[atomic moth]

You guys are ignoring that large Microsoft blurb posted on the last page.

[troushers]

Ubisoft is banking on the game selling more with two additional platforms (Xbox 360 + PS3) because they have a larger user base, and that's understandable. However, when Rayman Origins released on these two platforms, their user bases were already large (130+ Million) and the game still sold like shit.

More than this, Ubisoft are calculating that:

Combined sales of Feb Wii U release + PS3 / 360 Sep release << combined sales of simultaneous Sep WiiU/PS3/360 release

so
1) They see a big bump in Wii U sales coming (unlikely)
2) They think some substantial proportion of Wii U sales will inhibit PS3 / 360 sales (highly challengable)
or 3) They think moving the date will have neglible impact on Wii U sales (I don't think this is true either).

I really don't get this. I don't buy this microsoft simultaneous release conspiracy theory, we aren't talking about a little indie title with XBLA release, we are talking a major publisher with enough clout to stand up for themselves.

[mackattk]

It's the easiest thing to bypass. Ubisoft is given a wad of cash, and they say "no, we just have to delay the game, it has nothing to do with Microsoft's alleged policy". Hell, maybe even the prospect of selling a lot more copies is enough for Ubisoft. I see the Microsoft's policy as one contender, but look at the way it has exposed the Wii U? It's become so stagnant, MS and Sony might be succeeding in making it completely irrelevant. Don't be surprised if this continuous flow of "leaks" are controlled leaks that shift all eyes towards what's coming, and away from the Wii U. The Wii U had a big hitter this month, Rayman, and with this delay, combined with more leaks, everyone seems to forgetting about the Wii U. And they might be succeeding in keeping prospective buyers away from the Wii U for long enough that when they line up with their 350$ to get a premium by summer, their new consoles will already be released. And hey, it's just "a few month away" - why not just skip the Wii U and go for the next gen console? MS and Sony know this is their chance to diminish Nintendo's market share, and capture the enormous casual market they've been getting a raging hard on ever since a year before the managed to squeeze out Kinect and Move in order to steal away from Nintendo. They just might be succeeding.

I know the Wii U isn't doing well. Some of it might be buyer's remorse that I am upset, but I genuinely do like the Wii U. Off screen tv play has been a revelation for me as far as tv time with me and my wife. I was really depending on Rayman to come in and have another great game for the system. I really don't care the game is coming out to other systems, I just really want this system to be able to succeed.

Also, I really liked Rayman Origins. It was a blast playing it on both the PS3 and Vita.

[frankie_baby]

You guys are ignoring that large Microsoft blurb posted on the last page.

As I already mentioned such a policy is against EU regulations

[KingSnake]

How comes that this Microsoft "rule" does not apply to Ninja Gaiden?

[Warm Machine]

As I already mentioned such a policy is against EU regulations

Microsoft can choose to sign or not sign any games they want on their system. Nothing states that a game has to get on their service, disc or otherwise.

[DragonSworne]

How comes that this Microsoft "rule" does not apply to Ninja Gaiden?

Didn't the game already come out on 360?

[Calamari41]

Why isn't Iwata on the phone with Ancel making him an offer?

[evangd007]

You guys are ignoring that large Microsoft blurb posted on the last page.

MS makes exceptions if you are a big enough deal all the time. Most recent example is Minecraft to whom they allowed free patches and updates instead of their usual $40k fee per patch.

[VariantX]

How comes that this Microsoft "rule" does not apply to Ninja Gaiden?

Because all NG games originally launched on Microsoft consoles either first or together with other consoles. As long as MS gets it day one is probably the sticking point.

[frankie_baby]

Microsoft can choose to sign or not sign any games they want on their system. Nothing states that a game has to get on their service, disc or otherwise.

Eu competition rules do

[ShockingAlberto]

Management most likely made their initial decision based off of Nintendo's own estimates for Wii U sales.

Do you have any evidence of this?

[Boulayman]

Huh, I am quite worried about that dev who made the comment. It's all over the internet now and I am pretty sure he is gonna get in trouble :(

[Calamari41]

Huh, I am quite worried about that dev who made the comment. It's all over the internet now and I am pretty sure he is gonna get in trouble :(

Just wait for the internet's reaction if word gets out that this guy got fired over this.

[Boulayman]

Do you have any evidence of this?

Well, if he had any evidence, he wouldn't say '' most likely'' ? He will just affirmatively claim it ?

[Septimius]

Eu competition rules do

What? No, they don't. Right now you're saying that EU's laws require all games to be released on all systems.

[frankie_baby]

Just wait for the internet's reaction if word gets out that this guy got fired over this.

Hasn't he already been laid off anyway

[19 & 21]

I'm not buying that game from the devs. I'm buying it from the fucktards who decided it would be in their best interests to delay a game that should have been done as an exclusive to WiiU for purely commercial reasons. I'm voting with my wallet.

Your vote says you see a product not worth buying, not that you disagree with the practices of Ubisoft. What's more likely, they get the message or they scuttle the studio? Even if they do get the message what looks worse to investors and who are the ones that deal with the investors - execs copping to poor business practice/foresight or a dev studio that didn't do a good enough job with the game?

Voting with your wallet in a way that -may- make some difference if enough people do the same is proving to Ubisoft that there is a Wii U market and buying the Wii U version on release day. You're just going to hang an incredibly talented studio out to dry if you don't buy the game that they've clearly busted their asses on. Don't allow your emotional reaction to cloud your judgement.

[frankie_baby]

What? No, they don't. Right now you're saying that EU's laws require all games to be released on all systems.

No but platform holders can't restrict what games third parties release on their systems, as you may or may not know the ps2 had a shit tonne of shovelware only released in europe

[Baconsammy]

Do you have any evidence of this?

Do I have evidence of why I *guessed* what I guessed? Sales were far below Nintendo's own stated expectations. Nintendo dropped the sales outlook by 1.5 million consoles. A week later Ubisoft announces this change. So yes, that informed my guess.

[Mael]

Do I have evidence of why I *guessed* what I guessed? Sales were far below Nintendo's own stated expectations. Nintendo dropped the sales outlook by 1.5 million consoles. A week later Ubisoft announces this change. So yes, that informed my guess.

If you think they only chose to delay just this week...

[MDSLKTR]

Just wait for the internet's reaction if word gets out that this guy got fired over this.

Lol @ "internet reaction"

[ShockingAlberto]

Do I have evidence of why I *guessed* what I guessed? Sales were far below Nintendo's own stated expectations. Nintendo dropped the sales outlook by 1.5 million consoles. A week later Ubisoft announces this change. So yes, that informed my guess.

Right, as long as we establish that you've completely made up this assertion you keep repeating, it's totally acceptable.

[Baconsammy]

If you think they only chose to delay just this week...

I think they chose this week to announce it. I think they've known as long as Nintendo has that Wii U wasn't selling as well as they'd anticipated.

Right, as long as we establish that you've completely made up this assertion you keep repeating, it's totally acceptable.

That's how assertions are made, yes.

[darkstar0155]

If you think they only chose to delay just this week...

I agree, this decision was probably made sometime mid/early january

[Class_A_Ninja]

If there is enough of a shit storm, and I bet they change their minds. Companies have been swayed by forum chatter recently. People say there are no Wii U games, and they get a January E3 from Iwata. Mass Effect 3's ending sucks, and we get a new one. Dead Island's stupid statue that no one was buying anyways is offensive, let's get rid of it.

It depends on how vocal these Rayman Wii U people are. It's a small audience.

[Calamari41]

Lol @ "internet reaction"

You're right, there has been no backlash over this delay.

[Pitmonkey]

Well, an official petition has been created in response to this. For anyone interested and wanting to try and get Rayman released on time for Wii U owners, sign it here.

http://www.change.org/petitions/ubis...the-wii-u#sign

[ShockingAlberto]

That's how assertions are made, yes.

They are by definition declarative statements without support or reason. Glad we're in agreement.

[dreamer3kx]

Ubis Miiverse community is pretty active, drawings and all.

[Boulayman]

More than this, Ubisoft are calculating that: Combined sales of Feb Wii U release + PS3 / 360 Sep release << combined sales of simultaneous Sep WiiU/PS3/360 release so 1) They see a big bump in Wii U sales coming (unlikely) 2) They think some substantial proportion of Wii U sales will inhibit PS3 / 360 sales (highly challengable) or 3) They think moving the date will have neglible impact on Wii U sales (I don't think this is true either). I really don't get this. I don't buy this microsoft simultaneous release conspiracy theory, we aren't talking about a little indie title with XBLA release, we are talking a major publisher with enough clout to stand up for themselves.

The one thing you didn't mention is the marketing/advertizing costs of having a staggered release. that's the one thing that could still make this make sense.
Personally I wouldn't have done it like that, the Wii U market is craving for something to play the next few months so they should just have taken their money and thought of the ps3/360 later as bonus imho.

[TAS]

This is so pathetic. Release the damn game for Wii U as originally planned and then release for PS360 in the Fall. What's the problem?

[marc^o^]

Well, an official petition has been created in response to this. For anyone interested and wanting to try and get Rayman released on time for Wii U owners, sign it here. http://www.change.org/petitions/ubis...the-wii-u#sign

I signed it, though I believe journalists doing their job and all asking Yves Guillemot if cust sat means anything to him would probably be more effective.

[NotLiquid]

Re: Microsoft policy, I'm pretty sure it's just a fine print most publishers are really scared of contending with when I can name a number of games off the top of my head that actively went against said policy such as Scott Pilgrim vs. The World, Ghostbusters (in Europe) and MK9 (released at the same time but with Sony exclusive content). Not so much a rule but a recommendation.

I'm not entirely sure how much of a big deal they'd see Rayman Legends be to want to drag the Wii U version down with them. I don't really think that's what it boils down to.

If there is enough of a shit storm, and I bet they change their minds. Companies have been swayed by forum chatter recently. People say there are no Wii U games, and they get a January E3 from Iwata. Mass Effect 3's ending sucks, and we get a new one. Dead Island's stupid statue that no one was buying anyways is offensive, let's get rid of it. It depends on how vocal these Rayman Wii U people are. It's a small audience.

Well the ME3 ending debacle spread beyond just forums, and if the Riptide statue wasn't recalled as quickly as it was, it was bound to end up stirring up another massive "video game controversy".

I'd love for the issue to be as vocal as possible but realistically I can't see Ubi changing their mind despite a deal of bad press they've gotten for this.

[Hex]

Any good news for us Wii U users? Please throw me a bone.

(I would 'shop a bone onto it but have no skills)

[Boulayman]

Can someone think of another game that was delayed so last minute despite the game being finished for marketing reasons and for so long ? I vaguely remember one year were quite a few games were delayed from the fall to feb/march to avoid the heavy fall competition (it still happens quite often but that year in particular was quite bad) but I can't pinpoint a delay comparable to this.

[DeuceGamer]

It's relative. At the moment, people have the pitchforks out, but if Ubisoft announce an eShop release along with PR bullshit about doing this due to "overwhelming passion from our fans" while explaining that they want "retail synergy" entwined with some nonsense about production lines and a lot of people will suddenly think "hey, at least they listened and tried to work around it..." and, well, I don't see a downside.

Not that I expect this will happen, but I'd be completely on board with this... There was a petition started late last night, but again, I don't expect Ubisoft to change their minds on this.

[NotLiquid]

Can someone think of another game that was delayed so last minute despite the game being finished for marketing reasons and for so long ? I vaguely remember one year were quite a few games were delayed from the fall to feb/march to avoid the heavy fall competition (it still happens quite often but that year in particular was quite bad) but I can't pinpoint a delay comparable to this.

Anarchy Reigns.

[Saint Gregory]

Can someone think of another game that was delayed so last minute despite the game being finished for marketing reasons and for so long ? I vaguely remember one year were quite a few games were delayed from the fall to feb/march to avoid the heavy fall competition (it still happens quite often but that year in particular was quite bad) but I can't pinpoint a delay comparable to this.

Wasn't NFS:MW finished in time for Wii U launch but delayed until this spring or was that rumor debunked?

[Boulayman]

Anarchy Reigns.

Seems a bit different though ?

Judging from wiki, what happened with that one is that it was supposed to be a worldwide release but then 2 months before they released they shelved the international part of the release then released it in japan on said date then said it was gonna be released in Europe and NA in March 2013 but later backtracked to release it two months earlier than that ?

It seems to be a bit different though ? Two months is not 2 weeks ? Was the translation completed on time ? I dunno, maybe I am too used to playing japanese games months after they come out in Japan so this seems more like a dev being too optimistic ( still waiting to hear on Yakuza 5...)

[NotLiquid]

Seems a bit different though ? Judging from wiki, what happened with that one is that it was supposed to be a worldwide release but then 2 months before they released they shelved the international part of the release then released it in japan on said date then said it was gonna be released in Europe and NA in March 2013 but later backtracked to release it two months earlier than that ? It seems to be a bit different though ? Two months is not 2 weeks ? Was the translation completed on time ? I dunno, maybe I am too used to playing japanese games months after they come out in Japan so this seems more like a dev being too optimistic ( still waiting to hear on Yakuza 5...)

It's true that there is a bit of a time discrepancy but the delay wasn't confirmed at that point in time, it was a silent switch to "TBC 2012" on their website. Platinum Games then mentioned that Sega put it on hold indefinitely but it was dubious as to whether it was confirmed or not as per word from a number of reps. PG had admitted that the game had gone gold already and that the Japanese, European and American games were identical, so Sega were just sitting on the release at that point.

Most people expected it wouldn't be a big delay, a couple of weeks most, but then a couple of weeks before the target JP release they openly say on Twitter to the countless of people posting them that they'd delayed the Western release of the game to some time in the first quarter of 2013, which was over a half year.

The worst part was that Platinum Games did not know about this at all until Sega said it on Twitter, and Inaba stated he felt pretty burned about the deal. The excuse Sega had was something about "not being able to press discs". I didn't follow it much after they finally announced the date, either way it was bad.

[Boulayman]

It's true that there is a bit of a time discrepancy but the delay wasn't confirmed at that point in time, it was a silent switch to "TBC 2012" on their website. Platinum Games then mentioned that Sega put it on hold indefinitely but it was dubious as to whether it was confirmed or not as per word from a number of reps. PG had admitted that the game had gone gold already and that the Japanese, European and American games were identical, so Sega were just sitting on the release at that point. Most people expected it wouldn't be a big delay, a couple of weeks most, but then a couple of weeks before the target JP release they openly say on Twitter to the countless of people posting them that they'd delayed the Western release of the game to some time in the first quarter of 2013, which was over a half year. The worst part was that Platinum Games did not know about this at all until Sega said it on Twitter, and Inaba stated he felt pretty burned about the deal. The excuse Sega had was something about "not being able to press discs". I didn't follow it much after they finally announced the date, either way it was bad.

' "not being able to press discs"'. Lol... Thanks for the precisions btw and yah if the game had gone gold already and the versions were identical, huh.. Sega and marketing... Funny how there is no marketing for the Aliens game coming out soon (published by Sega) and the example of game released in Japan and that I am waiting for is also a Sega game (Yakuza 5) eh ?

[MrKaepora]

Ubisoft being Ubisoft, what a surprise.

This game has bomba written all over it. It will be released in a period were there will be GTA 5 and probably some of the big guns of Nintendo itself, I don't see how can this possibly end well for Ubisoft.

I feel bad for the devs.

[michaelius]

Hitler is also really pissed off:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcRnNoLAfDE

[Boulayman]

Ubisoft being Ubisoft, what a surprise. This game has bomba written all over it. It will be released in a period were there will be GTA 5 and probably some of the big guns of Nintendo itself, I don't see how can this possibly end well for Ubisoft. I feel bad for the devs.

I keep seeing people saying it's a bad move because it'S gonna come out the same time as GTA 5 but I really don't see these games competing at all. So it'S not relevant imho, on the other hand as you said, Nintendo should have some other stuff in its sleeve by then and yah I do think Rayman will sell less bc of that on the Wii U. Ubisoft knows that as well but they figure that the extra market from the ps3/360 will compensate and it most likely will. The one thing I don't fully understand is why they don't try to just get the best of both worlds and release it now on the Wii U and then later on the ps360. Apart from the advertizing costs, there is also that Microsoft policy that was mentioned earlier. I guess they figured it wasn't worth risking the ire of Microsoft over this. Microsoft is most likely very adamant about that rule since that's an integral part of their strategy of how they decided to counter Sony having more exclusives.

[gumby_trucker]

Why isn't Iwata on the phone with Ancel making him an offer?

Man, just thinking about the politics at that corporate level is making my head hurt. It's like international relations between countries at this point...

I'd imagine Iwata and co. are considering the costs and benefits of making such an offer. They'd be getting a much needed high quality exclusive (even if only temporary) but they'd also be setting a precedent for moneyhatting for this kind of thing in the future, something they are very much against.

I think it's important to understand that once gaining releases from third parties turns into a moneyhat competition between the big 3, Microsoft can easily by away all support from Nintendo. They're just too big for Nintendo to try and compete with them on that level.

Meanwhile, I sincerely hope this game still does well, whenever it releases. The team deserves it, regardless of what their bosses do to piss off the fans.

[mugurumakensei]

I keep seeing people saying it's a bad move because it'S gonna come out the same time as GTA 5 but I really don't see these games competing at all.

All games indirectly compete for the same dollars, but that's not as much of an issue. All games compete for advertising directly. Therefore, competing in Fall means either Ubisoft pays more for ads or shows fewer ads at worse times.

[MrKaepora]

I keep seeing people saying it's a bad move because it'S gonna come out the same time as GTA 5 but I really don't see these games competing at all. So it'S not relevant imho, on the other hand as you said, Nintendo should have some other stuff in its sleeve by then and yah I do think Rayman will sell less bc of that on the Wii U. Ubisoft knows that as well but they figure that the extra market from the ps3/360 will compensate and it most likely will. The one thing I don't fully understand is why they don't try to just get the best of both worlds and release it now on the Wii U and then later on the ps360. Apart from the advertizing costs, there is also that Microsoft policy that was mentioned earlier. I guess they figured it wasn't worth risking the ire of Microsoft over this. Microsoft is most likely very adamant about that rule since that's an integral part of their strategy of how they decided to counter Sony having more exclusives.

Do you think people will spend 60 dollars on GTA and another 60 dollars on Rayman in the same period? Look at Epic Mickey 2, the game was released in a bunch of platforms and sold less than the first game.

[PetrCobra]

I don't understand why UBI doesn't come out and say "we will be making new content for the new versions, and we want that content to be on Wii U as well, so we are pushing that version back as a consequence". Even if not the whole truth, it might calm the emotions a little.

[farnham]

More than this, Ubisoft are calculating that: Combined sales of Feb Wii U release + PS3 / 360 Sep release << combined sales of simultaneous Sep WiiU/PS3/360 release so 1) They see a big bump in Wii U sales coming (unlikely) 2) They think some substantial proportion of Wii U sales will inhibit PS3 / 360 sales (highly challengable) or 3) They think moving the date will have neglible impact on Wii U sales (I don't think this is true either). I really don't get this. I don't buy this microsoft simultaneous release conspiracy theory, we aren't talking about a little indie title with XBLA release, we are talking a major publisher with enough clout to stand up for themselves.

1. I think would mean death of the platform. They need to have gained momentum and growth by september when wii fit and wii party is released 3 i agree with.