.jpg?q=50&fit=contain&w=1140&h=570&dpr=1.5)
The live service bubble is beginning to burst, and Ubisoft is right in the middle of the impact zone. Over the past few years, the company has tried desperately to introduce a number of titles intended to compete against industry juggernauts like PUBG and Fortnite, capitalising on current genre trends and player habits cynically, without any sense of creativity.
Hyper Scape, Tom Clancy’s xDefiant, and now Ghost Recon Frontline all feel like they’re swinging for the same fence, failing time and time again with similar spins in the online shooter space that don’t stand a chance against the big boys. Three times now fans have either reacted with general indifference or spiteful annoyance at beloved franchises being bastardised to fit a mould that they don’t need to occupy.
Hyper Scape got off to a good start thanks to its unique aesthetic, but it’s now faded into obscurity with a lacking social media presence and updates that mean nothing. It’s only a matter of time until it’s taken behind Ubisoft’s shed and put out of its misery. Surely this should teach the publisher some lessons - that it can’t keep throwing these big budget projects at the wall until something sticks purely because its competitors have nailed the formula. Things are beginning to give. If Ubisoft didn’t learn from Hyper Scape though, perhaps it will from Frontline.
Ghost Recon Frontline was first unveiled last week as part of the series’ 20th anniversary celebrations. It’s intended to be a class-based spin on the tactical shooter series that will pit teams of players against one another in tense competitive gameplay. On the surface it sounds great, but it didn’t take long for the community to see it for what it is - yet another attempt from Ubisoft to penetrate the live service market with little motive besides finally cashing in. The reveal trailer was bombed with dislikes, with social media flooded with scorn directed towards the game. Following this uproar, this weekend’s closed test was met with an indefinite delay.
Fans aren’t happy with the direction Ghost Recon appears to be taking as it seems to be copying the successful models of other arena and battle royale shooters. Breakpoint was a disaster when it launched a few years back, being subject to underwhelming sales and a critical mauling as it failed to capitalise on the co-op brilliance that made Wildlands such a success. It feels like Ubisoft is failing to listen to its audience, with no explanation given for Frontline’s delay beyond that we’ll be hearing more soon as development continues to progress. Coolio, go back to the drawing board and come back when you’re ready to deliver something more innovative and worthwhile. I think some folks are peeved that it’s also a first-person shooter, something the Ghost Recon series hasn’t really dabbled with much in the past. It used the perspective, but it was always mixed in with others.
There’s an element of toxicity here worth noting, but it’s also one of many examples that have seen Ubisoft turn its beloved properties into live service experiences that seek to abandon their original identity. Assassin’s Creed will soon follow in these footsteps with Infinity, while rumours are pointing towards Far Cry adopting a more online direction in the years to come. Rainbow Six Siege, For Honor, The Division, and so many more are doing the exact same thing, albeit with a few differences in their genres. These are games that demand a huge time investment, meaning it’s impossible to stay on top of all of them even if you wanted to. It makes Ubi’s portfolio feel hollow, even if the games themselves play well and are brimming with creativity.
Even a couple of console generations ago, Ubisoft was a publisher you could depend on for a vast catalogue of distinct games. Assassin’s Creed, Rayman, Splinter Cell, Prince of Persia, Steep, Far Cry 3, Valiant Hearts, Grow Home, and so many more proved the company to be worth keeping an eye on, but it feels like that identity has given way to homogeneity in such a way that being excited about Ubisoft nowadays is an increasingly hard sell. Even if the games play well and look gorgeous, so many of them are predictable and representative of things we’ve seen time and time again. I reviewed Far Cry 6 and very much enjoyed it, but I’d be a fool not to acknowledge that it rides on the coattails of a formula that was showing its age almost a full decade ago. It’s not good enough anymore.
This is a medium that I come to for engaging stories and meaningful gameplay systems that aren’t afraid to supersede the status quo, although such a combination can often abandon the economically successful model of live service shooters that Ubisoft is so keen to involve itself in. It already has a number of hits in the space, so why not continue to build upon those while providing your other studios an opportunity to try their hand at more ambitious projects that push the world of video games in directions we’ve never seen before? I suppose that wouldn’t be a safe bet, so it isn’t something high-profile executives and shareholders would be willing to greenlight.
Perhaps Ghost Recon Frontline will be the straw that broke the camouflage’s back, causing Ubisoft to take stock of its current slate of titles and decide which ones are necessary in a field packed with live service experiences that aren’t going anywhere. Unless you’re set to offer something that nobody else has, you aren’t going to survive, so it’s pointless spending millions only to eventually come up against the harsh reality of confronting your own failures. I doubt we’ll see a change, but I’ll keep my fingers crossed that the Ubisoft of the future isn’t a company that increasingly falls victim to its own stubbornness to chase trends, since those are the type of games I have absolutely no interest in playing.