They’d need to be forward thinking in which technologies they use such that they can be handed over to customers. Open source is always nice but isn’t strictly necessary, and it’s far less likely to happen whenever middleware is involved.
It shows that they’re trying to keep the game in a state where they’re spending no money and still potentially making money, but that may not be mutually exclusive with what you said.
With no insider information, Elder Scrolls VI probably comes 2028 or 2029, as that’s about what Bethesda’s cadence is. That would make Fallout 5 somewhere around 2033 or 2034.
They also could have just done that from the start. Look, this is good news, but the reason you design your servers like that in the first place is because you have the hubris to think you’re going to make Fortnite money. Hopefully their next project isn’t built with the same naivety.
They’ve already got one of those, Fallout 76. They’ve kept it going, and it’s probably even profitable at this point thanks to the TV show, but I doubt they’ve got the appetite for another one of those right now.
From the official press release:
Our teams are now developing The Elder Scrolls VI and Fallout 5 on Creation Engine 3…
Fuck!
I’m not going to get a ton of mileage out of the game if the online doesn’t work for me, regardless of how many files people figure out how to extract.
It was always coming to PC, as will any multiplayer PlayStation title, but the thing I’m concerned about is that PSN is required and has historically not worked via Proton. And then even if it does work, I’m concerned that defense in this game is going to be awful, as there’s seemingly only one not-so-great defensive mechanic outside of holding back to block.
Being a body in the online matchmaking pool adds value to the next player who has a greater incentive to give Blizzard more money because they played with you. Just logging in to play the game helps Blizzard, not to mention the positive word of mouth you spread afterward. That said, OP clearly has an itch to play this game that isn’t going to go away. There are games I won’t touch because they do things that offend me, and I’m not tempted to play them when there’s so much else out there. StarCraft II is one of them, even though it had been one of my favorite games in the past and there’s nothing else quite like it, for what that’s worth.
Ubisoft games put a tower on your map and then reveal other activity icons on your map once you climb it that it expects you to clear. Breath of the Wild asks you to use your eyes to decide what you find interesting from the top of the tower. Elden Ring has different types of rewards tied to certain types of locations, but it expects you to put together what those rules are on your own. There’s a huge difference there.
I guess not according to your unquestionable criteria but you don’t get to say in the seventies is bad.
I said reviewing in the 70s tends to not result in a sales bump. In order to average in the 70s, you’ve got far more negative reviews in the mix than a game that reviews in the mid 80s or low 90s. It doesn’t end up so unanimously praised that people can’t shut up about how much they love it, which drives sales, generally. I’m not here to talk you out of a game you enjoy. I really enjoyed Screamer and Invincible VS this year, and I’d call them both great games, both rated 77 on OpenCritic. Neither sold phenomenally well. If they’re lucky, those projects were scoped accordingly so that they were able to turn a profit and continue employing those developers.
Your first question was “Didn’t both those games review and sell well?” The answer is no. That’s what we were talking about, in this thread about Ubisoft laying off thousands of people.
For what it’s worth, I think they made a number of good games, but there’s far too much that’s far too similar between them. By the time Black Flag came out the first time, I was tired of the checklist open world format, and it’s why something like Breath of the Wild or Elden Ring will pop off when it addresses what people like me find lacking in the Ubisoft format. These days when I get into an open world game that adheres to the same principles as Ubisoft (like Final Fantasy VII Rebirth, for instance), it’s often despite the format, not because of it.
Around a 70 isn’t typically a great score, no, not as it tends to affect copies sold.
There are soft thresholds around mid 80s and around 90 where review scores have tangible effects on sales, which is part of how Baldur’s Gate 3 and Clair Obscur go on to sell multiple millions of copies despite a fraction of the marketing budget that Ubisoft commands.
I don’t care if you like Ubisoft games. They just spent a lot of money making games that not enough people bought to justify those budgets.
Around a 70 isn’t typically a great score, no, not as it tends to affect copies sold. Sales numbers are estimates extrapolated from physical sales, and often times shared with analyst partners like Circana; plus you can extrapolate Steam owners from things like number of reviews and random sampling from profile data and SteamDB. It is all vague. It also all points to these games severely underperforming, not to mention the layoffs that came in their wake. While still vague, you can find articles about Ubisoft’s CEO excusing Star Wars Outlaws’ performance for failing to “meet expectations”, not celebrating a success.
I listed three games, but you mean the two that weren’t free to play? No, they sold way under what they would have needed to break even and reviewed fairly middling. They put work into them post-launch, including a Switch 2 port for Star Wars, but back of the napkin math says that’s still nowhere near enough to help them out financially. And again, it doesn’t mean these games were terrible, but the market is showing that they’re generally not interested at the level Ubisoft needs them to be. Hyper Scape was a huge pile of money set on fire, too.
The CEO makes $1.5M per year in cash, so I very much doubt they’re spending hundreds of millions on executive salaries.
I have no criticisms myself for Star Wars Outlaws, as I didn’t play it, but the market didn’t want it, and Star Wars is for sure not underserved. I have been inundated with so much Star Wars since Disney bought it that I’m sick of it, and I’m not even seeking it out. The other thing I’m sick of is the Ubisoft Open World Game. I’ve played a lot of those. They built an efficient machine for churning those out. The market seems to be sick of them, too, at least relative to its former appetite. It’s not surprising that people are tired of both Ubisoft’s formula and Star Wars. You take a risk with Prince of Persia: The Lost Crown, a moderately budgeted game. You don’t take a risk with $200M+; that’s lunacy. Even with The Lost Crown, they reminded me via their Ubisoft launcher and additional DRM why I haven’t missed purchasing Ubisoft games for so many years.
Executive paycuts aren’t going to cover the delta of 1000 job cuts per year. Everyone loves to cite that one time Nintendo did that, but the math just usually doesn’t work out to the point where this solves layoffs or something. What’s going to get them out of financial fuckery and keep their talent retained is if they stop wasting hundreds of millions of dollars on projects like Hyperscape, Star Wars Outlaws, and Avatar that people don’t want and instead make games that their customers do want.
Correct. I have received help from that server in the past, and it’s unusable now. Part of what I hope to accomplish is to replace Discord, or at least offer my friends an off-ramp. Getting started with Discord is way easier, and in the year 2026, I wouldn’t know what other client to use to look for a community that gives me quick help via live chat. I no longer know how to use IRC, I’ve found.
OpenCritic only goes back to 2016, so metacritic would be all you have here.
They can have a ladder and matchmaking while still providing a server browser that goes to self-hosted servers. Even then, these are things that you set up with the assumption that your game is going to have a massive population, which is the foolish assumption all these live service games make. MMOs have been self-hosted for as long as pirates have been reverse-engineering the code. The only thing stopping it from happening more is the rights holders’ willingness to allow it. Competitive shooters started from server browsers and self-hosted servers.
If they wait until the game is a failure and about to close shop, I have no guarantee that this update will be its fate. But let’s say I know in advance somehow that the game is going to survive the servers’ decommissioning; I still end up with all the other negative side effects of an always-online game in the interim. Server queues, downtime that I can’t do anything about, no ability to play LAN with friends in a place with lousy internet, etc. SKG is looking for a minimum of preservation that I can get behind, but I don’t think it would be enough for me as a customer unless it was never always-online.
Looks like I missed it as I scrolled by a block on that page trying to recommend me other articles, as I was looking for the rest of this article.