Everyone knows Ubisoft for the legendary series of games Assassin’s creed, Watch Dogs, Splinter Cell and many others. The company also has many network projects, but does a good reputation prevent you from making money from ordinary players?? On the eve of the new The Division 2, I decided to conduct an investigation about this company.

Let’s start simple.
Surely everyone knows about the cult series of games Assassin’s creed, which until recently was an excellent action adventure with stealth elements. I think it’s not worth repeating that the series has turned into a conveyor belt with the help of which “Yubies” suck money from fans. All gamers know about this (except those who have a personal opinion on this matter) and no longer want to repeat themselves, and I won’t. But you probably didn’t know about the rest of the mess of shit that Ubisoft is cooking in the field of online games. Today we will look at the most famous Ubisoft network projects. So, bend your first finger.

For Honor
I’ll start by saying that I got my 28th reputation back in For Honore (For non-players, I’ll say that this is quite a lot) and I continue to play until now.
And what can I tell you?
This is a good “network fighting game” with capturing points and other modes, which people like to classify as MOBA-type games, one of a kind. Fight with swords, sticks, axes in the Middle Ages, it would seem, what could be better? Moreover, this has never happened before in the gaming market. And the problem is this.
I’ve updated this game about 30 times, and have followed every single addition from God. In most cases, updates turned out to be unnecessary garbage that changed the interface (most often for the worse) or changed elements of the game in a more “tolerant” direction (hello fems).
Ubisoft likes to “support” its network projects in this way, without actually doing anything. Once a year, four characters can be released, 2 of which are immature, and 1 is highly dependent on the battle mode, they will release a new donation mode in which reskinned items drop, although it would seem that the game has a lot of bugs, imbalances, problems with selecting players that turn your gameplay into a hellish pain in the ass, and more than 2 years have passed since the game. But you will play For Honor no matter what.

Tom Clancy’s Rainbow Six: https://vipzino.uk/login/ Siege
Tom Clancy’s Rainbow Six: Siege, popularly known as a rainbow, is a tactical online first-person shooter. I spent a huge amount of time in Rainbow and reached access level 100 (For non-players, I’ll say that this is quite a lot), because the game is addictive. This is a wonderful, original project with poor implementation. An endless number of bugs, unbalanced maps and characters. It would seem that a little more than 2 years have passed since the release of the project, it’s time to fix at least most of it. To hell with it, at least half! But no. Dear Ubisoft will clip 10 characters a year, 2/3 of which will be useless garbage, and 1/3 will be unbalanced. Useless garbage will be made even more useless, and donated skins will be released to correct the imbalance. But people will play it, because it’s interesting to play. No matter how much your fart burns from the fact that you were killed in the head through 10 walls by a random burst from an ally, and the game makers rework the face of one operative 3 times, each time making it a “global” update, you will play this.

You will play because there are no analogues. Royal battles, Counter Strike, DOTA2 – everyone is already sick of it. A person cannot sit in one place for too long – that’s how we are made. Nobody comes up with anything fresh in online games except Ubisoft, and they take advantage of it.

Best comments

Fight with swords, sticks, axes in the Middle Ages, it would seem, what could be better? Moreover, this has never happened before in the gaming market

Indeed, there was no Chivalry, no Mount and Blade, no other War of the Roses. “Freshness” from For Honor is just rushing.
And now the main question. What is the connection between the title and further writing?? Why these descriptions of as many as two games with a list of problems that would be enough to fill a comment in a discussion, but certainly not an article?? Monetization itself is generally given one line each. In the end, it all comes down to “because something is fresh,” which is not true at all.

“Dear readers, I eat shit because I don’t want to eat other shit.”. This is how the whole “investigation” reads:.

Somehow this sentence sounds too justifiable in the context of the accusatory tone of the article. If no one else comes up with anything (which, by the way, is a separate controversial thesis, but not about that now), then they have the FULL right to use this position of theirs. Why not??

I don’t disagree that they can use their position. My goal was to show this, but not to blame. Thanks for the criticism.