Clearly the next step for this system is to instantly determine each person's age, occupation and annual income, along with with a quick factoid or two to add flavour:

https://www.ubisoft.com/en-us/game/watch-dogs/

Cool enough, though not sure I'm sold on this over Artemis Spaceship Bridge Simulator... this basically is that, but having VR requirement and set in a Star Trek universe (from the comments it appears to be the JJ Abrams universe). I'm not one to be upset about it being Ubisoft.

Pulsar: Lost Colony is another one in the same thing, though it seems to be a bit more ambitious in total scope, though missing the VR requirement. It has away missions. It's the one I'd be more interested in playing... were I to have enough friends to play any of these. lol.

Weird, I wonder why he chose Far Cry Primal for this particular rant. The game received mixed reviews and has an average Metacritic score of 76 (across all three platforms). I seriously doubt Ubisoft would pay for such reviews.

As others have mentioned, publishers don't offer explicit bribes. They offer access. Preview copies, preview events, interviews, footage, screenshots, etc. In the long run, that's far more valuable than straight up cash.

@VoodooV! Great to see you back, man!

For everyone else, I backed this game and then I dropped ~$100 on extra ships.

I hope it's all its promised. I hope it's basically Star Wars/Trek/lightning in a bottle. I hope Chris Roberts makes enough to buy Facebook from it.

Do I think that will happen? Not bloodily likely. Am I expecting the greatest game ever? Not a chance.

But fuck me, I don't regret backing it for a second. If all I get is some shiny videos and the promise of something great, then that's worth more than any number of Ubisoft open world fetch quest-a-thons.

This is someone truly trying to push the envelope. To make a game that we dreamed of as kids, and who doesn't give a fuck about commercial realities.

It was so, so, SO fucking worth it to actually see a dec reach for the stars and push everything, especially PC technology.

If it fails ( and it probably will), then fuck it, they failed GLORIOUSLY.

I'd give them another $100 just for that.

isn't Ubisoft in French-speaking-Canada?
They couldn't find any French-accented voice actors?

shagen454, Shadow of Mordor isn't from Ubisoft, though clearly in ways inspired by it and the Arkham series. IMHO it's one of the better games this year.

This has been a damn good year for games even though a lot of the games that should have been good were really sort of rehashes/boring with subpar indie games, Ubisoft reskinning Assassin's Creed for every franchise (I'm looking at you Shadow of Mordor) and then there are all of the bland ass MMO's that looked decent but ended up sucking (Wildstar, ArcheAge). Not that they're bad, theoretically they are decent games but they just don't have the innovation or oomph.

I've NEVER spent $75.00 on a game needless to say a beta, but E:D is definitely worth it. It's my top game of the year (even in beta form). Closely followed by Divinity: Original Sin (fucking awesome RPG), Legends of Grimrock II (fucking awesome old school dungeon crawler (Ultima Underworld / Myst puzzler), Wasteland 2 (awesome Wasteland comeback) as well as Alien: Isolation (great concept, nailed the visuals & sound -- super intense). And then there was Hearthstone which I definitely spent more time playing than anything else.

But, Elite: Dangerous is stunningly brilliant, best sound I've ever heard in a game- it's so fucking good that I invested in a HOTAS & Oculus Rift (haven't gotten it yet though).

Downloading the update now - can't wait to see the changes.

Ubisoft? Pass.

If you gave EA money for this abortion, you are part of the reason why some publishers (EA, Ubisoft, Activision...) want to treat PC games as $60 rentals, and you are most definitely part of the problem. There are an ABUNDANCE of better, cheaper PC games developed by companies who want your business and won't treat you as just an open wallet. Sim City was a great franchise once, but just like Diablo, Crysis, and anything from Bioware nowadays, it's been consolized, socialized, and/or monetized into crap that most PC gamers want nothing to do with.

This "real cities do not exist in a bubble" is just corporate blathering to justify the always-on DRM, as if fans of the series have forgotten it has always been, first and foremost, a single player game, and a very enjoyable one at that. It is ABSOLUTELY IDIOTIC to force such a drastic change in gameplay/genre into a game that has been so defined by it's gameplay/genre over the years. Same thing when EA remade Syndicate as a FPS. A FPS Syndicate ISN'T SYNDICATE! I don't want to play with anyone else. I don't want my fucking savegames on your shitty server, even if it was an awesome server. If I give you $60 for your game, it's now MY game, and you leave me the fuck alone!

AAARRG! It's like PC game developers are all being run by fucking console kiddies and greedy shitstain corporate types who never played NetQuake or DWANGO, or Heretic, or System Shock, or X-Com, or any of the Black Isle or pre-Dragon Age 2 Bioware stuff, or any Diablo without a "III" behind it, or Warcraft: Orcs and Humans, or the Ultimas, or the Roberta Williams adventure games, or Wing Commander, or Tie Fighter, or MechWarrior. Deus Ex! A full fucking Deus EX play-through would be required before I'd even THINK about hiring your ass to develop a new PC game! On second thought, play it three times, once for each ending!

uuuuugh... so... anyway... yeah, fuck EA.

Ok, fine. Rage.

There has been much wailing and gnashing of teeth about Starcraft 2, Diablo III, Anno 2070, and other games that require an online connection.

The ones on Steam that require you to always be online are either multiplayer-only games (because you need to be online to actually play against people), and games that have their own online-only requirements (Ubisoft's UPlay, for instance).

Steam itself doesn't have any you-must-be-online reqs.

>> ^braindonut:

I want a new Tie Fighter so bad... SO bad...
And none of this stupid arcade action. Joystick, keyboard... just like the old days, but new graphics.
I want this SO bad.


I still have my Wingman Extreme sitting high on a shelf, just waiting for a new PC Tie Fighter or MechWarrior. Single player campaigns/missions, LAN, no consolitis bullshit, FULLY configurable keyboard and controller assignments. I don't even care if it's purty. Just don't let LucasArts, Ubisoft, id, EA, Blizzard, or Microsoft anywhere near it.

Dear Ubisoft,

Do you even know how to make a bad game?

Much love,
Kofi

In reply to this comment by dannym3141:
Take bioware for example. Before they were 'bought' by EA they made some of the (arguably, but almost universally accepted) best games of their particular genre. Baldur's gate 1 and 2, neverwinter nights....


Forgot about Bioware. They're on my list as well. They used to be an automatic buy, but DA2... EA is poison to game companies.

It's difficult to explain to young'uns who were raised on consoles why old-school PC gamers are so disappointed in the current state of PC gaming. This whole backlash that PC gamers are "elitist crybabies" is just so tired. I have a gaming mouse and a 104 keys, yet many PC games are designed for multiple platforms, and, unfortunately, the lowest common denominator is an ADD-addled console player with a gamepad. The result is cookie-cutter dross that is only made discernible in its genre by the textures and artwork that make up its world. I'm not saying great AAA pc games aren't being made any more, just that there are so few, and this move by developers towards always-online DRM for single-player gaming (Ubisoft, Blizzard) limits my choices even more, as I refuse to support that bullshit.

I still play through Doom and Doom2 about once a year and have a blast every time. I'm about halfway through yet another run of Diablo II, and I'm thinking I'll fire up Planescape: Torment or Baldur's Gate after that. So many excellent older games to play and replay, not to mention the large number of quality indie games being released. I don't miss Diablo III one bit.

>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:

Baaaah.
I guess you're gonna vote for Obama and Goldman Sachs again this year as well?
>> ^Quboid:
This video is trying to tell me that EA remake the same shitty game that idiots buy over and over.
However, what it actually tells me is that the maker of this video is a hipster asshole who thinks his opinions are worth more than other people's, and who thinks because they don't like Call of Honour, then people who do are simple minded, gullible sheep. This asshole is so full of his or her own opinion that anyone who disagrees must have fallen for EA's evil marketing because anyone actually thinking independently would surely have the same opinion as them, as they're so fucking special; they're the only sane person.
EA, Activision and Ubisoft do produce many shitty games and are involved in underhanded tactics like buying reviews. However, that doesn't mean all their games suck and it doesn't mean people who like an EA game, even an uninnovative sequel, are wrong. The implication that we should all follow what this guy thinks (or if you prefer, independently come to the same conclusion) would make us sheep.



What? You know this is a video about EA, not a political thing, right? I can assure you I am not going to vote for Obama or Goldman Sachs this year but this has zero to do with me thinking this guy is a prick for setting himself up as some sort of superior being.

If the video just criticised EA's game production system and how it results in a massive lack of innovation, and how PC gamers tend to get shafted, fine. I agree. But this guy implies that players who buy the latest FIFA, Battlefield or whatever are fools and that's insulting. I bought BF3 because I liked BF:BC2, not because something shiny was dangled in front of me and not because IGN gave it good marks. Likewise, I bought FIFA12 because I played FIFA11 lots and even though little has changed, I've still got many, many times as much gameplay from it than I've got from most other games from developers and publishers big and small.

My complaint isn't that poor little EA don't deserve the criticism. My complaint is that he seems to think people who don't share his opinion must be fools.

I have some pretty strong and negative opinions about EA, Activision, Ubisoft, and now, Blizzard. I'm thinking this was made by a PC gamer. Lot's to be pissed/disgusted about if you are a PC gamer and have been for at least 10-15 years or so.