Ubisoft: Only Triple-A Games Are Profitable

[Treblaine]

I hope Monsieur Presidente appreciates that profitable AAA franchises don't necessarioy start with a AAA game.

Killzone 1 was a flop, now Killzone 2 and soon Killzone 3
Modern Warfare 2 started at comparatively modest beginnings

And not forgetting out of nowhere huge successes JUST because they were good:
-Batman: Arkham Asylum
-Left 4 Dead
-Bioshock
-Borderlands


And franchises aren't necessarily always successful:
-Wolfenstein
-Overlord
-AvP
-SOCOM: confrontation

Ubisoft MUST realise that for great success you need long term investment even if it means short term loss.

 

[Akalistos]

If the useless UbiDRM wasn't proof enough, this comes to show that the Ubi suits have completely lost sight of reality. Every time they opens their mouth, it's just ridiculous.

Right... You have no idea how the economy work? Really now, you do realize that a 10$ game like Shank won't make the Millions Assassin Creed 2 did, right? What's ridiculous if the fact that you think otherwise.

Torchlight, I rest my case.

And speaking of Budget title, they aren't memorable. Torchlight is a good clone of Diablo 1... Hell, it's even better. But it's forgettable. There's also a expectation with DLG that isn't there with full retail game. It's the fun/$ ration. Even if it's better then most retail price, we still think that it either not as fun or that it's too short.

no it comes down to
A. how much hype the game has
B. Who is developing the game
C. The time you release a game.

Since there are plenty of good games that come out but sell terrible because of those things.

Yes, but beside B... It's the job of the marketing department. As such, many bad game go to ride in the big boy's ride. What is good tho is that they flat out tell you that if it's isn't any good as a Triple A title, they flush it. So... guess it can't hurt...

Maybe if instead of spending all your money on what supposedly works, you can spend half on what supposedly works and the other half on something new, innovative that works well with what supposedly works? Kind of a "don't put all your eggs in one basket" thing?

...And i do believe you can't make 50 Assassin's Creeds and Prince of Percia, even if Blizzard still survive on Warcraft and Starcraft.

 

[samsonguy920]

Well this would seem to sound like the beginning of Ubisoft's downfall. I am so media-addled right now but it was either in Zero Punctuation or Extra Credit the idea of publishers setting up indie branches as the movie studios do. Somehow I think Ubisoft isn't even considering this.
Oh well. Since I am only PC and they still have yet to change their mind on their DRM overall beyond RUSE on Steam, I don't care if they go kaput.

 

[Krantos]

Unless you manage to squeeze the budget a lot.

Seriously, Stardock just released Elemental. Their entire Budget was less than what a AAA dev relegates to cutscenes. It's not that hard to make a profit when you're budget is that small.

 

[Xanthious]

The next time Ubisoft heads get together on a large scale someone should just crash a small remotely operated single engine plane full o' explosives into whatever building they are gathering at and make the world of gaming that much better.

 

[3dfx]

It's so funny to me, watching these mediocre publishers get on their soap box and tell the gaming community how it is. While companies like Valve ignore the guidelines these publishers follow, yet churn out game of the year titles like they're trying to prove something to the world (other than L4D2, lets just forget about that).

I wish I could say I cared what Ubisoft had to say about gaming with a strait face, but I just don't.

Oh ubisoft a little game called torchlight would like a word with you!

A little game called Diablo would like a word with Torchlight

 

[sneakypenguin]

Love the people saying they know Ubi's job better than Ubi lol.

I'd agree with him, Examples such as torchlight while successes for indie/small devs still doesn't even approach the sales of a AAA game from an established franchise, much less pulling in the millions that games like AC2 did. AC 2 has sold over 9 million copies, as of early august torchlight was "well over 600k" not even a tenth of Ubi's premiere series. You couldn't support a major dev on sales of torchlight type successes.

 

[sneakypenguin]

It's so funny to me, watching these mediocre publishers get on their soap box and tell the gaming community how it is. While companies like Valve ignore the guidelines these publishers follow, yet churn out game of the year titles like they're trying to prove something to the world (other than L4D2, lets just forget about that).

Could you not also say that companies such as valve and blizzard are also following ubi's new take on things. In that they only develop AAA games with a large amount of sequels.

 

[Sartan0]

Ever heard of Plants vs. Zombies?

 

[Akalistos]

I hope Monsieur Presidente appreciates that profitable AAA franchises don't necessarioy start with a AAA game.

Killzone 1 was a flop, now Killzone 2 and soon Killzone 3
Modern Warfare 2 started at comparatively modest beginnings

And not forgetting out of nowhere huge successes JUST because they were good:
-Batman: Arkham Asylum
-Left 4 Dead
-Bioshock
-Borderlands


And franchises aren't necessarily always successful:
-Wolfenstein
-Overlord
-AvP
-SOCOM: confrontation

Ubisoft MUST realize that for great success you need long term investment even if it means short term loss.

I think he meant in a Development standpoint Treblaine. You can't call a game a Triple A title without being successful. We make them Triple A. As such, nobody think Killzone 1 as a AAA game... even if that mean Madden is one.

 

[3dfx]

It's so funny to me, watching these mediocre publishers get on their soap box and tell the gaming community how it is. While companies like Valve ignore the guidelines these publishers follow, yet churn out game of the year titles like they're trying to prove something to the world (other than L4D2, lets just forget about that).

Could you not also say that companies such as valve and blizzard are also following ubi's new take on things. In that they only develop AAA games with a large amount of sequels.

No you could not, both Valve and Blizzard have announced that they will be revealing brand new IP's at BlizzCon and E3, respectively. Valve isn't run like any other publisher / developer out there, it's that extremely unique style which results in excellent games that sell like hot cakes. These companies didn't get to where they're at by staying safe and investing minimal amount of time and money into the safest franchise possible, Blizzard didn't merge with one of the largest publishers in gaming because they make redundant games. Valve doesn't dominate the digital purchase market because they keep it safe.

 

[SimuLord]

Fredrik Wester and Brad Wardell are doing the Picard/Riker Double Facepalm (go ahead, someone's gonna post the image) right now.

 

[Bruce Edwards]

Well, it's hard to argue one of his points. Stopping work on a game that isn't going to measure up is - I would argue - a good thing.

Better to cut your losses and move on than to force an unpolished, buggy mess of a game onto the market and then never patch it. I'm sure we have all had experiences with these types of games before.

And, with Ubi's history, I would argue only working on triple-A games is for the best. Their mid-range titles have rarely lived up to their promise in recent times.

 

[Royas]

These are the same assmonkeys that think it's A-OK to require an always on internet connection for a single player game. I'm not exactly inclined to take anything they say seriously. If Ubisoft said that the sky was blue, I'd demand photographic evidence.

If they aren't making profits on less than AAA games, they are doing things wrong.

 

[sneakypenguin]

It's so funny to me, watching these mediocre publishers get on their soap box and tell the gaming community how it is. While companies like Valve ignore the guidelines these publishers follow, yet churn out game of the year titles like they're trying to prove something to the world (other than L4D2, lets just forget about that).

Could you not also say that companies such as valve and blizzard are also following ubi's new take on things. In that they only develop AAA games with a large amount of sequels.

No you could not, both Valve and Blizzard have announced that they will be revealing brand new IP's at BlizzCon and E3, respectively. Valve isn't run like any other publisher / developer out there, it's that extremely unique style which results in excellent games that sell like hot cakes.

To further play devils advocate, Ubi also has released a few new IP's in the past few years. AC, HAWKs, EndWar. You say its a unique style on valves part I say it's focusing on AAA games on all 3 companies part. Valve has HL1-2, team fortress1-2, L4d1-2, CS and CSS and the spin off portal 1-2, valve is unique in that they only do first person games using the same source engine. Blizzard is warcraft 1-3-wow, Diablo 1-2 soon 3, and starcraft 1-2. What is their unique style? Seems to me its Ubi's new AAA focus.

 

[The Lunatic]

Notch would like a word with you Ubisoft.

Minecraft has almost 100k sales.

 

[Treblaine]

I hope Monsieur Presidente appreciates that profitable AAA franchises don't necessarioy start with a AAA game.

Killzone 1 was a flop, now Killzone 2 and soon Killzone 3
Modern Warfare 2 started at comparatively modest beginnings

And not forgetting out of nowhere huge successes JUST because they were good:
-Batman: Arkham Asylum
-Left 4 Dead
-Bioshock
-Borderlands


And franchises aren't necessarily always successful:
-Wolfenstein
-Overlord
-AvP
-SOCOM: confrontation

Ubisoft MUST realize that for great success you need long term investment even if it means short term loss.

I think he meant in a Development standpoint Treblaine. You can't call a game a Triple A title without being successful. We make them Triple A. As such, nobody think Killzone 1 as a AAA game... even if that mean Madden is one.

that was my point, Killzone 1 WAS NOT A "AAA" GAME! Yet if Sony had been like Ubisoft then they would never have had the success of Killzone 2. Also that established franchises don't guarantee anything as with SOCOM.

I'm proving his logic is flawed that only games worth making are sequels to AAA games. It's utterly incestuous, there can be no growth as sequels inevitably decline as you put the best ideas in the first game, leftovers in the second, scraping the barrel at the third. How long can they ride on a few worn out and increasingly irrelevant Tom Clancy and Assassin's Creed spin-offs.

 

[Booze Zombie]

It is quite easy to argue his point, actually.
You can't discover how the market is changing if you sit in one place trying to sell to what you think is the current but is now in fact the past, you have to make mistakes to learn.
Sitting there thinking you've got it all planned out is the most sure-fire way to fail.

Why can't we just aim for high-quality in all games, even the cheap ones?
I mean, Runescape is higher quality than some products I've seen Activision, Ubisoft or EA pump out, because it's team put effort into it's creation and it built up a loyal fanbase by being well-made, not by being the most advertised or expensive game ever made.

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills, sometimes...

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

Sigh, I think people should just stop talking and make games. Whenever some official opens their mouth in the games industry, it just ends in bad.