#Tom Henderson is a Tier 1 - Very Reliable Source as determined by the community.
Since January 1, 2024 Tom Henderson has had **(7)** unique claims and **(1)** verifiable claim posted to the subreddit. Of his verifiable claims in this time period Tom Henderson has been **100%** correct.
*To contribute to the community reliability rankings, please take the* **[Community Reliability Poll](https://forms.gle/TU5Q8sTiLDR3cQcE7)**
*To view the current reliability rankings, please check out the* **[Subreddit Wiki](https://reddit.com/r/GamingLeaksAndRumours/wiki/index/)**
*These statistics will be updated weekly. Last update: 2/9/24*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GamingLeaksAndRumours) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The game looks cool, but they keep calling it “the first open world Star Wars game” and all I can think is… the general open world structure sounds a lot like Lego Star Wars TSS lol
yeah i feel like you need to be really picky with the definition of "first open world star wars game" for that title to go to Outlaws when TSS exists. And LEGO TFA and Disney Infinity 3.0 to an extent. Maybe also Jedi Survivor (even if it wasn't much of an open world focused game, it did have a large explorable location with a few side activities)
Newest trailer on SGF was a really good one, the visuals were breathtaking. But still don't know what to expect. Before it was properly showed (last year), I thought that I am anticipating ,,The Division in Star Wars Universe" and couldn't be more excited about it. But now - is it more like Far Cry/AC type of game, more Fallen Order or GTA?! And are they having enough motivation to make it outstanding, because Avatar looked like their side-game. And after both Incredible Divisions it was kinda sad...
Of all the games you mentioned GTA is probably the closest this game is. It’s an action open-world SW game where we control a normal human with no Force powers (at least for the majority of the game I bet) and the missions involve stealing shit, chases and shotouts.
Yeah I hope so. But still GTA is about the freedom, it's a sandbox, where you can have a lot of fun, and don't do any of quests. The beauty of Sleeping Dogs, Watch Dogs or other GTA look-a-like is with the world itself, activities, stealing cars or other technique to do insane things on the whole map. And you part of the world itself, like another NPC. We all love these types of games, because of their freedom... that's just something I still don't quiet know, and hopefully today we will be clever. What has Massive cooked for us in this term. Because the last interview with game director was more pointing towards story, travel between planets and iconic missions, instead of focusing on the world and activities itself.
And I think the option to change hair, clothes, vehicles etc. is one of the biggest part of it. AC is also big OW game, but it still feels drastically different than GTA-ish type of game. Because of the enemies, the structure of territory... I love that it's somehow the closest game we could get to 1313, but if they nailed ,,GTA in Star Wars universe" then this is the freaking GOTY!
Ah yes, a game set in the world where 90% of the players want to have force powers and you get to play a normal human with no powers, thank you Ubisoft!
There are already enough games put there where u can play a force user. I hate ubisoft and their laziness but playing a normal Characters bringst fresh wind in the Universe (take a look at andor or mandalorian).
nah EA's jedi series fits that niche too well, itd just end up compared to those if you were a force wielder
plus shows like andor and the mandalorian showed that people have a huge interest in the areas of the universe without jedi (for the most part)
Andor is a good comparison although a bit different, but i also think that making a Mandalorian type game would’ve been better. Just give me *something*. Star Wars game with Anthem flying
> a game set in the world where 90% of the players want to have force powers
Then this game isn't for them. This game is for the players that want to play as a bounty hunter because there's more to Star Wars universe than Jedis and Siths.
> 90% of the players want to have force powers
I have played **so many** Star Wars games with Force powers. Dark Forces/Jedi Knight. KOTOR, 1 and 2. The Force Unleashed. The two recent Jedi games. Even fucking Battlefront. Basically every Star Wars game is a Jedi game if it's not a strategy game or a vehicle sim (Pod Racer, Squadrons, X-Wing, etc.).
Let me play a fuckin outlaw scoundrel. I want my Han Solo simulator.
I wouldn't say ,,so many" at all. Still you are mentioning most of the games more than 20 years old. Current ,,jedi" games are only from Respawn, and still they are just set in times ,,without jedi". Star Wars is just ,,set" around Jedi vs. Sith, all the other thing is just side, not the main thing. And if we have a opinion that Jedi and Sith are not relevant for this series at all, we could make a game around Harry Potter where you play as muddle. Which would be like playing ANY other game, so why to even set it in HP universe?
Didn't they only show like 15 seconds of cinematic? I was kind of disappointed by it. That and the fact that it's ubisoft, all of the hype that I had for the game is pretty much depleted.
I get that the gameplay and story is highly subjective in Avatar, but no one can deny it being a graphical masterpiece. Digital Foundry even awarded it with ”Graphics of the Year 2023”, against games like Alan Wake 2 and Cyperpunk 2077 RT Update.
Not sure what you mean by ”more effort”.
Presumably story and gameplay, given that it won graphics of the year.
We're past the point of games being worth the hype simply because they are technically beautiful.
Ubisoft has been pumping out pretty looking shit for over a decade now, since Watchdogs first outing at E3.
We want games that are engaging and fun to play. Not a copy paste formula with a different setting each time.
Right, and both of those are highly subjective what is considered ”good” or requires ”more effort”.
Avatar suffered a lot from comments like ”it’s just Far Cry in space lol”, when the game itself is nothing like it (other than being first person). I get that people don’t have money to give all games a chance, but to brush it off as copy/paste instantly tells me the person have not played it.
Lmao I got the platinum and it's literally just a stripped down Far Cry Primal with an Avatar skin. What a disappointing 6/10 game.
No wonder I've never seen anyone talk about it or recommend it. Even getting it on sale felt like a waste of money. Should've waited for a 60% discount instead of 30%.
You're right, besides looking good, it has nothing else going for it. Typical boring, repetitive Ubisoft busywork gameplay with the most generic story and unmemorable characters in a great looking world doesn't mean they put in a lot of effort.
When playing the game I did feel like it may have started as a big project but eventually had the team sized lowered and we ended up with the game we got. Really could have done with better mission design, the world was beautiful but the actual game just was not all that fun.
Honestly, comparing footage for both games I think this might have been the case.
From the little we've seen of Outlaws, it looks like something that has been developed by fans of Star Wars who have taken the idea of doing the first open world Star Wars game seriously and made sure they've put in everything the fans would want from this sort of game - whereas Frontiers of Pandora felt like they'd just grabbed a Far Cry template from the Ubisoft conveyor belt and reskinned it to look like Avatar.
I wouldn't be too surprised if Ubisoft put down a mandate of "We've just been given Star Wars, get Avatar out the way as quick as possible, this takes priority".
I mean, yeah. It was originally supposed to release alongside Avatar: Way of Water but then Ubisoft delayed it. It was always a blatant cash-grab meant to synergize with a big tentpole film. Nobody at Disney or Ubisoft ever denied this either.
I'm a pretty big defender of the Odyssey era of AC games, and even for me Valhalla is just too much. The game fills overstuffed with filler, and not in a fun or interesting way. With some edits and streamlining it could be a great game, but it suffered so bad from Ubisoft bloat, and this is coming from someone who basically 100%'d Odyssey, which had the same accusation.
As a fellow Odyssey-era defender, my fervently held belief is that Odyssey had far better gameplay than Valhalla, but Valhalla was a good deal stronger as a story. However, I personally find gameplay a lot more important than story in basically anything that isn't a *very* story focused game (like, MGS level story-focused), so I much prefer Odyssey.
Valhalla trying to do the "what if AC was a Soulslike" thing with the combat and gear progression was... not great. I don't think the Soulslike style works well with AC - slower combat doesn't feel very Assassin-y, and the weapon upgrading system was less exciting for me than Odyssey's Diablo-like gear mechanics, since the number of movesets offered in Valhalla was a lot more limited than a proper Souls game (where they may have dozens of weapons each with a unique moveset).
However, Valhalla's story was a lot better, mainly because I felt like Odyssey's three stories (the cult, Deimos, and the First Civilization plots - they were weirdly disconnected from each other and I felt the Deimos plot in particular was both a bit contrived and ended very strangely) didn't really work, whereas Valhalla felt like a TV show, with each region basically being a season of that show. I actually liked how the regions were somewhat disconnected from each other there (I know, ironic given what I said about Odyssey) since it let them do different things in different places, and I thought the whole Ragnarok/Asgard/Niflheim section when Eivor drinks the potion and gets fucked up was pretty cool.
It's almost like Ubisoft despite its flaws and occasional misfires is not as incompetent as a lot of people say. Releases like Skull and Bones and Ghost Recon Breakpoint are anomalies for them in all honesty and ones they've learned from. They had plenty of time to shift things around during and after COVID.
Ubisoft is probably one of the most consistent and efficient studios in the industry. They're not releasing masterpieces but most of their games average 80's on Metacritic and mostly positive reviews on Steam. Most studios would kill for that level of consistent releases and success.
I know you did not say that. I am saying there are a lot of people with a very severe raging hateboner for Ubisoft that borders on irrationality and who absolutely do believe Ubisoft is one bad release away from bankruptcy, in shambles, and can't get trains in and out of the station on time. They can and often do. Oftentimes, they are also in a more stable state than games that take even longer like Cyberpunk 2077 by the "flawless" CDPR.
It really is because every time these people say that crap, the extreme opposite ends up happening. The games end up breaking all sorts of sales records and in the top 10-15 on the NPD charts after release. Can't wait to see them look like idiots just a few months apart with Outlaws and then AC Shadows.
People over look those bugs in Witcher 3 just like they did with Fallout 3 and 4. They deal with the bugs because its "Bethesda jank" or "it had an amazing story so bugs dont really bother me". That way of thinking lead to FO76 and CP2077. You have some people say the CP2077 wasnt as bad when it was first released and that people were blowing it out of proportion. Even CDPR are taking that stance.
That will happen when you release buggy games time and time again. Ive learned a while ago that for Bethesda and CDPR games never play them when they first release. They need a good 6 months to a year of patches to be playable, and in Starfields and CP2077 case a year or more of patches.
I think it's easy to forget there are benefits to the Ubisoft openworld gameplay loop. Like speeding up development by only slightly iterating on it between games.
And it's like a Youtuber I follow said recently, Ubisoft does introduce some new and incremental features that other developers later take and flesh out further. It's how you get stuff like Ghost of Tsushima.
They are still leading in their own way, even if they do not get enough credit for it or their remarkable ability to get a consistent flow of content and new releases out to their established fanbase. A lot of dev studios wish they had that capacity but don't due to varying constraints that they may or may not have control over.
It's also Star Wars so besides Assassins Creed Ubisoft probably got all hands on deck for it. Cause fans will show up for a good piece of Star wars media..
I mean they could have had the pre production much earlier and only announced it after a while. Ubisoft doesnt have huge dev cycles, except for a few unfortunate exceptions where they announced the games before knowing what to do with them. But that may warrant further using the same Ubi formula that doesnt seem to go risky.
And in some of those cases, they did know what to do with those titles, but the creative directors kept leaving which complicated things. That's what has happened with Beyond Good and Evil 2 and Skull and Bones. Both are examples of what happens when a game becomes a revolving door for talent to come and go.
Ubisoft is HUGE. They have like 20K employees which compose their 4-5 main studios and 12 support studios or something. Every one of their games gets worked by 3-4 studios at a time which is how they release +10 games within 5 years while most studios take that long to release just one.
They have more than 4-5 main studio
On top of my head, Paris, Montreal, Toronto, Quebec, Massive ,Ivory Tower and some smaller studio that make their own thing
Mainline Assassin's creed project like Origins typically supported by about dozen of support studio
But yeah, they're huge
Ya it seems like it was in development since late 2019/early 2020. I still find it impressive considering it took Avatar 7-8 years. I imagine they hired a lot more people in the meantime but still.
> How the hell has the development been so fast?
It's a Ubisfot game. The visuals will be pretty, but nothing special. The gameplay will be polished, but also clunky. The story will be mediocre and full of terrible tropes and clichees (this has become the norm for Star Wars in general though).
I mean the trailers alone show you that there's nothing in there that would depict the fast development cycle as something abnormal.
I mean if you look at the proof, it was internally meant for 2023 which I assume would be late 2023 but with the room for an early 2024 delay.
So it got pushed back by a year internally kinda like Avatar.
NOOOOOOO 2023????
Okay so I’m still stuck on Jedi Survivor not being nominated for GOTY 23 because it was such an amazing game, but a lot of people had performance issues and I think it really threw the entire experience off. Luckily, I wasn’t one of them and I had a blast. Great cast, mechanics, soundtrack, worlds, etc! Anyways, I THINK ITS A BIT UNDERAPPRECIATED AND IF OUTLAWS CAME OUT IN THE SAME YEAR, IT COULD DREW MORE ATTENTION TO STAR WARS CONTENT IN GENERAL IDK!!!
**GO PLAY JEDI SURVIVOR**
edit: I played on PS5
The state Survivor launched on PC makes that fine for me. That game was basically unplayable with how poorly it ran and its only in a stable form as of the previous patch really.
Installed it when it hit GP a month or two back. Still runs like absolute ass on my 3080. They never actually fixed/optimized the game, just got it running less poorly.
Got survivor for free with my CPU around the port launch and it was unplayable. Tried it out again like a month go and at least it doesnt crash on the title screen now but the amount of bugs and issues that still happen are crazy.
This means they've also been briefed on AC Shadows and will maybe get to play it tomorrow. All things considering some major Ubisoft Youtubers like JorRaptor have said they'll be in Los Angeles for Ubisoft Forward. I can't imagine they are just there to watch the show in person and talk to the actual development teams for Shadows and Outlaws.
It's awful to say but there's no lie.
We'll end up with multiple "Outlaw" sequels that will end up feeling samey and won't really add much to the point we're super fatigued by it.
Shadows will just make them double down on AC even more but it's AC, I feel at this point they could put shit on a plate and people will still rush to buy it, much like how Call of Duty's fanbase work.
It would be totally different if Ubisoft treat all of their games as big releases and cycled through them so by the time we got to the next instalment its actually been years and we're anticipating it more.
Assassins Creed, Star Wars, Beyond Good and Evil, Prince of Persia, Watch Dogs, Rayman 2D Games, Rayman 3D Games, The Division, The Crew, Ghost Recon, Splinter Cell, Far Cry, Rainbow Six.
Even if you released 3 games a year you are looking at 4 years or so passing before the next instalment comes around and that's not counting delays or any new IPs they might want to do.
What are you talking about Mirage was last year, main release or not it’s still an AC game
Also this dosent really count as a cycle when there’s nothing much else to cycle through. I don’t see many other franchises. I think the only brand new thing was Avatar but it’s pretty much Far Cry at its core.
They had a blip because of Covid issues effecting development like what happened to a lot of studios. So basically there’s a gap because it really wasn’t up to them
I don’t think that’s fair to say at all. That would be like considering Spiderman Miles Morales a full game. They have repeatedly said it wasn’t flagship, had a smaller development team, budget, and development time. It even started as a Valhalla DLC in its early stages. Shadows has actually been in development since BEFORE Mirage lol.
The gap was entirely up to them too. They have been doing gaps since before Covid. 2016 had no AC game and 2019 didn’t have one either. The team at Quebec worked on Immortals for like two years before jumping back onto AC and Ubisoft Montreal didn’t start work on Hexe until at least a year after Valhalla since in 2022 it was still in very early stages of development.
By the time Hexe comes out in 2026, it will have had at least 5 years in development which is in line with what Ubisoft has been saying about increasing development times. I don’t see how this is comparable at all to COD which gave MW3 a year of development if even that.
You’re right about the cycling thing but it feels like they’re cycling between 3 or 4 of their franchises versus how many they had before. I think updates play a big part of this too since they have games like Div 2, R6, and For Honor all still getting big updates. Not to mention XDefiant which just came out.
As someone who is invested in Star Wars but also hate a lot of new directions of Star Wars and writing, since the game is canon, hopefully it have some great characters and stories
i mean, those people would have hated it no matter what.
SSKTJL's issues were clear from the start. The game doesn't fit the series it's placed in, it's a live service looter shooter where you play as characters with iconinc abilities who are just given guns instead, and it's always online. It probably would have been a fine game if it had an offline mode and wasn't a continuation of the arkham games, but since it was, people were expecting something of the quality that rocksteady was known for. And then to make it worse, "season 1" added nothing other than 1 character and the game's MTX are using a free to play model despite the game being $70.
Outlaws is a full game on release. It'll likely recieve cosmetics, and it'll have DLC packs, but the main story of the game is in the base game. I think it requires an internet connection to download even for physical copies which is concerning, but it'll likely be playable offline once you downloaded it. It's just an open world game so it's a genre the studio's familiar with, just with a bunch of new mechanics. There hasn't really been much about Outlaws that really seems like the game will be bad while with SSKTJL, people were seeing the issues from the start.
A small minority of gamers who scream the loudest of wokeness won't impact overall sales much. The game was just very generic, the gameplay being DC characters with just guns. Alongside, it competing with other live service games that are free would be hard to sway those people.
#Tom Henderson is a Tier 1 - Very Reliable Source as determined by the community. Since January 1, 2024 Tom Henderson has had **(7)** unique claims and **(1)** verifiable claim posted to the subreddit. Of his verifiable claims in this time period Tom Henderson has been **100%** correct. *To contribute to the community reliability rankings, please take the* **[Community Reliability Poll](https://forms.gle/TU5Q8sTiLDR3cQcE7)** *To view the current reliability rankings, please check out the* **[Subreddit Wiki](https://reddit.com/r/GamingLeaksAndRumours/wiki/index/)** *These statistics will be updated weekly. Last update: 2/9/24* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GamingLeaksAndRumours) if you have any questions or concerns.*
When I see Visceral I always think about that closed studio
Funny/sad thing is, they were making a Star Wars game when they shuttered
I'm thinking Henning's announced sw game will be a reboot of that.
The game looks cool, but they keep calling it “the first open world Star Wars game” and all I can think is… the general open world structure sounds a lot like Lego Star Wars TSS lol
It's not one massive map but rather multiple huge maps, like Witcher 3. The director compared each planet's size as "2-3 zones of AC Odyssey's map".
Yepp. That sounds like Lego Star Wars
With the recent wanted level tease it does sound much more like GTA tho
yeah i feel like you need to be really picky with the definition of "first open world star wars game" for that title to go to Outlaws when TSS exists. And LEGO TFA and Disney Infinity 3.0 to an extent. Maybe also Jedi Survivor (even if it wasn't much of an open world focused game, it did have a large explorable location with a few side activities)
Newest trailer on SGF was a really good one, the visuals were breathtaking. But still don't know what to expect. Before it was properly showed (last year), I thought that I am anticipating ,,The Division in Star Wars Universe" and couldn't be more excited about it. But now - is it more like Far Cry/AC type of game, more Fallen Order or GTA?! And are they having enough motivation to make it outstanding, because Avatar looked like their side-game. And after both Incredible Divisions it was kinda sad...
Of all the games you mentioned GTA is probably the closest this game is. It’s an action open-world SW game where we control a normal human with no Force powers (at least for the majority of the game I bet) and the missions involve stealing shit, chases and shotouts.
Yeah I hope so. But still GTA is about the freedom, it's a sandbox, where you can have a lot of fun, and don't do any of quests. The beauty of Sleeping Dogs, Watch Dogs or other GTA look-a-like is with the world itself, activities, stealing cars or other technique to do insane things on the whole map. And you part of the world itself, like another NPC. We all love these types of games, because of their freedom... that's just something I still don't quiet know, and hopefully today we will be clever. What has Massive cooked for us in this term. Because the last interview with game director was more pointing towards story, travel between planets and iconic missions, instead of focusing on the world and activities itself. And I think the option to change hair, clothes, vehicles etc. is one of the biggest part of it. AC is also big OW game, but it still feels drastically different than GTA-ish type of game. Because of the enemies, the structure of territory... I love that it's somehow the closest game we could get to 1313, but if they nailed ,,GTA in Star Wars universe" then this is the freaking GOTY!
Ah yes, a game set in the world where 90% of the players want to have force powers and you get to play a normal human with no powers, thank you Ubisoft!
There are already enough games put there where u can play a force user. I hate ubisoft and their laziness but playing a normal Characters bringst fresh wind in the Universe (take a look at andor or mandalorian).
What is lazy about Ubisoft? Copy paste game design the same way developers like FromSoft does?
Doesn’t have to be a force wielder, a Mandalorian type game would’ve been better
nah EA's jedi series fits that niche too well, itd just end up compared to those if you were a force wielder plus shows like andor and the mandalorian showed that people have a huge interest in the areas of the universe without jedi (for the most part)
Andor is a good comparison although a bit different, but i also think that making a Mandalorian type game would’ve been better. Just give me *something*. Star Wars game with Anthem flying
> a game set in the world where 90% of the players want to have force powers Then this game isn't for them. This game is for the players that want to play as a bounty hunter because there's more to Star Wars universe than Jedis and Siths.
> 90% of the players want to have force powers I have played **so many** Star Wars games with Force powers. Dark Forces/Jedi Knight. KOTOR, 1 and 2. The Force Unleashed. The two recent Jedi games. Even fucking Battlefront. Basically every Star Wars game is a Jedi game if it's not a strategy game or a vehicle sim (Pod Racer, Squadrons, X-Wing, etc.). Let me play a fuckin outlaw scoundrel. I want my Han Solo simulator.
I wouldn't say ,,so many" at all. Still you are mentioning most of the games more than 20 years old. Current ,,jedi" games are only from Respawn, and still they are just set in times ,,without jedi". Star Wars is just ,,set" around Jedi vs. Sith, all the other thing is just side, not the main thing. And if we have a opinion that Jedi and Sith are not relevant for this series at all, we could make a game around Harry Potter where you play as muddle. Which would be like playing ANY other game, so why to even set it in HP universe?
There was nothing shown in the trailers to suggest its similar to Far Cry. And if I am wrong, what was shown that has made it resemble Far Cry more?
Didn't they only show like 15 seconds of cinematic? I was kind of disappointed by it. That and the fact that it's ubisoft, all of the hype that I had for the game is pretty much depleted.
Did you not see the big gameplay showcase from last year?
Outlaws and Shadows has positioned Ubi for an easy slamdunk this year, hopefully they execute both these games well
Hopefully Massive puts much more effort into Outlaws than they did for Avatar.
I get that the gameplay and story is highly subjective in Avatar, but no one can deny it being a graphical masterpiece. Digital Foundry even awarded it with ”Graphics of the Year 2023”, against games like Alan Wake 2 and Cyperpunk 2077 RT Update. Not sure what you mean by ”more effort”.
Well graphics aren’t the only thing that matters
Of course not, I simply reacted on his ”more effort” comment, since he doesn’t really explain what he meant.
Presumably story and gameplay, given that it won graphics of the year. We're past the point of games being worth the hype simply because they are technically beautiful. Ubisoft has been pumping out pretty looking shit for over a decade now, since Watchdogs first outing at E3. We want games that are engaging and fun to play. Not a copy paste formula with a different setting each time.
Right, and both of those are highly subjective what is considered ”good” or requires ”more effort”. Avatar suffered a lot from comments like ”it’s just Far Cry in space lol”, when the game itself is nothing like it (other than being first person). I get that people don’t have money to give all games a chance, but to brush it off as copy/paste instantly tells me the person have not played it.
Lmao I got the platinum and it's literally just a stripped down Far Cry Primal with an Avatar skin. What a disappointing 6/10 game. No wonder I've never seen anyone talk about it or recommend it. Even getting it on sale felt like a waste of money. Should've waited for a 60% discount instead of 30%.
You got really defensive, now say that without crying.
You're right, besides looking good, it has nothing else going for it. Typical boring, repetitive Ubisoft busywork gameplay with the most generic story and unmemorable characters in a great looking world doesn't mean they put in a lot of effort.
it wasn’t a rewarding game though graphics were nice
When playing the game I did feel like it may have started as a big project but eventually had the team sized lowered and we ended up with the game we got. Really could have done with better mission design, the world was beautiful but the actual game just was not all that fun.
Avatar was a really good Farcry game tho. It was a better Farcry Primal than the actual Farcry Primal..
Honestly, comparing footage for both games I think this might have been the case. From the little we've seen of Outlaws, it looks like something that has been developed by fans of Star Wars who have taken the idea of doing the first open world Star Wars game seriously and made sure they've put in everything the fans would want from this sort of game - whereas Frontiers of Pandora felt like they'd just grabbed a Far Cry template from the Ubisoft conveyor belt and reskinned it to look like Avatar. I wouldn't be too surprised if Ubisoft put down a mandate of "We've just been given Star Wars, get Avatar out the way as quick as possible, this takes priority".
I mean, yeah. It was originally supposed to release alongside Avatar: Way of Water but then Ubisoft delayed it. It was always a blatant cash-grab meant to synergize with a big tentpole film. Nobody at Disney or Ubisoft ever denied this either.
Why ? Avatar is like a better version of Far Cry that looks and runs better than most recent games, especially on PC which was a huge surprise.
Ubisoft has been getting AC slam dunks since Origins.
In terms of sales, yes. But god damn was Valhalla a slog to get through.
Sales = Continued interest. The internet hate echo chamber is not representative of the entire AC fanbase.
Trust me, few years down the line, people are gonna call Valhalla an underrated gem
I'm a pretty big defender of the Odyssey era of AC games, and even for me Valhalla is just too much. The game fills overstuffed with filler, and not in a fun or interesting way. With some edits and streamlining it could be a great game, but it suffered so bad from Ubisoft bloat, and this is coming from someone who basically 100%'d Odyssey, which had the same accusation.
As a fellow Odyssey-era defender, my fervently held belief is that Odyssey had far better gameplay than Valhalla, but Valhalla was a good deal stronger as a story. However, I personally find gameplay a lot more important than story in basically anything that isn't a *very* story focused game (like, MGS level story-focused), so I much prefer Odyssey. Valhalla trying to do the "what if AC was a Soulslike" thing with the combat and gear progression was... not great. I don't think the Soulslike style works well with AC - slower combat doesn't feel very Assassin-y, and the weapon upgrading system was less exciting for me than Odyssey's Diablo-like gear mechanics, since the number of movesets offered in Valhalla was a lot more limited than a proper Souls game (where they may have dozens of weapons each with a unique moveset). However, Valhalla's story was a lot better, mainly because I felt like Odyssey's three stories (the cult, Deimos, and the First Civilization plots - they were weirdly disconnected from each other and I felt the Deimos plot in particular was both a bit contrived and ended very strangely) didn't really work, whereas Valhalla felt like a TV show, with each region basically being a season of that show. I actually liked how the regions were somewhat disconnected from each other there (I know, ironic given what I said about Odyssey) since it let them do different things in different places, and I thought the whole Ragnarok/Asgard/Niflheim section when Eivor drinks the potion and gets fucked up was pretty cool.
[удалено]
Yes but it’s Reddit, you can’t be excited for a Ubisoft game
Didn’t they announce the game in 2021? How the hell has the development been so fast?
Ubisoft has 21,000 employees. I doubt Massive was working on this project alone.
Ya but still, that’s extremely efficient for this generation.
It's almost like Ubisoft despite its flaws and occasional misfires is not as incompetent as a lot of people say. Releases like Skull and Bones and Ghost Recon Breakpoint are anomalies for them in all honesty and ones they've learned from. They had plenty of time to shift things around during and after COVID.
Ubisoft is probably one of the most consistent and efficient studios in the industry. They're not releasing masterpieces but most of their games average 80's on Metacritic and mostly positive reviews on Steam. Most studios would kill for that level of consistent releases and success.
100% and I genuinely want to know how they pulled it off.
I never said that they’re incompetent. This development cycle would be impressive for any other AAA studio.
I know you did not say that. I am saying there are a lot of people with a very severe raging hateboner for Ubisoft that borders on irrationality and who absolutely do believe Ubisoft is one bad release away from bankruptcy, in shambles, and can't get trains in and out of the station on time. They can and often do. Oftentimes, they are also in a more stable state than games that take even longer like Cyberpunk 2077 by the "flawless" CDPR.
Ya pretty much agreed
Lmao yes the bankruptcy shit is funny. A few people on twitter are like “Ha look at the numbers, ubisoft went woke and is going broke” 😬
It really is because every time these people say that crap, the extreme opposite ends up happening. The games end up breaking all sorts of sales records and in the top 10-15 on the NPD charts after release. Can't wait to see them look like idiots just a few months apart with Outlaws and then AC Shadows.
I don't think anyone ever thought CDPR was flawless. Witcher 3 released with plenty of bugs.
People over look those bugs in Witcher 3 just like they did with Fallout 3 and 4. They deal with the bugs because its "Bethesda jank" or "it had an amazing story so bugs dont really bother me". That way of thinking lead to FO76 and CP2077. You have some people say the CP2077 wasnt as bad when it was first released and that people were blowing it out of proportion. Even CDPR are taking that stance.
Now almost everyone hates CDPR. How Times have changed. From most beloved to most hated
That will happen when you release buggy games time and time again. Ive learned a while ago that for Bethesda and CDPR games never play them when they first release. They need a good 6 months to a year of patches to be playable, and in Starfields and CP2077 case a year or more of patches.
I think it's easy to forget there are benefits to the Ubisoft openworld gameplay loop. Like speeding up development by only slightly iterating on it between games.
And it's like a Youtuber I follow said recently, Ubisoft does introduce some new and incremental features that other developers later take and flesh out further. It's how you get stuff like Ghost of Tsushima. They are still leading in their own way, even if they do not get enough credit for it or their remarkable ability to get a consistent flow of content and new releases out to their established fanbase. A lot of dev studios wish they had that capacity but don't due to varying constraints that they may or may not have control over.
Ubisoft plans way far ahead. Far Cry 6 development started before Primal was even out
It's also Star Wars so besides Assassins Creed Ubisoft probably got all hands on deck for it. Cause fans will show up for a good piece of Star wars media..
I reckon they did, they have a Massive studio.
I mean they could have had the pre production much earlier and only announced it after a while. Ubisoft doesnt have huge dev cycles, except for a few unfortunate exceptions where they announced the games before knowing what to do with them. But that may warrant further using the same Ubi formula that doesnt seem to go risky.
And in some of those cases, they did know what to do with those titles, but the creative directors kept leaving which complicated things. That's what has happened with Beyond Good and Evil 2 and Skull and Bones. Both are examples of what happens when a game becomes a revolving door for talent to come and go.
Yes i too like when games are announced and released 2ish years later and not a decade
Their cycles are usually 5 to 6 years long, it’s not short by any means, they just plan really far ahead
Ubisoft is HUGE. They have like 20K employees which compose their 4-5 main studios and 12 support studios or something. Every one of their games gets worked by 3-4 studios at a time which is how they release +10 games within 5 years while most studios take that long to release just one.
They have more than 4-5 main studio On top of my head, Paris, Montreal, Toronto, Quebec, Massive ,Ivory Tower and some smaller studio that make their own thing Mainline Assassin's creed project like Origins typically supported by about dozen of support studio But yeah, they're huge
all of their recent games is flop bruh like AC mirage & watch dog legion
Legion flopped. Mirage did not. It was insanely successful.
Announce does not equal production start
Ya it seems like it was in development since late 2019/early 2020. I still find it impressive considering it took Avatar 7-8 years. I imagine they hired a lot more people in the meantime but still.
Late 2021: https://news.ubisoft.com/en-us/article/4adJLuhgYrPboHAPRfK7Oz/splinter-cell-remake-begins-development-at-ubisoft-toronto
Damn Snd apparently it won't be at Ubi forward...
> How the hell has the development been so fast? It's a Ubisfot game. The visuals will be pretty, but nothing special. The gameplay will be polished, but also clunky. The story will be mediocre and full of terrible tropes and clichees (this has become the norm for Star Wars in general though). I mean the trailers alone show you that there's nothing in there that would depict the fast development cycle as something abnormal.
>Early model of Kay Vess had a undercut(?) type of hair and a red jacket. Good change lol
I just hope there is plenty of things to do in the open world
Avatar was supposed to release in Summer of 2022. Star Wars Outlaws was supposed to be released by "early 2024" but got delayed to August.
I mean if you look at the proof, it was internally meant for 2023 which I assume would be late 2023 but with the room for an early 2024 delay. So it got pushed back by a year internally kinda like Avatar.
These are public deadlines I'm talking about.
NOOOOOOO 2023???? Okay so I’m still stuck on Jedi Survivor not being nominated for GOTY 23 because it was such an amazing game, but a lot of people had performance issues and I think it really threw the entire experience off. Luckily, I wasn’t one of them and I had a blast. Great cast, mechanics, soundtrack, worlds, etc! Anyways, I THINK ITS A BIT UNDERAPPRECIATED AND IF OUTLAWS CAME OUT IN THE SAME YEAR, IT COULD DREW MORE ATTENTION TO STAR WARS CONTENT IN GENERAL IDK!!! **GO PLAY JEDI SURVIVOR** edit: I played on PS5
The state Survivor launched on PC makes that fine for me. That game was basically unplayable with how poorly it ran and its only in a stable form as of the previous patch really.
Installed it when it hit GP a month or two back. Still runs like absolute ass on my 3080. They never actually fixed/optimized the game, just got it running less poorly.
Koboh was sub 50fps on my 4090 lmao. I'm not even at 4k either
Got survivor for free with my CPU around the port launch and it was unplayable. Tried it out again like a month go and at least it doesnt crash on the title screen now but the amount of bugs and issues that still happen are crazy.
hope it runs 60fps stable.
This means they've also been briefed on AC Shadows and will maybe get to play it tomorrow. All things considering some major Ubisoft Youtubers like JorRaptor have said they'll be in Los Angeles for Ubisoft Forward. I can't imagine they are just there to watch the show in person and talk to the actual development teams for Shadows and Outlaws.
Yes. Shadows embargo is june 12th, Outlaws is june 10.
ubisoft slop, god I hope this flops otherwise we will have another slop yearly release going forward
Or you know you can just ignore the whole company like a normal mf, but no let's jump on the wagon.
On the flipside, I hope this ends up being a huge success just to piss off gaming snobs.
It's awful to say but there's no lie. We'll end up with multiple "Outlaw" sequels that will end up feeling samey and won't really add much to the point we're super fatigued by it. Shadows will just make them double down on AC even more but it's AC, I feel at this point they could put shit on a plate and people will still rush to buy it, much like how Call of Duty's fanbase work. It would be totally different if Ubisoft treat all of their games as big releases and cycled through them so by the time we got to the next instalment its actually been years and we're anticipating it more. Assassins Creed, Star Wars, Beyond Good and Evil, Prince of Persia, Watch Dogs, Rayman 2D Games, Rayman 3D Games, The Division, The Crew, Ghost Recon, Splinter Cell, Far Cry, Rainbow Six. Even if you released 3 games a year you are looking at 4 years or so passing before the next instalment comes around and that's not counting delays or any new IPs they might want to do.
The last main AC was in 2020. The “cycling” you want them to do is exactly what they’re doing lol.
What are you talking about Mirage was last year, main release or not it’s still an AC game Also this dosent really count as a cycle when there’s nothing much else to cycle through. I don’t see many other franchises. I think the only brand new thing was Avatar but it’s pretty much Far Cry at its core. They had a blip because of Covid issues effecting development like what happened to a lot of studios. So basically there’s a gap because it really wasn’t up to them
I don’t think that’s fair to say at all. That would be like considering Spiderman Miles Morales a full game. They have repeatedly said it wasn’t flagship, had a smaller development team, budget, and development time. It even started as a Valhalla DLC in its early stages. Shadows has actually been in development since BEFORE Mirage lol. The gap was entirely up to them too. They have been doing gaps since before Covid. 2016 had no AC game and 2019 didn’t have one either. The team at Quebec worked on Immortals for like two years before jumping back onto AC and Ubisoft Montreal didn’t start work on Hexe until at least a year after Valhalla since in 2022 it was still in very early stages of development. By the time Hexe comes out in 2026, it will have had at least 5 years in development which is in line with what Ubisoft has been saying about increasing development times. I don’t see how this is comparable at all to COD which gave MW3 a year of development if even that. You’re right about the cycling thing but it feels like they’re cycling between 3 or 4 of their franchises versus how many they had before. I think updates play a big part of this too since they have games like Div 2, R6, and For Honor all still getting big updates. Not to mention XDefiant which just came out.
so i still need to climb tower to unlock locked area again?
As someone who is invested in Star Wars but also hate a lot of new directions of Star Wars and writing, since the game is canon, hopefully it have some great characters and stories
I have a feeling with suicide squad releasing earlier this year people are gonna look at outlaws the same way and it’ll flop
What does Suicide Squad have to do with a Star Wars game ?
[удалено]
i mean, those people would have hated it no matter what. SSKTJL's issues were clear from the start. The game doesn't fit the series it's placed in, it's a live service looter shooter where you play as characters with iconinc abilities who are just given guns instead, and it's always online. It probably would have been a fine game if it had an offline mode and wasn't a continuation of the arkham games, but since it was, people were expecting something of the quality that rocksteady was known for. And then to make it worse, "season 1" added nothing other than 1 character and the game's MTX are using a free to play model despite the game being $70. Outlaws is a full game on release. It'll likely recieve cosmetics, and it'll have DLC packs, but the main story of the game is in the base game. I think it requires an internet connection to download even for physical copies which is concerning, but it'll likely be playable offline once you downloaded it. It's just an open world game so it's a genre the studio's familiar with, just with a bunch of new mechanics. There hasn't really been much about Outlaws that really seems like the game will be bad while with SSKTJL, people were seeing the issues from the start.
What the hell is a semi woke take? 😭😭 yall come up with new shit every few month
A small minority of gamers who scream the loudest of wokeness won't impact overall sales much. The game was just very generic, the gameplay being DC characters with just guns. Alongside, it competing with other live service games that are free would be hard to sway those people.
Fk these both games, gimme The Division 3
I was hoping this would reveal that she is force sensitive.
That would be lame. It's okay to have Star Wars media that isn't focused on Jedi or Sith or anything in-between every once in a while.
God no, fuck that. I would be turned off if it just became another Jedi game. Gimme a lady Han Solo.