Ubisoft defends $85 day-one DLC after AC Black Flag Resynced gets review-bombed

[midian182]

A hot potato: The highly anticipated Assassin's Creed Black Flag Resynced launched yesterday. Despite the hype, its Steam user rating debuted as Mostly Negative before moving to Mixed. But apart from several complaints about performance, the biggest issue was the $85 worth of DLC Ubisoft released alongside the game. Now, the company has responded to the outcry.

Black Flag Resynced currently has a Mostly Positive rating on Steam, but the huge amount of launch-day DLC resulted in the game being review-bombed into a Mostly Negative rating, with many noting that buying all the day-one extra content cost more than the game itself.

Also upsetting many players was the fact that the $70 Deluxe version of the game came with only a fraction of the DLC on sale. There were additional complaints about those paid-for items that offered a "paid gameplay advantage," such as a resource pack filled with gold and crafting materials, and a map pack that adds exploration markers to the in-game world.

Also check out: Assassin's Creed Black Flag Resynced: 50 GPU Benchmark

Ubisoft has long argued that these items merely save time rather than provide gameplay advantages. It once said that the microtransactions offered in Assassin's Creed Odyssey, which let players level up faster or acquire more gold and resources, were designed for those who "value their time." Other companies do the same, too.

Now, Ubisoft has responded to the Black Flag Resynced complaints. It first emphasized that the standard edition of Black Flag Resynced offers the full complete experience, with every mission, island, and part of the story included. It then added that all the additional packs are optional extras for players who want them and are never required.

Few companies stir up controversy over DLC, microtransactions, and season passes quite like Ubisoft. This is, after all, the company that once said microtransactions make the "player experience more fun."

This is far from the first Assassin's Creed game to include microtransactions, of course; the practice dates back to 2017's Origins. And Ubisoft is making a true, if obvious, point that they're optional.

But the flip side is that $85 worth of DLC, more expensive than the game itself, arriving at launch does seem excessive – and it's not like Ubisoft has a good reputation to start with. Maybe if there had been fewer items at launch and the rest had been added over time, people wouldn't have been as angry.

Ubisoft is hardly alone in pushing the limits of what players will pay for. Back in 2018, Activision charged Black Ops 4 players $1 for an "Open Dot" reticle that was, quite literally, a single red dot. The company temporarily discounted it to 50 cents as part of a sale.

Permalink to story:

Ubisoft defends $85 day-one DLC after AC Black Flag Resynced gets review-bombed

 

[ScottSoapbox]

Still haven't gotten to the original Black Flag in my backlog (picked up on deep discount), probably by the time I do I will be able to pick up the Mega Gold Complete Resynced Rebundled edition for $5 on at a key shop.

 

[Kirby1]

Same thing with assassins creed Odyssey. Launched with a bunch of DLC that can very easily be ignored, people cry about it anyway.

 

[NumberNine]

They seem very proud of their regurgutated code.

 

[Str8Shot]

If people don’t stop buying DLCs out of protest, watch how quickly the decision to outsource a full game into DLCs ends…

 

[brucek]

I had no real interest in this game to begin with, so maybe I don't count, but whenever I hear about about a game with large amounts of non-content DLC it just suggests to me that the base game must not be very much fun without it and must exist for the primary purpose of selling that DLC. That's an immediate hard pass for me.

Of course the wallets of 100 people like me are probably worth less than a single whale to these companies so the trend will continue.

 

[Theinsanegamer]

Same thing with assassins creed Odyssey. Launched with a bunch of DLC that can very easily be ignored, people cry about it anyway.

Megacorps shouldnt be selling half a game for full price.

 

[yRaz]

Pay for convenience items? You mean cheat codes, a thing that uses to be free....

 

[Alfonso Maruccia]

Oh, I almost forgot Ubisoft was still around.

 

[Kirby1]

Having played the game, I feel disappointed in it. It's basically a reskin of Odyssey and not much else. Graphic are better but combat feels worse. Everything just feels very clunky, I feel like I'm fighting the the environment just to move around.

But DLC has absolutely nothing to do with my opinion of the gameplay.

 

[Liljonny11]

I had no real interest in this game to begin with, so maybe I don't count, but whenever I hear about about a game with large amounts of non-content DLC it just suggests to me that the base game must not be very much fun without it and must exist for the primary purpose of selling that DLC. That's an immediate hard pass for me.

Of course the wallets of 100 people like me are probably worth less than a single whale to these companies so the trend will continue.

In my experience it's quite the opposite. Games that have really good gameplay tend to sell content DLCs even better, so the studios spend more time making those DLCs. Bethesda Games for example. The good games got good dlc, Starfield? barely call it a DLC.

 

[brucek]

In my experience it's quite the opposite. Games that have really good gameplay tend to sell content DLCs even better, so the studios spend more time making those DLCs. Bethesda Games for example. The good games got good dlc, Starfield? barely call it a DLC.

That's why I said "non-content". I have no trouble with beloved games that keep the fun going with meaningful paid expansion. But when I see a huge list of expensive DLCs that is not new content, but instead extra charges for playing the content I already bought, I'm suspicious.

 

[toooooot]

I do not give a sh*t about those dlcs. You do not need those extra accessories.
Btw, the game itself is beautiful. If you do not need private games or action, can use it it for meditation and relaxation. Those sees, tiny tropical islands, they are beautiful. I spent an hour warching people sail, yesterday. Devs deserve to be laid. And judging by the number of twich users watching it, I guess it's a success.

 

[BlackyNoir]

Can the press STOP talking about "review bomb" when it's just regular reviews? There's several things with wrong the product, the value is abysmal, the business practice is in bad faith, so negative reviews. How is that a "bomb" or different from just regular normal reviews?

 

[amghwk]

I remember those days, I mean during DOS days, if a game is released, it's the final full game. No so-called DLC bs. Nowadays, developers release game by the deadline set by the corporates. And then release "patches" to complete the game. Worst, is charging the consumers for "DLCs" to complete the game.

 

[Endymio]

I remember those days, I mean during DOS days, if a game is released, it's the final full game. No so-called DLC bs.

It was rather difficult to download content in the days before the Internet existed, eh?

...And then release "patches" to complete the game.

Sure beats the days when a title that shipped with a bug kept that bug forever, eh?

Worst, is charging the consumers for "DLCs" to complete the game.

"Complete" is a word with no clear meaning in this context. Even many early games shipped with features that allowed additional content to be added, often by the users themselves. Were they "complete" or not?

Honestly the tenor of these posts -- and the generally whiny, puerile, self-entitled attitude of gamers in general, along with their willingness to outright lie on game reviews to express not their own experience, but their discontent with the policies or politics of the publisher -- is why the field is in such a sad state. With customers like these, who needs enemies, eh?

 

[Watzupken]

Personally, I feel if the DLC is not essential to the game, then I don't have an issue with it. Having said that, when you have a DLC that makes the game easier for some who paid, chances is that the game is made harder, I.e. have to grind harder to level up or for gold, artificially. It certainly does not severely impact the gameplay and story, but there will be impact to people who did not pay extra.

In any case, I am not a fan of "remastered" games. It is just a quicker way to make money.

 

[Thatsdisgusting]

Unfortunately, fools with money AND witcher 3 prime example breaks all the arguments against DLCs