Ubisoft - How much longer can they get away with this 'downgrading'?

agnes · 19 Feb 2017 at 10:29

So, it's no shocker that the new Ghost Recon game has had a huge downgrade, to be honest, looks like an entirely different games compared to the original 'in game footage' trailers they shot a while back. And frankly, it looks basic.

Now I'm not fussed on Ubisoft, I've been playing The Division a tonne recently and I'm thoroughly enjoying it, but how anyone thought it would be like what they originally showcased at E3 before it hit the stores, is beyond me.

My question is this, how long will it be until they are called out on their incredibly false advertising? Obviously they have the leg to stand on, which is "We didn't confirm this as a finished game at E3" etc etc. But it's become so well known and simply, insulting when they release footage of a new game, and rake in the rewards from pre orders, only to release a game half as graphically good as what they originally showcased.

Surely a law is being broken here? Such as they can't take pre orders until the final product is revealed maybe? I don't know, it just infuriates me how they keep getting away with it and nothing is being done.

smogsy · 19 Feb 2017 at 10:31

they have a disclimaer at the bottom of every video. "not in game footage" or "aspects of the game may change in final release", do what i'm doing now just dont buy stuff from ubisoft

james.miller · 19 Feb 2017 at 10:39

I'm not going to cut my nose of to spite my face and boycott Unisoft because of stuff like that. People should know that e3 presentations and the like are about the vision they have for the game, regardless of what they say at the time. It's not final code, the game won't be like that on release, so forget about it and judge the game when it's released. I'm so bored of this whole false advising winge. Yeah the division isn't like the e3 presentation but I still sunk 300 hours in to it and THOROUGHLY enjoyed it. And yeah, in the same manner Witcher 3 wasn't like the e3 videos but that went on to be what is surely the most awarded game of all time. So really I think it's all one big barrel of laughs and if you dont buy a game you'd otherwise enjoy because of some video released 2 years earlier then it's you who looses out.

Ryan0r · 19 Feb 2017 at 11:05

The fact of the matter is that software development (and in particular, game development) is a very dynamic and iterative and changeable process. They'll obviously want to show off impressive prototypes, but these will always be representative of only a small working portion of the game that they have built to show off at that given time.

As development continues, and more features are added to the game, and the game world grows, sacrifices must be made in order for it to continue to run well, so they have to pare back some features (lighting, textures, geometry, etc) in order to use those resources elsewhere.

Anyone who pre-orders based on footage from a pre-alpha or pre-beta build is a fool and has zero right to moan. We are far too well informed nowadays, with so many ways to see how a game continues throughout its development, to have any grounds to complain when a game is released that doesn't match the lofty expectations created from an optimistic demonstration at an event 2 years previously. They'll always try to create something impressive to show everyone to sell the idea of a game, but I 100% believe there is no maliciousness when things have to change over the course of development. And this isn't just Ubisoft; lots of companies do this. See the uproar about No Man's Sky, and same again - how can you possibly moan when we can access all of the information we need before spending any money.

Moral of the story, don't pre-order. Wait, and make sure you know what you're getting. If you buy something and are disappointed, it's your fault alone.

Paul_cz · 19 Feb 2017 at 11:34

Ryan0r said:
The fact of the matter is that software development (and in particular, game development) is a very dynamic and iterative and changeable process. They'll obviously want to show off impressive prototypes, but these will always be representative of only a small working portion of the game that they have built to show off at that given time.

As development continues, and more features are added to the game, and the game world grows, sacrifices must be made in order for it to continue to run well, so they have to pare back some features (lighting, textures, geometry, etc) in order to use those resources elsewhere.

Anyone who pre-orders based on footage from a pre-alpha or pre-beta build is a fool and has zero right to moan. We are far too well informed nowadays, with so many ways to see how a game continues throughout its development, to have any grounds to complain when a game is released that doesn't match the lofty expectations created from an optimistic demonstration at an event 2 years previously. They'll always try to create something impressive to show everyone to sell the idea of a game, but I 100% believe there is no maliciousness when things have to change over the course of development. And this isn't just Ubisoft; lots of companies do this. See the uproar about No Man's Sky, and same again - how can you possibly moan when we can access all of the information we need before spending any money.

Moral of the story, don't pre-order. Wait, and make sure you know what you're getting. If you buy something and are disappointed, it's your fault alone.

Great post.

If we want companies to stop showing trailers that look better than final games, then companies will simply not show any footage until the look and tech is locked, 6 months before release at the earliest.

Bethesda did this with Fallout 4, and I suspect CD Projekt will do the same with Cyberpunk as well, so they can avoid any "downgrade" controversy. On one hand, good, on the other...I would actually like to see ingame footage earlier than that. Even if it comes with the caveat "not final code, game may look different at release".

Amatsubu · 19 Feb 2017 at 12:16

Frankly, I stopped caring. I never preorder games anyway and I always automatically assume a game will look noticeably worse after Witcher 3 and many Ubisoft games. It's not like the finished products always look horrible.

I just don't let myself get hyped too much.

neil_g · 19 Feb 2017 at 12:27

Again I agree fully with Ryan. These e3 demos are always massively polished tiny sections of the game. During the development they'll generally find that there may be technical or gameplay reasons why it just isn't possible in the full release.

Dirk Diggler · 19 Feb 2017 at 12:35

Basic rules:

Don't pre-order anything.
Watch and read actual game reviews from gamers, NOT the company selling the game or those affiliated with them.
Be suspicious of any game bundled in a Nvidia promotion.
Don't pre-order anything. Ever.

If anyone pre-orders a game based on developer videos that do not claim to be actual game footage, then they hardly have a case for whining about it.

Glanza · 19 Feb 2017 at 12:44

It's to be expected if it's got Ubisoft in the title. I can't think of any game they've released in the last 5 years that hasn't had a downgrade.

Nate75 · 19 Feb 2017 at 12:48

String said:
Basic rules:

Don't pre-order anything.

Watch and read actual game reviews from gamers, NOT the company selling the game or those affiliated with them.

Be suspicious of any game bundled in a Nvidia promotion.

Don't pre-order anything. Ever.

If anyone pre-orders a game based on developer videos that do not claim to be actual game footage, then they hardly have a case for whining about it.

Don't pre-order anything. Ever. Don't pre-order anything. Ever. Don't pre-order anything. Ever. Don't pre-order anything. Ever. Don't pre-order anything. Ever. Don't pre-order anything. Ever. Don't pre-order anything. Ever. Don't pre-order anything. Ever. Don't pre-order anything. Ever. Don't pre-order anything. Ever. Don't pre-order anything. Ever. Don't pre-order anything. Ever.

Problem solved!

Arthur Hucksake · 19 Feb 2017 at 12:49

I really enjoyed the GR beta myself. It's very console orientated to be fair, but i'm happy to play it on PS4.

mid_gen · 19 Feb 2017 at 12:56

agnes said:
Now I'm not fussed on Ubisoft, I've been playing The Division a tonne recently and I'm thoroughly enjoying it, but how anyone thought it would be like what they originally showcased at E3 before it hit the stores, is beyond me.

The same Division that is held up as an example of one of the best looking PC games on threads here regularly?

You can say what you like about the gameplay but from a technical point of view all the 'downgrade' and 'bullshot' hysterics proved to be just plain false.

Watch Dogs was a shambles and it's stuck Ubi with the downgrade meme when the reality is it's really not justified anymore.

Mynight · 19 Feb 2017 at 12:58

Glanza said:
It's to be expected if it's got Ubisoft in the title. I can't think of any game they've released in the last 5 years that hasn't had a downgrade.

To be fair they downgrade games after release as well

.

I agree with what the majority has said. Whilst it would be nice to play what we see it the demos we know its not going to happen so shouldn't buy it for what we see. I imagine the reasons behind such downgrades most of us wouldn't understand so it's just something we shall have to live with.

FloppyPoppy · 19 Feb 2017 at 13:01

It is a shame that it happens so much, it's worse when they have playable demos on show floors like E3 that are up to the standard in trailers but then we get it removed post event.

Nobody would be disappointed and not buy the game if they showed us what they were in the first place but it's the downgrade that puts people off.

agnes · 19 Feb 2017 at 14:38

I'm surprised so many people defend such an obvious lie to customers to get more sales...

And please don't mistake my original post, I'm focusing purely on the downgrade aspect, not the end result as I agree, the Division looks absolutely fantastic, incredible atmosphere, but that's not to remove the stigma around the fact they still did it in the first place.

And yea, Witcher 3 was the same, which I was incredibly dissapointed in CD Project Red, I'd expect better from them. All being said, Witcher 3 is by far my #1 favourite game.

So again, don't mistake my OP for a typical boycutt boy wonder post screaming "BAN UBI!!!! THEY GAMEZ SUXXXX"... They don't, I'm just curious as to why Ubi (and others) get away with such obvious lies. I can't understand how they can sell a product (pre orders) based upon something entirely different to what you get. I mean, where do you stand?

You go to a car show and see a Ferrari all looking amazing, you pre order one, turn up and you get a fiat. Same thing, still gets you from A to B, but it's not what you invested money in. An extreme analogy granted. But makes my point clearer. Oh, and to battle the "Don't pre order' brigade before they come along. I don't, not after Fable 3. But others do, and they won't stop. Which is what infuriates me.

Nexus18 · 19 Feb 2017 at 14:54

I never pre-order and if a game has been substantially downgraded then I won't buy it, ubi are the worst for this:

mid_gen said:
The same Division that is held up as an example of one of the best looking PC games on threads here regularly?

You can say what you like about the gameplay but from a technical point of view all the 'downgrade' and 'bullshot' hysterics proved to be just plain false.

Yes the division looks amazing and is a great game but it WAS downgraded:

Not only were the graphics downgraded but by the looks of it, the structure of the game was changed drastically too, not to mention the entire map...

Not sure how on earth you can say

all the 'downgrade' and 'bullshot' hysterics proved to be just plain false.

When the video above shows 2 very different games...

Mynight said:
I imagine the reasons behind such downgrades most of us wouldn't understand so it's just something we shall have to live with.

Consoles!

UBI have constantly gone on about wanting all platforms to be evenly matched for graphics, heck remember that time they came out and said that 30 fps was better because it was more cinematic, that says it all lol... Not only that but their constant derogatory comments about the PC gamer base are a joke, in their minds, they think we are all pirates.

Watch dogs had so many features, graphic improvements turned off but the funny thing is with their sloppy coding, they left everything behind in a config file, which could be turned back on easily and it had no real impact on performance and didn't break any thing, at least in my experience anyway.

If they know that they aren't going to be able to keep certain features/improvements in a game for the final release due to whatever reason, then they shouldn't show them in the first place.

Ryan0r · 19 Feb 2017 at 14:58

agnes said:
I'm surprised so many people defend such an obvious lie to customers to get more sales...

And please don't mistake my original post, I'm focusing purely on the downgrade aspect, not the end result as I agree, the Division looks absolutely fantastic, incredible atmosphere, but that's not to remove the stigma around the fact they still did it in the first place.

And yea, Witcher 3 was the same, which I was incredibly dissapointed in CD Project Red, I'd expect better from them. All being said, Witcher 3 is by far my #1 favourite game.

So again, don't mistake my OP for a typical boycutt boy wonder post screaming "BAN UBI!!!! THEY GAMEZ SUXXXX"... They don't, I'm just curious as to why Ubi (and others) get away with such obvious lies. I can't understand how they can sell a product (pre orders) based upon something entirely different to what you get. I mean, where do you stand?

You go to a car show and see a Ferrari all looking amazing, you pre order one, turn up and you get a fiat. Same thing, still gets you from A to B, but it's not what you invested money in. An extreme analogy granted. But makes my point clearer. Oh, and to battle the "Don't pre order' brigade before they come along. I don't, not after Fable 3. But others do, and they won't stop. Which is what infuriates me.

There are no lies. No-one is lying to you. Until you change your mindset on this, you'll always feel agrudged and hard done by.

If you think about it logically, and take into account what I and others have said by way of explaining the situation, you may begin to understand why these things happen. I've worked in games development and software development, I've seen (on a much smaller scale) how much things change, even when you have a rock solid design. Issues arise, technology changes, higher-ups stick their oar in... an endless list of potential things arising to screw with your original vision. No developer who shows a game at E3 has said "This is exactly the game you'll be getting in two years", because they know it won't be.

The car analogy is completely irrelevant and pointless; that's not software development. If you want to take it to the extremes and try comparing it to software development, then you could say that someone who pre-ordered a concept car shown at a trade show that was on display 10 years before the actual mass market vehicle came out, then moaning that it wasn't the same. They never are from concept to mass market.

agnes · 19 Feb 2017 at 15:06

Difference being is you can't buy that concept car and the sale won't be available until the final product has been show cased. Which is never the case with gaming these days.

Ryan0r · 19 Feb 2017 at 15:17

agnes said:
Difference being is you can't buy that concept car and the sale won't be available until the final product has been show cased. Which is never the case with gaming these days.

Exactly, so the car analogy doesn't work at all.

You'll have seen a McDonald's advert on TV or a poster, of a burger looking massive and juicy. Do you go into McDonald's and place your order, to be greeted with a limp, soggy burger then kick up a fuss? No, because all companies do it. They want to show you their product in the best possible light. They sex it up to get you interested. This isn't new or shocking or illegal (unless they go too far obviously). But again, no promises are being made for in-development games as they will DEFINITELY change during their development lifecycle. The developers know this, the public should now too. No reason not to.

We all want to know as much as possible about games we're interested in, so we get drip-fed details very early. This keeps consumers happy, and keeps interest in the product up, so the developers and publishers win too. It's daft to get yourself whipped up into a frenzy over what you think you're getting without looking at the facts before you part with your money.

james.miller · 19 Feb 2017 at 15:23

Nexus18 said:
UBI have constantly gone on about wanting all platforms to be evenly matched for graphics, heck remember that time they came out and said that 30 fps was better because it was more cinematic, that says it all lol... Not only that but their constant derogatory comments about the PC gamer base are a joke, in their minds, they think we are all pirates.

Thats old news, though. the whole 30fps thing was happening when Watch Dogs was released and they've not been back there since.

Nexus said:
If they know that they aren't going to be able to keep certain features/improvements in a game for the final release due to whatever reason, then they shouldn't show them in the first place.

They could just as easily not know, so what do they do in that case? They either show you want they want to build or they show you something more representative of want they really have at the time, which given that e3 trailer was 4 years ago wouldnt have been a whole lot... I just dont see the harm in it. if people want to go preorder based off such things when the game is still (at that point) 3 years away then more fool them.

I think the fact you can preorder games before they are finished is irrelevant anyway. We have a choice and we can choose not to - i didnt. in fact i wasnt even interested in the game until it was released.