Ubisoft Doubled Down... They Think You're Stupid
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 авг 2024
- I can't actually believe that 1. This is a real interview and 2. They think this is a good idea. If you don't agree with us, you're just not smart enough to see what we're doing FOR YOU. What an incredible timeline.
www.finder.com...
Follow my twitch! / kiraonttv
Join My Discord! - / discord
GET NORDVPN and help support me:
go.nordvpn.net...
USE COUPON CODE: kiratv
Want to support me further? I now have a Patreon.
/ kirayt
------------------------------------------------------------
#ubisoft #nft #quartz
-"So then, why did your business fail?"
-"Ah, because my customers were too stupid to realise how great my product was."
A tale as old as time itself. That being said both escalators and elevators were shunned as being unsafe.
True. But this isn't about safety, this is essentially telling consumers they have a problem they don't understand, so they can sell the solution.
@@Lappelduvideify They're still unsafe. The benefits just outweigh the risks for the most part.
@@Lappelduvideify Elevators were immediately incredibly popular that at least one building was constructed with an elevator shaft before the elevator was even invented, just in anticipation of the latent demand.
"YOU'RE HIRED"
Good thing you are applying for a government job.
When publishers say things like "You don't get it", "Do you guys don't have phones" or that "gamers don't know what they want" we know that they long lost touch with their audience and are only working for growth.
Corporations "haven't lost touch". They were never in touch to begin with. This is a crucial detail most people fail to realize.
Lol... "do you guys have phones?".... classic 🤣
Agree 100%... but in one instance there was a spark of truth in it, i think JAB was right when he said "you think you want it, but you dont" about WoW Classic. Now, after having played it's "relaunch" and my nostalgia being utterly destroyed by it, i agree with him. I thought i wanted it, but now i really wished it never happened. The population had a giant spike and a big fall, and then, just after a month or two, the classic servers were just as empty as the starting zones in retail WoW now. Totally amplifying the bad sides of Classic, even with them removing most game mechanical hurdles by using the new engine for Classic. Was horrible and i regret it.
"you just do not get it, how i am a criminal thief" - ubisoft
"Gamers are dead".
"True ownership is the future", just as they move away from physical media and digital purchases into services and subscriptions? Wow, that's rich.
especially that you will just "own" a receipt to use a skin on their games. This digital ownership is fishy.
@@Pariatech
One block on bitcoin if a megabyte of data, I would understand encoding 3D files and materials but all you can store feasibly at this point is the receipt.
@@JohnSmith-ox3gy witch is why nft is stupid mostly
''True ownership is the Future''
=Translated to what he really meant/wanted to say=
''The Future is that what is yours is mine, what is mine is mine, i am rich, you have nothing''
@@JohnSmith-ox3gy Even if you could store assets in the blockchain, then this asset would still only work in one game. It has been proven countless times by actual game devs, that the idea, that you can buy a nft skind and one game and then use the same skin in another game is simply impossible
Of course gamers "dont get it." NFTs are for investment seekers, *not* gamers. Gamers dont want to do any of this marketplace or block chain stuff. We just want to enjoy a good, feature complete game.
I haven't been going to Ubisoft for feature complete games in almost a decade.
NFT are for gamers. You can cry all day, it will change nothing. Gaming NFTS are the future and they are good for both gamers and developers.
The thing is, what is the investment? People can only make money if other people want an NFT someone else has. At this point I haven't seen that side of it.
@@Bowdon people already spend thousands of dollars on skins, why not just get proper ownership already?
What if I told you once... games were made to have fun with. *adjusts shades*
I love how they always twist "disgust" into "anger", or twist "no interest" into "boycott campaigns".
"All these haters just don't get it"
You have managed to compress 3 terrible ideas into one sentence.
1."All" = mass generalisation.
2." Haters" = people can't have other opinions, and if they do they just hate me in specific for no reason.
3."They don't understand me" = I know what I'm saying is stupid and delusional but I really want to fool people into following me so I won't even try to explain realistically.
it's a common thing in the cryptobro sphere you see. They try to act like they are modern and well informed but are actually stuck in the 2010's internet mentality of thinking every opposite opinion is hate, lie and missinformation.
It's corporate cancel culture. When RUclipsrs says something incredibly stupid and conseqently start losing subscribers they either make a non-apology, cry cancel culture or both
Somehow multimilion corporations use exactly the same tactics
The moment you see the word 'hate' mentioned as a synonym to any kind of feedback, you know you're dealing with something that DESERVES hate
Because it is easier to attack someones character than to address the issue. At least to me, "anger" implies lack of thought and more of an impulse while "boycott" means that they're being bullied.
“Note that this interview was conducted in English which is a second language for both of them, as opposed to their mother tongue which is money hungry nonsense” ☺️
Not Gonna lie, you had me in the first half
Hebrew?
"Dollar dollar pound euro yen peso dollar" - CEO
(translation: "I like money")
Gamers: 'We don't want NFTs.'
Ubisoft: 'You guys just don't get it... you just don't get how much MONEY we'll make off of a handful of whales and rampant speculation!'
Gamers: 'But what value do they have, really? Especially early on?'
Ubisoft: 'Can't hear you, doing some accounting atm.'
what accounting? The millions they'll lose trying to make their NFT work? lmao
@Mauri Font Not only from a coding perspective is the transferral of NFTs to other games/places an issue, but there is also a large financial disincentive to allow you to do so... If you buy a hat or skin from company A, company B won't want you to be able to use it on their platform/game since they also want to sell you their hats/skins/whatever.
@Mauri Font So you want to cash out of a game when you get bored of it? Well, why can't you just sell the game itself? Is it because the whole concept of 'ownership' was taken out back and shot in the head by these companies years ago, maybe? Now you're letting them re-build a fake, walled-garden secondary market inside the corpse of the original secondary market that they murdered, and you're trusting that users will be allowed to make any money off it? Oh sweet summer child, your gullibility is downright charming.
Imagine if they put this much effort into making better games
@Mauri Font if they wanted you to be able to trade skins, they would just put that in the game.
You'll notice that on Runescape, literally every item is tradeable. At least it was when I played 10 years ago.
You could just walk up to a player and initiate a trade, nobody needed an NFT.
Also, the NFT itself isn't actually the in-game item, that's not how block chains work. In order to facilitate the trade, the block chain position has to be linked through code with the in-game item.
Meaning that they could just make the item itself tradeable, without all that extra code.
Also also, if you want to trade the NFT, you now have to log into your game account and trade it, meaning that if the game servers shut down for any reason, the block chain is instantly dead. This is actually a lose-lose situation for both gamers and NFT people.
"So we decided it would not be very smart to hide it" meaning that if they thought the consumers wouldn't be the wiser, it would have been a smart move to hide the fact from them. Crazy how confortable they are saying such disgusting things.
"they just don't get it, but would not if we lied so we can'"
So are we stupid or not? haha
Exactly. When I heard that, I pictured them all sitting in a room, white-boarding ways to obfuscate what they were really doing, realizing they couldn't, and only *then* deciding they had to announce it. These executives have no ethics about anything they're doing. Makes my skin crawl.
I love how Ubisoft really is trying to keep pushing their NFTs after even the blockchain shows that nobody cares about them
sadly the NFT marketplace surpassed the ethereum trasing volume in august.. showing that somehow some people actually do care about this garbage :( tulip mania is why
@Pop Gligor They are also something created to make ppl buy crypto currency so the big players can cash out.
Or maybe its all going down for another reason lol
@@restfulori212 This is a good point! Also, how can one tell that it *wasn't* insider trading or a pump and dump scheme?
@@restfulori212 thats the same with ethereum.... bots literally trade back and forth.
Unfortunately there has been some success with NFTs. Apparently Konami was able to auction off Castlevania NFTs a couple weeks back. The NFTs consisted of digital pictures, gameplay snippets and music. They were able to snag $160K from the auction with the lowest priced item going for $26K which was just a map of Dracula's castle.
And the reason why I resist NFTs is BECAUSE I understand them. Tomorrow everyone will wake up from this damn fever dream having lost hundreds of dollars and I'm not gonna be one of those people.
Amen to that. My grandpa has a saying I adhere by. Nothing in this world that isn’t food, water, or shelter will be valueless if the economy collapses except for two things. Gold, and Ammunition. I always took it as “invest in physical things that actually have worth” becoming if this crypto bubble pops lots of people are going to have a receipt saying they own a PNG that’s absolutely worthless
@@stuglife5514
Gold is debatable. At the end of the day, it's a pretty looking metal that's only useful in things that would get taken out by an economic/societal collapse.
@@wakkaseta8351 Not really. Historically gold has had value way longer then it ever actually had a useage. Human beings will always put some sort of value on it. But I’m a huge proponent of “Ammunition is the best money”
@Mauri Font NTFs are fucking stupid and energy wasting. It’s only a way for crypto bros to make money and for Ubisoft. I already paid for the fucking game. DLC shouldn’t even be a thing to begin with. But I digress. It’s a video game. To play for fun. Not to play for money. Regardless, do you have any idea how awful of a take you have is? You can do that already without NFTs you moron. Look at CSGO skins. Us players trade those babies all day and they’re worth actual money and arent NFTs.
@Mauri Font You can already resell skins for games on the steam market place. You don't need a slow and energy-intensive system for that, it already exists.
If only someone could ask them "if you want a secondary market, and want players to be able to cash out when they're done with a game, why won't you allow them to sell the game?"
YES! Absolutely, this should be asked/brought up anytime one of these PR people starts talking about "ownership" or "creating value together." If the author of this piece was an actual journalist, he would have asked these two Ubisoft clowns why their customers aren't allowed to actually own the products they purchase. It's particularly gross when people talking about NFTs in games say "for the first time, gamers will be actually able to own part of the games they play." We used to be able to own the actual game itself, rather than some temporary license which can be revoked at any time.
Lmao great point
@@zvexevz Actually, you always just owned a license to play the game.
Otherwise, you'd be allowed to modify and copy it.
The difference was that in the past, it wasn't POSSIBLE for game companies to just withdraw your right to play a game. Legally they could, but with no way to enforce it, it wasn't feasible.
They'd have to force you to return your copy of the game.
@Nerobyrne
So NFTs promise a better way to enforce corporations' shitty practices? It's wild that the promised features of the tech are always either terrible ideas or lies.
@@Nerobyrne First sale doctrine: You are legally allowed to sell that disc with Halo 2 when you are done with it. Those were the good old days.
What Ubi isn't getting is, "We buy games for entertainment" not to have suddenly responsibilities in real life. Why should I need to talk with the Tax office about my gaming habit. Why should I even need to fill out tax for a game I play. How will national law impact this as not every country is allowing them. And so many more issues that Block chains all together have in the moment as soon as they are connected to money.
I guess UBI never considered those issues as currently relevant which just shows again they do not care about the consumer rather their own pocket.
That is my humble opinion on it.
That's why they want a "secondary market" which actually means people who buy the game NOT for entertainment, but for profit, and ubisoft takes a cut every time.
Yeah, we don’t play games as a second job! >_
Fuck NFT's and Crypto.
I said it before, I'll say it again. You want nft's in your game, automatic Adult Only rating. Not 18+, AO.
No store shelf displays, no outdoor advertising, no general public ads. That's what AO means, you're sold from under the counter.
And since it's a financial instrument (imho), implement proper KYC, AML and insurance for loss.
Then hit your multi million sales targets and make shareholders happy.
Won't hold my breath, but this is one of those moments where legislators should react fast. After all were talking about alternative investment options that are unregulated (I'm still surprised crypto and nfts haven't been regulated harder yet).
Politicians know that fancy 4th and 5th normal form databases have no intrinsic value unless they actually are used to protect something valuable. Protecting its own code, and considering this a "currency" is honestly a very confusing and eloquent little scam.
For reference:
Third normal form is no interdependencies between fields and tables, or calculations performed inside of said tables.
4th normal form adds a layer of encryption to data entry.
5th normal form has 1 or more layers of encryption on entry, and 1 or more layers of encryption upon query.
Sound familiar yet?
The reason corpos are getting in on crypto and NFT's is precisely because it is not regulated in any way.
Nah, legislators are too busy trying to take away any internet privacy we have. At least here in America, they are.
"You must play it for 2 hours" is actually code for "You must revoke your right to a refund on Steam"
So far, I've not heard a single compelling example of why and how NFTs add fun to games. Maybe that's where these companies should start if they want to have an open dialogue.
I don't know... game development companies trying to sell to gamers and fans of their games based on the content of their game?? That sounds pretty wild if you ask me. /s
Why would you want a decentralized network when a centralized one(like Steam) is under a company's control and more energy efficient?
That's because they add absolutely nothing to games, they're just digital receipts.
@Mauri Font Yeah about that, its easier to do that sort of thing without NFTs involved, all a developer needs to to do is code in an in game auction house which has been done in many games starting decades ago.
And even with NFTs you can only trade skins so long as the developer actively supports the feature which they can decide to stop doing at anytime so yeah NFTs are still redundant and useless on that count too.
@Mauri Font That has nothing to do with NFTs, go play TF2, you can sell your hats, weapons, ect.
Everything they claim NFTs do have been done by something else.
That is normally a sign of a scam.
him: "people think NFTs are just about speculation"
*a few questions later*
him: "some people might enjoy just controlling part of the market instead of playing the game"
I prefer games that you control the game market by playing. Not paying.
Indie devs are going to soar, all they have to do is make a game. Not an investment platform with candy crush attached.
But you don't own it
look up Josh Strife hayes video on NFT's what are they.
Basically you don't own anything. You have paid money to join a queue that doesn't go anywhere and your place number is registered with a blockchain and an image is attached to that number but you don't own that image. You just own the right to say that is your place in the queue.
Tarkov has NFTs if you game for 200 hours. I happily gift you that game, if you are interested in NFTs and we can farm them together in a game
@@fatalityin1 fuck off. Not interested in your snake oil grifter bullshit
@@fatalityin1 does it actually have nfts? Like fr?
"Am I so out of touch? No, it's the gamers who are wrong."
The interviewee literally said they considered hiding the fact that they were selling nfts but chose not to because they knew they would get caught...
The irony is that on top of that, their claim that they considered hiding it is obviously a lie in the first place, because the only reason to add NFTs to a game is so that you can _tell everyone_ that you're adding NFTs to the game, so you can show you're following the hot new trend (and the investors will like you). If you hide the crypto aspect, then you've wasted a lot of time and money to implement something nobody asked for or needed, for no reason.
@@foogod4237 "We knew we would get caught because there's no way to advertise our nfts to the nftbros without our real customers finding out about it"
After I read their ToS for Quartz, I know exactly that the interview is a BS. They either don't know anything and just say what they are told by PR team, or they just straight up lie about it.
Just few of the points from their ToS:
- You don't own the digit (digital art attached to NFT), just the NFT. The digital art is still owned by Ubisoft.
- You cannot sell it to anyone. There is a set of rules like buyer has to own the game, has to be a certain level,...
- You cannot even create a derivative art outside of their games (so streaming is ok, making fan art is not)
- You broke ToS, you lose any rights.
- We can cancel Quartz at any time and you lose any rights.
Hey Ubisoft, remember when EA and Blizzard pulled the "You don't know what you want." card? Remember how well it worked for them?
"I want to play games, I am not going to invest"
"You don't know what's good for you"
When i learned that to get all the NFTs you gotta play like 600 hours, ubisoft's intentions became obvious. They just thought the NFT craze would draw attention and increase sales and playtime on one of their titles that's probably underperforming, it was just a publicity stunt they tried to disguise as "innovation" and it backfired hilariously.
yeah why didnt someone like arya realty aka arya investments (not financial advice. not a financial advisor) jump right into the game.
@@hanswurst5222 idk ive got a feeling its more sinister than that
For the love of god, they need to stop calling us gamers like that. Every time the use the word gamer, it feels like they are trying to talk about something lower than them. We are your customers, that's it. Just call the people who buy your products (functional or not) with money, your customer, just like any other company does.
Ubisoft has been homogenizing features into their games for the last few decades. Everything has towers that you climb to reveal maps. Everything has an RPG-lite mechanic. In 50 years, Ubisoft will have one single overly-homogenized game called Tom Clancy's Ghost Assassin Cry Siege and it will have all their NFTs on it.
If their actions along the way don't get them starved for cash and cast into obscurity first that is.
And if you say you don't like it a post is made on the metaverse calling you a pedophile
@@suraivase7285 nah, new siege season drops/ Valhalla expansion (the first one was actually really good btw lmao) and it’s easy 50k-100k for them.
Tom Clancy’s Ghost Assassin Cry Siege 😂 facts tho EA and Ubisoft are trash
50 years? You mean more like 3 - 5 years. If Ubisoft is not broke at that point.
One of my pet peeves is when people lump everyone together and say "But this is what the people want," when its clear they have never talked to anyone who doesn't agree with NFTs.
They're tone deaf, that's why they claimed us that 'we wanted it', yet in reality it wasn't.
Thats why it will be funny to see it fail
@Kyles Isler fuck off back to political videos dipshit. i'm fucking sick of your ilk shoving your politics down peoples throats like anyone gives a shit. here's a fucking FACT: your political opinions are WORTHLESS, you will NEVER make any significant difference in this world, and NOBODY REALLY GIVES A SHIT what you think. Shut the FUCK up.
and before you even fucking start with your predictable, brainless nonsense logic - no, i'm not a democrat and that's not why im pissed. get some fucking self awareness.
@@powerbeard5653 Thank you. I don't care what strain of politics it is even. When people insist on obnoxiously injecting it into every online space for NO REASON, completely without provocation it's infuriating. And baffling that they don't see how idiotic and annoying it comes off. I am personally involved in political channels and podcasts sometimes, but I get so burned out and frustrated by it. When I go to channels unrelated to any of that it's supposed to be a reprieve and escape from it. But there is always someone in the comments of literally any video just trying to antagonize with politics.
Well no one wanted covid but the fabricators of said pandemic thrust it upon us
"You don't get it!" Yes indeed, I'm not getting Ubisoft games any more, you can keep that micro transaction bug riddin trash.
It’s so interesting to listen to statements that are so transparently the opposite of what the company is doing. “This is for the customer,” they say, while monetizing the fun away. Just incredible.
I stopped buying anything Ubisoft touches many years ago, this "interview" sums up how their corporate side convinced me not to bother with any of their IP.
Same: Ubisoft is on my boycott list ever since I encountered that cash shop ad inside a single player game, Assassin’s Creed Origins
It was a shame because Origins has an amazing aesthetic and lots of historical references.
To my shame I'm still on the verge wherever to buy or not the Settlers, cause I'm a fan of the series. Probably should listen to my conscience. NFTs are not even the worst thing about Ubisoft. The sexual misconduct allegations are far worse.
@@Gryphoon Yes, the "surprise discount mechanics".
They entered my own personal "boycott until the heat death of the universe" list way back when they first started pushing "always on DRM" onto people; the fact that they later discontinued that practice did not remove them from that list (the name of the list being "when you get to come off of it", ie, you don't).
Over the years since, they just keep providing me with additional reasons that I would have started boycotting them, were I not already doing that.
@@skyeplus
Do what you want cause a pirate is free, you are a pirate!
Yarr har fiddle dee dee
Being a pirate is alright to be
Do what you want cause a pirate is free, you are a pirate!
The blanket term "gamers" has been so misrepresented that people (me included) avoid calling themselves that, and it's because of articles/interviews like these. "Gamers are so distrusting, toxic, etc"... Dude, these people are literally your customers, if they're toxic in your games, guess who's at least partially responsible for allowing that?
Also, can anyone imagine why people have a negative atitude towards Ubisoft? I just can't put my finger on what caused that (contains sarcasm).
The term "gamers" is pretty meaningless. One gamer might be a toxic kid playing COD and other is a chill guy playing Stardew Valley. Saying stuff like "gamers are toxic" is the same as "tea-drinkers are angry people".
Exactly. If your game creates a toxic environment.... that's partially on your game -_- and the idea that all gamers are toxic is so insane. Have they never looked at the player base for games like Stardew? Or are those people just not considered gamers by Ubisoft's standards?
@@jessirarara They aren't gamers because they don't follow the stereotype they're thinking of
Since I am Dutch I can relate NFT to the Tulip Mania that happened here when people actually sold their house for a tulip bulb, but at least they got something, NFT gives you nothing that others cannot have. Utter nonsense....
The biggest question I have about that has to do with this situation.
Where there instances of people selling their bulbs back and forth to a friend to raise the prices? Or to themselves?
@@vxicepickxv If you mean futures, options and other derivatives... literally from day one.
Physical sales were mostly confined to the first few months; because it's not easy to grow one.
Seems like we've been telling video game companies what we want for years only for them to tell us that we don't know what we want. The real response to our pleas is basically "What you want requires us to put money into making a quality product but we would much rather slap together a digital item that costs almost nothing to make then have you give us money for that instead."
Yeah, let me just trust the company behind some of the most aggressive MTX, infamous for slowing their games down and selling time savers to deal with it.
At first, I was pretty ambivalent and thought: 'well, it's just arrogant corpos doing corpo things'. But, they literally think we're stupid for not agreeing with them. So I'm never buying an Ubisoft game again-- which is no real loss to me, fortunately, since I usually only bought them on huge discounts anyway, at this point.
To be honest. Most of the gamers posting on youtube are stupid.
NFT in gaming = win win for everyone.
So im assuming as a paid grifter, you think insulting us will make us buy a spot on a database that isnt backed by anything, and which will cost multiple times more than a game? Or a peer to peer trading system where the host charges massive transaction fees for a peer to peer trade?
Gtfoh. This is a way for them to double-triple-quad dip into the same game copy. Or sell literally nothing with a picture you dont/wont own for cash. No thanks.
@@cheesesniper473 These people are here to pick up 0 IQ pond scum 'investors', and to help any of their fellow pyramid scheme victims feel better about themselves if they end up in the comments
Its crazy how obvious it is that these companies are ruled by the finance teams, not the developers, creative teams and whatnot. And I understand, theyre tired of working and it allow them to make money without working too hard. Less work more money. However this only applies to the heads of companies, not the employees.
Passion fades away sadly. Cant wait for more indie titles to become gems.
yep. pretty much the only kinds of games i play. ready or not, tarkov, ground branch. shits sad.
Exactly, it isn't that people don't understand, it's that they reject it. People are wise to the scam now.
We strive to create a "save" environment where kids can speculate on things that have 0 value and loose all they have *claps in appreciation*
*lose everything their parents HAD =)
I have a serious question: if someone get their Quartz stolen and ubisoft get a cut from the reselling, could ubisoft be charged for trafficking and handling stolen goods?
the thing about nfts is that they come with no protections or regulation at all, and transactions of nfts are all "legal" transactions due to the structure of the system. If someone steals your quartz, they have a transaction on the blockchain and it is therefore "legitimate" and there's no way to reverse it. it wouldn't even be considered stolen.
no, because nothing was stolen. Nonfungible and all that. Welcome to the madness.
@@kkainoaxxx For a sale contract to be legitimate both parties must consent. I don't think a court of law would let it fly because you switch the term "good" for "NTF" and the term "sale contract" for "transaction".
The letter of the law might not have caught up yet but I'm sure a judge will not be bamboozled by cyptobros lingo.
@@GleepVonReticuli I just can't wait for a compilation of judges and lawmakers being told what an NFT is, then turning over to look at the camera like "who in the hell came up with such a stupid idea and why the hell even stupider people agreed with it"
@@GleepVonReticuli consider that if you buy a monkey nft and I copy paste it, I can out it on the blockchain with a different token, and it would be all legal. Because you are not buying the image, you're just buying the bragging rights and the subjective value that comes with it. I can sell mine for higher if I can give MY bragging rights more weight than yours.
It's all smoke and mirrors.
Companies reactions to NFTs remind me of back when Skylanders (or whatever tf they were called) came out and got popular, so multiple other companies, like Disney and LEGO, made their own versions and basically pushed them until people stopped wanting them anymore and they dropped the games without even completing everything they originally promised lol.
NFTs will be the exact same, imo. Companies will go all out and when the market inevitably dries up, they'll all be dropped.
Yep, only 3 big games did well at all in the toys to life craze (Nintendo is still doing them with amiibos though) and only Skylanders actually lasted at all.
@@kempolar9768 I feel like Amiibo are a step up since Nintendo to this day still support them, so that's already a plus, but the data on older Amiibo are still supported as well because of what Nintendo tries to use them with besides the "original game" they were intended for, and if a game has Amiibo support then your Amiibo you got 2-3 years ago is still valid for this new game you got
as opposed to the other versions of 'Toys to Life' gimmick games/figures where it was limited to a few games and that was that.
Hah, yeah, how stupid!
(glances at my childhood collection of skylanders and disney infinity figures)
@@ForestBoyProductions I totally dont have well over 100 skylanders still in my room lol....totally.
UEG had some good takes on this as well. "Everybody tells you that this idea is stupid. But then you think that means we actually want it."
How stupid does Ubisoft think we are?
This is the same company that releases the same two open world games every few years.
They think we are *very* stupid.
Well looking at their bank account... we are pretty stupid.
@@sinjin8576 Well, those games sell, so they're justified in their presumptions.
@@GaliosUA Maybe it's time for those games to not sell, if you know what I mean.
No, Ubisoft, we DO get it... and we do NOT want it!
Gamers don't want it.
Developers don't want it.
The only ones who do want it are the execs who stand to make a huge profit, and that very tiny fraction of the population who buy NFTs.
"So, it's really for them, it's really beneficial. Bu they don't get it for now." This dude must think we're complete morons...
They are on a speedrun to drive deeper into that ground.
@DavidHe346 They will make money, doesnt matter how much hate they get. What everyone fails to realize is there are millions of idiots that will eat this stuff up and throw money at whatever Ubisoft pumps out.
If there is any mention of any kind of blockchain in any game, I will never ever touch it. Doesnt matter if it is the best game ever. Or my favorite game franchise. Or if I have to drop all new games. Blockchain and all its enablers and criminal cultists can burn in hell for all I care.
Literally the only way that I can see for NFT technology being useful for gaming is as a literal receipt to download a game to bypass some annoying account bullcrap to be able to download your games or sell used games in a digital age.
And even then they could just arbitrarily bar whoever they wanted regardless of the blockchain. It would change nothing.
I have to say it, because when I hear the argument that ‘You own it and can bring it to other games’ it makes me mad.
No it won’t. Each game uses its own code, and injecting new code can break things. Not to me con different engines having different requirements for their models.
Also, besides the shitty immersion breaking that would result other companies won’t let you do so. It’s a stupid flawed system, and the fact that game companies are pushing it shows how much brain rot they all have.
It could be theoretically done, if you made code to read the history of the blockchain item, and then figure out the wallet owner, and provide them with whatever you provide for the token in that game. It's a really weird system to provide a unique look, but it's not impossible.
With NFTs you do not actually own the code, just a place in the blockchain which is displayed by whatever they decide, be an image, a video or whatever, but you do not own that thing, only the place in the blockchain.
It's baffling how much this gets thrown around, as if all games are just asset flips using identical engines, etc. And there is an argument that it could be a crosspromotional type of thing, attracting players from more popular games - but that's already possible now, but with free content, account linking, codes or whatever. The only difference with doing it via NFT is that you're doing all that work and far fewer people will ever get to see it. Essentially, you're hoping to leech off whales from other, more popular games.
21:40 This was highlighted to an unbelievably good degree with WoW in Warlords of Draenor. The cash shop mounts released during that expansion were very extravagant and, "coincidentally" fit the in game factions of that expansion very well, meanwhile the actual mounts that came from faction reputation were all recoloured versions of basic enemy mobs in the world. Felt clear as day that every mount originally designed as a faction reward were stripped out to sell on the store instead while they tossed together some scraps as a reward instead.
The sheer brazen contempt that some companies show for their customers is mind boggling sometimes. Corporations get so salty when the consumer speaks out against things that they do for their investors. Contort themselves into knots trying to keep the PR speak up so that the cash keeps rolling in while trying to not piss even more of their audience off.
Honestly at this point I think, and hope, that NFTs is going to be just like what 3D in movies was :
- An interesting technology and concept.
- A hype.
- Big corporations pushing it everywhere as a new promotion argument.
- The hype going down because it's not useful in every circumstances, actually it should have been reserved for very specific situations.
- The subject of the hype fading away after a large amount of resources of all kinds has been wasted.
he says: "people think NFTs are just about speculation"
litteraly a few sentances later he describes the advantage of beeing able to sell those thing when youre done with them.
well well well, aint that speculation somebody else wants to pay for that shit after im done with it? fucking hilarious
"Will NFTs replace microtransactions or be the new loot boxes?" -- "No"
"So NFT skins..." -- Yes.
Great contradiction. Lovely new microtransactions where all the bulk of the team would be working. You know what would be funny? The team developing the designs make the non-NFT versions better.
The idea is to maximize the value, so they're going for macrotransactions.
@@vxicepickxv of course, hence the contradiction to their own statement.
Finally someone says what NFTs actually are, freaking pointers! This "new tech" is literally ancient technology that doesn't even contain the "product."
havn't bought an Ubisoft game in years, I see no reason to discontinue that trend.
if these internal "teams" doing "research" would look up from their Excel spreadsheets once and awhile that would be cool. also, I would wager 99% of these executives hate video games, so that makes their jobs all the more pointless.
They hate games like they love sexual assault.
"Internal research" is business jargon for "just trust me bro"
The difference with physical games with artificial scarcity is we can make proxy cards, 3D print models, write house rules…. You actually own the game and can use it as you wish.
Any digital system that you buy into will disappear into a memory the moment the servers are no longer profitable. And even so called “decentralized” blockchain systems need computers supporting them.
As someone who worked at customer servese (or costomer support, i guess, not sure how to call it in english), if I told my customers that they "just don't get it", I would have probably been fucking fired. You can't just tell a customer who is not happy whith your prodact that its "not an easy concept to grasp".
gotta be a CEO then xD
And this is why I've not bought a ubisoft game since 2018 its clear they don't care about their product or consumer so screw them.
NFTs being this thing for games that let's you resell it when you're done with it is just the funniest fucking way to loop back around to simply having a physical disc that you can just put into your pc or console. Just solving a problem that's been solved for decades now
I'm definitly boycotting Ubisoft, never going to buy their products ever again.
That's the way to go. It starts with a single drop, that ultimately turns into a flood.
What people seem to not understand is that NFTs are worthless. If a new game, from a different company, comes out... how are we going to take our NFTs over to a game completely unrelated? Like, the key arguement for these people is "Get NFT in game and take it across the metaverse!" Like, what if the games released are more interesting and don't use NFTs or have a different partner company? Why would they use Earth 2's or Ubisoft's stuff when they can just make their own or none at all? People will leave the old games with all the NFTs to play a game that's actually fun and enjoyable.
That happening would be good but unfortunately many people will get wrecked by the sunk cost fallacy. People will cling to the companies they got their NFTs from like their life depended on it. I think this is the real reason companies are scrambling to implement NFTs. It is a race to stuff people into their own walled gardens/silo. The winner(s) will be the new platform holders. Assuming this whole NFT thing works out anyway. It is an opportunity to replace Google/Apple/Steam/etc.
As a currency these NFT/cryptocurrency is basically like company scrip en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Company_scrip
That fact they ignore the majority telling them we don't want NFT's nor do we want Ubisoft to get involved with them just shows how greedy they actually are. They only want a secondary market if they are the ones who profit from it. Otherwise they could care less.
Most games journalists I know, mocked this interview and reported it with some sarcasm. I didn't even know finder, before this interveiw
At this point it’s almost funny that corpos keep being shocked that they get an intensely negative reaction to NFT implementation. Maybe one of them will learn. Doubt it though.
What they don't get is my money.
Seriously, why would anyone even consider giving Ubisoft money?
If you're so balls deep into a franchise that you simply can't keep from playing it, then at least have the common sense to pirate it.
They not even worth pirating...
Yeah I've always said it's bad for the gaming industry if you just pirate games and never support the companies that make them but these days it actually seems like it might be better for the industry if they get pirated instead. A lot of the companies that I go out of my way to buy from because of my respect for them have lost a lot of that respect. Maybe if enough of us vote with our wallets these companies might see the sense in going back to trying to earn our money by making a quality product.
Yea i dont see why I should care about their bottom line if they dont care about making a quality game.
Every developer should keep asking themself: "Does this make the game a better game?" If the answer is no, don't do it.
I wish I could like this 1000 times!
It´s probably more the publishing side, that wants to implement those cheap money grabs.
@@Horus4302 Indeed, what doesn't help is that they also (probably) incite the developers to use/waste their time to find up new ways to milk the users, instead of finding new ways to make a better game.
Developers making decisions? Have you been living under a rock?
"You dont get it. Our company could make a ton of money with this scam"
A good example of this, I think, is buying a gift card for some money from a company (e.g. Amazon gift card). It only has value als long as the company honors this and you can buy stuff with the gift card code you get. The difference is, that since you buy the gift card with real money, you can most likely sue the company if they do not honor it. You will not be able to with the NFT stuff. At least not as long as there are no regulations/laws concerning this kind of system.
The legal precedent on gift cards, is that you're an unsecured creditor.
But you're right; it's still a lot more protection than NFT gives you.
At least these companies are getting so out of touch with their customer base its becoming blatantly obvious which ones actually will try to produce a game, instead of the lowest effort money grubbing schemes that are ruining gaming.
“Where’s my mother f’ing chocolate” is now the only way to describe NFTs
So Ubisofts' New Years resolution for 2022 (now that shitting on Blizzard for being horrible has kinda stopped being fun) is to show the people that yes, Ubisoft is as shit as ever.
After 10 minutes I didn't expect they could go any deeper into insanity but they've done it - you can learn history through assassin's creed
Thankfully people like you are shedding light on this. Many younger gamers are not aware of these predatory systems and it is important to understand when you're being played for a fool.
So glad to hear somebody finally saying "you don't need NFT to do this" because that has been what I've been screaming since this NFT craze began. An interesting technology is being used in ways that make absolutely no sense.
My number one stop for news on all this nonsense, Kira out here doing God’s work.
to summarize i guess to me this is like buying a broken item from the store and they give you store credit back for it, your money is now essentially already lost and tied to the company. so by buying quartz you’re tying your money into their ecosystem (losing it) and they’re selling you store credits rebranded as a good thing by saying you own part of it. if i have store credits for walmart i own a pack of gum in the store if i choose to trade it for that. this is not epic
It's interesting to see all the ways companies find ways to rephrase the "You guys all have phones, right?" sentiment that Blizzard gave which met with similar hatred by the gaming community
One thing to keep in mind: Ubisoft might have designed _their_ end of the whole thing so that you need to own and have played the game to get and trade Digits. But since their NFTs are on a public blockchain, nothing's stopping me from trading them on another marketplace that doesn't have those requirements to jack up prices.
Also, the History section of Tezos' wiki article is a fucking hoot.
well, even if the blockchain is public, if they own the nodes, they controll it and could litterally block transactions...
@@Akab Tezos is open-source (and also not Ubisoft's own thing), so anyone can set up as many nodes as they want. I'm pretty sure if Ubi tried to pull anything shady, the gaming community could quickly outcompete them.
Ubisoft using the "its their choice" BS excuse...the same BS used to justify microtransactions. Of course buying them is a choice but when mechanics are put in the game to make it harder or more grindy without them then is no longer a choice.
Ubisoft knows how to remind me that I will stay away from them. It started when they treated their workes badly and with every news from them I remain away.
No money for people that think that we are stupid.
I like the reason they didn't hide the fact it's NFT wasn't that it would be unethical, but because they *knew people would find out*.
They did the same when their introduced microtransactions. Now microtransactions are the norm even for subscription games...
Why do you think more and more people are pushing back against this, and louder?
No doubt that interviewer has financial interest in NFT's. And you shouldn't trust someone like that when they say something positive about NFT's considering his finances rely on people buying NFT's.
Honestly, I welcome this news. I'd much rather laugh about out-of-touch CEOs than hear about another horror story of workplace misconduct. I want to emplasize that I don't want to downplay the latter, much the opposite actually, I don't want the misdeeds of Kotick and his buddies to just fizzle out the way most negative press does (just as an example, remember when WB Games wanted to sell us DLC to "commemorate" the death of Michael Forgey? Yeah, I didn't forget), but god what a breath of fresh air it is to have a clear-cut "bad guy" just for us to gather around and mock for their incompetence.
Yeah... uh... Ubisoft's hands sadly aren't clean from that workplace misconduct. Not at all. 😬
"Is this an interview or is he just working for them"?
The guy is a games 'journalist', of course he is working for the game company.
I'm blown away. Maybe it's cos i've only worked retail my whole life, but of all the companies i've worked for, not a ONE has outright said "Yeahhh you're dumb so we're not giving you that price/returning that item/honoring that coupon/whatever." Even shitty retail generally bends over backwards to appease the whims of the customer. Why don't gamers get any such respect as the actual customers, here?
The problem is, We gamers arent the main customers of their game anymore, the shareholders and whales are.
I mean look at the video game market, the most profitable games are fcking mobile games, the one type of game almost every gamer considers as the worst of its kind.
The problem is, just like DLC, if all the games end up adding NFTs, the gamer audience will *checks notes* take it and keep buying the products because they simply can't not buy the newest game.
Count me out of that then.
@@troodon1096 same here. But it'll depend on enough players refusing to buy all nft games, even if *all* the new games have them. If NFTs becomes even slightly profitable, they will stick around.
Its because managers in game companies do not understand that users have used secondary markets in games since the 2000s. We don't need a secondary secondary market...
It just shows taht they have no clue what products they release and their target audience.
They forgot the adage "the customer is always right".
Even if Ubisoft is right and NFT is 'better' - if the customer doesn't agree they won't adopt it. Theres a lot of 'better' products that didn't see the light of day because consumers didn't adopt them.
sadly we arent their customers, the shareholders are.
"We've made it somewhat hard for player to get into it."
-Buy game
- play two hours
the absolute minimum you would expect for a person to engage in a game. If they think expect people play less, then they are already scamming the majority of player.
They really think we're toddlers that expect that this is "a difficult entry to NFTs"
When I came across a very well put together documentary from folding ideas on the video line goes up, I really don't think crypto or NFTs are useful for anything because it just makes more problems than solving and it's not really any better than what we have already.
Chocolate wrapper analogy makes perfect sense, I appreciate how you break these things down, I didn't realise how much I DIDN'T understand until I came across your channel and you explained what seems to be obvious but if this isn't your world, it really isn't.
I love how oblivious Ubisoft are to the elephant in the room. If their target audience "doesn't get it", that's not a defense of Ubisoft - it's an indictment. It proves that Ubisoft has done a terrible job. It is quite literally Ubisoft's job to convince their target audience. Them failing to do so has nothing to do with the audience.
All of this crap boils down to one thing and one thing only and that is the fact that more and more countries around the world are waking up to the gambling mechanics within gaming and are starting to correctly label them as gambling, this is just corporations attempting to stay one step ahead of the law so they can continue over monetizing their player base. Any discussion beyond that is just pure misdirection.
This is one of the very few channels I have the notification bell turned on
Legend
There was a video out there explaining NFTs and the analogy they used was "you are buying a numbered spot in a database matrix and the picture is just a poster beside that spot, you dont own the poster or the spot, you just have a right to stand in that spot and point at the poster and say 'this poster is beside my spot'. The poster is not unique, you don't own it but it is beside your spot in the database"
As time goes on we're getting games parted out and sold in smaller pieces as is. First we'd pay for a full game in the past, but then a lot of games started to sell portions of what would've been the original game as DLCs, and now they're selling individual skins that are all slightly different from one another.
no, if it all looks like a scam, there is no reason to assume, that this may one day turn into something that is not a scam.
Kira fails to apply bayes-theorem.
I already felt (in the past) in buying a lot of "virtual items in an online game" that I cared, initially, just to see then the game ruined patch by patch, to the point that the game itself became a continously "microtransactions", but the game itself went on a "powercreep": each new "item" had to be "greater" to the previos released one, or nobody would have bought it, and at the same time basically making worthless any previously relesed/bought items.
THIS driven me OUT of ANY "microtransaction" game.
I DO NOT play online anymore (... I just simply HATE the average toxicity of online gamers...), I stop "buying" unfinished products, released only to met a date, and...
... I'm BACK INTO PIRACY!
I wanna see the game running, I wanna see if I LIKE the game, then decide.
I bought some of the game that I had fun, IF they were really great, but totally pirated all of those companies that basically made "moneygrabbing" of their philosophy.
Same here. Sad thing is piracy and corporate greed sort of feed on each other, and despite some of us eventually buying the games that are worth spending money for, a majority of others will be content with pirated games. It applies to other 'pirate-able' media as well. In a third-world country like where I am, access to a lot of online services isn't the best. That's why piracy runs rampant here, and why I fear the big companies will keep charging more and more and get greedier every year.
Hello. Your comparison of an NFT to a piece of paper which says that you own a bar of chocolate on a table over there finally made me at least fundamentaly understand what the concept of NFT is. Thanks.
Force you to play for 2 hours when their refund policies are totally predatory can't imagine where this could be leading ...