Ubisoft Considers Beyond Good & Evil a Mistake

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

Gee, let's think here. How much marketing did Ubi do for BG&E? Not very much at all obviously because when I found out about its existence, it was on a bloody message board about 3 years after its release. >_>

Well then it is a good thing I do not have any brand loyalty to you fuckwits and will gladly withhold all of my money from all of your future titles.

This is why Valve continues to win at everything. Because the rest of industry cannot help but shoot themselves in the foot. As someone with zero marketing experience, let me market better than you morons at Ubisoft:

"Although sales were initially disappointing, we're thrilled that BG&E found its audience. We spend a lot of time making modern titles that meet or exceed our expectations that we forget about the underdogs of yesteryear that made us what we are today. I think its important to not just look at BG&E's sales or what the numbers say but to look at its legacy and its popularity now. That's a good indicator to me that we need to do a better job marketing our innovative new IPs. We need to look at fresh new ideas and characters as challenges and not risks. It's crucial that we don't let our next Jade take as long to be appreciated as our previous one."

Redd the Sock:
I like going through the upcoming lists looking for niche and indy games that look cool. If I'm curious I can look stuff up online and come back in a few days once I know more.

If gaming is your primary hobby, I don't understand if you do not do this. I dig around as this fellow does and go after intersteing new titles.

I have lived in China for over a decade, when BG&E came out there were obviously no ads for it here. Yet I heard about it because of interest in my hobby. I bought in for the Xbox on my next visit to the UK and loved it. I think I'll buy the game on Xbox Live or PSN later when I get home from work.

michael87cn:
THIS is the problem with games today. ALL they care about it profiting - nothing else. It's a job, that's all. If it doesn't make money, its a failure and not worth while.

I personally think games should be made by people who want them to be FUN. And if they're FUN they will be SUCCESSFUL.

However... they prioritize SUCCESS first, and don't care if the games are fun or not. They just want

1) To hype games up as much as possible via advertisements

2) To sell a ton of copies, regardless of customer satisfaction

3) To repeat the process (or stick to the mold) of game design that works. In other words, Call of Gear of Duty War.

that is normal in damn near every industry, dont know why you think it is a problem here.

big publishers and studios turn out consumer level products, while smaller more indi groups make games that are more focused on being art.

And just when I thought I could respect Ubisoft for their HD remake of AC: Liberation on it's way (with bonus content with it!), and Child of light... this. It's a miracle they're going forth with these projects aren't they?

They're kinda dense aren't they? I mean, they're well capable of games that don't have a huge budget that are awesome, and aren't sold for 60 USD. And really, they don't understand the buzz and desire for a BG&E2?

Classy PR ubisoft, classy.

I know game devs are afraid to take risks but surely BGAE has garnered enough fan support through digital distribution to recoup its losses over time right? Bleh, I see it mentioned so much nowadays maybe I just think BGAE is more popular then it actually is.

The_Scrivener:
This is why Valve continues to win at everything. Because the rest of industry cannot help but shoot themselves in the foot.

To be fair...That' kinda a BS comparison for a lot of reasons but particularly how few games valve has released compared to ubisoft.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_games_developed_by_Valve
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ubisoft_games

Easy not to shoot yourself in the foot when you have far less opportunity to do so..And even then valve has done it with l4d2 if you recall the brouhaha surrounding it :P

I like how Ubisoft are "known" for a game that's not even out yet, but not for Prince of Persia or the Tom Clancy titles. WTF?

Anyway, BG&E wasn't a mistake. It was however, a masterpiece of story, game design, characterisation and gameplay. I understand that "mistake" and "masterpiece" both begin with an "M", so it's an easy mistake (boom tisch) to make. It's a tragedy that the game didn't succeed financially as it did with critics and players alike.

Frankster:
To be fair...That' kinda a BS comparison for a lot of reasons but particularly how few games valve has released compared to ubisoft

So...quantity is more valuable than quality? The state of the industry now is such that companies just churn out sameish sequel anually and chumps buy it up. Personally, I prefer quality over quantity. A studio that releases fewer titles all of which are successes (Blizzard, Valve, pre-EA BioWare) IMO are better than those that mass produce "entertainment products".

Valve's success is in releasing only quality games that attain legendary status. Blizzard can claim the same. BioWare used to before EA put them onto the "other" track, that of churning out entertainment products. From a consumer perspective, I imagine a studio with 8/8 hits beats one with 8/50 (though shareholders may disagree).

HL2, Unreal Tournament and their ilk were the pre-eminent games of their day and lasted years upon years. Quake II was played more than Quake III was. Now you and most of us have been sold on the notion of upgrading our games anually and buying them in pieces...games as a service, something many in the industry wanted and now have managed to do on consoles, without a subscription charge. Quantity does not beat quality, except maybe financially.

Still, perhaps there's a place for both. In a way, it takes studios that churn out re-releases of the tired cover-based shooter stuff to make us appreciate the truly great games, the genre defining ones like L4D2, Portal, TF2 and Diablo, Starcraft and Warcraft.

Another way to look at it is this. How many copies of the next AssCreed or Dead Space or whatever will sell? Now, how many copies of Halflife 3 would sell, if it ever came into existence?

So what the guy's saying is. Go indie. Which I think a lot of people will be doing especially thanks to Steam, Gog etc that makes it very easy for small indies to publish their games.

I've been saying the 3A games industry is heading for a crash and this confirms it

BigTuk:
So what the guy's saying is. Go indie.

That's not really his message. What he's saying is that managed to get his idea greenlit with a major publisher with thanks to those Indie success stories. Every Indie success story therefore contributes to getting similar, original, "risky" ideas published through the larger companies on account that the execs will start to pay attention. Ubi saw BG&E's failure, he showed them Indie success stories.

"If that Indie game succeeded on a small budget, a similar title with larger budget and better marketing may do the same". He's saying that if you can't get your idea published traditionally, go indie anyway and succeed or fail, it will still teach & inform the industry.

alik44:

2. beyond good and evil, was considered a great game. even though i dont think i have ever seen a commercial when it came

In Britain there was, it was pretty cool too at least near the end i don't remember too much of it but there was some fighting and camera action and the end when a woman whispered "Beyond Good and Evil" and then a monster screamed.

I don't know why I didn't buy it though, i know i liked that trailer. I was 12-13 at the time so i didn't get a PS2 till 2004 I didn't get a Cube till 2006 and i didn't frequently access the internet till 2008.

So i guess it was all timing for me :P

KingsGambit:
snip

Don't put words in my mouth please ;) I'd rather 4 good games over 40 mediocre ones but that's not what I was getting at, not least because this line of thinking depicts ubisoft as a high quantity/low quality publisher which is just even more BS, from my point of view ubisoft have produced not only better games, but across more varied genres whereas I don't like any blizzard games and just 2 valve games (l4d1 and alien breed). I am not advocating a yearly churn of rereleases and hashed in sequels as I'm feeling you're implying.

What I'm getting at is valve is in a very unique self sustaining position (blizzard too actually, funny you bought them up as your 2nd example of high quality dev...) which other game studios can't replicate, it's a rather unfair comparison that lionizes valve for its circumstances rather then it's actual games and this deification is rather annoying.

That however still isn't what I was implying when I responded to scriveners statement, but rather pointing out it's much easier to not shoot yourself in the foot when you only had a handful of chances to do so against another case that has 1000s of such opportunities to happen, basically one is much more likely to shoot themselves in the foot regardless of the actual quality of their shoes. Or something, I kinda got lost with this metaphor.

"Another way to look at it is this. How many copies of the next AssCreed or Dead Space or whatever will sell? Now, how many copies of Halflife 3 would sell, if it ever came into existence?"

Ok here's another way to look at it that is a bit more true: I don't like half life , so wtf should I be excited about?
But I don't like AssCreed or Dead Space either (actually that's a lie, i like dead space but for the purposes of this example i don't), but ubisoft/ea also has a lot of other games out too, across more varied genres, unless you're going to keep with the line of thinking that a publisher that has put out more games=automatically lower quality, then chances are I'm far more likely to find a niche title in the ubisoft library then I am in valve or blizzard's catalogues.

Incidentally I find it weird you start out with an argument for quality over quantity, yet at the end go back to using sales figures as an indicator of quality.

Variety is the spice of life, and blizzard has been allergic to genuine innovation for some time whereas valve prefers chilling on its throne made out of steam money and do whatever the heck it wants simply because it can, a position no other gaming company can imitate.

I mean jeez, ubisoft here despite the pr faux pas is the dev still taking the most risks out of those we listed, they were the ones who put out BGAE in the first place for starters. Valve's biggest risk of the last few years was what, DOTA 2? Yeah real step forward in the future of gaming there (not that im ragging on mobos, i play them).What about blizz? Starcraft 2, diablo 3, yey totally threading new ground and diablo 3 had its fair share of problems.

Anyways I can't help but think your position is reflective of a positive bias towards valve/blizz (your list of "genre defining games"..valve and blizz hasn't genre defined anything for over a decade so this is indicative you have strong feelings about these devs likely dating back to their glory days) which is why you're so inclined to lash praise upon them even if they don't deserve it.
Valve and blizz however have done very little for me or satisfying my gaming needs, only reason I give valve an easier time then blizz is because I heavily use steam and I reckon it's a good service. So why should I want companies that do provide me my gaming needs to be more like the companies who don't? Ubisoft's practices might be abbhorent and I wish they did things differently, but "be more like valve" is kinda useless advice to them.

Oh and regarding bioware/ea... I'm not entirely sure EA is to blame here. But that is an entirely different topic.

nightmare_gorilla:
if it didn't sell enough copies to turn a profit then it is a failure in that sense

They didn't say that... so I assume it did turn a profit, just not a big fat one like if they made another assassins creed or splinter cell. But it's hard to say since the people who worked on the game would have been working on other projects concurrently. That plus the fact that they would have been paying those people the same amount of money anyway...

Funny how Jim Sterling just made a video about companies staying tight-lipped and not revealing information, but when they do open their mouths THIS is what they decide to say?! What a nice way to say "fuck you" to the people who bought that game and enjoyed it. Is it cool to point and laugh at people for liking your product now?

And even if the game did lose money, which they didn't say it did, it's not like they spent millions upon millions on advertising just to have it get crap reviews and completely tank like other games.

It's nice that assassins creed is making you so much money Ubisoft, but just how many numbers can you keep adding on to the franchise before you rehash it to death and people stop caring? Might not be a bad idea to have a critically acclaimed IP in the closet somewhere. And yes, sometimes a great series has a rough start or a rough patch and then goes on to do great things later on. The point is to keep trying new ideas even while you have other products that are making you tons of money.

And just because they consider Beyond Good and Evil a lost cause doesn't mean they won't sit on the ip until nobody remembers what it is anymore.

I read this article and I hear "We're out of ideas, so we're just gonna stick with Assassins Creed and Splinter Cell because that's all we know how to make."

I can appreciate the arguments that Ubisoft has to to try to make smart plays with what the titles they develop, but that still doesn't explain them coming out and trolling their own fans, I think that should tell you how fucking smart they are.

"Although sales were initially disappointing, we're thrilled that BG&E found its audience. We spend a lot of time making modern titles that meet or exceed our expectations that we forget about the underdogs of yesteryear that made us what we are today. I think its important to not just look at BG&E's sales or what the numbers say but to look at its legacy and its popularity now. That's a good indicator to me that we need to do a better job marketing our innovative new IPs. We need to look at fresh new ideas and characters as challenges and not risks. It's crucial that we don't let our next Jade take as long to be appreciated as our previous one."

Wow fuck dude that was awesome, but you forgot to add a part like "sorry for cockteasing you guys with a sequel we were never going to make for so long" etc.

If Beyond Good and Evil was a mistake, then why did Ubisoft find it necessary to advertise with an image of Pey'J on their Facebook page during E3? What the hell was that all about then? Why reference a character from 2003--to get people interested in a "mistake"?

Using that image of Pey'J just pissed me off once I realized there was no news for a BG&E 2, and this recent news confirms my theory that Ubisoft management and their marketing department are both intensely, almost blindingly stupid. I lost interest in the Prince of Persia sequels and the Animus in Assassin's Creed was moronic. So maybe they'll still get my money with Watchdogs.

On second thought I'll just buy it used.

Maybe Ubisoft shouldn't have faffed around and tried actually marketing the game so it would get some sales. There's nothing wrong with the game, you just didn't do shit to sell it and you suffered for it, you twats.

snekadid:
I had to read the title twice after reading the article, because I could swear the article was about EA. Between their crappy steam rip offs and their franchise management, you'd think Ubisoft was trying to become EA.

This makes me laugh so much. The hate against EA is so ridiculous.

Let's make this clear. Every single publisher wants to make money. Period. That's what they care about. All of them. EA is no different from any other publisher out there. It's not special in any way.

This is where I crawl in a corner and cry. I have been waiting years.... YEARS!!! for Beyond Good & Evil 2. Please Ubisoft this was not a mistake. Don't cancel the squeal. please?

Any shred of respect I had for Ubisoft just died. BG&E was amazing. It's 100% Ubisoft's fault it failed due to bad management of the IP. This is the kind of idiocy you get when you have suits that have likely never played a video game before running a video game company. If anything, the huge cult following the game has garnered years after it's release should be enough to tell Ubisoft how good of an IP BG&E is. But because of the elitist attitude of video game company executives,even if they did realize BG&E was a great game and there's money to be made in a sequel, they would never make one because that would be an admission of their own ignorance and fallibility and god knows that's out of the question.

Oh. I'm sorry.. I thought well thought out with complex female characters would sell and it was just a misogynistic games industry holding them from being produced.
You mean women don't actually hold the conflated 48% market share of the audience share once games like farmville and bejeweled are discounted?
You mean games targeted at women don't sell (to the same degree as those aimed at men)? no. that'd just be sexist.
b-b-b..but-but Ubisoft is just a bad company! I mean it was only released during the christmas-holiday period where the highest frequency of games are sold to a string a rave reviews. I mean it would've sold dramatically more if they sold it right! I mean even though the game was continually brought up in the gaming media as subject of praise people mustn't have known about it! That must be the reason it ranked 878th in all time sales and sold BELOW THE MEAN SALES OF A PS2 GAME a console notorious for its masses of shovel ware.

MaximumTheHormone:
Oh. I'm sorry.. I thought well thought out with complex female characters would sell and it was just a misogynistic games industry holding them from being produced.
You mean women don't actually hold the conflated 48% market share of the audience share once games like farmville and bejeweled are discounted?
You mean games targeted at women don't sell (to the same degree as those aimed at men)? no. that'd just be sexist.
b-b-b..but-but Ubisoft is just a bad company! I mean it was only released during the christmas-holiday period where the highest frequency of games are sold to a string a rave reviews. I mean it would've sold dramatically more if they sold it right! I mean even though the game was continually brought up in the gaming media as subject of praise people mustn't have known about it! That must be the reason it ranked 878th in all time sales and sold BELOW THE MEAN SALES OF A PS2 GAME a console notorious for its masses of shovel ware.

Yep. 100% agree. Beyond Good and Evil is hipster garbage. Shallow gameplay, short, lacking content, incongruent design (what genre is it?) stupid name (does it have anything to do with Nietzsche?) shallow, generic character (who cares about Jade?) Just another mediocre, throwaway title, not worth remembering.

But somehow it's become the game for all the wannabe gamer snobs to declare was just "sooooooo amazeballs" and didn't get it's fair chance because of blah blah blah. Whatever. Don't listen to them, they probably never actually played it anyway. The audience is never wrong.

Oh and I was just about to start considering to maybe think about buying AssCreed Revelations and 3.

Well, no. Fuck you, Ubisoft, from me, too.

BG&E was great, except for that control input screw games always do at some point where left becomes right and front becomes back. So yeah, well, if you say good games are mistakes, then why don't you just keep churning out the bloody PLAIN AVERAGENESS OF BLAND MEDIOCRITY shit.

Honestly, I love tomato soup, but I don't bloody want to eat tomato soup every fucking day.

Here's a crazy idea: Make a good game with a less extravagant budget, and promote it like you would one of your precious franchises. Tell people why your game is worth playing.

Fantoompje:
A game being a mistake profit-wise does not mean a game is a mistake design-wise, I suppose.

That's the problem here, though. Ubisoft is implicitly saying the only metric to judge a game's success is the profit margin. BG&E was a huge success in terms of critical acclaim, and nowhere near a mistake judged on those terms.

Griffolion:

Fantoompje:
A game being a mistake profit-wise does not mean a game is a mistake design-wise, I suppose.

That's the problem here, though. Ubisoft is implicitly saying the only metric to judge a game's success is the profit margin. BG&E was a huge success in terms of critical acclaim, and nowhere near a mistake judged on those terms.

I get the idea that when Plourde pitched Child of Light, it was in front of your stereotypical businessmen who perhaps barely play games themselves. Is that a big problem? I think it might be far from ideal, but it seems those are the kind of people who judge a game by its profit margin (which they have to, if profit margin was ignored they'd go bankrupt).
I know, not a good excuse, but I'm not trying to make an excuse I suppose. It's a company, which has to make money. I do think it's a bit of a shame it is like that, but I'm not surprised by such a statement at all.
And yes! I get the idea that BG&E is a huge success in terms of critical acclaim (love the game as well) =)

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!

*crosses ubisoft off christmas card list*

Ubisoft you absolute ********ing ******ing *******ing twats! I always felt an EA presence ever since that whole passport thing appeared which i assumed you only needed to get once, you know, like an ACTUAL passport. But fuck no. For every damn game just in case they missed out on a little profit with their pittance of a budget and all. Was paying for the game not enough to get what the game says it does?? Dont even get me started on those assassins creed 4 micro transactions just to customise your characters!

Now this...this is a true kick in the balls. That game was a fond memory on my xbox and have been planning on getting it on xbla. But they dont want to make anything 'new' and 'different' like that because of money?! which they obviously have hardly any of! Ugh! I feel ill.

Need to calm down now, wheres those skins?

I don't know why people are finding this to be so tremendously awful, or even really all that surprising.

They just have to make money, that's all there is to it. It seems callous and awful that they 'don't give smaller games a chance' or that 'they stifle artistic creations', but there are some pretty serious consequences to choosing a different route. Ubisoft isn't a single entity, nor is it a zord - a huge machine controlled by a few people in the head - its a business made up of hundreds if not thousands of individuals.

When a game does poorly, decisions about how much people get paid and who gets to keep their job have to be made. When the people at the head of the company say 'we want franchises and huge commercial successes', they're basically saying 'we would really like to not have to fire anyone/cut anyones pay'. Its all well and good to want artistic endeavors, or projects not driven by any sort of profit ideal, but I sure wouldn't want to be the guy who has to go from office to office telling people that there will be no year end bonuses, raises, or company events this year because someone upstairs wanted to do an art project.

EvilRoy:
I don't know why people are finding this to be so tremendously awful, or even really all that surprising.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I don't find this surprising. I know it didn't sell very well and at the end of the day, they do need to make money. I understand that. And if that was all there was to it I wouldn't be upset, just a little sad.

But that's not all there is to this. They keep getting our hopes up that there might be a chance to see a sequel. They have brought it up multiple times over the years, saying it's in the planning stages, it's in development, showing a teaser trailer, showing screenshots...hell there was even a picture of one of the main characters, Pey'j, on their Facebook page for E3 this year. That's what I'm upset about. If it's not worth the money to invest in a sequel, fine. Just stop jerking us around pretending you might actually put one out, Ubisoft.

MiskWisk:
The hell? Beyond: Good and Evil was a brilliant game. Yes, it had its flaws but the only reason I can think of that it failed to meet expectations was because I never saw a damned advert for the thing. You can't expect something to spread on the word of mouth alone.

No, they mean a mistake in business terms.

OT: Welp videogames are business nowadays. We can't have fun anymore, we need EFFICIENCY AND PROFITS or it's considered a failure. Look at Tomb Raider, sold 2.5 million or so in the first weeks. It was considered a financial failure by Square Enix while on the same note Dark Souls sold roughly the same amount and was considered a financial success. The point of the matter is game publishers keep thinking EVERY release needs to be a blockbuster sale to justify it getting made. What happened to making games that were good and the success of them was a byproduct of that?

"AAA" game publishing is killing the industry. They all need to re-focus, make games as good as possible and stop fucking thinking of it in terms of profits alone. For some reason "Too big to fail" comes to mind when I think about "AAA" development games now...

Grampy_bone:

MaximumTheHormone:
Oh. I'm sorry.. I thought well thought out with complex female characters would sell and it was just a misogynistic games industry holding them from being produced.
You mean women don't actually hold the conflated 48% market share of the audience share once games like farmville and bejeweled are discounted?
You mean games targeted at women don't sell (to the same degree as those aimed at men)? no. that'd just be sexist.
b-b-b..but-but Ubisoft is just a bad company! I mean it was only released during the christmas-holiday period where the highest frequency of games are sold to a string a rave reviews. I mean it would've sold dramatically more if they sold it right! I mean even though the game was continually brought up in the gaming media as subject of praise people mustn't have known about it! That must be the reason it ranked 878th in all time sales and sold BELOW THE MEAN SALES OF A PS2 GAME a console notorious for its masses of shovel ware.

Yep. 100% agree. Beyond Good and Evil is hipster garbage. Shallow gameplay, short, lacking content, incongruent design (what genre is it?) stupid name (does it have anything to do with Nietzsche?) shallow, generic character (who cares about Jade?) Just another mediocre, throwaway title, not worth remembering.

But somehow it's become the game for all the wannabe gamer snobs to declare was just "sooooooo amazeballs" and didn't get it's fair chance because of blah blah blah. Whatever. Don't listen to them, they probably never actually played it anyway. The audience is never wrong.

Oi, I played it all the way through and dammit I enjoyed the experience. Yeah it had it's flaws but everything does.

The Bandit:

snekadid:
I had to read the title twice after reading the article, because I could swear the article was about EA. Between their crappy steam rip offs and their franchise management, you'd think Ubisoft was trying to become EA.

This makes me laugh so much. The hate against EA is so ridiculous.

Let's make this clear. Every single publisher wants to make money. Period. That's what they care about. All of them. EA is no different from any other publisher out there. It's not special in any way.

True but it should be the only damn thing they care about. They should also care for the content they push out. They should care that they make quality products, not just products that sell well.

Allspice:

EvilRoy:
I don't know why people are finding this to be so tremendously awful, or even really all that surprising.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I don't find this surprising. I know it didn't sell very well and at the end of the day, they do need to make money. I understand that. And if that was all there was to it I wouldn't be upset, just a little sad.

But that's not all there is to this. They keep getting our hopes up that there might be a chance to see a sequel. They have brought it up multiple times over the years, saying it's in the planning stages, it's in development, showing a teaser trailer, showing screenshots...hell there was even a picture of one of the main characters, Pey'j, on their Facebook page for E3 this year. That's what I'm upset about. If it's not worth the money to invest in a sequel, fine. Just stop jerking us around pretending you might actually put one out, Ubisoft.

If that's what they've been doing, I can tell you its not meant to be jerking around. They've probably set it up as an overhead project.

That is, when a programmer or artist working on one project runs out of stuff to do, they get shunted into the overhead project pool where they can work on chargeable projects, rather than having their hours go to unchargeable overhead. Meaning that they totally intend to sell the product eventually. In fact, if they put enough hours to it they will have no choice but to release it regardless of profit potentials because if they don't all the time spent becomes retroactively unrecoverable/unchargeable and takes profit directly off the bottom line.

I know it seems weird, but many companies in many fields do this in order to help stock price and avoid profit loss due to poor scheduling (whether or not the poor scheduling was avoidable). In fact right now that's what I'm (supposed) to be working on. Just a backburner project that will likely break even eventually, in order to keep my unbillable time from going directly to the bottom line.

Unfortunately it simultaneously means that the project may take years longer than normal, and the level of polish of the project will be directly proportional to how interested the people working on it were.

There are plenty of game developers out there that dont pull the money making tricks that ubisoft and EA pull. Game developers with...dare i say it, LESS money and profit margins. Its not all about money. Look at the music industry, There are people who are in it for the money, then there are people who are in it for the music...
EA and Ubi are just some long running boy band producers who see franchises as guaranteed cash cows with anything else as heathenistic fund drainers.

Rockstar have plenty of money, but i certainly dont see them selling one use/one game passports and having to do yearly releases in the name of profits. They said themselves they want their games to be messages, to show people ideas etc.

Its just all bollocks, i like ubisoft games, but they do take the piss a little. Only marginally better than EA in a lesser of the two evils sort of way

I consider Ubisoft a mistake.

Funny, I didn't think I had any faith left in the AAA industry to lose, but good ol' Ubisoft comes along and proves me wrong.

Oh, by the way? Fuck you, Ubisoft. K, just wanted to make sure you understood my feelings about you.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here