Another Win For Mac Gaming: Assassin's Creed Shadows To Hit Macs on Day One of Release

[arbiter]

Probably due to negative stigma around the game they porting a LQ mac release to try to minimize the embarrassment the sales numbers are gonna be.

 

[Dragokar]

Ubisoft must be desperate to push its “value” up before they get bought out from Tencent/China. I think that are the last pushes from the Guillemot family before they only keep the leftovers when they sell it finally.

 

[dyonoctis]

You know you've sunken deep when you announce an AC game as a win for Mac gaming.

Lol. Yeah, in a barren wasteland, an oasis of pee is absolutely drinkable.

Ubisoft has been one of their "partners" for the whole gaming on apple silicon thing. They have to do the lip service. What they did with Arcade was nice, you have good mobile games that aren't plagued by microtransaction, but Apple as a whole is really not going to become super deep into the gaming culture and snob a bad AAA release.
Heck, even Playstation and Xbox have to do lip service for the upcoming trash.

It's not because it's from Ubisoft. It's because all of the latest AC games have essentially been the same game in a different skin (literally). Ubisoft has dug their own grave.

No, it's specifically because AC shadows is going to be a controversial release, forget the black Samurai, the gameplay itself had several issues in the various previews that have been going around on YouTube.

 

[cinemaware]

It's because all of the latest AC games have essentially been the same game in a different skin (literally). Ubisoft has dug their own grave.

That’s a very weak argument. Why fix something that's not broken? There are heaps of series that are "essentialy the same game", because the core things work well. And it's not even as much the same as in some games (eg KCD2 is essentially a reskin, even though I'm fine with that).

I'm not saying that these games are perfect but the amount of hate they get in comment sections get is just silly. It's the same bandwagonning like with Bethesda and other popular hate-ons. Meanwhile, in the real world these games sell millions of copies.

 

[AusWolf]

That’s a very weak argument. Why fix something that's not broken? There are heaps of series that are "essentialy the same game", because the core things work well. And it's not even as much the same as in some games (eg KCD2 is essentially a reskin, even though I'm fine with that).

I'm not saying that these games are perfect but the amount of hate they get in comment sections get is just silly. It's the same bandwagonning like with Bethesda and other popular hate-ons. Meanwhile, in the real world these games sell millions of copies.

Except that KCD is a unique experience, and KCD 2 only expands on the story with little improvements in the gameplay. It's not trying to show off what a revolutionary new thing it is while actually offering nothing substantial.

There's a difference between offering an honest, simple experience, and churning out the same game every year while trying to show it off as the next best thing.

 

[trsttte]

That’s a very weak argument. Why fix something that's not broken? There are heaps of series that are "essentialy the same game", because the core things work well. And it's not even as much the same as in some games (eg KCD2 is essentially a reskin, even though I'm fine with that).

Because the number in front of KCD is 2 and not 13. Assassins Creed is not broken per say but it's completely stagnated, there's nothing new to it, even the overarching theme with the ancestors and all that became very convoluted and impossible to follow.

 

[cinemaware]

There's nothing "unique" about KCD, it's just another videogame (albeit a very good one). The charge that AC is "trying to show off what a revolutionary new thing it is while actually offering nothing substantial" is completely off, since which AC has tried to do that? It’s also contradictory, because you can't argue that a series is stagnant and trying to be revolutionary at the same time.

Saying that they're "out the same game every year" proves you're arguing on autopilot because it's demonstrably false. Besides, when they tried to "go back to the roots" and made Mirage smaller, because of commenting massive saying how allegedly terrible big games are (despite Valhalla selling 20 mil), that was not good either - so, be damned if you do, damned if you don't. It;s the same with Shadows - the game has not been released yet, judging by the previews the gameplay seems vastly changed, and yet it's been already decided it is "staganant". I rest my case

It also doesn't matter whether it's KCD is #2 or 13 because it’s an example and the idea is the same. If KCD2 was from Ubi or EA people would apply the same complaints, only because the narrative says so. Nobody whines about GTA being stagnated (even though the actual game mechanics actually go backwards) or how hilariously derivative the gameplay concepts in CP2077 or Avowed are, because the companies behind them are the "good guys" (the hysterical backlash Cyberpunk got was mostly about tech, and that was only half warranted too since on PC the game was just fine).

Sure, the overarching story in AC is a ridiculous dumpster fire, especially the existence of Animus, which always has been one of the more wtf things in modern gaming. But that can be easily ignored because the "local" individual stories are just fine.

In any case my main point is about deciding a game is rubbish months in advance, based on completely irrelevant factors.

 

[AusWolf]

There's nothing "unique" about KCD, it's just another videogame (albeit a very good one). The charge that AC is "trying to show off what a revolutionary new thing it is while actually offering nothing substantial" is completely off, since which AC has tried to do that? It’s also contradictory, because you can't argue that a series is stagnant and trying to be revolutionary at the same time.

Simulating an accurate medieval life with accurate medieval combat in accurate locations is not unique enough? Well, show me which other game has done the same. I want to play them.

Saying that they're "out the same game every year" proves you're arguing on autopilot because it's demonstrably false. Besides, when they tried to "go back to the roots" and made Mirage smaller, because of commenting massive saying how allegedly terrible big games are (despite Valhalla selling 20 mil), that was not good either - so, be damned if you do, damned if you don't. It;s the same with Shadows - the game has not been released yet, judging by the previews the gameplay seems vastly changed, and yet it's been already decided it is "staganant". I rest my case

I don't want it to go back to its roots. I don't want it to do anything. I want new games, new stories, new experiences. AC offers none of that lately.

In any case my main point is about deciding a game is rubbish months in advance, based on completely irrelevant factors.

Nobody said it's rubbish. The thing is that nobody even cares. If I want AC, I'll play the first one, that was a brilliant game for its time.