Ubisoft defends $70 price for Skull and Bones, citing its "AAAA" status

midian182

Posts: 9,559   +120
Staff member
A hot potato: Ubisoft, once voted the most hated video game brand in the world, has been endearing itself to the general public once again. On this occasion, CEO Yves Guillemot has defended the $70 price tag (for the console versions) it's slapped on Skull and Bones, a game that has many live service elements. He says that amount of money is justified because it's a "quadruple-A" game.

Few titles have seen a development as long or as difficult as Skull and Bones. Its launch was delayed an astounding six times following the original reveal at E3 in 2017 – work on the game began back in 2013. It's also reported to have gone over budget and cost around $200 million, not to mention the number of management changes, shifts in game direction, etc.

In a conference call Q&A session that took place after Ubisoft's Q3 fiscal year 2024 results, Guillemot was asked about Skull and Bones' live service approach; a trailer for the year 1 roadmap was released at the same time as the open beta this week.

The caller wanted to know if Guillemot felt charging $70/$60 for Skull and Bones was a good idea, given its live service-focus, or whether it would have been better to make it a free-to-play title that could have attracted more players and help establish an online community. The CEO said the sheer size of the game and the fact that he considers it a AAAA title justifies the price.

"You will see that Skull and Bones is a fully-fledged game," Guillemot said. "It's a very big game, and we feel that people will really see how vast and complete that game is. It's a really full, triple […] quadruple-A game, that will deliver in the long run."

The open beta for Skull and Bones is currently live and runs until February 11. Guillemot's confidence in it being a AAAA game that people will be happy to pay for may be misplaced, given that a lot of players (but not all) are complaining about it being average and a bit boring, earning it the name Dull and Bones; I know of two players who quit within the hour.

Ubisoft will likely have had its eye on Diablo 4 when pricing Skull and Bones. Blizzard's ARPG also cost $70 at launch and has live service content. It brought in $666 million in revenue in just five days post-release, but then Diablo 4 had a lot of hype pushing those initial sales.

Guillemot might also be tempting fate by calling Skull and Bones a AAAA title. The last time we heard that expression was from Krafton, the parent of Striking Distance Studios, when talking about The Callisto Protocol, a Dead Space-style horror that saw disappointing reviews and sales.

Skull and Bones launches on February 16, 2024, priced $69.99, or you can play three days early by pre-ordering the $99.99 Premium edition. The PC versions are $10 cheaper. Progression in the open beta up to the rank of Brigand (tier 6 rank 1) will carry over to the full game.

Permalink to story.

 
A couple of AA must be a mistake.
The game is outdated
underdeveloped
and simply
a poor product.
 
I played open beta for about 30 minutes. After I found out you cannot leave your ship where ever you want (you have to goto designated 'docks', and there is no land combat (only ships , I uninstalled this POS immediately. AC Valhalla let you jump off your damn boat. This game is another pathetic pile of sht to be added to the existing large pile of sht games that keep coming out.
 
They went over budget, game got delayed a few times, all signs of bad management and poor project direction. These things have nothing to do with a customer, and should not effect game price at all. I played the open beta for less than an hour, and uninstalled it. That game took more than 7 years to make? Some people don't have passion and are just trying to make a quick buck...
 
I wouldnt trust anyone's opinion after playing 1 hour of a game. Thats not even enough to do most tutorials or understand what a game is.

That being said, calling the game AAAA actually makes me even more hesitant as that type of hype is easy to see through given the valid criticisms being levied against the game.

The price doesnt really bother me, I can afford my hobby without worrying about 70 bucks. I remember paying that much for snes games and nes games were not far behind in some cases back in the day. I think the price of games has remained largely stagnant outside of special editions.

I just want a good game and this one seems to be pushing hype that is not backed by anyones opninion of it.
 
I wouldnt trust anyone's opinion after playing 1 hour of a game. Thats not even enough to do most tutorials or understand what a game is.

That being said, calling the game AAAA actually makes me even more hesitant as that type of hype is easy to see through given the valid criticisms being levied against the game.

The price doesnt really bother me, I can afford my hobby without worrying about 70 bucks. I remember paying that much for snes games and nes games were not far behind in some cases back in the day. I think the price of games has remained largely stagnant outside of special editions.

I just want a good game and this one seems to be pushing hype that is not backed by anyones opninion of it.
I don't think I'll ever waste more than an hour again on a game after starfield. I knew in the first 15 minutes that it was going to suck but I dumped 80 hours into it because of the "it just takes awhile tool get good." Then l, after a couple months everyone is in agreement, "yeah, this game sucks." All of the stuff I hated in the first 15 minutes persisted out my 80 hours.

People's time is valuable, I won't pay $70 for someone to waste my time. They need to bring demos back if they're going to start charging this much for games. If you can't show me in an hour why I should play your game then I'm not playing it.

There are games that take years to learn, I have around 8000 hours in EvE over 15 years, but that is often advertised as a feature and you know you're going to have to invest some time into it.

Baulders gate 3, I was hooked in the first 5 minutes

Alan wake 2, took about 15 minutes to hook me.

Palworld, took about 5 minutes.

But I have a better idea, I just don't plan ubisoft, EA, or Activision blizzard games anymore. The whole AAA games industry is just a circle jerk of marketing to sell microtransacrions.

 
Quadruple "A"? LMFAO. He forgot the "S" for "special". Because this game is AAAASSSSSSSSSSSS.

Boring, uninspired live service trash. Ubisoft fired and missed, badly!
I wouldnt trust anyone's opinion after playing 1 hour of a game. Thats not even enough to do most tutorials or understand what a game is.

That being said, calling the game AAAA actually makes me even more hesitant as that type of hype is easy to see through given the valid criticisms being levied against the game.

The price doesnt really bother me, I can afford my hobby without worrying about 70 bucks. I remember paying that much for snes games and nes games were not far behind in some cases back in the day. I think the price of games has remained largely stagnant outside of special editions.

I just want a good game and this one seems to be pushing hype that is not backed by anyones opninion of it.
If a game cant hook you with a full hour of gameplay, and needs multiple hours just for tutorials, then it's not a good game. Games should not be jobs.

And frankly, if you need multiple hours to decide if you like a game, that says more about you then it does the game.
I don't think I'll ever waste more than an hour again on a game after starfield. I knew in the first 15 minutes that it was going to suck but I dumped 80 hours into it because of the "it just takes awhile tool get good." Then l, after a couple months everyone is in agreement, "yeah, this game sucks." All of the stuff I hated in the first 15 minutes persisted out my 80 hours.

People's time is valuable, I won't pay $70 for someone to waste my time. They need to bring demos back if they're going to start charging this much for games. If you can't show me in an hour why I should play your game then I'm not playing it.

There are games that take years to learn, I have around 8000 hours in EvE over 15 years, but that is often advertised as a feature and you know you're going to have to invest some time into it.

Baulders gate 3, I was hooked in the first 5 minutes

Alan wake 2, took about 15 minutes to hook me.

Palworld, took about 5 minutes.

But I have a better idea, I just don't plan ubisoft, EA, or Activision blizzard games anymore. The whole AAA games industry is just a circle jerk of marketing to sell microtransacrions.
I will never understand the mantra of "it gets good 20 hours in". Entertainment is to entertain. If I have to put dozens of hours in before something becomes entertainment, that is plain delusional. It's a part time job by that point, one you have to PAY for!
 
"quadruple"? more like quad'roob'le.
have new games more detailed texture: yes
have new better stroy: NO
better performance: NO
longer story: NO
 
I will never understand the mantra of "it gets good 20 hours in". Entertainment is to entertain. If I have to put dozens of hours in before something becomes entertainment, that is plain delusional. It's a part time job by that point, one you have to PAY for!
Well, with EvE I knew it was going to take me a very long time to learn the game before I could play it at its full capacity. The difference is that for the few hundred hours it took to learn how to play I was actually having fun learning how to play the game. That's just good game design
 
Well, with EvE I knew it was going to take me a very long time to learn the game before I could play it at its full capacity. The difference is that for the few hundred hours it took to learn how to play I was actually having fun learning how to play the game. That's just good game design

Definitely. You could jump into the game right away, but to get good at it took the time it took to build SP to actually be able to do it right. Their efforts to make it "more approachable" aka easier is what drove me away from taking it back up again when I checked it out after a long hiatus. So much was dumbed down that it eliminated all the tidbits that were earned by large amounts of experience. It made the process boring since you didn't have to work for it. Scanning was actually boring since they made it so easy.

In regards to Ubisoft's claim of AAAA game and $70 price tag, they should get used to me not owning any of their games.
 
I am sure it has AAAA budget considering how many times and years it has been delayed. But.... It looks like an easy skip for me.
 
Definitely. You could jump into the game right away, but to get good at it took the time it took to build SP to actually be able to do it right. Their efforts to make it "more approachable" aka easier is what drove me away from taking it back up again when I checked it out after a long hiatus. So much was dumbed down that it eliminated all the tidbits that were earned by large amounts of experience. It made the process boring since you didn't have to work for it. Scanning was actually boring since they made it so easy.

In regards to Ubisoft's claim of AAAA game and $70 price tag, they should get used to me not owning any of their games.
Idk if your talking about current or previous game design. It has been my experience that they haven't changed the mechanics much, but they'll way they're introduced.

And I f***inf love scanning in worm hole space. I have a hacky cloaker scanner designed to salvage in nullsec. The biggest adrenaline rush I've had in any game is making 30 jumps home through enemy space with 100x what net worth is.
 
Ubisoft has always been out there - out of touch with their audience and tone-deaf to complaints - but lately it appears they are intentionally trolling.
 
So these companies just make stuff up now so they can justify charging more for a game which from what I have seen should not be even rated at AAA status let alone AAAA which as far as I know that rating does not even exist. Color me surprised lol.
 
Last edited:
I've never heard of an AAAA game before.
Me neither. That is of course because the classification does not actually exist. This is Ubisoft's lame attempt to falsely propel themselves above everyone else when very little could be further from the truth.
 
They went over budget, game got delayed a few times, all signs of bad management and poor project direction. These things have nothing to do with a customer, and should not effect game price at all. I played the open beta for less than an hour, and uninstalled it. That game took more than 7 years to make? Some people don't have passion and are just trying to make a quick buck...
read again, it started in 2013..
 
I've enjoyed playing couple of the beta's now... $30, maybe $40 tops value personally I'd pay to play more of this game. Then again in my opinion prices of most of games these days are too costly.
 
Anyone who is going to buy any game from Ubisoft, at any price..
remember, remember, that you will never own this game..
 
I like playing games with Pirate themes, and the best so far for me is Black Flag.

I'm eagerly waiting to play this game, but I won't spend full price nowadays for any game, since the advent of digital distribution also introduced "sales".

And furthermore, this expected backlash against the aggressive pricing for a "dull" game will cause the sale to come sooner.

Still, I would wait for a 75% off sale, at least. No hurry, I have other games to play while I wait.
 
Well, with EvE I knew it was going to take me a very long time to learn the game before I could play it at its full capacity. The difference is that for the few hundred hours it took to learn how to play I was actually having fun learning how to play the game. That's just good game design
Well that's totally different. In your case EvE was "good" from the start.
 
Back