By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
mysteryman on 11 September 2014
Edit Thread
flagstaad said:
mysteryman said:

Rayman Legends suffered from extremely poor handling and alienation of the Wii U user base. Yet it still sold better than, and slightly less than, the Xbox360 and PS3 versions respectively.

You can put less effort into a product, that's fine. But when you then judge sales as if it were done properly, you are just being hypocritical.

Your logic is flawed. You don't need to buy a game in order to be entitled to have an opinion about it. That opinion is the basis of whether or not you buy the game in the first place.

If you believe that "the message is open for interpretation" when voting with your wallet, then it works both ways. By not purchasing the game, while being vocal about its shortcomings, publishers should have the insight to then say "maybe the fault lies with us".

Not necessarily the same effort. If all of the other teams had a boosted number of staff from dissolving the Wii U dev team, then the Wii U version still gets less man-hours.

This move is particularly sour for Wii U owners after the Rayman Legends delay, which was due to wanting a consistent release so as to save in marketing costs and to be fair to all gamers. But when Wii U owners will be missing out, it's fine. You can argue about the wiseness of the decisions made, regarding expected sales etc. but the fact remains that they've handled it all poorly and sent mixed messages to Wii U owners.

Rayman was the best version, released at the same time, with extra content and great reviews, on a genre that Wii U users should like/love and the sales were just 360k, it is a disgrace and no matter how bad the game was handled the consumers ignored a great game with a lot of effort in it.

The problem with the effort-return is how disbalanced it is on the Wii U, they put less effort on those ports?, maybe but not too much less, yet they are getting only 10% of the sales compared to the other consoles in many cases even less.

You can have an opinion before buying, but how much it matters depends only if you are a paying customer or not, if you are just rambling about how bad is that the game was delayed and you are not going to buy it, will Ubisoft (or any other company) really care? are you a potential customer? all signs indicate that you are not and never will be, so they can just ignore you and that is what is happening with the third party support right now, they made an effort good, bad or incomplete but for the effort they put they did not got any positive feedback, just lackluster sales, not even decent sales, and I am betting that a few even lost a good amount of money supporting the console, and to add insult to injury many gamers only talk bad about those efforts.

If the effort made was 10% and the sales received were 10%, they could reach the "maybe the fault lies with us" conclution, but most likely the effort was 50-80% and the results was a mere 10%, then the clear conclution it that is not their fault, think about it... if you take a test, made a 70% effort and got a 10% grade, are you willing to conclude that it was your fault?, but if you make a 70% effort and get a 60%-70% grade, then you will conclude that making a 100% effort will result on a better grade. That is why a good result can conduct to better conclutions that a negative one like the one proposed of just not buying.

And we are just focusing on the publishers, imagine how the development studio will feel after working for years on a project, putting their best effort on it and returning to it after the delay, just to get bad words, insults and desinterest. Do you think that studio will be willing to work on another project for the console? I certantly would not, and will avoid the console at all costs.

Not at all, it was originally a launch title that was delayed into the Wii U's first major drought. It was then released alongside Piknin 3 and Windwaker HD (and also Wonderful 101), it doesn't take a genius to know that was a much worse time to release. It was also competing against two consoles with install bases an order of magnitude greater, apparently with vocal fans upset about it being exclusive. Yet the Wii U version still performed equally as well. Ubisoft fumbled here, yet it's somehow the Wii U owners' fault?

It doesn't take much to destroy the value proposition of one version of a game compared to others. If they can't provide parity on at least the content, price and release date, then that is more than enough reason to play the game elsewhere.  It's up to publisher to provide a quality gaming experience in the first place, not consumers to purchase inferior versions in the hope of getting parity in the future.

That's all well and good if you could know what every customer would and wouldn't buy, but that is just not the case. I'll agree that there are vocal complainers that have no real interest in buying what they complain about, but there are also real potential customers that are simply lost sales. They shouldn't have to buy something that isn't what they want, just so that they are allowed to ask for what they actually want.

Far too much speculation and your analogy is horrendous, who else is to blame for your poor performance on a test if you didn't study properly? Though I'll mention that the relationship between effort and outcome is not as linear as you'd like to make out. Often it's that last few percent of work, that extra polish, that really boosts the outcome of a project.

I feel terrible for the devs that worked on Rayman Legends, it was part of the reason for the uproar. They were pulling all-nighters, months on end, to get the game out on time (for the first delay) only to have it go multiplat a week or so before release., with a much extended deadline. But if devs had as much power as you are implying, Rayman Legends would have released as planned.