Ubisoft near the bottom for game publisher Metacritic rankings
 

I know this will come as a shock to many of us, but the average Metacritic rating of Ubisoft's 2010 releases was lower than every other major publisher except for Konami.

http://features.metacritic.com/featu...2010-releases/

Whatever happened to this "commitment to quality" that they were harping on a couple years back?

Commitment to quality eh ? It all went out the window after SH 3. ;)

Nah, SH4 turned out pretty good in the end. SH5 is where we saw the major dip in quality and support.

Anymore, I think twice about any game that bears the UbiSoft logo.

They did average 72 for PC releases, which on paper you'd think was above acceptable.
One reason they scored low on the list was their console games.
If they only had PC releases they'd be in the top 6.

And THIS says something about the lousy state pc gaming is in. :shifty:

:D
Just lucky we have other Devs around eh :O:

As do I. It would take one heck of a title, with sterling reviews from both the gaming press and the public, to get me to buy Ubisoft again.

It's disappointing but I wouldn't call it shocking. A lot of major titles with incredible sales were released this year. Titles like Halo Reach, Call of Duty: Black Ops, and Mass Effect 2 moved the bar higher than it usually is, and Ubi is running out of room to exploit Splinter Cell, which has been a huge franchise for them in the past. Assassin's Creed has been taking up the slack to some degree, and from what I hear the newest installment is just outstanding, but I haven't played it myself; the premise just seems stupid to me.

I'm sure we haven't helped matters any by generally spurning SHV, as good as our reasons might be. The SH series isn't a major source of income for Ubi and I'm afraid they might drop it entirely. Now might be a good time to put the screws to them and remind them that we are a consistent, if small, source of income, provided that they don't try to pull that DRM crap again.

For me, in the case of SH5 it's not even the DRM. I can live with being connect to the internet to play so long as the quality of the game is high and there is good support for the game. This was not the case.

its surprising that silent hunter 5 wasn't the worst Ubisoft game last year:hmmm:
I wonder how bad the worst has to be.

I'm certainly not suprised but James has made some excellent points in his post....SH3 covers only a small portion of the Ubisoft business, it would appear they are falling behind in other game areas but no suprises there either.

Oh, absolutely. The Silent Hunter series beside, UbiSoft is clearly a company on the decline.

Ubisoft has sadly lost a lot of quality. SH5 was case and point.

I agree. The DRM factor is not a major cause for concern for me, either, though it remains annoying. It shouldn't even be an issue for me, because it doesn't affect my gameplay to any discernable degree, but the idea of it still pisses me off for some reason.

I play SH5 because I just want to drive a cool-looking U-boat and sink some goddamn ships, and SH5 more or less allows me to do that. However, given that just having a passable (to use the term generously) WW2 subsim is enough for me, the fact that I'm playing SH5 in less and less in favor of GWX is pretty telling.


I wondered that as well since you brought it up. As it turns out, in 2009 they actually made a "Grey's Anatomy" game that got like a 36 percent approval score. I have no idea why they thought it was possible to make a good "Grey's Anatomy" game.

SH5 is also on the list, with a 60-something percent approval score but only a 22% user approval score. Note that user score. That's us, people.

not surprised SH5 got a 22% user score. The game felt like an early beta to me when it was dumped on the market.

what was I thinking not returning it for that refund?