Assassin's Creed Mirage Returns to Series Roots, But Won't Ditch Cosmetic Microtransactions

Don’t ever change, Ubi.

I assume it will be a collection of outfits from previous titles like Altair and Ezio.

And whilst we are there they really need to remake the first game.

The thing is, those outfits are often so over the top that they breaks the immersion so I’m not even slightly tempted to buy them

It's a scummy thing to due but so long as they're purely cosmetic then it could be a lot worse. The joys of modern gaming.

Never paid anything in any Ubisoft game and I've got the Platinum in most of them without any problem.

I personally do not know why anyone is worked up over microtransactions as long as they are not 1) required to finish the game or see the whole game narrative and 2) they don't give a player an advantage (if multiplayer). If just cosmetic and someone wants to buy it, that is their choice and have no issue with the developer getting paid. I likely wouldn't do it as I agree with @Chaotic_Goat that they are usually way over the top anyway, but I don't blame the developer from offering. New content via maps, DLC, etc are also fair game.

Completely single player game + microtransactions = ZERO chance I support it. Looking forward to grabbing it used for $10!

I do not buy games to play Digital Dress-up Barbie. So it is irrelevant if an option or not

Did not buy any cosmetics DLC in Origin, Atlantis or Valhalla. Had Tons of fun in all of them. It was optional.

That said... if someone else wants to buy all of the DLC and makes the game more fun. Go crazy, it is your hobby and cash.

I mean if you wait till Black Friday this game will probably be $20-$25 which will be nice. Typical Ubisoft, wait for a month and the game is half off lol.

Don’t particularly mind cause they’re cosmetic only. The old single-player ones used to be far more egregious with selling maps and stuff for real money.

@JSnow2 so items that have zero effect on game play makes you stop playing a game?

I’ve not really been interest in AC since black flag but this apparent return to roots has me intrigued. Cosmetics, I’d rather weren’t there but I look at reviews at least.

Did anyone seriously expect Ubisoft to sell a complete game? Even their overpriced ultimate versions are usually incomplete (looking at you AC Valhalla)

I find it hard to believe that Ubisoft would offer microtransactions......oh wait.

Seriously, anyone who thought this game wouldn't have some form of microtransactions hasn't been paying attention or was enjoying a lovely dream.

Can't have Assassin's Creed without a little assassin's greed huh. Never change Ubisoft, never change...

It suprises me that people pay for microtransactions.

You know there was a time when developers added these in for free because they respect the fact that you spent money for a game they worked hard on.

Then came DLC which is fair given the amount of effort, but it was a gateway to what we're seeing today which also creates really over bearing and confusing user interfaces sometimes haha.

this news is hardly worth a comment. it's the expected business practice of most AAA publishers and has been the norm for over 10 years now. did anyone expect ubisoft to suddenly turn off the greed? i'm more surprised that people are surprised.

And I am totally fine with that.

I'm not bothered really by these. Ubisoft always gets a lot of shade for their microtransactions but I actually think they generally do a good job of keeping it from getting out of hand.

Of course I'd prefer it not be in there at all but I can't really blame them considering how much money they make.

Honestly this whole “going back to the series’ roots” is a huge load of BS, the game looks exactly the same as Valhalla/Odyssey/Origins albeit (allegedly) shorter and smaller map, gameplay looks the same, structure looks the same, even the menus and UI looks the same.

I miss the good ol days when you could unlock cool outfits by just playing the game.. but I’m not hating.. I’m a Ubi fan and they give you 2000 Helix Credits every time to start.. I usually just get a cool mount or something with it.. and like with AC Valhalla, they give away individual paid set pieces for certain missions.. don’t see why anyone WOULDNT play because of optional DLC

@munkholt @Jettstyles @twitchtvpat @Korgon The "but it's only cosmetics, it doesn't impact gameplay" argument is one of the most incredible marketing BS that gamers have been gobbling up for 2 decades now.

Unlocking new cosmetic items by playing the game and setting challenges, and looking at your character with a sense of accomplishment is a big part of a good game. When you remove it (completely or part of it), you remove some of the value of the game, and some of the fun you can have with it.

Think about it just a moment : it's because cosmetics are an important part of how people enjoy their game that they sell it. If it was so meaningless, they wouldn't earn any money doing it...

You know nothing, @JSnow2. Sorry couldn’t resist. 😂

I've never bought any micros off AC games and the store was never popping up or in my way.
You want it, it's there. You don't, then just play the game.
Not sure why this is an issue. I've never seen Ubi throwing in your face in-game towards the store. That would be different.

@RadioHedgeFund For sure. The first game had the best setting and time period, but hasn’t aged all that well.

Oh... Why did I think it wouldn't have any microtransactions at all.

@Jettstyles As long they are Ubisoft styled and baked in the menus like in Ubisoft games im ok ignoring them. But nothing is as emersion breaking as a buy now in your games. How cheap can you be forcing it in your face like a free to play mobile phone game in a full priced game.

I really don't mind it. Just optional suits that doesn't really make a difference from a story aspect, and we can enjoy the games without it. So for me it's ok.

@Olmaz Totally agree but they made most of the people believe its normal already putting microtransactions in a full priced game.

@Olmaz
Sure and if every single cosmetic in the game required you to buy it separately I'd have a much bigger problem with it. The thing is however with AC anyway they have plenty of awesome looking cosmetics that are unlockable just by playing the game as well. I still get the same satisfaction of seeing a fully decked out character by the end.

I get the "it's just cosmetic" argument doesn't sit well with people however with AC at the very least as someone who has played the entire series I've never once played one and said "Man all the cool cosmetics are in the stupid store!" In fact, most of the time the paid cosmetic look too out of place/ridiculous for me to really care about them.

I don't like the "it's just cosmetic" excuse either but for myself at least it's never hindered my experience with AC before so I doubt it will start with Mirage.

Here are some things to keep in mind as we have this discussion, again, about microtransactions in Ubisoft games or games in general.

1) Loot Boxes are always evil. If I can't see what I am getting then I don't want to buy it. Unless it's a free-to-play Gatcha game get the crap away from my full-priced product.

2) Usually Ubisoft leaves a way in AC games to earn a "premium" currency in the game and then they sell you the cosmetics for this special currency on a rotational basis. So technically you CAN earn all the cosmetic items just by playing the game. Granted these are fairly repetitive fetch quests and bounties but they are there so you can still "earn" the "Dragon Flame of Super Saiyan Azerothian Clown of Death Bikini Armor"

3) These "value-added propositions" are going to be even more necessary as game production becomes more expensive. I know that makes me sound like a corporate boot licker but it's not wrong to say.

4) It sure beats how they used to monetize games in the old days. I remember a time when I needed to feed coins into them in order to play

5) Why do cosmetics get such a hard time but Season Passes and monthly subs don't <shrug>

6) Hobby or Hardcore gamers are really the only ones getting upset about this. Casuals usually don't care and they are the ones that this stuff is truly marketed to and the ones buying it.

So ya.

@MikeOrator Ok I'll bite :

1-Loot boxes are evil, I agree, in whatever form they come. So for example Reda's chests in AC Origins were just this.

2-You're underrepresenting the amount of grinding you need to get enough currency to even buy one cosmetics. And forgetting to say that some of the grinding can't be done over and over the same day. By giving you just a bit of currency, Ubisoft is just trying to push you to buy more.

3-Well, you acknowledged how you sound, so I won't push it too far, but a company has always the choice to not dabble in practices that are obviously against the customer. This is another marketing BS publishers are trying to sell us (like the "it's only cosmetics" one). So no, when you look at the money video games are racking up right now, companies don't "need" to put microtransactions in full priced games. They can do that in their free games.But where I'll concede a bit is that fiduciary duty on the ceo makes them obligated to pursue such tactics. Sad world indeed.

4-Come on, apples and oranges here! Arcade games in the 80s/90s and home console games today are really not the same thing, and the industry has transformed completely.

5-I personally consider season passes as evil as microtransactions. Monthly subs are something else, some models make sense... but since I don't play multiplayer games, so I can't really defend them too much.

6-On this we agree. Which makes these tactics even worse since the publishers are using the ignorance of most of their customers to earn even more profit. So making as much people as possible aware of what they're getting and why it's bad is a good thing on our part.

So no. ; )

Given its Ubisoft, it would be more surprising of they didn't

@Olmaz

Thank you for matching the energy of my post. I often make a big post that goes ignored so it’s nice to see someone cares. Great responses to all my points. I do consider these viewpoints but at this time and place I don’t think much will change. Capitalism is the issue not game marketing specifically.

Of course, this ubisoft we're talking about, not fromsoft or nintendo.

@Olmaz @MikeOrator
Thank you for the respectful discussion!

@MikeOrator You're welcome, I also have the sad tendency to write long comments on forums like this, to the annoyance of most, so I get you!

I don't disagree completely with "capitalism is the issue", but it's an easy shortcut. Capitalism itself is not an issue, but a tool. How to reign it and use it efficiently should be the goal. But let's not delve into a deep analysis of our economic system here on PushSquare, I'm pretty sure it's not the right place! : )

But to get back to our issue, even if video game marketing is just another symptom of the disease, it shouldn't stop us making evident to everyone how bad the symptom is. Finding a cure always start by exposing the symptoms. ; )

@IOI It's an expansion on what was originally Valhalla DLC which was something of a series celebration anyway such as the France DLC bringing in Unity gameplay etc.

Can't say I recall the microtransactions ever getting in the way of AC games. They've always been shortcuts or cosmetic. The former speeding up the base game grind rather than, say, grind implemented to encourage purchase.

Preorderd and have no problem if people who want to buy cosmetics.