Can we get a single article thats anti-ubisoft that also doesnt vaguely reference the source material out of context? Is there really nothing of substance to write about? Where are the real journalists writing about any of this?

This is something only an out of touch suit with a buying addiction would say.

I don't care about what people buy for themselves, but implying it enhances the game in any way is extremely stupid. This is why suits ought to stay away from videogames.

They left out, "for us" in the end.

Been gaming on PC since 1984 - in no way shape or form is it "fun" to be forced to spend money to complete a part of a game. It's a shakedown. This is also why I would never spend a dime on anything Ubisoft.

Only a non gamer would say something so blatantly false

Why do we give coverage to stuff like this? It's clearly an attempt to keep their name relevant or manufacture consent. Maybe both.

Quite the opposite in fact. Microtransactions offer the promise of fun, but never deliver, because in order to incentivise users to purchase them, the player must feel like the game is 90% of the way to being fun and that tiny additional purchase will get it there.

It's like the cartoon image of the donkey rider holding a carrot on the end of a rod. The donkey keeps moving to try to get the carrot, but never quite reaches it.

I remember when we had cheat codes for single player games... I miss just cheating my way to the last level to have fun.

You know what makes games even more fun? Un-focking-lockables

I go back to history of games. My favorites through time...not 1 of them had micro transactions.

Uncharted...none Eye of the beholder and all early DnD games...none Civilization (up to about civ 4)...none And pretty much all pc games before 1989.

Just create and sell me a finished game on media I can keep. Why is this so fucking hard nowadays

There's a game I playtested that had microtransactions in it. Every time you went to the a menu that you have to interact with heavily, it would always move to the screen that had the microtransactions on it. Didn't matter where you were before you went to that menu, it always went on that screen. That was my number one feedback to the people listening to me. I'm sure it's too fun to change.

I've felt that the introduction of micro transactions was the beginning of the end of videogames. There is no reason to push boundaries inside of an industry as an artist when it is so heavily commoditized down to your basic attention in seconds.

I think maybe we need a little history to understand how we got here from gaming meaning gambling, to pinball, to "video" gaming, to Electronic Entertainment as a whole to realize where the boundaries are supposed to be.

Deceptive business practices need to be put in check. Consumer protection needs enforcement otherwise there would still be lead in everything you touch.

Who needs artists pushing boundaries when it's legal to sell heroin.

Playing arknights. I spend $5 on the monthly pass for non premium loot box currency as daily rewards. Every month I decide if I'm enjoying the game enough or if I should scale back. When I consider how much I'm spending annually, I always consider cancelling. It's not fun at all.

I mean they're not technically wrong, if it wasn't fun for people, people wouldn't be buying them. Considering the context and all, I guess it makes sense. There's too many whales enabling them. We get the games we voted with our wallets. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Headline makes it a bit misleading that Ubi thinks it's referring to all their players, but the actual line does say specify that it's for people who choose to buy them.

In the sense that gambling addictions and dopamine rushes are fun, then sure.

Ubisoft can pay me $1000 a month to play their games. Customers as a Service actual makes your business more fun.

If microtransactions are part of gameplay, they always lead to grind design that pushes to purchase to avoid the grind. If gameplay is fun without grind, why would anyone buy microtransactions.

Cosmetics can be done well with transactions, but those are near non-existent today. There was few in the beginning, but probably they don't sell enough for corporate overlords.

So do monthly subscriptions and unfinished releases!

True, but not for the people playing the games.

The fly actually make the soup better. But if you don't like the fly, just eat around it.

… for them.

they make the games more fun for them.

Of course they do.

Goodbye, ubisoft. I've long parted ways with you, you just didn't notice it yet.

Still sore about the upper management sex predator ring Ubi did nothing about. Won't buy Ubi ever again. Don't play the Ubi games I own.

They trashed the series (plural) I liked anyway.

Nothing more fun than paying for a game piece meal and without end.