Support NeoGAF

[Ludist210]

I don't blame them...those type games traditionally don't sell well on Nintendo consoles. But the news still stinks as an exclusive (for now) Wii U owner.

Anyway, as long a possible Rayman 3 comes to the WiiU I'm OK with it.
Legends is the best 2D platformer of the generation so far.

Rayman Legends was good, but c'mon, the best 2D platformer of this generation is Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze.

 

[Gotdatmoney]

I understand why they perhaps don't want to bother with established series at this point but I don't really get why they are so down on new series that don't have any bias associated with them. Watch Dogs to me would have made way more sense launching at the same time as the other versions. It's going to bomb in November and even more than that, the core fanbase that might support the title isn't going to want to buy it now that Ubi has essentially said no chance of you getting the second game. But you know, Nintendo screwed up so much with the WiiU I don't really blame third parties for keeping away.

 

[Aeriscloud]

I have no idea why Watch_Dogs is even still happening on Wii U. Seemed like they would have been better off cancelling it ages ago .

Because I still have my pre order for it DAMNIT!

 

[Shmuely Bully]

I'm seeing this statement repeated very often, and I think its very strange that people are willing to buy games from companies even when they are fully aware it is plagued with issues. I understand that they really want to play those games... but you're simply encouraging the devs to keep doing the same thing for future releases of the title. Perhaps, I'm too used to buying games that run well without the need for patches to fix crap. Oh well... it is the same result either way.

Even if I'm not willing to buy a game due to the issues that it has, an idea that really depends on the severity of the issues (and 'No DLC' or 'Late port' doesn't really meet my personal criteria for that) enough of the user base of the platforms that I buy is to make continued investment worthwhile for companies. The fact that the user base for Wii U isn't willing to do that is not a failure on the part of third-parties, it's a failure on the part of Nintendo to appeal to users who have a real interest in those games. Lets look at it this way: Had Bioshock sold in the tens of thousands for PS3 would 2K have ever bothered releasing Bioshock 2 for it?

Lets grant for a moment that the refusal by all but a slim minority of Wii U users to buy third-party games is based entirely upon the issues with those games, not a simple lack of real interest on their part. Even if that is the case, aren't they shooting themselves in the foot in the long-run? Much of the reason people got late or inferior ports for the Wii U could be because companies doubted they would sell well enough to justify spending more time and money on them. Aren't you just confirming those doubts by refusing to buy that version?

 

[sörine]

I'm only guessing, but it seems like common sense.

That said, I don't think Ubi have any Vita titles in the pipeline. What support are you referring to?

Edit: They don't even bother updating their Vita product page.

I was talking about EA. Who do seem to be the odd man out, every other major western publisher seems to be either publishing more on Wii U than Vita (Activision, Ubisoft, WB, Disney) or has halted/not bothered with support on both platforms (T2, Bethesda, Valve).

Our games on the Vita make us money. High attachment rate. Of course we're not AAA, so maybe we're anecdotal.

Sure, mid-tier/indie/casual seems to do great on both Wii U and Vita. That's exactly the sort of stuff I was implying makes sense earlier.

 

[Hiltz]

I understand why they perhaps don't want to bother with established series at this point but I don't really get why they are so down on new series that don't have any bias associated with them. Watch Dogs to me would have made way more sense launching at the same time as the other versions. It's going to bomb in November and even more than that, the core fanbase that might support the title isn't going to want to buy it now that Ubi has essentially said no chance of you getting the second game. But you know, Nintendo screwed up so much with the WiiU I don't really blame third parties for keeping away.

WatchDogs only got delayed on Wii U because it was treated as a last priority due to demographic issues and a sluggish install base growth. Quite frankly, it's kind of a miracle Ubisoft even is releasing it given how poorly every other mature title on this console has sold. Watch Dogs, and pretty much any other mature port will generally sell poorly on Wii U regardless of whether it comes out on time or not.

 

[roddur]

i wonder what will be nintendo's next console's future. 3rd parties mindset will not change at all. only company will be left making software is only nintendo itself.

i don't like nintedo doomed thing, but the whole gaming future with nintendo is very very bleak. making me sad thinking that this is the only gaming company that makes games after games full of unadulterated fun.

edit : and ubisoft, no matter how you slice it they treated this platform bad.

 

[bananafactory]

As a WiiU and PS4 owner, I'm not exactly hurt by this since I buy their games on PS4 anyway, but it does suck for people who only have a Nintendo system.

That said, it's hard to blame Ubi based on the facts they gave. They're a business and they do have a financial responsibility to make these kind of decisions. Tough situation for Nintendo though....

 

[SmokedMeat]

Generally because PC is a better platform in almost every respect to play your standard multi platform games and shoot bangs, with the additional benefit of a generally better experience, an open platform, cost savings and having even more exclusives than a Nintendo platform (which tend to have the most exclusives on consoles) by orders of magnitude.

I plop down in the recliner, maybe throw on my headphones, and start gaming on my TV. Your experience is no better than mine.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

I have no idea why Watch_Dogs is even still happening on Wii U. Seemed like they would have been better off cancelling it ages ago.

Heck, they clearly reached a point where they decided they didn't have the man-power to develop the last-gen versions, the current-gen versions, the PC game AND the Wii U game all at the same time, so why not just take it round the back of the shed right there and then?

Possibly they were predicting possible momentum for the console after MK8 that would result in a better sales ideal for WD U, but that seems like it would be flawed logic.

I think it's more than likely that when Ubi mentioned "we have games that are done but we're waiting on the userbase to be bigger before we release them", they were referring specifically to Watch Dogs.

After the release of MK8, it's also likely that they haven't seen a significant surge in Wii U sales or Watch Dog Wii U preorders, so they're just going to release the best game possible and readjust their priorities going forward.

 

[NickFire]

I can't fault any 3rd parties for avoiding Wii U right now with respect to ports. The performance gap with PS4 and Xbox One is too vast, and the install base compared to 360 and PS3 is miles and miles apart. Plus, there are at least a few people, myself included, who in no uncertain terms purchased a Wii U primarily for the exclusives.

 

[SmokyDave]

I was talking about EA. Who do seem to be the odd man out, every other major western publisher seems to be either publishing more on Wii U than Vita (Activision, Ubisoft, WB, Disney) or has halted/not bothered with support on both platforms (T2, Bethesda, Valve).

You can't call one legacy title per year 'support' in any meaningful way.

Take 2 gave us the sublime Borderlands 2 on Vita. I have my fingers crossed that it ain't the last title we'll see from their stable, though deep down I know it is

 

[Sify64]

Lets grant for a moment that the refusal by all but a slim minority of Wii U users to buy third-party games is based entirely upon the issues with those games, not a simple lack of real interest on their part. Even if that is the case, aren't they shooting themselves in the foot in the long-run?

Shouldn't that be the other way around, since the devs are the ones losing a sale. To me, buying those crap ports would be like shooting myself in the foot. If i buy their games I will have to play the game while dealing with the issues and hope that they will get fixed eventually. Moreover, I also have to hope to god that the sequel of the title will be released on my platform without issues at launch, when the devs have no reason to do since I was the sort of consumer that bought the first title anyway. Lastly, buying their crappy ports does not in any way guarantee that I will get the next entry in the series or any other similar games. I have almost no confidence in third party companies, to give them the benefit of the doubt.

 

[AmFreak]

I was talking about EA. Who do seem to be the odd man out, every other major western publisher seems to be either publishing more on Wii U than Vita (Activision, Ubisoft, WB, Disney) or has halted/not bothered with support on both platforms (T2, Bethesda, Valve).

The only EA game that is coming out for Vita is Fifa 15, which is a legacy edition which basically means 0 development costs.

 

[DNAbro]

Don't blame them at all. Bought Zombi U(should have done way better, game got unfairly trashed in reviews) and then later AC3(hated it, didn't even get to main part, crashed on me over 3 times).

After getting a PS4, why would I buy any of my multiplat games on Wii U? Played AC4 on PS4 and that was absolutely fantastic. And at the same time if you own multiple consoles such as PS3/360 and a Wii U, why would you buy those games on Wii U were there is less support, game runs worse, and the online community would die out real quick?

 

[TreasureHunterG]

I have almost no confidence in third party companies, to give them the benefit of the doubt.

It's no secret why third-parties aren't supporting Nintendo anymore, then. Not only Nintendo isn't supportive and don't care about them as their fans feel the same.

 

[MilesTeg]

I think it's silly for Yves to say things like this. The Wii U platform has largely been abandoned by third party so he should just say that the console isn't viable for AAA development. No need to fuel the flames. Basically it's a way for him to say "yeah, we are done with Wii U besides Just Dance and maybe Rabbids".

 

[hardcastlemccormick]

Third parties were idiots on the Wii, but Ubisoft was one of the few with a clue. Sad to see them go, but it makes sense.

The problem with the WiiU is its incredibly small install base. A game that does good for WiiU standards is still paltry. But anyone with a little bit of logic can figure this out: If a gamer wants Assassin's Creed and Splinter Cell, their third party tastes won't stop there. So when they're at the store, why would they buy a WiiU? Any other console will suit their tastes better, with complementary first and third party titles from everyone, not just Ubisoft.

All this whining and complaining about Ubisoft's ports and poor support miss that most gamers don't "by default" want to buy a WiiU, and most simply haven't. We haven't even gotten to the point where gamers would have to choose which version of the game to buy.

 

[Shmuely Bully]

Shouldn't that be the other way around, since the devs are the ones losing a sale. To me, buying those crap ports would be like shooting myself in the foot. If i buy their games I will have to play the game while dealing with the issues and hope that they will get fixed eventually. Moreover, I also have to hope to god that the sequel of the title will be released on my platform without issues at launch, when the devs have no reason to do since I was the sort of consumer that bought the first title anyway. Lastly, buying their crappy ports does not in any way guarantee that I will get the next entry in the series or any other similar games. I have almost no confidence in third party companies, to give them the benefit of the doubt.

Devs don't care. They have sales elsewhere and many more than they're ever liable to get on Wii U based on Ubisoft's 3% figure.

You don't get someone to like you by punching them in the face if they don't do everything just the way you want it which is the rough equivalent of the justifications that you and other Wii U owners are making in this thread. Not perfect? Not good enough, do it again and do it right next time!

If Nintendo or you want games like Assassin's Creed or Watch Dogs or any other major third-party IP on the system it's their and your responsibility to make devs care, because they're not going to lose money trying to appeal to a minority of a minority when they can make a ton more money elsewhere with fewer performance hassles. The math right now says spending much developing for Wii U outside of dance and party games is shooting yourself in the foot and almost guaranteed to lose money.

 

[SerTapTap]

I think it's silly for Yves to say things like this. The Wii U platform has largely been abandoned by third party so he should just say that the console isn't viable for AAA development. No need to fuel the flames. Basically it's a way for him to say "yeah, we are done with Wii U besides Just Dance and maybe Rabbids".

I don't see why what he said is a problem? It seems to be true, and gives a clue as to what Ubisoft titles you can expect on the platform. It's a lot better than saying nothing and just manually explaining "naw (M rated title #24) isn't going to be on Wii U because it is not a platform fit" each time.

 

[omegashockwave]

Well it sucks for the people who bought them for Wii U, when it only makes up 3% of sales, it's not like they didn't have a good reason.

 

[sörine]

You can't call one legacy title per year 'support' in any meaningful way.

Take 2 gave us the sublime Borderlands 2 on Vita. I have my fingers crossed that it ain't the last title we'll see from their stable, though deep down I know it is

I'm not saying Vita's getting meaningful EA support, there's missed opportunities there too. It's still better than Wii U though. Why isn't Wii U getting FIFA Legacy annually with literally every other system?

Sony gave us Borderlands Vita, it's essentially 1st party. T2's entire contribution to the system amounts to a napkin sketch for Bioshock Vita. It's sort of like using Bayo 2 as an example of Sega support for Wii U.

 

[Off-Kilter]

Really can't blame them. They tried, more than most other third party publishers in fact. It's just a very unfortunate situation.

 

[Sify64]

Devs don't care. They have sales elsewhere and many more than they're ever liable to get on Wii U based on Ubisoft's 3% figure.

You don't get someone to like you by punching them in the face if they don't do everything just the way you want it which is the rough equivalent of the justifications that you and other Wii U owners are making in this thread. Not perfect? Not good enough, do it again and do it right next time!

If Nintendo or you want games like Assassin's Creed or Watch Dogs or any other major third-party IP on the system it's their and your responsibility to make devs care, because they're not going to lose money trying to appeal to a minority of a minority when they can make a ton more money elsewhere with fewer performance hassles. The math right now says spending much developing for Wii U outside of dance and party games is shooting yourself in the foot and almost guaranteed to lose money.

If " devs don't care", how do you expect me to care? Oh Well... I am the "minority" so whatever.

 

[Shmuely Bully]

I'm not saying Vita's getting meaningful EA support, there's missed opportunities there too. It's still better than Wii U though. Why isn't Wii U getting FIFA Legacy annually with literally every other system?

Sony gave us Borderlands Vita, it's essentially 1st party. T2's entire contribution to the system amounts to a napkin sketch for Bioshock Vita. It's sort of like using Bayo 2 as an example of Sega support for Wii U.

The Vita has a huge attach rate and most of those sales are third-party. Between that and the marginally larger install base it should be getting more support.

If " devs don't care", how do you expect me to care? Oh Well... I am the "minority" so whatever.

Just don't be surprised when you continue to get no support then.

 

[PseudoViper]

Well that sucks... 'A' for effort I guess. Glad I got to play Zombi U.

 

[Triggerhappytel]

You can't call one legacy title per year 'support' in any meaningful way.

Take 2 gave us the sublime Borderlands 2 on Vita. I have my fingers crossed that it ain't the last title we'll see from their stable, though deep down I know it is

I'm not even sure T2 had anything to do with Borderlands 2 Vita - Sony paid for the port and published it, and besides, wasn't the port meant to be pretty poor anyway?

 

[Sify64]

Just don't be surprised when you continue to get no support then.

Easy fix.. Buy another platform and get the games that run well and the ones that don't will get the same treatment from me. I expected this outcome since, EA, so I won't be surprised.

 

[Chindogg]

They did try. Zombi U was unfairly slammed by critics and no one bought AC4 when there were sales on every other console. I had to complain to Amazon to get the Wii U version for $40 when the lightning deal had it for every other console for $30.

I do believe that delaying Rayman Legends was a massive mistake as it still sold best on Wii U and was the main game on every Wii U demo kiosk. The delay hurt everyone. Just like this Watch_Dogs delay will crush its sales. People are already tired of the game and are able to get it anywhere else.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

I'm not saying Vita's getting meaningful EA support, there's missed opportunities there too. It's still better than Wii U though. Why isn't Wii U getting FIFA Legacy annually with literally every other system?

Sony gave us Borderlands Vita, it's essentially 1st party. T2's entire contribution to the system amounts to a napkin sketch for Bioshock Vita. It's sort of like using Bayo 2 as an example of Sega support for Wii U.

FIFA 2013 sold a lot better on Vita than Wii U, I imagine.

 

[Shmuely Bully]

Easy fix.. Buy another platform and get the games that run well and the ones that don't will get the same treatment from me. I expected this outcome since, EA, so I won't be surprised.

Don't be surprised when (not if, when) Nintendo stops making consoles either then. The current trends are not sustainable in the long-run.

 

[MaxiLive]

Can't blame them!I bet the sales are truly awful on WiiU when you compare the production costs, plus with the future not looking any more profitable it is hard to invest. Think of how much each dev kit costs to give them one per a dev to code with, think of the amount of mans hours that go into the tech to produce 1-2 games selling a pitiful amount compared to other platforms.

As a consumer I would love to see all games on all platforms but I can't expect AAA developers and publishers to invest millions of dollars on a platform that can barely offer any promise of decent returns.

Maybe you might see more in the future when more tech is readably available (maybe Nintendo will offer more tools) and the dev kits themselves become cheaper but by then I'm guessing Nintendo's next machine will be doing the rounds so focus will be on that.

As an owner of a WiiU I don't really feel hard done by or anything and at least I will have the X amount of Nintendo games that are bound to come out and make the platform cost effective for myself.

 

[TreasureHunterG]

Easy fix.. Buy another platform and get the games that run well and the ones that don't will get the same treatment from me. I expected this outcome since, EA, so I won't be surprised.

Way to go by supporting Nintendo if you claim to love them so much by buying games on competing platforms when you have the option to buy them on Nintendo platforms.

 

[Sami+]

Nice of them to just come out and say it. Nintendo fucked up really, really badly this gen.

 

[hardcastlemccormick]

Way to go by supporting Nintendo if you claim to love them so much by buying games on competing platforms when you have the option to buy them on Nintendo platforms.

Consumer self-interest > Blind fanboy loyalty

 

[Vermillion]

I swear, some of you have a huge persecution complex. Yes, Ubisoft tried.

 

[Shmuely Bully]

Consumer self-interest > Blind fanboy loyalty

Short-term self-interest perhaps. The prevalence of short-term thinking is one of the main issues that larger companies have, it's a shame to see it's also so common among gaming enthusiasts. There is a sort of doublethink in play here: graphics don't matter until they're not as good as other platforms. Online/DLC isn't important until we don't get it. Late games may be good, but a bad game is always bad, until a late good game releases and then forget it because it's late.

It's irksome.

 

[Sify64]

Don't be surprised when (not if, when) Nintendo stops making consoles either then. The current trends are not sustainable in the long-run.

Okay... I will just buy their games on whatever platform they land on. And if Nintendo possibly stops making games, then i will simply buy whatever games resonate with me as a gamer.

 

[MDX]

Has all those "Ubi tried" posters had their chance to share their opinion?

Because, Ubi tried all right, they tried to set up the console to fail. Their attempts
only helped solidify early on the idea that the WiiU was only as powerful
as the 360 or PS3. No attempt to help brand the console as the first of the next gen consoles. Shoddy 360 ports was never going to cut-it.

This is how Ubisoft could have shown good faith in Nintendo to help grow their console:

Get Wii owners to upgrade with a proper sequel to Red Steel 2 and and Rabbids game.

If they wanted to introduce the Assassins Creed franchise on Nintendo
consoles they should have done what Nintendo is doing with Bayonetta and
come out with a bundle of remastered versions of Assassin's Creed one and two with the third. Including enhanced graphics, Off-TV play, with smooth 60fps gameplay.
And throw in a Link tunic for good measure.

Or, forget about Assassin's Creed, and focus on establishing another new exclusive franchise like ZombiU on the WiiU. And grow the franchise to become a million seller with the second and third installments. The first one already broke 500K.

4 exclusive game series is all they need: Red Steel, Rabbids, Rayman & ZombiU.

Ubisoft, EA, etc are showing their true colors. They can no longer be considered a 3rd party publishers. They are second party publishers to MS and Sony.

 

[Sify64]

Way to go by supporting Nintendo if you claim to love them so much by buying games on competing platforms when you have the option to buy them on Nintendo platforms.

Did you even read my comment?
i was given a reply that said the Wii U would lose support aka games, so my solution is to buy a platform that has the game that I really want to play but isn't on the Wii U like, Kingdom Hearts 3. This isn't fanboyism, lol, it is straight up being logical.

 

[flatearthpandas]

Lets grant for a moment that the refusal by all but a slim minority of Wii U users to buy third-party games is based entirely upon the issues with those games, not a simple lack of real interest on their part. Even if that is the case, aren't they shooting themselves in the foot in the long-run?

Support games with serious flaws so maybe the dev will try harder next time? Sounds like a losing strategy for the consumer.

I can't speak as to why the games do so bad on Wii U. For my part, if I was interested in Ubisoft or EA games, I certainly wouldn't choose to buy the version with missing features and no DLC support that comes out months after other consoles. But then, I have no interest in their wares. Not on my Wii U. Not on my PC. Not on my PS4. So while I am personally not sad to see them go, it is a shame for the few who are. But I see it as an all-around failure for all companies involved. Nintendo should have been publishing new games from third parties at Wii U launch instead of remasters; third parties should have showed at least a modicum of interest in building an audience for their games. Late releases, missing content, missing features, and no DLC support is not how you do that.

 

[Chill Penguin]

At the end of the day, people buy Nintendo systems to play Nintendo games. If someone was at all interested in mature type games, Nintendo would be an unreliable platform to play on solely. Those gamers all buy their mature titles on Playstation, Xbox, or PC. Until Nintendo creates an ecosystem and platform that gives gamers that like mature titles the confidence to make it their primary platform, third party mature games will sell like shit.

 

[Shiggy]

Has all those "Ubi tried" posters had their chance to share their opinion?

Because, Ubi tried all right, they tried to set up the console to fail. Their attempts
only helped solidify early on the idea that the WiiU was only as powerful
as the 360 or PS3. No attempt to help brand the console as the first of the next gen consoles. Shoddy 360 ports was never going to cut-it.

This is how Ubisoft could have shown good faith in Nintendo to help grow their console:

Get Wii owners to upgrade with a proper sequel to Red Steel 2 and and Rabbids game.

If they wanted to introduce the Assassins Creed franchise on Nintendo
consoles they should have done what Nintendo is doing with Bayonetta and
come out with a bundle of remastered versions of Assassin's Creed one and two with the third. Including enhanced graphics, Off-TV play, with smooth 60fps gameplay.
And throw in a Link tunic for good measure.

Or, forget about Assassin's Creed, and focus on establishing another new exclusive franchise like ZombiU on the WiiU. And grow the franchise to become a million seller with the second and third installments. The first one already broke 500K.

4 exclusive game series is all they need: Red Steel, Rabbids, Rayman & ZombiU.

Do you seriously think they would have fared any better that way? Seriously?

Ubisoft, EA, etc are showing their true colors. They can no longer be considered a 3rd party publishers. They are second party publishers to MS and Sony.

Oh right, that tells enough...

At the end of the day, people buy Nintendo systems to play Nintendo games. If someone was at all interested in mature type games, Nintendo would be an unreliable platform to play on solely. Those gamers all buy their mature titles on Playstation, Xbox, or PC. Until Nintendo creates an ecosystem and platform that gives gamers that like mature titles the confidence to make it their primary platform, third party mature games will sell like shit.

For Wii U it's something even more specific: People don't buy it to play Nintendo games. They buy it to play Mario and Zelda games and little else.

 

[Vlade]

i wonder what will be nintendo's next console's future. 3rd parties mindset will not change at all. only company will be left making software is only nintendo itself.

i don't like nintedo doomed thing, but the whole gaming future with nintendo is very very bleak. making me sad thinking that this is the only gaming company that makes games after games full of unadulterated fun.

edit : and ubisoft, no matter how you slice it they treated this platform bad.

bleak is too strong a word I think.

There is little difference between Ubi's tenuous support and Ubi's partial support. That's why they are switching to partial support. (Their support was laughable after ZU tho, you can't announce a certain version will be unsupported and then act surprised when that version performs poorly)

Nintendo will chug along with partial Ubi support for a while. There are ways to be successful that don't require being the same as every other console.

 

[DeuceGamer]

As most have mentioned, I can't blame them. I actually enjoyed playing AC3 and AC4 on the Wii U. The Gamepad helps when searching for collectibles or an Assassination Target.

I would have liked to have seen one more AC game with the same attention as the other consoles this year. With Nintendo publishing games like Bayonetta 2, Hyrule Warriors, and Smash more gamers may have purchased AC on Wii U compared to X360/PS3 but I doubt it would have been anything significant.

In my opinion, this is Nintendo's biggest hurdle they need to focus on and overcome. Unfortunately, I don't think Nintendo even see's it as a problem since they are still of the mind that they don't compete with MS/Sony...

 

[SmokedMeat]

I think ZombiU would've bombed regardless of what the reviews were.

It'll be interesting to see what level of support Nintendo's next system receives. I think UBI Soft will be there, but I doubt they're going to put out an exclusive like Red Steel/ZombiU at launch.

 

[SmokyDave]

Ubisoft, EA, etc are showing their true colors. They can no longer be considered a 3rd party publishers. They are second party publishers to MS and Sony.

Gotta say, 'showing their true colours' got a belly laugh out of me. Those snakes in the grass!

 

[Koppai]

Nobody wants to buy shitty ports when it's on PS3 and 360 with all the DLC.

Ubisoft and EA just don't try hard enough.

 

[DeuceGamer]

I think ZombiU would've bombed regardless of what the reviews were.

It'll be interesting to see what level of support Nintendo's next system receives. I think UBI Soft will be there, but I doubt they're going to put out an exclusive like Red Steel/ZombiU at launch.

It's a shame, but I tend to agree. I bought the Wii U for Zombi U at launch. Of course, I knew there would be plenty of Nintendo games I'd want to play, but without Zombi U I would have waited for Pikmin 3/W101.

While the gameplay would be different, I still hope to see a sequel to Zombi U. Even without the Gamepad I would enjoy a sequel with the atmosphere of the original.

 

[Broken Joystick]

Ubisoft, EA, etc are showing their true colors. They can no longer be considered a 3rd party publishers. They are second party publishers to MS and Sony.

lol

Surprised that Watch Dogs is even happening, will this even shift 5 figures?