are you surprised AC:S sells well ?

[Frog]

its a AC game. how the ♥♥♥♥ are you surprised it sold well ?

according to gameplay reviews, the game isnt bad. its not the best stealth game out there and doesnt look like AC game, which is why i wont play it, but it still got the title AC.

[Frog]

Początkowo opublikowane przez Ongen:

No they dont, if it was a success they wouldnt have let Tencent grab 25% of their shares in the IPs they want for 1.25 billion to pay off debt. Tencent saved them from going extinct, if Tencent didnt get involved Ubisoft would have been history. Can you cope any harder ? ;P

Początkowo opublikowane przez The Kloecken Duiver:

Ubisoft stock price indicates the opposite.
Over the past 30 days they went down 32% from 13.3 eur to 9.06 eur

since when did you guys become such experts in the stock market. i doubt you even know what a stock is.

there are a billion things we dont know and we dont know why the sale happened.
activision was sold to microsoft and they did not have any problems. that sale made alot of money to many people and bumped the stock value by ALOT.

all you do is guess and you are so convinced of it, while you have no idea what really happens.


*Tencent are famous for predatory moneization, why are you cheering them anyway ?

[Lucifer Verone]

Sold well how? All i see is 60k peak. Barely worth mentioning, everyone outside this bubble says this game is boring and uninspiring. I mean its on subscription, it hasnt sold well and yet we have articles saying this game sold more than Kcd and is trailing behind MHW. Im gonna need to see the actual numbers to believe that.

[Jem]

Początkowo opublikowane przez Frog:

*Tencent are famous for predatory moneization, why are you cheering them anyway ?

You mean Ubisoft isn't famous for predatory monetization too ? The multiple 40 dollars DLCs with 0 content ? The ending of AC shadows cut to be in the form of a DLC later? The NFTs in game ? The Uplay accounts shutdowned ? And so on...

[Weltall8000]

Początkowo opublikowane przez Lucifer Verone:

Sold well how? All i see is 60k peak. Barely worth mentioning, everyone outside this bubble says this game is boring and uninspiring. I mean its on subscription, it hasnt sold well and yet we have articles saying this game sold more than Kcd and is trailing behind MHW. Im gonna need to see the actual numbers to believe that.

#2 YTD by revenue and 80% recommended on Steam.

[Ongen]

Początkowo opublikowane przez Frog:

Początkowo opublikowane przez Ongen:

No they dont, if it was a success they wouldnt have let Tencent grab 25% of their shares in the IPs they want for 1.25 billion to pay off debt. Tencent saved them from going extinct, if Tencent didnt get involved Ubisoft would have been history. Can you cope any harder ? ;P

Początkowo opublikowane przez The Kloecken Duiver:

Ubisoft stock price indicates the opposite.
Over the past 30 days they went down 32% from 13.3 eur to 9.06 eur

since when did you guys become such experts in the stock market. i doubt you even know what a stock is.

there are a billion things we dont know and we dont know why the sale happened.
activision was sold to microsoft and they did not have any problems. that sale made alot of money to many people and bumped the stock value by ALOT.

all you do is guess and you are so convinced of it, while you have no idea what really happens.


*Tencent are famous for predatory moneization, why are you cheering them anyway ?

I never mentioned the stock market, i mentioned Tencent bailing out Ubisoft where the majority of the 1.25 billion was for paying debt. You spend a lot of time writing assumptions here on discussions, why not spend 5 minutes of those to google Ubisoft Tencent deal and get some knowledge so you dont have to make those assumptions anymore ?

The original thought was for Tencent to buy out Ubisoft and they even hired advisors to make the deal, this was last year before AC:S release. Ubisoft though chose to postpone that offer as they wanted to wait and see how AC: Shadows did first. They hoped it would either do well enough to save Ubisoft or worst case scenario raise the price for Tencent.
This is information that is easily accessible to anyone who bother to do a google search.

I am amazed how many half beats Ubisoft is able to attract, its truly amazing. You rather sit here making a fool out of yourself instead of checking simple facts and saving you from the embarrasment... Hell even the press release from Tencent / Ubisoft is available on the net with most of the information about the deal... Do yourself a favor and read it...

[SlapsMcGaps]

Początkowo opublikowane przez Weltall8000:

Początkowo opublikowane przez Lucifer Verone:

Sold well how? All i see is 60k peak. Barely worth mentioning, everyone outside this bubble says this game is boring and uninspiring. I mean its on subscription, it hasnt sold well and yet we have articles saying this game sold more than Kcd and is trailing behind MHW. Im gonna need to see the actual numbers to believe that.

#2 YTD by revenue and 80% recommended on Steam.

Touting Second best selling game of the year is absolute brainrot when almost nothing has been released yet when this was claimed, aside from Wilds, which outsold it by a landslide and KCD2 which was a huge success that turned a major profit and sold almost as well as shadows with 1/6th of the development cost. Second, of course its going to be the best selling game for 3 weeks when nothing else has been released to give it any competition. The only thing of note since has been schedule 1 which also has outsold it by a landslide selling close to 5 million copies on just steam. Listing the amount of players or copies sold a game has when you don't factor in development costs is useless if your trying to argue that it was a success. Even if they some how manage to break even, they just wasted 4 years of development time that could have been spent on something successful which is a massive failure in itself.

[n1claren]

Początkowo opublikowane przez Sins of History:

Początkowo opublikowane przez Jem:

The Witcher 3 (10 years old game) sold better in april 2025 than Ac Shadows, on Xbox.

you already tried this, and failed horribly.

The Witcher 3, also outsold monster hunter wilds, and you were defeated when you were caught red handed and unable to answer.

Using the same strategy after it failed so badly the first time.

No Mercy

its almost as if one costs 70$ and one costs 5 bucks :D

[Weltall8000]

Początkowo opublikowane przez SlapsMcGaps:

Początkowo opublikowane przez Weltall8000:

#2 YTD by revenue and 80% recommended on Steam.

Touting Second best selling game of the year is absolute brainrot when almost nothing has been released yet when this was claimed, aside from Wilds, which outsold it by a landslide and KCD2 which was a huge success that turned a major profit and sold almost as well as shadows with 1/6th of the development cost. Second, of course its going to be the best selling game for 3 weeks when nothing else has been released to give it any competition. The only thing of note since has been schedule 1 which also has outsold it by a landslide selling close to 5 million copies on just steam. Listing the amount of players or copies sold a game has when you don't factor in development costs is useless if your trying to argue that it was a success. Even if they some how manage to break even, they just wasted 4 years of development time that could have been spent on something successful which is a massive failure in itself.

Seeing as everyone is talking about how well #1 and something below #2 have been doing, #2 is pretty good. Once again, I am not saying this is like GTA V levels or anything.

You do not know how much MH outsold it by.

You do not know how much this cost to develop.

Of course it is going to be #1 for weeks on end, in those weeks continuing to outsell wildy successful games released less than a month prior to it. Failing games do that.

Again, you don't know the sales numbers of AC anyway, but Shadows made more money than that game.

No, what is being done over and over again is trying to contrive a narrative where this game is bad and conflating commercial success or failure with popularity. It makes more money than other games, so downplay that. Then use this double standard to act like because KCD2 cost less, it only has to sell 1/6 of AC to be more popular "successful." "...Ergo popular."Because it becomes profitable at a lower threshold. Which, again, we don't actually know if that point even is 1/6. Do you think KCD2 sold six times more than Shadows?

[SlapsMcGaps]

Początkowo opublikowane przez Weltall8000:

Początkowo opublikowane przez SlapsMcGaps:

Touting Second best selling game of the year is absolute brainrot when almost nothing has been released yet when this was claimed, aside from Wilds, which outsold it by a landslide and KCD2 which was a huge success that turned a major profit and sold almost as well as shadows with 1/6th of the development cost. Second, of course its going to be the best selling game for 3 weeks when nothing else has been released to give it any competition. The only thing of note since has been schedule 1 which also has outsold it by a landslide selling close to 5 million copies on just steam. Listing the amount of players or copies sold a game has when you don't factor in development costs is useless if your trying to argue that it was a success. Even if they some how manage to break even, they just wasted 4 years of development time that could have been spent on something successful which is a massive failure in itself.

Seeing as everyone is talking about how well #1 and something below #2 have been doing, #2 is pretty good. Once again, I am not saying this is like GTA V levels or anything.

You do not know how much MH outsold it by.

You do not know how much this cost to develop.

Of course it is going to be #1 for weeks on end, in those weeks continuing to outsell wildy successful games released less than a month prior to it. Failing games do that.

Again, you don't know the sales numbers of AC anyway, but Shadows made more money than that game.

No, what is being done over and over again is trying to contrive a narrative where this game is bad and conflating commercial success or failure with popularity. It makes more money than other games, so downplay that. Then use this double standard to act like because KCD2 cost less, it only has to sell 1/6 of AC to be more popular "successful." "...Ergo popular."Because it becomes profitable at a lower threshold. Which, again, we don't actually know if that point even is 1/6. Do you think KCD2 sold six times more than Shadows?

We can assume when ubisoft says shadows has reached 3 million "players" not copies sold, that the numbers are less than 3 million and at best are 3 million. Wilds has sold over 10 million copies. so it has likely sold over 3x as many copies as shadows.

We can make a reasonable estimation of the development costs of shadows looking at the cost to develop previous titles and then factoring in development time, inflation and marketing. using this estimate It put the base cost of development between at least 250 and 350 million dollars. then delays for months, marketing which is usually another 30 to 40% and then steam and sony taking 30% of sales. using all these numbers we can make an assumption that they would need to sell a bare minimum 5 million copies to even make a profit and likely a lot closer to 7 million if were being realistic. So your saying shadows made more money than what game? so far it looks like the only thing it's done is lose money. How can you say that sitting at #2 is pretty good when it literally lost them millions of dollars and is surrounded by games that all turned massive profits. Are you really unable to comprehend any of this? Like holy crap its such basic logic

[VhagarTheLastOne]

Początkowo opublikowane przez Frog:

Początkowo opublikowane przez Ongen:

No they dont, if it was a success they wouldnt have let Tencent grab 25% of their shares in the IPs they want for 1.25 billion to pay off debt. Tencent saved them from going extinct, if Tencent didnt get involved Ubisoft would have been history. Can you cope any harder ? ;P

Początkowo opublikowane przez The Kloecken Duiver:

Ubisoft stock price indicates the opposite.
Over the past 30 days they went down 32% from 13.3 eur to 9.06 eur

since when did you guys become such experts in the stock market. i doubt you even know what a stock is.

there are a billion things we dont know and we dont know why the sale happened.
activision was sold to microsoft and they did not have any problems. that sale made alot of money to many people and bumped the stock value by ALOT.

all you do is guess and you are so convinced of it, while you have no idea what really happens.


*Tencent are famous for predatory moneization, why are you cheering them anyway ?

You dont need to be expert to know that 92% decline isnt good. I thikn Ubisoft have chance to get into Guiness World Records. Now I get Elon Musk. Even Mr.Stock came to look at it.

Elon Musk should buy Ubisoft and start making Crypto games, Doge everywhere.

[Jem]

Początkowo opublikowane przez SlapsMcGaps:

Początkowo opublikowane przez Weltall8000:

Seeing as everyone is talking about how well #1 and something below #2 have been doing, #2 is pretty good. Once again, I am not saying this is like GTA V levels or anything.

You do not know how much MH outsold it by.

You do not know how much this cost to develop.

Of course it is going to be #1 for weeks on end, in those weeks continuing to outsell wildy successful games released less than a month prior to it. Failing games do that.

Again, you don't know the sales numbers of AC anyway, but Shadows made more money than that game.

No, what is being done over and over again is trying to contrive a narrative where this game is bad and conflating commercial success or failure with popularity. It makes more money than other games, so downplay that. Then use this double standard to act like because KCD2 cost less, it only has to sell 1/6 of AC to be more popular "successful." "...Ergo popular."Because it becomes profitable at a lower threshold. Which, again, we don't actually know if that point even is 1/6. Do you think KCD2 sold six times more than Shadows?

We can assume when ubisoft says shadows has reached 3 million "players" not copies sold, that the numbers are less than 3 million and at best are 3 million. Wilds has sold over 10 million copies. so it has likely sold over 3x as many copies as shadows.

This.

That's called basic logic.

[Weltall8000]

Początkowo opublikowane przez SlapsMcGaps:

Początkowo opublikowane przez Weltall8000:

Seeing as everyone is talking about how well #1 and something below #2 have been doing, #2 is pretty good. Once again, I am not saying this is like GTA V levels or anything.

You do not know how much MH outsold it by.

You do not know how much this cost to develop.

Of course it is going to be #1 for weeks on end, in those weeks continuing to outsell wildy successful games released less than a month prior to it. Failing games do that.

Again, you don't know the sales numbers of AC anyway, but Shadows made more money than that game.

No, what is being done over and over again is trying to contrive a narrative where this game is bad and conflating commercial success or failure with popularity. It makes more money than other games, so downplay that. Then use this double standard to act like because KCD2 cost less, it only has to sell 1/6 of AC to be more popular "successful." "...Ergo popular."Because it becomes profitable at a lower threshold. Which, again, we don't actually know if that point even is 1/6. Do you think KCD2 sold six times more than Shadows?

We can assume when ubisoft says shadows has reached 3 million "players" not copies sold, that the numbers are less than 3 million and at best are 3 million. Wilds has sold over 10 million copies. so it has likely sold over 3x as many copies as shadows.

We can make a reasonable estimation of the development costs of shadows looking at the cost to develop previous titles and then factoring in development time, inflation and marketing. using this estimate It put the base cost of development between at least 250 and 350 million dollars. then delays for months, marketing which is usually another 30 to 40% and then steam and sony taking 30% of sales. using all these numbers we can make an assumption that they would need to sell a bare minimum 5 million copies to even make a profit and likely a lot closer to 7 million if were being realistic. So your saying shadows made more money than what game? so far it looks like the only thing it's done is lose money.

Which, sales don't matter in the sense that we know it has players anwe know it is making #2 money. I ask this all the time and no one has a good answer, but, "why is the sales figure so important when we know (rather, "knew" three weeks ago) the player number and relative revenue is high (and has been #1 in the period of the past month, #2 YTD)?

$100 Million is like a 50% swing. And, I correctly state, we don't really know.

What we do know is it made less money than MH and more than everything else. And, it has been #1 week after week since release. Profitability is certainly within that range if we take those dev cost estimates to work with. And we have it at the second best start in franchise, only behind a game that raked in over a billion.

[Jem]

Początkowo opublikowane przez Weltall8000:

Which, sales don't matter

Title of this topic : "are you surprised AC:S sells well ?"

[Shakoris]

Początkowo opublikowane przez Weltall8000:

Początkowo opublikowane przez SlapsMcGaps:

We can assume when ubisoft says shadows has reached 3 million "players" not copies sold, that the numbers are less than 3 million and at best are 3 million. Wilds has sold over 10 million copies. so it has likely sold over 3x as many copies as shadows.

We can make a reasonable estimation of the development costs of shadows looking at the cost to develop previous titles and then factoring in development time, inflation and marketing. using this estimate It put the base cost of development between at least 250 and 350 million dollars. then delays for months, marketing which is usually another 30 to 40% and then steam and sony taking 30% of sales. using all these numbers we can make an assumption that they would need to sell a bare minimum 5 million copies to even make a profit and likely a lot closer to 7 million if were being realistic. So your saying shadows made more money than what game? so far it looks like the only thing it's done is lose money.

Which, sales don't matter in the sense that we know it has players anwe know it is making #2 money. I ask this all the time and no one has a good answer, but, "why is the sales figure so important when we know (rather, "knew" three weeks ago) the player number and relative revenue is high (and has been #1 in the period of the past month, #2 YTD)?

$100 Million is like a 50% swing. And, I correctly state, we don't really know.

What we do know is it made less money than MH and more than everything else. And, it has been #1 week after week since release. Profitability is certainly within that range if we take those dev cost estimates to work with. And we have it at the second best start in franchise, only behind a game that raked in over a billion.

Bro, do you even read titles?

[Weltall8000]

Początkowo opublikowane przez Jem:

Początkowo opublikowane przez Weltall8000:

Which, sales don't matter

Title of this topic : "are you surprised AC:S sells well ?"

Początkowo opublikowane przez Shakoris:

Początkowo opublikowane przez Weltall8000:

Which, sales don't matter in the sense that we know it has players anwe know it is making #2 money. I ask this all the time and no one has a good answer, but, "why is the sales figure so important when we know (rather, "knew" three weeks ago) the player number and relative revenue is high (and has been #1 in the period of the past month, #2 YTD)?

$100 Million is like a 50% swing. And, I correctly state, we don't really know.

What we do know is it made less money than MH and more than everything else. And, it has been #1 week after week since release. Profitability is certainly within that range if we take those dev cost estimates to work with. And we have it at the second best start in franchise, only behind a game that raked in over a billion.

Bro, do you even read titles?

Try reading entire sentences.