Topic: EA Buys Approximately 20% of Ubi Soft

[StrikerObi]

I guess EA got a big Christmas check from Grandma.

Only a week after announcing that they signed an exclusive deal with the NFL, EA has dropped another bombshell. Today they acquired 19.9% of Ubi Soft from Talpa Beheer B.V. As soon as the Securities Exchange Commission approves the transaction, EA will most likely hold a majority share in the French developer/publisher. Financial details of the transaction will not be released.

[Pale]

Awesome, now we'll get yearly versions of PoP and in each one we'll get new outfits.  Maybe on odd years they'll throw in a new weapon or two!

AWESOME!

[Bartman3010]

Argh. The gaming industry is turning into a crappy monopoly.

Video gaming is doomed.

[Polemistis]

Was is Ubi who made Beyond Good and Evil? I wuv that game!

[PaLaDiN]

I don't get why people like Beyond Good and Evil. It's a crappy Zelda clone, same as SFA. I paid less than $20 for it and I still think I wasted my money.

In fact I don't see why people like any of Ubisoft's games. They're all massively overhyped trash with little to no substance covered by excessive overcompensations in presentation that would only delude people who don't own PCs. Especially the first PoP. God, don't get me started on that game.

I hope they get bought out. A crappy company buying another crappy company. Good riddance... I'd have less names to keep track of for my "avoid" list.

[Ian Sane]

Upon reading this I made a scream not unlike that of Sinistar's.  That's kind of fitting since Sinistar was also purchased by a company with more money yet a considerably sh!ttier track record.

What can I say?  I hate EA and their attempts to take over the industry reminds me of when Hitler was slowly invading other countries and no one did anything until they absolutely had to.  These guys are killing our industry yet few seem to notice and probably won't until EA owns a stake in every significant American dev.  Fans of Command & Conquer and Sim City know it.  Fans of NFL2K now know it.  Soon Burnout and Timesplitters fans will know it but with everyone else it's like they won't notice until one of their favourite games gets destroyed.

Though I'm not really a Ubisoft fan anyway.  Most overhyped publisher this gen.  PoP: The Sands of Time is merely a good game, not GOTY particularly in a year where WIND WAKER was released.  Splinter Cell is a glorified Dragon's Lair.  Beyond Good & Evil is at best an average game.  There's nothing even remotely exceptional about it at all.  Of course my opinion of that game may be biased since I'm playing it at the same time as Metroid Prime 2.  Still as much as a don't care for Ubisoft they're miles ahead of EA.  Or they were I guess.

[PaLaDiN]

No, see. This could be a good thing.

EA is forming a conglomeration of crap. All the stuff it touches turns to garbage. They attract garbage like a magnet.

So inevitably, when people find out that EA sucks, it's gonna go under. All that's keeping EA afloat right now is the average consumer's ignorance.

This would lead to a culling of sorts and the game industry would emerge the stronger for it.

...

At least in my dreams... God knows consumer ignorance isn't going away any time soon.

[Pale]

Heh, you assume average consumer ignorance is going to go away.....

[Gamefreak]

Ubisoft made Far Cry, fools.

As for EA...Who's next? Sega?

Oh yeah, I hate EA. It's a horrible publisher. They treat their dev's like garbage and publish titles no matter how finished it is.
If it was MS or Nintendo going around buying everyone, I would be fine with it. They are good publishers with lots of money and give their teams respect and freedom.

[Pale]

MS is often synonomous with freedom..........

[Spak-Spang]

You know EA isn't that bad.  They aren't that good, but they are making games people want to play.  They are making money, so if they want to invest it let them.

Right now, EA is building a library of talented teams to create games.  As long as EA allows the developers freedom and creativity to do their thing, and give them the time needed to finish the games properly this is a good thing.  Smaller developers can't afford to budgets to make the huge titles.  EA can.  

I have noticed one thing that EA does that is very cool.  They allow their engines built to be used by all games that need them.  This is a great idea.  EA could actually create an amazing hybrid game soon.  One that combines a great racing game, adventure/spy game with an intense action game.  EA could be possed to actually bring new experiences by using the talents they have aquired to some awesome games.

Lets wait and see instead of just complain.  

This is the world we live in, and purchases like this happen.  You can cry, or you can accept it see the positive.

[VideoGamerJ]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
Upon reading this I made a scream not unlike that of Sinistar's.  That's kind of fitting since Sinistar was also purchased by a company with more money yet a considerably sh!ttier track record.

What can I say?  I hate EA and their attempts to take over the industry reminds me of when Hitler was slowly invading other countries and no one did anything until they absolutely had to.  These guys are killing our industry yet few seem to notice and probably won't until EA owns a stake in every significant American dev.  Fans of Command & Conquer and Sim City know it.  Fans of NFL2K now know it.  Soon Burnout and Timesplitters fans will know it but with everyone else it's like they won't notice until one of their favourite games gets destroyed.

Though I'm not really a Ubisoft fan anyway.  Most overhyped publisher this gen.  PoP: The Sands of Time is merely a good game, not GOTY particularly in a year where WIND WAKER was released.  Splinter Cell is a glorified Dragon's Lair.  Beyond Good & Evil is at best an average game.  There's nothing even remotely exceptional about it at all.  Of course my opinion of that game may be biased since I'm playing it at the same time as Metroid Prime 2.  Still as much as a don't care for Ubisoft they're miles ahead of EA.  Or they were I guess.

Well said.

[Ian Sane]

"I have noticed one thing that EA does that is very cool. They allow their engines built to be used by all games that need them. This is a great idea. EA could actually create an amazing hybrid game soon. One that combines a great racing game, adventure/spy game with an intense action game. EA could be possed to actually bring new experiences by using the talents they have aquired to some awesome games."

But this well never happen.  At best we would get a combination of an average racing game, average adventure/spy game, and average action game.  They couldn't create an amazing hybrid game because none of the parts are amazing to begin with.  And they wouldn't make them amazing because average sells better with the mainstream.  A truly amazing game requires some originality and has to be designed just a little bit differently from other games.  EA doesn't do this.  They're opposed to this form of game design.

"As long as EA allows the developers freedom and creativity to do their thing, and give them the time needed to finish the games properly this is a good thing."

This is the whole point.  EA DOESN'T DO THIS.  Freedom and creativity are not part of their focus.  They have a history of denying developers of freedom and creativity.  So why would they suddenly now change their focus?

You can say "as long as they allow the developers freedom and creativity to do their thing" for ANY publisher and it doesn't mean they're going to do it.  I could have said that about Acclaim.

[babaloulou]

 ------

[nickmitch]

The best way to describe this comes from Reno 911 and is as follows: "It's like throwing crap on a big pile of crap thats already got too much crap on it to begin with."

[joshnickerson]

Crap. All those rumors of an EA console within the next few years is seeming more and more real now. O.o
This seems to be turning into a weekly event. "Who will EA buy THIS week?"

[Illini4Orange]

1)  The NFL deal is very bad.  This eliminates competition in Pro Football videogames.  I do not know if anyone here recalls, but there was never a Madden game released the first year of the Playstation(One) because the game they designed was SO BAD compared to 989 Studios "Gameday" that EA did not release a Madden that year.  Has anyone ever played a 989 game?  Wow, who could ever imagine a 2nd party developer being so bad at graphics and controls ON THEIR HOME SYSTEM!?  But...what came out of this?  The Madden game that first appeared on the PS was GREAT!  EA got their ass kicked and put it in gear.  The "NFL 2kx" series was doing this.  Though they have had some drawbacks, the "2kx" series has been a very very good alternative to the Madden series.  

2)  I am glad to also see some people on this board are not impressed with Ubi Soft, I thought it was just me!  I bought Beyound Good & Evil, expecting a pretty good game (the reviews [even on this very site] made this game sound great).  What I got was a very poorly controlled-Zelda-wanna-be game that was a huge let down.  I thought Ubi Soft sounded like they might be a good thing for video games.  They had some nice concepts with creating franchises (PoP, BG&E, Rayman).  But, this is where the "Nintendo Difference" comes in.  They all fall well short of what they could be.  This is the exact reason why I buy ONLY Nintendo games.  

The 20% ownership by EA doesn't really matter to me.  I don't care.  I don't buy games outside of Nintendo, except sports games.  I buy EA NCAA sports games, but now I am not even going to do that.  I will just have to buy the NCAA sports games from Sega, if they still make this after this.  I don't see why they would spend so much money on their NCAA games when the Pro ones sell much better.  

BTW-Does anyone have NCAA Football 2005?  How annoying is it with all of the advertisements in that game?  Pontiac amoung others are all over that game and you can skip past their ads!  Why do I have to pay $50 to look at ads?  It is total BS and this all just adds to how much I do not care for EA.

[couchmonkey]

Wowsers!  EA=bad!  I'm going to be semi-boycotting the company now.  I can't give up on it entirely, I want Timesplitters 3 too badly, but everything else is out the door.

I wonder if an EA console would cause any damage to Nintendo's marketshare?  It almost seems like the answer is no, what with Nintendo fans' lack of interest in sports games.  I think it could seriously hurt PS2 and Xbox, though.

[Ian Sane]

"I wonder if an EA console would cause any damage to Nintendo's marketshare? It almost seems like the answer is no, what with Nintendo fans' lack of interest in sports games. I think it could seriously hurt PS2 and Xbox, though."

In theory you would assume so since Nintendo fans aren't as interested in EA.  However I thought the Xbox would only steal marketshare from Sony (due to obvious similarities in target markets) but it looks to me like they took away Nintendo's instead what with the "PS2 or Xbox" mentality a lot of people have.  The Cube realistically would have been in much better shape if the Xbox wasn't released.

An EA console would steal some people from Sony since there are people who buy a PS2 just for EA Sports.  But I think the that most gamers have no real hard loyality to one console maker and whoever is "in" succeeds and who isn't is squeezed out.  Sega couldn't survive on just their fans and Nintendo's fanbase isn't enough to make the Cube a high enough seller for most third parties.  If EA released a console I think they would after a year or so slot into a "rank" and the console(s) below them would struggle.  It seems like significant market share is taken mostly from those below.  EA would likely squeeze out Nintendo before Sony or MS, barring any huge N64 cartridge level mistakes.

[StrikerObi]

Quote
Originally posted by: PaLaDiN
I don't get why people like Beyond Good and Evil. It's a crappy Zelda clone, same as SFA. I paid less than $20 for it and I still think I wasted my money.

In fact I don't see why people like any of Ubisoft's games. They're all massively overhyped trash with little to no substance covered by excessive overcompensations in presentation that would only delude people who don't own PCs. Especially the first PoP. God, don't get me started on that game.

I hope they get bought out. A crappy company buying another crappy company. Good riddance... I'd have less names to keep track of for my "avoid" list.

Wow, I can't find a single part of this post I agree with.

Beyond Good & Evil is more developed than Zelda has probably EVER been as far as story goes. Link has been saving Zelda and killing Gannon since the 80's. The story never changes; it's only slightly modified for each game. Granted the two share a lot in common gameplay wise, but BG&E walks all over Zelda's story because unlike Zelda, BG&E actually has a story. It's a complex look at government, media, and propaganda. It's got an awesome (though somewhat easy to foretell) twist at the end.

As far as Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time ("the first one" as you call it, which is wrong as the series has been around for over a decade). This game is magnificent. It's got an artistic style that's beyond what most games can even hope to accomplish. The story, again, is absolutely top notch. The use of in-game dialogue between The Prince and Farah is astounding, and really helps the player connect with the characters. It's one of the only games I've ever really cared about the characters in. It's a beautiful love story, with a heart-breaking end.

Your entire post reeks of fanboy idiocy. In fact, most of the posts in this thread do. More companies than Nintendo make good games.

However, I will agree that this year Ubi Soft has been an awful awful developer. They shot down any chance of a sequel to BG&E and then proceeded to crap all over everything that was good about Prince of Persia. All that's left is a shell of what the game used to be, now covered in angst, blood, boobs, and awful godsmack songs.

[Ian Sane]

"Beyond Good & Evil is more developed than Zelda has probably EVER been as far as story goes."

Well I think that right there sums up the reason why BG&E has received a lot of praise and also why it has received a lot of backlash.  To me story in games is secondary.  The important part is always the gameplay and BG&E is not very exceptional in terms of gameplay.  Is it decent?  Sure.  But there are tons of exceptional games out there competing for my time and money.  People rave about BG&E like it's this amazing game that was brutally overlooked.  Well from strictly a gameplay point of view it made sense for it to be overlooked.  If you like the story that's fine.  But that's not what's important to me and many others.  When comparisons to Zelda are being made then gameplay is especially going to be what's under the magnifying glass because to a Zelda fan gameplay is king.

Story and content and characters have in the last few years become really important to a lot of gamers and I find it makes it hard for me to trust reviews.  How do I know the game is actually that great when the reviewer looks at a game like it's a book or a movie instead of a game?  A lot of games are getting huge praise just because they have a decent narrative.  To me those postives regarding both BG&E and PoP: The Sand of Time that you mentioned don't matter.  If I just want a story there are books and films that do it better than any game.

[CHEN]

It's not enough to have influence over the company however, at least not yet. But it's definitely a bad thing the direction the industry is heading. I don't even buy EA products and I won't either in the future, not after what they've done to their employees. At this rate they'll buy Blizzard too or even worse... invade Japan. Quick! Someone buy Capcom or Namco before it's too late!

[WuTangTurtle]

Wow, this is all messed up.

EA has a great oppurtunity to release a system.  It would make great sense at why they wanted a 5 year deal with the nfl.  In this way they make the next 5 Madden games on their console and everyone knows there are alot of Sony fans that will buy into EA's console for that.

But It would fail in Japan, In Japan you need creativity to sell any games, or some type of great RPG.

And for those who don't know how EA treats its developers this is how they operate:

1 guy works on modeling the nose, 1 guy textures the nose, 1 guy models the face, etc.
It's all run in a conveyor belt.  Creativity will never come through this method.

[TheYoungerPlumber]

We should send EA a box of monociles.

EA would not release a system because they'd spend more money on its development/marketing than it's worth.  They're the biggest 3rd party publisher, and they're very happy where they are.  Their investors want profits and probably wouldn't allows such an unneeded risk.  Some people (such as former PGC staff writer Adam Kontras) say Nintendo would be better off 3rd party, since it is a very strong publisher whose gmaes appeal to people who don't own their system.  I don't agree with that, simply becuase Nintendo likes full control, but it could only hurt EA's sales.  They have a strong foothold in the market and ANY CONSOLE GAMER can purchase most of their games.

As for Ubisoft, while only a few of their games have appealed to me over the years, I've always respected them for their genuine multiplatform attempts and, until recently, their artistic styule and respect for a gamer's intelligence.  I remember going to Ubisoft's booth at E3 and being able to discuss the displayed games in earnest with Associate Producers and other significant folks on the team.  Rayman 2 remains one of my favorite 3D platformers (though it is a little dated now), and Prince of Persia: SoT DID have good gameplay.  The story was well done, too, though that's not what appealed to me so much.  

[JonLeung]

To the one who compared BG&E to Zelda; Link actually fought Ganon in only half of the games.  SPOILERS...It's just that in the bigger, more well-known Zelda games that he tends to run into Ganon, people forget that he didn't in Adventure Of Link, Link's Awakening, Majora's Mask, one of the Oracle games (since when any one person plays them both, you can't face him in the first one you play), Minish Cap...but anyway...

I loved BG&E, but maybe because I rented it on my own impression that it would be good.  The problem with underrated games is that within certain circles they become overrated.  Like, I'm starting to get tired of hearing about how "mature" and great Eternal Darkness is, even though outside of the Nintendo community no one's really heard of it.  Maybe some of you who didn't like BG&E were expecting too much.  Though it was short, I loved almost all of it.

In this past year or two Ubi Soft has really become a publisher worth noting (I never really got into Rayman (though I should) or any of the billion of Tom Clancy games.)  But with all that quality stuff Ubi Soft has, no wonder EA wants it.  Well, it now has it.  EA's generic game library (I must admit I do like some of their games on rentals (I'd never buy them) but there are too few surprises) could use some Ubi Soft stuff, but for Ubi Soft's sake, I hope EA doesn't dictate what they do.

I never understood this stuff.  About buying up companies.  With 19.9%, they have a fifth of the vote on any decisions being made, right?  It's still a negligible minority if Ubi Soft always votes however they want, assuming they all work that well together.  Maybe my problem is envisioning companies as being a single person, as if the same person who makes CastleVania and Contra is the same person who now makes Metal Gear Solid and Yu-Gi-Oh! or something like that.