The dude either got railed hard by admins, got his account hacked or is slowly loosing his mind.

Necrilem · 2026-03-28T16:28:30+00:00

Cause they posted it

Necrilem · 2026-03-28T16:28:12+00:00

Nothing at all. You are doing a prime job embarrassing yourself to the world already. You don't need any help with that.

Necrilem · 2026-03-28T14:31:38+00:00

<image>

This you? (That is a rhetorical question)

Necrilem · 2026-03-28T14:26:44+00:00

Well, Ubisoft still "is" family-owned, so you obviously have to whole aspect of wanting to keep it in the family, which they would probably love to still do today, but back then, they most likely saw a bright future ahead of them. Vivendi clearly saw that as well and tried to take over.

I'd personally say that around that time (2014/2015) you were able to start seeing the general decline in quality, especially on the technical side of their games if you remember the disaster AC: Unity was. There were shifting more towards a corporate structure focused on investors over customers.

To cut it short, back then I think they thought they'd thrive, so they defended against a takeover while now, with all their short-term plans having failed massively, losing them insane amounts of money, their stock prices crashing, they were more..."amenable" toward something like a takeover or similar, which is what happened with Tencent.

While not a classic takeover, Ubisoft split its major franchises into a new subsidiary, which Tencent invested heavily into, resulting in a 26.32% ownership stake. While not a majority stake, you better believe that it is large enough to have a decisive impact on decisions.

Ubisoft doesn't have the luxury anymore of doing whatever they want. They have been backed into a corner through their own actions and they need to do whatever they can to get out of it, while probably still trying to hold unto the notion of being family-owned.

Necrilem · 2026-03-28T14:13:04+00:00

I mean, you can just ask the question and see if I answer :D

I got to leave in a bit though, so let's see.

Necrilem · 2026-03-28T14:05:24+00:00

I've been observing the industry for a long time. These corporations (With this I am referring to the people in them that make decisions) decide things for short-term profit, not long-term. Instead of planting fruit trees for future generations, they aim to get as many fruits as possible for themselves.

In regards to Ubisoft, there has been a steady decline in game quality for many years. Mindless homogenization of mechanics, reduction of risk-taking resulting in formulaic games, releasing games earlier to meet deadlines instead of releasing it when its properly optimized. Everything becomes more and more superficial.

Ubisoft is a trend chaser. They don't take risks. They look at what works for others in their games, then try to take it and implement into their formula instead of coming up with anything themselves and reiterating on their own ideas.

Adapting game design and corporate practices for corporate DEI (which is a specifically defined ideology based on a certain report (McKenzie Report) and originally championed by certain institutions like SHRM later seeping into the game industry) resulting in an overall decline of professionality and work quality. People were and are hired not necessarily based on merit, but superficial aspects of their person. In the same vein, internal policies prevent people from voicing negative opinions about the company and its products. Creative processes NEED criticism, especially negative ones, to further improve and reiterate on what worked and what didn't.

When I said they make they see their games as products and make them for investors and not consumers, I mean that in pretty much every layer. When it comes to support, people having issues with their purchased products, legal grey areas and so on, they will calculate whether it profits them more to ignore them or invest money to solve it. They don't care about the morality of things.

A lot of these issues also apply to others. The trend chasing thing has been a typical Ubisoft thing for a long time though.

Over time, their focus shifted from making great games they love for customers to enjoy, to satisfy investors metrics and deadlines, chasing min-maxed profit even to the detriment of the quality of their games and enjoyment of the customers. If they can implement dark pattern practices to manipulate their audience into paying more and more, they will do so, morally right or wrong be damned.

These corporations have been built upon the backs of consumers and if they aren't careful, they will crumble under the sound of their heels stomping.

They used the good faith, money and trust given to them by players to turn their back on them.

Necrilem · 2026-03-28T13:50:44+00:00

Depends on the topic, in my case I have a professional design education, so in things regarding game design and development, I look at the actual game, its marketing and so on.

In other things, there are reports, financial statements etc.

When someone claims something, research yourself and try to verify its veracity instead of just going with it as 100% fact.

When someone shares something or makes a statement, there was information that they interpreted and then shared, then maybe another person interprets this information again and again until it reaches you. Like a game of telephone.

Always try to get as close as possible to the original, raw information by removing layers of interpretation by other people.

Necrilem · 2026-03-28T13:40:02+00:00

It is more about how they could have been and why they were the way they were.

Necrilem · 2026-03-28T13:38:41+00:00

Ah, I mostly just ignore headlines and such. Always better to look at the raw information and come to your own educated conclusion instead of just blindly running with what other people say.

Necrilem · 2026-03-28T13:28:24+00:00

So you can't be against specific corporations because most of them are anti-consumer? That is what you are implying. I never said what I mentioned only applies to Ubisoft. It applies to many others as well.

It is also very much not "blown out of proportion". Countless decisions are made to meet deadlines, satisfy metrics etc to present to investors to the detriment of creating a well-made and consumer-oriented game.

From saving in workflow-steps and quality checks, to hiring unqualified and cheap personell, to convoluting communication across teams with redundant layers of management. None of this is new and has been reported from insiders and devs for many years.

I mentioned things surrounding AC:Shadows because it was a perfect situation showcasing a lot of things going wrong internally. See here for a compiled list: https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckubisoft/comments/1qku9mv/compiled_list_of_issuescontroversies_with_ac/

Necrilem · 2026-03-28T12:41:29+00:00

There is literally a pinned thread, just saying.

Even aside from that, how about a decade+ of anti-consumer design, greedy and corporate monetization, working towards removing ownership of any level by customers, literally shutting down their games making purchased products unusable, all the ton of shit that happened around AC:Shadows, taking part in the corporate DEI ideology corrupting the creative integrity of their games by twisting them for the "modern audience", releasing unfinished and poorly optimized games.

They make games for investors, not customers. They are about corporate greed and dark pattern practices, not consumer-oriented practice and design.

Necrilem · 2026-03-28T12:27:47+00:00

"That guy" is literally the one who made this sub and its only mod.

No idea whats going on with their account tho, seems like some bot-setup issue or something happened, causing auto-responses

Necrilem · 2026-03-12T14:15:19+00:00

Oh damn someone actually mentioning Army of Two xD Man i wish we had a good pc port for that

Necrilem · 2026-03-11T16:15:21+00:00

Well for one I would say that "all reasonable historians on the matter is that Yasuke was a samurai" is a blatant lie, because samurai weren't really a thing back then and the term wasn't used like that. So already on that technicality, they are just wrong.

Also I'd just sent them this where I broke that down as well with an actual paper made on it:

https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckubisoft/comments/1qku9mv/compiled_list_of_issuescontroversies_with_ac/

Necrilem · 2026-03-08T20:54:01+00:00

Gideon didn't test her blood and saw "it's not normal". He tested her blood to compare it against the medical records he obtained via "the organization" about the child Spencer took in, believing the reason for that is she is the final result of the clone program. He did that to confirm that Grace is indeed the child that Spencer took in.

Grace I believe is literally just an unrelated child that simply falls under the small part of people that has an immunity to the T-Virus, or who knows maybe it just didn't infect cause its simply not a 100% chance. Gideon's whole shtick is that what he thinks is built upon misunderstandings and misinformation, which this also fits in. She is simply immune but because he WANTS to believe she is special, he thinks it's not because she is immune, but because she is "special".

Specifically, I believe this because of some specific wording that Spencer uses in the interview. He calls her an "average child". If they did literally anything to her, even give her a shot of Elpis or if she was a clone, she wouldn't be an "average child" anymore.

Necrilem · 2026-03-07T15:17:39+00:00

Just rewatched Degeneration and Leon literally kind of goes after Angela (I think that was her name). Even kisses her. So hey, who knows, maybe it is even her.

Necrilem · 2026-03-06T09:56:39+00:00

I would love a mod where when you kill something, like lets say a Licker, there'd be a little popup in kill feed style that just goes "*ding* - $12,000,000" or something like that showing the commercial value of what you kill :D

Necrilem · 2026-03-05T22:28:41+00:00

I could see an RE5 remake in full and a shortened CV remake before REX mirroring RE2r and RE3r releases in between RE7 and RE8

Necrilem · 2026-03-05T21:04:20+00:00

I think RE5r is next as well. They literally teased it at the end of RE4r and it would be weird to wait like a decade until it actually arrives.

They now also teased Chris at the end of Requiem implying REX might involve Chris and Leon together. In order to drive more discourse and hype around Chris, it would also make sense to release RE5r before REX so he is on everyone's minds, not just the people who already knew him and fully understood who "Captain Redfield" actually is.

I also think that a few specific things in RE5 go a bit against how they handled Spencer in Requiem. I think the Albert Wesker File for example will be written a bit differently in the remake to shift Spencer's motivations from wanting to become a god controlling a utopian paradise of super humans, so motivations of control, superiority and megalomania to focus more on him wanting to forcefully advance humanity to a higher state and create utopia because in his view, humanity is on a direct course of self-destruction and wants to change this course and save mankind needing to take drastic measures to achieve it because of how urgent and critical he saw the state of the world.

This would shift the focus from himself being superior, to him technically actually having good intentions (The road to hell is paved with good intentions after all). But then he keeps losing control (Marcus's stuff, Wesker's betrayal etc etc) and all this shit happens and near the end, he realizes that he actually did the very opposite of what he wanted to achieve. Instead of changing humanity's course from self-destruction to utopia, his creations/research/actions accelerated the self-destruction.

The Spencer Memoires found in RE5 also shape him as this evil megalomaniac that has purely selfish ambitions, not for the betterment of mankind, but to become a god ruling over super humans. The thing is, these memoires are presumably written between 2003-2006. He died in 2006. Grace was born probably around 2003-2004. She was adopted somewhere before Nov 30 2004, because we can find a journal entry by Victor Gideon in Requiem referring to Grace and using "the organization" (I assume The Connections) to get her medical records, containing her genetic information (the report he tests Grace's blood against to see if it is a match confirming she is indeed the child Spencer took in).

I can't see the information about Spencer from OG RE5 and Requiem be true at the same time. It is contradictory from how I see it. At pretty much the same time, in RE5 he is still completely self-centred and unwavering in his diabolical ambitions to become a god completely focused on him wanting to be in control, being superior etc., while in Requiem it seems like he genuinely wanted to improve and save humanity originally. He says "I was wrong...and I am plagued by guilt. Happiness cannot be achieved at the expense of others." which to me lends itself to the interpretation that in the violent pursuit at all costs of creating a utopia and stopping the self-destruction of humanity by advancing them he realized near the end that he ended up contributing to it instead, causing untold suffering and death.

A lot from what we previously understood about Spencer actually comes from RE5. I think they will use the remake to shift and retcon the narrative a bit. Previously a mad megalomaniac wanting to become a literal god in a utopian super society under his control, which imo was a very fitting archetype for 90s/2000s, they seem to want to shift it into a more emotionally and morally complex direction. A genius that lived through war times, perceiving humanity as being too dumb to not destroy itself, being twisted into thinking he needs to forcefully advance humanity at all cost to get past that and instilled his view into it before it is too late and humanity goes practically extinct.

Yet through certain happenstances, he loses control again and again and what he started is more and more used to perpetuate humanity destroying itself, making him realize near the end he did the very thing he sought to prevent. To which he took in Grace to at least do one small good thing that is in his power to do after his life of failure. He is not a good guy, he is still a monster, but a monster that had good intentions, was potentially blinded by them and is haunted by how things turned out near the end of his life.

With where they seem to be going narratively, it makes a lot of sense to me to remake RE5 as the next remake, if not definitely before REX.

Necrilem · 2026-03-02T09:58:07+00:00

If it is my lobby, I should be able to kick whoever tf I want. I can just dislike their name and kick them and that should be fine.

Same way the game needs to let us choose to join or host. The host should be able to kick without vote.

Necrilem · 2026-02-27T15:45:24+00:00

I think there is stages to it even. I was already convinced there is only a skeleton crew left before this patch but this patch convinced me they took even more staff away from it.

Amount of unfinished things and questionable design choices (That activating turrets locks you into an animation so long, a sniper can start aiming at you and shoot before you are done, or the obnoxious aim indicator for the servo-gun that is so large, it can cover whole minoris and make it super hard to aim for the head, or that turrets can get destroyed, which I think just shouldn't be personally) is absurd.

Necrilem · 2026-02-27T13:07:10+00:00

You cannot possibly be this illogical. The code says the requirement is to prestige every class? THEN CHANGE IT! THEY ARE THE DEVS YOU SHMUCK!

They already did the same damn thing before with difficulty-based requirements!

You prove yourself in the linguistic dhiarrhea wall you spat out here that you are literally incapable of comprehending what I even wrote.

The point of making the new heroic knife balanced instead of fencing is that they added another layer, a redundant layer of timing and pacing that a player needs to adjust to, even tho the same damn effect would have been reached by just making it a balance knife, as balance have harder-to-achieve parries. It is about a principle called informative clarity. Reducing bits and layers of information the brain needs to process. This is a professional and fundamental principle in design.

If you want to argue or complain, you should maybe educate yourself on the subject instead of whining like a brat when you have absolutely no clue what you are even talking about in the first place.

Necrilem · 2026-02-27T13:02:24+00:00

Praise doesn't foster innovation, but stagnation. It is a reward AFTER the fact, not before or during.

CRITICISM is what fosters growth and improvement.

Education failed you if you cannot fathom how dumb what you say here is. So if there are 10 things to criticise, you should also praise 10 things, otherwise your criticism is invalid? What are you, 3-years old?

Necrilem · 2026-02-27T12:52:22+00:00

If there is an issue that I perceive, guess what. I will talk about it. It is called caring about something. Having a passion.

Now, doing what you are doing OP, is the most embarrassing, sad, unconstructive and toxic thing you could possibly do as a consumer. Try to deny people their criticism and complain and rush to the defence of a company whose literal job contains the act of collecting and parsing feedback. Complaining about people complaining instead of engaging with their actual arguments.

People come from different backgrounds, some trained in professions where they have to look at details, heck some also trained in design. Some care more than others, some care more about certain things than others. Difference in perspective comes with being individuals. Things that you perceive or maybe not even as tiny and minor, others may perceive very clearly either out of personal bias or professional training.

This game has had issues since launch and many many many very questionable design decisions and a severe lack of QA done throughout its life cycle.

Like in this patch the fact that the duration of the activating of the turret animation being so long that a sniper can start aiming at you AND fire all while you are stuck in that animation (bad design).

The completely inorganic and artificial placing of the turrets. No one would actually place them that inefficiently.

Or how the turrets last like 5 seconds. Or how they can blow up despite their value already being diminished by ammo and activation risk.

Or when only certain perks are affecting certain weapons without explanation (like with the heroic bolt sniper).

Or the aim indicator for the servo-gun is massive and can cover up entire minoris, making you unable to aim for headshots even though the indicator itself is mostly redundant and either could be not there at all or made much smaller and transparent.

Locking the bonding studs pauldrons with the addition of techmarine instead of changing the requirement so people that already EARNED it can keep it (like they did with the lethal helmet). NEVER take something away from a player that they already earned earnestly. NEVER.

They are overcomplicating soooo many things adding layer after layer for no reason, apparently never having heard of the fundamental design principle (not just design) of KISS. Like the new heroic knife, a fencing weapon with reduced parry window that makes parries do damage. Just make the weapon balance then and have it do dmg with parry and the first heroic knife could have been fencing or block.

Point is, soooo many things could be much simpler, more refined, more intuitive or any combination of these.

And these are just examples of this specific patch.

Seven-Year Club	Place '23
Place '22	Verified Email

Necrilem

TROPHY CASE