• ALilOff@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    I do see that since it’s Ubisoft, they could still push for games on the subscription service but in reality I could see the games being loaded up with micro transactions.

    Or it could turn into a convoluted game demo service, where you can play a portion of a game then they hit you with a pay wall, and since you’ve already played X% of a game they could view it as more likely to buy.

    • MudMan@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      OK, but that’s not how reality works, you’re making up offenses that nobody has committed because you’ve decided a particular brand is “bad” while ignoring actual offenses from brands you like and so have decided are “good”.

      So no, I’m gonna have to say your hypotheticals don’t make their offerings any worse (or better) than Microsoft’s or Valve’s. Now, the pricing and lack of content? Yeah, we can talk about those. But those don’t have anything to do with preservation concerns, lack of ownership or content churn, which are all legit issues with all digital distribution and subscriptions.