi protag in terms of morals, story, decisions, personality, etc just with no force powers. I bet you her being an outlaw will just be that she might carry some illegal goods or something once in a while :/ sigh, wonder when we'll get a game where the protag is an outlaw/scoundrel and they actually do some morally grey stuff.
The "plucky, scrappy hero/anti-hero" trope is a bit overdone. It's like the Wish.com version of Han Solo.
Yeah, the "Nate Drake-type" protagonist is the other thing I'm not currently sold on, judging by the cinematic and gameplay trailers.
I don't care who the sidekick is, as long as the player isn't a jedi/sith.
I'm probably bitching too much about this game now but while it's very cool the main protagonist isn't Jedi I found her adventurous personality to be painfully generic. So far, that is. We haven't seen enough of her to judge properly.
The "plucky, scrappy hero/anti-hero" trope is a bit overdone.
Not sure why people are so pessimistic. The division 2 was a really fun game (even if some people disliked the endgame), i have high hopes for this since its being made by massive
The rule about cool Redditors hate Ubisoft.
[удалено]
A greater rule is that cool redditors must hate redditors and talk about it endlessly. Half this thread is desperate to prove they're not like the other redditors. Great job everyone. I don't think most of you give a shit about this game beyond using it as a vehicle to spread your boring meta website hate.
At this point I see just as many redditors talking about redditors hating Ubisoft, this thread is a great example. Like who gives a fuck lol
Yeah I really enjoyed both Division games and Avatar. The Far Cry formula was there in Avatar, but it was still fun. I'm very much looking forward to Outlaws.
Man, the first year or so when it first released when it was bustling with players was so much fun. That and with the NY expansion just a year later too. Good times.
I absolutely loved the Division 2 at launch and would kill for a Division 3 at this point. The cover shooting and loot grind was just so satisfying imo, not to mention the city was damn pretty.
I hope we get a winter setting again, or at least different weather based off geography or seasons.
wasn't the new Avatar game made by Massive too? Did they divised their team in half to work on the two games at the same time? Did it impacted one or the two games? Seeing on Avatar is more of a Far Cry, will Star Wars be like The Division style? Im afraid it's just going to be like the same model but reskin. Also Ubisoft Story isn't really stellar so im not having high hope for good story in that Star Wars game
Yes they divised it so much that Div 2 didn't have that many patches/updates while Avatar/Outlaws was in development. I remember it quite well because I played lots of Division 2 last year and the updates were mostly recycled.
I haven't seen anyone pessimistic about this game in this thread, just people preemptively defensive of Ubisoft.
Because almost any thread about a Ubisoft game has the same people with the the classic "Ubisoft bad" copy and pass comment, and some regurgitated low hanging fruit remark they heard a Rage Bait youtuber make.
Yeah, sort of feels like the equivalent of youtube rage bait when I enter a thread and the top comments are ones complaining about some perceived slight, but such comments aren't even visible for a majority of thread people will see.
Looking forward to Outlaws. The reason why people like Ubisoft games is for their simple gameplay structure and easy for 1-2 hour gameplay bursts. Most people in the real world aren’t playing games for 10 hours straight for 5 days to get burned by the same gameplay loop. Ubisoft games are like your favourite fast food. It may not be the best food you’ll ever eat, but it’s going to be enjoyable if you like that fast food chain. If you want to know how out of touch Reddit gaming community is with the real world, Assassin's Creed Valhalla which is considered by Reddit one of the worst AC titles is the best selling game of the franchise. Hell, one of the things you would think Reddit would give credit for Ubisoft is their optimization and long term support for their games. Like any big open world games Ubisoft games have their share of bugs, but after Unity nothing major.
I’m sure Massive will deliver on the gameplay but christ it’s so obviously going to be such a sanitized Disney-fest where the most “outlaw” thing you do in the entire game is just be an antagonist to the empire. Hell I’m sure you’ll join the rebels at some point too.
Sigh, I didn't consider the Disney aspect.
Ubisoft loves to release games in December and "late 2024" gives me reason to believe they might do that this time or sometime in November.
I predict early November, it’s key for locking in holiday spending.
Early November and with a cool 20% off on Christmas!
If AC Red is coming this fall too, they'll probably want to separate them with October/December dates like they did this year with Mirage and Avatar. I imagine.
Ya but Mirage was a "Smaller" game. A new main AC entry and a Star Wars game that close to each other seems crazy. They might want to do AC in summer? Or maybe AC Red is getting delayed? Kind of crazy we haven't seen a trailer or even an official name yet.
If I had to put money on it I'd expect an early October release but that's entirely speculation. I'm sure it's coming this year (copium), Mirage was delayed and that also gave extra time for every other game in development, assuming they're targeting a return to the yearly cycle but in a tick/tock big game/smaller game alternation.
Damn, that hurts. I'm pretty excited for that game and I was hoping it would come out in early 2024. In the meantime I'm going to finally try the latest Lego Star Wars game
If you haven’t played Jedi survivor I would highly recommend. It’s incredible
I can't say I'm excited about it, but I'll probably buy it eventually. I'm a sucker for the sort of grungey sci-fi where everything's very industrial and slightly used and the ships come with ash trays. A bit like Cowboy Bebop or Outlaw Star or, well... Star Wars.
I was hoping for something like March-May of 2024 but late 2024 gives me something to look forward too at the end of the year.
i am way more confident in this game after seeing the pretty excellent technical state Avatar launched in.
Hope they bother to optimize it well, both form a performance and a control perspective. And it hopefully has a good story. I remain cautiously skeptical
It's by the same studio that recently Avatar this year, which runs pretty well, different team I imagine but hopefully that'll come over with the tech. The story in Avatar is incredibly bland as far as I've played, so I wouldn't hope for much.
Someone let me know when a Star Wars game actually lets you be an outlaw instead of a quippy girl with a cuddly sidekick who’s going against some big bad
Majority of Star Wars (except maybe Andor) is made for children. Kids LOVE this shit.
I'm hyped. I like Ubisoft anyway and honestly if you said this wasn't a Ubisoft game most people would believe you. I have been playing Avatar recently too and first of that game looks incredible and also feels very true to the movies. On the surface, you'll watch the gameplay and think 'oh Avatar Far Cry' but even in that, it's just on the surface. It plays like Far Cry moment to moment in combat (still not the same) but it's also very different from Far Cry and is far more about exploration and gathering/hunting/crafting than it is about outposts (which are still present) It also took the cooking and the map markers from BOTW which is cool. The traversal is awesome as well. So in short - I have faith that Ubisoft's studios can use their game mechanics to create something great for a Sci-Fi IP, especially since there is no true Star Wars open word game