Some people want Red Storm or another company to take GR from Ubisoft which is understandable. Before that can happen, Ubisoft has to make up for the last two titles. I think expectations from the community are high for the next game, if one ever comes out. Any other company should not have that weight on their shoulders. Ubisoft should relieve some of the bad rep they have with their consumers. They probably want to. Yes, it’s risky to have hope for Ubisoft but we can still be vigilant and vocal.
I think there has been to many mistakes made and a continuation of issues at every turn to still have faith in pairs personally to actually get this to where people would like to see it. I do believe that that have the capabilities but I am completely unsure if they have the will or desire. It's been almost a year since we were first told of improved communication and apart from toon and blush, ubi hasn't even had the decency or want to follow that through.
For all the trouble Blue went through to develop a poster for Ubisoft as guidance, I'll give Ubi Paris one last chance. I will grant them however long it takes to apply all they have learned from the success in Wildlands and the tragic trial and errors from Breakpoint. But I still do not trust them to be successful with just that one poster. They really need to make an effort to send out surveys during the coarse of the production of the next title to keep themselves from going off the rails again.
This is key. The feedback process needs to be an interactive process during development and not a scoring system at the end for what's released.Originally Posted by Keltimus Go to original post
I'm more concerned about Ubisoft keeping themselves in the dark. We're consistently offering help. Let's hope they take it when it matters most and not when it's too late.Originally Posted by Megalodon26 Go to original post
I think I’ll give Ubisoft one more chance on another GR but not Ubisoft Paris. It’s like there’s a barrier between communication of devs and community. Assuming this what Delta Company was built for but I can only assume communication is minimum for them too. So to see a product fail they just abandon us. Companies that had a rough start still maintain communication. This one of the reasons I personally like some Microsoft games. Games like State of Decay started horrible and for 2-3 years the devs didn’t give up on communication nor building the game. Sure we can say they have to since they 1st party but some 3rd parties do the same.
If Ubi Paris does make the next Ghost they need to have help from other studios. Red Storm, Montreal, Bucharest, whoever. They also need to either make the open world smaller or just open up regions every 2 months. Start with 3 regions, put heart in it, and go from there. Stay away from making islands. It’s a disaster. Water in Breakpoint take up so much space. I honestly rather leave the FarCry Wildlife and return to civilization. That’s another thing.
Reduce coping mechanics from other games. Let Division be Division, let FarCry be FarCry, and let GR be GR. If you want to be authentic to military at least return what we enjoyed most tactically. Smoke grenades and less tech. Remove live events. Fill enough content to satisfy players for a month or two update.
And what part of the community are we talking about here?Originally Posted by Megalodon26 Go to original post
Last time they made some "community effort" of any significance, was that Delta Company rubbish, which only was made to communicate with the fanboys, the ones that can't see Ubi doing anything wrong at all.