Ubisoft: Please give an official confirmation or denial to your players. | Forums

[Ubi-Jimothy]

You know what? I just got an indication or two that questions are not welcome around here, and opinions that are not pretty and rosy of the game aren't as well. Mod, please close the thread. Don't worry, people. I'm done with the forums and the game. Feel free to speculate your collective butts off.

Now that's not at all the case. Healthy, constructive criticism is actually very much appreciated, as it allows us to look into the issues you guys have with the game and see what can be done to make things better. However, generalizing a nation and blaming them for changes in the game, as well as stirring up rumours in multiple threads on the same topic is not constructive discussion.

Locking the thread as per your request, however. I apologise that you haven't had the best time on the forums, and for sure we don't want to see any of our community members go. All I'd say is that having some patience in receiving responses to questions (especially over the weekend) is crucial, as we don't always have the information at hand. If you do decide to leave, best of luck in your future endeavors, and thank you for being a part of the community.

[Goat_of_Vermund]

I know they do. I just say, I learned history in the university, and even I can't name one. India's history is not well known, nor is it's culture, the amount cultural mediator they exported were well below Chinese, and Bollywood couldn't catch up yet.

I woud personally like either a praetorian, and additional heavy or vanguard knight, but I suppose I would try out almost anything.

[Vakris_One]

I'm not asking them to explain HOW they do their business...only that our data is safe in consideration of the facts I presented. I never even hinted that they'd be breaking any laws anywhere. The EULA does specify, though, that they can and will share data AS REQUIRED BY LAW, and it is Chinese law that they have to.

My last thread had an aspect of asking questions about Tencent's influence in the game. Ergo Ubi-Jimothy's response. It did not address this aspect at all.



Again, the answer I received was about influence towards the character design. It didnt' address data protection, which is all this thread is about. Also, if you bothered to look at the links I provided here AND in that other thread, you'll see that I did prove my point quite clearly. Apparently you didn't see the need to actually follow the links I provided then or now. Even Tundra admitted that my links allowed for questions to be asked in regards to data protection, and we ended on a pleasant note and closed that thread. Apparently you didn't read that part either.

What's more troubling, in my opinion, is how fiercly you want to attack someone who's just asking questions. I haven't attacked you or anyone else with this, and when I've mistepped, I've owned it. Is it your nature to be so defensive and reactive to people who ask questions you don't like? You DO realize that there are other threads you can read, right? You don't HAVE to come in here and just spill all this salt everywhere.

If you disagree with my links, then let's have that discussion. If you have information and links to counter the points I bring up, then I'd love to see them. But all this vitriol only makes you appear like an old man yelling at kids to get off your lawn. I came here for a discussion. What's your intention in this thread?

I haven't attacked you. I haven't yelled at you. My lawn remains unmolested. Interesting that you think I'm "spilling salt" or being aggressive simply because I choose to express my disagreement with your theories. You seem to be suddenly unnaccustomed to being challenged and feel the need to paint me in a bad light by using personal attacks on my character without just cause. Let's just back that train up a little. The closest I came to making a sharp remark is when I expressed my opinion that I think it is rather underhanded to ignore the previous thread where your theories were strongly challenged and most of them were disproven. That may have been too snarky than I intended but I still maintain that you are stubbornly choosing to hear only what you want to hear and are refusing to admit the existence of counter points. My intention is to have a discussion only if you have an open mind.

None of the links you provided were proof of your claims that "Ubisoft is selling For Honor to China" (which was the crux of your position), nor that Tencent has a say in creative control, nor that the Chinese government will be allowed access to our data via For Honor. You did not prove any of your claims and to say that you did "prove your point" is just not true. The links you provided were simply an example for your reason for posing the question. Basically that the Chinese government does enough shady stuff that we should question it. That's fair enough and that's what Tundra acknowledged. He did not however cede to you any of the points he disproved you on such as Ubisoft's board of directors not having a single representative from Tencent, For Honor not undergoing design changes like that of Rainbow Six Seige, Wu Lin not being purposefully overpowered, perks, and US and EU data protection laws that Ubisoft must abide by if they wish to continue doing business in those regions.

You skirted around the points you were disproven on and even abandoned entire parts of your own opening arguments such as Tencent exerting creative control over For Honor. As soon as Tundra brought up the list of Ubisoft's board of directors, with not a single Tencent representative on there, you did a 180° turn and changed your argument. You went from incorrectly claiming that Tencent has a say in For Honor's direction simply because they own 5% of Ubisoft shares to completely abandoning that line of argumentation and changing it to "The law does not require that they have any members on your board. Just that you partner with them and share the technology, as well as keep servers in their country."

So yes I did pay attention in that thread. While you do change tact based on your points being disproven you do not acknowledge conceding the point and instead you swiftly move the goal posts mid-conversation in order to better suit your position. That's not the sign of someone who is willing to have an open and honest discussion. You'll forgive me the brashness but that's the tactic of someone who only wants to hear what they want to hear and will keep a debate going in circles on purpose if it doesn't go their way. The reason Tundra didn't continue discussing with you is because it was pointless to continue playing that game. He would disprove you on a point and you would subsequently move the goal posts again.

It is for that reason that I will not be interested in persuing a further discussion with you. As potentially interesting as it might be it would ultimately be an excercise in futility if your last thread is anything to go by. I am always open to being convinced otherwise of course, so long as you leave my lawn alone