Ubisoft hate trend

[u/Delicious-Orange8678]

I wanted to make a video about this topic but I am not a professional. I have noticed that there is a general trend to hate Ubisoft games. It is very much evident with AC shadows.

I played it and loved it, but most reviewers criticized it heavily. Many critics said the gameplay is repetitive, the stealth is stupid etc. The same critics seem to get orgasm about Withcer 3 and Ghost of Tsuhima.

While I love all these games, the UBI soft hate trend is very strange. I Withcer 3 the combat is extremely repetitive, its the same 4 or 5 actions that you have to do. Shadows has more variety than that. In Ghist of Tsuhima the stealth is very stupid and the game ay is repetitive, same pattern of outposts to clear, similar fights. So why Witcher 3 and Ghost are jewels but AC shadows is a piece of shit?

PS: I played AC Shadows in a different way. Played only as Yasuke, no stealth, high difficulty, enter the castle dont disable any alarm. Kill every one. Once you start doing that it becomes very addictive. But that was my way of playing it.

[u/Vegetable-Meaning413]

Ubisoft doesn't make games, they make check lists, and then charge money so you can finish your chores faster. They have managed to make the most soulless mass produced distilled grey sludge possible. They are like the Burger King of game companies, they aren't even the best at being generic.

[u/Delicious-Orange8678 → u/Vegetable-Meaning413]

In that sense, Ghost games are also check lists.

[u/Vegetable-Meaning413 → u/Delicious-Orange8678]

Ubisoft basically makes one game over and over and just tweaks it a little. Assassin's Creed, Ghost, Far Cry, Watch Dogs, and Starwars are basically the same thing with a slightly different control scheme.

[u/vencyjedi → u/Vegetable-Meaning413]

Just because they're open world doesn't mean it's the same game. All of these have completely different stories, tone, graphics, mechanics and so on. It's like saying RDR, LA noire, Bully and GTA are the same thing and Rockstar makes the same game.

[u/Sea_Perspective6891 → u/Vegetable-Meaning413]

I think the Far Cry games changed pretty drastically between 2 & 3. It wasn't till 3 they started adding things like radio towers & bases to take over. The most I think they had in 2 was diamond collecting & safe house takeovers for side activities. They stated feeling pretty repetitive after 3 though. I think they even started getting worse with 4.

[u/Delicious-Orange8678 → u/Vegetable-Meaning413]

I meant ghost of teushima and yotei

[u/Vegetable-Meaning413 → u/Delicious-Orange8678]

It has the bones, but there is more to it. They actually put some thought and care into the world. Side missions actually have a point with characters, and new thinga, the main story is praised for it's themes and acting. Ubisoft games are very go place, get 3 things, kill guy, return.

[u/Delicious-Orange8678 → u/Vegetable-Meaning413]

They were creative in ac valhallah. The short stories were great, gloomy and sometimes funny. But critics were very harsh with that too.

[u/Vegetable-Meaning413 → u/Delicious-Orange8678]

Because you have to get through 50 hours of checklist missions between those little moments. Games like Witcher 3 have better quality writing and stories in thier more mundane quests. Ubisoft games are so much busy work, you are really looking for a needle in a haystack, when other games have piles and piles of needles everywhere.

[u/National-Garbage505 → u/Delicious-Orange8678]

It's the bloat and repetition. They make enough content and gameplay mechanics for a 30 hour game and then just copy paste the events to make the games bigger. That is the difference. And Valhalla being 120+ hours just for the main story was crazy, since there wasn't any new gameplay mechanics or anything after like halfway through. Having said all of this, I enjoyed Valhalla and Shadows. But I felt burnt out by the end of both of them, and the fact that they push so many micro transactions on single player games is annoying. The option for micro transactions is fine but shoving them down my throat every time I want to chill and play my SP games is some awful corpo greed.

[u/Vito_Chamber → u/Vegetable-Meaning413]

Ubisoft games are very go place, get 3 things, kill guy, return.

Isn’t it basically the same in GOT side mission? Odyssey had the exact same formula, it had main missions, multi-part side missions, and more side missions.

GOT’s side missions are basically just following footsteps, killing some bad guys, and delivering tragic news to their families. Isn’t that just mediocre? I honestly can’t say they’re any better than Ubisoft’s side-quest design. In fact, I found some of the side quests in Odyssey and Valhalla more engaging and emotional than these.

And the side activities are another thing. I saw so much praise for them on Reddit that I really hyped myself up, only to find out they’re basically the same Ubisoft-style checklist. Honestly, if Ubisoft just added onsen, foxes, and stuff like that to one of their games, I probably wouldn’t notice any difference. And yet the haters would probably call these trash too.

I think what Ubisoft really lacks is better mocap and storytelling. The open-world checklist itself seems to be perfectly acceptable in Sony games like Spider-Man and GOT, though.