shikamaru317 said:
GOWTLOZ said:
I just told you Brotherhood would have sold more than Redemption if it only had a sequel in 2018, and Red Dead Redemption 2 was a huge risk which Rockstar took as Red Dead Redemption sold 15 million which is not much higher than Brotherhood and Assassin's Creed 3 sold more than 15 million. Assassin's Creed was a bigger and more popular series of games, but Ubisoft didn't take the risk, which considering Assassin's Creed 3's sales would be less risky. We as consumers should reward companies who take such risks for our immersion, even if that company is as big as Rockstar.
If you don't agree with the above, atleast we should be able to compare games just as they are and not give a fuck about the behind the scenes, because its the final product which should matter to the consumer. If a game is lacking due to its lack of funding, that's ultimately the developer's headache and not ours.
|
Yeah, but there is just no way that Ubisoft would ever give Assassin's Creed, their biggest selling series, an 8 year gap between releases. The best you can ever hope to see is an 2 year gap between AC games with 4 years of development per game, maybe $120m budget per game. Ubisoft is never going to risk more than that. Their bottom line depends on yearly and bi-yearly releases, it is the only thing that protected them from being bought out by Vivendi long ago.
|
What I'm saying is budget should be no excuse for Assassin's Creed Odyssey lacking immersion. Compare two games on what they deliver and not what budget they had to deliver on various fronts.
