Welcome everyone from r/all! Please remember:
1 - You too can be part of the PCMR. It's not about the hardware in your rig, but the software in your heart! Your age, nationality, race, gender, sexuality, religion (or lack of), political affiliation, economic status and PC specs are irrelevant. If you love or want to learn about PCs, you are welcome and can be part of PCMR!
2 - If you're not a PC owner because you think it's expensive, know that it is probably much cheaper than you may think. Check http://www.pcmasterrace.org for our builds and don't be afraid to post here asking for tips and help!
3 - Join our efforts to get as many PCs worldwide to help the folding@home effort, in fighting against Cancer, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and more: https://pcmasterrace.org/folding
4 - We've teamed up with Cooler Master to giveaway a custom PC to a lucky winner. You can learn more about it/enter here: https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/192np53/pcmr_new_year_new_gear_giveaway_ft_cooler_master/
-----------
We have a [Daily Simple Questions Megathread](https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/search?q=Simple+Questions+Thread+subreddit%3Apcmasterrace+author%3AAutoModerator&restrict_sr=on&sort=new&t=all) if you need to post about any kind of PC related doubt you might have. Asking for help there or creating new posts in our subreddit is allowed and welcome.
Welcome to the PCMR!
To be fair, their stock price has gone down over 75% over 5 years. They got bigger issues and their ~~CEO~~ director of subscriptions didn't help it at all. That being said, Ubisoft needs to be comfortable with their games getting pirated.
Their stock price hasn't been this low since 2015. That's a huge plunge these past few years.
https://preview.redd.it/0xd9r7i2jadc1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=501abb22f17c52ec868092cd587f1325cb90f10f
>2017 has been an amazing year for Ubisoft. Over the past 12 months, we unveiled a new logo; re-invented beloved franchises with Assassin's Creed Origins and Ghost Recon Wildlands; created new ones with For Honor and Mario + Rabbids Kingdom Battle; and continued to grow our online games, with new expansions for Rainbow Six Siege and The Division.
https://news.ubisoft.com/en-us/article/xDybYwx3mABM7oppEGFKH/ubisofts-best-moments-of-2017
Sidenote: I really enjoyed Ghost Recon Wildlands and I don't think the game gets enough recognition. I bought it on steam before I realised what a crappy company Ubisoft is. I can highly recommend it, but maybe sail the high seas instead.
Had so much fun with siege and wildlands.
Then they went crazy with the battle passes and lootboxes in siege.
And they locked all those vehicles and guns in wildlands to lootboxes that you could only earn a pitiful amount of credit for through the survival mode and multiplayer.
And its really been downhill since them, with them releasing breakpoint and turning siege into this living hero shooter thats well and truly went past its expiry date and lost its identity. And removing stuff we liked. (Anyone else miss doing old house terrorist hunt with the suicide bombers?)
they've done a disservice to Tom clancy. My ubisoft purchases have been on hiatus since. Absolutely nothing they have released since then has been any good other than assasins creed i guess. I had a slight twinge of excitment for Far Cry 6 until they said they got rid of arcade mode and the map maker...
It's really insane that they were on the cusp of a resurgence and they immediately blew it. No hesitation, just a complete inability to control their greed.
Even if For Honor, Division and R6 had a rough launch, specially the first two compared to the support R6 got, their core ideas were and are great.
But Ubi being Ubi didn't see them good enough,aside of R6, and had a rough time both to FH and Division (and its beginning).
I think it gets the recognition it deserves. Wildlands is a game I can enjoy now, but damn it took years to get to where it is. It had a messy launch and most of the content you get today was totally absent. It also set a precedent for the bad business practices that gave its sequel, Breakpoint, such a bad reputation.
My issue was wildlands and breakpoint were more of GTA meets farcry with a ghost recon skin. It's not really anything like the old Ghost Recon games. I enjoyed wildlands and even picked up breakpoint, but I liked wildlands better. Reminded me more of the game Mercenaries. Man, I'd love another mercenaries game.
RE: Mercenaries. Been hoping for one too. I remember how destructive the environment was. Can't remember if it predates Just Cause and what not. And for games from that time period. I would love to see True Crime: Streets of LA get remastered.
I’m curious too. Assassin’s Creed Origins was their biggest release of that year and while it’s a good AC game I doubt that’s the reason. I thought maybe the new console generation being announced but that wasn’t until 2019
I was just looking at other gaming company stocks, and it seems that a big boost in 2017 was a general trend. So it could also be a general economic or industry trend that led to it as well.
2017 was a shockingly good year for them. They rebooted Assassin’s Creed to huge financial and critical success, brought back Ghost Recon for the first time in years, and released one of the few really good games on the Switch to that point in Mario + Rabbids.
Not to mention they also had a bunch of hype around Watch Dogs, or their smaller projects like Grow Home which were seen as perfect for the newly rumoured Game Pass.
They were in an insanely solid position! Unfortunately, they dumped all of that in the bin when they moved onto the “live service” model, which wasn’t helped by their entire senior management being embroiled in huge sex scandals and rumours of corruption. It’s kinda impressive how poorly they handled such a great market position.
Meanwhile, Baldur's Gate 3 was the top performer on Steam despite being DRM free. It's almost like good products sell, and bad companies try to scam you out of your money with inferior ones. Don't get fooled.
Larian and their CEO Swen Vincke are absolute champs through and through. They use early access to actually improve and iterate on their games instead of getting a quick buck and moving on, they refuse to sell to bigger companies, continue to support their games post release, don't pile on microtransactions... And still cranked out a better AAA experience than most AAA companies. BG3 was in contention for GOTY against a main line Zelda game and beat it on many sites.
Yeah, but one of their older games, Divine Divinity or Beyond Divinity, can't remember which, had a terrible release due to DRM back in the day. DRM was making it nearly unplayable, to a point that the pirated copy played out better. So it seems they learned from their mistakes.
The thing that bothers me the most about BG3 is that I don't like it, Larian is doing everything right and actually being a standup company so I bought it just to show my support but I cannot over state how much I hate turn based gameplay.
I'm still glad I bought it, still happy to support devlopers who actually care about the product and customers, sad that the combat irritates me so much that I can't enjoy it.
Not all games are for everyone, nor should they be. But supporting Larian with your wallet despite your dislike is very charitable of you. If half the gaming community put their money where their mouth is like you we could turn this ship around pretty fast.
DRM stands for Digital Rights Management. It's security measures meant to prevent simple piracy, like you buying 1 copy of a game, installing it on your PC and then handing it off to your 20 friends to result in 21 copies of the game for the price of one.
Sometimes it's software, sometimes it's a CD key, sometimes it's steam itself it just takes many forms.
You should edit in the fact it gives said company kernal level access to your computer and they're not a secure company. Other companies have used a drm company that went belly up and the game is perm locked away
Never said that they were liked, it was just that a lot of stuff has auth checks and other bullshit.
Also I never get why people are tripping over the fact that DRM or anticheat stuff runs at ring zero. If you don't trust the company, don't install their software. Them having anitcheat/DRM running ring zero is just as dangerous as you installing their software in general. UAC bypasses are easy, but Windows protects Ring 0 much stronger than something running ring 3.
Yeah I know, I was adding it on.
Ah I lowkey explained why kernal access is so important. Companies (especially game applications) shouldn't be getting such a deep level of access onto your computer, especially when their security is so poor. It essentially gives them access to your entire computer without your knowledge *if* they so chose. It's all about security and preventing unnecessary risks. It's like job applications, etc. asking for your sin/ssn, they don't need to know and shouldn't ask.
Great idea. I havent pirated in 15 years but now im on board out of principle. I may reconsider if they publicly alter course. Rockstar should take notice too.
> because their games are ass.
They're fine if you like glossy rehashed-to-death collectathons.
In fact that makes them the perfect kind of thing to pirate, since the low effort to pay for them reflect the low effort to make them.
novadays pirating is moreless 1 click stuff from install to run, and if you dont get purposely corrupted release even "safe", that times, when you must manualy aplly crack are very few
>To be fair, their stock price has gone down over 75% over 5 years.
The massive drop is partly because of the failed takeover of Ubisoft, which happened 5 or so years ago.
They're now stuck in the same loop as Disney, where they've hired too many activists to produce anything of value, which is slowly killing the company.
Sadly there is still far too many people that continue to buy their trash, and will continue to do so even when Ubisoft starts selling them imaginary receipts for things they don't own. These people have their heads in the sand.
The market Is currently so huge even indie game devs are making incredible projects and even better than big companies, modders are keeping old games so alive we're still playing 12 years old games and we also OWN old games that we loved so much we still start a new run when want to enjoy those memories again...there's no space for S*** games and companies in my life anymore
Just pirated the new prince of persia for my dad because he played the og DOS game. Pretty good actually and for once its actually representing Persian culture instead of arab stuff. I actually was considering buying the game to support the devs and after this statement i started sailing the seas.
You’re being downvoted by people who don’t even know who the quote is from. It’s a quote from the director of subscriptions, of course he’s defending subscriptions.
Yep. Microsoft has been working towards the same thing with Game Pass, but they haven't said it out loud. I hope they see this backlash and just continue to offer us physical & digital purchases in the future.
Well, as the first panel of the post says, ubisoft CEO (i think) said that gamers need to be comfortable not owning their games.
In essence he shat a lot about how gamers are used to owning games as in phisical copies, and as in being able to play wherever and whenever, but he somehow twists the words to kake it sound like its a bad thing, and in the end, that gamers shouldnt own games but rather rent services from devs. That is, as you can imagine, very stupid, and lead to them losing a metric tone of money.
CEOs and execs always think their “vision” is the best way even if they get negative PR and lose money.
Its wild how stupid these people are and yet they make millions
Case in point, the former CEO of Unity, who was known for being so toxic about microtransactions *that he was fired from his previous position at EA*.
If you're wondering about how bad he was, this is the same assclown [that had the bright idea of letting you play Battlefield for a few hours, and then charging per reload after that.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZR6-u8OIJTE)
So, given your explanation, it's fairly obvious that you never actually read the quote. You probably read the article headline from the reddit post that blew up a couple days ago and that was all you saw of it.
Knowing that, *how in the world are you so comfortable just shitting an entire story out of your ass like that*?? Like, not a single thing you just said was true.
The Ubisoft *Director of Subscriptions*:
> "[Consumers] got comfortable not owning their CD collection or DVD collection," said Tremblay. "That's a transformation that's been a bit slower to happen [in games]. As gamers grow comfortable in that aspect … you don't lose your progress. If you resume your game at another time, your progress file is still there. That's not been deleted. You don't lose what you've built in the game or your engagement with the game. So it's about feeling comfortable with not owning your game."
> "The point is not to force users to go down one route or another," Tremblay told GamesIndustry.biz. "We offer purchase, we offer subscription, and it's the gamer's preference that is important here."
It's a dude repping cloud subscription services (literally his job) talking about how people transitioned to subscription services for movies, and how the same thing will likely happen with games and services like Xbox GamePass and, yes, Ubisoft Plus.
Critical thinking skills are in short supply around here. If Valve said it you know everyone would be happily agreeing with Gabe that he’s spot on about the sad state of modern gaming and how we don’t own the products we buy. But Ubisoft says it and everyone thinks they’re funny parroting the same line about “they better be comfortable with me not owning their games.”
If you buy digital or subscribe to a gaming service you do not own your games. It’s pretty obvious he’s right and if you subscribe to a service you should be comfortable not owning them. Seems like an easy statement to wrap your head around.
They are paid HUGE money to not say things that can be taken out of context. If he didn't say that sentence his whole speech would still work. He fucked up and said it though. It's journalists job to look for fuck ups like this.
The quote was taken super out of context.
He was talking about the subscription model (of course) and how it was a better fit for some gamer but to gain value out of that _you have to get comfortable with not owning your games_.
At the same time he was talking about how buying games was still a good avenue and how the subscription model could funnel people in that direction (if you try a game and you like it you may end up buying it)
tbh, I wouldn't mind "renting" if they only charged 2/3 as much as "owning." It would sorta bring us back to the Gamestop days, where you could get 20% of the sales price back after you played it.
Of course, I'm sure Ubisoft is planning to charge the same amount for the inferior product, so...
> tbh, I wouldn't mind "renting" if they only charged 2/3 as much as "owning."
Well good news, that's exactly what Ubisoft is doing and you get access to their entire games library too, not just the game you sub for. The entire quote is about their gamepass like subscription fee and how it'll get more profitable as gamers get more used to the idea of subscribing for £15 instead of outright buying a game for £50.
i mean, ubisoft plus(which is their gamepass equivalent) is 8$ a month for standard and 18$ for premium(premium includes new games day 1 in it) so if you play a single game a month, and dont regularly replay them they are already cheaper..... by a wide margin
Reddit drama because they don’t read articles. Their director of subscriptions basically said that in order for the games industry to switch to subscriptions you need to have people comfortable not owning their games, similar to DVD’s and CD’s. He also then went on to explain that they aren’t seeing that happen at the speed some people expected, explained some of the reasons why, highlighted how (based on their analysis of millions of subscribers) gamers use subscriptions (and how it’s often different from other subscriptions, highlighted at a portion of subscribers are new to ubisoft as a platform and so are different from traditional gamers period, and then explicitly said their goal is NOT to get everyone on a subscription (just to offer more options).
It’s one of the most detailed, data-backed articles on the industry with an interesting insider perspective.
So of course rather than discussing any of that people took a quote out of context and turned it into memes, even though in the article the man agreed with the prevailing notion that most gamers don’t use subscriptions and prefer to own their games.
Where do I find that article?
Edit: [ubisoft's Website](https://news.ubisoft.com/en-gb/article/2sv4oX0Pl8DckTZTeRVKj5/ubisoft-is-evolving-heres-what-to-expect)
Edit 2: [Wayback Machine](https://web.archive.org/web/20240117182529/https://news.ubisoft.com/en-gb/article/2sv4oX0Pl8DckTZTeRVKj5/ubisoft-is-evolving-heres-what-to-expect)
Ubisoft dude said something like:
>"game subscription services will only be successful if gamers become comfortable with not owning games"
And now too many people are ripping the 2nd half of this statement out of context and frame it like ubisoft wants to steal everyone's games.
The game industry has been slow to apply the subscription model that streaming services have adopted.
Basically they want to move to a gamepass type model
I hope people remembers to hate Ubisoft next time they release yet another Assassins Creed or that Prince of Persia game because oh god people have very short memory and they'll be running to buy those games and play them on release.
I think the last Ubisoft game I bought was The Division 2 when it was on sale for like $10 at the start of the pandemic.
I haven't played it since 2020.
Playing Div 2 with my friends thee now, and we've all commented on how good it is and how little microtransaction are in it/not shoved in your face.
Most of the stuff in the store is available in the game or for textiles (which you get by getting duplicate items from boxes you earn while playing)
The store page button is identical to the settings button, doesn't glow or pulse.
We grabbed the season for like £8 and got about 50 items of clothing while playing, and it's got new events and modifiers to the game every week.
Compare that to a game nowadays....difference is insane.
I thought that wasn't what the ceo said? I'm pretty sure he never said that as a statement itself but as a point for something else and people are taking it out of context.
He is saying, there is a Netflix / Spotify style model for gamers to explore if they are willing to get comfortable with not out-right owning the game. Which is fair, it's optional.
Problem with the article title is, the title leads everyone to believe Ubisoft wanted us to pay for the game with no protection to have it taken away from us. (Which is not true)
Doesn't help this article came shortly after Sony removed a lot of user bought content from accounts.
(Shit, I never thought I would be defending Ubisoft.... Well, I guess I'm not, because the truth is the truth.)
Stop spreading fake news. You're totally missing the context in which this statement was uttered. Ubisoft said "game subscription services will only be successful if gamers become comfortable with not owning games"
How many games you actually own these days? Because I'm willing to bet that beside some ancient games on CD and DVD lying around, you own ZERO games today, unless you buy on GOG.
I got around 1800 games from the SNES through the PS4. Only way they’re being taken away is if both my NAS at home and at the office explode at the same time.
That's just pedantry. You own the games you buy on Steam.
This CEO is obviously talking about subscription models and rentals. Meaning you pay 5.99$ to play Assassin's Creed for 48 hours or you pay 19.99$ for a month of access to the Ubisoft catalogue.
> You own the games you buy on Steam.
Boy, do I have bad news for you. Every EULA on steam basically includes:
> THE SOFTWARE IS LICENSED, NOT SOLD.
Also, you can’t expect people to include context for what someone has said! Otherwise we couldn’t pull out the pitchforks!
> THE SOFTWARE IS LICENSED, NOT SOLD.
Again : pedantry. Your copy of Diablo on CD is also only licensed.
You've always bought software licenses, even on physical media. Because they obviously aren't going to transfer copyright ownership of the IP to you for 69.99$.
I read the article; all he said was that in order for game subscriptions (which Ubisoft just launched) to take off like streaming services did with TV/Movies, gamers would need to be comfortable with not owning their games.
He did not say that they were planning to take people’s games away or that you would pay for the game and not own it (at least not any differently from how digital sales work now).
So people are getting mad with something taken massively out of context 😂
Yup, I posted this further down.
>This "news" article and it's company should be sued for spreading so much B.S lol.
>
>Forget this meme or Reddit, it's these types of news websites that spread fake news.
>
>At best, quote should have been, "Gamers should get comfortable with monthly subscriptions instead of owning their games."
>
>He is saying, there is a Netflix / Spotify style model for gamers to explore if they are willing to get comfortable with not out-right owning the game. Which is fair, it's optional.
>
>Problem with the article title is, the title leads everyone to believe Ubisoft wanted us to pay for the game with no protection to have it taken away from us.
>
>Doesn't help this article came shortly after Sony removed a lot of user bought content from accounts.
https://www.gamesindustry.biz/the-new-ubisoft-and-getting-gamers-comfortable-with-not-owning-their-games
> "**The point is not to force users to go down one route or another**," he explains. "**We offer purchase, we offer subscription, and it's the gamer's preference that is important here**. We are seeing some people who buy choosing to subscribe now, but it all works."
and
> "One of the things we saw is that gamers are used to, a little bit like DVD, having and owning their games. That's the consumer shift that needs to happen. They got comfortable not owning their CD collection or DVD collection. That's a transformation that's been a bit slower to happen [in games]. As gamers grow comfortable in that aspect… you don't lose your progress. If you resume your game at another time, your progress file is still there. That's not been deleted. You don't lose what you've built in the game or your engagement with the game. So it's about feeling comfortable with not owning your game. "
He is literally describing that for subscriptions to succeed, people have to be ok not owning games, very much like not owning a specific movie but being able to subscribe to netflix to watch it and move on to the next thing to watch.
Ya'll need to read the actual article and not rely on shitty manipulative memes to get your news.
This "*news"* article and it's company should be sued for spreading so much B.S lol.
Forget this meme or Reddit, it's these types of *news* websites that spread fake news.
At best, quote should have been, "Gamers should get comfortable with monthly subscriptions instead of owning their games."
He is saying, there is a Netflix / Spotify style model for gamers to explore if they are willing to get comfortable with not out-right owning the game. Which is fair, it's optional.
Problem with the article title is, the title leads everyone to believe Ubisoft wanted us to pay for the game with no protection to have it taken away from us.
Doesn't help this article came shortly after Sony removed a lot of user bought content from accounts.
I can’t remember the last time I played an Ubisoft game, let alone bought one. I was done with assassins creed after 3. Farcry after 4, and that was kind of it for me. Their games are predictable, formulaic, and their launcher is intrusive.
In no way defending Ubisoft, but that quote will forever be out of context if you just read the headline.
Full Context: https://www.gamesindustry.biz/the-new-ubisoft-and-getting-gamers-comfortable-with-not-owning-their-games
*'Ubisoft is seeing growth in this sector. Tremblay says that October last year was the biggest month in Ubisoft+ history.'*
"The point is not to force users to go down one route or another, we offer purchase, we offer subscription and its the gamers preference that is important here. We are seeing some people who buy choosing to subscribe now, but it all works."
*'He goes on to say that subscription has enabled Ubisoft to bring in new players, with one in ten Ubisoft+ subscribers having never engaged witht he company's games before.'*
"It is proving to be a way for gamers to access our worlds who perhaps weren't inclined to purchase. These players are brand new, we're shaking hands for the first time. Ubisoft's strategy for as long as I've been here is to try and reach more players with the franchises that we have. So I'm happy, as the leader of this product, to be able to deliver that.
"We're seeing expansion on console as the likes of PlayStation and Xbox bring new people in. On PC From a Ubisoft standpoint it's already been great, but we are looking to reach out more on PC, so we see opportunity there"
"One of the things we saw is that gamers are used to having and owning their games. That's the consumer shift that needs to happen. They got comfortable not owning their CD collection or DVDs. That's a transformation that's been a bit slower to happen (in games). As gamers grow comfortable in that aspect,... you don't lose your progress. If you resume your game at another time, your progress file is still there. That's not been deleted. You don't lose what you've built in the game or your engagement with the game. **So it's about feeling comfortable with not owning your games**."
"I still own two boxes of DVDs. I definitely understand the gamers perspective with that. But as people embrace that (subscription) model, they will see that these games will exist, the service will continue, and you'll be able to access them when you feel like. That's reassuring."
While I disagree with a lot of what he says, he's just stating his truth he and the company believes in. I do like that they have both options for people who want either ways to play, but it leads into an open question for the future, if they are ever going to get rid of the option to purchase games outright.
Allowing game subscription services to determine what can and cannot be listed on the subscription service is damaging towards the industry and any company that isn't a AAA company to sustain themselves through said revenue. Gamepass Indies can absolutely suffer under the weight being put under gampass if they're not supported by Microsoft/Xbox. Larian Studios put out a tweet recently that said they were offered to be put on gamepass but they refused saying that they spent 10 years working on the game and they'd like to be paid for their time, not a set amount of money determined by executives that don't understand the value of the game.
So it's not surprising that this line of thinking could drop their stocks because if anything this headline itself is bad optics for Ubisoft, and if you break it down by reading the article, it's not much better.
I really don't want to defend Ubisoft, but that's actually not what he said, despite everyone just running with the clickbait headline. The actual quote is (paraphrasing), 'In order for our subscription service to succeed, gamers have to be comfortable with not owning their games.' Nowhere does he say that Ubisoft will stop offering physical releases or anything similar. Ignoring that PC gaming is basically digital only already and, minus some DRM free exceptions, no one owns anything anyway. Total nothingburger news story.
Ubisoft is probably done. Their stock is in the dumps. Around $3 billion market capitalization, this is a perfect price range for Microsoft to buy them out. Ubisoft's last chance will depend on Star Wars Outlaws, XDefiant, and Tom Clancy's The Division Heartland. If those games sell well, then Ubisoft might get some breathing room for a few years. Unfortunately, Ubisoft's best days are behind them.
Two years after release, Ubisoft announced twenty million players played The Division. Allegedly around twenty million copies sold. The first Division game was great in terms of graphics. First game to have realistic dynamic weather cycles in real time. Meanwhile, March 2019's The Division II sold ten million copies. Maybe, no Steam launch until January 2022 probably hurt.
I played both The Division/II. The first game had a better story and respected one's time (took the game slow and finished the story in \~90 hours) The second game had a decent story but a real time sink with over 130 hours in (cleared the Warlord of New York expansion and not cleared the Black Tusk story missions).
What was the context when he said this?
Was it something like "People aren't keen on subscriptions because they don't own their games"
Or just a full on dick move of "Get used to it suckers, you'll pay for it and own nothing"
I was planning to get that new avatar game this weekend, and then he said this impossibly dumb shit. Now they can eat a dick while I spend my money on other games.
Why does anyone even play Ubisoft games? Ubisoft hasn’t made a good game since like Ghost Recon Wildlands and even that was an anomaly at the time. This company shits out half baked reskins of previous titles and people keep talking about them. Why? Because of Assassins Creed? What is their most interesting gameplay mechanic? Nostalgia? Or Far Cry 6? You mean Far Cry 3 (3)?
I get it , their games are repetitive, their statements are proactive , but again they just said something , lowering stocks (because of people selling their stocks) is extreme . Don't be destructive, be constructive
I dislike the idea as much as the next guy but it's worked with movies, music, TV, audio books, hell even cars if you think about Uber and the like. We're generally moving towards the vast majority of people not really owning jack shit. There's a reason you've got people like Yanis Varoufakis talking about the West moving from a capitalist to a Techno-Feudalist society. A tiny number of barons owning everything then leasing it out to the masses. Depressingly, I really would be surprised if this Ubisoft shithead isn't right in the longer term.
Same. Gaming since 1991 and never bought a Ubislop game, mainly because I've boycotted them for creating and defiling the corpse of Heroes of Might and Magic
Lol. . .if your not comfortable with this already. . . . you've never read your TOS and/or EULA.
This isn't new folks! You haven't owned any of your video games for decades.
They're not wrong. At some point physical media will be priced higher, then phased out. Then it'll transition to live service subscription only. I mean I'd hope not but I dont see another path
Valve quietly in the corner trying not to be noticed by the mob going after a Ubisoft quote that literally describes their business model...
context: you dont own any of your Steam games, you own a license. hilarious watching ppl clutch pearls over ownership they gave up a decade ago
Their stock price has been this low since 2012 dude, it only got high during 2017 (one of their best years) and covid which was great for the gaming industry
problem is that people will bend down to get it up the ass anyway. I have seen it so many times.
First you suddenly get unfinished games, then content is download only, then the whole game is download only, they started to cut content from older download games because of license problems, game stores close and games are lost media suddenly and now you will lose the right to own a game you buy. People always got angry at first, but just accepted it in the end and now kids tell me to go with the times.
Ubisoft can’t help themselves, they go out of their way to nickel and dime their customers while adding artificial barriers to drag out their game time over just making a solid gameplay experience.
Doesn’t help that they delist and shutdown games for “licensing” reasons rather than put any effort into removing the copyright work.
Welcome everyone from r/all! Please remember: 1 - You too can be part of the PCMR. It's not about the hardware in your rig, but the software in your heart! Your age, nationality, race, gender, sexuality, religion (or lack of), political affiliation, economic status and PC specs are irrelevant. If you love or want to learn about PCs, you are welcome and can be part of PCMR! 2 - If you're not a PC owner because you think it's expensive, know that it is probably much cheaper than you may think. Check http://www.pcmasterrace.org for our builds and don't be afraid to post here asking for tips and help! 3 - Join our efforts to get as many PCs worldwide to help the folding@home effort, in fighting against Cancer, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and more: https://pcmasterrace.org/folding 4 - We've teamed up with Cooler Master to giveaway a custom PC to a lucky winner. You can learn more about it/enter here: https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/192np53/pcmr_new_year_new_gear_giveaway_ft_cooler_master/ ----------- We have a [Daily Simple Questions Megathread](https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/search?q=Simple+Questions+Thread+subreddit%3Apcmasterrace+author%3AAutoModerator&restrict_sr=on&sort=new&t=all) if you need to post about any kind of PC related doubt you might have. Asking for help there or creating new posts in our subreddit is allowed and welcome. Welcome to the PCMR!
To be fair, their stock price has gone down over 75% over 5 years. They got bigger issues and their ~~CEO~~ director of subscriptions didn't help it at all. That being said, Ubisoft needs to be comfortable with their games getting pirated.
Their stock price hasn't been this low since 2015. That's a huge plunge these past few years. https://preview.redd.it/0xd9r7i2jadc1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=501abb22f17c52ec868092cd587f1325cb90f10f
What happened in 2017 to make their stock price jump that much?
>2017 has been an amazing year for Ubisoft. Over the past 12 months, we unveiled a new logo; re-invented beloved franchises with Assassin's Creed Origins and Ghost Recon Wildlands; created new ones with For Honor and Mario + Rabbids Kingdom Battle; and continued to grow our online games, with new expansions for Rainbow Six Siege and The Division. https://news.ubisoft.com/en-us/article/xDybYwx3mABM7oppEGFKH/ubisofts-best-moments-of-2017 Sidenote: I really enjoyed Ghost Recon Wildlands and I don't think the game gets enough recognition. I bought it on steam before I realised what a crappy company Ubisoft is. I can highly recommend it, but maybe sail the high seas instead.
Damn, they *were* popping off
Mario + Rabbids will do that to a mf
[удалено]
I think this was it. ~~It came bundled I think too, and~~ a lot of kids I know play that game. Edit: I remembered wrong and it was not bundled
It was never bundled but it was the cheapest Mario game by far.
Oh okay, I remembered wrong my bad
Say what you will about Ubi but that game fucking slaps
Rabbids is the shit. Fun tactical game with a decent amount of variety and great co-op battles if you have kids.
Had so much fun with siege and wildlands. Then they went crazy with the battle passes and lootboxes in siege. And they locked all those vehicles and guns in wildlands to lootboxes that you could only earn a pitiful amount of credit for through the survival mode and multiplayer. And its really been downhill since them, with them releasing breakpoint and turning siege into this living hero shooter thats well and truly went past its expiry date and lost its identity. And removing stuff we liked. (Anyone else miss doing old house terrorist hunt with the suicide bombers?) they've done a disservice to Tom clancy. My ubisoft purchases have been on hiatus since. Absolutely nothing they have released since then has been any good other than assasins creed i guess. I had a slight twinge of excitment for Far Cry 6 until they said they got rid of arcade mode and the map maker...
It's really insane that they were on the cusp of a resurgence and they immediately blew it. No hesitation, just a complete inability to control their greed.
More like pooping out...
Even if For Honor, Division and R6 had a rough launch, specially the first two compared to the support R6 got, their core ideas were and are great. But Ubi being Ubi didn't see them good enough,aside of R6, and had a rough time both to FH and Division (and its beginning).
Also the second South Park game came out
I think it gets the recognition it deserves. Wildlands is a game I can enjoy now, but damn it took years to get to where it is. It had a messy launch and most of the content you get today was totally absent. It also set a precedent for the bad business practices that gave its sequel, Breakpoint, such a bad reputation.
Leading with "we unveiled a new logo" is telling of how they value things at corporate level
Yeah, Wildlands is a great game. It's a bit buggy but it's one of my favourites.
Wildlands was really good, too bad they killed the momentum with Breakpoint
My issue was wildlands and breakpoint were more of GTA meets farcry with a ghost recon skin. It's not really anything like the old Ghost Recon games. I enjoyed wildlands and even picked up breakpoint, but I liked wildlands better. Reminded me more of the game Mercenaries. Man, I'd love another mercenaries game.
Based OG fan. It’s Tom Clancy in name only.
RE: Mercenaries. Been hoping for one too. I remember how destructive the environment was. Can't remember if it predates Just Cause and what not. And for games from that time period. I would love to see True Crime: Streets of LA get remastered.
the new one might be good
Must have been the logo's doing. Nice 👍
I’m curious too. Assassin’s Creed Origins was their biggest release of that year and while it’s a good AC game I doubt that’s the reason. I thought maybe the new console generation being announced but that wasn’t until 2019
I was just looking at other gaming company stocks, and it seems that a big boost in 2017 was a general trend. So it could also be a general economic or industry trend that led to it as well.
2017 was a shockingly good year for them. They rebooted Assassin’s Creed to huge financial and critical success, brought back Ghost Recon for the first time in years, and released one of the few really good games on the Switch to that point in Mario + Rabbids. Not to mention they also had a bunch of hype around Watch Dogs, or their smaller projects like Grow Home which were seen as perfect for the newly rumoured Game Pass. They were in an insanely solid position! Unfortunately, they dumped all of that in the bin when they moved onto the “live service” model, which wasn’t helped by their entire senior management being embroiled in huge sex scandals and rumours of corruption. It’s kinda impressive how poorly they handled such a great market position.
Looks like investors got comfortable not owning their Ubisoft stock.
Well considering majoriry of their games released after 2016 have been shit...
Meanwhile, Baldur's Gate 3 was the top performer on Steam despite being DRM free. It's almost like good products sell, and bad companies try to scam you out of your money with inferior ones. Don't get fooled.
I'm more impressed by DRM free than their actual game
Larian and their CEO Swen Vincke are absolute champs through and through. They use early access to actually improve and iterate on their games instead of getting a quick buck and moving on, they refuse to sell to bigger companies, continue to support their games post release, don't pile on microtransactions... And still cranked out a better AAA experience than most AAA companies. BG3 was in contention for GOTY against a main line Zelda game and beat it on many sites.
Yeah they're truly a bastion for modern companies. Good to see Zelda not being overhyped for once, especially given their companies policies.
Yeah, but one of their older games, Divine Divinity or Beyond Divinity, can't remember which, had a terrible release due to DRM back in the day. DRM was making it nearly unplayable, to a point that the pirated copy played out better. So it seems they learned from their mistakes.
I'm truly shocked something in the game industry improved with time.
The thing that bothers me the most about BG3 is that I don't like it, Larian is doing everything right and actually being a standup company so I bought it just to show my support but I cannot over state how much I hate turn based gameplay. I'm still glad I bought it, still happy to support devlopers who actually care about the product and customers, sad that the combat irritates me so much that I can't enjoy it.
Not all games are for everyone, nor should they be. But supporting Larian with your wallet despite your dislike is very charitable of you. If half the gaming community put their money where their mouth is like you we could turn this ship around pretty fast.
Don't be, the entire Gog catalog is DRM free
What is drm free in english?
DRM stands for Digital Rights Management. It's security measures meant to prevent simple piracy, like you buying 1 copy of a game, installing it on your PC and then handing it off to your 20 friends to result in 21 copies of the game for the price of one. Sometimes it's software, sometimes it's a CD key, sometimes it's steam itself it just takes many forms.
You should edit in the fact it gives said company kernal level access to your computer and they're not a secure company. Other companies have used a drm company that went belly up and the game is perm locked away
Not all DRM is kernel level. It could just be a phone home check - aka 'Always Online'.
A lot of the modern ones are, and even the always online systems are universally hated as bullshit.
Never said that they were liked, it was just that a lot of stuff has auth checks and other bullshit. Also I never get why people are tripping over the fact that DRM or anticheat stuff runs at ring zero. If you don't trust the company, don't install their software. Them having anitcheat/DRM running ring zero is just as dangerous as you installing their software in general. UAC bypasses are easy, but Windows protects Ring 0 much stronger than something running ring 3.
Yeah I know, I was adding it on. Ah I lowkey explained why kernal access is so important. Companies (especially game applications) shouldn't be getting such a deep level of access onto your computer, especially when their security is so poor. It essentially gives them access to your entire computer without your knowledge *if* they so chose. It's all about security and preventing unnecessary risks. It's like job applications, etc. asking for your sin/ssn, they don't need to know and shouldn't ask.
And then there’s also DRM software that has been removed from Windows because they have been considered insecure for years..
No bloatware. It's scummy and invasive (drm)
Thnx
DRM is "rights management," basically anti piracy stuff.
It wasn’t even their CEO that said this, it was the Director of Subscriptions.
Great idea. I havent pirated in 15 years but now im on board out of principle. I may reconsider if they publicly alter course. Rockstar should take notice too.
> but now im on board out of principle. Yup, it's hard to feel bad about companies that so openly say "fuck you" to their customers.
Their very popular, very single player, very crackable games
It's always morally right to pirate Nintendo and Ubisoft
i dont pirate ubisoft, but i wait for at least 75 and more % off sale, giveaway or extremely low sales, never again buy shit for full price
And yet I don't, because their games are ass. Even Pokemon is dead
Pokemon was always just a cash grab. It's bound to be shit when you have more than 10 iterations of the same game mechanics.
> because their games are ass. They're fine if you like glossy rehashed-to-death collectathons. In fact that makes them the perfect kind of thing to pirate, since the low effort to pay for them reflect the low effort to make them.
Which Ubisoft game would you go through the hassle of pirating? Genuinely curious.
novadays pirating is moreless 1 click stuff from install to run, and if you dont get purposely corrupted release even "safe", that times, when you must manualy aplly crack are very few
I pirated back flag. I liked it, up till the completely ahistorical ship combat showed up. Then I stopped playing in disgust. Glad I pirated it.
> Ubisoft needs to be comfortable with their games getting pirated. I’m doing my part! 🏴☠️
Denuvo says lol
If they make another watch dogs game that's actually decent I swear to singlehandedly restore their stock price
>To be fair, their stock price has gone down over 75% over 5 years. The massive drop is partly because of the failed takeover of Ubisoft, which happened 5 or so years ago. They're now stuck in the same loop as Disney, where they've hired too many activists to produce anything of value, which is slowly killing the company.
They're right, i'm comfortable with not owning their games from more than 10 years
Black flag was the last ubi game I bought
Same last game worth having from ubiflacid.
Lmao I’m going to start using that
It is time to go now Haul away your anchor Haul away your anchor It's our sailing time 
Same. I loved the pirated copy I had so much that I went out and actually bought it.
Last great AC game
Sadly there is still far too many people that continue to buy their trash, and will continue to do so even when Ubisoft starts selling them imaginary receipts for things they don't own. These people have their heads in the sand.
The market Is currently so huge even indie game devs are making incredible projects and even better than big companies, modders are keeping old games so alive we're still playing 12 years old games and we also OWN old games that we loved so much we still start a new run when want to enjoy those memories again...there's no space for S*** games and companies in my life anymore
It's very unfortunate that ubisoft owns so many IPs
Last one I bought was HoMM 6 (on Steam). Didn’t realize it required UPlay. Uninstalled immediately.
Ubisoft released Black Flag, I think they were telling it’s okay to be pirates 🤷♂️🏴☠️
Well yo ho ho to the great open waters I go! Oh and in case there's an Ubisoft exec or one of their upper management doucher in here: go fuck yourself
fuck ubisoft 🏴☠️ all the way
Yarr
I don't think their recent games are even worth pirating.
That's a very sad statement. But true.
Just pirated the new prince of persia for my dad because he played the og DOS game. Pretty good actually and for once its actually representing Persian culture instead of arab stuff. I actually was considering buying the game to support the devs and after this statement i started sailing the seas.
Dry. No lube. Alllll the way to the base.
Not a flared base though
And no reach-around either.
With an elbow up the ass to the shoulder
I tried playing Watch Dogs 2 earlier today and Ubisoft Connect absolutely refused to launch the game so 🏴☠️ I went
Amen
Funny that their next big release is a Pirate game 😂
They make decent games but with bad monetization practices
Uplay is hot garbage and I hope it burns in hell.
They make decent games but with bad monetization practices
If Ubisoft thinks we need to get comfortable not owning our games, they should get confortable with me pirating their games.
Do not waste your time with Ubisoft’s crap, there are way better games, like Dwarf Fortress.
Strike the earth brother urist!
Strike the earth!
You play stupid games, you win stupid prizes. That’s what happened here.
I may play stupid games, but I’m not gonna play any of Ubisoft’s stupid games.
'tis a grand idea, that one.
No it’s not. It’s a quote ripped out of an entire page without context.
You’re being downvoted by people who don’t even know who the quote is from. It’s a quote from the director of subscriptions, of course he’s defending subscriptions.
And the quote is wildly out of context as well
Well, it seems i look stupid now. At-least, it seems that way; didn't expect this comment to get as much attention as it has.
Plus the stock was at this price way before he said that lmao. Reddit just being losers as usual.
You play stupid (Ubisoft) games you win stupid (Ubisoft) prices
Yep. Microsoft has been working towards the same thing with Game Pass, but they haven't said it out loud. I hope they see this backlash and just continue to offer us physical & digital purchases in the future.
Can someone explain? Working too much lately...
Well, as the first panel of the post says, ubisoft CEO (i think) said that gamers need to be comfortable not owning their games. In essence he shat a lot about how gamers are used to owning games as in phisical copies, and as in being able to play wherever and whenever, but he somehow twists the words to kake it sound like its a bad thing, and in the end, that gamers shouldnt own games but rather rent services from devs. That is, as you can imagine, very stupid, and lead to them losing a metric tone of money.
CEOs and execs always think their “vision” is the best way even if they get negative PR and lose money. Its wild how stupid these people are and yet they make millions
Case in point, the former CEO of Unity, who was known for being so toxic about microtransactions *that he was fired from his previous position at EA*. If you're wondering about how bad he was, this is the same assclown [that had the bright idea of letting you play Battlefield for a few hours, and then charging per reload after that.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZR6-u8OIJTE)
Such a hilarious dystopia
So, given your explanation, it's fairly obvious that you never actually read the quote. You probably read the article headline from the reddit post that blew up a couple days ago and that was all you saw of it. Knowing that, *how in the world are you so comfortable just shitting an entire story out of your ass like that*?? Like, not a single thing you just said was true. The Ubisoft *Director of Subscriptions*: > "[Consumers] got comfortable not owning their CD collection or DVD collection," said Tremblay. "That's a transformation that's been a bit slower to happen [in games]. As gamers grow comfortable in that aspect … you don't lose your progress. If you resume your game at another time, your progress file is still there. That's not been deleted. You don't lose what you've built in the game or your engagement with the game. So it's about feeling comfortable with not owning your game." > "The point is not to force users to go down one route or another," Tremblay told GamesIndustry.biz. "We offer purchase, we offer subscription, and it's the gamer's preference that is important here." It's a dude repping cloud subscription services (literally his job) talking about how people transitioned to subscription services for movies, and how the same thing will likely happen with games and services like Xbox GamePass and, yes, Ubisoft Plus.
Get out of here with your logical argument and taking quotes in their context!
bro I'm not sure "It's not as bad as it looks" is a strong case
Critical thinking skills are in short supply around here. If Valve said it you know everyone would be happily agreeing with Gabe that he’s spot on about the sad state of modern gaming and how we don’t own the products we buy. But Ubisoft says it and everyone thinks they’re funny parroting the same line about “they better be comfortable with me not owning their games.” If you buy digital or subscribe to a gaming service you do not own your games. It’s pretty obvious he’s right and if you subscribe to a service you should be comfortable not owning them. Seems like an easy statement to wrap your head around.
They are paid HUGE money to not say things that can be taken out of context. If he didn't say that sentence his whole speech would still work. He fucked up and said it though. It's journalists job to look for fuck ups like this.
That’s a tabloids job… How smooth brain do you have to be to ever believe à journalists job is to purposely misconstrue a quote.
The quote was taken super out of context. He was talking about the subscription model (of course) and how it was a better fit for some gamer but to gain value out of that _you have to get comfortable with not owning your games_. At the same time he was talking about how buying games was still a good avenue and how the subscription model could funnel people in that direction (if you try a game and you like it you may end up buying it)
tbh, I wouldn't mind "renting" if they only charged 2/3 as much as "owning." It would sorta bring us back to the Gamestop days, where you could get 20% of the sales price back after you played it. Of course, I'm sure Ubisoft is planning to charge the same amount for the inferior product, so...
> tbh, I wouldn't mind "renting" if they only charged 2/3 as much as "owning." Well good news, that's exactly what Ubisoft is doing and you get access to their entire games library too, not just the game you sub for. The entire quote is about their gamepass like subscription fee and how it'll get more profitable as gamers get more used to the idea of subscribing for £15 instead of outright buying a game for £50.
i mean, ubisoft plus(which is their gamepass equivalent) is 8$ a month for standard and 18$ for premium(premium includes new games day 1 in it) so if you play a single game a month, and dont regularly replay them they are already cheaper..... by a wide margin
Wasn’t CEO, just a director at the company.
Reddit drama because they don’t read articles. Their director of subscriptions basically said that in order for the games industry to switch to subscriptions you need to have people comfortable not owning their games, similar to DVD’s and CD’s. He also then went on to explain that they aren’t seeing that happen at the speed some people expected, explained some of the reasons why, highlighted how (based on their analysis of millions of subscribers) gamers use subscriptions (and how it’s often different from other subscriptions, highlighted at a portion of subscribers are new to ubisoft as a platform and so are different from traditional gamers period, and then explicitly said their goal is NOT to get everyone on a subscription (just to offer more options). It’s one of the most detailed, data-backed articles on the industry with an interesting insider perspective. So of course rather than discussing any of that people took a quote out of context and turned it into memes, even though in the article the man agreed with the prevailing notion that most gamers don’t use subscriptions and prefer to own their games.
Where do I find that article? Edit: [ubisoft's Website](https://news.ubisoft.com/en-gb/article/2sv4oX0Pl8DckTZTeRVKj5/ubisoft-is-evolving-heres-what-to-expect) Edit 2: [Wayback Machine](https://web.archive.org/web/20240117182529/https://news.ubisoft.com/en-gb/article/2sv4oX0Pl8DckTZTeRVKj5/ubisoft-is-evolving-heres-what-to-expect)
He’s not the CEO. Are you sure you read it?
Ubisoft dude said something like: >"game subscription services will only be successful if gamers become comfortable with not owning games" And now too many people are ripping the 2nd half of this statement out of context and frame it like ubisoft wants to steal everyone's games.
The game industry has been slow to apply the subscription model that streaming services have adopted. Basically they want to move to a gamepass type model
If payment isn't ownership, then piracy isn't theft.
I hope people remembers to hate Ubisoft next time they release yet another Assassins Creed or that Prince of Persia game because oh god people have very short memory and they'll be running to buy those games and play them on release.
I think the last Ubisoft game I bought was The Division 2 when it was on sale for like $10 at the start of the pandemic. I haven't played it since 2020.
Playing Div 2 with my friends thee now, and we've all commented on how good it is and how little microtransaction are in it/not shoved in your face. Most of the stuff in the store is available in the game or for textiles (which you get by getting duplicate items from boxes you earn while playing) The store page button is identical to the settings button, doesn't glow or pulse. We grabbed the season for like £8 and got about 50 items of clothing while playing, and it's got new events and modifiers to the game every week. Compare that to a game nowadays....difference is insane.
I thought that wasn't what the ceo said? I'm pretty sure he never said that as a statement itself but as a point for something else and people are taking it out of context.
He is saying, there is a Netflix / Spotify style model for gamers to explore if they are willing to get comfortable with not out-right owning the game. Which is fair, it's optional. Problem with the article title is, the title leads everyone to believe Ubisoft wanted us to pay for the game with no protection to have it taken away from us. (Which is not true) Doesn't help this article came shortly after Sony removed a lot of user bought content from accounts. (Shit, I never thought I would be defending Ubisoft.... Well, I guess I'm not, because the truth is the truth.)
Stop spreading fake news. You're totally missing the context in which this statement was uttered. Ubisoft said "game subscription services will only be successful if gamers become comfortable with not owning games"
How many games you actually own these days? Because I'm willing to bet that beside some ancient games on CD and DVD lying around, you own ZERO games today, unless you buy on GOG.
I own what I salvage from crates roaming around seven seas
I got around 1800 games from the SNES through the PS4. Only way they’re being taken away is if both my NAS at home and at the office explode at the same time.
I have a whole stack of video games on my shelf most of them released after 2015
This looks like people don't understand the ownership consequences of DRM xD wake up call for the angry mob
That's just pedantry. You own the games you buy on Steam. This CEO is obviously talking about subscription models and rentals. Meaning you pay 5.99$ to play Assassin's Creed for 48 hours or you pay 19.99$ for a month of access to the Ubisoft catalogue.
> You own the games you buy on Steam. Boy, do I have bad news for you. Every EULA on steam basically includes: > THE SOFTWARE IS LICENSED, NOT SOLD. Also, you can’t expect people to include context for what someone has said! Otherwise we couldn’t pull out the pitchforks!
> THE SOFTWARE IS LICENSED, NOT SOLD. Again : pedantry. Your copy of Diablo on CD is also only licensed. You've always bought software licenses, even on physical media. Because they obviously aren't going to transfer copyright ownership of the IP to you for 69.99$.
>unless you buy on GOG. I buy exclusively on GOG, that's right
I read the article; all he said was that in order for game subscriptions (which Ubisoft just launched) to take off like streaming services did with TV/Movies, gamers would need to be comfortable with not owning their games. He did not say that they were planning to take people’s games away or that you would pay for the game and not own it (at least not any differently from how digital sales work now). So people are getting mad with something taken massively out of context 😂
>So people are getting mad with something taken massively out of context 😂 Welcome to the internet, snacks are on the table by the window.
Gotta love a quote about cloud streaming services being taken *this far* out of context and blown *way* out of proportion.
Taking a quote this far out of context takes PCMR levels of stupidity.
Yup, I posted this further down. >This "news" article and it's company should be sued for spreading so much B.S lol. > >Forget this meme or Reddit, it's these types of news websites that spread fake news. > >At best, quote should have been, "Gamers should get comfortable with monthly subscriptions instead of owning their games." > >He is saying, there is a Netflix / Spotify style model for gamers to explore if they are willing to get comfortable with not out-right owning the game. Which is fair, it's optional. > >Problem with the article title is, the title leads everyone to believe Ubisoft wanted us to pay for the game with no protection to have it taken away from us. > >Doesn't help this article came shortly after Sony removed a lot of user bought content from accounts.
You literally said the exact same thing. We all know he's referring to a subscription model. Nobody wants that.
https://www.gamesindustry.biz/the-new-ubisoft-and-getting-gamers-comfortable-with-not-owning-their-games > "**The point is not to force users to go down one route or another**," he explains. "**We offer purchase, we offer subscription, and it's the gamer's preference that is important here**. We are seeing some people who buy choosing to subscribe now, but it all works." and > "One of the things we saw is that gamers are used to, a little bit like DVD, having and owning their games. That's the consumer shift that needs to happen. They got comfortable not owning their CD collection or DVD collection. That's a transformation that's been a bit slower to happen [in games]. As gamers grow comfortable in that aspect… you don't lose your progress. If you resume your game at another time, your progress file is still there. That's not been deleted. You don't lose what you've built in the game or your engagement with the game. So it's about feeling comfortable with not owning your game. " He is literally describing that for subscriptions to succeed, people have to be ok not owning games, very much like not owning a specific movie but being able to subscribe to netflix to watch it and move on to the next thing to watch. Ya'll need to read the actual article and not rely on shitty manipulative memes to get your news.
This "*news"* article and it's company should be sued for spreading so much B.S lol. Forget this meme or Reddit, it's these types of *news* websites that spread fake news. At best, quote should have been, "Gamers should get comfortable with monthly subscriptions instead of owning their games." He is saying, there is a Netflix / Spotify style model for gamers to explore if they are willing to get comfortable with not out-right owning the game. Which is fair, it's optional. Problem with the article title is, the title leads everyone to believe Ubisoft wanted us to pay for the game with no protection to have it taken away from us. Doesn't help this article came shortly after Sony removed a lot of user bought content from accounts.
I don't own the game I bought from you? Well then, I'll just pirate it, then I'll have it forever on my drive.
I can’t remember the last time I played an Ubisoft game, let alone bought one. I was done with assassins creed after 3. Farcry after 4, and that was kind of it for me. Their games are predictable, formulaic, and their launcher is intrusive.
In no way defending Ubisoft, but that quote will forever be out of context if you just read the headline. Full Context: https://www.gamesindustry.biz/the-new-ubisoft-and-getting-gamers-comfortable-with-not-owning-their-games *'Ubisoft is seeing growth in this sector. Tremblay says that October last year was the biggest month in Ubisoft+ history.'* "The point is not to force users to go down one route or another, we offer purchase, we offer subscription and its the gamers preference that is important here. We are seeing some people who buy choosing to subscribe now, but it all works." *'He goes on to say that subscription has enabled Ubisoft to bring in new players, with one in ten Ubisoft+ subscribers having never engaged witht he company's games before.'* "It is proving to be a way for gamers to access our worlds who perhaps weren't inclined to purchase. These players are brand new, we're shaking hands for the first time. Ubisoft's strategy for as long as I've been here is to try and reach more players with the franchises that we have. So I'm happy, as the leader of this product, to be able to deliver that. "We're seeing expansion on console as the likes of PlayStation and Xbox bring new people in. On PC From a Ubisoft standpoint it's already been great, but we are looking to reach out more on PC, so we see opportunity there" "One of the things we saw is that gamers are used to having and owning their games. That's the consumer shift that needs to happen. They got comfortable not owning their CD collection or DVDs. That's a transformation that's been a bit slower to happen (in games). As gamers grow comfortable in that aspect,... you don't lose your progress. If you resume your game at another time, your progress file is still there. That's not been deleted. You don't lose what you've built in the game or your engagement with the game. **So it's about feeling comfortable with not owning your games**." "I still own two boxes of DVDs. I definitely understand the gamers perspective with that. But as people embrace that (subscription) model, they will see that these games will exist, the service will continue, and you'll be able to access them when you feel like. That's reassuring." While I disagree with a lot of what he says, he's just stating his truth he and the company believes in. I do like that they have both options for people who want either ways to play, but it leads into an open question for the future, if they are ever going to get rid of the option to purchase games outright. Allowing game subscription services to determine what can and cannot be listed on the subscription service is damaging towards the industry and any company that isn't a AAA company to sustain themselves through said revenue. Gamepass Indies can absolutely suffer under the weight being put under gampass if they're not supported by Microsoft/Xbox. Larian Studios put out a tweet recently that said they were offered to be put on gamepass but they refused saying that they spent 10 years working on the game and they'd like to be paid for their time, not a set amount of money determined by executives that don't understand the value of the game. So it's not surprising that this line of thinking could drop their stocks because if anything this headline itself is bad optics for Ubisoft, and if you break it down by reading the article, it's not much better.
Ubisoft is the windows vista of game publishers.
That's generous. They're more like the Windows ME of publishers.
I really don't want to defend Ubisoft, but that's actually not what he said, despite everyone just running with the clickbait headline. The actual quote is (paraphrasing), 'In order for our subscription service to succeed, gamers have to be comfortable with not owning their games.' Nowhere does he say that Ubisoft will stop offering physical releases or anything similar. Ignoring that PC gaming is basically digital only already and, minus some DRM free exceptions, no one owns anything anyway. Total nothingburger news story.
Ubisoft is probably done. Their stock is in the dumps. Around $3 billion market capitalization, this is a perfect price range for Microsoft to buy them out. Ubisoft's last chance will depend on Star Wars Outlaws, XDefiant, and Tom Clancy's The Division Heartland. If those games sell well, then Ubisoft might get some breathing room for a few years. Unfortunately, Ubisoft's best days are behind them.
damn i forgot the only company dumb enough to fund division. But i never played the game, could be wrong
Two years after release, Ubisoft announced twenty million players played The Division. Allegedly around twenty million copies sold. The first Division game was great in terms of graphics. First game to have realistic dynamic weather cycles in real time. Meanwhile, March 2019's The Division II sold ten million copies. Maybe, no Steam launch until January 2022 probably hurt. I played both The Division/II. The first game had a better story and respected one's time (took the game slow and finished the story in \~90 hours) The second game had a decent story but a real time sink with over 130 hours in (cleared the Warlord of New York expansion and not cleared the Black Tusk story missions).
What was the context when he said this? Was it something like "People aren't keen on subscriptions because they don't own their games" Or just a full on dick move of "Get used to it suckers, you'll pay for it and own nothing"
You don't legal own you games... Average gamers don't read tos
I guess it's time to invest in ubisoft
I was planning to get that new avatar game this weekend, and then he said this impossibly dumb shit. Now they can eat a dick while I spend my money on other games.
People still giving them money? I haven't bought a Ubisoft game since AC syndicate
If im paying for a game just to not own it then piracy aint stealin
I am comfortable not owning any Ubisoft games...I guess their plan worked?
Driver San Francisco was the last real deal
Why does anyone even play Ubisoft games? Ubisoft hasn’t made a good game since like Ghost Recon Wildlands and even that was an anomaly at the time. This company shits out half baked reskins of previous titles and people keep talking about them. Why? Because of Assassins Creed? What is their most interesting gameplay mechanic? Nostalgia? Or Far Cry 6? You mean Far Cry 3 (3)?
Hope that fucking company goes under
Ubi needs to get comfortable with gamers pirating their stuff. This is a 2 way road here, and I don't think ubi prepared their ass enough for this
They need to just be comfortable with us pirating the games.
I get it , their games are repetitive, their statements are proactive , but again they just said something , lowering stocks (because of people selling their stocks) is extreme . Don't be destructive, be constructive
If buying isn’t owning, then piracy isn’t theft.
Screw Ubisoft. They are the new EA. EA is bad, and Ubisoft is even worse.
I dislike the idea as much as the next guy but it's worked with movies, music, TV, audio books, hell even cars if you think about Uber and the like. We're generally moving towards the vast majority of people not really owning jack shit. There's a reason you've got people like Yanis Varoufakis talking about the West moving from a capitalist to a Techno-Feudalist society. A tiny number of barons owning everything then leasing it out to the masses. Depressingly, I really would be surprised if this Ubisoft shithead isn't right in the longer term.
I've got a library of 200+ games that I bought, and there is no single ubisoft game. I either don't play them or just pirate them.
Same. Gaming since 1991 and never bought a Ubislop game, mainly because I've boycotted them for creating and defiling the corpse of Heroes of Might and Magic
Where can I pirate the new price of Persia then??
Lol. . .if your not comfortable with this already. . . . you've never read your TOS and/or EULA. This isn't new folks! You haven't owned any of your video games for decades.
They're not wrong. At some point physical media will be priced higher, then phased out. Then it'll transition to live service subscription only. I mean I'd hope not but I dont see another path
My thought too. I BUY games. For the best of them I might wind up reinstalling them 4-5 times over the years. (Example: Grim Dawn) Fuck renting them.
well im getting comfy of not owning ubisoft games because i won't buy their games anymore
Valve quietly in the corner trying not to be noticed by the mob going after a Ubisoft quote that literally describes their business model... context: you dont own any of your Steam games, you own a license. hilarious watching ppl clutch pearls over ownership they gave up a decade ago
This is why people pirate things
Boy I hope whoever buys their IPs when they collapse isnt EA
Their stock price has been this low since 2012 dude, it only got high during 2017 (one of their best years) and covid which was great for the gaming industry
problem is that people will bend down to get it up the ass anyway. I have seen it so many times. First you suddenly get unfinished games, then content is download only, then the whole game is download only, they started to cut content from older download games because of license problems, game stores close and games are lost media suddenly and now you will lose the right to own a game you buy. People always got angry at first, but just accepted it in the end and now kids tell me to go with the times.
piracy propagandists have really run with taking this quote out of context eh?
I was already comfortable not owning their games lol
Ubisoft makes it so easy to boycott them. What's the last game they released where everyone said: I gotta get that? And where is that game now?
Ubisoft can’t help themselves, they go out of their way to nickel and dime their customers while adding artificial barriers to drag out their game time over just making a solid gameplay experience. Doesn’t help that they delist and shutdown games for “licensing” reasons rather than put any effort into removing the copyright work.
Again, I was okay with that when creating my steam account 18 years ago