Ubisoft expected the recently released Ghost Recon: Breakpoint to perform better than it has done. We don't have any clear figures to work with, but in the company's latest financial report, Ubisoft boss Yves Guillemot says that "critical reception and sales during the game's first weeks were very disappointing".
Breakpoint's predecessor, Ghost Recon: Wildlands, turned out to be a huge hit for the publisher, so it probably expected a similar level of success. However, Breakpoint was not well received. Reviews were lukewarm at best, and its excessive microtransactions, coupled with its shoddy attempts at adopting a live service model, earned a damaging backlash from existing Ghost Recon fans. Clearly, negative word of mouth has had a significant impact.
In typical Ubisoft fashion, Guillemot states that the developer will keep supporting Breakpoint despite its poor start. "As we have done with past titles, we will continue to support the game and listen to the community in order to deliver the necessary improvements," the report reads.
Ubisoft titles such as Rainbow Six: Siege and For Honor immediately spring to mind, so the hope is that Breakpoint will eventually blossom much like its predecessors. Just a shame we can't have a great game at launch, isn't it?
[source twitter.com]
Comments 38
same for division 2 lol well atleast them epic store exclusive money should be enough for now.
more open-UBI-world asset flip garbage, they tried going cheap on this one, oh well
You'd think they would learn after a while that they need to just make their games good from the get go. But then again, as of late, good games and Ubisoft don't really go together.
His PR speak is so insulting.
Somehow I’m having trouble seeing this in a negative light.
Its nice to see gamers beginning to pay more attention to these pathetic cash grabs.
1. Make the game fun first and foremost - don't tell me that you left a crappy feature (bug) in the game for 'realism.' You're being lazy and everyone knows it. If you can't be bothered to fix your game then I won't be bothered to play it.
2. Don't charge extra money for things that the game should have shipped with. Like maps of collectibles - charging extra for things you ripped out of the game is a naked cash grab and an instant red flag that the game is not worth the money.
3. If you still insist on doing real money transactions for in game content that content better be visual only and have zero effect on the game or you are going to lose sales. Gamers are becoming sick and tired of being nickle and dime'd to death.
4. If you are asked a question and feel the need to reply in 'PR Speak' then we are going to call it out for the lie it is. Answer honestly for a change and stop acting like you are Dr. Evil. If you MUST resort to PR speak take a moment to think of why - chances are its because there is something wrong with the game.
This is what happens when you make a terrible game copy and pasted from the spare parts bin and stuff it full of microtransactions, people don't want it. Funny how that works and I wonder if this is the real reason why all of those Ubisoft games have been delayed
Good, that’s what happen when you make game focused on microtransaction rather than being a good game.
That's the way to do it. Hit them in the wallet.
@mr_tone Is that you, Yves?
Im happy too see it bomb this game is a insult. Microtransactions too the point where you think is this a free to play mobile game. Buggy, boring lets hope this happens a lot more too these horrible games.
@mr_tone Its hot garbage. The game monetized in a insulting way. Great too see it that it sells bad. Stop making up excuses for terrible copy and paste work that puts monetization before quality of a game. You are part of the problem that lets us see a decrease in quality games.
Should have just made wildlands 2. Really that simple.
The beta did nothing for me. Easy pass.
@Flaming_Kaiser this year in gaming isn't one that is going to remembered fondly with trash like this, Anthem, Contra, WWE 2K20, NBA2K20 casino simulator and Fallout 76 continuing to destroy what little goodwill Bethesda had left over from Skyrim. There have been a couple of bright spots such as Capcoms resurgence and hopefully a sprinkling of great titles still to come but overall a disappointing year
shocker.
this is what happens when you don't have any idea how to give a game a unique identity, and just crowbar in stuff from the standard ubisoft checklist.
ghost recon lost most of its identity with wildlands, which was an awful lot like far cry bolivian druglord edition far cry 3 was more popular than future soldier, so obviously wildlands has to be more like far cry. the division was most successful new IP in ages, so let's add those mechanics into the new ghost recon. the result is game that looks like it was designed by formula. it's the ubisoft patent these days.
So basically they are hoping for a "The Division" turn around didn't that take like 1 or 2 years to get ???? I still haven't finished Wildlands because it's rather repetitive so I only play it for a hours a week. Breakpoint was a joke from the start if I was a member of the Clancy family I would get the naming rights pulled. Because no game in years has had anything to do with Tom Clancy (RIP) from my personal perspective
I doubt it has much to do with microtransactions and stuff, more that people are a bit fed up with this type of game or don’t have the time to play multiple types of the same game to stick to one they know and enjoy. Like Destiny.
I bet if they'd made a new Rayman game sales of it wouldn't have been disappointing😉 (Just do it already!)
I did buy Breakpoint to play with nephew, we both hated it. I had more fun trying to break the game, then eventually traded it in & got Code Vein.
Same thing might happen with BG&E2. And if that happens, we will probably never see it again.
@ApostateMage 🤣🤣🤣
Personally I enjoyed the beta but it just didn't seem like something I gotta run out and buy. I mean I waited 6 months and got the division 2 for $15, grabbed wildlands for $30 6 months later, just be patient and you can scoop up ubi games for dirt cheap and by the time you do most of the bugs are gone.
good, and i hope they stay away from the always online gaas games for good too.
@carlos82 Lets hope we get a surprise release of. Dino Crisis. But there were some nice titles this year just not from the massive triple A companies.
@sonicmeerkat I rather not get them that sends a better message. But thats me personally.
I like the game, albeit it’s fairly soulless. I don’t get all the fuss about the micro transactions tho? I finished the campaign without even being tempted in buying anything, or having felt I needed to?
@Ianjong A €60 starterpack should not need a microtransactionpack so heavy it looks like you are playing a free to play game. And then have the nerve too put in a seasonpass too and be terribly polished. The problem is this is the start next time it will be worse.
It’s lay too late. It’s a terrible concept for Ghost Recon. It can’t be saved no matter what they do, just the wrong series.
I said this game and Division 2 would flop lol. Said the same about FO76 and Anthem. GaaS is not doing as good as these companies claim on a AAA level. Especially when they are not FTP. Good riddance to this garbage.
Ghost Recon Wildlands carried on the formula which had worked well in the past by using the usual AI team-mates (which is its main selling point) and it had the option to play offline if you wanted, I thoroughly enjoyed it. Ghost Recon Breakpoint on the other hand doesn't have either of these options so Ubisoft shot themselves in the foot with this. It's like releasing a new Gran Turismo where you don't have cars but can only race with go-carts and if you lose internet connectivity in the middle of the race you have to start again. I love Ubisoft games in general but they slipped up on this one.
Most people that played wildlands were people that played the first Divison (or big percentage at least. And I really don't have any data to corroborate this.. but ).
My vision:
So, since TD2 is a "kill rinse repeat" game, people play it for a looooong time.
So, launching one game so close to another wasn't a good move, since you play one or the other.
And being both AAA games with price tags matching this, is less likely to people buy both.
Another thing was, also, the state of The Division 2. The game came out with so many bugs that no one, after trying TD2, would want to go near GRB.
Well I have enjoyed playing it when the connection doesn't disconnect but I think for me the let down is the fact that they didn't have the AI team mates like in wildlands and also the fact you have to have a constant online connection to play is really annoying. everytime I'm in a base and I'm about to finish it the connection cuts offline which I think is unacceptable and immensely frustrating. I personally think they should make an offline mode for the fans of ghost recon after all its cost 50 quid on preorder and some people have paid more for it, I think they should listen to there fans from now on otherwise they may go out of business. After being thoroughly disappointed with assassin's creed oddysey I feel like ubisoft have finally joined the other gaming company's at being gready which is a shame as assassin's creed was my favorite franchise of there's and ghost recon wildlands was also a impressive game. I won't be preordering another of ubi's games without knowing if there going to have an offline single player mode and also a good game. So listen to your fans ubisoft and make a change to add in an offline mode on ghost recon breakpoint then you will get your fans back.
Says something when every comment defending the game are from accounts created in the last 24hrs...
"Breakpoint's predecessor, Ghost Recon: Wildlands, turned out to be a huge hit for the publisher"
So what do they do? Change it!
I loved Wildlands. Solo with the admittedly dodgy AI, or in co-op, it was great fun. I never so much as touched the PvP and didn't buy any of the DLC, but the base game was fantastic. I didn't even mind grinding the collectables, because it was fun to do so.
The gameplay in the technical test and closed beta of Breakpoint was just as much fun. The animation was iffy, and the vehicles were awful, but the shooting and combat were just as good as Wildlands.
What utterly killed it for me were the looter-shooter elements. I spent hours following a side-mission in the closed beta, humping across the map on foot because the vehicles were so bad, only to find that I couldn't even attempt the final part because my bullsh*t 'Gear Score' was nowhere near high enough. That was the moment I decided I wasn't buying the game, and I didn't even bother taking part in the open beta.
If I want to play The Division, I'll buy The Division... not a Ghost Recon game. In fact, I did buy The Division... it was okay... but I wasn't keen on the whole looter-shooter thing, and so I didn't buy The Division 2... and I didn't want those aspects in Breakpoint either. And that's before we even get the MTX nonsense.
All I really wanted from the follow-up to Wildlands was a similar game on a different map, with much-improved squad AI for when my mates weren't available for co-op; AI which didn't walk in front of/into the side of moving trains, and which didn't consistently lose line-of-sight if an enemy moved a few feet, despite apparently being able to shoot through rocks/hillsides at other times.
That's what happens when you create an online-only, bugged-out, looter-shooter experience with omitted DLC content. Everyone can plainly see what this is, and the proverbial king is naked. It's just not a common-sense buy.
One of my friends worked on the game, so I am kind of tempted to try it out, but other than that I am like super uninterested in it.
I want Ghost Recon, not Division 3. The loot killed the game for me.
@Cutmastavictory totally agree.
Tap here to load 38 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...