Gasp! A company improving their game because it gets them more money?! STOP THE FUCKING PRESSES!
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Jimpressions: Assassin's Creed Odyssey- It's Grindy, It's Greedy, It's Ubisoft!
- Thread starter Deleted member 135
- Start date
Gasp! A company improving their game because it gets them more money?! STOP THE FUCKING PRESSES!
Just as an example: Lootboxes? Those things? Remember them?
I'll give Ubisoft this, they aren't as bad as EA or Activation (damning with faint praise there)
Most are actually pretty good so far. It's basically Skyrim side quests. Some are better than others but I haven't hated any of them.
Do you hate every single company in the world as much as Ubi?
Because some people will buy it regardless? Take fifa for example, people spend thousands of pounds buying card packs when you can win enough coins to buy card packs by just playing the game. There's people out there who buy games and just want everything right now and almost don't want to play the game they bought. It's a strange mentality to have but there's lots and lots of people out there like that.
I played ac origins for fifty hours and bar there being too much content and the game feeling a bit too long I never once thought I wish I could pay money to not play this. There's a lot of people jumping in this thread two footed who seemingly haven't played odyssey or have no intention of playing it just to jump on the bandwagon.
Because it's a good game and the complaints about "grindiness" are completely overblown and inaccurate.
People who have played the game have told you again and again that it's not the case. It wasn't the case in AC:Origins and it's same system.
Maybe you should try it yourself before stating something like it's a fact. But you already said that you'll never buy it unless they remove the EXP booster. Sadly for you, I doubt that threat will do much. But if it makes you feel good to stand up for this cause that you obviously care deeply about, good for you.
Corrent me if Im wrong, but far as I'm aware the only Ubisift games that have lootboxes are Ghost Recon Wildlands and R6 Siege. Both of which are cosmetic.
"I'll just wait until the price goes down before I buy it. How dare game publishers look for alternative revenue streams beyond the sticker price?"
I never bought into Wildlands beyond the demo, but AFAIK they also had outfits and weapon skins for sale outside of lootboxes a la Fortnite/WoW.
"If you've made a game that people want to pay to not play, they want to pay to skip it, you've made a f*cking sh*t game." -Jim.
That line is perfect.
Love it 'cause it's true, lol.
--------------------------------------------
Edit:
I don't mean it specifically for Odyssey, but for any game that asks for money to play less.
I haven't played Odyssey yet. Just clarifying.
That line is perfect.
Love it 'cause it's true, lol.
--------------------------------------------
Edit:
I don't mean it specifically for Odyssey, but for any game that asks for money to play less.
I haven't played Odyssey yet. Just clarifying.
Last edited:
Oh heck no I hate a plenty a lot more than Ubisoft.
Ubisoft makes some well crafted, if often generic, games with a bunch of extra DLC garbage.
Like, they're not even the worst game company.
That poster said he's never playing the game and has gotten so much information about the game wrong just ITT that it's a case study in why people can't really discuss game design without first hand experience.
Counterpoint: Jim Sterling said it is the case, he's played it too, and I trust his word a lot more then any of the Ubisoft defenders in this thread.
Yes that's why I said Ubisoft is better than EA and Activation.
Origins has lootboxes but AC games are never designed with those in mind compared to something like Overwatch or Uncharted 4. So they're incredibly incredibly easy to forget.
On the other hand I don't need to play the game to know that a "Pay Money to play the game less" button is bad. And the fact that this game has such a button means I'm never going to play it.
Does it? I've admittedly only been in the store for Origins once, but I dont recall seeing loot boxes. Just weapons, mounts, skins and stuff like that. Some of which I bought because it looked cool. Did Origins have random loot?
Wait, are we talking about the box from that kid whose name I forget? You could spend real money on that thing, right?
...dude.
are you going to say that right after you claimed odyssey has higher legendary drop rate and that origins had xp boosts? and if it wasnt the store prices it was the helix credit youre given with the gold edition. MT's were ignorable in origins and i still bought them.
Odyssey is a different game.
Its all funny because i literally have the gold edition on me and im the furthest thing from a jim sterling fan and yet somehow im being lumped in the fake outrage group because im having issues levelling without the shitty side quests.
Hell im even saying its a better game than origins overall.
I wonder where all this support for ubi has come from because nobody gave a single fuck about origins last which did mt's better. but then again, odyssey had a special recognition in era even before the mtx stuff was revealed.
"Game is properly balanced and a pay button to play less of the game thing is overblown."
Receipts for both statements:
-The mercenary system in Odyssey is literally designed to be a constant source of good loot as they're basically roaming minibosses. Some even talk to you as you pass them even if you have a small bounty.
-Origins had time savers as well
Last edited:
The game is not properly balanced. If it was it wouldn't have an option to pay money to give you more EXP.
The mere presence of this EXP booster is proof that the game has an unbalanced EXP curve.
It let's you pay but it isn't designed to make you pay.
You've been stating that the game grindy and designed to make you pay as if it's a fact without any first hand experience. Quit it. Come back after playing the game instead of blindly falling for Jim's fake and sad outrage.
Again, you're talking as if you've played the game. It IS properly balanced. You haven't played it. Don't make stuff up.
No it fucking isn't. That's not even remotely how this shit works.
It's designed to make you want to pay.
Yes it is.
Don't pay if you don't want to, but know that Ubisoft is deliberately making leveling up take longer to make you want to buy their booster.
He got props with that line once before and uses it often now and he is wrong here.
He has gone from being respected with some quality discussion to just chasing clicks by yelling at clouds.
You can play AC without ever needing or wanting to 'skip' or speed up anything.
Shortcuts or extra xp boosts are not the same shit he has been trying to outlaw in games, he just has nothing better to bitch about and thought oh hey a new release and it's ubisoft this should be easy.
No it isn't. Play it and tell me how it made you want to pay.
But it doesn't apply at all because from almost all accounts, it's far from a shit game.
Then again, I get that his point is that they should be ashamed to put that in if they considered that they made a good game. But it's just one of the many perks they're selling in the in-game store, along with useless swords and outfits. It's probably decided by the marketing team, independently from the developers who just add it at the end. People are seriously overstating the nefarious nature of this thing.
You keep saying that but you aren't convincing anyone else. I doubt you're convincing yourself either. This is all an act, yes?
No. I'm not going to support this business practice. Like how I don't play any games with lootboxes that aren't f2p.
Well if they are selling you an EXP booster they want you to buy it, so they want to make getting EXP just inconvient enough to make you want to pay.
Therefore, the game's level curve is unbalanced.
I forget which game did that last year. Was it Forza?
Do you just not udnerstand how game design works? Do you believe that somewhere mid development someone went "HEY, BUT FUCK THOSE GUYS! MAKE THEM GRIND OR PAY US LOL" or would it make more sense that a business guy walked in last moment and told them to shove a booster in the store?
Citation needed.
Nah, even though that version of the game gives you more exp than the base game, the mere existence of mts means that the game is not properly balanced.
Between level's 24 and 32 there was one main quest at level 27 that took about 20 minutes.
Oh, yeah I wasn't saying that it's true for Odyssey but in general terms for any game that asks for money to play less, lol.
Yeah, I bought the game and it's sitting on my PS4 for now. I'm planning to give it a fair try as soon as I finish DQ11 and LiS2ep1.
Sorry for the confusion. I edited my post.
Dudes been spouting the exact same stupid line all day long, even though he's repeatedly been proven wrong. He doesn't actually care about the truth, nor should you bother trying to educated him.
You don't have to support it but don't make shit up without any first hand experience in playing the game.
No, they've been selling boosters in many games just as an extra revenue for those who want it. The game isn't designed with boosters in mind. Again, don't make false assumptions based on literally nothing.
You know why.
I mean, yes? Not in so many words. But somebody higher up went "hey we can wring some more money out of people by selling them an EXP Booster" and then the devs had to tune the EXP gains to encourage people to do that.
Eh, there's a few genres where "playing less" actually makes the game better, if that makes sense. Fighting games are a big one, at least ones with unlockable characters. Lets that DBZF for example, I could play the game and beat it on hard mode with an A rating (I think?) to SSB Goku/Vegita, or I could pay for them. For the vast majority f Fighting Game players, option B is better because it allows you to play a character you want.
No they didn't! Don't make stuff up without a source of information or first hand experience.
Because it was turned off in the review copy. Ubisoft has been doing this for a long time my man, they know how the system works.
Protip: Shouting "NO YOU" at someone doesn't prove them wrong.
What other reason could the EXP booster be in the game other than to sell it?
Please tell me what I'm making up?
- There is an EXP Booster you can pay for in this game
- Ubisoft wants you to give them more money
- Therefore, Ubisoft wants to encourage you to buy the EXP Booster
All three of these things are true, yes? So therefore the only conclusion one can reach is:
- The game is designed to give out less EXP than what would be needed for well paced progression to encourage you to buy the Booster.
Ah yes, but regurgitating the same line that has been proven wrong multiple times totally makes you right though.
LOGIC!
Literally a dev ITT saying straight up that that's not how a game like this is monetized. Refute the following text:
^
If your post doesn't directly address the above then don't bother posting.