▲ 1421 ▼ It's just a coffee (startrek.website) submitted 2 years ago by The_Picard_Maneuver@startrek.website [M] to c/memes@lemmy.world 196 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] FierroGamer@sh.itjust.works 70 points 2 years ago (4 children) Ubisoft Says Gamers Should Get More Comfortable Not Owning Their Games permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] IWantToFuckSpez@kbin.social 47 points 2 years ago* Ubisoft should get more comfortable with losing any significance they had in the industry. Compared to others in the rest of the industry they are small potatoes. They definitely don’t hold enough power to force a subscription service on to the market. Their market cap is less then $3 billion even Zynga is worth more. permalink fedilink source parent [–] FishFace@lemmy.world 19 points 2 years ago (3 children) Misinformation. An article not as blatantly trying to manipulate people: https://www.ign.com/articles/ubisoft-exec-says-gamers-need-to-get-comfortable-not-owning-their-games-for-subscriptions-to-take-off?utm_source=twit permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Daveyborn@lemmy.world 13 points 2 years ago (1 child) Its wild the difference 5 words make for a headline permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Sanctus@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago (2 children) It doesn't make a difference. He still wants you to get comfortable with that. It doesn't matter how he dresses up his sentences his thought process is the same, thats how he got to CEO. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] WillBalls@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago But he's not CEO. He's the director of subscriptions at ubi, so of course he's going to push this line of thinking; his job depends on it! The good news is that Ubisoft's stock fell ~10% once this soundbite took off, so hopefully other publishers read the room permalink fedilink source parent [–] FishFace@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago (2 children) The point of the dishonest article is to make you believe the CEO feels entitled to gamers becoming OK with subscription models. What he actually feels is a hope that subscription models will take off. It's rage-bait. Did it work? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] grue@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago ...you believe the CEO feels entitled to gamers becoming OK with subscription models. What he actually feels is a hope that subscription models will take off That sounds like a distinction without a difference to me. permalink fedilink source parent [–] FierroGamer@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 years ago As I said, I didn't read that one, but I feel like it did do something to you so probably yes. permalink fedilink source parent [–] deweydecibel@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago* (1 child) People keep pointing this out like it's some kind of misinformation. The Ubisoft executive is saying gamers need to get comfortable not owning their games before subscription services will take off. The Ubisoft executive would also very much like subscription services to take off. QED the Ubisoft executive is saying "I'd really like gamers to get used to idea of not owning their games so our subscription service can take off". It comes back to the same thing: Ubisoft is saying aloud what they want the future of gaming to be. And please don't tell me you're giving them the benefit of the doubt, here. The problem is people apparently haven't figured out yet how to read what the CEO of a for-profit company means when they say shit publicly about their services. Learn to read between the lines. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] FishFace@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago There's a mile of difference between saying "consumers need to get comfortable not owning their games" and "we want consumers to get comfortable not owning their games (but using subscription services instead)". The former statement is extremely arrogant. The latter is just obvious. And it's reasonable even if you or I personally don't want to get our games on a subscription model - millions of people get their music through Spotify and it suits them just fine even though other people don't want that. So it's a way of straw-manning the people pushing subscriptions so you can hate them. permalink fedilink source parent [–] FierroGamer@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 years ago Thanks, I just linked the first article I found assuming it would be enough to get the point across, did it say something incorrect? permalink fedilink source parent [–] JJROKCZ@lemmy.world 14 points 2 years ago Ubisoft should get comfortable with the idea of going out of business. I refuse to buy anything of theirs or interact with their shit launcher. Bad practices and bad products combined mean bankruptcy and i hope it happens soon so decent companies can get ahold of their IPs and make some good games out of them because Ubisoft is clearly not interested in doing so permalink fedilink source parent [–] leave_it_blank@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago So you only buy a license? Like on Steam, Epic, and all the others? Shocking. I think modern gamers are comfortable with this, they just haven't realised it yet. Or they buy on gog. Then they really have ownership. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] IWantToFuckSpez@kbin.social 47 points 2 years ago* Ubisoft should get more comfortable with losing any significance they had in the industry. Compared to others in the rest of the industry they are small potatoes. They definitely don’t hold enough power to force a subscription service on to the market. Their market cap is less then $3 billion even Zynga is worth more. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] FishFace@lemmy.world 19 points 2 years ago (3 children) Misinformation. An article not as blatantly trying to manipulate people: https://www.ign.com/articles/ubisoft-exec-says-gamers-need-to-get-comfortable-not-owning-their-games-for-subscriptions-to-take-off?utm_source=twit permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Daveyborn@lemmy.world 13 points 2 years ago (1 child) Its wild the difference 5 words make for a headline permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Sanctus@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago (2 children) It doesn't make a difference. He still wants you to get comfortable with that. It doesn't matter how he dresses up his sentences his thought process is the same, thats how he got to CEO. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] WillBalls@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago But he's not CEO. He's the director of subscriptions at ubi, so of course he's going to push this line of thinking; his job depends on it! The good news is that Ubisoft's stock fell ~10% once this soundbite took off, so hopefully other publishers read the room permalink fedilink source parent [–] FishFace@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago (2 children) The point of the dishonest article is to make you believe the CEO feels entitled to gamers becoming OK with subscription models. What he actually feels is a hope that subscription models will take off. It's rage-bait. Did it work? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] grue@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago ...you believe the CEO feels entitled to gamers becoming OK with subscription models. What he actually feels is a hope that subscription models will take off That sounds like a distinction without a difference to me. permalink fedilink source parent [–] FierroGamer@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 years ago As I said, I didn't read that one, but I feel like it did do something to you so probably yes. permalink fedilink source parent [–] deweydecibel@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago* (1 child) People keep pointing this out like it's some kind of misinformation. The Ubisoft executive is saying gamers need to get comfortable not owning their games before subscription services will take off. The Ubisoft executive would also very much like subscription services to take off. QED the Ubisoft executive is saying "I'd really like gamers to get used to idea of not owning their games so our subscription service can take off". It comes back to the same thing: Ubisoft is saying aloud what they want the future of gaming to be. And please don't tell me you're giving them the benefit of the doubt, here. The problem is people apparently haven't figured out yet how to read what the CEO of a for-profit company means when they say shit publicly about their services. Learn to read between the lines. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] FishFace@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago There's a mile of difference between saying "consumers need to get comfortable not owning their games" and "we want consumers to get comfortable not owning their games (but using subscription services instead)". The former statement is extremely arrogant. The latter is just obvious. And it's reasonable even if you or I personally don't want to get our games on a subscription model - millions of people get their music through Spotify and it suits them just fine even though other people don't want that. So it's a way of straw-manning the people pushing subscriptions so you can hate them. permalink fedilink source parent [–] FierroGamer@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 years ago Thanks, I just linked the first article I found assuming it would be enough to get the point across, did it say something incorrect? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Daveyborn@lemmy.world 13 points 2 years ago (1 child) Its wild the difference 5 words make for a headline permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Sanctus@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago (2 children) It doesn't make a difference. He still wants you to get comfortable with that. It doesn't matter how he dresses up his sentences his thought process is the same, thats how he got to CEO. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] WillBalls@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago But he's not CEO. He's the director of subscriptions at ubi, so of course he's going to push this line of thinking; his job depends on it! The good news is that Ubisoft's stock fell ~10% once this soundbite took off, so hopefully other publishers read the room permalink fedilink source parent [–] FishFace@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago (2 children) The point of the dishonest article is to make you believe the CEO feels entitled to gamers becoming OK with subscription models. What he actually feels is a hope that subscription models will take off. It's rage-bait. Did it work? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] grue@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago ...you believe the CEO feels entitled to gamers becoming OK with subscription models. What he actually feels is a hope that subscription models will take off That sounds like a distinction without a difference to me. permalink fedilink source parent [–] FierroGamer@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 years ago As I said, I didn't read that one, but I feel like it did do something to you so probably yes. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Sanctus@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago (2 children) It doesn't make a difference. He still wants you to get comfortable with that. It doesn't matter how he dresses up his sentences his thought process is the same, thats how he got to CEO. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] WillBalls@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago But he's not CEO. He's the director of subscriptions at ubi, so of course he's going to push this line of thinking; his job depends on it! The good news is that Ubisoft's stock fell ~10% once this soundbite took off, so hopefully other publishers read the room permalink fedilink source parent [–] FishFace@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago (2 children) The point of the dishonest article is to make you believe the CEO feels entitled to gamers becoming OK with subscription models. What he actually feels is a hope that subscription models will take off. It's rage-bait. Did it work? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] grue@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago ...you believe the CEO feels entitled to gamers becoming OK with subscription models. What he actually feels is a hope that subscription models will take off That sounds like a distinction without a difference to me. permalink fedilink source parent [–] FierroGamer@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 years ago As I said, I didn't read that one, but I feel like it did do something to you so probably yes. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] WillBalls@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago But he's not CEO. He's the director of subscriptions at ubi, so of course he's going to push this line of thinking; his job depends on it! The good news is that Ubisoft's stock fell ~10% once this soundbite took off, so hopefully other publishers read the room permalink fedilink source parent
[–] FishFace@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago (2 children) The point of the dishonest article is to make you believe the CEO feels entitled to gamers becoming OK with subscription models. What he actually feels is a hope that subscription models will take off. It's rage-bait. Did it work? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] grue@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago ...you believe the CEO feels entitled to gamers becoming OK with subscription models. What he actually feels is a hope that subscription models will take off That sounds like a distinction without a difference to me. permalink fedilink source parent [–] FierroGamer@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 years ago As I said, I didn't read that one, but I feel like it did do something to you so probably yes. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] grue@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago ...you believe the CEO feels entitled to gamers becoming OK with subscription models. What he actually feels is a hope that subscription models will take off That sounds like a distinction without a difference to me. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] FierroGamer@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 years ago As I said, I didn't read that one, but I feel like it did do something to you so probably yes. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] deweydecibel@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago* (1 child) People keep pointing this out like it's some kind of misinformation. The Ubisoft executive is saying gamers need to get comfortable not owning their games before subscription services will take off. The Ubisoft executive would also very much like subscription services to take off. QED the Ubisoft executive is saying "I'd really like gamers to get used to idea of not owning their games so our subscription service can take off". It comes back to the same thing: Ubisoft is saying aloud what they want the future of gaming to be. And please don't tell me you're giving them the benefit of the doubt, here. The problem is people apparently haven't figured out yet how to read what the CEO of a for-profit company means when they say shit publicly about their services. Learn to read between the lines. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] FishFace@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago There's a mile of difference between saying "consumers need to get comfortable not owning their games" and "we want consumers to get comfortable not owning their games (but using subscription services instead)". The former statement is extremely arrogant. The latter is just obvious. And it's reasonable even if you or I personally don't want to get our games on a subscription model - millions of people get their music through Spotify and it suits them just fine even though other people don't want that. So it's a way of straw-manning the people pushing subscriptions so you can hate them. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] FishFace@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago There's a mile of difference between saying "consumers need to get comfortable not owning their games" and "we want consumers to get comfortable not owning their games (but using subscription services instead)". The former statement is extremely arrogant. The latter is just obvious. And it's reasonable even if you or I personally don't want to get our games on a subscription model - millions of people get their music through Spotify and it suits them just fine even though other people don't want that. So it's a way of straw-manning the people pushing subscriptions so you can hate them. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] FierroGamer@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 years ago Thanks, I just linked the first article I found assuming it would be enough to get the point across, did it say something incorrect? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] JJROKCZ@lemmy.world 14 points 2 years ago Ubisoft should get comfortable with the idea of going out of business. I refuse to buy anything of theirs or interact with their shit launcher. Bad practices and bad products combined mean bankruptcy and i hope it happens soon so decent companies can get ahold of their IPs and make some good games out of them because Ubisoft is clearly not interested in doing so permalink fedilink source parent
[–] leave_it_blank@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago So you only buy a license? Like on Steam, Epic, and all the others? Shocking. I think modern gamers are comfortable with this, they just haven't realised it yet. Or they buy on gog. Then they really have ownership. permalink fedilink source parent
