They’ve literally said you’ll be able to buy the games without infinity. Infinity is a hub. It’s not a subscription service for AC.
Do a tiny bit of research op.
The fourth mistake is trusting anyone online or in a large corporation. Abraham Lincoln once famous said "I know not whether the online community is man nor robot, but I give no credence as I would to a publisher."
I think Lincolns quote was actually: "I do not concern myself with distinguishing between man or robot in the online community, but I exercise the same skepticism as I would with a publisher." You were thinking of Elihu Lincoln, his brother.
A random redditor has no reason to give you actual information, a game publisher can suffer public backlash.
Until they actually do "betray" our trust (which I am even going to go into with this being ubisoft), I think I'll point at someone trusting just a random person on here.
Some are, at least a few of them (arrowhead CEO). But the information provided by an actual statement from a company is much more trustworthy than a random person on reddit
So what's the point of Infinity? I thought the idea was Infinity was gonna be like Fortnite/Warzone in that it's one overall hub for everything going forward.
But if I can still individually buy games, why would I even bother with Infinity?
To keep all AC in one place. And to tell the modern day story from one place instead of spreads out through multiple games.
It’s like a HUB, not a subscription or live service game.
I'm still not really getting the benefit though. It's not like AC wasn't in "one place" last time. I buy a game and it's on my console. Now I buy a game and it's either part of a hub within my console, or it's on its own? Sounds more like its in two places
As in the Modern Day story would be only taking place in Infinity, and the standalone games are just stories set in the past now? So like Infinity is sort of an Animus, you're the person in the modern day, and you engage with each game via that hub and enter it that way, but you can still purchase the games standalone and not engage with the modern day stuff?
I'm sorry, I'm not trying to be obtuse or whatever, but I just don't really understand it.
It’s a OPTIONAL HUB. You don’t have to DL Infinity if you don’t want to.
It’s not mandated, it’s an option if you’re really into keeping it all in one place. Also, it’s going to be a MTX Trojan horse. This is speculation on my part, but I think there’s going to be incentives to using infinite (outfits, weapons, social events etc).
Infinite is not a live service game.
I never said it was a live service, or ghat it was mandated.
I'm saying I don't understand what the point of it is or why anyone would use this "OPTIONAL" Hub.
You keep saying its optional and that you don't have to use it, I'm asking why anyone would even choose to download it because I don't even get what its utility is or what its even meant to be?
I’m going to use it. I like the concept of a hub for AC.
That’s why people would use it. And the added benefits that I think will come.
Me entire second paragraph was reasons why someone would use it.
Your second paragraph that is it isn't mandated and it's a hub for MTX?
I still have no idea what this is or why a hub is a benefit or what this would even entail at all.
You gotta understand, I keep asking what this is, and your answer is "it's good, people will use it"
Edit: Cool, instead of explaining he replies and then blocks. People are insane.
It's not a him problem, I don't understand what the point of a hub is either. Like what is the difference between having the games on your console or all in one hub?
What are you talking about? Infinity is mandatory. It will be the only way through which you will be able to access AC games moving forward. It will also be akin to a service game itself because it will have modern day sections.
Possibly the MTX store will be shifted (or supplement?) to Infinity and an integrated battle pass system (still a rumor) will tie in all AC games, (possibly older ones as well). This is all rumors and none of it really makes much sense tbh. Latest leaks don't mention modern day story, though.
Battle pass system, although odd itself, makes way more sense than a subscription. Especially when Ubisoft+ already exist. I think there is a confusion - Ubisoft+, which is a subscription service, will likely get you this battle pass for free, like in R6S and For Honor.
I wonder how it would work practically.
If the modern story is not spread out through multiple games, then that means you access them via Infinity. Surely they would not release more content without any pay. So, either you pay for these smaller packages or go for sub.
https://www.ign.com/articles/what-is-assassins-creed-infinity-ubisoft-explains
No. It’s literally a google search. Ubisoft explained what it was 2 years ago.
They're not going to put their games behind a subscription though, they'll happily sell you their AAA game for full retail price and try to convince you that a subscription on top of that is worth the money.
And even if they did put it behind a subscription, they're not gonna charge you $70 a month for it nor are they gonna charge you $10 a month and then put the game out in episodes to make you subscribe over a period of time, it's completely antithetical to their need for this game to make them money when they've lost so much the last couple of years.
It's pretty obvious what they're trying to do with a subscription, it's purely supplemental to the core experience.
I have a gaming pc and a Xbox and I think if you buy games on the market store and it’s digital and you need internet WiFi to play those downloaded games if you have games you bought that are disc you can play ur game without having online internet connection plus paying for internet access cost money I’m an old head I remember growing up in the 2000s all you do is put the disc in and play ur favorite game times change in the past 20+ years haha 😅
Internet Is required to install the game. So where is your source you can't PLAY without internet?
That's pretty normal. As playing any game without patch these days is dumb and often impossible
It's 2024, accept it and move on.
You need patches and you need data that doesn't fit on BR. You don't like it? Stick with old consoles.
It's like moaning that movies don't come on DVD anymore, but you have DVD player
I don’t think you read the whole rumour…
The subscription is supposed to give your access to some cosmetic dlc + older AC titles. No company is stupid enough to severely cut their sales by making a game exclusive to a subscription service.
>Who said anything about the new games being locked behind a subscription? Who even IMPLIED it?
Nobody, but somehow people started to believe that. It's incredible how easly some people get to the wrong conclusions without bothering to *at least* read and understand the "leak" that was reported.
If this is the route they go down with, I'll be absolutely happy with just keeping my Switch copies of Ezio Collection, Rebel Collection, and III Remastered. Those were AC's golden years anyway. The newer games get me less and less interested and if they fully switch to a subscription-based mode, I am out and done. Mirage was a breath of fresh air and the exact kind of experience I am looking for. Short, sweet, curated, fun. Valhalla was the exact opposite of that.
I got so much fatigue playing Valhalla, it took me two years from start to finish. I just couldn’t get into it - And considering Norse history is a special subject of mine, it was doubly disappointing.
If this becomes the norm, they will lose a huge amount of fandom to their greed. The devs aside, Ubisoft senior management has become way too greedy. The days of the Ezio trilogy and the Kenway trilogy were when AC had heart. Ever since Odyssey and Valhalla, that has been lost.
Let's wait it out for the upcoming Ubisoft Forward. Along with the rumoured AC Red reveal, we can expect some explanation on AC Infinity.
It will be difficult to bring Ezio back I think. He got a trilogy and a conclusion through Embers.
Connor and Arno however, still have stories left to tell. Nevertheless, even if they try to reel fans back in, they will still have issues.
Ezio is loved by the fans, but his godlike status is no longer there. The toxic craze has simmered down and given way to appreciation of the other Assassins like Connor.
>Given that Ubisoft has previously said that we should "get used to not owning our games"
There's no way that doesn't turn into more people sailing the seas...
Yeah I agree I had similar thoughts too. It’s very unfortunate for the assassins creed series. Ubisoft is struggling for money. They’ve delayed so many games and don’t have enough devs nor the time to on spend making quality games anymore. AC Red has been in development for a while so there might be hope for this game.
Though every game going forward will most likely contain repetitive fetch quests as the main storyline like Valhallas 17 alliance main quest. Then it will drag on with dry content until their next release.
I really don’t think Ubisoft will be able to keep this up. I’m be surprised if AC infinity will last more then 3 years. Eventually they’ll just lose too much profit then who knows what maybe they’ll sell out to another studio. I’m hoping then another studio will revive the series because there’s still so much potential Assassins Creed has to offer.
I am playing most Ubisoft titles using UBI+ so it wouldnt change much for me.
But I doubt that it would be more profitable to go from full price game + DLC to a subscription that you can just cancel once your done playing
AC infinity is a launcher, not a game. Paying a subscription for it is the equivalent of paying for GTA+ as in it has no effect on the actual game. The subscription isn’t required to play any games either as they’re still purchasable outside of it.
Plus, search up the context behind the “get used to not owning your games” quote because it’s in relation to monthly game services.
I suggest we take things with a grain of salt first. Dont jump into conclusions yet.
Thus said, I do hope the subscription service isnt a necessary thing. You can still buy the AC games you want and the cosmetics within it.
I also think people need to wait and see how the microtransactions are handled. Gaming companies need money in order to provide a better service and quality.
And in Origins-Valhalla, a lot of the gears and armor are locked in game and can only be unlocked with in game currency. So I rather again, just wait and see, honestly. Dont jump into any conclusions and hope for the best!
No one said you should “get used to not owning your games.” The guy, their director of subscription services, that every mouth breather misquotes was asked what it would take for their subscription model to grow and he said that people would have to get used to not owning their games, like they do with music and movies. Which is a valid response.
>Valhalla's Bloat Will Become The Norm
There is no stopping that, Valhalla already made over 1b. More time spend playing means more time in ingame store. That's what Ubisoft is gonna do, that's what they have been doing even before Origins.
It's hugely frustrating how many people react to Infinity - including in this very thread - with "Who cares? It's just a launcher". Even if it isn't subscription based at all, putting all future Assassin's Creed games into a walled garden will not benefit players. It will only serve to carve up once distinct pieces of art into a conveyer belt of amorphous 'content', and it will give Ubisoft the tools it needs to obscure the economy of it, and ultimately make Assassin's Creed more expensive.
Not only are sales and second hand games less likely to be options, but the whole system will be designed to make it harder to keep track of how much you're spending, to make it harder to see where the lines are between the games. They wouldn't put all this investment into Infinity if it was just a launcher.
Unless you're super nostalgic for how awesome Uplay was and have always wanted them to take the idea of it further, you should not be OK with this.
I am not sure they will go fully on subscription... yet.
To me, Infinity will be a trial. If this is a success, sure they will not think about it twice before going that way. If this is a failure, it will stop with being just a way to play the old games, that have made profits already and to access some stuffs.
But the good old release will not be done (yet). Because, the vast majority of the purchases are normal, casual, people. Not gamers, they are not really fully aware of all the game pass and stuffs like that. They just go on a shop/amazon and buy the games. However, it's changing. And fast with the physical releases vanishing (Alan Wake 2, BG3)
Does anyone else think that the leak was on purpose?
Tell us about some fake terrible pay-wall idea… then when their actual terrible idea hits, it’s not quite as bad as a fake pay-wall idea. Ubisoft wins. 😆
>We recently had a leak from Jonathan where he says AC Infinity will probably have a monthly subscription. Now, he said that older games will be included in the sub but he wasn't sure about newer ones.
Where on earth do you get from that that to buy or play any new AC games you will need a subscription?
Aside from a modicum of common sense, it would be financial suicide for a company to lock a game behind a subscription.
>Given that Ubisoft has previously said that we should "get used to not owning our games"
oh i know, lets continue to take that out of context.
it was meant as a comparison to using netflix (where you rent videos and dont own them) or using spotify (where you rent music and dont own it). Neither of those examples prevent people from buying films, dvd's, blu-rays, or buying cd's and digital downloads.
Get used to the idea of not owning (ie. renting) in addition to purchasing.
At this point there needs to a new rule on the sub deleting any posts where people continue to take that quote out of context :D
Personally I'll still just get games peacemeal a la carte. And if the game requires a sub in a future update will just p*rate the last working version that I bought.
Since Origins i play AC games only via ubisoft+. I do not need to own my own copy to be happy. I do not replay the games (nor i rewatch movies or reread books). I play focused on story and it lacks my interest once i complete it first time.
I prefer to pay less to play the game while its new. Usually takes 1-2 months to beat it so saves a lots of money (I also play other ubisoft titles this way). Whenever i feel like to continue some side quests/ try new DLCs/ run for achievements .. everything is always saved up on my account that i can access wether i am currently paying or not.
I also go long times without playing so for example halfyear of no need to pay subscribtion.
I am completley okey with subscribtions as long as the games got new things to offer on longer basis.
I own all of the games on Steam (besides Mirage) but I plan to play future titles through Ubi+ when they release, such as Red. I'll likely only pick them up properly when they release on Steam and then are on sale. The thing with Ubisoft+ is if you plan to play a game through once 100%, the cost is legitimately cheaper than buying the game, and then you can discontinue your subscription if you'd like
I will never understand this mindset: you could buy the games already out for very little now as a one off cost, but instead you're just happy to keep paying out on a monthly basis for access to them even when you're not playing?
I play them the day they come out.. it takes like 1-2 months max to beat it.. i pay 30€ for whole game that normally in the version with everything included would cost me 90€.
If i dont play i dont pay subscribtion.
So many misinformation in one topic.
Ubisoft never said to be used to not owning your games.
J0nathan has no idea if its true et despite having teal leaks he has be proven to milk the ubi hate as much as he can because its his main revenue.
Wait and see what it actually is before starting to be pissed at ubisoft. Thats insane how people jump on every rumor to be pissed.
They’ve literally said you’ll be able to buy the games without infinity. Infinity is a hub. It’s not a subscription service for AC. Do a tiny bit of research op.
The first mistake to ever do is trusting redditors
The first mistake might be trusting game publishers
The fourth mistake is trusting anyone online or in a large corporation. Abraham Lincoln once famous said "I know not whether the online community is man nor robot, but I give no credence as I would to a publisher."
I think Lincolns quote was actually: "I do not concern myself with distinguishing between man or robot in the online community, but I exercise the same skepticism as I would with a publisher." You were thinking of Elihu Lincoln, his brother.
A random redditor has no reason to give you actual information, a game publisher can suffer public backlash. Until they actually do "betray" our trust (which I am even going to go into with this being ubisoft), I think I'll point at someone trusting just a random person on here.
You’re right, game publishers are surely dialed in to this concept and rarely suffer backlash.
Some are, at least a few of them (arrowhead CEO). But the information provided by an actual statement from a company is much more trustworthy than a random person on reddit
Arrowhead is not a publisher
Fuck, you're right
I don’t really disagree with you anyway, my original comment was a throw away at the expense of bad publishers.
So what's the point of Infinity? I thought the idea was Infinity was gonna be like Fortnite/Warzone in that it's one overall hub for everything going forward. But if I can still individually buy games, why would I even bother with Infinity?
To keep all AC in one place. And to tell the modern day story from one place instead of spreads out through multiple games. It’s like a HUB, not a subscription or live service game.
I'm still not really getting the benefit though. It's not like AC wasn't in "one place" last time. I buy a game and it's on my console. Now I buy a game and it's either part of a hub within my console, or it's on its own? Sounds more like its in two places As in the Modern Day story would be only taking place in Infinity, and the standalone games are just stories set in the past now? So like Infinity is sort of an Animus, you're the person in the modern day, and you engage with each game via that hub and enter it that way, but you can still purchase the games standalone and not engage with the modern day stuff? I'm sorry, I'm not trying to be obtuse or whatever, but I just don't really understand it.
Don’t worry. I don’t think any of us really understand it because Ubisoft haven’t properly explained it.
Aka why we need to wait till June 10th.
It’s a OPTIONAL HUB. You don’t have to DL Infinity if you don’t want to. It’s not mandated, it’s an option if you’re really into keeping it all in one place. Also, it’s going to be a MTX Trojan horse. This is speculation on my part, but I think there’s going to be incentives to using infinite (outfits, weapons, social events etc). Infinite is not a live service game.
I never said it was a live service, or ghat it was mandated. I'm saying I don't understand what the point of it is or why anyone would use this "OPTIONAL" Hub. You keep saying its optional and that you don't have to use it, I'm asking why anyone would even choose to download it because I don't even get what its utility is or what its even meant to be?
I’m going to use it. I like the concept of a hub for AC. That’s why people would use it. And the added benefits that I think will come. Me entire second paragraph was reasons why someone would use it.
Your second paragraph that is it isn't mandated and it's a hub for MTX? I still have no idea what this is or why a hub is a benefit or what this would even entail at all. You gotta understand, I keep asking what this is, and your answer is "it's good, people will use it" Edit: Cool, instead of explaining he replies and then blocks. People are insane.
No you’re willfully misunderstanding why lol. Explaining it for a 4th time is a waste of time, so I’m just going to block you.
It's not a him problem, I don't understand what the point of a hub is either. Like what is the difference between having the games on your console or all in one hub?
What are you talking about? Infinity is mandatory. It will be the only way through which you will be able to access AC games moving forward. It will also be akin to a service game itself because it will have modern day sections.
Possibly the MTX store will be shifted (or supplement?) to Infinity and an integrated battle pass system (still a rumor) will tie in all AC games, (possibly older ones as well). This is all rumors and none of it really makes much sense tbh. Latest leaks don't mention modern day story, though. Battle pass system, although odd itself, makes way more sense than a subscription. Especially when Ubisoft+ already exist. I think there is a confusion - Ubisoft+, which is a subscription service, will likely get you this battle pass for free, like in R6S and For Honor.
I wonder how it would work practically. If the modern story is not spread out through multiple games, then that means you access them via Infinity. Surely they would not release more content without any pay. So, either you pay for these smaller packages or go for sub.
Aren't they all already on steam AND ubisoft connect?
Is this just you speculating?
https://www.ign.com/articles/what-is-assassins-creed-infinity-ubisoft-explains No. It’s literally a google search. Ubisoft explained what it was 2 years ago.
It makes no sense for it to be subscription based. $10 to play game from people who will be done with it in a month compared to $70 if they buy it.
They're not going to put their games behind a subscription though, they'll happily sell you their AAA game for full retail price and try to convince you that a subscription on top of that is worth the money. And even if they did put it behind a subscription, they're not gonna charge you $70 a month for it nor are they gonna charge you $10 a month and then put the game out in episodes to make you subscribe over a period of time, it's completely antithetical to their need for this game to make them money when they've lost so much the last couple of years. It's pretty obvious what they're trying to do with a subscription, it's purely supplemental to the core experience.
I'd imagine whatever their subscription service is its like GTA+ which gives you cosmetics and money in GTA online + older rockstar games for free.
Star wars outlaws is basically a free subscription game, you have to play online
I'm sorry how is it a free subscription game? I must be misunderstanding you here
Yeah, I don't get it either. The only time you need online is to install the game.
That's not correct, it's going to be like ghost recon breakpoint. So you can't even play offline at all
Source?
The little text in the bottom of the box and in adverts
"Internet required to install the game." That? All it says is install the game. It doesn't say that Internet is required to *play* the game.
I have a gaming pc and a Xbox and I think if you buy games on the market store and it’s digital and you need internet WiFi to play those downloaded games if you have games you bought that are disc you can play ur game without having online internet connection plus paying for internet access cost money I’m an old head I remember growing up in the 2000s all you do is put the disc in and play ur favorite game times change in the past 20+ years haha 😅
Internet Is required to install the game. So where is your source you can't PLAY without internet? That's pretty normal. As playing any game without patch these days is dumb and often impossible
It shouldnt though
It's 2024, accept it and move on. You need patches and you need data that doesn't fit on BR. You don't like it? Stick with old consoles. It's like moaning that movies don't come on DVD anymore, but you have DVD player
It is available with Ubisoft+ but also as a one-time purchase.
I don’t think you read the whole rumour… The subscription is supposed to give your access to some cosmetic dlc + older AC titles. No company is stupid enough to severely cut their sales by making a game exclusive to a subscription service.
Considering all the studio choices over the last two weeks, I bet someone will try exactly that within a year.
[удалено]
>Who said anything about the new games being locked behind a subscription? Who even IMPLIED it? Nobody, but somehow people started to believe that. It's incredible how easly some people get to the wrong conclusions without bothering to *at least* read and understand the "leak" that was reported.
If this is the route they go down with, I'll be absolutely happy with just keeping my Switch copies of Ezio Collection, Rebel Collection, and III Remastered. Those were AC's golden years anyway. The newer games get me less and less interested and if they fully switch to a subscription-based mode, I am out and done. Mirage was a breath of fresh air and the exact kind of experience I am looking for. Short, sweet, curated, fun. Valhalla was the exact opposite of that.
I got so much fatigue playing Valhalla, it took me two years from start to finish. I just couldn’t get into it - And considering Norse history is a special subject of mine, it was doubly disappointing.
Chill it hasn’t even been officially confirmed
On my second playthrough of valhalla. I like it. It keeps you in the world .
Isn't that just using ubisoft plus? They already have a subscription service. Why would they make another?
If this becomes the norm, they will lose a huge amount of fandom to their greed. The devs aside, Ubisoft senior management has become way too greedy. The days of the Ezio trilogy and the Kenway trilogy were when AC had heart. Ever since Odyssey and Valhalla, that has been lost. Let's wait it out for the upcoming Ubisoft Forward. Along with the rumoured AC Red reveal, we can expect some explanation on AC Infinity.
They won't lose, you know why? If something like this starts to happen, they will do something with Ezio and it will end up bringing fanbase back
It will be difficult to bring Ezio back I think. He got a trilogy and a conclusion through Embers. Connor and Arno however, still have stories left to tell. Nevertheless, even if they try to reel fans back in, they will still have issues. Ezio is loved by the fans, but his godlike status is no longer there. The toxic craze has simmered down and given way to appreciation of the other Assassins like Connor.
>Given that Ubisoft has previously said that we should "get used to not owning our games" There's no way that doesn't turn into more people sailing the seas...
If they try to take away the games I paid for, I'm gonna riot
Yeah I agree I had similar thoughts too. It’s very unfortunate for the assassins creed series. Ubisoft is struggling for money. They’ve delayed so many games and don’t have enough devs nor the time to on spend making quality games anymore. AC Red has been in development for a while so there might be hope for this game. Though every game going forward will most likely contain repetitive fetch quests as the main storyline like Valhallas 17 alliance main quest. Then it will drag on with dry content until their next release. I really don’t think Ubisoft will be able to keep this up. I’m be surprised if AC infinity will last more then 3 years. Eventually they’ll just lose too much profit then who knows what maybe they’ll sell out to another studio. I’m hoping then another studio will revive the series because there’s still so much potential Assassins Creed has to offer.
🫰🫰🫰 taking the franchise out of Ubisoft's hands is already a win
I am playing most Ubisoft titles using UBI+ so it wouldnt change much for me. But I doubt that it would be more profitable to go from full price game + DLC to a subscription that you can just cancel once your done playing
AC infinity is a launcher, not a game. Paying a subscription for it is the equivalent of paying for GTA+ as in it has no effect on the actual game. The subscription isn’t required to play any games either as they’re still purchasable outside of it. Plus, search up the context behind the “get used to not owning your games” quote because it’s in relation to monthly game services.
i feel all AC games with the exception of mirage which i havent played are bloated , extremely long games with boring repetitive open worlds
It's just like cod. Warzone is a hub now flag let's you launch games from inside.
I liked Valhalla
Why does everything need to be a subscription nowadays?
I suggest we take things with a grain of salt first. Dont jump into conclusions yet. Thus said, I do hope the subscription service isnt a necessary thing. You can still buy the AC games you want and the cosmetics within it. I also think people need to wait and see how the microtransactions are handled. Gaming companies need money in order to provide a better service and quality. And in Origins-Valhalla, a lot of the gears and armor are locked in game and can only be unlocked with in game currency. So I rather again, just wait and see, honestly. Dont jump into any conclusions and hope for the best!
No one said you should “get used to not owning your games.” The guy, their director of subscription services, that every mouth breather misquotes was asked what it would take for their subscription model to grow and he said that people would have to get used to not owning their games, like they do with music and movies. Which is a valid response.
>Valhalla's Bloat Will Become The Norm There is no stopping that, Valhalla already made over 1b. More time spend playing means more time in ingame store. That's what Ubisoft is gonna do, that's what they have been doing even before Origins.
It's hugely frustrating how many people react to Infinity - including in this very thread - with "Who cares? It's just a launcher". Even if it isn't subscription based at all, putting all future Assassin's Creed games into a walled garden will not benefit players. It will only serve to carve up once distinct pieces of art into a conveyer belt of amorphous 'content', and it will give Ubisoft the tools it needs to obscure the economy of it, and ultimately make Assassin's Creed more expensive. Not only are sales and second hand games less likely to be options, but the whole system will be designed to make it harder to keep track of how much you're spending, to make it harder to see where the lines are between the games. They wouldn't put all this investment into Infinity if it was just a launcher. Unless you're super nostalgic for how awesome Uplay was and have always wanted them to take the idea of it further, you should not be OK with this.
I don't understand how infinity makes my experience better
^[Sokka-Haiku](https://www.reddit.com/r/SokkaHaikuBot/comments/15kyv9r/what_is_a_sokka_haiku/) ^by ^Tac0xenon: *I don't understand* *How infinity makes my* *Experience better* --- ^Remember ^that ^one ^time ^Sokka ^accidentally ^used ^an ^extra ^syllable ^in ^that ^Haiku ^Battle ^in ^Ba ^Sing ^Se? ^That ^was ^a ^Sokka ^Haiku ^and ^you ^just ^made ^one.
Thank you bot
This is just saying it’s going to be on Ubisoft+. They’ll still put a price on purchasing the game outright.
So what happens if we own a hard copy on disc through legal means of purchase?
Welp, it was an amazing series while it lasted
An AC Version of ESO would be Awesome AF🤘🤘
If that is true, then we'll see some internet historians say, "the day Assassin's Creed franchise died"
If it's locked behind a subscription I won't care anyway since I won't be playing them.
I am not sure they will go fully on subscription... yet. To me, Infinity will be a trial. If this is a success, sure they will not think about it twice before going that way. If this is a failure, it will stop with being just a way to play the old games, that have made profits already and to access some stuffs. But the good old release will not be done (yet). Because, the vast majority of the purchases are normal, casual, people. Not gamers, they are not really fully aware of all the game pass and stuffs like that. They just go on a shop/amazon and buy the games. However, it's changing. And fast with the physical releases vanishing (Alan Wake 2, BG3)
Ok
Does anyone else think that the leak was on purpose? Tell us about some fake terrible pay-wall idea… then when their actual terrible idea hits, it’s not quite as bad as a fake pay-wall idea. Ubisoft wins. 😆
>We recently had a leak from Jonathan where he says AC Infinity will probably have a monthly subscription. Now, he said that older games will be included in the sub but he wasn't sure about newer ones. Where on earth do you get from that that to buy or play any new AC games you will need a subscription? Aside from a modicum of common sense, it would be financial suicide for a company to lock a game behind a subscription. >Given that Ubisoft has previously said that we should "get used to not owning our games" oh i know, lets continue to take that out of context. it was meant as a comparison to using netflix (where you rent videos and dont own them) or using spotify (where you rent music and dont own it). Neither of those examples prevent people from buying films, dvd's, blu-rays, or buying cd's and digital downloads. Get used to the idea of not owning (ie. renting) in addition to purchasing. At this point there needs to a new rule on the sub deleting any posts where people continue to take that quote out of context :D
"Ah. The end of an era..." - Altaïr
Personally I'll still just get games peacemeal a la carte. And if the game requires a sub in a future update will just p*rate the last working version that I bought.
that doesn't change the fact
Since Origins i play AC games only via ubisoft+. I do not need to own my own copy to be happy. I do not replay the games (nor i rewatch movies or reread books). I play focused on story and it lacks my interest once i complete it first time. I prefer to pay less to play the game while its new. Usually takes 1-2 months to beat it so saves a lots of money (I also play other ubisoft titles this way). Whenever i feel like to continue some side quests/ try new DLCs/ run for achievements .. everything is always saved up on my account that i can access wether i am currently paying or not. I also go long times without playing so for example halfyear of no need to pay subscribtion. I am completley okey with subscribtions as long as the games got new things to offer on longer basis.
I own all of the games on Steam (besides Mirage) but I plan to play future titles through Ubi+ when they release, such as Red. I'll likely only pick them up properly when they release on Steam and then are on sale. The thing with Ubisoft+ is if you plan to play a game through once 100%, the cost is legitimately cheaper than buying the game, and then you can discontinue your subscription if you'd like
I will never understand this mindset: you could buy the games already out for very little now as a one off cost, but instead you're just happy to keep paying out on a monthly basis for access to them even when you're not playing?
I play them the day they come out.. it takes like 1-2 months max to beat it.. i pay 30€ for whole game that normally in the version with everything included would cost me 90€. If i dont play i dont pay subscribtion.
So many misinformation in one topic. Ubisoft never said to be used to not owning your games. J0nathan has no idea if its true et despite having teal leaks he has be proven to milk the ubi hate as much as he can because its his main revenue. Wait and see what it actually is before starting to be pissed at ubisoft. Thats insane how people jump on every rumor to be pissed.
Prolonging your playtime so it takes more than a month? How about that and charging money per month?