Havok83
Avenger
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2006
- Messages
- 43,622
- Reaction score
- 425
- Points
- 73
Both those games sold extremely well. They were in the millions and among the best selling games in a very populated fall when released. Ubisoft should charge full price for them bc those were both full fledged titles and not merely some DLC pack that also got a retail release. Both were significant enough to warrant a $60 pricetag especially when both were 20+ hours to complete and added a multiplayer component. There was absolutely nothing lazy about ACB or ACR. They didn't even reuse the environment as they went and created brand new and detailed cities and catacombs for each game. ALOT of work was put into each title.Yeah and i think a good number people skipped those ones. I know there were a lot of people who played AC1 and AC2 and just came back for AC3.
I think it's a bit lazy that. It works for the COD series but is that a model that should be adopted for a game series like AC? I think it alienates your base to introduce a game with all new innovations and settings than you have to wait two more games in that series to get the next set of innovations and setting changes.
Last edited:
t: