Jeff’s Musings: Mildly Annoyed with Ubisoft

oprainfall writes: “There is only one true way to fix the problem: release all of your games on every platform, including the Wii U. If that means that South Park: The Stick of Truth is delayed again, if that means that shooter/Tom Clancy fans get angry over having to wait a bit longer for Rainbow 6: Patriots and Splinter Cell: Blacklist, then so be it. This is the only way to make it right.”

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
lilbroRx1982d ago (Edited 1982d ago )

Finally, an article from someone who sees the problem and actually understands it.

They didn't delay AC3 to release simultaneously with the Wii U. They were never all in on support for the Wii U despite their claim. They gave Wii U owners 1 "decent" game and complain about poor reception.

I had high hopes for Ubisoft on the console, but they are starting to reach EA levels of disgust in my eyes with the disparaging things they say. They slam Nintendo for "their own" shoddy, late ports, that no one wanted, not selling and then even go so far as to say Nintendo are the ones who need to reduce the price of their product.

I had planned on purchasing Rayman Legends at the end of last month, but there is no way I'm going to buy it or anything else they release for that matter now. At the moment Ubisoft is pretty much dead to me.

Ulf1982d ago (Edited 1982d ago )

Why should Ubisoft miss the holiday season prime time, for Nintendo's benefit, again?

IIRC, Nintendo dev kits were woefully underpowered until the last revisions, which they delivered only a few months before Wii U release. How is not putting 2007 tech in the hands of devs a *little* earlier a problem caused by the 3rd party publishers, and not Nintendo themselves?

If you think that cramming a game designed for the 360 and PS3 CPUs onto the Wii U's CPU, especially an early model devkit one, would be easy, you are insane. The AC series in particular has loads of heavy duty animation work (i.e. anim decompression and anim blending), AND lots of AI work, which MUST be done on the CPU.

Should they have revamped their whole game, targetted at the 140M consumers who have already demonstrated a desire to buy it, to work on a lesser CPU, with weaker/less AI, less characters/animations, etc., so that the 3-4M *max* customers Nintendo could sell Wii Us to,over the holidays, can have a chance at buying AC3?

When the game actually arrived... did it sell out? Or did the people, who wanted it, already get it on their 360 and PS3, knowing it was basically the same... maybe a little better on the consoles it was designed for, even?

How on earth is propping up Nintendo the responsibility of ANY 3rd party publisher? Nintendo should be offering huge license fee discounts, and the like, for *Wii U exclusives*, and should have been, from the beginning. If they had been, we'd see a load of Wii U exclusives, not ports!

Qrphe1982d ago

Ubisoft is the big publisher that has stood alongside the Wii U the most. They pretty much gave away a 1st party Ip to Nintendo and were planning to give away another one. Yes, they screwed up with Rayman Legends but they're still far from being EA-tier material.
Games not selling well on the Wii U is not just Ubisoft's opinion, it's pretty much a well-known trend.
If by the end of this year EA and Activision drop ship with their titles, you can at least hope for Ubisoft to support the platform with Black Flags and whatever else they may be releasing.

lilbroRx1982d ago (Edited 1982d ago )

You and me have different definitions of "standing alongside". As I said, they released 1 "decent" game. The rabbid game was bad, the ports were poorly done and overpriced considering that better performing version for the exact same price, if not lower, could be gotten elsewhere. They scrapped the Wii U version of Ghost Recon before the console even released.

ZombiU was the best thing they released in a I wouldn't even call it AAA. Just look at the split reviews. Also, it has game breaking glitches. I know this because I encountered one of them.

The Rayman Legends delay was just icing on the cake.

"Games not selling well" does not cover the issue. Its cheaply developed games that no one wants not selling well well. The "better" games on the console have sold well. Most of them are on the eshop though.

They are not at EA level yet, but they are making the effort.

Ulf1982d ago (Edited 1982d ago )

I refuse to believe that Ninty couldn't have put together a machine with enough muscle to justify an upgrade over the PS3 and 360.

Say a quad-core Jaguar, as opposed to the PS4's eight-core, and GPU more in line with a HD 7750 or so. Maybe 4GB of RAM? Again, half of what the PS4 offers. It would have been cheap... and at the same time, it would have been *competitive*. There is NO reason a Wii U with a measly 32GB of internal storage, 2 GB of RAM, and that weak CPU, should cost $350, when a PS4 is likely to cost $500 or less.

Drop the price of the 32GB model to $300, bundle in a decent game and a Wiimote(!), and a LOT more people will contemplate buying one... although, at this point, I think the game is lost. The machine is just too weak -- its gonna be the "oddball" again, and won't see crossplats, which is what killed the Wii early last gen.

Again, 3rd party publishers are looking to make money. If they cannot accurately target their market with a product, they won't fire a product in that direction. That's Business 101, not "we dislike Nintendo", or somesuch BS.

lilbroRx1982d ago (Edited 1982d ago )

Are you seriously slamming Nintendo because they didn't release components to match a specs that no one knew until a few weeks ago? I didn't know Nintendo had hardware psychics.

4 Time the RAM of the current gen consoles and a GPU that is over twice as powerful is a fairly substantial improvement.

Why would Nintendo add an extra $50 to the loss they are already taking? It would sell no more consoles because price is not, nor has it ever been, the issue. The problem is lack of games "that people actually want to buy".

Also, what you just stated the end is the main point the article brought up(you clearly didn't read and just came in here to talk down about Nintendo based on your presumptions). He points out that even were the same problem to surface with the other console, the response would not be the same as it is toward Nintendo. When products failed to make a profit on the PS3/360(which happened a lot this gen(Factor 5/Free Radical/Big Huge Games/THQ) the companies did not bash those consoles or their manufacturer, nor did they drop support.

theWB271982d ago

Why are you defending Nintendo so much? They are notoriously shoddy when it comes to 3rd party support. Nintendo doesn't care as much because they believe their 1st party games carry their platform.

People are mad because Ubi saw that the WiiU wasn't selling enough to justify a exclusive release and could see they wouldn't get their return.

TO delay the other games for the WiiU doesn't make sense because they survived a whole gen on basically the 360 and PS3 so they know they'll get the return on those systems and Nintendo is a plus if they sell anything on it.

Nintendo shot themselves in the foot by releasing two straight underpowered systems in a row. They made the system to meet their 1st party needs and to think otherwise is foolish.

Ulf1979d ago (Edited 1979d ago )

...Nintendo made a console that is the equivalent of the 360 and PS3. You don't think they could have upped the bar, at least a little bit, irregardless of the other companies' specs?

I'm sure they KNEW the PS4 would not have the same performance as the PS3.

MartinB1051982d ago

Nintendo think inside a bubble. Nintendo design their systems around the requirements of their own games. Nintendo do not offer a PS4-power system because their own games wouldn't take advantage of it.

Sony and Microsoft make efforts to work with developers to put together systems that satisfy as many people as possible.

Nintendo's method would be acceptable if the system weren't so overpriced. But Nintendo is Nintendo, and Nintendo are arrogant and believe that their offering of less is somehow inherently worth more, because it has "Nintendo" printed on it.

The Wii U isn't going to win next generation, but it could be moderately successful if Nintendo pull their head out of the clouds and get their pricing sorted out.

Farsendor11982d ago

really don't care who supports wiiu,I wont buy the console.

CaptainN1982d ago

Also let's not forget the very first game shown for Wii-U was Ghost Recon Online for Wii-U, and was supposed to be exclusive to the Wii-U(exception PC) and what happened to that game??? Oh they postponed it indeffinetly....and we haven't heard anything since! Then they screwed over the 3 million + install base of Wii-U who were waiting for Rayman Legends, making them wait until Sept when the game was complete in Feb. They are literally sitting on a game for 7 MONTHS just to release it at the same time as other consoles. This could have at least been a timed exclusive during those 7 months. And what do U owners get, some little extra exclusive content this summer, WOW, thanks for that !