Topic: Ubisoft Comments on Avatar's Disappointing Sales

[NWR_Lindy]

No idea why they were rushed with this particular game.  Avatar is a mega-movie that will be talked about for the next several months, so really, was it absolutely necessary to release it at the movie launch?  I know it's "common sense" to do that, but why not make a really good game that does the movie justice, and release it a few months from now?

Honestly, a crappy game damages the Avatar brand.  If I was Cameron I'd be more concerned with that than having a game out on the same day as the movie.

[TJ Spyke]

Before the game came out he said he worked closely with the developers (he even said he liked some of the original content the developers were creating so much that he ended up putting them in the movie). Nobody thought the movie would be the mega hit it has become. The trailers were terrible and a lot of people were expecting it to possibly flop.

[ThePerm]

I've yet to see a licensed game do well, or at least break half a million.


Easycure: The CEO was talking in general. None of the versions of the game broke the top 20. So the game is a failure overall.

outside goldeneye right?

[NWR_pap64]

I've yet to see a licensed game do well, or at least break half a million.


Easycure: The CEO was talking in general. None of the versions of the game broke the top 20. So the game is a failure overall.

outside goldeneye right?

Right. It seems this generation has truly lacked solid licensed games. Not to mention that Goldeneye was released years after the movie was released in theaters, so the extra time helped it become a great title.

[Chozo Ghost]

Wasn't there some Star Wars game on the N64 that was really awesome?

[NWR_pap64]

Wasn't there some Star Wars game on the N64 that was really awesome?

There were several if I am not mistaken...

Shadows of the Empire was a midquel of some sort, taking place between Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi. It was an N64 launch game, so it was very rough, but people liked it. Then there was the Rogue Squadron games by Factor 5 which were awesome and very popular. Then when Episode 1 was released there was Star Wars Racer, based on the Pod Racing sequence. I believe one of the last N64 Star Wars games was Battle for Naboo, also made by Factor 5.

[NWR_insanolord]

I still maintain that Star Wars: Racer on the N64 is by far the best thing to come out of the prequels, and very nearly makes them worth it single-handedly.

[Dasmos]

I still maintain that Star Wars: Racer on the N64 is by far the best thing to come out of the prequels, and very nearly makes them worth it single-handedly.

No joke. That game was awesome. Hard if I remember correctly, but awesome.

[Deguello]

I've yet to see a licensed game do well, or at least break half a million.


Easycure: The CEO was talking in general. None of the versions of the game broke the top 20. So the game is a failure overall.

outside goldeneye right?

It's amazing that nobody learned the lesson of that game as far as licensed games go and the game's popularity only had the opposite effect.    GoldenEye was so good because it wasn't rushed to meet the movie deadline.  The deadline had already passed and Rare was like "screw it, let's make something good."  But unfortunately, other developers saw GoldenEye and thought "this proves licensed games could sell well!"  and didn't see that GoldenEye was the exception that proved the rule.

It's still the best selling movie licensed game, and we've had movie licenses from far more popular movies than James Bond circa 1995 (Like Matrix and Lord of the Rings and stuff.)

[DAaaMan64]

Its so stupid, that game should have never been crappy. Thats the failure.

Ubi is just poopy

[Stratos]

I still maintain that Star Wars: Racer on the N64 is by far the best thing to come out of the prequels, and very nearly makes them worth it single-handedly.

No joke. That game was awesome. Hard if I remember correctly, but awesome.

I loved the code that let you use two controllers to steer. Made the game even funner since it was closer to how you really would drive a pod racer.

I've yet to see a licensed game do well, or at least break half a million.


Easycure: The CEO was talking in general. None of the versions of the game broke the top 20. So the game is a failure overall.

outside goldeneye right?

It's amazing that nobody learned the lesson of that game as far as licensed games go and the game's popularity only had the opposite effect.    GoldenEye was so good because it wasn't rushed to meet the movie deadline.  The deadline had already passed and Rare was like "screw it, let's make something good."  But unfortunately, other developers saw GoldenEye and thought "this proves licensed games could sell well!"  and didn't see that GoldenEye was the exception that proved the rule.

It's still the best selling movie licensed game, and we've had movie licenses from far more popular movies than James Bond circa 1995 (Like Matrix and Lord of the Rings and stuff.)

Yet wasn't there a James Bond game that came out years later that still flopped? (the one where Sean Connery permitted his likeness to be used) I think that was From Russia With Love. I recall it getting really poor ratings. Though it was an EA title.

[Deguello]

I think there might have been a Tomorrow Never Dies game on the PS1, but that must have been bad because nobody seems to remember it much.  The World is Not Enough got the FPS treatment on the N64, but it was pretty clear it was no GoldenEye.

[Stratos]

It was a PS2/XBox/Gamecube game.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/From_Russia_With_Love_%28video_game%29

Within three months of its release, it had sold approximately 277,000 copies.

[Chozo Ghost]

I think most of us can agree that games based on movie franchises work out best when the games aren't rushed to coincide with the movie's release. So with that being the case, games made years after the movies will tend to be better than games like Avatar that have to sync up with the movie's appearance in theatres.

The Star Wars based games are usually considered great, and that's because the movies came out 30 years ago so there's no rush to make these games now. Another good example would be the Godfather game, which was excellent on the Wii. The Godfather movie is like what, 35 years old now? The game is great and has a strong connection with the movie, but it wasn't rushed.

So I don't think its fair to say that movie licenses will always create terrible games. The problem is with the rushing. If the developers take their time the movie games can be just as good as anything else. But on the other hand, its also kinda understandable why developers rush them. I mean, how well would an Avatar game do if it came out a year or two later after the hype of the movie had faded away? But if the game was excellent it would probably sell even without the hype of the movie to drive it.

The people who are going to buy movie games like Avatar are the consumers who don't read reviews and most likely consumers that are buying the games for their kids. Their kids might be fans of the movie, so they might think the game would be a good idea. So they buy it and take it home, and a few hours later both parent and child are pissed off at the crappy game, but Ubisoft has their money so from Ubisoft's perspective that's not a bad arrangement. But informed consumers like us who read reviews online or elsewhere are going to know to avoid games like this.

[NWR_pap64]

I just remembered another licensed game that was pretty damn good despite being made to coincide with the release of a movie: Peter Jackson's King Kong. Funny enough, that too was made by Ubisoft and launched right beside the movie IN DECEMBER NO LESS!

The game may have been a limited FPS/Adventure game, but I thought it was really good. It used the franchise very well, the graphics were pretty good and it felt like playing the movie.

I think Ubi took the development of that game more seriously than Avatar. While King Kong didn't get stellar reviews they were far better than Avatar's current reception. It was directed by Michel Ancel (who did Rayman and Beyond Good and Evil), and that benefitted the game greatly.

I don't know how well that game sold across all platforms (I recall it was also an Xbox 360 launch game), since it was released in December, but I think it must have done better than Avatar.