Ubisoft announced today that the For Honor Closed Beta will be available from January 26th–29th on PC. Those still waiting to pledge their sword can sign up to have a chance to participate in the closed beta at its official website.
Coinciding with the Closed Beta, Ubisoft is launching War of the Factions, a limited-time event which will help answer the question: When the mighty Vikings, deadly Samurai and bold Knights finally collide on the battlefield, who will reign supreme?
War of the Factions will track all multiplayer activities across all platforms from all players during the Closed Beta, and will reward players for fighting for their factions and honor the winning faction with additional rewards. The rewards will transfer to the full game and only be available to Closed Beta participants.
Developed by Ubisoft Montreal in collaboration with other Ubisoft studios, For Honor promises to offer an engaging campaign and thrilling multiplayer.
Players embody warriors of the three Great Factions – the bold Knights, the brutal Vikings and the enigmatic Samurai – fighting to the death on intense and believable melee battlefields.
The game will be online-only and its innovative combat system aims to put players in total control of their warriors, allowing them to utilise the unique skills and combat style of each hero to vanquish all enemies who stand in their way.
For Honor will be available on February 14th!
John is the founder and Editor in Chief at DSOGaming. He is a PC gaming fan and highly supports the modding and indie communities. Before creating DSOGaming, John worked on numerous gaming websites. While he is a die-hard PC gamer, his gaming roots can be found on consoles. John loved – and still does – the 16-bit consoles, and considers SNES to be one of the best consoles. Still, the PC platform won him over consoles. That was mainly due to 3DFX and its iconic dedicated 3D accelerator graphics card, Voodoo 2. John has also written a higher degree thesis on the “The Evolution of PC graphics cards.”
Contact: Email
They pretend that this game is meant to be epic. Instead, under the veil of advertisement (which num?bnuts think will make the game better), we got a SJW hack’n’slash with exaggerated characters, where you kill mostly bots. For me it’s all fur coat and no knickers, like so many AAA games nowadays.
Where is the hell is it “SJW”?
Female samurai, black vikings, etc.
It’s a travesty of those cultures. Now everything has to be artificially equalized. All cultures and genders are mindlessly cobbled together, only to prevent some overly sensitive adult brats from complaining.
It’s a videogame. From Ubisoft, so historical accuracy is out of the window (and they never claimed faithfulness).
Also, do you realize that this isn’t different than someone complaining that it doesn’t have different genders or whathever?
You realize how meaningless this all this is?
The same “adult brats” complaining about “hurr durr mah videogames are offensive” aren’t different that the ones “hurr durr mah videogames are being diverse”.
FFS, one group will complain “it is Y because this”, the other “It is X because that” and where does it “is it any good?” comes to question?
Not even f*cking once.
Videogames are full of of rancid sh*t I tell you.
“and where does it “is it any good?” comes to question?”
For Honor seems very dull as a game, in my opinion. I already mentioned it in the first comment.
——————————
“From Ubisoft, so historical accuracy is out of the window (and they never claimed faithfulness).”
But it’s stupid, as long as they call them “Vikings” or “Samurai”, and use items and behaviors from their cultures. They speak Icelandic and Japanese in order to refer to their historical counterparts. So Ubisoft wants us to believe there is some element of reality to them.
I think it’s disingenuous and kind of shows the lack of respect for those cultures. If you call a group “bulldogs”, there shouldn’t be poodles or cats there.
——————————
“The same “adult brats” complaining about “hurr durr mah videogames are
offensive” aren’t different that the ones “hurr durr mah videogames are being diverse”.”
It’s not the same. If you shoot an innocent human, you are a murderer. If you shoot an assaulter, you’re just a defender. One could say that they are the same because “a person using a firearm shot another person” applies to both. But they are not. Intentions count.
Same there, the agenda has been and is being pushed. Ubisoft overtly stresses the fact that their games have diverse casts. By doing this, they strongly suggest that they do it just to appease someone. Do you understand that such weird catering can get annoying? Because for me, such intentions are pathetic. Why do we need to pretend that women and men are the same? It’s bulls?hit that nobody right in their mind believes in, but still they pretend to do so. It’s an elephant in the room. I feel obligated to point it out.
Ubisoft said that For Honor was “a game for everyone”, because it included both genders and many races. So they think games are only for the people who match the protagonists’ races and genders? Okay, so Tomb Raider isn’t for me because I’m a male? That’s nonsense.
Battlefield 1 is even worse, though. There we have agenda in a game about an authentic conflict…
Oh Jesus F*cking Christ, it is like making a mountain out of a molehill.
By the virtue of being a videogame we have to stop this “disrespect of culture yadda yadda”. It is power fantasy, something that someone thought that was cool to make a videogame out of and they went and did it. Some bits of research here and there tells nothing, it is just fluff.
Vikings vs Samurais vs Medieval warriors. Full stop, done. Not real.
We have specific cases for games going for accuracy, not all games go for it and we should have learned by now.
“The agenda has been and is being pushed. Ubisoft overtly stresses
the fact that their games have diverse casts. By doing this, they
strongly suggest that they do it just to appease someone. Do you
understand that such awkward and false catering can get annoying? Because for me, such intentions are pathetic. Why do we need to pretend
that women and men are the same? It’s bulls?hit that nobody in their
right mind believes in, but still many pretend to do so.”
You know what you do? Roll your eyes and move on. Otherwise as soon as you start “you shouldn’t do that” you know what is the first group to be annoyed and/or affected by that? Exactly the same group you, without even thinking, indirectly blame for the “malaise”.
Ubisoft (or any company for that matter)? Laughing all the way to the bank.
“Ubisoft said that For Honor was “a game for everyone”, because it
included both genders and many races as playable characters. So they
think games are only for the people who match the protagonists’ races
and genders? Okay, so Tomb Raider isn’t for me because I’m a male?
No, and you are twisting the same way your “boogie man SJWs” twists everything to fit their particular agendas.
Any reasonable group will see both points of both annoying groups and will come with a reasonable conclusion or ways to work it out.
But all those sh*t flinging idiots do is the usual “X game doesn’t appeal to me, clearly this is Y doing” between themselves.
This isn’t going to solve nothing (and gaming has a lot of issues to solve). It is just pointing fingers, and that makes the ambient in this industry unbearable by the day.
I’m sure, like me, he is still pissed that Dead Pool got beat out by some finger-snappin’ musical…. and is just transferring his wish for a real ‘R’ rated triple A game, just like we finally got a real ‘R’ rated Superhero blockbuster.
Degrading the game industry is something I should be worried about. Things get so neutered and forcibly politically correct (even though they are rated M!), that it makes me cringe and spoils the whole fun. It’s better to scold those who do this in order to show something isn’t right.
And it’s not only a problem concerning games. White males get fired in real life, just because the rates of people of each ethnicity and gender have to be equal. Job isn’t about ethnicity or gender, but about doing the required things as good as possible. You know, this is racism, but racism glorified by governments (politicians work like pop stars, average people will just recognize their famous faces and believe in whatever they say). It’s powered by the very same delusion which is powering the developers of For Honor or Battlefield 1. That’s what I hate. They’re trying to turn the world upside down.
Why didn’t old games have such weird things going on in them? Why no one was complaining when there was a male-only cast of soldiers? What caused the developers to be artificially inclusive recently? Do you think it’s a good thing and why?
Yes, social politics is what degrades the game industry, right.
FFS.
It is not turning upside down, is giving the same opportunities as people that for reasons unknown didn’t/don’t have.
Yeah, it sucks to get fired, the artificiality sucks also, but it also sucks to complain about different groups being able to have the same opportunities that you’ve learned to take for granted.
Equality is about giving everyone a equal chance, not about giving everyone a equal result.
The same way you say “this is taking my chances” someone can say “no, this is giving me one”.
How the hell is having a female cast of historical figures/groups, on a already established not realistic situation, affect your enjoyment?
How the hell some groups having a better time identifying with a character on a videogame (that being artificial or not) is bad? Do you come to a gay or lesbian or trans and say “you shouldn’t support that representation because that’s artificial”? How does that affect you?
Oh, and if you think that old games didn’t have any political meaning back them, you’re in for a surprise.
And just to clarify, yes, there is a issue with PCs, people complaining about meaningless stuff, but there is also the other annoying side of people complaining about people complaining.
It is a pile of sh*t on top of another.
Just learn some reasoning, learn to be better and move on. If people are wrong, they will remain wrong until the end, trying to shun down them will only make them scream louder.
“Yes, social politics is what degrades the game industry, right.
FFS.”
Yes, it degrades the game industry in a way. Of course it’s independent of, for instance, making the gameplay shallow. Rainbow Six: Siege annoys me recently with this men/women equality (how many girls want to be in special forces? And how many boys do? Delusion.), but the gameplay per se is really good.
It also makes things more boring, because EVERY game has to have EVERY culture in it.
“Yeah, it sucks to get fired, the artificiality sucks also, but it also
sucks to complain about different groups being able to have the same
opportunities that you’ve learned to take for granted.”
But they have equal opportunities. A black/white/yellow person can show that they can do some job well, and he’ll get hired. A black/white/yellow person may show that they can’t do a job, and they won’t get hired. What’s unequal there?
“Equality is about giving everyone a equal chance, not about giving everyone a equal result.”
Yes, so it’s an equal chance: show that you can do the job, we’ll hire you. We don’t care about your skin color.
Equal result is exactly what those people want to achieve. We don’t care about how good you can do the job, we only care about your skin color and will hire you based on that.
“The same way you say “this is taking my chances” someone can say “no, this is giving me one”.
But it’s unfair. It’s as if one runner was faster than the other, but the slower one was awarded the gold medal just because of his skin color. Don’t you think it’s morally wrong?
“How the hell is having a female cast of historical figures/groups, on a already established not realistic situation, affect your enjoyment?”
Because it comes off as weird, since they’re called Vikings, Samurai, Knights – like real-life groups. Wouldn’t mind too much if their names were clearly fantastic.
“How the hell some groups having a better time identifying with a
character on a videogame (that being artificial or not) is bad? Do you
come to a gay or lesbian or trans and say “you shouldn’t support that
representation because that’s artificial”? How does that affect you?”
Well, it’s annoying when they are overrepresented. Some people are deaf, but how often do we see deaf people in games? Some people are albinoes, but again, it’s not like somebody is trying to make half of the characters have this trait. They understand that not everything in this world has to be equally distributed (hell, the extreme and ultimate example of it is called heat death of the universe).
It’s like a kid on a party who prefers liquorice candy, so half of it will have to be liquorice. Even though the overwhelming majority of kids don’t like them. It’s just spoilsporting in my book.
Personally I don’t think it’s SJW, there are far worse examples than this one (such as Bioware’s games). But I do think their character designs is a bit odd and unimmersive. And I do agree political correction degrades gaming industry, and not just gaming but our whole world, it’s true and only fool deny it. I’m not white, not westerners, but even I can see that, because it also affects my country “negatively”.
Some people think they’re making the world a better place(even by video games), but actually they’re not! They think they “should” do it, but actually that’s wishful thinking, a delusion. They’re just making same mistakes some people did before, like those communists. They want representing everyone, satisfying everyone, liberating everyone, for “social justice”, but in the end they’re just pushing everyone into hell “equally”, with their hypocritical agendas. People will find out they’re not making an Utopia but actually Dystopia.
Ubisoft and honor does not go well together in the same sentence…or in any other way. 🙂
So they should rename the game to “For Money”
CBT on January 26th–29th when game releasing is February 14th? This don’t sound good 😉
R.I.P Video Games Industry.
No soft reset? So those privileged to play the beta also get a head start and can put their faction in the lead before the game is fully released? Fuck that. It may only be a minor lead, but it’s still sh**ting on your playerbase that isn’t in the beta.
*Insert counter-rant about life not being fair here*
Absolutely no reason to get this… unless it can be modded to take away virtually all of the horrible, oversized UI elements.
Let me play this like Witcher 3, and THEN I might think about spending actual money on it…
“It is a delusion for women to fantasize about being on special forces,
but for boys it is cool ‘cuz “thats the way it is”? F’ing hell.”
The delusion here lies in the thinking that boys and girls equally want to be operatives/knights/other manly roles, and that you have to equalize the distribution of genders and races, or otherwise you’ll hurt someone. I can guarantee it doesn’t happen, just like most boys don’t fantasize about being princesses.
They didn’t have too many women initially in Siege, by the way. But now they are adding two operatives at a time, and those couples always include both genders.
———————————————————-
“NO it has not, not all games do it and you’re doing the same thing that Anita did, that is, cherry picking and twisting it to fit your agenda.”
I know it’s not true that every game has every culture in it. What I mean is that’s kind of their endeavor. If Ubisoft were developing 100% of games, we’d be flooded with overly inclusive games.
———————————————————-
“All of a sudden having representation is artificial”
It isn’t, but having overrepresentation is.
———————————————————-
“Oh jeebus f*ck, who cares it isn’t a military training, is a bloody videogame.”
Sorry, a fan of immersion here. I care. There are many, many “just-a-video-games”, so if there is something more serious, a game that creates a strong feeling of being there, it’s a shame for me when it has to succumb to suspension of disbelief, like almost every other title.
———————————————————-
“how is that having diversity a bad thing?”
We’re talking about “that kind” of diversity, first of all. Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn’t. For example, it’s good in Overwatch, but not really in a medieval strategy with real-life factions. In Siege, we have real-life special operations units, so I expected something more authentic in this department.
“I’m not prepared to pursue my line of inquiry any further as I think this is getting too silly!”
F’ing hell S0ldier, f’king hell…
Haha, but the discussion isn’t silly at all, it’s just long-winded.
The moment you introduced “serious” and “my immersion” (well, it was already silly before those, but it just reached a breaking point) then it became silly.
Absolutely silly. 100% silly. Silly, silly, silly.
What do you dislike about immersion?
Do you think all games have to be “only games” revolving around suspension of disbelief, with petty boys wielding swords 5x bigger than them and jumping 50m high?
Now, the “It’s only a game” excuse is what is really silly there.
No, and stop twisting my words, if anything, I never said I dislike immersion (much to the contrary) and I’m not saying that games shouldn’t be immersive, but not all games are supposed to be.
I’m merely pointing out your silliness in complaining about immersion and accuracy in a game where Samurai, Vikings and Knights are fighting against each other or the “delusion” that is having women in a made up group of special forces fighting against terrorists with unknown purposes loosely based on a made up setting by a paranoid nutjob named Tom Clancy.
From what I know, Clancy’s books don’t have so many fighting women in them. Older games as well. It just “coincidentally” started happening when Ubisoft began promoting gender parity in their other games.
And looking at the Siege’s trailers, realism and immersion were to be expected. Don’t forget that those counter-terrorism units are real.
It’s not like I was asking for too much.
As for For Honor – it just strikes me as cheap and hamfisted pandering. The game wasn’t going to be immersive anyway. I don’t know where I said that I expected For Honor to be immersive.
Now, if those cases were isolated, maybe I wouldn’t suspect it’s some kind of agenda. However, I see what’s Ubisoft trying to do there. They promote artificial equality with many of their games, and they even brag about in the interviews. They visibly try to push their political views through their games.
All right, stop playing Ubisoft games, play only those that fits your agenda.
Problem solved.
Alternatively, you could stop taking things so f*cking seriously. But don’t let me tell you what to do, keep fighting the good fight chum.
Yep, I rarely play Ubisoft games.
There are no other devs who make games where you can run around in medieval or renaissance cities, though.
What service it does if it can’t be immersive with all that dirty diversity? :o)
I didn’t see very much hamfisted diversity in the first three games, to be honest. In Revelations, though, that sudden racial change of Desmond was weird as hell.
Oh my giddy aunt… I’m moving on from this.
Reply
OK, discussion ended.