Don't Expect Any Early Reviews For The Crew

lol

I don't even blame Ubisoft. They have no obligation to provide early review copies. I blame the players who pre-order games or buy them blindly on day one.

@sravankb: South Park: Stick of Truth, Valiant Hearts and Child of Light were all great.

That is fair enough. But they had better hope that there are no online connection issues or anything else that will make the game unplayable.

Wouldn't it be amazing if the Giant Bomb crew just completely ignored The Crew and subsequent other games that pulled this bullshit?

For example: any time it's brought up in conversation by someone Jeff just says "what game are you talking about?" etc.

Just completely fucking ignore it to oblivion. Fucking Ubisoft.

I want to see what the PROS think before I buy!

lol

@obsideondarman:

Not really, seeing as how none of them are five year olds.

Conclusion. This game sucks ass.

I agree with JF Sterling Son on this, that it could just be making sure those reviews are not rushed.

Or it could suck ass as many Oobee games are want to do lately and it's a coverup.

The reviews would probably be more favorable in an environment where the online is more likely to work such as when only reviewers have copies. So people baking up conspiracy theories about Ubisoft being deceptive, take a break lol

This does the opposite of that, Jeff has said that the first reviews online are the ones that get all the pageviews, so everyone will be tripping over their dicks to publish reviews by the 3rd or 4th.

The Crew is currently having a beta on both XBOX ONE and PS4. I've played about an hour of it so far. Not impressed, seems like Need for Speed with a little bit better graphics and more arcadey handling. Not interested...

But if you go and buy a game the second the stores open their doors without waiting for any reviews or coverage it's instantly a conspiracy or an "embargo fiasco" because no one has the time to wait a few hours much less an entire day before rushing out and grabbing a game off the shelf. After all they only make like 5 of them a year so better act fast, thats why I need those reviews weeks ahead of time.

Yo, Ubisoft:

Enjoy a year of me purchasing 0 of your titles.

Here we go again!

Ubisoft has to have the most pathetic PR of any business on the planet. There is no reason for the average person to trust this statement after the shit they've pulled this year. They think they can play the same card as Bungie. The difference is that Bungie played their card well, while Ubisoft consistently goes all in on shit hands.

So basiclly Ubisoft is saying:

"Expect a game so broken as AC Unity, because we won't allow any reviews before launch".

The average person doesn't read up on gaming sites in advance. They hear the latest, see ads and buy it if it looks interesting to them. Don't be ignorant.

This is so insanely out of touch and pretentious. Ubisoft just stop.

I don't see a problem with Ubisoft's position. Let the game premier as intended and be reviewed as such. If the servers can't handle it, or something else breaks, it will be unfortunate, but fair for the reviews it gets.

I have friends who are so called "average people", and while they don't check gaming sites every day like us enthusiasts, they do sometimes check on news about their favorite game series. They are, for example, Call of Duty fans or Assassin's Creed fans, and these friends of mine only check that kind of news. This often comes from the developer or the publisher of said games. The friends I have who like the AC games have told me that they were very disappointed with Unity and that they weren't sure whether or not the next one would be any better. Now, they're still going to be fans of AC, but they've some lost trust in the news they're getting. The next time they see Ubisoft talk about how great the next AC will be, they will take that with more than a grain of salt until Ubisoft makes a better game than Unity.

Don't argue about the semantics of the "average person" because either way, the "average person" isn't going to trust the boy who cried wolf if the wolf doesn't come, no matter the source of information, even if that source is nothing. The "average person" isn't a clueless naif, and while they won't see this article, they will still have the distrust like most of the people in this comments section apparently have.

I don't see the problem with this. Funnily enough we'll still see day one reviews. Games media everyone.

Give them the benefit of the doubt. If they truly expect this to be 10x better with a good size population then let them put their money where their mouth is. Just hang out, and see if it is any good, and if it isn't then you can throw shade but for now just let it be.

I am pretty stoked for this game.

Cough cough, we don't have much confidence in our own product so we're not letting you review it until people are already buying it. Ciao.

Well this is a multiplayer only game right? And considering how messed up the servers have been for several recent major releases I would honestly not put any faith in a review that didn't spent at least several days with servers at full capacity anyways. I get the desire for launch day or earlier reviews, but I'd prefer an accurate review a week later over an inaccurate review a week early.

@supa_kappa: To be fair they actually have a case with this, as Bungie/Acti had with Destiny.

Why is everyone so hostile over this?

The Unity embargoe was slightly dumb but now Ubisoft is the Devil? I don't see anything wrong with this and it benefits the consumer. How many times have we seen games get good reviews only to have the online be broken as soon as it goes live.

Haven't they talked about waiting to run reviews of heavily multiplayer games until they launch and they know how they perform in real world scenarios? It seems like what GB does is perfectly in line with what Ubisoft is looking for in this case.

It is because most of these people already dislike Ubisoft for one reason or another, and most other people have nothing to say about this topic. So kinda neutral news like this will always attract negative comments because people aren't going to chime in and say "I have no strong feelings about this news".

The embargo was one of many problems with Unity. Usually after a trainwreck like this you expect some kind of assurances that it won't happen again, instead Ubisofts response is a blogpost saying "we don't care" in PR speak. How exactly does this benefit the consumer? Review copies of online only games has been done many times in the past but now it can't be done anymore.

I enjoyed the beta and had no problem pre-ordering the game because of it. Granted, at that point it was really a demo and I treated it as such, but I'm looking forward to it all the same.

Was/is AC: Unity broken? No doubt of that, but it is being worked on and will work fine in time. Does that justify it in most people's eyes? No. But here's the tricky part for people to admit: Most everyone online (along with quite a few people here it seems) are so stoked at the idea of bashing a new Ubisoft, EA or Activision game that it really doesn't matter how it turns out.

Any flaw, regardless of severity? A betrayal. The hint of micro transactions, no matter how seemingly insignificant? A twisted knife, planted squarely in our poor gullible little backs. It's a joke to hear some of you people.

I don't pre-order games for exclusive content or the company in question's bottom line, I do it to support the idea; the potential. Have I been burned before? Of course, but I was happy to at least show support instead of the common rage I'm seeing around here.

Folks say that a pre-order is just blind faith. I propose a retort for the naysayers - You're cowards.

See how easy it is to rock the hyperbole you seem to like so much? Here's an idea - How about we actually wait and see how the game is before we automatically assume it's garbage due to some timeline on when it can be discussed?

Crazy thought, I know, but hey, it might catch on!

I regretted purchasing Unity for PS4. It was a terribly unpleasant experience in terms of technical problems and a boring, stale game to boot. It was my mistake for grabbing the game before the reviews came out. To see such a broken product ship caused me so much shock that I canceled my preorder for Far Cry 4 (I know that Jeff always preaches against preorders and now I understand why). I waited for the reviews to come out before picking it up. Thankfully, I have run into zero issues on the PS4 and have played about 5 hours and really enjoy it. But my trust has been broken with Ubisoft at this point. I don't buy the PR argument about wanting reviewers to test the game with a full community. To me it seems like they want to grab up all the preorders and day one purchasers before the game is officially licensed for review. Call me cynical but Unity was beyond the pale in terms of trash being released under the banner of a Triple A title.

Played the beta on the Xbox One last night. No connection issues at all. All seemed pretty stable to me.

However, I was bored after the first race and didn't like the handling on any of the vehicles I tried.

Opening up events by driving into radar stations - hilarious though.

Klepek strikes again!

Also this game... Will not be good.

@bollard: I have played this game in the Beta, it was pretty fun as far as open world racing games are concerned.

@humanity: Admittedly I didn't ever get into the beta, but all my hopes were shot with the 30fps on PC and floaty looking handling. Also towers.

@bollard: They give you a reason to get off the beaten path. I dunno depends what you like I suppose. In Forza you gotta look for "hidden garages" or whatever. At some point in a driving game you need a reason to drive somewhere and hooking up to a radio tower is as good as any I suppose.

How did the reviews for BF4, Drive Club, and Master Chief Collection benefit the consumer? Review copies of online games is silly because you're giving the reviewer an experience which may or may not be the same as the consumer will experience. You're already seeing sites hold their reviews for online heavy games.

As a consumer, don't you want the review to be based on the experience you'll have?

Activision went through this, EA did too. It's only fair Ubisoft.

SMH.

"Properly understood" = "realized as shit by players"

Ubisoft is giving EA and Activision a run for their money as the worst publisher in the industry. In my opinion, they've already clinched it.

I am going to quote Yahtzee:

A good game should be good enough to stand on its own and not require you to play with others to make it good.

I have yet to see any game prove that wrong other than multiplayer games. Yes, games like Destiny are more fun with more people around, but it's still fun without them, just less so. Also, the problems the game has are not diminished by playing with others. If The Crew sucks when you play it by yourself, it will still suck while playing with others. Just less so. That doesn't mean you can't form an opinion over it.

Look come on y'all this embargo thing until launch is not a big deal. Just wait a couple of weeks before not buying this game is all.

(hey, we read reviews, too!)

Translation: We read all the reviews about some of our most recent games and decided that finishing games, getting them reviewed, and then shipping them costs time and money and it's better for our bottom line to ship an unfinished game directly to you the consumer and still get your money.

Here's an odd thought, when I order meat, and it's under-cooked, you can send it back to get properly cooked. Can we start doing that with games?

Well, here's another one I dislike. Considering it's going to probably get the same middling scores as Destiny - AT BEST - and will likely be another dissapointment on top of the disastrous Unity, well, Ubi's in a pickle. It's kinda fucked up that Farcry 4 and the next-gen port of Rayman Legends are the only things they've put out that are worth anything to anyone this year.

I don't know why people keep lumping Activision in with EA and Ubi. I've yet to see them withhold game reviews or anything else, and no matter how much hipsters hate Call of Duty or Skylanders, those games tend not to be broken as shit. There's no Activision analog for Uplay or Origin, the only DLC that ever comes out for CoD are inconsequential for those who aren't super heavy into the multiplayer, they don't lie to our faces about games being complete when they're not, and while they do have aggressive release schedules with games, they're also the fastest to stop doing things that don't work. Is it really because people on forums dislike Call of Duty? I'd like to think that people can distinguish "publishes and makes money from a series I dislike" from "actively trying to bullshit consumers and press."

@professor_t: Destiny did not have a good launch.