PDA

View Full Version : Ubisoft Would Delay An Assassin’s Creed ‘If It’s Not Good Enough’



catkiller97
12-20-2013, 09:24 AM
f we think we’ve ended up with a 70 percent Assassin’s Creed game, we’re not going to ship it,” Detoc told IGN. “That damages the brand. I’m not going to give you the names of products, because you know them as well as I do, but if you start to make games at 70 percent, even with a big brand, eventually people are going to change their mind about that brand. They won’t want it anymore. That’s what saves the recurrence. There are 30 million people or so who have been playing Grand Theft Auto. Last year, to pick a round number, we had about 10 million people playing Assassin’s Creed. When we come up with an Assassin’s Creed the next year, there’s another 10 million brand new people who might be interested in the new setting, because of the new history, or the new naval battles and the pirates. It’s a variation on gameplay from even last year.”

More - http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/12/19/ubisoft-would-delay-an-assassins-creed-if-its-not-good-enough

MIA SILENT
12-20-2013, 09:40 AM
"I’m not going to give you the names of products, because you know them as well as I do"

Must be talking about AC:R.

Jk, he obviously means COD.

killzab
12-20-2013, 10:21 AM
Not a chance in the world they would delay it, unlike Watch Dogs which NEEDS to make a strong impression as the first game in the series, AC is Ubisoft's regular cash cow, which allows them to finance other projects. They can't afford to delay it.

DinoSteve1
12-20-2013, 10:32 AM
"I’m not going to give you the names of products, because you know them as well as I do"

Must be talking about AC:R.

Jk, he obviously means COD.
Or ME3 it wasn't finished.

Also AC3 could have used a few more touches.

LoyalACFan
12-20-2013, 10:37 AM
Not a chance in the world they would delay it, unlike Watch Dogs which NEEDS to make a strong impression as the first game in the series, AC is Ubisoft's regular cash cow, which allows them to finance other projects. They can't afford to delay it.

This. I'll believe it when I see it. We've had annual games for the last five years. Not holding my breath for any change. Besides, the way he said it made it meaningless anyway, since "good enough" is subjective. They obviously pushed out the supremely short Revelations and the supremely buggy AC3, so apparently "good enough" means something different to UBI corporate than it does to the devs or the fans.

LoyalACFan
12-20-2013, 10:38 AM
"I’m not going to give you the names of products, because you know them as well as I do"

Must be talking about AC:R.

Jk, he obviously means COD.

Lol yeah, I thought the same thing. People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

ze_topazio
12-20-2013, 11:14 AM
They had no problem releasing AC3 full of bugs and incomplete stuff.

poptartz20
12-20-2013, 12:14 PM
:( alright farlander! Until next time!


http://s3.amazonaws.com/stripgenerator/strip/05/86/66/00/00/full.png

Megas_Doux
12-20-2013, 12:36 PM
Cough cough AC II cough cough.....

I think he is talking about Battlefield.

BoBwUzHeRe1138
12-20-2013, 12:47 PM
:( alright farlander! Until next time!


http://s3.amazonaws.com/stripgenerator/strip/05/86/66/00/00/full.png

Wrong thread there, buddy.

thewhitestig
12-20-2013, 01:12 PM
That's a huge slap at EA's face.

DarktheMagister
12-20-2013, 01:24 PM
If EA had a face worth slapping....

FrankieSatt
12-20-2013, 02:34 PM
I don't believe for a second they would delay a game, of any kind. Proof Positive is what they did with Splinter Cell Conviction, a game that should have never been released much less released in the shape it was in.

UbiSoft is all about getting content out the door, at whatever cost, or why would they talk about releasing a new AC game every year?

thewhitestig
12-20-2013, 03:17 PM
I don't believe for a second they would delay a game, of any kind. Proof Positive is what they did with Splinter Cell Conviction, a game that should have never been released much less released in the shape it was in.

UbiSoft is all about getting content out the door, at whatever cost, or why would they talk about releasing a new AC game every year?

How about Watch_Dogs and The Crew?

SixKeys
12-20-2013, 03:38 PM
*reads title*

Must....resist....urge....to comment....about AC3....

Assassin_M
12-20-2013, 05:27 PM
*reads title*

Must....resist....urge....to comment....about AC3....
AC III was 70.99% complete..

Shahkulu101
12-20-2013, 05:36 PM
It's quite a feat on ubisofts part that they release a half-baked buggy mess with the worst mission design ever and manage to sell 12 million copies. The most deceptive marketing campaign in the history of the universe.

dxsxhxcx
12-20-2013, 05:40 PM
It's quite a feat on ubisofts part that they release a half-baked buggy mess with the worst mission design ever and manage to sell 12 million copies. The most deceptive marketing campaign in the history of the universe.


I believe AC3 sold so well because the original plan was supposed to be a trilogy, so people had a lot of expectations about the third numbered title...

Shahkulu101
12-20-2013, 05:46 PM
I believe AC3 sold so well because the original plan was supposed to be a trilogy, so people had a lot of expectations about the third numbered title...

Yeah, that's what me made so hyped as well.... Believe it or not I was super excited for the Desmond missions - the skyscraper platformer was alright but the others...as I'm sure you know....

DinoSteve1
12-20-2013, 05:50 PM
I believe AC3 sold so well because the original plan was supposed to be a trilogy, so people had a lot of expectations about the third numbered title...

Ugh a trilogy of Conner, thank God for Black Flag.

ReaperSaga
12-20-2013, 05:54 PM
They would release every game as a sh!tty optimized garbage a year with only a crashing black screen, because they know their big ego gets them even little money from it.

Oh wait, they are already doing this.

dxsxhxcx
12-20-2013, 06:32 PM
Ugh a trilogy of Conner, thank God for Black Flag.

the franchise was supposed to be a trilogy, not AC3...

DinoSteve1
12-20-2013, 06:34 PM
ah sorry, yeah I knew that.

pacmanate
12-20-2013, 08:43 PM
LOL. 70%?! 75% isn't good, neither is 80%. A game should be 95% or more to be "good enough". 70% is NOTHING.

Kagurra
12-20-2013, 08:48 PM
Ubi delaying an AC game?

Yeah right lol.

pacmanate
12-20-2013, 08:49 PM
Ubi delaying an AC game?

Yeah right lol.

Well if it only has to be of 70% quality thats never gonna happen, what a joke.

DinoSteve1
12-20-2013, 08:51 PM
95% or more? It should be 100% You wouldn't but 95% of a car would you?

Kagurra
12-20-2013, 08:52 PM
Well if it only has to be of 70% quality thats never gonna happen, what a joke.

I agree they should if that's the case. But they won't. They shipped AC3, didn't they?

pacmanate
12-20-2013, 08:57 PM
95% or more? It should be 100% You wouldn't but 95% of a car would you?

They are saying a statistic that is good enough. I'm not saying it shouldn't be 100% but that doesnt make sense in context and I cba to explain my point.

Also, I can't drive so that's impractical.

pacmanate
12-20-2013, 08:57 PM
I agree they should if that's the case. But they won't. They shipped AC3, didn't they?

AC3 is a different story, this is the only time I will defend the game.

It was the first time having a new protag after 3 years. They had to do it.

DinoSteve1
12-20-2013, 09:10 PM
They are saying a statistic that is good enough. I'm not saying it shouldn't be 100% but that doesnt make sense in context and I cba to explain my point.

Also, I can't drive so that's impractical.

ok then you wouldn't but 95% of a loaf of bread.

This is why on disc and day one dlc is such a touchy subject.

pacmanate
12-20-2013, 09:11 PM
ok then you wouldn't but 95% of a loaf of bread.

This is why on disc and day one dlc is such a touchy subject.

Nothing will ever be 100% in quality, its all opinionated.

I'm just saying 70% is a low percentage when it comes to quality, even if its subjective. 95% or higher sounds reasonable.

MIA SILENT
12-20-2013, 09:13 PM
ok then you wouldn't but 95% of a loaf of bread.

This is why on disc and day one dlc is such a touchy subject.

I would. Don't like the heal.

Next.

MIA SILENT
12-20-2013, 09:17 PM
Nothing will ever be 100% in quality, its all opinionated.

I'm just saying 70% is a low percentage when it comes to quality, even if its subjective. 95% or higher sounds reasonable.

I'm sure when the devs make these games they strive for the best. I doubt they're just sitting around like, "Meh, as long as we put in at least 70% effort who cares".

pacmanate
12-20-2013, 09:20 PM
I'm sure when the devs make these games they strive for the best. I doubt they're just sitting around like, "Meh, as long as we put in at least 70% effort who cares".

The fact they even came out and said 70% tells you something though, that as long as its 71% its "okay" and can go into production

MIA SILENT
12-20-2013, 09:28 PM
The fact they even came out and said 70% tells you something though, that as long as its 71% its "okay" and can go into production

First they'd have to determine how much 70% of a game they put 100% effort into actually is. Just doesn't make sense. It was probably just an offhand remark. You may well be putting too much thought into it. Now, if you were talking about the people who made Colonial Marines I'd agree with you!

aL_____eX
12-20-2013, 09:31 PM
I'm sure when the devs make these games they strive for the best. I doubt they're just sitting around like, "Meh, as long as we put in at least 70% effort who cares".
Agree. That would bruise my ego if I was a developer for one of the most valuable franchises in gaming and would not give my best to give players the best gaming experience possible! I doubt that people at Ubi just develop AC gamse because they bring in the big money. I still believe in the good in people, means they love what they do and they want to make it as good as possible! Money is an aspect too, that's clear.

DarktheMagister
12-20-2013, 09:34 PM
You know.....I can only really remember ever experiencing a single game breaking glitch in AC3..... The one where you get stuck in walk mode during The Infamy of King Washington. Other than that.....can't think of another.

Was I just lucky? Did everyone else play a glitch fest?

killzab
12-20-2013, 09:35 PM
Agree. That would bruise my ego if I was a developer for one of the most valuable franchises in gaming and would not give my best to give players the best gaming experience possible! I doubt that people at Ubi just develop AC gamse because they bring in the big money. I still believe in the good in people, means they love what they do and they want to make it as good as possible! Money is an aspect too, that's clear.

I'm pretty sure all the developers are passionate about their work. The higher-ups... maybe not so much.

killzab
12-20-2013, 09:35 PM
You know.....I can only really remember ever experiencing a single game breaking glitch in AC3..... The one where you get stuck in walk mode during The Infamy of King Washington. Other than that.....can't think of another.

Was I just lucky? Did everyone else play a glitch fest?

The fact they never fixed the glitched you mentioned is unacceptable.

aL_____eX
12-20-2013, 09:41 PM
I don't know about how much their work is influenced by the beliefs of the bosses or whatever. But as long as devs can make the game the way they want it to be and the marketing is up to other people, I think AC will always be something to enjoy. At least I hope it will be and it will not be only about the $$$. Because so far, the AC series has put so much love and effort in it, without a doubt, they didn't do much wrong until now. I hope they keep it up.

Correct me if I'm wrong about Abster... I mean Ubisofts business structures

phoenix-force411
12-21-2013, 12:26 AM
Wouldn't delays be a good thing for this series since it really needs that time in between? My hype for the franchise is slowly dying, but I'll still play them nonetheless, because they always impress me nonetheless.

killzab
12-21-2013, 12:28 AM
Wouldn't delays be a good thing for this series since it really needs that time in between? My hype for the franchise is slowly dying, but I'll still play them nonetheless, because they always impress me nonetheless.

Of course they would, but we know Ubi won't do it because of their Assassin's Greed !

creamofpayne
12-21-2013, 12:53 AM
I'm pretty sure all the developers are passionate about their work. The higher-ups... maybe not so much.

This is pretty much the bottom line, and is generally true for most companies/industries.

Those who actually BUILD the game care deeply about their work, but deadlines must be met and the execs will push it out regardless.

DarktheMagister
12-21-2013, 03:21 AM
The fact they never fixed the glitched you mentioned is unacceptable.

Well yeah.... but it isn't necessarily broken until you download the second episode....so....there is that fix.

roostersrule2
12-21-2013, 04:39 AM
AC3 is a different story, this is the only time I will defend the game.

It was the first time having a new protag after 3 years. They had to do it.They also had to make the 21:12:12 deadline, they still had an extra month of dev time though too reach that.

phoenix-force411
12-21-2013, 08:00 AM
They also had to make the 21:12:12 deadline, they still had an extra month of dev time though too reach that.

The way the 21:12:12 was delivered wasn't exactly all that OMG like. It was pretty dull actually, but ACIII is still a good game despite its huge negatives.

roostersrule2
12-21-2013, 08:03 AM
The way the 21:12:12 was delivered wasn't exactly all that OMG like. It was pretty dull actually, but ACIII is still a good game despite its huge negatives.Indeed, but Ubi really wanted to make that deadline.

AC3 is an okay game, a 6/10 IMO.

phoenix-force411
12-21-2013, 08:08 AM
Indeed, but Ubi really wanted to make that deadline.

AC3 is an okay game, a 6/10 IMO.
That deadline costed too much in the end. I never cared if they made the deadline or not, but ACIII should have came out this year. It's not like we'll care about the end of 2012 anyways, but I can see that they wanted the in-game timeline to keep up with real time.