why only 15k players on a 15 day old game

[Monty Hall]

why is no one playing this? i see 10 y/o games with a 100k + users . what happened ?
is it not appealing to the target audience 18-25 white males ..

[5ean5ean]

Its midnight on a weekday where I am. We have these things called jobs and school.

[The_Box]

This dude's so dedicated to the idea that this game HAS to fail that he's watching the SteamDB page for a game he doesn't even own or want to play in order to post the player numbers on the forum because he thinks the numbers are bad.

It's still holding a respectable number in the overall charts given the fact that only a small portion of the playerbase is even on Steam.

[sidray749]

find another hobby other than checking steam db every minute and jacking off your ego

[Smirk]

Ubisoft stock has tanked, they're closing down offices, laying people off, getting taken over by foreign investors, but everything is fine.

Snow White is doing fine too, according to these moonbats.

[WolfEisberg]

Smirk lähetti viestin:

Ubisoft stock has tanked, they're closing down offices, laying people off, getting taken over by foreign investors, but everything is fine.

Snow White is doing fine too, according to these moonbats.

Ubisoft stock has been tanking for 5+ years. Though its stocks started go up again after the annoucement of 3 million players, but then Ubisoft announced the subsiderary deal with Tencent and that made investors upset which made the stocks drop again, so that has nothing to do with the sales of the game.

The closure of the office and the layoff of its employees were announced back in January, so that has nothing to do with the sales of the game either.

https://www.eurogamer.net/ubisoft-announces-studio-closure-as-it-lays-off-185-staff

Ubisoft is not being taken over by foreign investors. 25% isn't a take over, its a minority investment, and with that investment it was announced that Ubisoft is in control.

Anything else you want to be wrong about?

[5ean5ean]

WolfEisberg lähetti viestin:

Smirk lähetti viestin:

Ubisoft stock has tanked, they're closing down offices, laying people off, getting taken over by foreign investors, but everything is fine.

Snow White is doing fine too, according to these moonbats.

Ubisoft stock has been tanking for 5+ years. Though its stocks started go up again after the annoucement of 3 million players, but then Ubisoft announced the subsiderary deal with Tencent and that made investors upset which made the stocks drop again, so that has nothing to do with the sales of the game.

The closure of the office and the layoff of its employees were announced back in January, so that has nothing to do with the sales of the game either.

https://www.eurogamer.net/ubisoft-announces-studio-closure-as-it-lays-off-185-staff

Ubisoft is not being taken over by foreign investors. 25% isn't a take over, its a minority investment, and with that investment it was announced that Ubisoft is in control.

Anything else you want to be wrong about?

Don't bother.... its there job to do mental gymnastics on Steam forums to deny reality.

Thier boycott failed and they are still in the grieving process. Acceptance will come eventually.

[Smirk]

WolfEisberg lähetti viestin:

Ubisoft stock has been tanking for 5+ years.

Why do you think more data points of crappy sales equating further stock devaluations serves your stance more than mine?

WolfEisberg lähetti viestin:

The closure of the office and the layoff of its employees were announced back in January, so that has nothing to do with the sales of the game either.

Pre-sales can and are used as a good measuring stick for future sales. This was done to appear more attractive to outside investors because their games aren't selling well enough to justify their size.

Expect more cuts in the future.

WolfEisberg lähetti viestin:

Ubisoft is not being taken over by foreign investors. 25% isn't a take over, its a minority investment, and with that investment it was announced that Ubisoft is in control.

Their presence is saving the company.

Expect to see different approaches to the development of Ubisoft IPs in the future.

[WolfEisberg]

Smirk lähetti viestin:

Why do you think more data points of crappy sales equating further stock devaluations serves your stance more than mine?

You cut off everything else I said, which literally answers your question because the context is important, and these facts paint a factual story against what you were trying to do.

I said "Though its stocks started go up again after the annoucement of 3 million players, but then Ubisoft announced the subsiderary deal with Tencent and that made investors upset which made the stocks drop again, so that has nothing to do with the sales of the game."

Pre-sales can and are used as a good measuring stick for future sales. This was done to appear more attractive to outside investors because their games aren't selling well enough to justify their size.

Expect more cuts in the future.

Nope. In their reports to investors they stated they were happy with the pre-order results.

Ubisoft has been enacting a cost cutting reduction program for over a year now, even before Shadows was up for pre-order. The UK office is nothing more than a part of that cost cutting program. That cost cutting program is to help fix the problem the company has been in for the last 5ish years.

Their presence is saving the company.

Not the same as being taken over. Their money investment is helping the company.

Expect to see different approaches to the development of Ubisoft IPs in the future.

considering the 5ish years of mostly failures, that is probably a good thing, they need a different approach and not keep on doing the same thing they have been doing for the last 5ish years.

[Smirk]

WolfEisberg lähetti viestin:

Though its stocks started go up again after the annoucement of 3 million players, but then Ubisoft announced the subsiderary deal with Tencent and that made investors upset which made the stocks drop again, so that has nothing to do with the sales of the game.

It's hovered around 3 bucks or less, regardless of the numbers put out by Ubi. The acceptance and timing of the Tencent investment isn't a coincidence, and wouldn't have needed to happen if Shadows was a huge success.

Nope. In their reports to investors they stated they were happy with the pre-order results.

And a criminals report to the police/judge is that he is innocent. What else do you expect a company to tell investors?

Ubisoft has been enacting a cost cutting reduction program for over a year now, even before Shadows was up for pre-order. The UK office is nothing more than a part of that cost cutting program. That cost cutting program is to help fix the problem the company has been in for the last 5ish years.

And expect cuts to continue, as Shadows isn't a success, like many of their other recent games.

Not the same as being taken over. Their money investment is helping the company.

It's saving the company. Guess what you tell the investors keeping your company afloat, especially one with such a stellar track record?

You tell them "Yes sir."

considering the 5ish years of mostly failures, that is probably a good thing, they need a different approach and not keep on doing the same thing they have been doing for the last 5ish years.

And if it happens, it's due to Tencent's input/pressure. Ubi refused to change for 5 years, you can't pretend that it's just a coincidence that these changes occur after Tencent and be taken seriously.

[Nohiro]

The_Box lähetti viestin:

This dude's so dedicated to the idea that this game HAS to fail that he's watching the SteamDB page for a game he doesn't even own or want to play in order to post the player numbers on the forum because he thinks the numbers are bad.

It's still holding a respectable number in the overall charts given the fact that only a small portion of the playerbase is even on Steam.

IT's not that the game has to fail the game failed. Tencent got 25 pourcent of the company and will continue to eat it bit by bit until nothing remains, so this game was supposed to save ubisoft so so so hard that on release date it tanked the stock price again, the don't talk about copies sold (but players) etc etc So yeah the game failed. Even if ubisoft made the greatest game of all time (and not only mediocre games) people will still not purchase it... they had to many of these , too many bad practices for people to give them an other chance they are the ones who made it this way, by treating the players poorly for years. Let say... You worked at a company like that, you were treated like garbage because you wanted to change things while activist were playing around screwing up the project you cared about , would you like it ? This making the art director leave, and most of your team too because of the work condition and low pay, would you like it ? When a director of the said project say in front of everyone in a public chat of the company that he is looking to find a way to only hire women (which is discrimination it's illegal) but no one says nothing cause he has been at the company for 25 years and only cares about genders instead of people who can actually do the job they are hired for, would you like to work there ? Cause I can tell you a million stories like that.

[WolfEisberg]

It's hovered around 3 bucks or less, regardless of the numbers put out by Ubi. The acceptance and timing of the Tencent investment isn't a coincidence, and wouldn't have needed to happen if Shadows was a huge success.

That deal would have been in the works for many months, maybe even more than a year before the game even released. THat deal was going to happen regardless of the sales of Shadows, if anything if Shadows didn't do well enough Tencent might have been able to back out of the deal.

There was no way that Shadows was ever going to be enough to save the company from it's 5+ years problem, even if it did just as well as Ubisoft's most successful game in their entire history, Vahalla.

[quote[ And a criminals report to the police/judge is that he is innocent. What else do you expect a company to tell investors? [/quote]

Lying to investors is against the law, carries massive fines, and even possible jail time. There is no reason to believe that Ubisoft CEO would take such a massive risk.

And expect cuts to continue, as Shadows isn't a success, like many of their other recent games.

Ubisoft said a long while ago that their cost cutting program is going to continue through FY2026. So yes, that is going to happen, and it would happen regardless of the success of Shadows because there is no way that a single success would ever be enough to fix the 5+years of problems. Also, by all accounts so far this game is looking to be Ubisoft second biggest success in their history judging this games performance compared to Vahalla that is Ubisoft's biggest success in their history.

It's saving the company. Guess what you tell the investors keeping your company afloat, especially one with such a stellar track record?

You tell them "Yes sir."

The 1ish Billion isn't going to be enough to keep them afloat, but it can help them get on the right track. And as per the usual for when having minority investors, while they can make recommendations, the ultimate decision is the one who is in control, which is not Tencent.

And if it happens, it's due to Tencent's input/pressure. Ubi refused to change for 5 years, you can't pretend that it's just a coincidence that these changes occur after Tencent and be taken seriously.

Tencent has been pretty hands off with their investments. There isn't any reason to believe they are going to be anymore hands on. Considering that the plan for cost cutting has been a program in affect for years before Tencent even did that 25% investment into a subsidiary, and Ubisoft saying that this program will go through FY 2026, again before Tencent's recent investment, its clear that anything that happens from now on is also a part of Ubisoft's cost cutting program.

[Nohiro]

WolfEisberg lähetti viestin:

It's hovered around 3 bucks or less, regardless of the numbers put out by Ubi. The acceptance and timing of the Tencent investment isn't a coincidence, and wouldn't have needed to happen if Shadows was a huge success.

That deal would have been in the works for many months, maybe even more than a year before the game even released. THat deal was going to happen regardless of the sales of Shadows, if anything if Shadows didn't do well enough Tencent might have been able to back out of the deal.

There was no way that Shadows was ever going to be enough to save the company from it's 5+ years problem, even if it did just as well as Ubisoft's most successful game in their entire history, Vahalla.

[quote[ And a criminals report to the police/judge is that he is innocent. What else do you expect a company to tell investors? [/quote]

Lying to investors is against the law, carries massive fines, and even possible jail time. There is no reason to believe that Ubisoft CEO would take such a massive risk.

And expect cuts to continue, as Shadows isn't a success, like many of their other recent games.

Ubisoft said a long while ago that their cost cutting program is going to continue through FY2026. So yes, that is going to happen, and it would happen regardless of the success of Shadows because there is no way that a single success would ever be enough to fix the 5+years of problems. Also, by all accounts so far this game is looking to be Ubisoft second biggest success in their history judging this games performance compared to Vahalla that is Ubisoft's biggest success in their history.

It's saving the company. Guess what you tell the investors keeping your company afloat, especially one with such a stellar track record?

You tell them "Yes sir."

The 1ish Billion isn't going to be enough to keep them afloat, but it can help them get on the right track. And as per the usual for when having minority investors, while they can make recommendations, the ultimate decision is the one who is in control, which is not Tencent.

And if it happens, it's due to Tencent's input/pressure. Ubi refused to change for 5 years, you can't pretend that it's just a coincidence that these changes occur after Tencent and be taken seriously.

Tencent has been pretty hands off with their investments. There isn't any reason to believe they are going to be anymore hands on. Considering that the plan for cost cutting has been a program in affect for years before Tencent even did that 25% investment into a subsidiary, and Ubisoft saying that this program will go through FY 2026, again before Tencent's recent investment, its clear that anything that happens from now on is also a part of Ubisoft's cost cutting program.

Tencent was an investor in ubisoft before that 25 pourcent thingy, they bought a ton of shares like 3 -4 years ago.

[DarkRighteousFistOfLords]

Monty Hall lähetti viestin:

is it not appealing to the target audience 18-25 white males ..

What does appeal to that demographic these days, besides Joe Rogan, Asmongold and Andrew Tate, because they can't figure out their own masculinity or form an independent thought without a podcast or a YouTube grifter to do their thinking for them?

*rolls eyes*

Glad I don't have to wake up in the morning being one of those chronically miserable people, living in a world where everything is woke and women hate me. Tough times.

[WolfEisberg]

Nohiro lähetti viestin:

Tencent got 25 pourcent of the company and will continue to eat it bit by bit until nothing remains,

THat deal and plan would have been in the works for many months, even a year, prior to it happening. That deal was going to happen regardless of the success of Shadows. Heck, its possible that Tencent might have been able to back out of the deal if Shadows didn't do well enough.

so this game was supposed to save ubisoft so so so hard that on release date it tanked the stock price again,

the stock price didn't tank by that much on release. What made it tank really hard is the Tencent deal for the new subsiderary that the investors didn't like. Just before that deal was announced, the 3 million player number was announced and the stock price increased by a lot. Then later in that day the tencent deal was announced and that made the stocks tank the next day.

the don't talk about copies sold (but players)

As per the usual for Ubisoft regardless of how success the game is. Vahalla was Ubisoft's most successful game in their history and they also only shared players numbers in the short time after release. They didn't share sales units and revenue until 2 years later when they announced that it sold over 20 million copies and over a $billion in revenue. The last known player number for Vahalla, prior to the 2 year announcement, that they announced was like 2.5 Million players which was announced some time during the first week.

So even if Shadows got the same kind of success as Vahalla, which there would be zero reason for Ubisoft to believe it would have done better than Vahalla in a non covid time, it would have not been enough to fix the 5+ years of problems. One games success was never going to be enough.

etc etc So yeah the game failed. Even if ubisoft made the greatest game of all time (and not only mediocre games) people will still not purchase it... they had to many of these , too many bad practices for people to give them an other chance they are the ones who made it this way, by treating the players poorly for years. Let say... You worked at a company like that, you were treated like garbage because you wanted to change things while activist were playing around screwing up the project you cared about , would you like it ? This making the art director leave, and most of your team too because of the work condition and low pay, would you like it ? When a director of the said project say in front of everyone in a public chat of the company that he is looking to find a way to only hire women (which is discrimination it's illegal) but no one says nothing cause he has been at the company for 25 years and only cares about genders instead of people who can actually do the job they are hired for, would you like to work there ? Cause I can tell you a million stories like that.

I doubt vast majority of gamers even know anything about what you are talking about. All of that would have been irrelevant to the point of people like you would have been nothing more than a tiny miniscule blip.

[WolfEisberg]

Nohiro lähetti viestin:

WolfEisberg lähetti viestin:

That deal would have been in the works for many months, maybe even more than a year before the game even released. THat deal was going to happen regardless of the sales of Shadows, if anything if Shadows didn't do well enough Tencent might have been able to back out of the deal.

There was no way that Shadows was ever going to be enough to save the company from it's 5+ years problem, even if it did just as well as Ubisoft's most successful game in their entire history, Vahalla.



Lying to investors is against the law, carries massive fines, and even possible jail time. There is no reason to believe that Ubisoft CEO would take such a massive risk.



Ubisoft said a long while ago that their cost cutting program is going to continue through FY2026. So yes, that is going to happen, and it would happen regardless of the success of Shadows because there is no way that a single success would ever be enough to fix the 5+years of problems. Also, by all accounts so far this game is looking to be Ubisoft second biggest success in their history judging this games performance compared to Vahalla that is Ubisoft's biggest success in their history.



The 1ish Billion isn't going to be enough to keep them afloat, but it can help them get on the right track. And as per the usual for when having minority investors, while they can make recommendations, the ultimate decision is the one who is in control, which is not Tencent.



Tencent has been pretty hands off with their investments. There isn't any reason to believe they are going to be anymore hands on. Considering that the plan for cost cutting has been a program in affect for years before Tencent even did that 25% investment into a subsidiary, and Ubisoft saying that this program will go through FY 2026, again before Tencent's recent investment, its clear that anything that happens from now on is also a part of Ubisoft's cost cutting program.

Tencent was an investor in ubisoft before that 25 pourcent thingy, they bought a ton of shares like 3 -4 years ago.

Tencent owns about 10% investment into Ubisoft, its not a ton.