[QUOTE=Craptasket;52295830][img]https://i.imgur.com/TXJExaf.png[/img]
This is bothering me more than it should[/QUOTE]
This is all I can picture..
[IMG]https://i.stack.imgur.com/OgkQD.jpg[/IMG]
What exactly is the logo supposed to be.
[QUOTE=AaronM202;52296037]What exactly is the logo supposed to be.[/QUOTE]
A logo. What exactly was it supposed to be before?
[QUOTE=AaronM202;52296037]What exactly is the logo supposed to be.[/QUOTE]
swirl like their old one
The lines on the logo seem like they should be a lot thinner, otherwise it's not that bad.
Swirls are the most uninspired logos.
[QUOTE=Alxnotorious;52295959]I undersand, it's meant to signify breaking with the norms of games media while also conforming to the same black and white, simplified template for logos that other companies have begun using.[/QUOTE]
Pretty much this. The 2003 logo was out of date, and the new one conveys the same basic design in a more usable format while also incorporating some stylization in the text treatment of the brand. The old one just doesn't work in monochrome, turns into a swirly mess at low sizes, and relies on gradients and shadows that now look out of date and are harder to resolve in a visually cluttered medium. The new one reflects the general tech industry trend of redesigning logos to work everywhere with flat, high-contrast, minimalist design and web-safe fonts so content can match the typographic branding.
I don't think I've ever seen a logo thread on Facepunch that wasn't a chorus of 'lmao I could do better than that in five minutes of photoshop'. If it were 2003 I guarantee people would be complaining that the 'new' Ubisoft logo has a goofy font, pointless trademark, lack of color, and unnecessary use of drop shadows and layering. Sometimes the criticisms are legitimate, but even the best logos meet resistance simply because they're different from what people are used to.
[QUOTE=Nemisis116;52295870]Why is it every time a big company makes a new logo its a flat boring solid colored cheap piece of shit
Can this terrible fad please end[/QUOTE]
One of the important things in a good logo is having it pretty versatile, so it's supposed to be recognizable even when you only use two colours. But I do agree that this one below is cleaner.
[QUOTE=DFC;52295927]Should have just used
[Thumb]http://vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net/logopedia/images/c/c1/Ubisoft_logo_Monochrome.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20150318102620[/thumb][/QUOTE]
The new one looks like someone cranked up the stroke too much. But actually I like the new font more, if we forget about that fucked up O.
I miss the second logo, with the rainbow.
Third one is ok, too. Never remembered the first one.
4th one I honestly don't like.
I wonder how the animated version goes.
I liked the previous logo's variations that you had in certain games
[video=youtube;gLSwo8gMF3g]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLSwo8gMF3g[/video]
God I hate this trend of "lets use the same fucking font and single color for an original flat piece of shit made in 30 seconds".
[QUOTE=Sombrero;52296267]God I hate this trend of "lets use the same fucking font and single color for an original flat piece of shit made in 30 seconds".[/QUOTE]
It is, however, a trend and Ubisoft are following it.
Their 1986 logo follows the trend at the time, with the bright colors and that joined up text
Their 1995 logo follows the trend at the time, serif fonts etc
Their 2003 logo follows the trend at the time, where people played around more with fancy effects, gradients, shadows etc.
Well... that didn't take long :v:
[IMG]http://cs6.pikabu.ru/post_img/2017/05/31/11/14962556771916497.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE=darth-veger;52296266]I wonder how the animated version goes.
I liked the previous logo's variations that you had in certain games
[video=youtube;gLSwo8gMF3g]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLSwo8gMF3g[/video][/QUOTE]
Well that as infinitely more character
why not just use that for everything?
I love that each new logo was so unique and different, and if anyone remembers their history with games, actually did signify some pretty big changes along the way with the evolution of the company and just seeing these logos again brings back some really great memories.
It's a shame that this new logo is just a really poxy iteration on what they've been using and on top of that just looks plain shit anyway. Kind of just goes with the theme of how Ubisoft has spiraled these days. Why does this logo change make me sad?! I'm pathetically nostalgic haha but it is what it is.
[QUOTE=AaronM202;52296037]What exactly is the logo supposed to be.[/QUOTE]
It's probably not meant to be anything in particular but it sets them apart and makes them instantly recognizable.
I worked for a company once that had a heart as their logo and it was really hard for the marketing team to make that sort of common symbol their own.
It looked fine before. A bit flat, but not too flat, still some depth and colour. Now it has no depth whatsoever. Or colour, for that matter. Doesn't stand out to me at all or look unique
I'm far from being an artist and I can see glaring problems with this. For one, it's uninteresting to look at; there is next to no variation- varying the thickness of the lines could've made a huge difference. Second, it's use of those sharp corners appears totally thoughtless- the corners draw the focal point either to the end of the spiral or a bit off from the center- neither being an interesting point to look at.
I can't say who is at fault here but if the person that decided upon this logo has a design degree, I'd be pretty shocked.
Idk I like it
... The logo is fine.
It's nothing special, but it's hardly worth complaining about.
snip, i'm late
[QUOTE=Megalan;52296815]Well... that didn't take long :v:
[IMG]http://cs6.pikabu.ru/post_img/2017/05/31/11/14962556771916497.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]
perfectly summarizes the company on the hole
[t]http://i.imgur.com/dU4zJtm.png[/t]
[QUOTE=Nemisis116;52295870]Why is it every time a big company makes a new logo its a flat boring solid colored cheap piece of shit
Can this terrible fad please end[/QUOTE]
flat solid colour design is the standard that should be aimed for - just ones that are good. as everyone else is saying, the little disjointed part of the O is frustrating to look at
i like it, very clean
the thing on the O makes it stand out and a bit more memorable, it also matches the look of the outer ring of the swirl
[QUOTE=Eric95;52298453]the thing on the O makes it stand out and a bit more memorable, it also matches the look of the outer ring of the swirl[/QUOTE]
yes that is very clear - but designs should also be pleasant to look at
[QUOTE=Rusty100;52298458]yes that is very clear - but designs should also be pleasant to look at[/QUOTE]
it is pleasant to look at imo
it's like whining about how the O in the previous logo had one square corner, you'll get used to it
Those hard 90 degree edges upset me far more than they should.
I wonder how long they'll keep it. It seems like almost everyone thinks it's a big pile of shit (in some cases quite literally) but companies hate admitting they did something wrong.
I don't mind making the logo more minimal, even if that's so boring and safe, but I'd at least like them to make it a perfect circle and get rid of those sharp edges. While they are, I guess more 'unique', they're unique in a bad way.
[QUOTE=Mister Sandman;52298784]I wonder how long they'll keep it. It seems like almost everyone thinks it's a big pile of shit (in some cases quite literally) but companies hate admitting they did something wrong.
I don't mind making the logo more minimal, even if that's so boring and safe, but I'd at least like them to make it a perfect circle and get rid of those sharp edges. While they are, I guess more 'unique', they're unique in a bad way.[/QUOTE]
It's unique in that "I'm a visual design genius here's my first logo ever" way.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
