• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

E3 - Ubisoft Ubisoft E3 2019 | Viewing and Discussion Thread | June 10, 2019. 1:00 PM PT / 4:00 PM ET

lifa-cobex

Member
Oct 15, 2010
3,734
2,592
1,005
uk
Guess the wait for Square to be the only hope for something interesting...

 
  • LOL
  • Fire
Reactions: Pantz and jshackles

Nikana

Go Go Neo Rangers!
Jan 26, 2016
11,158
15,752
915
It's good for consumers now, bad for the industry and consumers in the long run.

It's simple math that you make more money on the high end selling your product at $60 if your series can sell over 2 million copies rather than earn some chump change scraps from a subscriptions. Subscription based games will encourage more GaaS styled games and will significantly lower the budget of titles in the future. Games will be made cheaply as possible to turn a profit.

Most people who work in the industry make their money off of bonuses from a game selling well. Subscription based gaming under a large umbrella will drastically reduce the amount of money that can potentially be made for high qualified individuals in the industry.

If you take that away then there's really no reason for them to work in the industry anymore.

Iwata warned developers time after time about devaluing their product.

It doesn't devalue the product if the quality stays consistent.

It's only bad for the industry if consumers don't keep the subscription.
 

Mista

Banned
Nov 21, 2014
20,414
35,340
1,420
This whole Siege charity tournament is scripted. Its very obvious they wanna push it as far as the game can
 

Tekkie

Member
May 18, 2013
4,266
2,572
830
There's 13 year olds alive right now that don't know wtf a Wii even is and we got Ubisoft still making games for it like they're the kings of retro.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Animagic

Shakka43

Member
Dec 5, 2018
918
1,304
455
Every year I hold a little hope for Ubisoft/Housemarque to announce an Outland 2, every year I end up disappointed in Ubisoft's conferences.
 

jakinov

Member
Nov 19, 2008
922
1,036
1,120
It's good for consumers now, bad for the industry and consumers in the long run.

It's simple math that you make more money on the high end selling your product at $60 if your series can sell over 2 million copies rather than earn some chump change scraps from a subscriptions. Subscription based games will encourage more GaaS styled games and will significantly lower the budget of titles in the future. Games will be made cheaply as possible to turn a profit.

Most people who work in the industry make their money off of bonuses from a game selling well. Subscription based gaming under a large umbrella will drastically reduce the amount of money that can potentially be made for high qualified individuals in the industry.

If you take that away then there's really no reason for them to work in the industry anymore.

Iwata warned developers time after time about devaluing their product.
Even though I did bring up cancelling and taking advantage of month-by-month to save money. I think the expectation for a company like Ubisoft is to eventually raise the price when the value increases; and that people actually subscribe for an entire year and in turn end up spending more (or Ubisoft gets more dollars) on a subscription than they likely would have spent the entire year buying 1-3 games. More people would subscribe yearly then try to save money by unsubscribing all the time. Most of Ubisoft sales on PC likely come from STEAM (who takes a sizeable cut) and PC games are often whored out for big discounts before they even come out or shortly after; so it's not simply $60x2million . Ubisoft could actually end up making more money doing both than they would just selling games individually depending on what customers end up actually doing. We don't have a crystal ball so we'll have to wait and see. For third party studios, I don't know what actually deals are in place but I'm guessing it's a lump sum of cash (like what happens with TV shows and subscription services) and any money on individual sales. I would think for the small studios they would be safer/happier for them to have Ubisoft (or Microsoft) give them a lump sum of cash to be able to stick it on their service (if that's what is actually offered) than for them to hope they get a lot of sales because you don't know for sure if you'd actually sell 2 million copies and if it'd all be at full $20-$60 (before STEAM's cut and all that). If that's what is actually offered to these studios it's a risk/reward thing.

The bonus part is interesting though; I didn't know bonuses were expected/commons.

I personally really like the subscription model because I want to be able to try games to see if I'll actually like them and I don't really want to keep using the Steam refund.
 

mckmas8808

Ah. Peace and quiet. #ADayWithoutAWoman
May 24, 2005
46,363
12,184
2,000
She is cute, but she's been placed there as diversity signalling.

You don't actually believe this do you?

Do people like this "bio" think this does women justice? Like no one is touching her. Stick your political tripe away from E3, fuck sake.

Let's be honest, strongly doubt she was hired because she was the most skilled. That means the most skilled got dropped for "diversity". Get fucked, bio.

This you bruh?



David Leech? Not Lynch like I thought I heard. David Lynch would've weird AF, lol.

OOOOOHHHHH!!!! I thought he said David Lynch too.
 
Last edited: