With E3 coming up, JohnGR pointed out a video in the comments of one of our E3 trailer posts that compares Ubisoft's demos with their released games. I tend to be relatively forgiving of these issues, personally, but the video is quite well done from an editing standpoint. It has quite a few moments of dry irony, especially with the contrast between the demo's busy audio sequences and the game section's silence.
We'll be seeing a lot of demos over the next handful of days. It's good to keep in mind that they are promotional snippets, either video or playable, that represent what the developer or publisher wants their game to be viewed as. Sometimes, it's just an overly optimistic view of what they can accomplish.
This is amazing. Thanks for
This is amazing. Thanks for posting this Scott. I knew Ubisoft were scum but this really highlights it.
Good thing to remind people
Good thing to remind people not to believe everything they see at 100% face value on an unreleased product.
Ubi are not the only ones, but this video is a good reminder regardless.
oh, the screentearing in that
oh, the screentearing in that video, my eyes…. my eyes… MY EYES!!!!
Each times i start R6 i
Each times i start R6 i search for my heli drop on the top house roof…but then i remember that ubi didnt delivered what we’ve seen from the demo. I mean look at theses particles XD.
I sincerely hope that every
I sincerely hope that every Ubisoft demo is followed with a Q&A session, during which the devs and/or marketing drones are peppered with the same question over and over:
“So, is this just like Watch Dogs and The Division, or is that actually what the game looks like?”
The Division, the original
The Division, the original was what I played at an event during the Beta Testing session. I can’t compare with what is available now as I haven’t played it since. I did notice for game playability, some of the special effects created some visual challenges. Could be the reason why it was changed.
As for Farcry 3, I am wondering if the comparison is between a PC and console as it looked much better and cleaner on the GTX 760 than the GTX 285M.
They might have had reasons
They might have had reasons to change things but by now you would think they would show the public what they can actually achieve and NOT what they hope to. That way they would give the public one less reason to get angry at them
E3 is just an excuse to show us a great idea for game but bumble it in execution
Is it possible for a
Is it possible for a publisher/developer to get into legal trouble for things like this?
Show off a product to consumers/press and then downgrade it on release?
I doubt it, but, even if you
I doubt it, but, even if you could, I'd see it mostly hurting ambitious indie devs.
Its possible, though don’t
Its possible, though don’t know who would win the case. Some people sued Sega and Gearbox for the advertising and release of Alien: Colonial Marines. Last I heard Gearbox was dropped from the case and the judge denied the “class action” status so not sure if anything has happened since then.
One of the major issues with the case is that they can’t prove that anybody who bought the game did so because they had seen the misleading promotional material or not. That seems like a shaky defense to me, as you could argue that for any and all misleading advertising for every product ever sold but I’m not a lawyer.
I think the biggest difference is that at E3 all these companies have disclaimers saying everything being shown is a work in progress or beta or some other wording. With the Alien game, they were showing outdated footage as late as the week before the game launched, which was clearly not indicative to the actual game.
They should change their name
They should change their name to YoubeScum. Bait and switch merchants.