Ubisoft: No New Games Unless They Can Be Made Into Franchises

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT
 

Dr.Awkward:
Idiots. Complete idiots. You're completely devaluing all your IPs this way - Just because this is how the fast food industry quickly grew to what it is today doesn't mean it can work the same in the games industry. People want quality these days, not quantity.

Here's some advice: You wouldn't have to "franchise" your games if you would cut out the bloat in the company. And in most cases, you're going to find that it's often near the top, and very hard to get rid of.

Not to mention that bloated marketing campaign he was so proudly displaying, how about putting that into another game. Some marketing budgets could afford a few small games on their budget alone it's rediculas.

Meh, I'm not worried. They'll say something stupid, there will be a commotion, and then they'll say they were misquoted. That or they'll devalue their IP's, realize they made a mistake, and then retract their statement. Either way, I never really cared for their company anyway. Luckily I have the self restraint not to buy sequels I know are bad. If a company makes bad sequels to good games, I do the research and proceed to not buy them. That way I can pretend there was no sequel. That's what I did with Final Fantasy 7. No idea what happened after the destruction of Midgar, and I can't say I really care.

What I find interesting about this is that everyone I talk to is far more interested in Watch Dogs than Assassin's Creed. You don't need to make a franchise. You just need to make a good game.

God dammit, Ubisoft. How could you possibly think this mindset is anything less than scum prime?

I'm still very excited for Watch_Dogs, but extremely less excited for the sequel, knowing it's going to be forced.

I almost hope the game doesn't sell well, to dissuade milking the fuck out of it.

Andy Chalk:
/images/library/deriv/499/499826.png' width='350' height='196']
Ubisoft's Vice President of Sales and Marketing says the triple-A game business these days is too expensive for "fire and forget" development.

And who's fault is that?? Yours. Your the ones who made game development so bloody expensive. It would probably help if you didn't spend so much on marketing esp. since you don't have to. In the age of social media you don't need to spend nearly as much money on marketing as you used to because work of mouth, or should I say, word of Internet will do most of the work for you. Yet you spend more money on marketing then you ever have before. Why is that? I sure as hell would love to know.

The_Echo:
I almost hope the game doesn't sell well, to dissuade milking the fuck out of it.

That would be one lesson they'd take from it. The other lesson would be, "We should stick to established IP's."

Vice President of Sales and Marketing, doesn't that say it all. Or maybe not, but it sure seems like it.

"Watch Dogs needs to be a blockbuster because it deserves to be"

Oh fuck off. This is just fear to be different, and it's why I don't expect much from triple AAA gaming scene anymore.

Nothing Ubisoft said in that quote tells me that they have any fucking idea how to make games successfully anymore.

So they are going to beat the Watchdogs IP to death? Yay 0 interest in it due to it.

Tony Key:
"Because now we're in (a) blockbuster world..."

Where one iceberg of a game can sink Titanic publishers.

Smart business strategy, guys. I'll just leave this here for y'all, then.

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." - George Santayana

Robyrt:
I don't see why everyone is bemoaning this move. If you want to justify a AAA budget, you need a plan for making that money back, which means you need to turn your game into a series. Bioshock and Demon's Souls didn't become any worse just because they had sequels that iterated on the concept. Blood Dragon is a good example from the other end of a weird, unique small game that helped to justify the massive expense of making Far Cry 3.

Dude, the whole point we're all whining about this is because triple-A budgets are ridiculously bloated in the first place! They sink so much cash not only into making the game, but marketing it, and this results in over-large costs that they can't possibly recoup without demanding their games to have an audience larger than actually exists.

And Blood Dragon can't be used to justify how much it cost to make FC3 because Blood Dragon is a different game! The former might just be a reskin of the latter, but that's still no reason to lump Blood Dragon's profits in with FC3's. They shouldn't have spent so much money on it in the first place.

I mean, you'd freak out at your significant other if they spent five grand on a new outfit they're only gonna wear two or three times a year, wouldn't you?

P.S: Demon's Souls is not triple A, and it had a spiritual sequel because they had realistic goals for making their money back and garnering a following.

Yes, Ubisoft, milking a franchise every year is a great idea and won't lead to a huge crash. Just look how successfull Guitar Hero and Tony Hawk were with that strategy.

Here's a thought, just give us good games. They don't have to be mega-budget triple A titles all the time either. Just look at X-Com Enemy Unknown's success. Also, if you're going to stick to franchises, space them out like Rockstar or Atlus do. The last full GTA game was in 2008. The last major Persona sequel was also in 2008. Yeah, we've gotten releases in between,but the big splashy stuff is spaced apart. I love Assassin's Creed, but it's really starting to wear thin.

CardinalPiggles:
I just lost a lot of interest for Watch Dogs honestly.

I get the feeling they will be holding back features on the first game so they can ever so slightly improve it's later iterations without putting in any extra creative effort.

It's what companies do with DLC. They hold back content so they can sell it down the line. Sequels are just a slower process.

This is pure speculation, don't get me wrong. But given how some companies handle DLC I wouldn't be at all surprised if this is how they handled their new interesting franchise.

I've only ever seen Capcom do the whole DLC thing you're talking about, what other companies have done this?

OT: This could actually work out. No seriously, if you think about it, it really does make sense that it WILL work. By not making single stand alone games they are saving on money, and by investing in a franchise they may make MUCH better games. I have more interest in Watch Dogs now because if they're planning on making it into a franchise then they're definitely putting effort into it. Personally I would rather a company focus on building a game meant to span multiple games than have them just do odd little projects. Indie games already do the whole, "1 good idea and done!" so why should the Triple A market have to try and copy what's already working? For all the people whom say, "Triple A companies just copy what's popular" you should rejoice that instead of trying to be like the indie games they're trying to be the big box office action packed sequel poping hits...and that's a good thing.

If someone's going to do it, why not the people with the money?

Well, looks like I stop buying Ubisoft titles now... I know that game companies are bushiness, but I can't tolerate a game company doing this sorta thing.

All in all, it's just another brick in the wall.

I'm turning into a bit of a doomsayer when it comes to AAA budgeting, and this isn't helping. At all.

Can we all get signs that say "THIS IS WHY AAA IS FAILING" and surround the HQ of whatever developer said something stupid in the last week until they stop being stupid?

Otaku World Order:
Yes, Ubisoft, milking a franchise every year is a great idea and won't lead to a huge crash. Just look how successfull Guitar Hero and Tony Hawk were with that strategy.

Here's a thought, just give us good games. They don't have to be mega-budget triple A titles all the time either. Just look at X-Com Enemy Unknown's success. Also, if you're going to stick to franchises, space them out like Rockstar or Atlus do. The last full GTA game was in 2008. The last major Persona sequel was also in 2008. Yeah, we've gotten releases in between,but the big splashy stuff is spaced apart. I love Assassin's Creed, but it's really starting to wear thin.

Or Nintendo who remembers to only release new Zelda, Mario, Fire Emblem, Donkey Kong, Mario Kart, and Metroid games when they're ready. It leads to less consumer exhaustion. One of the reasons these dev team sizes are spiraling out of control is because they're trying to get these games done in a 1 to 2 year time frame (though the latter IS feasible) by just throwing utterly absurd numbers of people at them, hoping to get all that coding done. It's not a system that can last forever as it's like trying to bake a turkey twice as fast by turning it up to 700 degrees as opposed to 350. It doesn't work like that.

Ah, all the people saying they are stupid. You lot do realize that without this attitude, they'd go bankrupt?
I don't even like Ubisoft, but come on.

Lunar Templar:
this story is CRYING OUT for that Bender 'laugh harder' vid, but I just can not do it, it to easy when they say something this stupid and mean it.

There you go.

Here's how to do it...

[ youtube=FopyRHHlt3M ]

Just remove the spaces between the bracket and text and you're done.

Dr. McD:

Lunar Templar:
this story is CRYING OUT for that Bender 'laugh harder' vid, but I just can not do it, it to easy when they say something this stupid and mean it.

There you go.

Here's how to do it...

[ youtube=FopyRHHlt3M ]

Just remove the spaces between the bracket and text and you're done.

Not what I meant when I said 'can't do it'. what I meant was 'it's to easy a target to be any fun'

Seriously, I'm ready for the second great video game market crash, already. Let the triple A studios burn to ashes an let a new golden age grow out of the remains. (As long as the small folks get jobs).

So let me get this straight. In a world where the video game community and gaming journalism as a whole are extremely hostile toward homogenization, bureaucratization, anti-consumerism, and general notions against creativity or innovation, the VP of sales and MARKETING of Ubisoft releases a statement like this? Are we sure he's not just trying to get fired?

Lilani:
So let me get this straight. In a world where the video game community and gaming journalism as a whole are extremely hostile toward homogenization, bureaucratization, anti-consumerism, and general notions against creativity or innovation, the VP of sales and MARKETING of Ubisoft releases a statement like this? Are we sure he's not just trying to get fired?

Actually most people just want to line up for the same prossesed crap they got last year because the name is popular.

And why yes, I am still bitter about Pacific Rim losing to Grown-ups 2.

Sad to hear. The real killer in AAA gaming is grossly inflated budgets. Tomb Raider stands as a heavy example of how such a bloated budget can ruin a project, had they spent only a reasonable amount of money on it then it would have been a shining success; instead it sold out all it's predecessors and was still a financial failure.

Learn a lesson from the indie field, a good number of people don't really care about graphics, so trim the budget and ship a game that looks like it could run on the gamecube. Good artists can use style to make up for a technical lack of fidelity, without blowing out budgets or development times.

Big publishers can blame anything from piracy to their own customers for a games failure, but fact is they just cost too much to produce and simply aren't better than the games from a few generations ago. They're no longer and they're not more fun; but they look marginally better and cost significantly more to produce.

Time for a new boycott, people.

This ceaseless spamming of sequels needs to STOP.

I think we all knew this anyway. Ah well. At this stage, people with this attitude can get what they deserve however it comes to them. If they want to trot out the same tired shit every year, I'll just do my part by not buying it, and let everyone else decide the rest.

Andy Chalk:
"Because now we're in (a) blockbuster world, and Watch Dogs needs to be a blockbuster because it deserves to be and as a company that's what we need it to be," Key said. "It's the most ambitious production in the history of Ubisoft, and we need to make sure that everybody who likes videogames has a chance to decide that this game is going to be hot. That's the hard part about a new brand, that awareness outside the core needs to be created."

Is it possible to make at least the first sentence into some kind of an "Escapist quote of the day" kind of thing. This crap is too funny to only be seen in one forum thread. At least I'll (most likely) be able to hear it again in the Jimquisition after a week or two, you know he loves this kind of stuff.

If you look at Ubisoft's track record(or from what I could find), this has been their strategy for a while now. Between 2011 to 2013 they've had seven non-franchised games. 2 off road racers, 3 arcade/psn store games, an actual guitar playing game, and Watch Dogs will enter later, but that will be franchised the hell out of. That's what I could find anyway.

Andy Chalk:

Ubisoft's Vice President of Sales and Marketing says the triple-A game business these days is too expensive for "fire and forget" development.

And I can't help but think "gee. If only you were in a position to do something about that."

akiata:
If you look at Ubisoft's track record(or from what I could find), this has been their strategy for a while now. Between 2011 to 2013 they've had seven non-franchised games. 2 off road racers, 3 arcade/psn store games, an actual guitar playing game, and Watch Dogs will enter later, but that will be franchised the hell out of. That's what I could find anyway.

Rocksmith 2014 has been announced, so it look like that's going franchise as well.

I don't know the other games off-hand, but I'd be willing to bet that a few of them are going to be franchised as well, making the list even smaller.

Its time to calm a llama down internet. So Ubisoft has made a decision you dont like. So what? Some people like sequels some people like stand alone games. Some people like COD some people like Journey. Ubisoft doesnt have to cater to every demographic. Now I do agree that they are releasing AC too frequently but hey people are buying them so why should Ubisoft change that? It's simple supply and demand.

Im just so tired of gamers pulling the 'oh you have an opinion that is different to mine therefore you can go to hell' card.

PoolCleaningRobot:
Its annoying because Ubisoft found success with the random, small title Blood Dragon. Maybe the answer is to release smaller and cheaper games in order to gather interest in a series and make money rather than spend a shit ton hiring 5 different developers to pump out mediocre yearly sequels and spending a few hundred million more to market said game

At this point, I just hope Ubisoft is the next THQ

You read my mind. I actually found myself having fun playing Blood Dragon, and Call of Juarez, and also thought that maybe they had something going with the fifteen dollar games.

OT: Well, here's hoping that Rocksmith will turn out enough cash that Ubisoft will keep it around.

Dr. Octogonopus:
Its time to calm a llama down internet. So Ubisoft has made a decision you dont like. So what? Some people like sequels some people like stand alone games. Some people like COD some people like Journey. Ubisoft doesnt have to cater to every demographic. Now I do agree that they are releasing AC too frequently but hey people are buying them so why should Ubisoft change that? It's simple supply and demand.

Im just so tired of gamers pulling the 'oh you have an opinion that is different to mine therefore you can go to hell' card.

The problem is that by exclusively focusing on games that can be franchised, they will be contributing to homogenization of the games market, and by refusing to take risks they will prevent fun little one-off games from being made by their developers, i.e. Beyond Good and Evil, that contribute to the growth of the art form.

Not to mention that if even one of these over-budgeted "AAA" games fails, they risk being thrown into dire financial straits, which benefits no one.

I have the right to disagree, vehemently, with a company's business decision if I think it is moronic and short-sighted, which this most definitely is.

At least this now opens the way for some other publisher to throw the hat in the ring and encourage smaller titles to come to them for development.
Yes, there might be a few games that tank but hopefully it will generate some surprise blockbusters or successes like Dark Souls or Minecraft and Journey
Let Ubisoft make excuses for not being super profitable and blame it all on us gamers for not supporting there games with billions and billions of sales and then spending more on micro transactions and DLC and preordering everything with the Ultra Super Collector Edition
The last article I read about the next Assasins Creed was they had spents tons of money on the wind and water effects for when you are on the ship.
If they spent as much time on the story and gameplay mechanics maybe the games could be produced for cheaper and still be stand alone.

i will still buy watchdogs, but not watchdogs 2. in fact its going to be my first game from ubisoft in years.

Krantos:

Andy Chalk:

"Because now we're in (a) blockbuster world, and Watch Dogs needs to be a blockbuster because it deserves to be and as a company that's what we need it to be,"

You know, it'd be nice for industry to NOT prove Jim Sterling right, but... damn. That's pretty much verbatim what Jim was saying the mentality of Publishers is.

"This game is going to be a Blockbuster, because we want it, and we need it to be."

you should have learn a long time ago, Jim is Always right, even when hes wrong.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here