Yes, this is late game where it’s easy to max out before the end. I will say I liked the progression in game. You certainly have to work a bit to get there, but then it’s satisfying.
Sounds positive. Not quite a BotW/TotK-banger, but I didn’t expect such a quirky concept to score big on the first outing. Only spotted one truly critical review in there, and even that was more “It’s a neat idea, but doesn’t truly pan out all that well”.
There are tons of games that are playable on smartwatches. Apart from that, there are a lot of single watch-games from the past. McDonalds and BurgerKing have also had a lot of watches with games or toys, as well.
Ya, this search started withmye discovering the Tetris watch. Unfortunately j can’t justify spending that much. I have a pinetime. Will look into tamogatchi ones
In this game, players must arrange characters and scenes to complete story objectives presented at each level. The challenge lies in figuring out the right combination to achieve the desired outcome. storyteller rewards players for their creative thinking and ability to solve narrative puzzles, offering endless ways to approach storytelling.
You are correct, it’s been on a downward slope since about 2021 but had a another sharp dip this morning probaly following the news they were delaying Asassins Creed
A rushed game is usually pretty bad, a delayed game is eventually good. While I dont hold AC in very high regard, im glad they told people that it needs more time to cook instead of throwing it out there half-baked.
I don’t know, the first one was cobbled up together from early access by programmers at a marketing firm and while janky (part of the charm some would say), it was quite an achievement.
The approach which should have delivered better results was wrecked with takeovers and company drama then dumped to the public in a bad state.
It’s not much of a delay. It was supposed to come out in 2 months, but delayed another 2 months. Doesn’t seem like much time to get any real work done.
They also cancelled their premier at the Tokyo game show days before schedule. I have to wonder if they’re worried about the backlash that a lot of games are getting lately (Dustborn, Concord, etc) and just trying to push the game a little bit further out to avoid controversy?
You realise this isn’t make believe at all, right? Stocks are ownership.
If a stock dips low enough it’s possible to do what microsoft did with Activision Blizzard and buy out another company wholesale, for instance.
Speculation on the stock market isn’t the reason the market exists, it’s a side effect of its pricing mechanisms, the actual point of it is to gather money for companies and gather stake for buyers.
If a major company like Ubisoft keeps tanking, odds are you can look forward to another major buyout and merger which will make the already horribly oligopolistic game industry even smaller, which is not good for anyone involved.
That’s just generally all of media right now. We are at perhaps the highest level of accessibility for media creation we’ve ever been, but that means that any schmuck with a pair of thumbs and time to waste can make something.
High accessibility means abysmal signal/noise ratio, turns out.
It does. There are some upsides, though. One bonus is that, at least in some small ways, some of these shitbag companies that have acted terribly in the past are letting up because we have options. We don’t have to rely on a couple of big studios for every game we play. So EA has backed off of their terrible launcher.
I also think it’s kind of cool that any schmuck can make their dream come true. I’ve definitely put out a bunch of music that I don’t market, just because I always wanted to do it. Anyone with an idea and a laptop can code up a game. The ridiculous amount of shovelware aside, I think that’s pretty cool.
I just wish there was a better way to sift through the dreck to find the good stuff.
Yeah I mean, it’s got upsides and downsides, like everything. Unparalleled access means anyone can make something, which means a lot of things that have niche appeal can find their audience, etc.
It also means a lot of things without any appeal will be out there.
It’s not good or bad in itself but it can be impractical on the consumer side of the equation, and it makes even the remarkable stuff very likely to just disappear in the shuffle.
Sure, but the stock is tanking now, and the regulations are not on the books.
Like, I agree there needs to be an overhaul of a bunch of regulations regarding monopolies and such, but this doesn’t help analysing the current situation where they’re not in place.
A stock would never drop to zero because the company would be liquidated before that happened. If the stock actually dropped to zero they would have no money they need to call bankruptcy before that point.
Are you being paid by someone to be especially stupid today, or is this your normal level of comprehension? I hope so because right now you seem like this the sort of person that would find stairs confusing.
Jesus fuck no, it’s a valid graph. It shows the relative trend over time and the sudden change. It may show less of a change if it was zero based, but a drastic change that is well off the normal trend is important to visualize. Also like, all exchanges have a toggle to flip to the zero based.
Look at this thread and realize that it’s just a lie. You can show the exact same information with a starting at zero graph, but won’t be able to push the “stock is tanking!” panic point. Publishers and marketers do this on purpose to manipulate headlines. This is why the stock market is mostly just high stakes gambling. No one involved is making rational decisions, just moving from panic to mania like psychotic patients.
You can see right there at the top of the graph it’s down 20% in the given timeframe. There are ways to make graphs misleading, but there’s nothing misleading at all about zooming in on the data in this chart
Percentages are also misleading. The timeframe will always stretch the percentage. Sure, a 20% drop on the same day is significant, but it still says absolutely nothing about the overall situation, nor why it happened. It is a significantly smaller drop when compared to their year long performance, and a significantly larger loss if only the last month is taken into account. There’s research on this, observing day to day changes on stock prices to describe a company is just as effective as describing people’s personalities through astrology. It’s bullshit.
Yes, and that’s literally all this post is trying to convey. This post is not a news report or a economist’s dissertation, this is a screenshot of the pre-bell stock price posted to Lemmy
It’s already being called the lowest price in a decade. Technically true, but honestly disingenuous since the massive price bump to over €100 was an anomaly caused by the pandemic that swept the entire industry, not just this one publisher. Also drivel to generate engagement. Just like this post, here we are discussing it, despite the fact that it is misleading and poor characterization of the entire picture.
It being at its lowest price in a decade is literally true. I don’t have a clue why you’re bringing the pandemic into this since this stock reached its peak in 2018. Ubisoft stock has been on a precipitous decline for 4 straight years now, wtf are you even trying to convey here?
If you are not in for the dividents or the voting privileges stocks are always a game of “I hope someone is dumb enough to pay more than me for these shares”.
The stock is tanking. 20% is a huge drop for any massive company. Do you know how much money disappeared overnight because of this? From my very rough calculations, Ubisoft just lost about 300 million dollars because of this drop. That’s more than any fine they’ve had.
The worst day in Stock Market history was Black Thursday, the beginning of the Great Recession. The market only dropped 11% that day. (Somebody call me out if I got those numbers slightly wrong, that’s from Wikipedia). These are massive numbers, that I don’t think you fully appreciate or understand. The stock market usually deals in single digit or more likely fractional amounts of change. Double digit changes are a huge deal.
Do you know how much money disappeared overnight because of this?
I do know, none. Not a single cent disappeared. Because stocks aren’t liquidity. That money was never there in the first place. Some paid some money to get those stocks, that money was real and it entered the company’s liquidity. Then they spent it on something. Those stocks are but the promise of paying some dividends, some time in the future or giving some power inside the company. Their virtual fluctuations of price over time are nothing but smoke and mirrors, people exchanging virtual titles over those rights like little kids trading collectible cards. Some people cashed out for a low price (that was already grossly overinflated from the pandemic days, so they probably still made bank) and it pushed an already correcting stock to accelerate for today. That money didn’t come from the company, it was exchanged entirely by third parties, public traders. Ubisoft didn’t participate at all in whatever pushed the price drop. No matter how much I want it to, Ubisoft is not in any more danger today than it was in yesterday. They are still filthy rich, if anything the biggest danger for this is that it gives them lee way to layoff another group of underpaid developers or gut another studio to appease the stockholders. Who are already in a frenzy for blood because Outlaws didn’t make all the money.
If you were to compare Ubisoft today to Ubisoft 2 years ago, you would see they dropped nearly 93%. Dear golly, how is this poor boutique family company in business after such a massive loss? /s
Ubisoft just lost about 300 million dollars because of this drop.
So they have 300 million dollars less to spend? They’re going to fire 300 million dollars worth of talent? Their bank account changed by 300 million dollars?
I’d argue it doesn’t accurately show the relative value at a cursory glance. The chart shows the area under the curve having decreased over 90%, but when looking at the y-axis, you can see that initial assessment was misled.
In a speculative industry like finance, shouldn’t we try our best to make charts less… alarmist?
If you are trying to show year-over-year profit and you have $100 million give or take a few thousand, then starting your y-axis at zero is going to be a pretty worthless graph
There is no point of starting the chart to 0 since it doesn’t give any information other than the share price, which is already communicated by the Y axis anyways.
And it’s going to be competing with the Ghost of Tsushima sequel.
For me they’re different enough to not really be in competition, but they felt the need to issue a statement about it, so they’re obviously a bit worried.
Not that I’m that interested in either. Give me that Soul Reaver remaster baby. Inject that shit into my veins.
bin.pol.social
Najstarsze