Might&Magic X Legacy

[Tpek]

I really can't believe no one brought it up yet.
The early access pack was released yesterday:

http://www.gamersgate.com/DD-MMXLDDE/might-and-magic-x-legacy-digital-deluxe-edition-early-access

http://store.steampowered.com/app/238750/

[tgb]

I can.

1) It requires Uplay
2) It's only the first chapter of the game.
3) By Ubi's own admission it's riddled with bugs
4) It's $30

[Huw the Poo]

I was interested after Tpek's post.  Then I read tgb's post about the uplay requirement and it's immediately blacklisted.

*sigh*

[Tpek]

2) It's only the first chapter of the game.
3) By Ubi's own admission it's riddled with bugs
4) It's $30

It's an  early access.
Of course it is riddled with bugs and only part of the game.
They have simply adopted the way many games sell via Steam nowadays.

[tgb]

2) It's only the first chapter of the game.
3) By Ubi's own admission it's riddled with bugs
4) It's $30

It's an  early access.
Of course it is riddled with bugs and only part of the game.
They have simply adopted the way many games sell via Steam nowadays.

Less content and more bugs than a demo, AND it's $30?  Please, sir, may I have another?

Look, I can understand a small indie developer self publishing and needing to keep cash flow going throwing something like this out there for $30.  But Ubisoft?  Gimmee a break.

[Tpek]

2) It's only the first chapter of the game.
3) By Ubi's own admission it's riddled with bugs
4) It's $30

It's an  early access.
Of course it is riddled with bugs and only part of the game.
They have simply adopted the way many games sell via Steam nowadays.

Less content and more bugs than a demo, AND it's $30?  Please, sir, may I have another?

Look, I can understand a small indie developer self publishing and needing to keep cash flow going throwing something like this out there for $30.  But Ubisoft?  Gimmee a break.

Hey, it's not like they are the publishers of million-dollar selling franchises like Far Cry and Assassin's Creed... oh wait....  :P ;)

[Rayfer]

I was very interested in this, I have enjoyed this series over the years, but when I went onto the Steam forums for the game it seemed everyone was bemoaning the fact it required this Uplay DRM and most of the posters said that this alone prevented them from a purchase even though they really wanted to.  I am not familiar with Uplay but considering the nature of their posts I too decided not to take the plunge. What makes Uplay so bad?

[Huw the Poo]

What makes Uplay so bad?

Apart from being completely superfluous if you're already buying the game on Steam?  Uplay games require constant internet connections even for single-player games.  The implementation varies from game to game, but it's been as bad as immediately losing all progress if your connection drops for whatever reason, and being unable to play again until it's sorted.  Remember, you don't even need to lose your net connection, you just need to lose connection to the Uplay servers.  Obviously this is far from rare, and sometimes the servers are unavailable to everyone; two notable occurences being a DOS attack, and when Ubisoft switched around some hardware, leading to a lot of unavailability even though it was supposed to be very quick.

Oh, and they also lie about it.  From Dust was not supposed to require a constant connection, but did anyway.

This is why Uplay games are on my blacklist, however badly I want them (and my god I want Anno 2070 really badly).

[Darkspire]

This is why Uplay games are on my blacklist, however badly I want them (and my god I want Anno 2070 really badly).

They dropped the ball when Settlers came out, I thought after that fiasco the idea was dropped until I found Anno 2070, I really loved 1701 and having rebuilt the PC again I was well over the requirements and was all fired up for a purchase till I read about the 'always online', real, real shame.

Darkspire

[FarAway Sooner]

I'm not crazy about intrusive DRM, which is why I avoid buying games on Steam whenever I can get them elsewhere.

But as HUW says, Uplay has a number of problems that Steam doesn't.  The constant connection requirement is one of them.  That is exaggerated by the fact that Ubi has a solid reputation as a shoddy developer.  Their games are often a buggy mess upon release, and their implementation of uPlay is often poorly thought out. (e.g., for Heroes of Might & Magic 6 you needed uPlay to get certain bonuses for your Hero, but those bonuses were choices you made that were specific to your log-in and significantly affected your style of play--so my wife and I couldn't both play a campaign game at the same time unless we wanted the same style of play)

At the end of the day, given Ubi's record of shoddy software releases and poor quality development, I just don't trust them to turn off the uPlay requirement before they'd go belly-up.  There's no reason to think that they value the user experience that much.

For all those reasons, any game that features uPlay is on my blacklist.  Which saddens me, because I do appreciate what some of those titles would offer otherwise.

[Rayfer]

What makes Uplay so bad?

Apart from being completely superfluous if you're already buying the game on Steam? 

This is confusing to me (please forgive my ignorance on these issues)....some of the Steam forum posters are saying that you get the worse of Uplay even though you are buying/playing it on Steam.  In other words, you get the worse of both worlds. In your above comment, are you saying this as well or something else because others on the Steam forums say that buyin and playing it on Steam negates the Uplay issues? 

[Huw the Poo]

What I meant by that sentence was that if you're buying a game via Steam, that's already one layer of DRM.  Uplay is yet another layer, which is totally unnecessary because you already have the first (Steam).  It "merely" adds insult to injury that Uplay is a particularly onerous DRM.

[Rayfer]

What I meant by that sentence was that if you're buying a game via Steam, that's already one layer of DRM.  Uplay is yet another layer, which is totally unnecessary because you already have the first (Steam).  It "merely" adds insult to injury that Uplay is a particularly onerous DRM.

Thanks for the clarification....I was hoping for something else because I enjoyed this series and was considering getting on board early. But I think I'll wait and see how it plays out.

[Darkspire]

Try Wizardy 8, maybe not up there with the GFX but they do the job and are quite functional, depth is equal to if not better than the current CRPG's doing the rounds and IMO one of the best CRPG I have ever played (and still do). one that has been slated but I quite like in a similar vein is Dungeon Lords, that is worth a look at as well. have not really found a M&M that was any good since VI, before that was the first one on the PC, which takes a lot of Dosbox fiddling to get to work, did have III on the Amiga, but never found it to be worth the effort on the PC.

Darkspire

[Rayfer]

Try Wizardy 8, maybe not up there with the GFX but they do the job and are quite functional, depth is equal to if not better than the current CRPG's doing the rounds and IMO one of the best CRPG I have ever played (and still do). one that has been slated but I quite like in a similar vein is Dungeon Lords, that is worth a look at as well. have not really found a M&M that was any good since VI, before that was the first one on the PC, which takes a lot of Dosbox fiddling to get to work, did have III on the Amiga, but never found it to be worth the effort on the PC.

Darkspire

Agreed...already own and have played Wizardry 8, great rpg.  Dungeon Lords I found tough to get into, got it recently in an enhanced or updated re-release but it was still not up to par with the great ones.  Agree also that M&M VI is the best of the series with VII a close 2nd. VIII was, IMHO, awful.  IX was playable but not great.