Having recently finished the Master Chief Collection, I started thinking about Halo 5.
And I immediately felt no desire whatsoever to purchase the game.
I can say without hesitation that the Master Chief Collection was the most broken game I’ve ever played. Perhaps it was simply the co-op aspect. I will never know. It’s getting traded in this weekend toward something else.
I suppose I can’t get over my disbelief that months and months after release, there are still game-breaking issues that haven’t been addressed (and likely never will be). As a consumer, that makes me wary. How can I be sure 343’s next game won’t be a slightly more polished mess?
It’s odd to even say that, as I quite like to believe the best in people. In general. So it pains me to think such things, however founded.
I also have to say, I just didn’t “feel” the Halo universe. I know the games have a huge fanbase, and I mean them no disrespect; Halo just isn’t my particular cup of tea.
It doesn’t help that the latest 343 game I played was borderline unplayable. Even if I had endless piles of merry cash, I wouldn’t pre-order Halo 5. I probably wouldn’t buy it on sale. Anymore, you just never know what you’re getting into with a AAA game upon release.
It’s not news to anyone that Assassins Creed: Unity had a rocky launch. It was so bad, they gave away free DLC. In some cases, they gave away an entire game, also for free.
When a company throws more of their salable products at you, perhaps they know they failed somewhere along the line.
Now don’t get me wrong, I actually (begrudgingly) love Ubisoft. I am a monstrously huge fan of the Far Cry series (Far Cry 3 was my game of the year in 2012, and Blood Dragon was one of the best gaming experiences I’ve had. Ever.), and I think they have done some remarkable things with the Assassins Creed franchise.
I just think, somewhere along the way, they got a wee bit greedy.
When they went to yearly releases, I both understood the decision, as well as was concerned about it. I mean, this isn’t like a Call of Duty game where the single-player campaign is a compact (and linear) six to eight hours. The Assassins Creed games are huge open worlds. Pushing a yearly, open world game to release in time for the holidays is borderline insanity. I actually wonder what their tempered expectations of each release are. Do they send it for production knowing it is a broken product? Or is it possible they haven’t been exposed the bugs that the rest of us most certainly will be?
If it is the former, how can a company do that in good faith to their customers?
It would be awfully shady if it were the case.
That being said, I am cautiously interested in Assassins Creed: Syndicate. I like that you can play as either the brother or the sister, and the setting of Victorian London is enticing.
But I can not bring myself to pre-order the game, or even buy it until it has been out for a couple of months and the inevitable patches are in place.
So I wonder, how do you feel about this? If you are interested in a forthcoming game from a company who has made some curious choices, are you willing to overlook their recent foibles? Do you “vote with your dollars” and hold off until it goes on sale? Or do you pass on their new releases all together?
I already know Halo 5 is a pass for me. But, as I said, I’m hoping for the best from Assassins Creed: Syndicate. I just won’t be buying it at full price.