Increasingly, we’re seeing publishers incentivise their expensive Deluxe and Ultimate Editions with early access. While these bundles generally include additional items, like DLC and cosmetics, many fans buy them because they’re excited to play an upcoming title as soon as possible. That’s certainly the case with open worlder Star Wars Outlaws’ £105/$110 Gold Edition, which has been available since Tuesday, 27th August.
The problem is, Reddit is awash with correspondence from Ubisoft, asking fans to restart their save files. According to the French publisher, players may encounter game breaking bugs if they continue their progress, and thus must ensure they update their game to the newest version and start over to avoid any potential problems. “If you continue on a prior save you will unfortunately face issues and progression blockers,” the email reads.
While it’s obviously a good thing that the firm has caught this issue fast and contacted players immediately, it does render the point of paying extra to play early redundant. There are a handful of fans on Reddit who’d already made significant progress in the game, and are now facing the prospect of starting all over again.
To be fair, the company has acknowledged this isn’t the “best experience” in a follow-up email, and is pledging 100 Ubisoft Connect Points and a Trailblazer trinket to make up for the inconvenience. Personally, we think we’d prefer some kind of financial recompense for podding out on the more expensive version only to be inconvenienced, but maybe we’re just being too optimistic here.
Either way, take heed whenever you plan to play Star Wars Outlaws to ensure you have v1.000.002 or later installed – and always think carefully before splashing out on these expensive early access promotions.
[source reddit.com, via x.com, x.com]
Comments 68
I don't understand why people are willing to pay more to start a few days earlier - but then, I've learned to curb my FOMO and wait until a good sale, so I'm rarely leaping in on release day for any game.
It makes more sense to me for season-based games like EA Sports titles, where a few extra days could give you a competitive advantage early.
Never go full Ubisoft… and that’s from someone who actually likes their games 😅. Wait a month or two and their games will be half the price and be double the game (well they’ll be patched and work better than at release anyway).
Yay gaming in 2024 a ducking shambles from one thing to the next, from one month to the next.
Monetizing early access to a game is gross, and I will purposefully wait to buy games that are published in this manner in deep sales.
That said, at this point you're pretty loose with your money if you're not waiting the three months it takes for their games to be discounted 50% anyway.
Don't most patches just integrate in fine with current save files? This is the first I've heard of a patch also needing the player to start from scratch. Kinda odd.
If you charge a premium price to play early, and then f it up for these early adopters, you should refund a premium price...
(Didnt buy it myself, im just going by what is fair)
@Veritas7Ax
Not always, but it is very rare - i nearly got caught by one in the last couple of years but managed to avoid it as i was a bit behind others...i just cant remember what game it was...sorry.
@Veritas7Ax It's definitely rare. Like you say, usually the patch just fixes the game and the save is unaffected.
So yeah, this is pretty unfortunate. (Especially as it will only really affect those who paid extra.)
Early Access. Pay more. Get less. Guaranteed. That's the Gen 9 promise!
Most people who are caught by this will still shell out for the next early access game from Ubisoft as the FOMO is just too strong.
I assume the update will give them a message saying this or there will be a lot of people who just blindly carry on.
This is only on PS5, right?
@Lup That’s what I’ve been reading, which makes me glad I’m playing it on Series X via Ubisoft+.
@colonelkilgore with the Star Wars logo I don’t think it’s gonna be half price anytime soon, but yeah, at least the major bugs will get sorted out.
Yeah it is awkward for sure. But marketing and desperation works clearly. They better not have gotten too far ahead before then and it's online only so no choice but to take the update, how great of 3 day early access those that purchased that tier. Ah major patches.
I’m hoping there’s a Stars thing for this game. But I’d not pay double for it.
I’m sorry for anybody who has to go through all that. 😬
Surely refunds are due at this point. Shocking to pay for early access anyway (you’re a mug) but you’d at least want it to work.
Begging for people to stop buying Ubisoft games at launch. They’ll be $20 by next year
@colonelkilgore 100% I got AC Valhalla 2 months after it came out for $30 and it STILL had the pre-order quest in the case too, there's no reason to buy Ubisoft games at launch.
This seems to be a disc thing as my pre-download what i downloaded on the 25th was already with the latest patch and i've had zero issues with this bug so if you went digital you're fine.
I can't imagine myself paying 100 bucks to played the game early even if i have the money. But with how buggy / broken Ubisoft games, i'm glad i never buy their games on day 1.
These past 5 years, i only bought 3 Ubisoft games and i got them from a big sale; AC China for 2 bucks, Watch Dogs 2 for 5 bucks, and AC Syndicate for 7-8 bucks. That's a total 14-15 bucks for 3 games, much cheaper than 100 bucks for one early access game with a broken save file mwahahaha 😆
This reminds me of the time I had to sit in Ibiza airport for 21 hours due to my airline having a breakdown and having to bring another plane to pick us all up. I was so sleep deprived by the 20th hour that I couldn’t stop laughing when we all got sat in the flight and they handed out complimentary mini coke cans. A ingame trinket, absolutely meaningless gesture and of no value at all.
@Loamy as I said in the forum, if this is the actual reason, does that mean that they released a game in its version 1.0000 state that did not function as a complete game? Testers will have seen this, surely, as it is just from regular progression, not even stress testing. So they green lit it for release in that state with the "patch later" mindset, knowing full well it was totally broken. It is fine for small glitches and random stuff in a game that still works as a complete game, but if the original game does not actually function, how can it be legal to release in that state? it really baffles the brain 🫠🫠🫠
@Deoxyr1bose that advice is also kind of loopy if you think about it though. "If you want to buy a game that you definitely want to play then wait until it's cheap or second hand"...
...So, then what? Studios will never make any games that you want to play, as no one is buying them 🫠
I know it's Ubisoft, and I've made my thoughts clear about this f*** up, but come on... think a little about what that advice would actually mean to the industry.
I’ve got a bad feeling about this
This is hilarious
@shonenjump86 why? They made the decision to give money to Ubisoft knowing full well what kind of company Ubisoft is
@Ravix maybe they might learn to release a good polished game if gamers stop throwing money and their wallets at them.
@Loamy ah, thought I'd lost you. Class action would have been an entertaining twist in the tale. But i'm glad you found out anyway, as I was wondering the exact ins and outs of the issue, but didn't really know where to look.
So atleast someone can play through 1.0000 and never update and get to the end. But if they update it will kill their original save. Very strange indeed and probably quite muddy waters, no doubt covered by all the terms no one reads 😅
@KillerBoy missing the point by being subjective 👀 The advice they suggested wasn't aimed at people who aren't sure if they want the game, it's aimed at people that really want the game and thus buy it on release day(-3), so it is obviously the type of game they want to play in the first place so that argument is totally moot.
It doesn't matter if it's Ubisoft, or some indie dev, if someone makes games that you know you want, you should always support them if you are able to.
Whether or not you think Ubi is worthy of this doesn't really matter as you aren't the one buying it. So you're basically saying the fun of others is not a valid reason to buy games they want 😅
Overall, I do agree with you that people should vote with their wallets... so if you do not believe the quality you want is present, dont vuy it. But on the flip side, if it's a game you want, you buy it otherwise what is the point in ever wanting anything.
£105 beta testers
@Ralizah Is it really gross though? People want it, and they're willing to pay the price, so why not make a buck? When you think about it over the life cycle of the game, isn't that how it's always been? If you want to play it first, you're going to pay the most. The price will naturally drop due to decreased demand, so those who waited are rewarded with a discount. I dislike the Ubislop experience, but this to me is just downright clever. Monetize the FOMO.
v1.000.002 has been available since the 25th Aug (2 Days prior to launch) so this should only affect a very small amount of players who for some reason are not connected to the internet for a disc based update or have updates turned off.
Got to say this is one of those increasing number of fluff articles I have noticed post pandemic.
@Loamy No what i'm saying is when i downloaded the game on the 25th the update was already included with the download so digital versions shouldn't be impacted as from the off the update was there.
@IntrepidWombat "People want it, and they're willing to pay the price, so why not make a buck?"
You realize this reasoning can be used to justify just about anything sleazy in the industry, right?
Sacrificing trust and your brand image for short-term money grubbing schemes like this is a bad trade.
Games starting at full price and dropping in sales is about adjusting prices to account for lessening demand, not milking your biggest fans for everything they're worth.
Not that I agree with how they adjust their prices, either, because rapidly devaluing your games after launch is also pretty unfair to the people who support your games at launch. Punishing people for buying in early is a good way of pushing people off of day one purchases for all but the biggest franchises. Which ends up impacting their smaller, better games the most.
I do not feel bad what so ever for people paying over a 100 dollars to play a game 3 days early lol.
making uninformed buying decisions always comes with a risk^^
@Ralizah "Games starting at full price and dropping in sales is about adjusting prices to account for lessening demand, not milking your biggest fans for everything they're worth."
To continue playing the devil's advocate, I could argue that most games (barring exceptions for truly exceptional titles) are never more in demand than in their early release windows. What any commodity is worth is determined by the market - if the market is willing to pay $110 for a game, then that's that game's full price, and the $70 price point is the first price drop based on a projected fall-off of demand. I'd also argue that the publisher telling people up front, "Hey, the price is going to drop in three days" is a pretty stand-up thing to do. They could just say, "We're going to launch the game at $110. We will drop it eventually, but you're going to have to guess when. Either be patient or buy it now, but we're not telling." Given that people are willing to pay the price, I'd say that's between those people and the publisher.
Ubi's credibility went out the window ages ago. This doesn't hurt their brand image because it's already in the toilet, but that doesn't stop people from buying the corporatized garbage they continue to spew out. If Capcom announced a Resident Evil Code: Veronica remake and that I could play it a few days early for an extra $30, I'd do what I've done for the last 20 years any time a Resident Evil game comes out: take the day off work, ensure that I had it in hand as early as possible, and play the hell out of it with a smile on my face. Who am I to say that people who eant end to do the same thing with this game are wrong?
@IntrepidWombat "if the market is willing to pay $110 for a game, then that's that game's full price, and the $70 price point is the first price drop based on a projected fall-off of demand."
With big releases, up to a certain theoretical limit, there's going to be a tiny portion of the audience that'll spend hundreds of dollars for 'special editions' of games. You talk about 'the market,' when, in reality, that's a tiny minority of people. Actual game launches, on the other hand, are typically when game sales are at their peak (thus the game being full MSRP).
Moreover, if the special edition price was the 'full price,' it wouldn't be bundled with season pass vouchers and release days early.
Also worth mentioning that a more expensive edition of this game exists as well. Does that mean the game's full price is $130, and it releases simultaneously with a price drop? Do you see how this framing breaks apart with just a little bit of scrutiny?
"Ubi's credibility went out the window ages ago. This doesn't hurt their brand image because it's already in the toilet, but that doesn't stop people from buying the corporatized garbage they continue to spew out."
Sure, and it has damaged them when it comes to all but the biggest releases that have penetrated into the mainstream. Companies can and do reverse course and repair their brand image over time.
When one is in a hole, it's usually advisable to stop digging, even if it takes a bit of time to climb out.
Gave them my money, and have zero problems so far, not even a bug. Very happy with the game.
Use your money however you want, people.
I'm more amazed that people still buy Ubi games at launch, nevermind earlier.
It will be £30 by Christmas.
Paying 110 for a game you can play on Ubisoft+ is insane.
@Loamy @Ravix
Not sure about lawsuits, but this 'patch it later' attitude definitely is one of the biggest issues backfiring on publishers (and devs), and isnt good for anyone.
There have always been those customers who only buy on sale (im sort of ignoring these).
However, there is a growing prevalence of not buying at launch due to the large number of unoptimised / buggy games launched in the last few years.
I know ive done it before - game comes out with performance issues, i wait, game is fixed, i wait a little bit longer until its on sale (next sale).
I also know that pre orders are very important to publishers/devs (though i cant see another reason except being locked in at full price).
After a few bad experiences culminating in Jedi Survivor (which i couldnt play until they patched it approx 6 months later), and mostly due to fps issues, I stopped pre-ordering last year anything but 1st party Sony (purely because of their excellent track record) - and I used to pre order (well) over half my games.
I did see an article a while back which showed that the average purchase price of games had gone down, even though 'full price' had gone up. Im sure that there is an element of 'if your putting prices up i will wait for sale', but im sure the article showed that actual purchase price average was still going down.
I know im not average in my gaming habits - who is - but i know publisher / devs putting out unoptimised games has completely changed how i buy games over the last year or so, and i now buy far fewer games at full price.
Loamy - i know we spoke about Lies of P recently - this was an exception - i played the pre launch demo, was really happy, so pre ordered.
The day publishers (and developers) treat the customer with a bit more respect and don't release games with these (and many more) issues, is the day that maybe they will more regularly earn my top dollar when I buy games on or around launch. Until then, I'm more than happy to wait until the game is ready to enjoy as intended. I realise that day may never come, but I don't see this as an unreasonable stance.
Again it is proven that you never should buy games day one. You will always have better experience if you wait a while. Maybe only Astro will prove that wrong, but in any other case this rule is a "must follow". Same will prove with Indiana. We will play much polished game than the xbox day one fans (muhahaha)
@Ravix Yeah, not to mention you're saving such a relatively small amount of money while waiting 3 months or more to do something you want to do. If you save £30 by waiting 3 months, you now have about 33p a day more for those 3 months. You go to a pub for a meal and a few pints and spend £40 but if I put off something I enjoy for a quarter of a year I can save less than that? Wow.
If you wait for it to be more patched, I can understand that - though personally, the games I buy aren't the ones that release as a buggy mess.
@colonelkilgore or even better. Wait 2 years for the gold edition at 66% off!
This might just be what people needed to realise how silly it is to pay for early access
Playing games early as a pre-order incentive is a trend that needs to burn, but also 100 Ubi-Points is so LOL, its completely worthless, makes me almost respect the sheer big F U energy it has. Though if you're still spending £100 plus on day 1 UBI games in 2024...
I find it hard to sympathise with those affected. If you spend that much to play a couple of days early, in an industry where products releasing in an unacceptable state is becoming increasingly more common, you clearly have more money than sense.
Everyone is free to spend their money as they see fit, but I really wish we'd stop rewarding these companies for their questionable practices.
I don’t get this. A save file contains a property determining the game’s version it was created under. Hence when having updated the game and trying to load an older version save file, it’s either directly compatible or a conversion/migration process runs on them to make sure they’re working with the new version. I don’t see any reason why such migration algorithm is unable to be built in this particular case except for unwillingness.
@Veritas7Ax RDR2, BF4, Cyberpunk 2077
Is this game not sold in the UK? Don't think we have games in dollars here. Is this site based in America or something?
It’s bad enough paying to play early but for a Ubisoft game?!?! I enjoy a lot of their games but you’d get the better experience if you wait
@get2sammyb this is fortunate you mean. Those people were supporting bad business practices and they got what they deserved.
Some weird takes on people who buy things early access and don't wait. Also the logic of waiting is based on the presumption you are owed time you might never get. That is why if I want something I don't wait for it. I can replace lost money but I cannot replace lost time.
@Lup 100% mate, I have it pre-ordered but didn't go as far as paying extra for early access but only because I am Northern and tight 😂 I can't wait to play it, less than 24 hours for me now
Out of interest what do the trophies look like?
This is more then unfortunate this is taking money from people who payed for early access.
Also it's just releasing the game later for the rest and a the people who payed extra got a worse version.
I happens way to much that early releases for extra cash don't work properly this happens quite a lot with releases lately.
And giving people ingame garbage or with the suïcide squad that gave you useless ingame currency that does not cost them a thing is just a rippoff.
You let people pay for the the early access if it has issue give them a refund for the money payed extra.
@Matroska That would a solid case but with Ubisoft games they drop off so much in price it's the smartest thing to do. You can another discounted games for that difference.
I'm currently downloading the base version ready for a little blast at 12 midnight. Can't wait.
@Matroska People aren't gaming it out by how many cents a day they save, they're thinking if they wait 6-12 months and pay $30 they can now buy two older games for that price instead of one new release.
If they have patience and/or a giant backlog it's a logical choice for those on a budget, plus by then it's a superior experience after all the patches fix whatever bugs were found.
This didn't happen to me but I started playing AFTER the update...so I can't give an opinion.
I'm still sour about Watch Dogs. Gamers never forget.
This is nothing short of hilarious! Ubisoft can really stick it upwards.
This is why I never buy games on launch, it makes sense to wait for the lion's share of bugs to be ironed out first. That "getting in early" creates even more issues is actually pretty sad.
Outcast sounded promising, but Ubisoft is not my favorite developer, and many games feel samey.
This game is good (6 or higher out of 10), but I think I'd like Survivor much better. I was fond of the first one, but I needed to see if Outcast would do something truly special.
Also, lame with early access prices. Ironic that players that are most eager and willing to shell out by far gets the least polished and worked on game. Even to the point of having to restart. That's egregious.
It's a shame. Last game I bought was...... Enslaved on steam. For my deck... Not ever buying full price again.
@Ralizah And its not even a real early access they just let you pay so other can wait. The sad thing is that recent early access was the opposite of what it was.
And now it's used in the worst way the opposite way it was intend for to make the game better now it is used to make a quick buck.
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...