Community Managers: Empirical Evidence Part II

This is a follow up post to my previous one (can't link, because it has since been deleted? hmmm) about the lack of transparency between us, the players/fans, and Ubisoft. I will reiterate my previous point (since I can't link you to my previous post (: )– I do not wish to crucify anyone at Ubisoft. Ghost Recon could be a great game, but unless things change, it won't be.

Many of you asked for the empirical evidence that I had. Instead I will merely point you in the right direction — go and look at how old r/rainbow6 is…

Need I remind you that other Rainbow Six titles are in existence (other than Siege)? Are they mentioned on this sub? No. Is that a coincidence? No.

They did the same bogus fluff that they are doing now back when Rainbow Six: Patriots was cancelled, and they will continue to do it. The fact that many of you choose to ignore it is not my fault, but you can read through the forum posts outside of Reddit (that's a hint) if you do not believe me.

Ubisoft has hired "community managers" before to "gauge the community". It's merely to fabricate some kind of positive image. Pretend to listen. Pretend to care. Pretend to notice. Never deliver. They ignored us in the past, and they will continue to do so. Community requests, no matter how popular, mean very little to them. Even from their most loyal fans.

If you are a "community manager" reading this post, please explain the following: if you really care about your fans and their opinions, then why did Ubisoft send a cease and desist notice to Project IV?

All your loyal fans want is a spiritual successor to the old Rainbow Six and Ghost Recon games. Please stop ignoring us!


Original post

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *