Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
While i don't see reason for taking it bad im seriously worried about Ubisoft condition.
Like well, they are Developers of many fantastic titles, for example i simply love Assassin's Creed series, and started playing all the titles in the series lately in timeline order.
I wish them well like every other Developers which i like. I completly don't get all the hate and value drop of the whole Company of Ubisoft. Like , what the hell, why?
Now the actual question is that did they honestly believe that it attracts wider audience this way or was this because of woke DEI ideologies or something. Who knows?
I read somewhere (I don't remember) that half the developers have never worked on a game before. I don't know how much impact that has on a game's development or final state, but it's worth mentioning.
Incompetence.
With many design and marketing decisions being disrespectful towards Japanese culture, it feels less like malice and more like incompetence. They used a symbol for a flag, that already belongs to a pre-existing group, without their permission. They used the real name (and maybe location) for at least one real life shrine, without their permission. They used a "1-legged Torii Gate" as a prop to market their funko-pop-like figurines, and there's only one real life "1-Leg Torii" Gate in Nagasaki, Japan, which is a remnant of the atomic bombings. The other things might me minor, but that last one in unconscionable.
To me personally, it feels like Yasuke was added mid-development, and that might have caused disruption in development. Even if that's not the case, Ubisoft's not been in a good spot for the last few years, and a company in chaos is going to have a tumultuous atmosphere in the workplace. Studios closing down, senior devs leaving, new devs working on tech developed by those senior devs, upper management exerting control over many aspects of the game, improper communication between the many teams/studios working on certain things, teams rushing to meet deadlines, etc. We also don't know the real reason behind the 4 month delay from Nov to March. It must have been something big, because a company struggling financially, now has to pay 4 extra months of salaries to ~19,000 employees until they can cash-in on their big ticket franchise.
I'm still on the fence, I've not taken either side regarding this game. I'm waiting until launch for either side to sway me. For me it's less about the many controversies, and more about the final quality of the game.
10 hours of additional content? Basically CUT CONTENT sold separately. On top of STEAM, UPLAY and EXTRA DRM just to be sure no one will buy it xD
The worst DLC were the two sequences obviously cut from Assassins Creed 2, since then it’s been better and while I hate Microtransactions, they’ve never bothered me in AC as they are mostly cosmetic. I guess after I’ve seen how bad it can be in Middle-Earth: Shadow of War it didn’t seem too bad anymore.
Too bad they literally tried to change history at start by spewing nonsense that Yasuke was actual samurai and using fake wiki notes
These people don’t play AC and it ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ shows lmao
We can ransack and steal and break stuff in churches and mosques in past AC games
We can assassinate priests and fight
popes too
It’s historical fiction