For Honor is a really great game.
Will friend people on uPlay if y’all wanna 1v1 me some time.
3 Likes
Do you get to keep the game, or is it just a thing we’re you test it for a week then send it back?
3 Likes
It’s yours to keep forever.
6 Likes
Sounds like some kind of contagious disease, I may need a check up…
4 Likes
It’s exactly like every other Ubisoft game I buy-- it’s yours to keep, just like how my already-just-spent money is theirs to keep.
3 Likes
Simple solution, stop giving ubisoft your money.
4 Likes
appreciate the heads up @Enki 
never been interested in For Honor enough to actually “pay” for it 
, and sorta only the sp “taste”/section, so this is a great way for me to be able to proper sample it, at some point 
(since i don’t care about the missing heroes etc, likely not gonna do much mp’ing, even it’s even still has a heartbeat by the time i get to it 
)
, don’t you just hate it when you buy something and “they” decide to keep your money ? 
curse you “quid pro quo”…! 
2 Likes
Meh, you never know. Getting mad over generosity is just pointless, it’s just rather unlucky that the time I decide to give into friends’ recommendations by buying Watch_Dogs and AC IV: Black Flag happened to be just before they gave away Watch_Dogs and AC IV Black Flag (twice). Black Flag was the worst because I had the game for less than a week before it was given out for free out of nowhere-- I tried to get a refund, but Steam was a little skeptical since I’d already played 10 hours.
At the very least, Ubisoft is saving me $60 by making sure Beyond Good & Evil 2 is so utterly vile and irredeemable that I wouldn’t even consider buying it for a second.
2 Likes
Well yes it wasn’t mainly your impeccable timing of buying things that was the leading cause of my recommendation. What you could be concerned with instead is that their games are almost always over priced, under performing, over protected, under developed and just the same damn game over and over.
There are a handfull of exceptions I’ll concede that but I don’t find those few titles worth ignoring ubisoft’s general scummy business practices for. Even if they’re free.
2 Likes
Meh. I don’t think Ubisoft is some grand villain. They do crappy things, but a lot of their games are genuinely unique. Part of the reason I outright ignore most outrages is because they almost always focus on the entirely wrong aspects of what practices are right and wrong. It always feels like people are just looking for excuses to be outraged, so when it comes to an ACTUALLY SHITTY thing to do, the response is always mixed due to people calling bluff.
Watch_Dogs, for example, does have a lot going for it. Its neo-noire setting, its genuinely interesting world, its beautiful artistic design (this is without WorseMod, mind you), an impressive engine, and so on. It has its flaws, yes, but those don’t get talked about because people were so busy whining about “graphics downgrades.” It’s a thing that happens in every game. I sure didn’t see significant outrage over The Witcher 3 doing the same thing-- a game that also ran into the 10-20 FPS range quite a bit on PS4. I’m only giving CD Projekt flack here because it goes by assumption that they’re generally following some good business practices. Their reputation is pristine for a reason-- but if they don’t get slammed for it, why does someone else?
They streamlined that messy UI from before into rolling it all up into one button, something that generally works well in practice. The criticism I hate the most, though-- that it’s “not really like hacking–” this is something that makes me almost 100% certain that nobody who was part of the outrage behind the game ever played it. This is something the INTRO tells you-- Aidan is not a hacker. He is a script kiddie with a phone, a fixer who goes in with a gun while someone behind a screen does all the background work.
He uses the apps he’s provided without any knowledge of their inner workings, like a powertool, because that was what he did before the events of the game. It’s the entire reason why he doesn’t just work alone the entire game, why he’s forced to cooperate with both former contacts and new faces simply because he doesn’t have the knowledge he needs to get through everything thrown at him.
Something else I really do appreciate in Ubisoft games is the small details. Yes, it’s not everywhere, but where it is, you notice. The little text blurbs you get over any character you scan in Watch_Dogs really does add to the atmosphere. The way Aidan slips his hands into his coat physically with no clipping whatsoever is a technical achievement of its own. Rainy Chicago looks amazing. The cans and crap rolling around on the L-Train just make the game that little bit more immersive in a brief moment where you’ve escaped pursuit and have a moment to calm down and take in the scenery. Even if you’re not looking for details, there’s always going to be that one moment where you bump into a car door, stop to wipe off your phone’s screen before putting it away (while it’s raining), and just stop like “whoa, that was actually really cool!”
Oh boy, another “in defense of Watch_Dogs” rant. That really was just an example, but anyway, I really do think they’re doing a lot of great things. They also haven’t fallen down the same rabbithole of marketing-transactions that companies like Valve pioneered, and they certainly haven’t a squandered a franchise as badly as Bethesda has with Wolfenstein II. They haven’t demolished a company over an 84 instead of 85 on Metacritic and forced them to turn to Kickstarter for last ditch efforts, or deliberately set impossible milestones on a company in order to force a buyout. No matter what Ubisoft does wrong, nothing brings them even close to the level of incompetence and greed that SqareEnix, Bethesda, and WB have displayed in the past.
It’s just that said great things happen in the middle of some pretty stupid decisions, and when stupid things happen, people often find themselves angry but with no real thing to be angry about. It just confuses everything, and there are plenty of legitimate criticisms for how the company operates WITHOUT trying to make up reasons.
And trust me, with what they’ve done to BG&E2, I’m definitely not in a “defend Ubisoft” mood right now. For the way I feel about the company right now, staying objective in defending them is VERY hard.
1 Like
I will read your dissertation here at some point, but for now I’d just like to say please do not confuse “outrage” with informed consumer choice and wanting to be a responsible consumer.
Heh. Don’t worry, I don’t expect you to do that. I need to control myself better.
I know there’s legitimate outrage in the mix, too. It just frustrates me that these epeople are often talked over by people just looking to cause a ruckus, and it usually boils down to the dumbest things. Just recently, one of the major controversies with Destiny 2 was with them locking the forums down to people who OWNED the game-- as in, the people who should actually be giving feedback since they know what they’re talking about.
I suppose the only way I can finish my point is by dropping what often constitutes as a good foundation for “outrage.” All I can really do is point you in the direction of the new Gears of War 5 trailer.
Man, am I hyped for this game. It takes place years after Gears 4, now following Kait after the ending for 4 dropped a MASSIVE bomb on the plot that basically changes everything about her character. It looks incredible…
…except that apparently it qualifies as “SJW propaganda” now, just because it’s not following JD again.
Oh boy, you must have not been hanging around the forums that I was at the time of its release. People were complaining left and right about the “downgrade” (Granted, not as much as Watch_Dogs, but it was still an issue for a vocal minority. Has noone ever heard of bullshots?) of graphics especially on consoles. High-end PCs, I believe, had no issues seeing it in gorgeous 4k. It looked spectacular to me on my craptop. It was one of several controversies surrounding it at that time that thankfully did not last that long.
On a side note, I played the game on a gtx 640m graphics card, so I knew I was asking for trouble since I should not have even been able to run it. It was impossible to use kb/m (it would move like molasses), but had no issues with a controller. Only issue I ever ran into is that audio did not match visuals in cutscenes. It was so much better when I got my new pc though and was probably the main reason my graphics card gave out not too long after I completed the base game considering the strain I put it under.
That’s kind of what I mean. I only know about the “controversy” because it was there ever so briefly, but it was also just a small footnote to a game that received universal 95s no matter where you looked. Those people were laughed at as hyperbolic, or at best they got “oh, darn, downgrades… but who gives a f___ honestly, ARGHH THIS GAME IS SO GOOD!”
And no, I wasn’t hanging around the forums. I heard about it originally from a single Boogie video, and I kind of guessed that it was a smart move considering all the stories of people playing the game on hardware way below the minimum specs. This is the same series as The Witcher 2, a game you STILL can’t run well, let alone at max settings. Hey, I’m getting Crysis 2 flashbacks…
I didn’t mean to say that the controversy wasn’t there at all, but Watch_Dogs? It’s still known as “the game that got downgraded.” Granted, a lot of that was PR. With CD Projekt, they explained that the engine itself was literally dying with these improvements, and they made the changes for stability’s sake. With Ubisoft, they gave some corporate nonsense that translated to “console parity,” which was… hooboy, it was STUPID. It still doesn’t look that bad, though! It has a lot of really nice lighting effects, and in some ways the visuals are less muddy than the E3 demo. The problem is the transition from advertising to gameplay and how the FILTERS were modded.
Even then, the game didn’t get a fair shake. A lot of the big screenshots and videos being passed around took vertical slices from E3, then compared them to the bane of open world games-- middle of a city, and mid-day. Perhaps the ugliest a game can look. Textures are full-brightness, no shadows to mask anything. If there is good lighting in the game, it certainly won’t show up here. Watch_Dogs shines visually when it’s either night-time or at least cloudy/hazy, where headlights turn on and the lighting effects can be seen at their peak. Even then, it’s downgraded from E3, but it’s still a sight to behold.
1 Like