Hailinel's forum posts

#2 Posted by Hailinel (25787 posts) -

@professor_t: Destiny had a prelaunch alpha and beta. That didn't help the problems people had with it at launch.

#3 Posted by Hailinel (25787 posts) -

Yeeeeah, not going to trust Ubisoft on this. Staying far, far away.

#4 Posted by Hailinel (25787 posts) -

@chaser324: Small sample size or no, MCC is a game that it's fanbase had every reason to expect it would function on day one. Or day seven. It's a not insignificant failure.

#5 Posted by Hailinel (25787 posts) -

@nardak said:


Ubisoft should have made these fixes before the game was even released. At this point the problems are so widely known among the gaming public that there is really no point in hiding these problems.

Also the only way that Ubisoft can try to fix the damage done to its public image is to be forthcoming when it comes to these problems regarding the game.

There has been speculation that Ubisoft released the game withouth fixing these problems because its stockholders would have probably suffered losses if the game would have been delayed. The embargo gives evidence to this speculation.

Recently quite a few games have been released in a somewhat unoptimized state. Publishers really need to tighten up their quality control.

Sadly, it's not always QA that's the problem. I'd wager that most of the issues that the game shipped with were already known and were declared "Won't Fix" or had their fixes delayed until after release. Not the dev team's ideal call, but they had to be pressured by higher-ups and the release date they had no control over. And of course, now they're taking heat and being seen as incompetent despite being forced to ready the game for a deadline that they couldn't possibly meet with the game in acceptable quality.

#6 Posted by Hailinel (25787 posts) -

What's their other option at this point? Continue to act oblivious and deny the issues exist? Ubisoft PR is backed into a corner they can't spin their way out of.

#7 Edited by Hailinel (25787 posts) -

More proof that optional stuff in games can really degrade the whole experience. I'm sure some exec said 'it's not like you *need* these chests, so no harm no foul'.

Optional content by itself doesn't hurt the game. It's asking the player to perform ridiculous backflips like Ubisoft is asking just to access a subset of the game's content that's ridiculous.

#8 Edited by Hailinel (25787 posts) -

Maybe I'm just not interested in point and click adventure games any longer, but with the art style this seems like a lot of money, and a lot of development time.

Development costs are more than just the art style.

#9 Posted by Hailinel (25787 posts) -

There are still games being made for previous-generation hardware, so is it fair to judge?