-
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.
Ubisoft Bans Player-Made Assassin's Creed Quests That Compete With Its Microtransactions (Jim Sterling)
- Thread starter Lashley
- Start date
Ubisoft : "Microtransactions are optional"
Players : "Ok, I'll choose another option then"
Ubisoft : "Wait, that's illegal"
Players : "Ok, I'll choose another option then"
Ubisoft : "Wait, that's illegal"
Good. I was actually looking forward to user created missions, but 90% of it is just this XP grinding garbage. Glad they got rid of it.
Just don't play those?
Free XP is an exploit, unless you pay us.
Sure, it's still bothersome when your map is littered with garbage and maybe now people will actually create something worthwhile.
OP
OP
"You paid $60, that's not enough!"
I love the game, but this so awful.
Do you think that people doing the free XP quests is what detracted other people from doing more elaborated ones? I really don't.
I think that there's a good game behind all the Ubisoft crap and usual open world fillers/sort-of-mandatory grinds.
In this industry there are developers, publishers, and parasites. Ubisoft (et al) are parasites, like ticks or leeches. Time we start calling them what they truly are.
This is why less games have had mod tools since Gen 7, the publishers want you to purchase DLC or level boosts etc etc instead.
A good example of this was Total War, always had mod tools, then Sega purchased Creative Assembly & they magically vanished for a while.
Good thing Bethesda put mods on Consoles too, so the blow back will come from both PC & Console gamers if they get any ideas about removing their SDK in future titles.
A good example of this was Total War, always had mod tools, then Sega purchased Creative Assembly & they magically vanished for a while.
Good thing Bethesda put mods on Consoles too, so the blow back will come from both PC & Console gamers if they get any ideas about removing their SDK in future titles.
Imagine unironically coming into a thread to do nothing but drop a hot take about a game you want to appear cooler than.
The people making "stories" for quick XP were never going to make real stories, but they clutter up the interface and add a lot of noise to a game that already has too much to do and filter through. It's hardly a good look for Ubisoft to leave them up in any prominence.
I want you to be honest, do you think Ubisoft is more worried about "clutter" or the fact that this undermines their MTX?
I don't know, but I would imagine that they will implement restrictions on the quest like the amount of XP and the like if that's the case.
They don't have to make them automatically visible but don't need to ban them. The only reason they banned those quests was so they don't compete with their own MTX.
Then Ubisoft should highlight what they consider to be the "good ones". Not ban the others. But those others might impact their microtransactions revenue. That's the real problem they have with them.
Almost a year later and the hate train for this game continues to roll on.
Do i think this decision was made independently of the fact they charge people for xp boosters? No
Do i think the the sole reason they made this decision was cuz it undermines their xp booster? Also no.
The booster is what it is--it's a booster. You're getting xp at a +50% rate but you still have to engage with the game and play through missions to get anything out of it.
The created content in question is nothing more than a way to farm xp from doing the same quest over and over again.
Do i think this decision was made independently of the fact they charge people for xp boosters? No
Do i think the the sole reason they made this decision was cuz it undermines their xp booster? Also no.
The booster is what it is--it's a booster. You're getting xp at a +50% rate but you still have to engage with the game and play through missions to get anything out of it.
The created content in question is nothing more than a way to farm xp from doing the same quest over and over again.
AC nowadays is mainly for its virtual tourism. I know one peep who posts at least 1 AC Odyssey screenshot to their Steam activity page and their screenshots are magnificent.
The simple gameplay system they've gone for lately has some fun to it.
Jim does love taking shots at Ubisoft, but this thread in particular is a discussion of a genuine problem. Ubisoft is responsible for this thread, you should be frustrated at them for overshadowing what, by all indictations, is a very good game.
The fact either of those exist is proof of a poorly designed game. Fuck AC now and forever.
let people enjoy their damn single player game, shit. pretty transparent move by Ubi lol. come the fuck on. this isn't about the quality of user content. this is solely 1000000% about protecting the additive monetary value to them of their XP booster.
not that they'd be the only ones to do this. all these big publishers are in it to make money, of course. but it's taken to this super frustratingly cynical level. there's this fake veneer where they're pretending to be these engaging companies, but shit like this constantly shows they're more akin to parasites in the end. just concerned about sucking up as much profit as possible from consumers who've already paaid for the damn product.
at least ubi delivers fun enough games across the board, despite the bullshit. ea doesn't even get that far 95% of the time these days.
not that they'd be the only ones to do this. all these big publishers are in it to make money, of course. but it's taken to this super frustratingly cynical level. there's this fake veneer where they're pretending to be these engaging companies, but shit like this constantly shows they're more akin to parasites in the end. just concerned about sucking up as much profit as possible from consumers who've already paaid for the damn product.
at least ubi delivers fun enough games across the board, despite the bullshit. ea doesn't even get that far 95% of the time these days.
Last edited:
Imagine coming into a thread to post this stupid smug shit.
And of course, good job Ubi for being garbage.
I want to be outraged, but as an erstwhile AD&D dungeon master who sometimes let his players to take a stab at being the DM, only for their whole party to suddenly and overnight be level 60 wizards with swords +20 and full Tarrasque immunity... I totally get Ubisoft here, lol.
I absolutely get what you're saying, unlike the go-to "just ignore what you don't like" crowd. Sifting through garbage is not fun. That said, there is a real solution to the root problem and removing XP stories isn't it.
Ubisoft doesn't have a problem with you leveling up quickly, as long as you pay them for it.
To paraphrase my comment from the previous thread, I'm in the "this change isn't because of the XP Booster MTX because they can't possibly be selling enough this late in the game's lifecycle to warrant the loss of goodwill by removing Story Creator XP" camp. Any meaningful character progression ends at level ~50 (the original level cap), the rest are Mastery levels which don't do as much unless you are a min-maxer (and you get a ton of free Mastery levels from the Atlantis DLC, which requires hitting lv. 50 and beating the game to access).
That said, allowing this XP abuse is 100% Ubisoft's fault since the exploitation of user-generated content is pretty standard.
That said, allowing this XP abuse is 100% Ubisoft's fault since the exploitation of user-generated content is pretty standard.
That's not the appropriate word, or the right analogy. You paid $60, in exchange you got an excellent game with tons of post-launch support.
Seems like a symbiotic relationship to me. One that even tilts towards the consumer in some ways, since the base $60 price hasn't changed in two decades.
Hhaha, feel bad for the console players without things like trainers that PC players can get around this situation with.
Of course it does. Ubisoft have already shown they don't have a problem with fast tracking when they are getting money during the process.
If it exists, there is a defence force for it. No exceptions.
I would agree with you if I hadn't played the game. I know first-hand that the standard XP gain rate is reasonable.
That doesn't change the fact that you can speed it up for a fee.
Because if you want a build that doesn't become obsolete in 3 hours of gameplay, you need to hit the cap.
There's absolutely character progressions past lvl 50 because of the dumbass level cap increases. As it stands, if you say, have an end-game build (because 50 is obvs the endgame, there's no missions that even *start* at higher levels before level scaling) or use legendary gear it quickly becomes obsolete because you level past it leading you to scrounge for the same random rolls for your gear you got by chance to begin with or you have to pay inordinate amount of resources (especially with Legendary gear) to upgrade the gear to your level.
It would likely take more dev effort to take them out than leave it in (actually serious here; software development is weird like that. It's not just a switch)
The better question is "why are they driving people to buy boosters?" which if they are, they are doing a poor job as the Shop is the most deemphasized MTX store in a video game.
Shh it's time for the people who have not and will not play this game to insist that it was built around boosters