Might as well be a pre-written statement where they fill out the blanks at this point.
"We learned from the mistakes me made with ____________"
We tried to push the limits of human decency and corporate ethics by robbing you by shoving out a mediocre product, but apparently you're almost as stupid as we thought you were - but not quite as much as we had hoped. Thankfully, apologies cost no money to make, so here, have one. You stupid fuck.
Bring back Jade Raymond and we'll talk.
Ubi can't be trusted when it comes to having games perform as promised.
"I do not believe I am ready for public consumption at this time. Come back a few weeks after the game ships."
Bring back Patrice Desilets and we'll talk.
Ubi can't be trusted when it comes to having games perform as promised.
What happens when you don't download the day 1 patch on pc, also only occurred on a couple specific graphics cards.The hell is that? lol
Fixed
Raymond contributed to both Watch Dogs and Unity, and look how both of those turned out. Ubi's quality dropped after he left. And with all the stuff surrounding 1666 and his firing, he is never going back.
So i'm a fanboy for being able to reply to the same blanket statements (and seemingly allowed blatant trolling) that get reiterated in every single Ubi related thread? Honestly, it's a discussion forum, follow my posts, I always try to back my statements up with a source of visual. Honestly, the revisionist history and blanket statements like "they've never tried to change the games" are extremely frustrating to read.It IS strange how he's in every Ubisoft related thread.... defending Ubisoft. I mean... of all developers to have a fanboy that dedicated, why Ubisoft?
So i'm a fanboy for being able to reply to the same blanket statements (and seemingly allowed blatant trolling) that get reiterated in every single Ubi related thread? Honestly, it's a discussion forum, follow my posts, I always try to back my statements up with a source of visual. Honestly, the revisionist history and blanket statements like "they've never tried to change the games" are extremely frustrating to read.
Totally ignores PC in that PR. PC had a lot of the higher settings and had to be enabled with mods.
That's the thing, on GAF, you see that common complaint, but outside of this forum, many actually like their games. GAF is not indicative of the general gaming community. That and the fact that many say "oh it's repetitive" as a blanket statement, they don't actually state why or how, or acknowledge the differences between their games, they just use the word as if it's the only defining factor of the games. W3 is repetitive, the majority of question marks contain or lead to sword diagrams, Arkham Knight is repetitive, I have to shoot breakable objects in the environment to solve a riddle. These sounds like fun games to you? Ofc not, because both those statements completely ignore pretty much every other thing you can do in those games. And that's what happens in these threads. Yes you can collect a lot of chests in AC:Unity, you can also play the campaign, you can also play the side content that has a story for a large amount o characters that you meet both in the campaign and side campaign, mission design is now much more open. etc.But do you see the fact that so many people find them boring and repetitive and same old stuff all over again?
Doesn't that point out that maybe, just maybe, they are not changing them enough to matter? Or not in the right ways?
But i thought people disliked Brotherhood
Älg;171078629 said:You mean broken shadows and bloom out the ass? Yeah, fantastic.
What?
Brotherhood is still the best aggregated reviewed assassins creed game. And its considered among the best with 2 and black flag.
That's the thing, on GAF, you see that common complaint, but outside of this forum, many actually like their games. GAF is not indicative of the general gaming community.
I didn't enable the broken shadows (headlights casting shadows). Or up the bloom.
Ended up having to tweak it myself as much as I could because the modders were going overboard.
The on-foot gameplay (stealth/shooting) was the best part of the game. Characters, Atmosphere, Narrative, Cars, and Hacking were all extremely dull though
Nah, 2 had a higher MC by 1. Unless you're going off of the PC MC, which is odd as it has less reviews.
Älg;171079703 said:The shadows were more or less broken. They were of significantly lower quality than the rest of the shadows, and there were a lot of issues when you walking close to a car.
Here's some what the mod added:
Increased bloom. This went back and forth between releases. At one release it was so extreme that a single light source could bleed over the entire screen.
Permanent DoF. The DoF effect was already in the game; the mod only made it permanent. Purely and artistic choice.
Fog. Again, was already in the game. Artistic choice.
Colour grading and stuff. Artisti choice.
The only thing the mod added that wasn't already in the game was the shadows, and as I said, they were far below standard.
Siege isn't even out yet
The improved lighting and shadows put the default game to shame really.
You had mods that could decrease the DoF too.
There were also NPC, extended distance and rain improvements.
Didn't see that E3 thread?
The reveal trailer was just a lie while the playable had terrible textures and crappy performance.
Didn't see that E3 thread?
The reveal trailer was just a lie while the playable had terrible textures and crappy performance.
Well it's a discussion forum.So why do you constantly tire yourself out trying to change the opinions of people who aren't going to change?
You would be much better off ignoring those comments, instead of fighting against them, because now people don't take you seriously because of your subtitle.
So i'm a fanboy for being able to reply to the same blanket statements (and seemingly allowed blatant trolling) that get reiterated in every single Ubi related thread? Honestly, it's a discussion forum, follow my posts, I always try to back my statements up with a source of visual. Honestly, the revisionist history and blanket statements like "they've never tried to change the games" are extremely frustrating to read.
If "fanboy" isn't the right word, then perhaps "Ubisoft Apologist" is more apt. I'm not so much speaking about the posts you're responding to but moreso the fact that you are literally in every Ubisoft thread defending any Ubisoft game that gets mentioned. Maybe some of these statements are frustrating to read, but most people wouldn't go to every single Ubisoft related thread, track them down, and respond to them. Do you do this for any other developerpublisher? Or is it just Ubisoft?
Read my posts history and you'd see me defending a lot of devs. Not solely Ubisoft. How about we act our age and avoid name calling? I'm not tracking these posts down. I read the article in the OP, then read the posts, and respond to some posts. You make it sound like I respond to literally every post in the thread.If "fanboy" isn't the right word, then perhaps "Ubisoft Apologist" is more apt. I'm not so much speaking about the posts you're responding to but moreso the fact that you are literally in every Ubisoft thread defending any Ubisoft game that gets mentioned. Maybe some of these statements are frustrating to read, but most people wouldn't go to every single Ubisoft related thread, track them down, and respond to them. Do you do this for any other developer\publisher? Or is it just Ubisoft?
"Sacred honor."The answer's on his tag. Every Ubisoft thread, every single one I read, this guy's in it defending their sacred honour. Never see him doing the same thing with other companies.
Ubisoft said:With E3 2015 we said, OK, lets make sure the games are playable, that theyre running on the target machines. When we show something, we ask the team, make sure its playable, make sure gamers can immediately see exactly what it is. Thats what we learned from the Watch Dogs experience if it cant be played on the target machine, it can be a risk.
If "fanboy" isn't the right word, then perhaps "Ubisoft Apologist" is more apt. I'm not so much speaking about the posts you're responding to but moreso the fact that you are literally in every Ubisoft thread defending any Ubisoft game that gets mentioned. Maybe some of these statements are frustrating to read, but most people wouldn't go to every single Ubisoft related thread, track them down, and respond to them. Do you do this for any other developer\publisher? Or is it just Ubisoft?
Exactly. Example, most ubisoft related threads, pick one and it's always the same shit, someone makes a false blanket statement, all fine, I come in with facts and sources and the reply is almost alwaysWhenever people rant and complain about anything, even when the complaints are bullshit, no problem.
But like something a lot and discuss it on a discussion forum and you get called an apologist.
If "fanboy" isn't the right word, then perhaps "Ubisoft Apologist" is more apt. I'm not so much speaking about the posts you're responding to but moreso the fact that you are literally in every Ubisoft thread defending any Ubisoft game that gets mentioned. Maybe some of these statements are frustrating to read, but most people wouldn't go to every single Ubisoft related thread, track them down, and respond to them. Do you do this for any other developer\publisher? Or is it just Ubisoft?
By playable, are you talking about the alpha which had ALPHA plastered on all the unifinished assets that was available on PC earlier this year, or are you talking about the T Hunt stuff they showed at e3?
Because if you are talking about the prior -_-
Also, people played the build that was used in the reveal and is apparently "fake". It was played by the public. There are matches of it being played uploaded to youtube and gametrailers.
So ubisoft made a playable lie then?
The graphics were the least of Watch_Dog's problems.
Any changes to lighting and shadows was due to the multitude of overdone post processing effects rather than actual improvements
Exactly. Example, most ubisoft related threads, pick one and it's always the same shit, someone makes a false blanket statement, all fine, I come in with facts and sources and the reply is almost always
"Lol look at his tag, i'm so clever."
like what's the point? Yes, I'm a fan of Ubisoft games, so what.