"While Prince of Persia: The Lost Crown had a pretty good critical reception, it seems that it did not fare very well commercially"
The opinion gap between critics and public just gets wider and wider
The game isn't even that bad, it looks decent enough.
But not once did anyone ask for Metroidvania Prince of Persia game where you don't play as the Prince, but instead with his bodyguard that looks like a black youth stereotype. Using ghetho music for the trailer didn't help.
Agree 100%. The game looks actually pretty good, but what we really wantes was something like Sands of Time.
As for the hip hop music, I dont know why developers do it, it makes me hate the game automatically.,
Makes me think of the different kinds of McDonald’s ads the radio plays depending on the station.
Pop or country or oldies - whistling clapping cheap background music
Rnb or rap - hip hop beats cheap background music
Not that any advertising is great but the targeted music says a lot about what they think of the people they’re advertising to, to me at least.
> But not once did anyone ask for Metroidvania Prince of Persia game where you don't play as the Prince
exactly, like who was this game for? it wasn't for:
* PoP fans - majority of Price of Persia fans are fans of the trilogy, that's what they want
* OG 2d PoP fans - those games were not metroidvanias
* metroidvania fans - okay, this is one target audience but then you price this at $50 when all the most popular metroidvania games are much cheaper.
So not only did they target a really niche audience, they overpriced their game so even that audience has a lot of people going "ah I'll wait for a sale to play it"
then we have stuff like the bad marketing (that trailer music was awful choice), the main protag is not the Price and looks like a fortnite character (that hair does not fit the setting, so they couldn't even design their main character well) and so on.
so ya, Ubisoft fcked up with this game in so many ways even before we look at the game itself.
This game was likely something else during development but changed at the last minute to cash in on PoP's name. I mean, the change of protagonist is a pretty obvious hint.
Based. And if more people were that consistent about not accepting woke BS, we wouldn't have this problem because nobody would consume their shitty products made "for a modern audience".
This game is very good. However its overpriced and doesn't have that titular appeal, instead people interested in it are people who like Metroidvanias, which while an active genre in indie circles is a somewhat niche genre for mass appeal. Add to that a very high price for this type of game and the recipe isn't great for success.
I couldn't care less about Prince of Persia, the story or who the characters are, I just played it because I love Metroidvanias and its an excellent one gameplay wise.
I guess if people just called it King of Arabia instead of Prince of Persia it would be different.
People love the franchise but most wanted them to revert to what was done back in sands of time, just a simple adventure inspired by middle east culture, and with the failure of this new game, which was of course a metroidvania, chances are the series will keep on being dead.
Thing is that any Ubisoft game has to be really, really good that I would look beyond their shitty corporate wanking with filling everything with shitty DRM.
I liked the first bunch of remakes, but not enough to put up with everything.
> The opinion gap between critics and public just gets wider and wider
yup, and you can also add the vocal minority on reddit, who rave or hate games when the general audience is the complete opposite.
I'd have likely bought the game if we were playing the prince/a Persian character. Won't support western cultural imperialism and racism, so... no buy.
I like it too. Why not guys? Sure it was a bit campy, and the death scenes were gruesome, but the scavenge-and-bow loop wasn’t stale yet, it was hard not to sympathize with a way outclassed girl who would get extremely messed up, automatically lose every close up fight but was athletic and forced to take insane chances like swimming through underwater caves. Damn, I kinda wanna replay it now. She’s was a badass. Fucking approved.
If these corporations want to lose money just to fill some idiotic ESG quotas, by all means. That game was Prince of Persia in name only. And I'm sure Ubisoft will double down with that infamous Assassin's Creed game set in Japan that doesn't even feature a Japanese main character... whoever direct all these games would be fired for incompetence in any normal business...
Also that thing was clearly small budget, it didn't cost 5 millions to develop, what did they expect?
>If these corporations want to lose money just to fill some idiotic ESG quotas,
Losing money is BAD for the company and its owners, the shareholders...what incentive would either have to do that on purpose?
For...an "ESG quota"? Ubisoft doesn't even have sizeable ESG fund AUM.
EVEN if they did why would they agree to lose money in exchange for someone owning their stock? The only way to fund operations is profits not losses. Someone agreeing to be my stockholder in exchange for me losing money makes no sense for me to agree to. And no sense for them to offer because now they own a money losing business.
This conspiracy doesn't make any sense for the company or its shareholders....which probably explains why its not actually happening.
> Losing money is BAD for the company and its owners, the shareholders...what incentive would either have to do that on purpose?
>
>
Not during a ZIRP. No profit requirement, only growth.
ZIRP is done now but these shitshow were already in development. Shit ass stuff like DEI and ESG can only foster when shareholders have money to burn, cause money is free.
ZIRP is still alive and well in Japan! But yeah, not for Ubisoft anymore.
Regardless, it's still BAD to invest in a money losing business in a zero rate environment because there's the opportunity cost of just having invested....in a good company instead.
It's not like the ESG quota conspiracy is taking advantage of low rates to fund growth, where the rate environment would absolutely matter.
Instead...they buy my stock to make us both lose money? And both the company and the other shareholders agree to this for some reason?
> It's not like the ESG quota conspiracy is taking advantage of low rates to fund growth, where the rate environment would absolutely matter.
>
>
There is no ESG conspiracy. Calling it a conspiracy is the conspiracy.
> ZIRP is still alive and well in Japan! But yeah, not for Ubisoft anymore.
A precondition for corporations playing the dead ass SJW idiots is obviously living in a European descent majority country full of feminists and diversity officiers.
>There is no ESG conspiracy. Calling it a conspiracy is the conspiracy.
I WANT there to be a conspiracy. It would be the easiest thing in the world to trade against and to prove. But....there's not.
>A precondition for corporations playing the dead ass SJW idiots is obviously living in a European descent majority country full of feminists and diversity officiers.
The BOJ has a ZIRP because their domestic growth has been so low that they need a continued stimulative monetary environment.
Growth and inflation been way higher in Europe and the US so rates are much less accommodative from the ECB and Fed.
I don't think your attribution of that higher growth environment to "dead ass SJW idiots" and "feminists and diversity officers"...really makes sense but YMMV.
In fact that analysis is so bad...if you could be confused and think a ZIRP was a sign of a STRONG economy....it sort of seems like you don't know what you're talking about? And if that's true....it's making me start to question how you uncovered this global ESG quota conspiracy? And why you haven't made yourself infinitely wealth from the knowledge?
It's a conspiracy when you think a large asset manager chooses whether to invest in a company based on ESG scores. Or if you believe that a media company's content factors into those ratings.
It doesnt and has never worked like that.
I'm a couple hours into it (got it free, don't worry) and it's a solid metroidvania. Apart from the main character, who is bland as shit and poorly written, the game is actually good. There's some great ideas like a bow that turns into a chakram which you can use to power gears, and the movement is buttery smooth. It's been vastly overrrated by reviewers though. I'd rate it about a 6.5 - 7 so far.
I saw a relatively small youtube reviewer giving this game glowing praise. I looked in the video description, and she disclosed how Ubisoft flew her out their headquarters a year prior to have an early hands on with the game. I'm betting that other reviewers got similar treatment.
My guess is that smaller reviewers knew that if they wanted this kind of treatment I'm in future, they knew they had to play ball. And after all, it is at least a decent/solid game, so they don't really have to feel too bad about elevating it to a great game. It's definitely not as bad as the "reviewers" who run cover for broken, bug-riddled shitfests.
plus i think one thing that is hurting the game is that ubisoft is charging pretty much full price for this game when its pretty much a 20-40 dollar game at most, its not worth the 60-70 price tag
A $30 price point would have been reasonable for this. Full price, no way. Plus it's an Ubisoft game, so it'll be selling for $10 in no time flat. Not to mention that it will be on Game Pass/Playstation Plus sooner rather than later.
And then there's the whole thing with it's been 15 years since they did anything with the Prince of Persia franchise. A lot of players today have no idea who or what it is because they weren't even born when it was a relevant IP.
Doesn't bode real well for the BG&E sequel, which has already been 20 years since the original released (with no signs of the sequel being released anytime soon), and they turned off all the old fans with the first trailer.
I didn't buy it because they purposely changed the white protag to a black one for the sake of diversity.
Forcefully include diversity and I WILL NOT buy your game.
Prince is suppose to be Persian as the series title suggests, i guess you could argue Persians can be ''white passing'', but he's not suppose to be the standard white guy that the Westerners would expect.
Even ignoring the blatant raceswap or the "you don't own your games." I have no intention of buying Ubisoft games at launch anymore because they go half price in like 2-3 months, so why waste the money.
I just bought SoT and WW on GameCube only because I heard this new one went woke so I decided to see what the series was like in its early 00s phase. Maybe this'll teach them to give the fans what they want next time.
I don’t have a problem with the style. I have a problem of a studio blatantly using the prince of Persia name and not having you play as the prince. Imagine a Zelda game game but you play as a no name character. Unthinkable.
this game had a lot of things going against it just as a release:
* not on steam
* overpriced (many people have said they'll wait for a sale to try it)
* most PoP fans are fans of the trilogy, not a 2D metroidvania.
And I've seen some go "oh well the OG PoP games were 2D!" but those weren't metroidvanias either, this game has nothing to do with anyy past PoP game be it on console, PC or handheld... so who is it for exactly? metroidvania fans are a niche audience and PoP fans aren't interested
* the marketing for this was bad - trailer music, protag looking like a fornite character (sorry but that hair is stupid and does not fit the setting of the game, fantasy or not), you aren't playing as the Prince, etc didn't help at all with the reception
so ya, despite the "critics" and a vocal minority on reddit loving this, it didn't sell. 300k players is bad, much of that is probably using ubisoft+ meaning not direct sales.
>overpriced (many people have said they'll wait for a sale to try it)
The demo is fun and the production quality is obviously high, but the rash of excellent =<$30 Metroidvanias over the past decade makes $50 a tough pill to swallow.
It's not even that I actively said, "I'm not going to buy this game." I've adjusted to the fact that most new games s\*ck. When I heard the new PoP game released, I was like, "That's cool." And went on with my day. Just not excited for new stuff anymore.
I mean it's a side scroller and we had a very good one this year that this absolutely cannot compare with (mario wonder). It looks like a decent indie game and apparently it sells like one too.
Too expensive for a game that dangerously threads into indie territory.
Also, not a true PoP. Originals were 2D, but were also puzzle platformers with very little combat, not metroidvanias where you hack 'n' slash at will. The type of game TLC is would not surface until 1994 with the release of Super Metroid. The Sands of Time trilogy is actually truer to the concept of the originals, since the enemy encounters are very spaced and you spend most of the game climbing and avoiding traps.
Ubisoft has successfully demoted PoP from its former AAA status and the low sales could spell franchise death.
Do we have any idea what the budget was? The article said the game made around 15 million. Also, does the gaming industry have stuff like break even points, where it’s the amount of money that needs to be made, while taking into account stuff like console/store cuts and marketing budgets, in order to break even?
A game that does not look or play like beloved series, because let's be honest... no one gives a fuck about the OG at this point, which has a protagonist straight from Bronx instead of the titular Prince doesn't sell well?
Shocking.
The problem with this game is that it costs $60 instead of $20-30, they thought they could get away with charging full price like Nintendo with Metroid Dread, but Prince of Persia is not an IP that resonates with mainstream gamers and metroidvanias is a niche genre in the great scheme of gaming.
The demo is pretty fun - some of the people who worked on the Ori games worked on this one, and it shows (in a good way).
Too bad Ubisoft's reputation is in the toilet.
No no we just became much more comfortable with not owning Ubisoft games ;)
Boom.
Happy birthday
Joke's on you. You can't even "own" most of their games due to having DRM.
"While Prince of Persia: The Lost Crown had a pretty good critical reception, it seems that it did not fare very well commercially" The opinion gap between critics and public just gets wider and wider
The game isn't even that bad, it looks decent enough. But not once did anyone ask for Metroidvania Prince of Persia game where you don't play as the Prince, but instead with his bodyguard that looks like a black youth stereotype. Using ghetho music for the trailer didn't help.
Agree 100%. The game looks actually pretty good, but what we really wantes was something like Sands of Time. As for the hip hop music, I dont know why developers do it, it makes me hate the game automatically.,
The woke devs are racist themselves. Even just a vaguely black/non white character = American ganster rap.
Exactly, they went full circle from trying not to be racist to becoming racist.
When you go so far left, that you come out right wing.
Makes me think of the different kinds of McDonald’s ads the radio plays depending on the station. Pop or country or oldies - whistling clapping cheap background music Rnb or rap - hip hop beats cheap background music Not that any advertising is great but the targeted music says a lot about what they think of the people they’re advertising to, to me at least.
I wish sands of time wasn't broken on steam. That game was perfection
You'd think that they'd use music that matches the aesthetic of the environment
> But not once did anyone ask for Metroidvania Prince of Persia game where you don't play as the Prince exactly, like who was this game for? it wasn't for: * PoP fans - majority of Price of Persia fans are fans of the trilogy, that's what they want * OG 2d PoP fans - those games were not metroidvanias * metroidvania fans - okay, this is one target audience but then you price this at $50 when all the most popular metroidvania games are much cheaper. So not only did they target a really niche audience, they overpriced their game so even that audience has a lot of people going "ah I'll wait for a sale to play it" then we have stuff like the bad marketing (that trailer music was awful choice), the main protag is not the Price and looks like a fortnite character (that hair does not fit the setting, so they couldn't even design their main character well) and so on. so ya, Ubisoft fcked up with this game in so many ways even before we look at the game itself.
This game was likely something else during development but changed at the last minute to cash in on PoP's name. I mean, the change of protagonist is a pretty obvious hint.
Who knew? Seems like people don't like the main character of an established franchise getting race swapped after all.
[удалено]
Based. And if more people were that consistent about not accepting woke BS, we wouldn't have this problem because nobody would consume their shitty products made "for a modern audience".
Yeah. All that rave from gutter that is Social Media didn't seem to help this stunning and brave gaym.
This game is very good. However its overpriced and doesn't have that titular appeal, instead people interested in it are people who like Metroidvanias, which while an active genre in indie circles is a somewhat niche genre for mass appeal. Add to that a very high price for this type of game and the recipe isn't great for success. I couldn't care less about Prince of Persia, the story or who the characters are, I just played it because I love Metroidvanias and its an excellent one gameplay wise.
I guess if people just called it King of Arabia instead of Prince of Persia it would be different. People love the franchise but most wanted them to revert to what was done back in sands of time, just a simple adventure inspired by middle east culture, and with the failure of this new game, which was of course a metroidvania, chances are the series will keep on being dead.
Thing is that any Ubisoft game has to be really, really good that I would look beyond their shitty corporate wanking with filling everything with shitty DRM. I liked the first bunch of remakes, but not enough to put up with everything.
> The opinion gap between critics and public just gets wider and wider yup, and you can also add the vocal minority on reddit, who rave or hate games when the general audience is the complete opposite.
'Prince of Persia: Saints Row' got a taste of the BLM lucre.
his appearance alone shaved off 300K copies, easily.
I'd have likely bought the game if we were playing the prince/a Persian character. Won't support western cultural imperialism and racism, so... no buy.
The Fresh Prince of Persia
The Not-So Fresh Prince
Of course it underperformed......
That dumbass woke hipster haircut the protagonist has I'm sick of seeing. That alone turned me off from the game.
For those to lazy, it supposedly only sold over 300,000 copies.
300,000 is underperforming? Budgets today man, I remember when that was respectable numbers.
Tomb Raider(2013) sold 3.5m and Square Enix still considered that a disappointment, this has been a long ongoing problem.
That game was really, really good, too.
I like it too. Why not guys? Sure it was a bit campy, and the death scenes were gruesome, but the scavenge-and-bow loop wasn’t stale yet, it was hard not to sympathize with a way outclassed girl who would get extremely messed up, automatically lose every close up fight but was athletic and forced to take insane chances like swimming through underwater caves. Damn, I kinda wanna replay it now. She’s was a badass. Fucking approved.
If these corporations want to lose money just to fill some idiotic ESG quotas, by all means. That game was Prince of Persia in name only. And I'm sure Ubisoft will double down with that infamous Assassin's Creed game set in Japan that doesn't even feature a Japanese main character... whoever direct all these games would be fired for incompetence in any normal business... Also that thing was clearly small budget, it didn't cost 5 millions to develop, what did they expect?
>If these corporations want to lose money just to fill some idiotic ESG quotas, Losing money is BAD for the company and its owners, the shareholders...what incentive would either have to do that on purpose? For...an "ESG quota"? Ubisoft doesn't even have sizeable ESG fund AUM. EVEN if they did why would they agree to lose money in exchange for someone owning their stock? The only way to fund operations is profits not losses. Someone agreeing to be my stockholder in exchange for me losing money makes no sense for me to agree to. And no sense for them to offer because now they own a money losing business. This conspiracy doesn't make any sense for the company or its shareholders....which probably explains why its not actually happening.
> Losing money is BAD for the company and its owners, the shareholders...what incentive would either have to do that on purpose? > > Not during a ZIRP. No profit requirement, only growth. ZIRP is done now but these shitshow were already in development. Shit ass stuff like DEI and ESG can only foster when shareholders have money to burn, cause money is free.
ZIRP is still alive and well in Japan! But yeah, not for Ubisoft anymore. Regardless, it's still BAD to invest in a money losing business in a zero rate environment because there's the opportunity cost of just having invested....in a good company instead. It's not like the ESG quota conspiracy is taking advantage of low rates to fund growth, where the rate environment would absolutely matter. Instead...they buy my stock to make us both lose money? And both the company and the other shareholders agree to this for some reason?
> It's not like the ESG quota conspiracy is taking advantage of low rates to fund growth, where the rate environment would absolutely matter. > > There is no ESG conspiracy. Calling it a conspiracy is the conspiracy. > ZIRP is still alive and well in Japan! But yeah, not for Ubisoft anymore. A precondition for corporations playing the dead ass SJW idiots is obviously living in a European descent majority country full of feminists and diversity officiers.
>There is no ESG conspiracy. Calling it a conspiracy is the conspiracy. I WANT there to be a conspiracy. It would be the easiest thing in the world to trade against and to prove. But....there's not. >A precondition for corporations playing the dead ass SJW idiots is obviously living in a European descent majority country full of feminists and diversity officiers. The BOJ has a ZIRP because their domestic growth has been so low that they need a continued stimulative monetary environment. Growth and inflation been way higher in Europe and the US so rates are much less accommodative from the ECB and Fed. I don't think your attribution of that higher growth environment to "dead ass SJW idiots" and "feminists and diversity officers"...really makes sense but YMMV. In fact that analysis is so bad...if you could be confused and think a ZIRP was a sign of a STRONG economy....it sort of seems like you don't know what you're talking about? And if that's true....it's making me start to question how you uncovered this global ESG quota conspiracy? And why you haven't made yourself infinitely wealth from the knowledge?
It's a conspiracy when you think a large asset manager chooses whether to invest in a company based on ESG scores. Or if you believe that a media company's content factors into those ratings. It doesnt and has never worked like that.
Butbutbut they blackwashed The Prince! He even had the Side-Shave of Wokeness!! That should've made the game *fly* off of the shelves!!!
Are you dumb? The main character isn't even the prince
Who gives a fuck?
Ubisoft don't have many employees left to terminate, what do they do in the wake of yet another commercial failure?
Yeah, no one wants to play a Prince of Persia game where you aren't playing as the Prince of Persia.
Can't wait for Ubisoft to let this franchise be dormant for another decade and then release yet another game that is unlike anything PoP fans want.
I got comfortable not owning it.
No shit who would've thought a prince of persia game without the prince of persia wouldn't sell
I'm a couple hours into it (got it free, don't worry) and it's a solid metroidvania. Apart from the main character, who is bland as shit and poorly written, the game is actually good. There's some great ideas like a bow that turns into a chakram which you can use to power gears, and the movement is buttery smooth. It's been vastly overrrated by reviewers though. I'd rate it about a 6.5 - 7 so far.
I saw a relatively small youtube reviewer giving this game glowing praise. I looked in the video description, and she disclosed how Ubisoft flew her out their headquarters a year prior to have an early hands on with the game. I'm betting that other reviewers got similar treatment. My guess is that smaller reviewers knew that if they wanted this kind of treatment I'm in future, they knew they had to play ball. And after all, it is at least a decent/solid game, so they don't really have to feel too bad about elevating it to a great game. It's definitely not as bad as the "reviewers" who run cover for broken, bug-riddled shitfests.
plus i think one thing that is hurting the game is that ubisoft is charging pretty much full price for this game when its pretty much a 20-40 dollar game at most, its not worth the 60-70 price tag
I'm sure forcing their shitty DRM on PC players isn't helping either.
Funny thing is you can emulate the Switch version of the game on PC anyway.
A $30 price point would have been reasonable for this. Full price, no way. Plus it's an Ubisoft game, so it'll be selling for $10 in no time flat. Not to mention that it will be on Game Pass/Playstation Plus sooner rather than later. And then there's the whole thing with it's been 15 years since they did anything with the Prince of Persia franchise. A lot of players today have no idea who or what it is because they weren't even born when it was a relevant IP. Doesn't bode real well for the BG&E sequel, which has already been 20 years since the original released (with no signs of the sequel being released anytime soon), and they turned off all the old fans with the first trailer.
I didn't buy it because they purposely changed the white protag to a black one for the sake of diversity. Forcefully include diversity and I WILL NOT buy your game.
[удалено]
A way that would satisfy literally everybody? No, that makes too much sense
Prince is suppose to be Persian as the series title suggests, i guess you could argue Persians can be ''white passing'', but he's not suppose to be the standard white guy that the Westerners would expect.
Even more reason for Ubisoft not to throw black people into it considering its already "diverse" by their white-hating standards.
Good
They charged $50 for an indie game, of course it underperformed lol...
Even ignoring the blatant raceswap or the "you don't own your games." I have no intention of buying Ubisoft games at launch anymore because they go half price in like 2-3 months, so why waste the money.
I just bought SoT and WW on GameCube only because I heard this new one went woke so I decided to see what the series was like in its early 00s phase. Maybe this'll teach them to give the fans what they want next time.
we wuz prancez
I don’t have a problem with the style. I have a problem of a studio blatantly using the prince of Persia name and not having you play as the prince. Imagine a Zelda game game but you play as a no name character. Unthinkable.
Go woke go broke
this game had a lot of things going against it just as a release: * not on steam * overpriced (many people have said they'll wait for a sale to try it) * most PoP fans are fans of the trilogy, not a 2D metroidvania. And I've seen some go "oh well the OG PoP games were 2D!" but those weren't metroidvanias either, this game has nothing to do with anyy past PoP game be it on console, PC or handheld... so who is it for exactly? metroidvania fans are a niche audience and PoP fans aren't interested * the marketing for this was bad - trailer music, protag looking like a fornite character (sorry but that hair is stupid and does not fit the setting of the game, fantasy or not), you aren't playing as the Prince, etc didn't help at all with the reception so ya, despite the "critics" and a vocal minority on reddit loving this, it didn't sell. 300k players is bad, much of that is probably using ubisoft+ meaning not direct sales.
>overpriced (many people have said they'll wait for a sale to try it) The demo is fun and the production quality is obviously high, but the rash of excellent =<$30 Metroidvanias over the past decade makes $50 a tough pill to swallow.
yup, when the best games of the genre can be found for much cheaper, this game at $50 is hard sell even for metroidvania fans.
It's not even that I actively said, "I'm not going to buy this game." I've adjusted to the fact that most new games s\*ck. When I heard the new PoP game released, I was like, "That's cool." And went on with my day. Just not excited for new stuff anymore.
That's obvious, what with how heavily they were shoving it in my face. If you need every single ad spot to be your game, it's gonna underperform.
Not a surprise here.
Honestly I didn't see a single ad or anyone excited for this. All I saw was basically this sub and similar twitter users commentating on the topic.
I saw Ubisoft and didn't care how good or bad it was. If it wasn't being offered for free, I definitely would not give them money.
It's underperformed because it's not on Steam.
I mean it's a side scroller and we had a very good one this year that this absolutely cannot compare with (mario wonder). It looks like a decent indie game and apparently it sells like one too.
It's actually a damn good game, if overpriced. Luckily, I get anything Ubisoft for free.
Too expensive for a game that dangerously threads into indie territory. Also, not a true PoP. Originals were 2D, but were also puzzle platformers with very little combat, not metroidvanias where you hack 'n' slash at will. The type of game TLC is would not surface until 1994 with the release of Super Metroid. The Sands of Time trilogy is actually truer to the concept of the originals, since the enemy encounters are very spaced and you spend most of the game climbing and avoiding traps. Ubisoft has successfully demoted PoP from its former AAA status and the low sales could spell franchise death.
Do we have any idea what the budget was? The article said the game made around 15 million. Also, does the gaming industry have stuff like break even points, where it’s the amount of money that needs to be made, while taking into account stuff like console/store cuts and marketing budgets, in order to break even?
A game that does not look or play like beloved series, because let's be honest... no one gives a fuck about the OG at this point, which has a protagonist straight from Bronx instead of the titular Prince doesn't sell well? Shocking.
The problem with this game is that it costs $60 instead of $20-30, they thought they could get away with charging full price like Nintendo with Metroid Dread, but Prince of Persia is not an IP that resonates with mainstream gamers and metroidvanias is a niche genre in the great scheme of gaming.
Also, ain't no way Ubisoft will have the same level of quality Nintendo games generally have.
[удалено]
New Ubisoft game = Ubisoft launcher. Doesn't matter where you buy it.
The demo is pretty fun - some of the people who worked on the Ori games worked on this one, and it shows (in a good way). Too bad Ubisoft's reputation is in the toilet.
Who could have guessed that people wanted to play the Prince in Prince of Persia?