People don't want to support a company that treats them like shit. It's that simple. If the game wasn't ready and it was delayed, that's one thing. For them to spit in our face and then slap us is completely different. The game's done. The game is being delayed because they don't have faith in us as consumers. The game's being sent to die and something that was supposed to be a gift to Nintendo fans was taken away. They're providing a product and they have the right to delay it. But we also have the right to be pissed at them for doing it.People talking about boycotting the game, I understand that you are upset but it seems like a crazy knee-jerk reaction to me.
A quality game in February will still be a quality game in September. In fact, they might even use the time to add extra content or polish what's there so it's a better game. But the game goes from "day 1" to "day never" because of a questionable delay? I don't know about you guys, but I'd be picking the game up if it launched next week or next year... because I am excited for the game. Same goes for many games I am excited about, regardless of shady publisher dealings.
Personally, I'm looking forward to them hopefully rejigging the Murfy levels for traditional control. The Murfy stuff worked well enough in the demo, but I much prefer having direct control over the character. If Wii U owners are given a choice between the two styles, surely that's a good thing right?
People don't want to support a company that treats them like shit. It's that simple. If the game wasn't ready and it was delayed, that's one thing. For them to spit in our face and then slap us is completely different. The game's done. The game is being delayed because they don't have faith in us as consumers. The game's being sent to die and something that was supposed to be a gift to Nintendo fans was taken away. They're providing a product and they have the right to delay it. But we also have the right to be pissed at them for doing it.
That's fine, but really all of the major publishers have pulled major dick moves in the past. I would never let the actions of a publisher prevent me from supporting a developer I like, or allow me to miss out on a great game.
And how do we know that the developers aren't going to use this extra time to polish up the game or add more content? Or, like I said in my previous post, add an alternate control method for the Murfy levels?
If you want to support the developer, send them a check. If you want to play the game, buy it used. Buy it for $30 used and then sending the developer a check for $30 would give them more money than buying the game new and you get to play the game without supporting shitty business decisions. If Ubisoft thinks they can disregard WiiU owners, we have to show them that we have a voice.That's fine, but really all of the major publishers have pulled major dick moves in the past. I would never let the actions of a publisher prevent me from supporting a developer I like, or allow me to miss out on a great game.
And how do we know that the developers aren't going to use this extra time to polish up the game or add more content? Or, like I said in my previous post, add an alternate control method for the Murfy levels?
Just to be clear, if by "the Wii U version was done", people think the game was already submitted to Nintendo, pressed, etc, then no, it wasn't done.
Even if Ubi intended to release Legends on Wii U first, it wouldn't have been at the end of February, they were far (at least 1 month of delay) from ready.
A little insider news.
Just to be clear, if by "the Wii U version was done", people think the game was already submitted to Nintendo, pressed, etc, then no, it wasn't done.
Even if Ubi intended to release Legends on Wii U first, it wouldn't have been at the end of February, they were far (at least 1 month of delay) from ready.
A little insider news.
Just to be clear, if by "the Wii U version was done", people think the game was already submitted to Nintendo, pressed, etc, then no, it wasn't done.
Even if Ubi intended to release Legends on Wii U first, it wouldn't have been at the end of February, they were far (at least 1 month of delay) from ready.
A little insider news.
Ubisoft has corroborated this dev's story: Rayman Legends really is complete on Wii U and is only being held back so the publisher can simultaneously release across all platforms.
"There are no issues with the game development," said Ubisoft public relations specialist Sarah Irvin in a statement to Digital Spy. "The only reason for the delay is to release on multiple platforms.
Just to be clear, if by "the Wii U version was done", people think the game was already submitted to Nintendo, pressed, etc, then no, it wasn't done.
Even if Ubi intended to release Legends on Wii U first, it wouldn't have been at the end of February, they were far (at least 1 month of delay) from ready.
A little insider news.
and"There are no issues with the game development," Irvin told Digital Spy, adding, "the only reason for the delay is to release on multiple platforms."
The developer, who quit the company at the end of last month, blamed the decision on Ubisoft's "men in ties" and explained that the Rayman Legends team had just finished a crunch period to get the Wii U version ready (until yesterday it had been due to launch on 26th February).
"If you're pissed, imagine how we feel," wrote the developer on Spanish forum EOL, using the alias Zeta69 (translated by NeoGAF). "Think on the situation, we've been making overtime with this game practically since May preparing E3, and then almost a demo per month (Gamescom, Wii U presentation, shops, eShop, etc...) and at the same time trying to actually finish the game.
"We had a first delay because it was obvious we couldn't finish on time but we gave it all to be there on February. What face do you think we had when the week we had to close the game we're being told it's not going to be released? I couldn't believe it.
"For us, this means we've spent six months barely seeing our wives, kids, and friends for nothing because, after all, such a haste wasn't needed. Believe it, it was a hell to swallow this news."
"Believe it, it was a hell to swallow this news."
The developer wrote a message last month celebrating the project's completion, presumably before the news of the game's delay was handed down.
"Today is a great day! We've closed Legends [development] " read a post dated 9th January. "See what you think next month!"
It's unclear who the Zeta69 account belongs to, but years worth of posts point to an ex-Ubisoft Montpellier employee who worked at the company for some time. The developer left on 31st January after the end of Rayman Legends' Wii U development.
No it wasn't ready.
As far as i know, the game haven't hit the submission to Nintendo phase even in February. When you take into consideration the average time for the submission process, and after you have the production phase, then clearly, they weren't ready for a February release.
I understand what you are saying. But development was done. Obviously this decision affected production schedule. As far as they where concerned they are not releasing till september. Why submit anything now? That changes nothing.No it wasn't ready.
As far as i know, the game haven't hit the submission to Nintendo phase even in February. When you take into consideration the average time for the submission process, and after you have the production phase, then clearly, they weren't ready for a February release.
No it wasn't ready.
As far as i know, the game haven't hit the submission to Nintendo phase even in February. When you take into consideration the average time for the submission process, and after you have the production phase, then clearly, they weren't ready for a February release.
No it wasn't ready.
As far as i know, the game haven't hit the submission to Nintendo phase even in February. When you take into consideration the average time for the submission process, and after you have the production phase, then clearly, they weren't ready for a February release.
Does that mean the game's not done or that Ubi execs didn't submit it to Nintendo? You clearly have a developer saying the game's done and even leaving his job BECAUSE the game's done. You also have a PR person saying there's no delay in development. I find it much more likely that the devs submitted the game to Ubi but Ubi didn't submit to Nintendo. Unless you're sure that the game just straight up wasn't done? Either way, there's no reason why the game couldn't be released in March, April, May, June, July, or August.No it wasn't ready.
As far as i know, the game haven't hit the submission to Nintendo phase even in February. When you take into consideration the average time for the submission process, and after you have the production phase, then clearly, they weren't ready for a February release.
March at best.
No it wasn't ready.
As far as i know, the game haven't hit the submission to Nintendo phase even in February. When you take into consideration the average time for the submission process, and after you have the production phase, then clearly, they weren't ready for a February release.
Why was this even exclusive to begin with? There's obviously no moneyhat, and the WiiU-specific stuff is gimmicky. So strange that a sequel to a multiplat game would go exclusive with no moneyhat.
Well, i'm sorry but the submission process + production is a part of a game development in my view, so it wasn't ready.
People working at Ubi knew since January that the game wouldn't be ready for the scheduled date, as the executives haven't greenlighted the submission process at the time.
Now of course, in terms of content, the game was surely done. This story is a real pity.
Well, i'm sorry but the submission process + production is a part of a game development in my view, so it wasn't ready.
People working at Ubi knew since January that the game wouldn't be ready for the scheduled date, as the executives haven't greenlighted the submission process at the time.
Now of course, in terms of content, the game was surely done. This story is a real pity.
Well, i'm sorry but the submission process + production is a part of a game development in my view, so it wasn't ready.
People working at Ubi knew since January that the game wouldn't be ready for the scheduled date, as the executives haven't greenlighted the submission process at the time.
Now of course, in terms of content, the game was surely done. This story is a real pity.
So it's done, thanks for second insider verification.
Like i said, and it's illustrated by our little chat, the way we understand "done" is different for people.
For me, "done" is when the game is pressed and shipped to retail. And Legends was far from that, as it hasn't enter the submission process (with sometimes a round-trip, meaning at least 1 submission to Nintendo, that send back the build for corrections, then another submission) + production. And both can be quite lengthy in time.
What Idea Man doesn't know is he just failed the hidden Ubi GAF PR audition, he's out the running for the new position </3
Like i said, and it's illustrated by our little chat, the way we understand "done" is different for people.
For me, "done" is when the game is pressed and shipped to retail. And Legends was far from that, as it hasn't enter the submission process (with sometimes a round-trip, meaning at least 1 submission to Nintendo, that send back the build for corrections, then another submission) + production. And both can be quite lengthy in time.
IdeaMan, moving goalposts like Ubisoft moves release dates. Can't wait to hear about the philosophical intricacies of what "done" truly means. I mean, is anything ever really done, or are we just perpetual slaves in this mortal coil, moving from one activity to the next at junctures of transition conveniently labeled as done, although closure only exists as an abstraction which placates the ego and obscures death fear? Oh, unless you mean the dev team completed their work on the software. Well yeah, sure, it's done if that's what you mean.
Why are they anouncing it in a manifest rush, with no site or youtube channel updated, without telling retailers, juste 20 days before release? They shoulds have figure it earlier.
This is ridiculous though. Literally do correct me if I'm wrong, but when you stuck your oar in, I'm not sure anyone was at any point discussing done in terms of discs waiting to be pressed in factories, and it was extremely clear that we discussing it exactly in the terms both the devs, and Ubi have stated themselves. If you're going to try and go this route, you effectively have to pay more attention to the discussion before posting.
Of course though, you're backtracking, and that's fine. Like I said, stop trying to make it something that it isn't. We are very clear here on what's happened and why it's dissatisfying.
Oh man hah. I laughed.
This is the real question.
Basically, they knew since the second-half of January i would say, considering the time for submission + production, that they wouldn't hit the scheduled date.
So they could have announced this decision since nearly one month. Why waiting so much ? Maybe they wanted to do it during their recent event, maybe they were still hesitating on the course to the follow (a two stage launch, one earlier for Wii U then the others in September), etc.
Well, i'm sorry but the submission process + production is a part of a game development in my view, so it wasn't ready by definition. There's is a sizable period between end of content development and being ready to hit the shelves.
THIS is what is despicable in that mess. A loss of exclusivity? Fine, expected. A delay? Fuck, but OK... The way it is anounced : such contempt!
Oh, clearly you know more than the people working at ubisoft. If Ubisofts idiotic PR says it was ready for release on Wii U, that being the absolute worst thing they could have said (Barring outright cancelling the Wii U version), then nobody has any reason to believe anything otherwise.
We know for a fact that game development is "done". The fact that suits decided not to submit it for release is what we're all pissed about. What you're saying doesn't change a thing.
Well, after having read some pages of this thread and the other one (titled "was done"), i've seen a lot of people nearly believing that the discs were pressed and just retained in factories. In other words, that they were so close to put their hands on those. But like i said in my first post, it wasn't the case, at least two phases, really important, including one that can have consequences (albeit generally minor) on the game content, remained.
Anyway, the result is the same for us
No it wasn't ready.
As far as i know, the game haven't hit the submission to Nintendo phase even in February. When you take into consideration the average time for the submission process, and after you have the production phase, then clearly, they weren't ready for a February release.
EDIT: well, to be more correct, it's possible that men in ties blocked the decision to hit submission, WHEREAS the game was indeed ready.
But what i mean is that as legends wasn't submitted in February, well in now way it could have been released at the scheduled date.
If anybody at ubisoft is reading this, the marketing team not the devs, know this, I will not purchase your game at the 60 dollar price point. I will wait till it hits the bargin bin. Because of your stupid choice to delay the game, you saved me 40 bucks. Maybe I should say thank you. I will take the 40 bucks I saved and purchase perhaps a next gen game, or collectors edition of GTA assuming they release one.
If you want to support the developer, send them a check. If you want to play the game, buy it used. Buy it for $30 used and then sending the developer a check for $30 would give them more money than buying the game new and you get to play the game without supporting shitty business decisions. If Ubisoft thinks they can disregard WiiU owners, we have to show them that we have a voice.
And don't hold out hope that they're going to change stuff in the WiiU version. They ended development. A lot of workers who worked on the project have already left the company (temp workers just to get the game done?). The game probably already went gold.
Just checked oit the Uplay community on Miiverse. Ubisoft is getting ripped on there. Some very funny post and drawings. Miiverse is just too amazing. I really hope Ubisoft is watching whats going on over there. Lots of unhappy Wii U owners.
I know people don't understand how long it can take to get a game approved and then printed/packaged, but people aren't that dumb. People understand that being done with your homework doesn't mean that you've turned it in. Noone (and I'm sure there's one or two idiots out there invalidating this slightly) thinks that companies regularly print their games and then sit on them for a month for no reason before they send them to retailers.
Due to the dire need of quality U software and Nintendo's obvious reliance on the product to fill a software drought, would it be naive of me to think Nintendo would have expedited this usually lengthy submission process? Nintendo needed this product on time just as much as Ubi. Or moreso, as it turns out.
Just checked oit the Uplay community on Miiverse. Ubisoft is getting ripped on there. Some very funny post and drawings. Miiverse is just too amazing. I really hope Ubisoft is watching whats going on over there. Lots of unhappy Wii U owners.
No it's a pretty standard procedure, with lotchecks, stability measurements after a fixed number of hours, etc. They can't say "ok we need this game so screw the submission, go go press the discs !", it would be irresponsible.
I think some posters here thought that i was saying the developers were late in the content creation, and because of this they couldn't hit submission in time, sorry for the confusion, but i haven't said that one time, just that the idea that the game was done is false, when you take into consideration submission + production.
No it's a pretty standard procedure, with lotchecks, stability measurements after a fixed number of hours, etc. They can't say "ok we need this game so screw the submission, go go press the discs !", it would be irresponsible.