Ubisoft’s Executive VP Wants to End Finite Experiences

DooKey

DooKey

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 25, 2001
Messages
13,559
In an interview posted on Ubisoft's blog the Executive VP wants to end finite experiences in Ubisoft games. He doesn't want a game to just have an ending any longer and he wants to be able to extend the game to other deeds or tasks to be done after completing the first rendition of the story. I don't agree with his new focus on gaming and I believe we'll start to see shorter games from Ubisoft and then they'll milk us with copycat DLC so we can kill the bad guy in every country on earth before the game fades away. I'm of the opinion that a fully fleshed out game that has a substantial experience and gives you a feeling of accomplishment is much better than some never-ending story line that drags on forever. Do we want every game to turn into WOW and its clones?

But when you succeed, you have to leave the game, because there is nothing else to do. So the goal was to break this, and say that you will be the hero of a region or population many times, not just once. And if you get rid of a dictator or an oppressor, something else is going to happen in the world, and you will have a new goal.
 
So basically they want to turn games into tv series? That will get new episodes in varying quality until interest dwindles and then it never gets proper closure? What can I say? FUCK NO!

I play games to experience the story. Yes some games are good enough to be played for their own sake, but I'd still ignore them if they had no valid campaign.
 
Soooo, DLC baked in that only unlocks when you finish the prior story arc?
 
220px-SiN_Episodes_-_Emergence_-_Box_Front.jpg


Last attempt at this worked out greatttt....
 
Serialized video games, about as much fun as blowing your cock off with fireworks.
 
In my opinion, the stuff in the article, its just fancy word dress up. Easy to talk about, hard to actually make reality. In my opinion, the gaming market is pretty big, big enough to accommodate lots of varying AAA games with particular focuses and genres. I like a game with a nice story, but sometimes I just want to get competitive, and etc. Looking at Ubisoft's current supported and incoming releases, I think I can say their focus isn't entirely on making the same game over and over again.

Unique:
Rainbow Six Siege - Multiplayer Shooter, with emphasis on teamwork
For Honor - multiplayer, dueling/fighting game?
Trials Rising - racing motorbikes
Mario + Rabbids Kingdom Battle - Xcom clone
Anno 1800 - Strategy game/supply-chain hell
The Crew 2 - open-world racing/etc
Starlink - action-adventure with Starfox
Transference - some sort of adventure game
Just Dance 2019 - Dancing game

Not as Unique:
Assassin's Creed Odyssey - open-world
Skull & Bones - open-world, PvP and PvE on the seas
Division 2 - looter shooter, in the vein of Destiny and Anthem?
Far Cry 5 - open-world

Hmm, actually now listing it, im seeing a trend of ubisoft single-player games that are pretty oriented towards open-world. I suppose thats where the fatigue is coming in. I didn't buy either the Far Cry or the Assassin's Creed series nor Division 1 but I do see how one who did might be sick of the open-world and the serialization at this point.
 
I have wondered WHY gaming studios havent done a version of GURPS for the computer

http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/

What i mean is.. the "base" game is the gaming/character system. You create your character that resides in some base world, then through DLC's play that same character in various game worlds from westerns to medieval to space. It could be both online for various MP or solo.
 
Oh cool, books where you reach the last page, only to find out there are more pages.

J.K. Rowling "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (2007)" said:
The scar had not pained Harry for nineteen years. All was well.
Click to expand...

J.K. Rowling "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (2018)" said:
The scar had not pained Harry for nineteen years. All was well... until, suddenly, it started to hurt again.
Click to expand...
 
I have an idea. Maybe keep a game that has a definite ending, but you can choose a myriad of ways to get to that ending. Depending on how you played, the ending changes up. You may even have choices at the end on how it ends. The ending is complete and provides closure, but sets up a possible sequel. This gives the game such a long-lasting experience, it feels like it never ends, and you want to go back even years later and replay it. Seems like this has been done before....
 
So after finding out many players get fatigue and lose interests in open world they make the move to exclusive continuous play... Am I the only one seeing never ending doc with no resolution.....

Because id avoid that crap
 
The new term is "live services", meaning tons of microtransaction and DLC BS without having to actually like, release a sequel ever.

Continuing the downfall of the AAA gaming industry.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Madoc
like this
M76 said:
So basically they want to turn games into tv series? That will get new episodes in varying quality until interest dwindles and then it never gets proper closure? What can I say? FUCK NO!

I play games to experience the story. Yes some games are good enough to be played for their own sake, but I'd still ignore them if they had no valid campaign.
Click to expand...

This. A proper ending is great. I think they just want to take the lazy way out and not worry about having a strong story. They want to fully move to the cut/paste open world design. Further remove the story and purpose, fully embrace "play as your feels", and have generic set pieces that you can continue to make and sell until it stops making a profit.
 
Isn't this taking the Agile methodology too far out in order to save cost and get money/value as soon as possible.
 
Well, then, looks like I won't be buying Ubisoft games for a while. At least until this clown isn't working there anymore.
 
ubisoft couldn't conclude a game anyway.

look at assassins creed. there is no end in sight.

they killed off the main protagonist and they still lumber on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Madoc
like this
I asked on Steam if anyone played all the Ass creed games one or two people did but skipped the PS vita version. UBI should focus on making fantasy games that are not based on simulating real life.
 
Instead of bringing dead franchises that are kinda already dead. They should partner with Valve bring a Ubi soft Left for dead to the table and Half life 3. SinceValve is stuck in a 2009 time warp powered by a portal.
 
"I'm of the opinion that a fully fleshed out game that has a substantial experience and gives you a feeling of accomplishment is much better than some never-ending story line that drags on forever."

QFT! Perfectly stated.
 
katanaD said:
I have wondered WHY gaming studios havent done a version of GURPS for the computer

http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/

What i mean is.. the "base" game is the gaming/character system. You create your character that resides in some base world, then through DLC's play that same character in various game worlds from westerns to medieval to space. It could be both online for various MP or solo.
Click to expand...

Wow, that website is some late 90s shit.
 
Ubisoft needs to chill a bit longer? Didn't we just recently allow them back into our good graces for years of anti-consumer behavior? EA.... don't even THINK about it. You are definitely still in the dog house!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top