Anno 2205 Beta Cancelled

[owsf2000]

I must admit I know pretty much nothing about the game in question. Not surprising since I've long since stopped caring about what Ubisoft releases. However this should spark some warning signs to those who preordered or are thinking of getting it at launch.

Remember, this is the company that tied up their early reviewers of the game with non-disclosure agreements that forbid them from actually reviewing Assasin's Creed Unity until 17 hours after the game had launched. You know, enough time for all the initial sales to be made. And we all saw how horrible that launch turned out right?

So. With that in mind. Why oh why would Ubisoft suddenly pull the advance beta of this game that was promised to all the people that pre-ordered it? And instead, if I read it right, they're just going to get some free/exclusive DLC. DLC they won't be able to use until after the game is released and bought of course.

Personally, if I -did- have a preorder for the game, I'd have cancelled it at this news. Even if it isn't going to be a horrible buggy experience at launch, this is still bait and switch tactics. If I preordered it because I wanted in on the early beta, that's what I want to get. Especially if I wouldn't have preordered it for some DLC.

(Just so we're clear, I'm now eagerly awaiting to hear news on the state of this game when it launches. I really would like to see if it ends up being an embarrassment like Unity was.)

Comments

[kane-magus.livejournal.com]

I was about to make a glib quip along the lines of "Wow, Ubisoft is still around?" or "Wow, people still buy Ubisoft games?" but I thought better of it, because of course they're still around, somehow, and of course people still stupidly buy their games. Go figure. *weary sigh*

[owsf2000.livejournal.com]

The reason for this, I've noticed, is because there's a HUGE number of people that still believe that at the end of the day "it's all about the games.". And they eagerly (and in some cases reluctantly) attach themselves to the sewer pipe and suck whatever's coming through because they absolutely HAVE to support their favorite franchises - even if those franchises stopped being awesome years ago.

I think I remember at least one person that refused to boycott companies (for valid reasons) because that would put the jobs of the devs at risk. Like it was his responsibility or something.

[kane-magus.livejournal.com]

Yeah, the way I see it is that since those devs are trying to sell me shoddy, chopped up, laden-with-unnecessary-extraneous-shit games that I don't want to and won't buy, then, well, they kind of deserve to lose their jobs over that, you know? If it's their job is to do stupid shit like that, then that's not a very good job, now is it?

Though, with that said, I'd much, much prefer if all of the money-obsessed meddling executives (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/ExecutiveMeddling/VideoGames) were the ones to lose their jobs instead, to be replaced with people who actually fucking understood that they need to just leave the goddamn devs alone in the first place and quit saddling them with these asinine commands from on high to pollute the games with all of that shit and just let them make the damn games. The video game industry and video game consumers as a whole would be much better off if that were the case.