this post was submitted on 30 Oct 2023
127 points (96.4% liked)

PC Gaming

8524 readers
746 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] hal_5700X@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago (2 children)
[–] anteaters@feddit.de 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Singapore keeps throwing money at it, Ubisoft takes it in and let's Ubi Singapore work on that dumpster fire.

[–] ShortBoweledClown@lemmy.one 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You have a source for that? I've only seen Ubi is on the hook for the money used if the game doesn't ship

[–] anteaters@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago

Nope. The only known "fact" is that Ubisoft was given a grant by Singapore which obligated them to release it at some point. Can't imagine why Ubisoft would keep that thing in development for so long instead of just releasing anything if it wasn't for external money that they don't have to care about.

[–] Vilian@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago

why?, valve keep the game in development for longer, and in the end if worth, why can't ubisoft do the same?