Why does Ubisoft get so much flak in the community?

[spurraider21]

Often times when reading a review for a new open world action game... one of the common criticisms I read (usually in the comment section by posters, and not by article authors) is that the game is "Ubified" or just another Ubisoft-like game.

They really revamped the open world genre with Assassins Creed 2 which is still a fun, successful formula. Far Cry is popular. Their Tom Clancy games are fairly popular. While the AC games had fallen off a bit, by all accounts Origins and Odyssey are both quite good, so its not like they've gone stale.

I don't see anything glaringly wrong with the company, but its such a common critique of other open world games being "too much like ubisoft games" etc. People complained about tallnecks in Horizon being ubisoft towers. The tallnecks were fun.

[baseline bum]

Ubisoft games meant climbing towers and tons of collectible crap littering your map. They also got a ton of flack for major graphical downgrades in the reveals of their games vs what they actually looked like when released, Watch Dogs being the most famous example. They have been doing great work the last couple of years though. The first half of this gen their shit was pretty lame across the board.

[baseline bum]

Oh yeah and Assassins Creed Unity was released with terrible performance on all systems, sky high system requirements for PC, and some nasty bugs.

https://cbsnews1.cbsistatic.com/hub/i/2014/11/14/72fa0009-6714-49d4-ba0a-713d6ccd46ef/assassins1.jpg

[spurraider21]

Ubisoft games meant climbing towers and tons of collectible crap littering your map. They also got a ton of flack for major graphical downgrades in the reveals of their games vs what they actually looked like when released, Watch Dogs being the most famous example. They have been doing great work the last couple of years though. The first half of this gen their shit was pretty lame across the board.
but then how can you praise horizon which consists of tallnecks to climb and tons of collectible crap littering your map (metal flowers, artifacts, vantage points... and stuff like corrupted zones to cleaer). god of war had stupid odin ravens, artifacts, and treasures/maps

rockstar games are popular but their maps look like somebody just vomited a thousand points of interest. uncharted is like 40% climbing and finding stupid artifacts. i dno, just seems ubisoft gets unnecessarily shit on for those mechanics when people love those same mechanics as long as its a different dev

[baseline bum]

but then how can you praise horizon which consists of tallnecks to climb and tons of collectible crap littering your map (metal flowers, artifacts, vantage points... and stuff like corrupted zones to cleaer). god of war had stupid odin ravens, artifacts, and treasures/maps

rockstar games are popular but their maps look like somebody just vomited a thousand points of interest. uncharted is like 40% climbing and finding stupid artifacts. i dno, just seems ubisoft gets unnecessarily shit on for those mechanics when people love those same mechanics as long as its a different dev

The tallnecks are about the most interesting tower climb ever and Horizon and God of War have combat that really separates themselves from what Ubisoft was doing the first half of this gen. Also Horizon was fucking flawless on launch (it's still the only game I have ever pre-ordered since reviews came a week before launch) while the AC games have been pretty buggy at launch. Ubisoft has come correct with their reboot of AC in Origins but the first half of this gen their games were bland and generic. Microtransactions are another thing that really puts people off toward Ubisoft.

[Reck]

Just think it’s a product of today’s shitty standards. Releasing a game every 11 months and broken as fuck tires people.

[spurraider21]

Just think it’s a product of today’s shitty standards. Releasing a game every 11 months and broken as fuck tires people.
yes and no. while i'm not in that category, people gladly pony up money to buy new version of spots games every year, even though changes are incremental and barley noticeable year to year. i used to be in the crowd that bought the new call of duty games on a year to year basis. i dont think people mind paying for "more of the same" as long as its quite good.

[Joseph Kony]

i have no problems with Ubi. I commend them for actually churning out a good amount of solid games, only think i dont like is that i have to play them via uplay on PC and their store doesnt work through steam and makes me go directly to uplay to purchase anything in game.

i personally loved Watch Dogs, and i really enjoyed the second but thought it was kind of a letdown storywise. and i'm replaying AC Origins which is imo the best game they've put out to date. but Ubi is a huge company and they churn out a fuck ton of games, so of course they are going to put out some trash every now and then which gets a lot of flak.

[Joseph Kony]

although one thing i will say is there are many games (like the FC series) where they just kind of copy and paste the game again and while its not a huge deal its kind of lame. but then again when they try to do a sequel completely different than the ones before it (Origins) people get butthurt that its not the same as every other AC game

[ElNono]

They had some really bad misses. For example, on some AC games you could only open chests if you had the app installed on your mobile phone. They also received a lot of slack for the micro transactions BS and the DLCs being short. And shitty.

At least with AC, they’ve gotten better in the last couple iterations

[DJR210]

-Yearly shit releases (until they bucked the trend w/ AC Origins)
-Uplay
-buggy unfinished releases
- 30 FPS "cinematic graphics" statement
-deceptive advertising