Quote:
Originally Posted by Neal Stevens
My 2 cents: Ubisoft put their backs into SH3 and SH4, and were on the way with SH5 before their resources were exhausted before completion. Say what you will about them, they gave us the best WWII submarine simulations, really the only WWII subsims, since 1997.
Making a high fidelity simulation that will please just a fraction of the high demands and expectations of the customers is resource intensive, and that means expensive. When the sales don't add up to a profit, well, there's no business in losing money.
|
It has become obvious when you analyze their later products that at a certain point Ubisoft decided to put alot of engineering into making their games not replayable. There's all kinds of ways they can do that.
In other words, a subsim like a good tactical shooter, have alot of replayability to them. The very essence of these types is conductive for the Players to be invested in them, mostly due to their communities as observed here. Why would they make a game for the next five years when they can sale you five games every year? Giving a little of what you want every time yet being extremelly carfull not to offer the full package to endup with a corporate disaster like GhostRecon or RvS, where Players still play those to this day.
They are not into making or publishing video games. They are into making money for them and the shareholders. No solution will ever come form Ubisoft unless they crash first. Then maybe things will change for a short period.