Is UbiParis the most incompetent of the Ubisoft studios? | Forums

[Flaw3dGenius23]

I would say all of Ubisoft's devs are first class as the worlds and potential in all their games are excellent. We should really be pointing our fingers at the greedy execs hogtying the devs in to loot, RNG, Episodic seasons, roadmaps, poor narratives all to make us play online and for long periods of time but at the same time sucking all that was good out of gaming for carrot tempting addictive BS.

God, I hope Cyberpunk will bring back the fun and excitement that gaming used to be like with Ubisoft. Maybe that game's success will let these skilled Ubi devs have longer timelines and better narratives without being burdened by a$$hole execs nickel-and-diming us at every opportunity.

The worlds are generally huge vast empty lifeless worlds with barely anything in them. Compare them to a R* world and they are awful.

[Stomp0nMybaIls]

The worlds are generally huge vast empty lifeless worlds with barely anything in them. Compare them to a R* world and they are awful.

Well 2 years compared to 8 years makes a large difference, also not to mention R* have absolutely terrible gameplay when it comes to gunplay and movement.

[FCacGRdvWD]

Even though they claim that each studio has the power to create a game in their own vision, the games they (Ubisoft and not the Studios) have churned out as of late beg the difference because in one way or another they are the same or with the same assets and mechanics. Wildlands, personally speaking, was not a GR game but it wasn't a bad game even with all the bugs and glitches at launch.

Breakpoint on the other hand, OMFG, they just decided to spend the big money paying Walker and Lil Twatney and $2 dollars on the actual game because they were sure they were going to sell the candles out of that cake. And the reason they thought they could was because people were making lines begging and crying for Ubisoft to grab their money if only they would come up with This game or that patch or those pants so in their eyes, people only care for cheap stuff and zero about good mechanics, though, luckily for many of us, they were wrong.

The worlds are generally huge vast empty lifeless worlds with barely anything in them. Compare them to a R* world and they are awful.

Well 2 years compared to 8 years makes a large difference, also not to mention R* have absolutely terrible gameplay when it comes to gunplay and movement.

Sure it does but nobody told them to only take 2 years instead of 8, they decided to gamble on painting a turd gold, call it a day and rent Money Trucks directly to their banks not even bothering to count it first.

I doubt they have learn their lesson but if that is what it takes to bring them down a notch and eat some humble pie, I am all for it. I just hope people remember 2019 when the new hype train comes along this year.

[Flaw3dGenius23]

Well 2 years compared to 8 years makes a large difference, also not to mention R* have absolutely terrible gameplay when it comes to gunplay and movement.

Tbh i was really surprised how poor the gunplay and movement was in Breakpoint... Ubi have been making GR games for how long? If anything gunplay and movement has regressed massively.

[Stomp0nMybaIls]

Tbh i was really surprised how poor the gunplay and movement was in Breakpoint... Ubi have been making GR games for how long? If anything gunplay and movement has regressed massively.

I'm not sure how I feel about movement and gunplay honestly, I actually like parts of it like the terrain interaction with sliding and what not, but trying to corner into buildings is absolutely awful, not to mention the lack of prone movement, which I can't understand in the slightest. Gunplay feels fine, but that's kind of standard for any shooter. Though it is rather surprising how drastically shooting/movement has changed across all GR games as a whole.

[ArgimonEd]

Not gonna lie I like the way he gets in combat stance and low ready his gun when near a treat really nice too.
First game I see the character do that.
And his stance when shooting is really solid, maybe the knees are too bent, and the handgun is too close to him (which would make it a bit more difficult to get a really aggressive grip on the pistol (and in gameplay reduces what we can see and causes the pistol to become an obstacle when trying to transition through targets, and also the very reduced FOV which is highly disorienting).
But as an shooter, I really like the animations in the game, and now that they are tweaking the recoil of the guns with the TU 2.0 gun play feels really good.

[kniVes-6-]

The worlds are generally huge vast empty lifeless worlds with barely anything in them. Compare them to a R* world and they are awful.

But that's my point. Those awesome games (big fan of both GTA and RDR2) have between 6-8 year development cycles. I would happily wait longer for a much better narrative and gaming experience from Ubisoft but I can't see that happening anytime soon with the kind of execs running the show at Ubi.

What angers me the most is about a month after buying Breakpoint I purchased RDR2 for slightly less money when it was released in on PC that's when I lost my soft spot for Ubisoft. Like economies, Ubisoft should have their triple 'A' rating reduced to a single 'A' until they can prove otherwise.

Adding insult to injury Ubisoft is still cranking out season pass DLC at £25 for Breakpoint and Div2 for 5 hours content max and that I can't abide by and no longer purchase until they are single-digit pound notes months later, that actually denote their real-world worth value tbh.

I really respect R* for giving a really intense story campaign that lasts for countless hours with not much in the way of RNG which is saved for those who thrive in the online versions. Ubisoft gives a poorly developed short narrative and a rude push into online RNG regardless if you like it or not and charge the same f**king price. The gamer is not regarded at all in this equation. We're just paying fodder which I find really disrespectful to the gaming community.

[EvacSunNiner]

I actually agree with Paris being the worst studio ever. I also heard some rumors that there are loads of internal politics and ego issues and they hit heads almost at every aspect and not listening to military advisors.

I think this studio has zero personal pride. It is very disjointed and has a lot of teamwork exercises to do. I generally feel like they could not be asked to work properly on this and they would need to start from scratch to get things right. They nowhere near of quality of work compared to Ubisoft - Toronto/Montreal.

This is most likely the case. The former team and people who worked on the previous titles must be gone and replaced by "Just Dance" looneys with zero interest and enthousiasm for the military genre.

You can tell by the design in the deep state event, that they want to implement sjw ideas like the purple haired bit*h for the sake of it. It doesn't matter to them if it's totally out of place, because they want to be progressive and show they are really diversive.

[Ballzinfern2017]

This is most likely the case. The former team and people who worked on the previous titles must be gone and replaced by "Just Dance" looneys with zero interest and enthousiasm for the military genre.

You can tell by the design in the deep state event, that they want to implement sjw ideas like the purple haired bit*h for the sake of it. It doesn't matter to them if it's totally out of place, because they want to be progressive and show they are really diversive.

You can tell by their Twitter. Children. Probably nepotism.

[D.O.Double_G.]

Don't get it twisted, I'm a Ghost for life. But damn, COD has ANOTHER update coming tomorrow. What are you doing Ubi????