It's ironic. They say "players should get used to not owning THEIR games" and not "players should get used to not owning OUR games". Clearly they used those choice of words very carefully to make you think you own them, while also talking about NOT owning them. Doublespeak at its finest.
I love when consumers vote with their wallets and pull a big middle finger towards these shit companies. Companies that pull this shit (get use to not owning our games) where piracy is justified.
My last Ubisoft game was division 2. I'll never buy another, that game was such a regression from the first, I found myself banging various rocks together to make fire, then I was terrified of the fire I created. Fuck modern gaming.
"Gamers are so lazy, it's just launcher that takes 2 minutes to install" 1) Please wait for an update for our launcher. 2) Username and password are not working. 3) Request password reset. 4) Log into email to get reset email. 5) Do this little puzzle to prove you are not a bot. 6) Email not there. 7) Check junk, email not there. 8) Recall that the account is tied to your other email. 9) Attempt to log into email. 10) Password not working for alternate email. 11) Reset password for alternate email. 12) Do this little puzzle to prove you are not a bot. 13) Log into alternate email. 14) Password Reset Link expired. 15) Request another link. 16) Log into account. 17) Prove that you are not a bot. 18) Agree to the new terms of service of the launcher. 18) Update game. 19) Agree to the new terms of service of the game. 20) Finally can play game.
Also (at least for me): due to it being nothing but bloatware, wait for the launcher to freeze/hang when opening and closing, then have the game do the same when opening it from the launcher It would always create a sluggish process, even when using nothing but all SSDs in my PC. It was just overloaded with junk. Tried using it for one game on sale several years back, Watch Dogs, and never again - refunded it and just pirated it after so many times launching it. Bethesda tried to force the same shite for certain games and hid their Creation Kit behind it, which was needed for larger mod creations with new quests, interiors, etc. Thankfully they got rid of it, but still. It’s one good way to make people go other routes to obtain their shite.
you forgot: 1) complete captcha to prove you are not a bot 2) flawlessly completed captcha 3) it seems you failed captcha 4) flawlessly completed captcha 5) it seems you failed captcha ... 17) flawlessly completed captcha for 12th time 18) it seems you failed captcha you failed too many times captcha blocked for the next hour try later
It’s a shame, I played XDefiant, it had potential, but the game wasn’t ambitious enough gameplay-wise, and refusing to put it on Steam as a free game was a HUGE mistake. It was clear to me that the game would die very very quickly.
@@linkplayshalo14 the problem is that it just felt like call of duty, like bo4 but worse. Cod isn't big because of its multiplayer, which i know sounds shocking, they have zombies, they have campaign, they have all these built up side modes that people enjoy. Xdefiant had Cod ability edition. Its sniping was fun for like 10 or so games and then got boring.
To be fair, even when their games re on steam they are big fail their best peak from their last game was 8000 ... I mean steam or not it change nothing and look star wars outlaw peak at 2486 ...
-hero shooter with stupid abilities -goofy unserious art style -they tried attaching the Tom Clancy name to this arcade shooter -overly-expensive micro transaction -not on steam but on one of the worst launchers in existence -one of the worst anti-consumer companies ever -typical DEI hiring and studio mismanagement leading to a bloated budget The gameplay was actually decent, and the lack of SBMM was a breath of fresh air, it felt like playing a shitty version of Modern Warfare 2 (2008)
@cravepoison2010 seems like basic arcade shooters with little depth like this never last long. I'm already bored of bo6 in the same way. After a while it's just more of the same, gets boring
The whole point of the game was to create an arcade shooter using Ubisoft ip’s, based on your comment it seems you don’t realize that Tom Clancy games ARE Ubisoft games, have been for decades. Also the guy in charge of this game made mw2, it was meant to feel like old cod
@@Nahrix It's probably a mix of both... I mean Ubisoft have started demanded that steamdb be either shut down or hide player numbers... which means public visible player numbers do factor in. But yes you're correct that refunds do play a role, after all just last year they updated some TOS for Division 2 (among others) stating that "we do not guarantee that our product will be functional or free of viruses" (among other things but I just wrote those specific two because... those two are kind of 'goes without saying' but Ubisoft managed to weasel themselves out of it).
I was an early adopter of XDefiant but stopeed playing after a while for multiple reasons. 1. Not enough content. 2. Super Slow weapon progression. 3. Netcode that saw you getting killed around corners etc regularly. 4. Lack of any SBMM meant that pretty much every match was manned mostly by ultra sweats with every weapon upgrade unlocked. I quit after a few months and later came back again after a few month break only to find these problems (bar the netcode which improved a bit) had gotten worse, MUCH worse. I think the total lack of SBMM which they made a selling point actually doomed them for "normal" player uptake and meant the game was eventually entirely peopled only by hardcore sweats with every weapon unlock and anyone new who tried it was kerb stomped every match until they uninstalled.
Same, the netcode was very bad, killed around the corners and getting killed with 3 shots while I put an entire mag in the face of the player and he still run like I was shoting flowers.
Weapons were extremely EASY to progress?? New guns are gated behind some fairly easy tasks ("4000 damage with AR's, get 20 head shots with SMG's, etc.). There are no "high level" guns or "low level" ones with large power disparities, they all perform fairly on par with each other. One match with 15 kills will upgrade your gun like 2.5 levels, the vast majority of weapon attachments are available by weapon level 25, you get all attachments around weapon level 40. Getting past 100 is legit just skin unlocks. You more than likely feel this way because you were discouraged very early on and stopped playing, I suppose from the lack of SBMM and because there was practically NO CONTENT early on. They only added content thru the 2-3 seasons AFTER LAUNCH and only just NOW does the game feel somewhat complete with enough variety. I enjoyed the lack of SBMM, I'm half decent, so I would get normal games 8/10 times, 2/10 times I would smash the lobby. The problem for me is lack of people playing! More noobs would equal a WAY better time for the vast majority of people. That was Ubisoft's mistake for not being on Steam. Net code problems and packet loss was insane at first, it got way better recently, but it was too little too late cuz everyone had already stopped playing by the time they fixed it.
Cant blame lack pf sbmm as its failure when the netcode was the number 1 issue people quit for. Had the netcode not at all been an issue then we could maybe have a picture of what a successful game without sbmm would be received. The problem is the only people who stuck around are sweats, so all matches became sweaty. When there was 15million players the matches were truly a mixed bag.
You forgot: -anticonsumer statements (need to get used to not owning games) -terrible steam implementation (no achievs, no trade cards, just a shortcut to their launcher) -removing players ability to play games they bought -copy/paste game design with little to no innovation.
@@didiwever834 they are irrelevant for most people, but imo the main thing is the badge for decorating your profile which you get from getting all the cards, which is also irrelevant for most people lmao. but there's a lot of people that get the badge for their favorite games, i 've seen many people with the badge of things like terraria, don't starve, L4D2 and that one weird guy dedicated to collect all the badges of every game.
The biggest reason they’re failing is the massive overhead. Huge HR departments, DEI initiatives, and too many people not directly involved with game development. It’s unsustainable and baloons budgets.
It's not that straight forward, the overhead becomes a problem when you're not making enough profits, take Microsoft for example, their overhead is huge but still represent a small percentage of their turnover, if their profits suddenly drop, what was let's say 30% overhead becomes 90% overhead which indeed becomes a problem, but the root cause wasn't initially the overhead, same goes for Ubisoft, it was an extremely profitable company with huge revenues, which means the overhead would naturally be big for such a big company, so their problem is not the overhead, it's the profits, they're simply not making enough money.
@ Excactly the point i made. You’re just over complicating it. Same issue Disney is facing. Too much money going out not enough coming in. Salaries are the highest cost for any company.
@@steffen89able Yeah, but they are not failing "BECAUSE of the overhead", they are failing because their games are not selling. If for some reason you have less income and can't afford your mortgage anymore, the problem is not your mortgage, it's your loss of income.
having casual no sbmm and ranked sbmm is the easiest way to make sure both sides are happy. if i dont play for a week i dont want to be put in the same lobbies when i was sweating because i dont want to sweat everytime i get on a shooter for example
Next month is national layoff month. For those of you who don't know in corporate America, the majority of layoffs occur in January. It is a pretty common trick corpo use to make the numbers look good during the first quarter. Ubisoft and gaming companies like them are in for a blood bath next month.
@@day7053 thx for the input I didnt know that Still, ubisoft is based in france and one of their major studio is in canada sounds like another "how to be american on internet" thing ngl
January is the 4th quarter of year, as quarters are based off of fiscal years which end March 31st end of the day. They have to make their books look great so investors keep investing They layoff at this time because it makes the 4th quarter look better at the beginning plus January is usually the slow period up until mid-late Feb until the end of March, but it may also tie into not firing people before the end of the tax season or maybe something to do with not firing people until after the holidays, who knows maybe it all ties together.
while im not saying you're entirely wrong, you also forget that waiting to fire people until after the holidays happens because firing people during the holidays means the long term loyal and reliable employees dont get as much room to be off for the holidays, and work is busiest right before the holidays so it's better to wait until things slow down to start laying people off. I'm not disagreeing with you, I just think it should all be taken into account.
My biggest problem with SBMM isn't necessarily the skill-based part, but rather the match-making part. I think match making hoppers that remove the ability for players to organically meet up with the same group of people hour after hour, day after day is poisonous for long-term game community building. Everyone's first MMO guild, Quake clan, or Counter-Strike team is a product of playing on persistent dedicated servers where players have the liberty to repeatedly cross paths and socialize like they do in the real world. When playing a game involves you being told who/when/where to play it's kind of analogous to the difference between playing a game during recess and phys-ed class. Recess is fun because it's on your terms. Phys-ed is a coin toss depending on who the teacher decides to group you with. With PC multiplayer on dedicated servers this was never an issue. If you wanted to chill you could go to a newbie server. If you wanted more challenge you'd go to a better server. If you wanted a balanced match you had pickup games, scrims, ladders, and leagues.
Imagine having a life where you go outside and live life.. 🤷. Last Ubisoft game I played was rainbow6: Vegas.. And the only other FPS I've played are CS titles, N64 goldeneye(PS2 also)/perfect dark.. I have a Wii and PS2 that I rarely use and a PC that id rather game on.. mouse & keyboard, all I need. 🤷. So like, this sorta crap is kinda irrelevant to me, but I'll still check out the topic because it might be relevant to something else in gaming.. case law is a thing, it helps to keep up on.
@@ImPoStier work experience is still work experience. 🤷 Imagine being free of the rat race tho.. 😂 Not having to commute to work.. No boss up your ass because of "meeting a deadline".. 🤷. 📊🤺
One thing left of the list was, 50% - 75% of the game "developers" at Ubisoft are rookies just starting out. All the talent has either left or was replaced by a DEI hire, and a lot of the work on Ubisoft games is contracted to outside developers (a majority of them are the talent that left or were replaced).
i guess Ubisoft is dying , with Assassin's Creed their greatest achievement in 20 years , its not unsurprising . They made what some gamers wanted until the gross negligence that are these producer L's came about . The future looks grim for our Canadian game studio but there will be another , hopefully better , Game dev studio. They played themselves by joining forces with sweet baby inc. Literally less than 50 people trying to dictate what the games industry will sell to millions .they could have had a modding effort for games that didn't fit and then all is solved. What we are seeing now are legal layoffs and severances so the CEO's can have a golden parachute come closing time.
6:00 "Ubisoft hoped the game would compete with Call of Duty" Actually had me crack up in the office. Now people looking at me weird. One guy in the next cubicle asked be what I was laughing at. I told him, and he just said "Nobody's competing with Call of Duty." He's not even a big gamer and he knows. So how did these devs not know?
Not gonna lie, I belive someone can compete with Call of Duty, but: 1) you won't overtake it overnight, and it would be dumb to think you can. Doing that will take a LONG time 2) only way you're going to "get on the board" is by numbers. Not launching on steam was a stupid decision, and I'll be honest, I don't remember a lot of advertising being done for the game Finally, 3) Having the current reputation disaster that Ubisoft currently has will kill your releases. "Get used to not owning your games." THEN WHY THE FUCK WOULD I WASTE MY TIME IN THESE GAMES?! MUCH LESS WASTE MY MONEY!? remember: if it isn't worth your time, it isn't worth your money, and anything you don't own is not worth either. Edit for spelling
its downhill for cod for years now, numbers of player go down and down and down. okay mpney goes up because more agressive sales tactics but that has an end some day
@@HasturTheShadowpuppet #1 is actually the reason why I think you can't compete with CoD right now. CoD has become so big, even non-gamers know it. Who among the non-gamers know XDefiant? That's why any prospective competitors to CoD will need to slowly build their audience.
I think a really good Souls-Like/For Honor 2 story mode could save Ubisoft. For Honor is the only game they have that people continue to play. If you picked up 2 axes your playstyle would resemble berserker, if you picked up a longsword it would resemble warden etc etc. They should put all their effort towards making a For Honor 2 story, with fleshed out/smooth combat and challenging boss mechanics. I believe if they did it correctly, it would not only save their company but also create a combat system more enjoyable then souls games.The game would also be unique and original. Turning over a new leaf for ubisoft
A For Honor 2 that’s a prequel to For Honor and you play as Apollyon and she through your the game slowly becomes my radical in her ideology and more tactical in how she gets her way
I was working at Ubisoft Osaka for 5 years, and that's really sad to see its closing, even though there was no such troubles in the past. And now, they decide to keep the ones which continue to spread the disasters of the company and layoff people who have worked so hard for several years. I'm not sure if Ubisoft will be able to stay alive for next years.
Failed project = Close Studio = No Career Development. This is a classic formula to bankruptcy, hiring new people and pray they can do the job better than the one just got fired.
Thank you for perspective, it does seem like we are in a post-competence age. People are hired/fired based on other criteria, and games fail because of decisions of people who do not know how to make games.
"We don't want to sell on steam because they take 30%" I love how dumb these companies are, they could sell 2x - 10x more if they sold on steam and make even more money.
They could release it on both and make it 20-30% cheaper on theirs. The consumer doesnt care where his money flows to, consumer wants to consume a good product.
30% of revenue or profit? Because its easy to assume that a company the size of Ubisoft has significant overhead so a gross 30% off the top of revenue could cost them money.
This makes zero sense. 1.5mln people played this game last month. They are shutting this down, because the servers cost them too much, not because the game failed. They failed to make it profitable. And they probably mismanaged costs of keeping it alive into eternity. Just like they mismanaged every part of their development. It's a machine for jobs and employment. This easily could be salvaged, but big companies never learn.
Remember the OKB design bureau. Then it will all become clear. Waste, corruption, pettiness, and malfeasance. It's just Marxism with different terms. Same shit, different day.
Given that they started firing devs in a first month of launch when game was only climbing in numbers and desperately needed extra hands to fix all the issues? That's a murder with an intent. Ubisoft pulled the plug back on launch and nobody knows why.
On a side note, i applied to be a concept artist intern for ubisoft 10 years ago, they rejected me because i dont have 1 year experience in the industry. For an intern position. Kekw. I’m happily freelancing now.
It’s also worth mentioning that Ubisoft continues to release “the same game” every few months. Far Cry 6 was just Far Cry 5…which was Far Cry 4…which was Far Cry 3… .
They literally created a fortune 500 company by reskining farcry 3 dlc's every year (which are just themed farcry 3 dlc's with 20hrs content and 100 hours busy work nonsense) It's so incredible it lasted this long. Oh and they reskinned assassin's creed origins as well, that one didn't work as well tho. Here's the thing, the reason fromsoft games are so good is because each game they make started as an idea that was passionately turned into a game, Ubisoft starts out with a game then hastily hires cheap labor to stuff a passable story into it. The story and lore can never be compelling because it's secondary. This is an abomination of game and art making.
@@jimb12312your PC specs, browsing data, the usual stuff. Pretty sure, they are in the midst of a lawsuit because of that right now. Yea, Steam takes 30%. Not being on Steam has done wonders for Ubisoft, hasn’t it? They were valued the highest in 2018, said they were moving away from steam in 2019 and immediatelly after started losing stock value during the height of Covid pandemic. But yea, that 30% steam cut is not worth the exposure, better get on that Epic games train, kekw.
To the guy saying Steam takes a 30% cut. First, it's free to play, so Steam takes 30% of nothing, Ubisoft would have lost so much money. Second, discoverability is a thing, market access is a thing, and Steam is best in both accounts, meaning you'd win more than you lose. Third, big companies have better deals, around 10-15%.
I remember a collegue once told me, he had a friend working at Massive and they got into an argument. The guy from Ubi said, "There are more important things than gameplay". Well, yes, just look at the state of the company. Let's not even talk about the studio he moved to, working on Everywhere, which has burned millions of dollars and has literally nothing to show yet (and most probably will never).
Sad to hear that "Everywhere" is no where near completion. I'd really hope that Leslie Benzies, former President of Rockstar Games, would be different.
Yeah idk how you're going to kill CoD when your singular selling point is CoD with no SBMM. That's a thing only CoD-loyal players care about, which is a problem because most of them are too loyal
It really failed tho cause of all the delays of everything they put it into the game they waited last minute and had got denied to be put on playstation and xbox cause they took so long
The game got 15million registered players. Yes not releasing on steam hurts and being tied to the ubisoft launcher hurts but thats only on pc. Console gamers dont have to download the launcher. What killed the game was releasing it in a borderline alpha state with zero content and abysmal netcode.
My problem with sbmm, is a method of it in cod, is to put me against players of equal or close to equal opponents (this is fine) but typically my team itself is usually below my opponents skill level.
Apex had the smme problem. They put you through a meat grinder 5 matches in a row, but then throw you into fair lobbies until you do well in one match (do well, not win) and then it's back to the grinder.
This was a really fun game. What killed it was the delays since the beta, sever lag, and they were too little too late on the updates. Rest in peace XDefient, you will be missed.
@@ihatecabbage7270 I agree that Ubisoft deserve the hate. But not the game, it was fairly popular last month alone pulling almost a MILLION players. Yet Ubisoft started downsizing the first month of its release when it was getting players faster than any Ubisoft game. Ubisoft killed the game because it wasn't getting them enough money quickly. Practically shooting themselves in the foot.
The problem isn't that Skill-Based Matchmaking exists; it's that there's no alternative in the form of unranked/casual. Who genuinely wants to sweat and tryhard every single game?
Meanwhile Conqueror's Blade's NA/EU are begging for Skill-Based MM to come back to their ranked mode, and are all playing normal queue because of how bad ranked is without it. Gotta have a balance, exclusively either direction kills a game.
Skill-based matchmaking is inherently bad. Being good should enable you to do better, with skill-based matchmaking, everyone is forced to only do okay.
@@captaingrizzly9511 This sounds ridiculous to me. As long as it's not a BR or the TTK isn't too high, how are you getting stressed by FPS games? Just find one with a TDM then and no stress.
Xdefiant was a good game but not enough content to keep players engaged. The mastery camos also took way too long to grind and there was only a battle pass every season and a skin shop. The game played incredibly well compared to todays bo6 stability issues, constant packet burst, all the lies and manipulation from activision and so on. Big rip, this was Ubisofts best game.
I loved XDefiant and it's pretty hilarious that all the CoD fanboys that bitched and moaned about XDs launch issues now has BO6 with all its messed up issues. All the bitching about the netcode and now BO6 is much much worse than XD ever was. Not only that the hit registration is so fucked people think that there's skill based damage and there very well might be considering how shady Activision is. Same goes for the movement. All the SBMM protected kids came to XD and were blown away by the movement because they genuinely did not know MW3 had way crazier movement because sbmm protected them from the people who actually knew how to use it. Now BO6 has even crazier movement but they still wouldn't know because they are still in protected lobbies with other people who have no idea how to use it. SBMM has done irreparable damage to the entire arcade FPS genre.
I think the total lack of SBMM which they made a selling point actually doomed them for "normal" player uptake and meant the game was eventually entirely peopled only by hardcore sweats with every weapon unlock and anyone new who tried it was kerb stomped every match until they uninstalled.
@@TheDoats oh yeah the BO6 servers are terrible the number of times you get insti killed by someone who was not even around the corner yet is FAR worse than any CoD title of the last 8 years or so.
What do you mean, the AC game set in japan that everyone was clamoring for with a "checks notes" ... a black samurai ?!!!. God how i wish they would have released it this year so they can have all the bombs in a row.
The problem isn't that it was a bad game. The problem is Ubisoft decided to try and tackle a genre that already has deep rooted games people aren't willing to abandon so easily. Love it or hate it CoD has an enormous player base and while some players do venture outside of that circle it isn't a number that makes the space profitable. It's why trend chasing is bad in general. You're trying to compete with established things that are already people's favorite. Unless you do something truly spectacular you have no hope in space, not unless you build it around the idea that you can't spend as much developing it and can always upgrade it over time as popularity grows. If you're going to try and compete with deeply rooted IPs you need to start small, build a fan base, and try to expand it from there. Outright competing isn't going to work in your favor. Sure, there's a slim chance of success but it's so small you're better off not trying at all. Stick to what you know and what you do best. Otherwise you end like Volition. Getting shuttered because you were forced to make a game out of your wheelhouse and you decided to do so in the worst way possible, pissing off all of the people who would have supported it. A popular trend in game development these days.
@@B-Ran_the_Man oh right that’s a thing lol. I’ve played the beta, I think, looked solid, then I’ve heard about all the bs, monetisation and all, and completely lost interest. Is the game even out?
@@DeltaDragon79 why do people act like fortnite, fall guys, minecraft, roblox, and rocket league don't exist??? Three of those games are literally 100 times more successful than the top games on steam; candy crush also has better numbers lol.
I feel like the only reason this game failed was because it wasn't on Steam. I think a lot of people would have at least tried a free to play CoD-type game if they didn't have to deal with all of the bullshit of making a new account, and download a completely different launcher among all the other extra bullshit.
It was part of the reason but the main problem was they were competing in a market that had a giant like cod and they were very slow to release the game and a lot of things kept getting delayed cause they kept waiting to do things like if I remember correctly they waited so long to do the paper work for it to be on playstation and xbox that they got denied for the game to release so it took even longer for the game to release
2:00 No skill-based matchmaking and the way Activision has it implemented (EOMM) is there specifically to put you in the sweatiest lobbies possible so that everybody stays at a similar KD. It's not enjoyable and the majority of people don't like it. And you can see this in the posts of from people that played XD saying it's a breath of fresh air compared to this or other games. There's other games that don't have SBMM where the community have said similar things. Skill-based matchmaking is a cope from Activision themselves. There's no reason for it to be in games. All it does is it protects the worst players on the planet by putting them into lobbies where with a good player on their team that has to carry them... I'm talking dudes that have never handled a controller in their lives or don't understand that they have to press W to go forward. Like people this stupid, that's what skill-based matchmaking protects. The majority of people don't see a difference between skill-based matchmaking and non-skill-based matchmaking until you have played for more than an hour. Then you realize you haven't been put into the sweatiest lobbies on the planet for winning a few games. Every lobby is average with no SBMM, with maybe a few outliers here or there, where there's like a streamer triharding. And the way SBMM is currently implemented, it makes grenades curve in the air towards people that the algorithm decides must die. Every part of Call of Duty nowadays is rigged. There is nothing that isn't rigged. The damage can randomly be dropped. Your damage could be upped if you're a terrible player. There is nothing that is fair about how SBMM works... And this is something that's 100% possible because this is how the Ricochet anti-cheat works. Ricochet drops damage to zero if you're cheating. But it can also do things like raise your fall damage to a million percent, which explains some of the clips where people have died from mantling on a van with full health. It can also curve grenades and curve projectiles and this is something that we are seeing in multiplayer done to everybody. Also, if skill-based matchmaking was so necessary, how did Call of Duty blow up to what it was before 2019 when they implemented the how strict the algorithms were? Sure, there was light SBMM back then, but it was light. We didn't have disbanding lobbies like this. The reason why the lobbies disband is because the algorithm is so strong it literally needs to recalculate new players because every game you play makes it so that you cannot be mashed with the players you just played with because it's already remathting everything out. SBMM is unnecessary. Also, the only reason why it was implemented in the first place was because the algorithm prioritizes putting you in lobbies with people that have skins to peer pressure you into getting skins, that's literally what the patent filing for it said.
@@BryanTS90 I dont think it will work this well again with battle net. Also the early days required you to put in way less data about yourself. Email + PW was enough. D2, WC3 and SC were super popular and there basically wasnt anything negative to say about them. I wont be suprised if the average gamer has a 3 digit amount of accounts by now (not just games) and yet another one is just exhausting, esp. if money is involved.
Even if u had it on Ubisoft u still have to have a Ubisoft account to play and still need the launcher to then launch the game for the first time(which is 99% of the time according to them)
What is Ason talking about? Old school fps shooters remember a thing called dedicated servers where you can choose a server to play in and stay in. Let’s be real. Gamers like me still prefer fps shooter with dedicated servers.
Yeah. Then you would make friends and forms beefs with those lobbies and people were more social since you were playing back to back games with the same people. Now its garbage and has been since like after MW3 (the original)
This precisely. I never got into CoD for this. We hosted on GameSpy for MoHAA. We had a mod that basically played like Advanced Warfare. We had our own banners, and full control of the ban hammer. We had control over speed and gravity of the game for the whole room. We played however we wanted to and we had so much fun. FPS has been lame af for a very long time.
NGL this game was incredible as far as fun FPS’ go… I’m not surprised that it’s not profitable though, given that the purchasable skins/gunskins/battle pass stuff was mostly “blah” and it was really rare to see anybody who actually bought anything. Like you’d be able to see who paid for skins and I would say out of like 10 games in a row, you might see like one or two people per game… sometimes less often.
The problem with skill base matchmaking is mostly due to how they pair teams. Some games think that if you pair 2 great players with 4 garbage players, it offsets against a team of 6 equally skilled players.
@@Mikey-uj3dc He is just looking for an excuse why he loses. Ofc in his example he is one of those 2 good players who are held back by their dogsht teammates.
@@Mikey-uj3dc halo infinite (bad game anyhow) for example does exactly what hotfire said, you can check opposing team ranks, so in casual you can be onyx, & be given silver or gold players while the opposition will have two diamond & a plat or two , which obviously favors the team with a higher bar than it does with you having to carry & sweat out to win, if everyone was equal, 1 onyx + dead weight v 1 onyx + dead weight then its no biggie, but thats not how it turns out 90% of the time in casual during its more peak player counts nor how it calculates it in blops cold war where it seems to keep everyone in a loop of a 50% win/loss which ends up feeling unearned & stupid Hence the “hey I don’t mind playing ranked to a decent extent but leave unranked to feel less sweaty” sentiment from anti sbmm peeps, since again in recent years with cod especially they ramped it up to a ridiculous feeling level, asmon hardly seems to play online shooters anymore so him using vague memories of 2007 & automatically equating its the exact same level is disingenuous
@Mikey-uj3dc Go play halo infinte. That's exactly how it works. It starts looking for similar skill, then if it cant find players, it expands the range to include others who don't belong. Sometimes im the better player with weak teammates and other times im the dead weight. Best systems imo are ranked playlist that factor rank only. Gold players play against ONLY gold players for example.
@@ProphetJigaloA 6/10 player like me in sbmm era cod gets the worst experience possible. I'm not good enough to compete with the streamers or anyone with a decent rank. I'm also too good to get an easier lobby where I can stomp a father of 4 with a negative kd.
"Denying that there are plans to pull the plug after season 4" This was 100% a true statement...because they are pulling the plug BEFORE season 4 ever happens, lol.
Comparing to recent games? Maybe not horrible. Does it bring anything to the table? Nah, nothing original or done better than most of other similar FPS games
Was a really good idea. If it had had an xtra 2 years before it released I think it would’ve had a good shot. Brand new franchise with very little content just couldn’t compete with the giant content slop that cod pours out
Nah, it would have still died. Not launching on steam hurt its potential. But the horrible netcode issues and abysmal lack of content is what truly killed the game. Ive always said that xdefiant is the best most polished alpha ive ever played. It needed at least another year in the oven to add content and polish stuff like the netcode.
I would not blame the developers, sure probably there is a % of them that are not to par but that doesn't affect the overall product that much, but management. Every large company has a direction, that direction is usually put to paper in a form of a strategic document that basically says - We start out here, our aim is this, this is how we can achieve it - without going into to much detail. One of the quickest ways to check the boxes is expenditure reduction in the form of quality control. Strong quality control sends back product that are not up to standard, this is not only in IT but also every industrial production, causing delays and increasing expenditures. So cutting quality control has been the go to card for many many managers to inflate the success of the company by providing an accounting magic trick causing a rise in popularity of the company due to artificial success. The problem is you can ride that train so far and Ubisoft has been on this ride for a long time. I think it was Heroes of Might and Magic 7 when I said good bye to Ubisoft forever due to corrupted save files that prevented me to finish the game, customer service was useful like smearing Nutella on your haemorrhoids. After all it is the management that sets the direction of the company and their job is to implement the plans and the strategies that enable the company to position itself on the market, this includes and impacts literally everything from hiring policy, internal policy, deadlines, quality ... but those guys are usually overlooked even though they pat themselves on the back while receiving unearned bonuses that usually overshadow developers annual pay by duble digit factor.
SBMM (skilled based match making) isnt the issue, like asmond said, its ranked... The issue is EOMM (engagement optimized match making). EOMM is like a slot machine where the wins are determined before you even press play (its been proven, patents exist, dont argue unless youve researched). People think they are talking about EOMM, but they call it SBMM. Not all, but most. Like asmond said, Weve always had SBMM, in ranked to a greater extent, and in pubs, to a lesser extent. What we havent had is the EOMM created by these data nerds.
Actually, EOMM kinda makes sense. If it’s used to distribute the wins evenly to avoid people just having shit luck with the teams and never winning due to it.
@@NameName-ll2yx No its not. Research psychology, and figure out why randomness and addiction are linked. Its the "maybe i win nextime, who knows, its not skill, its lady luck!!!". Thus why you get the gambling addiction. You literally advocated for handing out participation trophies. Id rather lose 80% of my games if i knew for a fact it was my fault. That would mean i could change it in real time by getting better, studying, learning the meta, actually using the strategy in real time, and calming the in game nerves. OR EVEN, sticking my neck out and making friends online who want to team up. All that can be done to improve your win %. IN FACT, if you are winning more than you lose, then that means the algo will FORCE the loss even though you didnt deserve it. It rewards being subpar by handing you wins, and disincentivizes you getting better because it will force you to lose the better you get. thus 50% for all, good and bad. And thats gunna be a NO for me dawg.
No, its SBMM also. The original system just balanced out the lobbies when they gathered players randomly and would move people around which was fine but now it looks for specific ranks before you get into a lobby and when you do, you dont get to keep playing and have to reset the groups over and over because the game is updating your elo
@@NeighborhoodWatchMannyup. I remember MW2 back in 2009-2010. There were no algos. At the beginning I was constantly curb stomped but I would watch and learn from good players and adapt to the point where I would still have a good game even if we lost as a team. And lobbies would carry from game to game so you could stick with the same players. In BO6, I will have a great game, maybe a second, and then the algo kicks in and I get absolutely slaughtered for two to 3 games until the algo kicks back on and I get a win. And every new match is with a brand new bunch of players. I've even noticed on the smaller maps, spawn points will start to get "aggressive" as in I will spawn literally behind someone. Like the algo is giving me a free kill. It's bizarre.
@@NameName-ll2yxno. Just no. There’s no excuse for rigging players experience in real time to accommodate bad players or trick bad players into thinking they are good so they play more. Eomm ruined cod.
The reason that Prince of Persia game didn't do well is because they made it like the original PoP games and not the popular ones that started with Sands of Time.
Here’s my solution to match making, 3 modes. Ranked: as usual Causal: uses ranks but adds 3-4 standard deviations on each side of your rank to pull a pool from Party: no guard rails, elites and noobs can and will be placed on the same team, opposing times, in battle royals, welcome Arkham with joker in charge levels of oversight is what I’m getting at.
X defiant is performing to our expectations. We see this game as a CoD killer and we will continue to support the game for a very long time. - Ubisoft AAAA Game executive
You missed a good couple of things on your list their asom but I got you. Assassins creed was my favourite franchise so I was pretty invested since I was a kid and had a front row seat to this car crash in real time. Assassins creed is the best measure of this because their stocks went up in 2009 as you said which is when Assassins creed 2 released hence why it was their flagship IP - overlapping dev cycles for games in the same franchise which doesnt allow for the intergration of feedback (this started with brotherhood) - Releasing broken games with the intention of fixing them later if they do at all (assassins creed Unity which also was the first to add those microtransactions you talk about at 20:29) - Removal of central mechanics ( to this day the best and most mechanically compelling free running is in the first 4 games go watch a Leo K video if you disagree and AC games without social stealth is ridiculous) - IP dilution, ill grant im not sure how much this effected their other ips someone else would know better but it was clear that there was a market for a historical action RPG series hence the success of odyssey however games like this are not what die hard fans who were very jaded at the point were looking for and they lost us after that it broke the lore worse than making female astartes in war hammer (Assassins creed odyssey broke me - LazerzZ) - this ties into the previous points but whenever feedback was intergrated it wasnt from fans it was from games journalists who will complain about concerns far from what players want just look at elden ring and "easy mode" - Lack of clear narrative direction/ creative missmanagement (they ended the big bad 'Juno' they had build up for nearly a decade in a tie in comic as well as numerous other baffling creative decisions that made no real sense like the english accents in unity or the torii gate controvery for a modern example) -Straight up lying to/ misleading fans, Assassins creed Valhalla thier most successful title was marketed on having many mechanics that got removed by the rpg creeds returning this shamelessly was done to the literal minimum threshold to where they couldnt get sued for false advertising. With every game further and further away from its original vision AC 1 and 2 these games became less and less true to themselves and allowed to develop forward instead of regressing (being made into ubislop) while being more and more a vehicle for profit and investment over art rather than a synthesis of the two. I didnt buy odyssey or mirage, I wont be buying shadows and I sincerely hope shadows is the game that will take out 'Abstergo Entertainment' once and for all. They corrupted everything we stood for and lost everything we gained, Altair was a prophet.
@@renemuller7383 What? You mean people don't presentially get together with their friends, each with their own computer connected to a LAN, to play Doom anymore? I'm shocked!
@@Lowdian : actually.. a friend of my does regulary still participate in LAN's... though they are playing more modern games. though to be fair we where not talking about lan but about online-play.
It was the perfect stop gap between the cod releases and died as soon as the new cod came out. It was fun and crazy to think it’s closing down now and gone forever.
Also people who are not unemployed hate skill based matchmaking. You get 1 good game and next 10 games are a fuckfest where you are the one getting fucked
What's funnier about all of this is that and I'm pretty sure about it, is that the game was not profitable enough to maintain management and executive salaries or keep them their bonuses. I've read about a lot of games that actually break even or make a slight profit be shut down because apparently the expectation of the suits were 10x higher but they were expecting a massive success early on, probably still thinking Fortnite and Genshin levels of profits are still within reach.
The problem with skill based matchmaking that people have is that its no longer just for ranked game modes but also casual game modes. In a casual game there used to be a mixed bag of players with varying skill levels and maybe 1 or 2 really good players on either team and now you're pretty much going up against what the game considers to be people at your skill level but not really as what happens is every match they assess how you did and decide whether you need an easier lobby or a harder one the next time around. Ultimately this can lead to really bad players never having issues while the average and highly skilled players get shafted with high ping, worse latency, and more frequent packet bursts (lag). I know this because me and my friend play cod together sometimes and when I'm hosting we have like 80-100+ ping but when he's host we have maybe 30-60 ping, he can't survive my lobbies but I absolutely stomp in his and we live in the same area. Matchmaking used to pair you up with people within your area but not anymore, those 80-100+ ping lobbies are taking place in severs that are based in other states as I'm from the US and sometimes even in other countries and that's why the ping is so high, they are literally telling you you're too skilled to get randomly matched with people in you're area unless they themselves have the same skill as you or better.
Honestly just give us the option to turn it off too just anything and make it work better I don't want to fight bots one game and cause I got thirty kills against bots I'm fighting my demons
14:11 I hate the 30% cut argument. I'd imagine these studios are spending more having to distribute the game themselves and maintain those servers and staff.
That SBMM comment was a little bit detached. It’s a point of contention precisely because there is a lot of people that don’t want it. I don’t want SBMM in casual games/modes. it’s totally unnatural. I want to hop into a lobby where everyone gets thrown together against each other, and the only difference between people, is their username. I don’t want a brainless ‘consistent’ experience. It is the inconsistency that creates memorable crazy moments. It is the unknown possibilities that makes me excited to play, knowing that something amazing can happen at any time. A game lobby should have players from every single “skill level”, all mashed together. That is what a community is too. Everyone being a similar skill level is BORING. (in casual gaming.) If you want SBMM then fine, go play ranked, go compete, but don’t shove it down the casual throat. It RUINS games. Team Fortress 2 started dying in 2015, the moment they introduced matchmaking (SBMM) into CASUAL mode, removing their normal Valve servers in the process, in the same update they introduced competitive mode. There is a reason for that. Competitive mode is fine. But don’t fucking tamper with Casual. Matchmaking has NO ROOM in casual games. Their purpose is competitive.
Fr, Asmon's take threw me off guard. SBMM should not have any major influence in public/ casual lobbies, if your casual lobbies makes you feel as if you are in ranked matches, that's a problem
It's anti-friendship. I can't play with my 3KD friend, I get destroyed in his SBMM lobbies. And my 0.6KD friends have a terrible time in my lobbies. We've had to make purposefully nerfed 2nd accounts on COD for partying up so everyone can have a decent experience and not get dragged into the best players CDL gold tier sweat lobbies.
I think they actually did a study on the satisfaction of players with vs without SBMM. If I remember correctly, the better 50% of players were slightly more happy, but the worse 50% was significiantly enjoying the game less. I mean it makes sense, if you're a 45 year old person, that has barely played any games but just wants to enjoy this one for a bit, it makes no sense to be grouped with mid/high players. You'll just keep getting rekt and you'll get frustrated
People's hatred with SBMM is that it sacrificed your connection to the server to find a more balanced lobby. So you end up with packet loss and desyncs all over the place.
I don't see why they couldn't simply have separate lobbies which are completely transparent about which have SBMM and which don't then that way there's no need for playerbases to be at each others' throats about which one is best, I'm one of the people very against SBMM because I know the maths they use, just label them clearly, job done
Skill based match making is good when it is as advertised, the issue is most competitive games now use skill based match making and feed it into an algorithm to make players play as much as possible by intentionally stacking games so one side is more likely to win. Hence why most players don't like skill based match making.
The reason why the game died is pretty simple. Players came from Call of Duty, where Skill Based Match Making is VERY VERY strict. They thought they were good but got negative KD's after realizing no-life players are just better than them. They just said ''fuck that shit'' and went back to their protected lobbies on CoD.
I had a feeling this would happen. They promised so much before launch, but most of the changes haven't even came out, and those that did, didn't even come until season 2, when one of the best Call of Duty's in years launched. They didn't even have good net code until after season 1's mid-season, months after launch, after 3 successful beta's that didn't have those problems. Then you had the XP situation. Also most of the maps aren't good for the audience they were trying to pull. And they didn't nerf problematic hero characters until people started leaving and not returning
Skill based match making exists so that casual players don’t get rolled on every game. The result is that my experience is negatively affected so that the person who barely plays the game has a better experience. That concept in itself is a problem. Before anyone suggests “your experience is worse with sbmm because you don’t wanna have to play with people as good or better than you” that’s not my complaint at all. The way I see it we have two options: 1. SBMM (prioritizes a players overall stats as a means of determining which host to connect them to) 2. Regional Matchmaking (prioritizes a players connection and latency to the host as a means of determining which host to connect them to). Everyone complains about lag and latency, server issues, ghost bullets, delay, and other such connection related nonsense, but then refuses to acknowledge the fact that 50% of the connection problems are a result of SBMM. Why am I on the east coast playing in a lobby that’s hosted in California with people who live in western states? Why is my latency 20ms higher than the lobby average? Hmm I wonder? Oh ya never mind I forgot, latency is a skill issue. My fault.. I don’t care who’s in my lobbies. One game it might be most casuals and I have a good game, one game it’s all greasy cheese finger basement sweats and I get folded like a Lawn chair. That’s fine! That’s the game. What’s not fine is connecting me to a server 1900 miles away for no reason other than the amount of kills I got last game. That’s dumb. Give us regional matchmaking, we all have decent connection, and the playing field is level, if you suck you suck, if you’re goated you’re goated, fairs fair. Ranked is natural SBMM. We don’t need to artificially induce it in public lobbies to cater to casual players. Just give me the best possible connection every time regardless of the lobbies skill level. -End Rant-
People are starting to downplay the DEI aspect, not even in the top 3 issues according to Asmon. Nah people had enough, even if the game is good, DEI detected will be ignored.
I also played halo back in the day but there was a clear difference between ranked players and the variety of players you would encounter in social playlist . Today everything feels like ranked 90% of the time unless the engagement optimization matchmaking is throwing you a bone . Partially referring to call of duty.
Not many are aware Ubisoft shut down the Division Heartlands too some time back. The game was in development for like 4 YEARS. I even got into an alpha test. I wish I recorded some gameplay. I didn't think they would straight up cancel a game that was in development for that long. Ubisoft is not lookin good.
Ubisoft said it themselves, "Players should get used to not owning their (ubisoft) games."
We did.
It's ironic. They say "players should get used to not owning THEIR games" and not "players should get used to not owning OUR games". Clearly they used those choice of words very carefully to make you think you own them, while also talking about NOT owning them. Doublespeak at its finest.
I love when consumers vote with their wallets and pull a big middle finger towards these shit companies. Companies that pull this shit (get use to not owning our games) where piracy is justified.
@PartyhatRS and that failed catastrophically. They should've said nothing for their own good
Yup. They should get used to players not buying their games any day now.
My last Ubisoft game was division 2. I'll never buy another, that game was such a regression from the first, I found myself banging various rocks together to make fire, then I was terrified of the fire I created. Fuck modern gaming.
Not going on steam because they take 30% when the discoverability of just being on steam will boost your games sales by 10x is moronic
i didn't get it because it wasn't on steam lol
well there are a lot of people like me who won't buy games unless they are on steam because we don't want more bloatware on our pc's
@@ohlosha It was horribly difficult to even download it.
To be fair who would buy it even if steam shows it to you? I never heard about this game and on first look its just another slop shooter.
@@InsertArgumentHere that's an exaggeration, as if you would need to download it every time you want to play it
"Gamers are so lazy, it's just launcher that takes 2 minutes to install"
1) Please wait for an update for our launcher.
2) Username and password are not working.
3) Request password reset.
4) Log into email to get reset email.
5) Do this little puzzle to prove you are not a bot.
6) Email not there.
7) Check junk, email not there.
8) Recall that the account is tied to your other email.
9) Attempt to log into email.
10) Password not working for alternate email.
11) Reset password for alternate email.
12) Do this little puzzle to prove you are not a bot.
13) Log into alternate email.
14) Password Reset Link expired.
15) Request another link.
16) Log into account.
17) Prove that you are not a bot.
18) Agree to the new terms of service of the launcher.
18) Update game.
19) Agree to the new terms of service of the game.
20) Finally can play game.
True
You forgot some steps:
- Click link in Mail to reset your Password
- Choose a new Password
- You must choose a Password that you haven't used before
@@robinjordan3094
- Cannot use an old password
Also (at least for me): due to it being nothing but bloatware, wait for the launcher to freeze/hang when opening and closing, then have the game do the same when opening it from the launcher
It would always create a sluggish process, even when using nothing but all SSDs in my PC. It was just overloaded with junk. Tried using it for one game on sale several years back, Watch Dogs, and never again - refunded it and just pirated it after so many times launching it.
Bethesda tried to force the same shite for certain games and hid their Creation Kit behind it, which was needed for larger mod creations with new quests, interiors, etc. Thankfully they got rid of it, but still. It’s one good way to make people go other routes to obtain their shite.
you forgot:
1) complete captcha to prove you are not a bot
2) flawlessly completed captcha
3) it seems you failed captcha
4) flawlessly completed captcha
5) it seems you failed captcha
...
17) flawlessly completed captcha for 12th time
18) it seems you failed captcha you failed too many times captcha blocked for the next hour try later
Looks like players are getting used to not owning their games
I mean it was free to play
@@SwigerQ86even still, Im getting used to not owning their games, including the free ones
As long as the service is good I don't mind. If the service doesn't meet the money I spend fuck that.
Badum tss
based
Ubisoft collecting L's like they're infinity stones.
Off topic, but SBI is collecting L's like they're Pokémon cards and Hot Wheels
The L-Gauntlet.. with every L-Stone. Then with a single snap your arms fall off.
Ubisoft collecting Ls like they're playing Scrabble.
It’s not that rare, they collect them like the beach collects sand at this point 😂
The number of infinity stones in a universe isn't any much the Ls ubisoft is collecting.
It’s a shame, I played XDefiant, it had potential, but the game wasn’t ambitious enough gameplay-wise, and refusing to put it on Steam as a free game was a HUGE mistake. It was clear to me that the game would die very very quickly.
I actually enjoyed it with friends
Ubisoft has an ambition killing problem lol
It had fun gameplay but didn’t see nearly enough support to compete with similar games.
@@linkplayshalo14 the problem is that it just felt like call of duty, like bo4 but worse.
Cod isn't big because of its multiplayer, which i know sounds shocking, they have zombies, they have campaign, they have all these built up side modes that people enjoy.
Xdefiant had Cod ability edition. Its sniping was fun for like 10 or so games and then got boring.
I thought it was just too basic, just had the feel of AAA slop
Wait a fucking minute, Ubisoft had an Osaka branch, AND THEY STILL FUCKED UP ASSASSIN'S CREED SHADOWS AS HARD AS THEY DID?
Because the decision about Yasuke was about pushing an ideology, not about making the game better.
The cultural consultant of that game is a Korean-American. Let that sink in...
Because they were never making a game. They were making propaganda for a cult.
@@NuttachaiTipprasert”Eh he’s got the slant, he will do”
Yeah, and they hid behind the Osaka branch when people called out their errors.
F2P and not on Steam XD
What a brilliant move Ubisoft XD
Also F2P on console.
Has nothing to do with steam bro
@@B1u35ky Of course it has nothing to do with Steam, nobody said it was steams fault ? Where do you get that from ??😊
To be fair, even when their games re on steam they are big fail
their best peak from their last game was 8000 ... I mean steam or not it change nothing and look star wars outlaw peak at 2486 ...
@@nicolasc2269 exactly, nothing to do with Steam
-hero shooter with stupid abilities
-goofy unserious art style
-they tried attaching the Tom Clancy name to this arcade shooter
-overly-expensive micro transaction
-not on steam but on one of the worst launchers in existence
-one of the worst anti-consumer companies ever
-typical DEI hiring and studio mismanagement leading to a bloated budget
The gameplay was actually decent, and the lack of SBMM was a breath of fresh air, it felt like playing a shitty version of Modern Warfare 2 (2008)
True, I had a fun time in the first few months and then just went on to play other games but didn’t know it’d have such a short lifespan
"-they tried attaching the Tom Clancy name to this arcade shooter" --- this is a sin
@cravepoison2010 seems like basic arcade shooters with little depth like this never last long. I'm already bored of bo6 in the same way. After a while it's just more of the same, gets boring
Don't forget the shitty net code
The whole point of the game was to create an arcade shooter using Ubisoft ip’s, based on your comment it seems you don’t realize that Tom Clancy games ARE Ubisoft games, have been for decades. Also the guy in charge of this game made mw2, it was meant to feel like old cod
The best thing Concord did in its short life was set the full refund precedent.
😂😊
You forgot CREW 1 and California 😂
Under rated opinion
Not on steam be because Ubisoft gets traumatised everytime they look at the live player count
Nah. Because they want all the money rather than payibg 30%
The playercount trauma is new for them
@@animelytical835430% of free is still free
This game unironically had over 1.5 mil players over the launch month, they are just greedy idiots
No. It's not on Steam because they don't want to be subject to enforcable refunds for future projects where they rip off the customer.
@@Nahrix It's probably a mix of both... I mean Ubisoft have started demanded that steamdb be either shut down or hide player numbers... which means public visible player numbers do factor in.
But yes you're correct that refunds do play a role, after all just last year they updated some TOS for Division 2 (among others) stating that "we do not guarantee that our product will be functional or free of viruses" (among other things but I just wrote those specific two because... those two are kind of 'goes without saying' but Ubisoft managed to weasel themselves out of it).
I was an early adopter of XDefiant but stopeed playing after a while for multiple reasons.
1. Not enough content.
2. Super Slow weapon progression.
3. Netcode that saw you getting killed around corners etc regularly.
4. Lack of any SBMM meant that pretty much every match was manned mostly by ultra sweats with every weapon upgrade unlocked.
I quit after a few months and later came back again after a few month break only to find these problems (bar the netcode which improved a bit) had gotten worse, MUCH worse.
I think the total lack of SBMM which they made a selling point actually doomed them for "normal" player uptake and meant the game was eventually entirely peopled only by hardcore sweats with every weapon unlock and anyone new who tried it was kerb stomped every match until they uninstalled.
Same, the netcode was very bad, killed around the corners and getting killed with 3 shots while I put an entire mag in the face of the player and he still run like I was shoting flowers.
Weapons were extremely EASY to progress?? New guns are gated behind some fairly easy tasks ("4000 damage with AR's, get 20 head shots with SMG's, etc.). There are no "high level" guns or "low level" ones with large power disparities, they all perform fairly on par with each other. One match with 15 kills will upgrade your gun like 2.5 levels, the vast majority of weapon attachments are available by weapon level 25, you get all attachments around weapon level 40. Getting past 100 is legit just skin unlocks.
You more than likely feel this way because you were discouraged very early on and stopped playing, I suppose from the lack of SBMM and because there was practically NO CONTENT early on. They only added content thru the 2-3 seasons AFTER LAUNCH and only just NOW does the game feel somewhat complete with enough variety.
I enjoyed the lack of SBMM, I'm half decent, so I would get normal games 8/10 times, 2/10 times I would smash the lobby.
The problem for me is lack of people playing! More noobs would equal a WAY better time for the vast majority of people. That was Ubisoft's mistake for not being on Steam.
Net code problems and packet loss was insane at first, it got way better recently, but it was too little too late cuz everyone had already stopped playing by the time they fixed it.
Cant blame lack pf sbmm as its failure when the netcode was the number 1 issue people quit for. Had the netcode not at all been an issue then we could maybe have a picture of what a successful game without sbmm would be received.
The problem is the only people who stuck around are sweats, so all matches became sweaty. When there was 15million players the matches were truly a mixed bag.
You forgot:
-anticonsumer statements (need to get used to not owning games)
-terrible steam implementation (no achievs, no trade cards, just a shortcut to their launcher)
-removing players ability to play games they bought
-copy/paste game design with little to no innovation.
Not that your not Right. But are Trade Cards really a big thing?
watch dogs has trading cards, extending to things like emotes and packs.
@@didiwever834 They are for some people apparently.
@@didiwever834 they are irrelevant for most people, but imo the main thing is the badge for decorating your profile which you get from getting all the cards, which is also irrelevant for most people lmao.
but there's a lot of people that get the badge for their favorite games, i 've seen many people with the badge of things like terraria, don't starve, L4D2 and that one weird guy dedicated to collect all the badges of every game.
The Ubisoft Connect bullshit fucked me up so bad
The biggest reason they’re failing is the massive overhead.
Huge HR departments, DEI initiatives, and too many people not directly involved with game development. It’s unsustainable and baloons budgets.
Could be.. and lawsuits definitely do not help. TBH. A lot of games have suffered legal axes since Atari. (Rare, another example)
It's not that straight forward, the overhead becomes a problem when you're not making enough profits, take Microsoft for example, their overhead is huge but still represent a small percentage of their turnover, if their profits suddenly drop, what was let's say 30% overhead becomes 90% overhead which indeed becomes a problem, but the root cause wasn't initially the overhead, same goes for Ubisoft, it was an extremely profitable company with huge revenues, which means the overhead would naturally be big for such a big company, so their problem is not the overhead, it's the profits, they're simply not making enough money.
@ Excactly the point i made. You’re just over complicating it.
Same issue Disney is facing. Too much money going out not enough coming in. Salaries are the highest cost for any company.
@@steffen89able Yeah, but they are not failing "BECAUSE of the overhead", they are failing because their games are not selling. If for some reason you have less income and can't afford your mortgage anymore, the problem is not your mortgage, it's your loss of income.
Clueless take.
having casual no sbmm and ranked sbmm is the easiest way to make sure both sides are happy. if i dont play for a week i dont want to be put in the same lobbies when i was sweating because i dont want to sweat everytime i get on a shooter for example
Next month is national layoff month. For those of you who don't know in corporate America, the majority of layoffs occur in January. It is a pretty common trick corpo use to make the numbers look good during the first quarter. Ubisoft and gaming companies like them are in for a blood bath next month.
@@day7053 thx for the input I didnt know that
Still, ubisoft is based in france and one of their major studio is in canada
sounds like another "how to be american on internet" thing ngl
Ubisoft is American????? What???
January is the 4th quarter of year, as quarters are based off of fiscal years which end March 31st end of the day. They have to make their books look great so investors keep investing
They layoff at this time because it makes the 4th quarter look better at the beginning plus January is usually the slow period up until mid-late Feb until the end of March, but it may also tie into not firing people before the end of the tax season or maybe something to do with not firing people until after the holidays, who knows maybe it all ties together.
while im not saying you're entirely wrong, you also forget that waiting to fire people until after the holidays happens because firing people during the holidays means the long term loyal and reliable employees dont get as much room to be off for the holidays, and work is busiest right before the holidays so it's better to wait until things slow down to start laying people off.
I'm not disagreeing with you, I just think it should all be taken into account.
It's gonna start this month
"7 months old. He was just a kid." - Phil
Phil.. you know the wine makes you emotional.
Oh hell yeah, a Sopranos reference on an Asmon video! My favorite show!
They compromised
Abortion
Its America all over again huh-
The studio never had the makings of a varsity athllete
I waited 20 years for a Japanese assassin's creed game. I compromised and let the company collapse
My biggest problem with SBMM isn't necessarily the skill-based part, but rather the match-making part. I think match making hoppers that remove the ability for players to organically meet up with the same group of people hour after hour, day after day is poisonous for long-term game community building. Everyone's first MMO guild, Quake clan, or Counter-Strike team is a product of playing on persistent dedicated servers where players have the liberty to repeatedly cross paths and socialize like they do in the real world. When playing a game involves you being told who/when/where to play it's kind of analogous to the difference between playing a game during recess and phys-ed class. Recess is fun because it's on your terms. Phys-ed is a coin toss depending on who the teacher decides to group you with. With PC multiplayer on dedicated servers this was never an issue. If you wanted to chill you could go to a newbie server. If you wanted more challenge you'd go to a better server. If you wanted a balanced match you had pickup games, scrims, ladders, and leagues.
Imagine you worked on Division Heartland, the game got cancel.
They move you to work on Xdefiant.
Then your tasked to design a group of "operators" that look like they belong in a Jaguar commercial...
Imagine having a life where you go outside and live life..
🤷. Last Ubisoft game I played was rainbow6: Vegas..
And the only other FPS I've played are CS titles, N64 goldeneye(PS2 also)/perfect dark..
I have a Wii and PS2 that I rarely use and a PC that id rather game on..
mouse & keyboard, all I need.
🤷. So like, this sorta crap is kinda irrelevant to me, but I'll still check out the topic because it might be relevant to something else in gaming.. case law is a thing, it helps to keep up on.
Imagine they haven’t done anything noteworthy in 10+ years and they have to try get a new job with this type of resume I bet that’s pretty common 😂
@@ImPoStier work experience is still work experience. 🤷
Imagine being free of the rat race tho.. 😂
Not having to commute to work..
No boss up your ass because of "meeting a deadline"..
🤷. 📊🤺
Imagine thinking any game Ubisoft makes would be good…
One thing left of the list was, 50% - 75% of the game "developers" at Ubisoft are rookies just starting out. All the talent has either left or was replaced by a DEI hire, and a lot of the work on Ubisoft games is contracted to outside developers (a majority of them are the talent that left or were replaced).
i guess Ubisoft is dying , with Assassin's Creed their greatest achievement in 20 years , its not unsurprising . They made what some gamers wanted until the gross negligence that are these producer L's came about . The future looks grim for our Canadian game studio but there will be another , hopefully better , Game dev studio. They played themselves by joining forces with sweet baby inc. Literally less than 50 people trying to dictate what the games industry will sell to millions .they could have had a modding effort for games that didn't fit and then all is solved. What we are seeing now are legal layoffs and severances so the CEO's can have a golden parachute come closing time.
11:11
In 2006 A game called Assassin's Creed saved Ubisoft from closing
In 2025 A game called Assassin's Creed assisted in closing Ubisoft
_It's like poetry, it rhymes_ -George Lucas.
Yasuke was an assassin after all. He killed the Ubisoft.
Cycle
6:00 "Ubisoft hoped the game would compete with Call of Duty" Actually had me crack up in the office. Now people looking at me weird. One guy in the next cubicle asked be what I was laughing at. I told him, and he just said "Nobody's competing with Call of Duty." He's not even a big gamer and he knows. So how did these devs not know?
Not gonna lie, I belive someone can compete with Call of Duty, but:
1) you won't overtake it overnight, and it would be dumb to think you can. Doing that will take a LONG time
2) only way you're going to "get on the board" is by numbers. Not launching on steam was a stupid decision, and I'll be honest, I don't remember a lot of advertising being done for the game
Finally, 3) Having the current reputation disaster that Ubisoft currently has will kill your releases. "Get used to not owning your games." THEN WHY THE FUCK WOULD I WASTE MY TIME IN THESE GAMES?! MUCH LESS WASTE MY MONEY!?
remember: if it isn't worth your time, it isn't worth your money, and anything you don't own is not worth either.
Edit for spelling
its downhill for cod for years now, numbers of player go down and down and down. okay mpney goes up because more agressive sales tactics but that has an end some day
@@HasturTheShadowpuppet #1 is actually the reason why I think you can't compete with CoD right now. CoD has become so big, even non-gamers know it. Who among the non-gamers know XDefiant? That's why any prospective competitors to CoD will need to slowly build their audience.
I think a really good Souls-Like/For Honor 2 story mode could save Ubisoft. For Honor is the only game they have that people continue to play. If you picked up 2 axes your playstyle would resemble berserker, if you picked up a longsword it would resemble warden etc etc. They should put all their effort towards making a For Honor 2 story, with fleshed out/smooth combat and challenging boss mechanics. I believe if they did it correctly, it would not only save their company but also create a combat system more enjoyable then souls games.The game would also be unique and original. Turning over a new leaf for ubisoft
A For Honor 2 that’s a prequel to For Honor and you play as Apollyon and she through your the game slowly becomes my radical in her ideology and more tactical in how she gets her way
I was working at Ubisoft Osaka for 5 years, and that's really sad to see its closing, even though there was no such troubles in the past.
And now, they decide to keep the ones which continue to spread the disasters of the company and layoff people who have worked so hard for several years.
I'm not sure if Ubisoft will be able to stay alive for next years.
I sure hope it doesn't stay alive. After everything they did they deserve nothing more.
You're not the white women who work out of france. So you were always gonna lose your jobs first.
if you know them, and they work better than the ones keeping jobs, start a new studio with them and MAKE UBISOFT LOOK DUMB 😂😂😂
Failed project = Close Studio = No Career Development. This is a classic formula to bankruptcy, hiring new people and pray they can do the job better than the one just got fired.
Thank you for perspective, it does seem like we are in a post-competence age.
People are hired/fired based on other criteria, and games fail because of decisions of people who do not know how to make games.
"We don't want to sell on steam because they take 30%"
I love how dumb these companies are, they could sell 2x - 10x more if they sold on steam and make even more money.
They could release it on both and make it 20-30% cheaper on theirs. The consumer doesnt care where his money flows to, consumer wants to consume a good product.
They want to pretend that they can outcompete steams pro user policies. Basically they like their delusion too much.
30% of revenue or profit? Because its easy to assume that a company the size of Ubisoft has significant overhead so a gross 30% off the top of revenue could cost them money.
You do realise the game was free to play?
@joeldykman7591 steam gets a 30% cut of the listed sale price. So a $60 game sold on steam. Company gets $42 and steam gets $18.
I'm scared for trackmania, literally one of the last franchises in their catalogue treating you with some dignity.
Honestly XDefiant wasn’t half bad. There just wasn’t enough to motivate players to stick with it.
Nah the whole thing was ass from day 1. Zero balancing.
I think it never was meant to be an extreme balanced game tho. It just didn’t really have that much of an appeal to stick with it
@@FirstaccountGotcensored Honestly speaking I think you haven't the game before.
Zero balancing?? I don't play the game but what I'm pretty sure if there op/meta instantly nerf
Not half bad is not a great business model
This makes zero sense. 1.5mln people played this game last month. They are shutting this down, because the servers cost them too much, not because the game failed. They failed to make it profitable. And they probably mismanaged costs of keeping it alive into eternity. Just like they mismanaged every part of their development. It's a machine for jobs and employment. This easily could be salvaged, but big companies never learn.
Astoundingly accurate comment
Remember the OKB design bureau.
Then it will all become clear. Waste, corruption, pettiness, and malfeasance.
It's just Marxism with different terms. Same shit, different day.
You just point that out.
" They failed to make it profitable." is the live service game failure.
Given that they started firing devs in a first month of launch when game was only climbing in numbers and desperately needed extra hands to fix all the issues? That's a murder with an intent. Ubisoft pulled the plug back on launch and nobody knows why.
Played it or tried it?
On a side note, i applied to be a concept artist intern for ubisoft 10 years ago, they rejected me because i dont have 1 year experience in the industry. For an intern position.
Kekw. I’m happily freelancing now.
It’s also worth mentioning that Ubisoft continues to release “the same game” every few months. Far Cry 6 was just Far Cry 5…which was Far Cry 4…which was Far Cry 3… .
Far Cry 5 was fantastic, 6th one not that much.
Far Cry is a franchise a far cry from this. That’s one that’s totally different each new integer
@@Neyenn as a fc5 enjoyer hes still right. It was a reskin of fc3 and 4.
Far Cry 5 is the game where bugs from 10 years ago still hasn't been fixed.
They literally created a fortune 500 company by reskining farcry 3 dlc's every year (which are just themed farcry 3 dlc's with 20hrs content and 100 hours busy work nonsense) It's so incredible it lasted this long. Oh and they reskinned assassin's creed origins as well, that one didn't work as well tho.
Here's the thing, the reason fromsoft games are so good is because each game they make started as an idea that was passionately turned into a game, Ubisoft starts out with a game then hastily hires cheap labor to stuff a passable story into it. The story and lore can never be compelling because it's secondary.
This is an abomination of game and art making.
Ubisoft subscription. "You pay us to sell your data." That's why Ubisoft has a game launcher.
Data for what? They have their own launcher to avoid losing 30% to Valve. Steam takes a 30% cut.
@@jimb12312basically market research. And Steam takes 30 percent in exchange for the massive exposure this game surely needed.
@@jimb12312and now they lose everything
@@jimb12312your PC specs, browsing data, the usual stuff. Pretty sure, they are in the midst of a lawsuit because of that right now.
Yea, Steam takes 30%. Not being on Steam has done wonders for Ubisoft, hasn’t it? They were valued the highest in 2018, said they were moving away from steam in 2019 and immediatelly after started losing stock value during the height of Covid pandemic.
But yea, that 30% steam cut is not worth the exposure, better get on that Epic games train, kekw.
To the guy saying Steam takes a 30% cut. First, it's free to play, so Steam takes 30% of nothing, Ubisoft would have lost so much money. Second, discoverability is a thing, market access is a thing, and Steam is best in both accounts, meaning you'd win more than you lose. Third, big companies have better deals, around 10-15%.
I remember a collegue once told me, he had a friend working at Massive and they got into an argument. The guy from Ubi said, "There are more important things than gameplay". Well, yes, just look at the state of the company.
Let's not even talk about the studio he moved to, working on Everywhere, which has burned millions of dollars and has literally nothing to show yet (and most probably will never).
Sad to hear that "Everywhere" is no where near completion. I'd really hope that Leslie Benzies, former President of Rockstar Games, would be different.
So what you're saying is Everywhere is Nowhere
I remember they glaze the fuck out of this game. "Cod killer"
Yeah they glazed it so much it drowned
It was a good game untill you realise it was on Ubisofts own client and not on steam
Yeah idk how you're going to kill CoD when your singular selling point is CoD with no SBMM. That's a thing only CoD-loyal players care about, which is a problem because most of them are too loyal
Who wants to be associated as a COD killer? They already killed it off themselves.. the only audience they have is raging adrenaline junkies
Ubisoft shutting down all the woke studios
Can’t feel bad for any game that refuses to put its self on steam and fails.
It really failed tho cause of all the delays of everything they put it into the game they waited last minute and had got denied to be put on playstation and xbox cause they took so long
The game got 15million registered players. Yes not releasing on steam hurts and being tied to the ubisoft launcher hurts but thats only on pc. Console gamers dont have to download the launcher.
What killed the game was releasing it in a borderline alpha state with zero content and abysmal netcode.
My problem with sbmm, is a method of it in cod, is to put me against players of equal or close to equal opponents (this is fine) but typically my team itself is usually below my opponents skill level.
Apex had the smme problem. They put you through a meat grinder 5 matches in a row, but then throw you into fair lobbies until you do well in one match (do well, not win) and then it's back to the grinder.
This was a really fun game. What killed it was the delays since the beta, sever lag, and they were too little too late on the updates. Rest in peace XDefient, you will be missed.
lol, happy that the game and the studio shuts down.
@@ihatecabbage7270 The fact that you're happy about that, probably should do some reflecting, brother.
@@ihatecabbage7270 I agree that Ubisoft deserve the hate. But not the game, it was fairly popular last month alone pulling almost a MILLION players.
Yet Ubisoft started downsizing the first month of its release when it was getting players faster than any Ubisoft game.
Ubisoft killed the game because it wasn't getting them enough money quickly. Practically shooting themselves in the foot.
Did they ever add SnD?
@@yssera yep
The problem isn't that Skill-Based Matchmaking exists; it's that there's no alternative in the form of unranked/casual. Who genuinely wants to sweat and tryhard every single game?
Meanwhile Conqueror's Blade's NA/EU are begging for Skill-Based MM to come back to their ranked mode, and are all playing normal queue because of how bad ranked is without it. Gotta have a balance, exclusively either direction kills a game.
Doesn't really matter because those sweating people will just join unranked/casual games to pub stop, and or smurf like any other game.
Skill-based matchmaking is inherently bad. Being good should enable you to do better, with skill-based matchmaking, everyone is forced to only do okay.
fps games are way too stressful now. i feel like i need to be drinking just to play them. titanfall was the last fps game i had fun with.
@@captaingrizzly9511 This sounds ridiculous to me. As long as it's not a BR or the TTK isn't too high, how are you getting stressed by FPS games? Just find one with a TDM then and no stress.
We have to thank Ubisoft for being the prime example on what to NOT do in anything gaming-related.
Xdefiant was a good game but not enough content to keep players engaged. The mastery camos also took way too long to grind and there was only a battle pass every season and a skin shop. The game played incredibly well compared to todays bo6 stability issues, constant packet burst, all the lies and manipulation from activision and so on. Big rip, this was Ubisofts best game.
Agree to this. It was actually a good game.
I redownload it over the weekend, short lived lol
I loved XDefiant and it's pretty hilarious that all the CoD fanboys that bitched and moaned about XDs launch issues now has BO6 with all its messed up issues. All the bitching about the netcode and now BO6 is much much worse than XD ever was. Not only that the hit registration is so fucked people think that there's skill based damage and there very well might be considering how shady Activision is.
Same goes for the movement. All the SBMM protected kids came to XD and were blown away by the movement because they genuinely did not know MW3 had way crazier movement because sbmm protected them from the people who actually knew how to use it. Now BO6 has even crazier movement but they still wouldn't know because they are still in protected lobbies with other people who have no idea how to use it. SBMM has done irreparable damage to the entire arcade FPS genre.
I think the total lack of SBMM which they made a selling point actually doomed them for "normal" player uptake and meant the game was eventually entirely peopled only by hardcore sweats with every weapon unlock and anyone new who tried it was kerb stomped every match until they uninstalled.
@@TheDoats oh yeah the BO6 servers are terrible the number of times you get insti killed by someone who was not even around the corner yet is FAR worse than any CoD title of the last 8 years or so.
Ubisoft circling the drain... They know Shadows won't save them.
What do you mean, the AC game set in japan that everyone was clamoring for with a "checks notes" ... a black samurai ?!!!.
God how i wish they would have released it this year so they can have all the bombs in a row.
@8:37 yeah those construction workers are still employed. Not like they made defiant, no need to fire them
The problem isn't that it was a bad game. The problem is Ubisoft decided to try and tackle a genre that already has deep rooted games people aren't willing to abandon so easily. Love it or hate it CoD has an enormous player base and while some players do venture outside of that circle it isn't a number that makes the space profitable. It's why trend chasing is bad in general. You're trying to compete with established things that are already people's favorite. Unless you do something truly spectacular you have no hope in space, not unless you build it around the idea that you can't spend as much developing it and can always upgrade it over time as popularity grows. If you're going to try and compete with deeply rooted IPs you need to start small, build a fan base, and try to expand it from there. Outright competing isn't going to work in your favor. Sure, there's a slim chance of success but it's so small you're better off not trying at all. Stick to what you know and what you do best. Otherwise you end like Volition. Getting shuttered because you were forced to make a game out of your wheelhouse and you decided to do so in the worst way possible, pissing off all of the people who would have supported it. A popular trend in game development these days.
Calling it now: Multiverses will be the next live service game to announce their closure
@@B-Ran_the_Man oh right that’s a thing lol. I’ve played the beta, I think, looked solid, then I’ve heard about all the bs, monetisation and all, and completely lost interest. Is the game even out?
Yasuke should have been a side character like Da Vinci. They coulda made him an awesome iconic character with a great storyline.
I didn't even know XDefiant existed, probably because it's not on steam
as far as i know it's only on epic games and the ubislop launcher. steam might have helped
Sad truth is if something isn't on Steam then odds are against it unless it's extraordinary.
Fr tho, the game released on may 2024 and I never heard of it before 😅
@@wisico640 how? it was everywhere when it launched
@@DeltaDragon79 why do people act like fortnite, fall guys, minecraft, roblox, and rocket league don't exist??? Three of those games are literally 100 times more successful than the top games on steam; candy crush also has better numbers lol.
I feel like the only reason this game failed was because it wasn't on Steam. I think a lot of people would have at least tried a free to play CoD-type game if they didn't have to deal with all of the bullshit of making a new account, and download a completely different launcher among all the other extra bullshit.
never even heard of this game before this.
It was part of the reason but the main problem was they were competing in a market that had a giant like cod and they were very slow to release the game and a lot of things kept getting delayed cause they kept waiting to do things like if I remember correctly they waited so long to do the paper work for it to be on playstation and xbox that they got denied for the game to release so it took even longer for the game to release
2:00 No skill-based matchmaking and the way Activision has it implemented (EOMM) is there specifically to put you in the sweatiest lobbies possible so that everybody stays at a similar KD. It's not enjoyable and the majority of people don't like it. And you can see this in the posts of from people that played XD saying it's a breath of fresh air compared to this or other games. There's other games that don't have SBMM where the community have said similar things.
Skill-based matchmaking is a cope from Activision themselves. There's no reason for it to be in games. All it does is it protects the worst players on the planet by putting them into lobbies where with a good player on their team that has to carry them... I'm talking dudes that have never handled a controller in their lives or don't understand that they have to press W to go forward. Like people this stupid, that's what skill-based matchmaking protects. The majority of people don't see a difference between skill-based matchmaking and non-skill-based matchmaking until you have played for more than an hour. Then you realize you haven't been put into the sweatiest lobbies on the planet for winning a few games. Every lobby is average with no SBMM, with maybe a few outliers here or there, where there's like a streamer triharding.
And the way SBMM is currently implemented, it makes grenades curve in the air towards people that the algorithm decides must die. Every part of Call of Duty nowadays is rigged. There is nothing that isn't rigged. The damage can randomly be dropped. Your damage could be upped if you're a terrible player. There is nothing that is fair about how SBMM works... And this is something that's 100% possible because this is how the Ricochet anti-cheat works. Ricochet drops damage to zero if you're cheating. But it can also do things like raise your fall damage to a million percent, which explains some of the clips where people have died from mantling on a van with full health. It can also curve grenades and curve projectiles and this is something that we are seeing in multiplayer done to everybody.
Also, if skill-based matchmaking was so necessary, how did Call of Duty blow up to what it was before 2019 when they implemented the how strict the algorithms were? Sure, there was light SBMM back then, but it was light. We didn't have disbanding lobbies like this. The reason why the lobbies disband is because the algorithm is so strong it literally needs to recalculate new players because every game you play makes it so that you cannot be mashed with the players you just played with because it's already remathting everything out.
SBMM is unnecessary. Also, the only reason why it was implemented in the first place was because the algorithm prioritizes putting you in lobbies with people that have skins to peer pressure you into getting skins, that's literally what the patent filing for it said.
If a PC game is not on Steam it does not exist.
What about Fortnite lol?
Game Pass? BattleNet?
What about for Retro gaming? In other words: GOG because Steam doesn't provide built-in compatibility tweaks like they do
@@SomeRandomRUclipsr2024 Fortnite on PC? Lol
@@BryanTS90 I dont think it will work this well again with battle net. Also the early days required you to put in way less data about yourself. Email + PW was enough. D2, WC3 and SC were super popular and there basically wasnt anything negative to say about them. I wont be suprised if the average gamer has a 3 digit amount of accounts by now (not just games) and yet another one is just exhausting, esp. if money is involved.
"Battlefield killers" and "CoD killers" - the only game they kill is their own LMAO
Damn right 🤣, i was laughing when asmon post this
because of the brain dead masses (ironically the same people that complain). Sunk cost fallacy.
Just like Battlebit
@@Ducky-vl7mp Battlebit definitely can be better than CoD or Battlefield. They just dont update it. The game still has the same guns and mechanics.
Battlefield is dead already tbh. There's like 0 hype for Battlefield 7 and rightfully so
Even if u had it on Ubisoft u still have to have a Ubisoft account to play and still need the launcher to then launch the game for the first time(which is 99% of the time according to them)
I dont remember the last time i bought a Ubisoft game :S
Last ubisoft game i played was battle of the battle of giants games for ds well over a decade ago
For honor
Recently bought Ghost Recon Wildlands, so freaking good man, playing thru it twice😂
I do. Rocksmith 2014 nearly a decade ago. Still a great piece of software. There's no way in hell I'll "upgrade" to the new rocksmith live service.
It was assassin's Creed 2 for Xbox 360 lmao
Remember its not the studios and DEFO not Ubisoft's fault.. its the gamers for not mindlessly consuming the slop!
I stopped playing this because it wasn't on steam so I literally forgot it existed. It was a pretty fun game.
What is Ason talking about? Old school fps shooters remember a thing called dedicated servers where you can choose a server to play in and stay in. Let’s be real. Gamers like me still prefer fps shooter with dedicated servers.
Yeah. Then you would make friends and forms beefs with those lobbies and people were more social since you were playing back to back games with the same people. Now its garbage and has been since like after MW3 (the original)
Most games still use dedicated servers.
This precisely. I never got into CoD for this. We hosted on GameSpy for MoHAA. We had a mod that basically played like Advanced Warfare. We had our own banners, and full control of the ban hammer. We had control over speed and gravity of the game for the whole room. We played however we wanted to and we had so much fun. FPS has been lame af for a very long time.
Ahhh the great times of Battelfield and Medal of Honor!
I still play Battlefield 4 PC almost weekly on similar servers in EU, it's great.
Aaah... Natural Selection... Can't wait to see David Attenborough (AKA editor) talk about this one on the clips.
NGL this game was incredible as far as fun FPS’ go… I’m not surprised that it’s not profitable though, given that the purchasable skins/gunskins/battle pass stuff was mostly “blah” and it was really rare to see anybody who actually bought anything. Like you’d be able to see who paid for skins and I would say out of like 10 games in a row, you might see like one or two people per game… sometimes less often.
The problem with skill base matchmaking is mostly due to how they pair teams. Some games think that if you pair 2 great players with 4 garbage players, it offsets against a team of 6 equally skilled players.
You have no idea what you're talking about.
@@Mikey-uj3dc He is just looking for an excuse why he loses. Ofc in his example he is one of those 2 good players who are held back by their dogsht teammates.
@@Mikey-uj3dc halo infinite (bad game anyhow) for example does exactly what hotfire said, you can check opposing team ranks, so in casual you can be onyx, & be given silver or gold players while the opposition will have two diamond & a plat or two , which obviously favors the team with a higher bar than it does with you having to carry & sweat out to win, if everyone was equal, 1 onyx + dead weight v 1 onyx + dead weight then its no biggie, but thats not how it turns out 90% of the time in casual during its more peak player counts
nor how it calculates it in blops cold war where it seems to keep everyone in a loop of a 50% win/loss which ends up feeling unearned & stupid
Hence the “hey I don’t mind playing ranked to a decent extent but leave unranked to feel less sweaty” sentiment from anti sbmm peeps, since again in recent years with cod especially they ramped it up to a ridiculous feeling level, asmon hardly seems to play online shooters anymore so him using vague memories of 2007 & automatically equating its the exact same level is disingenuous
@Mikey-uj3dc Go play halo infinte. That's exactly how it works. It starts looking for similar skill, then if it cant find players, it expands the range to include others who don't belong. Sometimes im the better player with weak teammates and other times im the dead weight. Best systems imo are ranked playlist that factor rank only. Gold players play against ONLY gold players for example.
@@ProphetJigaloA 6/10 player like me in sbmm era cod gets the worst experience possible. I'm not good enough to compete with the streamers or anyone with a decent rank.
I'm also too good to get an easier lobby where I can stomp a father of 4 with a negative kd.
"Denying that there are plans to pull the plug after season 4" This was 100% a true statement...because they are pulling the plug BEFORE season 4 ever happens, lol.
2 games ubisoft. You killed 2 games this year.
Xdefient was not horrible tbh
The name is pretty horrible
it was pretty bad
played it once and hated it. These F2P shooters are mostly garbage. Full of monetization, cheaters, and horrible gunplay
True, but not putting it on Steam effectively killed it. It probably would have died regardless but at least it could survive a year or so lol
Comparing to recent games? Maybe not horrible. Does it bring anything to the table? Nah, nothing original or done better than most of other similar FPS games
Was a really good idea. If it had had an xtra 2 years before it released I think it would’ve had a good shot. Brand new franchise with very little content just couldn’t compete with the giant content slop that cod pours out
Their DEI shooter flopped?!
Oh my God!
They don't even have a single-player campaign. And they claimed it was going to be the next COD-killer? What hubris.
Black ops 4
@btwags the most poorly received COD of all, and after 14 COD games were released beforehand. You call that a win for XDefiant?
@@RworldKM Ghosts was WAY worse received.
If this game was not part of Ubisoft and was on Steam, it would have done amazing.
Nah, it would have still died. Not launching on steam hurt its potential. But the horrible netcode issues and abysmal lack of content is what truly killed the game.
Ive always said that xdefiant is the best most polished alpha ive ever played. It needed at least another year in the oven to add content and polish stuff like the netcode.
I would not blame the developers, sure probably there is a % of them that are not to par but that doesn't affect the overall product that much, but management. Every large company has a direction, that direction is usually put to paper in a form of a strategic document that basically says - We start out here, our aim is this, this is how we can achieve it - without going into to much detail. One of the quickest ways to check the boxes is expenditure reduction in the form of quality control. Strong quality control sends back product that are not up to standard, this is not only in IT but also every industrial production, causing delays and increasing expenditures. So cutting quality control has been the go to card for many many managers to inflate the success of the company by providing an accounting magic trick causing a rise in popularity of the company due to artificial success. The problem is you can ride that train so far and Ubisoft has been on this ride for a long time. I think it was Heroes of Might and Magic 7 when I said good bye to Ubisoft forever due to corrupted save files that prevented me to finish the game, customer service was useful like smearing Nutella on your haemorrhoids.
After all it is the management that sets the direction of the company and their job is to implement the plans and the strategies that enable the company to position itself on the market, this includes and impacts literally everything from hiring policy, internal policy, deadlines, quality ... but those guys are usually overlooked even though they pat themselves on the back while receiving unearned bonuses that usually overshadow developers annual pay by duble digit factor.
"You shouldn't have done that, he was just a boy. Poor fella." - Cartmen
SBMM (skilled based match making) isnt the issue, like asmond said, its ranked... The issue is EOMM (engagement optimized match making). EOMM is like a slot machine where the wins are determined before you even press play (its been proven, patents exist, dont argue unless youve researched). People think they are talking about EOMM, but they call it SBMM. Not all, but most. Like asmond said, Weve always had SBMM, in ranked to a greater extent, and in pubs, to a lesser extent. What we havent had is the EOMM created by these data nerds.
Actually, EOMM kinda makes sense. If it’s used to distribute the wins evenly to avoid people just having shit luck with the teams and never winning due to it.
@@NameName-ll2yx No its not. Research psychology, and figure out why randomness and addiction are linked. Its the "maybe i win nextime, who knows, its not skill, its lady luck!!!". Thus why you get the gambling addiction. You literally advocated for handing out participation trophies. Id rather lose 80% of my games if i knew for a fact it was my fault. That would mean i could change it in real time by getting better, studying, learning the meta, actually using the strategy in real time, and calming the in game nerves. OR EVEN, sticking my neck out and making friends online who want to team up. All that can be done to improve your win %. IN FACT, if you are winning more than you lose, then that means the algo will FORCE the loss even though you didnt deserve it. It rewards being subpar by handing you wins, and disincentivizes you getting better because it will force you to lose the better you get. thus 50% for all, good and bad. And thats gunna be a NO for me dawg.
No, its SBMM also. The original system just balanced out the lobbies when they gathered players randomly and would move people around which was fine but now it looks for specific ranks before you get into a lobby and when you do, you dont get to keep playing and have to reset the groups over and over because the game is updating your elo
@@NeighborhoodWatchMannyup. I remember MW2 back in 2009-2010. There were no algos. At the beginning I was constantly curb stomped but I would watch and learn from good players and adapt to the point where I would still have a good game even if we lost as a team. And lobbies would carry from game to game so you could stick with the same players.
In BO6, I will have a great game, maybe a second, and then the algo kicks in and I get absolutely slaughtered for two to 3 games until the algo kicks back on and I get a win. And every new match is with a brand new bunch of players. I've even noticed on the smaller maps, spawn points will start to get "aggressive" as in I will spawn literally behind someone. Like the algo is giving me a free kill. It's bizarre.
@@NameName-ll2yxno. Just no. There’s no excuse for rigging players experience in real time to accommodate bad players or trick bad players into thinking they are good so they play more. Eomm ruined cod.
They should learn to code.
Oh, wait…
The reason that Prince of Persia game didn't do well is because they made it like the original PoP games and not the popular ones that started with Sands of Time.
They ruined my boys beautiful hair, that's the real reason it flopped
@@VetriVade It was indeed the terrible Character Design that kept me from buying
Also the simple fact it was a Ubisoft game makes a lot of people not even want to give those game's a try anymore.
@@IgnisHostesTuosDevoretit's the "millennial black dude hair that nobody has irl" look
Also they made the main character the wrong race and played hip hop.
This is what they get for doing Yasuke dirty in Assassins Creed, this is his revenge 😭😭
Justice for Captain BBC!!! 🙏🙏
Big Black Captain 💪🏿
Here’s my solution to match making, 3 modes.
Ranked: as usual
Causal: uses ranks but adds 3-4 standard deviations on each side of your rank to pull a pool from
Party: no guard rails, elites and noobs can and will be placed on the same team, opposing times, in battle royals, welcome Arkham with joker in charge levels of oversight is what I’m getting at.
X defiant is performing to our expectations. We see this game as a CoD killer and we will continue to support the game for a very long time.
- Ubisoft AAAA Game executive
If i worked st consultant company i would suggest that the reason is not enough gays and not enough A's.
skill based matchmaking = good. Engagement based matchmaking = bad. People get these two things confused.
You missed a good couple of things on your list their asom but I got you. Assassins creed was my favourite franchise so I was pretty invested since I was a kid and had a front row seat to this car crash in real time. Assassins creed is the best measure of this because their stocks went up in 2009 as you said which is when Assassins creed 2 released hence why it was their flagship IP
- overlapping dev cycles for games in the same franchise which doesnt allow for the intergration of feedback (this started with brotherhood)
- Releasing broken games with the intention of fixing them later if they do at all (assassins creed Unity which also was the first to add those microtransactions you talk about at 20:29)
- Removal of central mechanics ( to this day the best and most mechanically compelling free running is in the first 4 games go watch a Leo K video if you disagree and AC games without social stealth is ridiculous)
- IP dilution, ill grant im not sure how much this effected their other ips someone else would know better but it was clear that there was a market for a historical action RPG series hence the success of odyssey however games like this are not what die hard fans who were very jaded at the point were looking for and they lost us after that it broke the lore worse than making female astartes in war hammer (Assassins creed odyssey broke me - LazerzZ)
- this ties into the previous points but whenever feedback was intergrated it wasnt from fans it was from games journalists who will complain about concerns far from what players want just look at elden ring and "easy mode"
- Lack of clear narrative direction/ creative missmanagement (they ended the big bad 'Juno' they had build up for nearly a decade in a tie in comic as well as numerous other baffling creative decisions that made no real sense like the english accents in unity or the torii gate controvery for a modern example)
-Straight up lying to/ misleading fans, Assassins creed Valhalla thier most successful title was marketed on having many mechanics that got removed by the rpg creeds returning this shamelessly was done to the literal minimum threshold to where they couldnt get sued for false advertising.
With every game further and further away from its original vision AC 1 and 2 these games became less and less true to themselves and allowed to develop forward instead of regressing (being made into ubislop) while being more and more a vehicle for profit and investment over art rather than a synthesis of the two.
I didnt buy odyssey or mirage, I wont be buying shadows and I sincerely hope shadows is the game that will take out 'Abstergo Entertainment' once and for all. They corrupted everything we stood for and lost everything we gained, Altair was a prophet.
Ut99 / Wolfenstein Enemy Territory / Quake 3 Arena.... "What is skill based matchmaking, just join a dedicated server"
yea.. [grandpavoice] back in my time we where our own matchmaking by deciding on which server to play [/grandpavoice]
@@renemuller7383 What? You mean people don't presentially get together with their friends, each with their own computer connected to a LAN, to play Doom anymore? I'm shocked!
@@Lowdian : actually.. a friend of my does regulary still participate in LAN's... though they are playing more modern games. though to be fair we where not talking about lan but about online-play.
It was the perfect stop gap between the cod releases and died as soon as the new cod came out. It was fun and crazy to think it’s closing down now and gone forever.
Also people who are not unemployed hate skill based matchmaking. You get 1 good game and next 10 games are a fuckfest where you are the one getting fucked
What's funnier about all of this is that and I'm pretty sure about it, is that the game was not profitable enough to maintain management and executive salaries or keep them their bonuses. I've read about a lot of games that actually break even or make a slight profit be shut down because apparently the expectation of the suits were 10x higher but they were expecting a massive success early on, probably still thinking Fortnite and Genshin levels of profits are still within reach.
What's the point to be bought by large company, let them fuck up your products and casted aside. Remain indi please for the sake of god
The problem with skill based matchmaking that people have is that its no longer just for ranked game modes but also casual game modes. In a casual game there used to be a mixed bag of players with varying skill levels and maybe 1 or 2 really good players on either team and now you're pretty much going up against what the game considers to be people at your skill level but not really as what happens is every match they assess how you did and decide whether you need an easier lobby or a harder one the next time around. Ultimately this can lead to really bad players never having issues while the average and highly skilled players get shafted with high ping, worse latency, and more frequent packet bursts (lag). I know this because me and my friend play cod together sometimes and when I'm hosting we have like 80-100+ ping but when he's host we have maybe 30-60 ping, he can't survive my lobbies but I absolutely stomp in his and we live in the same area. Matchmaking used to pair you up with people within your area but not anymore, those 80-100+ ping lobbies are taking place in severs that are based in other states as I'm from the US and sometimes even in other countries and that's why the ping is so high, they are literally telling you you're too skilled to get randomly matched with people in you're area unless they themselves have the same skill as you or better.
2:14 yes, and that is where SBMM belongs, ranked or competitive not casual game modes.
Amen
I can confirm this is a correct opinion.
Honestly just give us the option to turn it off too just anything and make it work better I don't want to fight bots one game and cause I got thirty kills against bots I'm fighting my demons
Thank you that’s what I was thinking
Another CoD killer that killed itself
I'm sure we'll see many studio's shutting down in the next couple years
Only a matter of time before bankruptcy
14:11 I hate the 30% cut argument. I'd imagine these studios are spending more having to distribute the game themselves and maintain those servers and staff.
It's also only 30% up to a certain number of sales and then it goes down to 20% and even lower I think.
What's 30% cut when you hit a much much wider audience. Would you rather make 100k no cut or 400k and give 30% to a platform
That SBMM comment was a little bit detached. It’s a point of contention precisely because there is a lot of people that don’t want it. I don’t want SBMM in casual games/modes. it’s totally unnatural.
I want to hop into a lobby where everyone gets thrown together against each other, and the only difference between people, is their username.
I don’t want a brainless ‘consistent’ experience. It is the inconsistency that creates memorable crazy moments. It is the unknown possibilities that makes me excited to play, knowing that something amazing can happen at any time.
A game lobby should have players from every single “skill level”, all mashed together. That is what a community is too.
Everyone being a similar skill level is BORING. (in casual gaming.)
If you want SBMM then fine, go play ranked, go compete, but don’t shove it down the casual throat. It RUINS games.
Team Fortress 2 started dying in 2015, the moment they introduced matchmaking (SBMM) into CASUAL mode, removing their normal Valve servers in the process, in the same update they introduced competitive mode.
There is a reason for that. Competitive mode is fine. But don’t fucking tamper with Casual. Matchmaking has NO ROOM in casual games. Their purpose is competitive.
Fr, Asmon's take threw me off guard. SBMM should not have any major influence in public/ casual lobbies, if your casual lobbies makes you feel as if you are in ranked matches, that's a problem
It's anti-friendship.
I can't play with my 3KD friend, I get destroyed in his SBMM lobbies. And my 0.6KD friends have a terrible time in my lobbies.
We've had to make purposefully nerfed 2nd accounts on COD for partying up so everyone can have a decent experience and not get dragged into the best players CDL gold tier sweat lobbies.
I think they actually did a study on the satisfaction of players with vs without SBMM. If I remember correctly, the better 50% of players were slightly more happy, but the worse 50% was significiantly enjoying the game less.
I mean it makes sense, if you're a 45 year old person, that has barely played any games but just wants to enjoy this one for a bit, it makes no sense to be grouped with mid/high players. You'll just keep getting rekt and you'll get frustrated
People's hatred with SBMM is that it sacrificed your connection to the server to find a more balanced lobby. So you end up with packet loss and desyncs all over the place.
I don't see why they couldn't simply have separate lobbies which are completely transparent about which have SBMM and which don't then that way there's no need for playerbases to be at each others' throats about which one is best, I'm one of the people very against SBMM because I know the maths they use, just label them clearly, job done
Skill based match making is good when it is as advertised, the issue is most competitive games now use skill based match making and feed it into an algorithm to make players play as much as possible by intentionally stacking games so one side is more likely to win.
Hence why most players don't like skill based match making.
The reason why the game died is pretty simple. Players came from Call of Duty, where Skill Based Match Making is VERY VERY strict. They thought they were good but got negative KD's after realizing no-life players are just better than them. They just said ''fuck that shit'' and went back to their protected lobbies on CoD.
cod multiplayer is waaaay harder and sweatier than X-D was. X-D was actually pretty fun, but just another cod clone that isn't cod
I had a feeling this would happen. They promised so much before launch, but most of the changes haven't even came out, and those that did, didn't even come until season 2, when one of the best Call of Duty's in years launched. They didn't even have good net code until after season 1's mid-season, months after launch, after 3 successful beta's that didn't have those problems. Then you had the XP situation.
Also most of the maps aren't good for the audience they were trying to pull. And they didn't nerf problematic hero characters until people started leaving and not returning
They didn't want to give Gabe his 30% so now they get to refund 100%.
Ubisoft
Upsettingly Bad Infrastructure - Suffocating Our Faithful Team
Skill based match making exists so that casual players don’t get rolled on every game. The result is that my experience is negatively affected so that the person who barely plays the game has a better experience. That concept in itself is a problem. Before anyone suggests “your experience is worse with sbmm because you don’t wanna have to play with people as good or better than you” that’s not my complaint at all. The way I see it we have two options: 1. SBMM (prioritizes a players overall stats as a means of determining which host to connect them to) 2. Regional Matchmaking (prioritizes a players connection and latency to the host as a means of determining which host to connect them to). Everyone complains about lag and latency, server issues, ghost bullets, delay, and other such connection related nonsense, but then refuses to acknowledge the fact that 50% of the connection problems are a result of SBMM. Why am I on the east coast playing in a lobby that’s hosted in California with people who live in western states? Why is my latency 20ms higher than the lobby average? Hmm I wonder? Oh ya never mind I forgot, latency is a skill issue. My fault.. I don’t care who’s in my lobbies. One game it might be most casuals and I have a good game, one game it’s all greasy cheese finger basement sweats and I get folded like a Lawn chair. That’s fine! That’s the game. What’s not fine is connecting me to a server 1900 miles away for no reason other than the amount of kills I got last game. That’s dumb. Give us regional matchmaking, we all have decent connection, and the playing field is level, if you suck you suck, if you’re goated you’re goated, fairs fair. Ranked is natural SBMM. We don’t need to artificially induce it in public lobbies to cater to casual players. Just give me the best possible connection every time regardless of the lobbies skill level. -End Rant-
X Defaint the "Cod Killer" kekw
No wonder they failed, it's pretty hard to fish a Cod and kill it with a video game ! :)=
@@Raidoser this joke is worse than the game.
Blametruth shitting and crying rn
Lol 😅 Can’t wait for the vid
lol hes gonna take it out on cod with more unhinge rants
@@void.hermit😂 The DATA 🤓👆
OHHH THE DATA
Mf needs to make his own game at this point lmfao
People are starting to downplay the DEI aspect, not even in the top 3 issues according to Asmon. Nah people had enough, even if the game is good, DEI detected will be ignored.
Should've been on steam
Asmon has the oldman shirt on ! shits about to get real
I also played halo back in the day but there was a clear difference between ranked players and the variety of players you would encounter in social playlist . Today everything feels like ranked 90% of the time unless the engagement optimization matchmaking is throwing you a bone . Partially referring to call of duty.
Not many are aware Ubisoft shut down the Division Heartlands too some time back. The game was in development for like 4 YEARS. I even got into an alpha test. I wish I recorded some gameplay. I didn't think they would straight up cancel a game that was in development for that long. Ubisoft is not lookin good.