Senior Member
Ubisoft open-world shooter Ghost Recon: Wildlands is the biggest-selling launch of the year so far.
(Pic about launch)
Wildlands is also the second-biggest launch for any game with the vague Tom Clancy moniker attached - which covers everything from Ghost Recon to Rainbow Six: Siege to Splinter Cell. The only Tom Clancy game launch it didn't outsell? The Division.
search: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/20...he-year-so-far
Senior Member
Senior Member
Senior Member
Speaking financially from a business point of view, you are probably right. Speaking from a potential for added revenue point of view and a player satisfaction point of view?Originally Posted by S.V. Go to original post
Senior Member
Senior Member
I would say the last three Tom Clancy releases have been flops.
R6:Siege is still pretty bad because of the way LOS is calculated. The rest of the game is decent, but when they can't make it so the operator's eye level is where the LOS is generated from then you have significant problems. I could also talk about the lack of variety due to only a few map updates and other small things, but nothing is as significant as the LOS issue.
The Division sold strong but ended up having a very rough time getting sorted out. There still needs a lot of work to be done to get it where it needs to be. The neglect for the PVE players, the mishandling of PVP. The inability to listen to the forums for what the players want only to end up using the player suggestions six months later. All in all The Division has a lot of potential but it's been mishandled ever since release.
I should note the single biggest failure about The Division for me personally is the fact I no longer trust Ubi to release a finished product. Which is why I haven't purchased Wildlands.
Then we have GR:Wildlands which is probably the game with the most potential that has been squandered because they released it unfinished. The Division's problems were a matter of not knowing how to give the players what they want. GRW's problem is they have what the players want but the little details that make a game feel polished are missing. The constant barrage of little annoying issues end up detracting from the game as a whole.
The closed beta should have happened three months from release. The open beta two months from release. Then they spend time actually fixing the problems instead of just worrying about netcode and cramming as many people into the game as technologically possible.
In the end Ubi has made money right now, but they are hurting their future bottom line because gamers are going to stop buying unfinished products. Sales are declining. People are losing interest in paying to be beta testers.
Senior Member
I know all that matters is sales, and congrats to GRW for that.
That being said this game won't sniff any game of the year awards and will be in a $20 bin sooner rather than later. The lesson I learned with The Division was don't buy a season pass. The lesson I learned with GRW was don't pre order. At least not with Ubisoft games.
I really hope they clean up the numerous flaws in this game (AI, bullet drop, helicopter controls, SAM spawn rate, etc.). My plan at the moment is to stop playing GRW and just focus on Horizon Zero Dawn and march madness. Hopefully in a couple of months, and a few patches, GRW will be worth playing. I did the same thing with Unity and was glad I did. That game was a broken mess but 6 months after launch it was finally playable. I guess that's just Ubisoft's approach to games. "Software is never finished, it's just due. Release it not, maybe we'll fix it later."
Senior Member
