Ubisoft Delays Assassin's Creed Shadows to February 2025 After Cancelling Tokyo Game Show Appearance and Press Previews

[Cpt.Jank]

Ubisoft and the Assassin's Creed game franchise have had a bit of a rough time of late, with recent installments to the franchise largely having received a lukewarm or even negative reception. Now, just two months ahead of the official launch of Assassin's Creed Shadows—which is slated to revive much of the allure of some of the older Assassin's Creed games—Ubisoft is reportedly pulling out of the Tokyo Game Show and cancelling early media previews of the game.

Ubisoft Japan broke the news via a post to the company's official X account, although it doesn't reveal why it cancelled the September 26 broadcast, citing only "various circumstances" for the cancelled appearance. Alongside the cancelled Tokyo Game Show showcase, Ubisoft has also reportedly cancelled the subsequent Assassin's Creed press previews, which were scheduled for next week. The cancellation of both of these events has led fans to speculate about potential launch delays for the next Assassin's Creed game.

Dear Community,
Regarding our online participation in "TOKYO GAME SHOW 2024" scheduled for September 26th at 3:00 PM.
Due to various circumstances, we regret to inform you that we have decided to cancel our participation.
The currently ongoing gift campaign commemorating the official broadcast will continue.
We apologize for the short notice.
We sincerely apologize to everyone who was looking forward to the broadcast.
Ubisoft Inc.

While this hardly serves as confirmation that the game will be delayed, it's certainly possible, especially given the current shape of the gaming industry. That would explain why both the showcase and the press previews were both cancelled around the same time—especially if there is still a lot of work to do to get the game in a working state. This also isn't the first time that Assassin's Creed Shadows has run into trouble—earlier this year, Ubisoft faced criticism from fans over the historical accuracy of one of the game's protagonists.

Yasuke, an African samurai, caused an uproar in the Assassin's Creed fan base, because there were some suggestions that he never existed in history in the first place. Others, meanwhile, were unhappy that he was being portrayed as a samurai, arguing that he was a weapons carrier instead. While most historians are almost 100% certain he existed, others have their doubts, and those doubts have created a bit of a rift in the gaming community. Regardless, the concerns about the historical accuracy are unlikely to be the cause of any cancelled events or press previews, since Ubisoft has already addressed the origin of the game's protagonist when the community first raised the issue.

The Assassin's Creed Shadows team has a message for our Japanese community.

Update Sep 25th: Ubisoft has confirmed via a post to the Assassin's Creed X account that Assassin's Creed Shadows is delayed until February 14, 2025. In the post, Ubisoft says that the game is "an ambitious addition to the franchise" and that it needs more time to "polish and refine" the experience. Additionally, Ubisoft will be refunding any existing Assassin's Creed Shadows pre-orders and giving those who pre-order access to the game's first expansion for free when it ships.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source

 

[nguyen]

I hope they run out of investment money for pandering soon and back to make games for everyone, instead of the selected few

 

[ZeppMan217]

If you want a Japanese Ass Creed, just play Ghost of Tsushima. They also announced a sequel, Ghost of Yotei, coming 2025.

 

[RayneYoruka]

If you want a Japanese Ass Creed, just play Ghost of Tsushima. They also announced a sequel, Ghost of Yotei, coming 2025.

10/10

 

[AusWolf]

Of course reception is lukewarm at best. It's the same darn game over and over again! Total yawnfest.

This is what happens when game studios look at market analysis to determine their next course of action instead of simply asking themselves the question "what kind of game would I enjoy playing".

As for the message, there's a glaring contradiction right on page 2:

So is it a respectful, factual representation or not?

 

[Ruru]

Gotta wonder that doesn't people get bored of these since they're released as often as annual sports games.

 

[Gigaherz]

I am so sick of being lied to and getting disrespected by these Companies.

back to make games for everyone, instead of the selected few

Its the opposite now. The games are shallow, made to appeal to everyone and dont exclude anyone.

 

[Bloste]

Of course reception is lukewarm at best. It's the same darn game over and over again! Total yawnfest.

This is what happens when game studios look at market analysis to determine their next course of action instead of simply asking themselves the question "what kind of game would I enjoy playing".

As for the message, there's a glaring contradiction right on page 2:
View attachment 364727
So is it a respectful, factual representation or not?

"respectful representation", thats bullshit.

It is an accurate representation or not. And if not, it's not a representation, but BASED on that historical period.
For example, Kindom Come: Deliverance is a faithful representation of 15th century Bohemia. It's not respectful or disrespectful, it is simply as it was. Rewriting historical periods using current morals or ideological bias in pursuit of "respect" should be clasified as "fantasy" and not "representation", respectful or not.

 

[64K]

I don't even know where to begin to describe the mess that Ubisoft is. Some of it can be discussed here and some can't but the bottom line is that the publisher has been floundering for a long time now and they just seem to have a knack for screwing up. Delays, bad PR, not giving a damn what the majority of gamers want and that's not all. Investors are getting fed up with the leadership's incompetence and it shows with their stock being down almost 60% over the past year alone.

 

[AusWolf]

Its the opposite now. The games are shallow, made to appeal to everyone and dont exclude anyone.

What these big companies are getting wrong is that a game's appeal has nothing to do with the cultural groups represented in them.
It has all to do with good storytelling and gameplay, which these franchise games are severely lacking.

"respectful representation", thats bullshit.

It is an accurate representation or not. And if not, it's not a representation, but BASED on that historical period.
For example, Kindom Come: Deliverance is a faithful representation of 15th century Bohemia. It's not respectful or disrespectful, it is simply as it was. Rewriting historical periods using current morals or ideological bias in pursuit of "respect" should be clasified as "fantasy" and not "representation", respectful or not.

That's exactly my point, but better said.

Edit: I've read many reviews from black, Asian, female, etc. gamers who enjoyed the heck out of Kingdom Come: Deliverance, not because the game represents them in any way, but because it's a darn good game.

 

[arbiter]

When you are portraying a location in history claiming "respectful representation" of the play, you can't claim to be respectful when you are using someone has nothing showing they did anything in history the game is portraying. All they have is the person existed but not that they were anyone of significance in representation of that time.

 

[JWNoctis]

"respectful representation", thats bullshit.

It is an accurate representation or not. And if not, it's not a representation, but BASED on that historical period.
For example, Kindom Come: Deliverance is a faithful representation of 15th century Bohemia. It's not respectful or disrespectful, it is simply as it was. Rewriting historical periods using current morals or ideological bias in pursuit of "respect" should be clasified as "fantasy" and not "representation", respectful or not.

I'd say the problem is whose respectful. A theoretical medieval Japan truly grounded on modern morals would not be medieval Japan at all. Other games - even those less grounded in reality, like Shadow Tactics - did it pretty well before, without coming off as disrespectful to anyone I knew.

KCD also did pretty well with its claim of authenticity, helped by the ingame codex that was actually interesting to read. Faithful is its own respectful, some other controversy surrounding that game's director notwithstanding.

What these big companies are getting wrong is that a game's appeal has nothing to do with the cultural groups represented in them.
It has all to do with good storytelling and gameplay, which these franchise games are severely lacking.


That's exactly my point, but better said.

Edit: I've read many reviews from black, Asian, female, etc. gamers who enjoyed the heck out of Kingdom Come: Deliverance, not because the game represents them in any way, but because it's a darn good game.

Exactly.

 

[AusWolf]

When you are portraying a location in history claiming "respectful representation" of the play, you can't claim to be respectful when you are using someone has nothing showing they did anything in history the game is portraying. All they have is the person existed but not that they were anyone of significance in representation of that time.

In my books, "respectful" means "as faithful to the original as practically possible". Adding events to suit your story is fine (for example, we don't know if there was a guy called Henry in 14th century Bohemia).

On the other hand, including cultural groups that were not present at the time, or showing certain actions as normal that were not considered normal back then (let me not elaborate on this, please) just to appeal to an imaginary modern, cosmopolitan audience who, even if it exists, may not even be interested in playing the game in the first place is disrespectful towards the source material.

Furthermore, when a Netflix director says that Sapkowski's work is crap, so we'll get a new Witcher, or when Amazon completely rewrites Middle Earth in their highly esteemed series called Ring of Diarrhoea or something, that goes way beyond disrespect and should be illegal. But I digress.

 

[Suspecto]

Just stop buying their games, every AC is a copy paste job, honestly, I played the first AC and could never understand what anyone could find even remotely entertaining about it, it is just worse Far Cry 3, repetitive, 4 types of missions, climb the tower. Repeat. Now also with the agenda.

 

[AusWolf]

Just stop buying their games, every AC is a copy paste job, honestly, I played the first AC and could never understand what anyone could find even remotely entertaining about it, it is just worse Far Cry 3, repetitive, 4 types of missions, climb the tower. Repeat. Now also with the agenda.

IMO, the first one was good because it was new. I also liked the story twist at the end. But that's it. The rest of the series isn't new or interesting anymore.

 

[Gigaherz]

I played the first AC and could never understand what anyone could find even remotely entertaining about it, it is just worse Far Cry 3, repetitive, 4 types of missions, climb the tower. Repeat.

AC1 is in restrospect one of the worst games of the series because it had the clunkiest combat system (that completely changes in the endfight for no reason and without warning, still mad about that years later) and gameplay and environment variety. You have to understand that at the time no game came close the the level of freedom in movement and that was already enough appeal to most gamers. AC2 was where the Series really took of with a more detailed and believeable world, Interesting characters and cineastic scenering instead of the mass off lazy cutscnes we have today. This went on and peaked with Unity. There haven quite some great AC games but there is simply a limit to how much you can do with a franchise that has to have a mass appeal.

 

[AusWolf]

AC1 is in restrospect one of the worst games of the series because it had the clunkiest combat system (that completely changes in the endfight for no reason and without warning, still mad about that years later) and gameplay and environment variety. You have to understand that at the time no game came close the the level of freedom in movement and that was already enough appeal to most gamers. AC2 was where the Series really took of with a more detailed and believeable world, Interesting characters and cineastic scenering instead of the mass off lazy cutscnes we have today. This went on and peaked with Unity. There haven quite some great AC games but there is simply a limit to how much you can do with a franchise that has to have a mass appeal.

Frankly, I loved the first one because of the freedom of movement and its detailed world (for its age), but quickly lost interest afterwards. Sure, the second and third were a lot more polished gameplay-wise, but they added nothing else on top, or at least nothing I wanted. We didn't have any of our questions answered in the story, everything just escalated, and didn't result in anything. The same "hide - get behind - stab" mechanism got old, too. It started to devolve into a "you want answers? Just play the next game" formula. Besides 1-2-3, I only bought Rogue, hoping that playing on the templar's side would be different, but boy, was it money wasted! This is the same reason why I can't be asked to watch most TV series, either. There's no such thing as never-ending entertainment. You either have something meaningful to say, or you don't.

 

[Gigaherz]

@AusWolf I completely disagree with your perception of the games you named, not your cup of tea I guess. But as a gamedev I have to ask: What would you have wanted that they were missing?

 

[Onasi]

Hot take: AC should always have remained a Prince of Persia title (like it started as in development) and actually USED all the new movement systems for regular gameplay. Because, as it stands, it just never really ended up… mattering? Like, the peak of platforming in the series is probably the puzzle tombs in AC2 and onward. But in regular gameplay you can easily get away with the “hold button to parkour” and… yeah. There are cool deep techs in there and it was actually steadily developing up to Unity, but rarely used. And then Ubi just decided to axe the entire lineage and turn AC into the pseudo-rpg slop it is now.

 

[AusWolf]

@AusWolf I completely disagree with your perception of the games you named, not your cup of tea I guess. But as a gamedev I have to ask: What would you have wanted that they were missing?

That's fair, we don't have to agree on everything.

What I found missing later is any kind of answer or conclusion to things that happened in the first game. 2 and 3 only added more questions without providing any answer to anything. Gameplay-wise, I also found later iterations (I wouldn't call them episodes) convoluted and messy. There's too many collectibles, side quests, bonus events, and shitloads of other crap..., I mean, "content" that doesn't add any value.

The story in 1 was cleverly crafted. Sure, going through all the kills was a bit dull (as the main character points it out as well), but the puzzle comes together by the end, topped with a massive twist. I didn't feel the same kind of smoothness in 2 and 3. In fact, I can't even remember what they were about - I know that they took place in Italy and America, but that's it. It's not what I want to remember my games by.

 

[Gigaherz]

But they did answer it in the Desmond episodes... hence my confusion, 3 also had quite a twist at the end. And I dont remember if it was 2 or brotherhood (Because the share the same characters and setting) but they had quite a hearbreakerquest in there.
Perhaps you were more preoccupied with other things back then, I rememer the desmond series quite fondly. I can see your points on the later entries of the series tho. I focused mainly on the story and quests that would allow me to upgrade the base. I peronally miss the visual progress from building up your town or hideout.

 

[AusWolf]

But they did answer it in the Desmond episodes... hence my confusion, 3 also had quite a twist at the end. And I dont remember if it was 2 or brotherhood (Because the share the same characters and setting) but they had quite a hearbreakerquest in there.
Perhaps you were more preoccupied with other things back then, I rememer the desmond series quite fondly. I can see your points on the later entries of the series tho. I focused mainly on the story and quests that would allow me to upgrade the base. I peronally miss the visual progress from building up your town or hideout.

Perhaps I was preoccupied. Or I wasn't, I don't know. Maybe I should catch up on the storyline to refresh my memory.

But as of now, I don't remember anything special about those games. Sure, they added lots of stuff, but most of it was totally unnecessary for the AC experience (for example, what you mentioned: building your hideout in 2, or hunting in 3). I love games being simple and focused. I don't like it when there's a trillion things to do, unless it's a Bethesda open world walking simulator, or a city builder / tycoon type sandbox.

 

[Prima.Vera]

The best AC ever made I think was the Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag. The naval fights and water simulations were the best ever until then. It was a total refresh over the existing AC games, that's why it was so good.
Would definitely love another one like that, instead of the current woke garbage, which the Japanese do not want anything to do with it.

 

[AusWolf]

The best AC ever made I think was the Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag. The naval fights and water simulations were the best ever until then. It was a total refresh over the existing AC games, that's why it was so good.
Would definitely love another one like that, instead of the current woke garbage, which the Japanese do not want anything to do with it.

Yes, naval fights were quite interesting. But was it an AC game? I don't know...

 

[nguyen]

I am so sick of being lied to and getting disrespected by these Companies.


Its the opposite now. The games are shallow, made to appeal to everyone and dont exclude anyone.

Nah, only a few vocal and narcissistic people think games or other media should represent them, and when games are made to represent those few people they exclude the majority of gamers.