If you weren't working in Ubi Montreal, then there's no way for you to tell how they implemented their micro transaction system.1-LOL
2-We're 1.6million people in Montreal and there's something like 2600 employees at Ubisoft Montreal. Not everybody from Montreal on Gaf is working for Ubisoft.
3-I actually work for one of Ubisoft's competitor in Montreal so I have nothing to gain from defending them except a bit a sanity.
Alright, I'll bite.
You're completely missing the point. Ubisoft intentionally decided to remove the micro-transactions from review copies because they knew it would negatively affect the perception of their game, and rightfully so. This thread proves why. They knew it was a bad/shady move and yet they did it anyway. In this case, "going crazy over nothing" is completely justified. I have a spine and don't like to be insulted, Thank you Very Much, Ubisoft.
Either way they created a situation where pricing (a relevant and influential part of the game) was not provided to reviewers which could have resulted in inaccurate review scores not reflecting the actual balance of the game.Except they did not intentionally remove it from review copies. It was there in the menu, just not accessible due to the server not running.
Shouldn't it say 'review copies' not 'retail copies'?That's a much better, less' rage at Ubisoft inducing' thread title.
Just listened to the segment of the bombcast, and christ has all of this been blown out of proportion. They specifically stated that the servers were down due to it being pre-release, and they simply couldn't confirm if it was a real currency, or some sort of meta-game system (though they all seemed convinced that it was an actual microtransaction platform).
The microtransactions are shit, but it's not like Ubisoft intentionally hid anything from reviewers. I get that people want to smack Ubisoft around a little - they've done a great deal to deserve it. But focus on real issues, instead of just making shit up to fit a narrative.
Except they did not intentionally remove it from review copies. It was there in the menu, just not accessible due to the server not running.
Those specific servers are down for a reason. Other online servers worked, but the game options that were a negative for the game were down while reviewers were playing their copy.
It makes me wonder how anyone can review games when signing embargoes means playing a rigged game. It's almost as bad as previews where you sit in gaming chairs with expensive headphones, except this time it's about pushing negative features to the side, because "the servers were down" while acting coy.
It may not trick some reviewers, but it had an impact on those that aren't as vigilant.
Those specific servers are down for a reason. Other online servers worked, but the game options that were a negative for the game were down while reviewers were playing their copy.
It makes me wonder how anyone can review games when signing embargoes means playing a rigged game. It's almost as bad as previews where you sit in gaming chairs with expensive headphones, except this time it's about pushing negative features to the side, because "the servers were down" while acting coy.
It may not trick some reviewers, but it had an impact on those that aren't as vigilant.
Either way they created a situation where pricing (a relevant and influential part of the game) was not provided to reviewers which could have resulted in inaccurate review scores not reflecting the actual balance of the game.
Are you actually defending microbulshit or are you just PR? Can't tell.This post should be stickied to the OP. Clearly people just read the title and assume from there out:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=138446119&postcount=220
Its extremely evident of what microtransactions were (or weren't). It didn't matter about pricing. Critics don't care and if players who don't want to do microtransactions don't care, neither should they. If you're opposed to microtransactions, why do you care if some rando is paying $20 for a cloak unlockable now that you can get by playing the game as normal, as opposed to $10 or $5 or $9,000? Why would that change a review score?
I'm a nurse. Shampooing a crotch isn't really that big a deal after you get used to it.UBI can shampoo my crotch.
I'm a nurse. Shampooing a crotch isn't really that big a deal after you get used to it.
You'll see shit so weird you couldn't even make it up if you tried.Jesus fuck Ubisoft, what are you doing?
I'm studying nursing and no one told me about this yet.
You'll see shit so weird you couldn't even make it up if you tried.
Also, there's still time to change your mind/profession.
You'll see shit so weird you couldn't even make it up if you tried.
Also, there's still time to change your mind/profession.
Are you actually defending microbulshit or are you just PR? Can't tell.
Don't want this in my games. Make it free and charge whatever you want.
P.S. Other than that, fix this steaming pile you call game Ubisoft. I hope they bomb financially with Unity, maybe they'll learn the lesson.
Now imagine how much they are gonna fuck up division considering that it is an MMO shooter.
Are there any Ubisoft developers or community managers here on GAF? I feel sorry for the backlash they're receiving, even if they took no part in this game.
Sucks for Ubi, tho. They're having a terribad year with consumer backlash.