-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Ubisoft says it’s ‘surprised’ by Mario + Rabbids sequel’s underperformance
- Thread starter IbizaPocholo
- Start date
- Opinion Game Dev
AV
We ain't outta here in ten minutes, we won't need no rocket to fly through space
Spot on. I was so ready to love Sparks of Hope and as soon as I played a few maps it just felt like I'd already seen all the concept had to offer in the first. Ended up selling it.
Not a bad game by any stretch, but an idea that sadly ran its course.
AV
We ain't outta here in ten minutes, we won't need no rocket to fly through space
Regarded by who? The game has a straight up invincibility toggle in the pause menu designed for struggling kids. Unless you mean the very concept of a turn based strategy game but I think that's selling kids' brains short.
Lucifers Beard
Member
I think that one potential issue with this is that a lot of people knew how quickly they discounted the first game and were waiting for that initial price drop.
I had a feeling the game would drop pretty quick and within a couple months it had dropped from £50 to £30, so I picked it up for myself as a Christmas treat.
I had a feeling the game would drop pretty quick and within a couple months it had dropped from £50 to £30, so I picked it up for myself as a Christmas treat.
Lunarorbit
Member
Les Rabbids pas terrible!
SCB3
Member
A couple of things happened
- It was announced super Early, I thought for the longest tiem it was a early 2022 title
- It was delayed twice
- It released in a busy Holiday season a week before Pokemon
- The first game was decent but not amazing and the weird DK DLC didn't help as you couldn't play as DK in the main game at all
- They announced a bunch of DLC before it was released, never a good thing imo especially as putting Rayman in from the start would be a good selling point
- It's price was cut almost immediately, I picked up the Cosmic edition for £30 just before xmas, it was retailing for £60-70 before that
Nautilus
Banned
The reasons for that are simple:
- Far more aggressive competition compared to the first game. The first game pratocally had the whole month to it, while Sparks of Hope was competing with multiple games, including Pokemon.
- Ubisoft pricing strategy is bitting them in the butt. People know the game will reach 10 - 20 dollars in price after less than a year so, given the competition, prefers to wait and pay less. That's what I'm doing. Loved the first game, Sparks of hope looks amazing, but I would rather wait and pay 10 dollars for the game, which I know it will happen sooner than later, and I'll play games on my backlog until then.
- Far more aggressive competition compared to the first game. The first game pratocally had the whole month to it, while Sparks of Hope was competing with multiple games, including Pokemon.
- Ubisoft pricing strategy is bitting them in the butt. People know the game will reach 10 - 20 dollars in price after less than a year so, given the competition, prefers to wait and pay less. That's what I'm doing. Loved the first game, Sparks of hope looks amazing, but I would rather wait and pay 10 dollars for the game, which I know it will happen sooner than later, and I'll play games on my backlog until then.
KXVXII9X
Member
Was it regarded as difficult? The second one is fairly known to be much easier and accessible than the first with more options to tailor difficulty to someone's needs. I was stumped on the first game, but I think the second one is much more kid friendly.
Queso de Grande
Member
The first one was a really great surprise, but kinda overstayed it’s welcome by the end.
Nautilus
Banned
Best timeline ever.
worldwithpyramids
Member
A shame, really. The Mario + Rabbid games are the best stuff Ubi has produced in a decade.
Camreezie
Member
Mephisto40
Member
Honestly, who gives a s**t about Rabbids?
Kadve
Member
What where they expecting though? Normal Mario style numbers? Cause in that case they where kinda delusional. Also i don't think they realise that the "small things that talk weirdly and act completely crazy" archetype is not that popular anymore.
And people keep begging them for another proper Rayman game, especially a 3d one.
Last edited:
Northeastmonk
Gold Member
That’s better than a ton of layoffs, but I wouldn’t count on the series carrying the company. It’s very niche. I bought it for my kid for Christmas. They played until they died and then went back to Animal Crossing. I am starting to believe that kids want mindless, goalless objectives, and no type of “failure” to their play style. That’s just a random thought.
MikeM
Member
Not sure who does the forecasting there, but you better account for inflation and recession pressures on consumers otherwise most companies will be also announcing “surprisingly slower” sales.
This is good in a way- force new ideas and better competition for a smaller pool of gamer dollars.
This is good in a way- force new ideas and better competition for a smaller pool of gamer dollars.
Kokoloko85
Member
Didnt even know the game came out…
Agent_Nobody
Member
They’re going to be ‘surprised’ again when Skull and Bones releases.
yurinka
Member
I assume that it wasn't too smart to release this game that close to new entries of super sellers like Pokemon, God of War or CoD. But well, I assume that as they said the game maybe had a bad launch but will have good legs and like the previous one will have good sales after its launch window, outside that very busy Christmas period.
SSfox
Member
And good proper POP game.
They're just starting to pay their lame choices.
Yup.
Last edited:
Gamer_By_Proxy
Member
I skipped cause I didn't finish the first one yet. I'm trying to get better about finishing games before I buy their sequels.
sloppyjoe_gamer
Gold Member
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
I'll buy the gold edition for 10 pounds on the store sale in a year
BlackTron
Member
I have the first one which is pretty good but to me the concept was held back by the rabbids. I liked them in their first Wii game, but juxtapose them with Mario characters and they seem like they shouldn't even be there. Call me cynical but it came off as desperation on behalf of Ubisoft for their own characters to be in the same room as legends. I would prefer this game with simply Mario character allies/enemies a la Mario RPG and if it were that way I'd probably buy the sequel. One Mario x Rabbids game is enough for me TBH.
Dr. Wilkinson
Member
More than that, I think if you look historically, direct sequels to a game on the same hardware tend to not do as well as their predecessor. Had they held it for Switch 2, I think it would've done a lot better. But the fact is, Switch is old and in decline, the userbase is less active as the hardware continues to age, SRPGs have never been a widely popular genre to begin with, and the software market for Switch is extremely overcrowded. There just wasn't much incentive to buy this game unless you're a super-fan of the original. Being highly-reviewed and high-quality isn't always enough with all those other factors at play.
Last edited:
alucard0712_rus
Gold Member
I've played first one and that was the best game I never thought I would love som much. Gameplay, graphics, animations was top notch. Will buy DLC for sure after beating it!
Bragr
Banned
I have been anticipating this news for a while. I noticed that the game didn't pop up on used game markets (this is true for Bayonetta 3 as well), which is usually a bad sign with games featuring Mario. It also performed poorly on the Switch top-sellers list.
The first game was unique, but this time around people know what it is and they won't be able to get the same sort of hype and word-of-mouth. They needed to go deeper, feature Rayman from the get-go, go to a Nintendo-themed world, go to an Assassins Creed-themed world, feature multiplayer, whatever it takes to get onto the hype radar.
That never happened though, and the game ended up being most appealing to big fans of the first game, which is too few to generate anywhere near what they hoped for.
It's a shame, it's a great crossover and a cool exclusive.
The first game was unique, but this time around people know what it is and they won't be able to get the same sort of hype and word-of-mouth. They needed to go deeper, feature Rayman from the get-go, go to a Nintendo-themed world, go to an Assassins Creed-themed world, feature multiplayer, whatever it takes to get onto the hype radar.
That never happened though, and the game ended up being most appealing to big fans of the first game, which is too few to generate anywhere near what they hoped for.
It's a shame, it's a great crossover and a cool exclusive.
DaGwaphics
Member
DLC type content updates wouldn't be a bad thing necessarily. It's all the little MTX and the grind to encourage user spending that bothers me more than anything.
diffusionx
Gold Member
I am one of the few who have it, and it’s a good sequel. Problem is that the original came out in those early days of the Switch when people were hungering for content and it could stand out. This one took wayyyyyyyy too long to come out (five years between games!) and launched on a platform with Pokémon, Animal Crossing, Bayonetta, Xenoblade 3, P5R, etc. Etc. It just got pinched from all sides.
I don’t know why it took them so long to ship this game but something is really screwed up with Ubi these days, according to Wiki it took five studios around the world to make this game and of course it had serious delays.
I don’t know why it took them so long to ship this game but something is really screwed up with Ubi these days, according to Wiki it took five studios around the world to make this game and of course it had serious delays.
Last edited:
tomato shrub
Member
It's one of the more interesting Mario spinoffs in a long while, especially since it feels even closer to a Mario RPG now and doesn't rely on your typical mushroom kingdom level themes. But overall it's still a far cry from classics like Paper Mario 1 and 2, especially since all the characters are pale and passive. So it's not like this is deserving of a sales breakthrough or anything. I'm sure it still sold more than many better games out there.
Last edited:
LavitzSlambert
Member
I enjoyed Mario + Rabbids a lot, but I’m not sure how they can miss why the first game was such a success. It was a Mario licensed game in the first year of the Switch’s life cycle. Although there were huge releases that year, Switch owners were hungry for new content and, like Golf Story, early games did better than they would have fared when there are more options to play. They made a SRPG which is definitely not a mainstream genre, even if you put Mario in it. And they released it right around GOWR and Pokémon Sc/Vi, towards the inevitable end of the Switch’a life cycle. I am not at all surprised and am shocked why Ubisoft would be, this just seems to be a reaction due to their latest earnings release, they’re under pressure because they screwed up with a bunch of other games and are in the spotlight shaking and stammering.
SCB3
Member
Fun fact, I picked up the special edition of this for £35 yesterday, that must've sold poor as well
Tams
Gold Member
People knowing that it would get a price cut/go on sale is absolutely on issue, and is now even more reinforced.
And it just makes it even more obvious why Nintendo almost never discount their own games; they know it lowers the perceived value of their games and that a lot of people then just wait for it to go on sale.
And it just makes it even more obvious why Nintendo almost never discount their own games; they know it lowers the perceived value of their games and that a lot of people then just wait for it to go on sale.
Umm, most people don't know the names of most publishers, let alone give a shit about them.
Last edited:
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
Looks like it was a game that wasn’t needed.
crackajack
Member
Games get canceled all the time, probably most of the time without public notice, but canceling 7 games in a rather short period sounds like drastic cost cutting and immediately losing confidence in all of them at once, seems weird, as though no one believed in any of them ever. Investing any dev's time is only done if you initially think you get your money back and none of those was promising enough? So all involved are rather used in sure investments like AC? Maybe early, still cheap stages but probably resulting in even less risk, more AC and just "mega-brands". Very much like EA and AB almost no smaller titles anymore? I doubt this is great for an extended period of time. No idea how anyone can play CS forever, but I am also not interested in playing real football or basketball every day so what do i know, but before something becomes a megabrand you have to occasionally throw new shit on the wall and see what sticks. Milking Fifa/EA football and Madden works forever, but even among those gamers I think many want every now an then something else, not just CoD, Fifa, CS, AC, Fortnite every day. I guess Tencent and Embracer studios might actually fill that AA gap that did not work that well for quite a while now.
working on 4 AC games, Avatar and Star Wars alone is probably more than enough even for an armada of studios and they work on Skull Bones, PoP Remake, another FC, another Rainbow Six? Some guys still tinkering with BG&E, maybe something in UbiArt framework, Just Dance? Splinter Cell probably also had some prototypes here and there.
working on 4 AC games, Avatar and Star Wars alone is probably more than enough even for an armada of studios and they work on Skull Bones, PoP Remake, another FC, another Rainbow Six? Some guys still tinkering with BG&E, maybe something in UbiArt framework, Just Dance? Splinter Cell probably also had some prototypes here and there.
EDMIX
Member
I love the first and didn't even know they had a sequel coming out.
Was completely off my radar.
Fbh
Member
I enjoyed the first game, even bought the DK DLC which was great. But for some reason I don't have much of a desire to play this. I got my fill from the previous game and don't really need more.
Though the fact this is the one new Mario game on the Switch that you know will be like $30 or less in a few months doesn't help either.
Though the fact this is the one new Mario game on the Switch that you know will be like $30 or less in a few months doesn't help either.
BootsLoader
Banned
Ubisoft needs to get this shit together. They release garbage games and wait for them to sell because of the “name”, Assassins Creed for example, every year we get a re-skin. How long they thought they would get away with this?
Sygma
Member
Released too close to Midnight Suns, Tactics Ogre and Pokemon for the people who actually bought the first to care. Like it got successful, but not to that point. Also both midnight suns and tactics ogre are way better purely from a combat / tactics perspective, even if admittedly Midnight Suns didn't sell that well either
Last edited: