Skull and Bones Failure | Forums

[del190830110037552]

a fact? really? a fact maybe from you but sadly we dont control a companies new IP

just wait for more info dude. you sound ridiculous.

I'm sorry but noone trusts ubisoft anymore

[Stainless001]

I'm sorry but noone trusts ubisoft anymore

I trust Ubisoft.

[Scarekr0we]

i trust ubisoft as well.

[del190830110037552]

still trusting ubisoft after everything they have done? LOL

[TheWaveFighter]

Captain_Ryder_7 i really want to say thankyou for posting so much about the game but shouldn't you think that there are others like me that enjoy the looks of the game and wish to play and enjoy it how it is.
dont take me bad.
Good Luck with the beta code!

-TheWaveFighter

[Horus.36]

I trust Ubisoft.

[TheWaveFighter]

i trust Ubisoft!

[Captn_Hawsehole]

I like Ubisoft, overall, but to say I trust them is a bit of a stretch with the releases of the last few years.

By and large, I agree with Ryder. The spirit of his commentary anyway, if not it's form.

Ubisoft has stumbled unto something unexpectedly popular with the naval combat in ACIII. They had a hugely successful proof of concept in ACIV for a game containing large amounts of detailed naval combat, and thought to capitalize on the success of these mechanics again, but I think that, from the information we have so far, they have misjudged the interest people have in the naval combat itself. I'm certainly not saying that a purely naval combat oriented game it isn't sustainable, other games like Naval Action have proved it before, but the naval combat in a Ubisoft game should be a means to an end rather than an end in itself, and if naval combat is really the point, I wonder what makes it specifically a pirate game. Change the flags and give them uniforms and you have a war game set in the time frame of the War of the Spanish Succession, which was waged across the globe. What makes it a pirate game is the story line and context in which the naval combat occurs.

What I mean is that a game which has only naval combat and no epic story line, no real open world sense of scope and scale, is going to leave a lot of people disappointed. These are what I turn to Ubisoft for. That's why I loved ACIV and even Wildlands for all it's faults. I mean... they have chosen a fantastic location. I can very easily think of a campaign plot line involving raiding the rich ships of the East India Companies of Great Britain, France and the Netherlands.

So then why just multiplayer naval combat? And even then, why just being "the ship"? Why no real characters detachable from their positions on the ships and proper boarding action mechanics? As it stands, and much pained I am to admit it, right now the cartoonish Sea of Thieves, which doesn't have much in the way of a plot either, makes for a better specifically "Pirate" game.

You know, what they could do is initially release the multiplayer experience as a "service" and platform, and in the spirit of "games as a service" release episodic single player/co-op campaigns as full-fledged expansions to extend the game's life. That would be a proper compromise I think.

[Captn_Hawsehole]

I wish I could edit my last post. Dammit.

I am aware that the devs have mentioned that there would be single player parts to the game at launch, but if you are still ship-bound and can't explore the islands, I fear it'll just be the same thing as the multiplayer, but lonelier...

[emrdesign]

I think Skull & Bones is just a cheap rip-off of AC Blackflag where they take the fun part out and tie you onto a ship you can not disembark. The name of the game is nice but other than that it will fail. But of course thats just my opinion.