Ubisoft's new game is insincere, Assassin's Creed can't keep on laughing

Over the past few years, Ubisoft has been thriving, last year's "Assassin's Creed 4: Black Flag" applauded and hit, and "watchdog" has been successful, there is another alternative to the "South Park: The Rod of Truth." Ubisoft canceled its own egg-sore DRM and won back a large number of PC players. And this year also released two "Assassin's Creed", is simply a cash cow to bear the same fruit. But the Assassin's Creed failed to keep Ubisoft laughing.

In a word, Ubisoft has gone too far to emulate the EA model and has too many projects at the same time, resulting in resource fragmentation and quality degradation. "Watchdog" can only be considered good, not very good; "South Park" is only good, not very good, "Island 3" is their best game in recent years, but there are some technical problems. Their new project "The Son of Tomorrow" looks like a big manufacturer of independent style game, I dare not speculate, but can see that Ubisoft really want to put the net a little bigger. But all plans are premised on the need for your housekeeping (Assassin's Creed) to lay a solid foundation. But for now, the "Assassin's Creed: The Revolution" game evaluation results are mixed, although not too bad low score, but it certainly is not able to reach the height of the series. And we've seen the biggest problem with Ubisoft: The game's strategy for evaluating the taboo.

Many media failed to get a preview of the Assassin's Creed: the Revolution. There are a lot of great things that will require the media to agree to the estoppel when providing a preview of the review, until the game is released on the afternoon of the release of the evaluation results. This is a more unreasonable requirement for modern gaming circles, since many of the game evaluations were made in the days before the game was officially released and even weeks ago, the EA's Dragon Age: Trial has already published a lot of media scores, and Ubisoft is embarrassed, which will undoubtedly give players a doubt about the game and lose confidence. Because this performance means that they are not confident in the game, the game can not meet the expectations of the player and the media, so the game is not published before the release of evaluation scores, Kong before the last vote. Many media outlets have said they will no longer respect such agreements if future reviews of the ban continue until the game is sold.

EA is one of the most notorious players in the gaming industry, and has won two of the worst companies in the United States in 2012 and 2013, but EA is getting a little better, but Ubisoft is on the path to EA. Now the EA got rid of John Riccitiello and started to really make good games. "Dragon Age: Trial" media evaluation has been optimistic, BioWare finally get rid of a long period of tepid, is about to achieve breakthroughs.

Ubisoft can't imitate anyone else, especially EA. Ubisoft should stick to its own path. As a game publisher, whether you are the industry leader or an independent small workshop, the most important thing is to make good games. The problem with EA is that they start to be content with the golden game, because the golden mean game is already making money, so there's no need to innovate and take risks. And now, this has become a problem for Ubisoft. EA put the shareholders first, put the player second, perhaps as a company, this is inevitable, but please at least not so obvious, don't play with the money bag fool.

I don't think Ubisoft is evil in itself, at least not as bad as EA years ago. But they can do better. Their response to the Assassin's Creed: The Revolution and the start of next year's blockade of the whole will have an important role to play in their image, and they can immediately get their mind off the cliff or they can continue to degenerate. Hope they choose the former.