Topic: There Are 'No Plans' for a ZombiU Sequel

[bluelander]

Ubisoft's support is dwindling.

http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/news/34862

ZombiU was "not profitable," and there "are no plans (or even desire) for a sequel," according to Ubisoft CEO Yves Guillemot.

In a report by Gamesindustry International, he went on to cite the poor profitability of ZombiU as the reason behind making Rayman Legends multiplatform.

He also stated plans for Ubisoft to work with the Wii U through Christmas and "see where we are from there," seeming to indicate that Ubisoft may be rethinking its support of the system.

[Enner]

That's a shame. From what I can tell, the game would have benefited from a sequel to iron out the kinks.

[lolmonade]

Not surprising, considering Ubisoft stated recently that ZombiU "wasn't even close to benig profitable", despite the fact that it was probably the best selling 3rd party game so far for the system.
 
I bought it, and it is a unique and enjoyable game, but also don't know if this style of gameplay would have mass-market appeal anyway.
 
That coupled with Wii U's lackluster sales, and it's not surprising there isn't a good business case for a sequel at this time.

[Ian Sane]

It isn't hard to get support from Ubisoft and EA.  I could practically write "videogame system" on the side of a Kleenix box and those companies would start making games for it.  But we know that EA has quickly soured on the Wii U and now Ubisoft isn't sounding so interested in it anymore either.  If Nintendo can't get these guys, they won't get anyone else.  I don't see how the third party support on the Wii U is ever going to improve.  The third parties are bailing and that leaves just Nintendo who has become embarrassingly slow at releasing new games.  Are we going to start seeing literally single-digit game releases per year?  How are Wii U sales going to pick up when the third party support is getting worse?

The Wii U seems like it's going to be like the Dreamcast, only with a far inferior lineup of games.

[paleselan]

Nintendo should've covered the difference so that the game broke even, then funded a sequel.

[KisakiProject]

I really liked this game.  Favorite WiiU game.  I can only hope Nintendo decides to moneyhat a sequel.

[Evan_B]

You seriously think Nintendo would EVER allow single digit releases in a year, Ian? Either you're just trolling for the sake of it or I don't even know...

That being said, it's a shame Zombi U didn't sell well- I'm playing it right now and loving it. It's a rare example of pandering in the worst way- being a zombie fps- but still being a good game. Certainly better than anything Nintendo has put out on the system thus far.

[TheXenocide]

No desire? I desire! I love Zombiu!

[Luigi Dude]

Like I said in the other thread, Ubisoft has only themselves to blame for spending too much on this type of game.  Any game that has perma-death as a major gameplay feature is never going to have wide appeal even if it has Zombie's and is a FPS.  It also doesn't help it tries to be a more traditional survival horror with slower paced gameplay, something that hasn't been popular in a long time as well.

Shows what's wrong with the industry if a niche game sells a few hundred thousand copies but that isn't enough to be even close to profitable.

[ThePerm]

Ubisoft really can't be blamed here. Ubisoft previously released new releases on a new Nintendo system and they sold quite well. This time that didn't work out. I hate to see Ubisoft shift their focus, but unlike EA they have a good reason to. Had EA tried a little harder then WiiU would have looked like a better platform from the get-go and Ubisoft would have sold more units. A console is like an ecosystem. All the factors need to be there for it to be successful. Nintendo needs to drop some of its regularly policies temporarily in order to bolster their system.

[Adrock]

What a bummer. ZombiU was great. I was hoping for a sequel to build on the original.

[Ian Sane]

What percentage of Wii U owners bought ZombiU?  Ultimately that would determine if Ubisoft or Nintendo deserves the blame.  A high percentage would mean that the game sold well within the Wii U userbase and was restricted by low console sales, which would be Nintendo's responsibility.

Zombies are very common in entertain these days.  I'm sure the suits look at that and think "Zombies are the hot thing right now!  We need to make a zombie game" and figure that that familiarity is the key to a certain hit.  I never for a second gave the slightest **** about ZombiU and it was precisely because zombies are the hot thing right now.  I'm sick of zombies!  I could wait at least a decade before I would have the slightest interest in zombies again.  And Capcom alone already nailed zombies in videogames TWICE with both Resident Evil and Dead Rising and then you also have games like Left 4 Dead and Dead Space.  There is no need to experience zombies in a videogame setting.  It has been done.  That itch has been scratched.  Ubisoft was really entering a saturated market.  The subject matter is so commonplace right now that it makes it harder to stand out.  Going with what's hot ironically makes the game less visible than something out-of-nowhere would have.

I haven't bought a Wii U because it feels like it offers nothing new that other consoles with years under their belt have not already done.  That also applies for third party games.  What does ZombiU truly offer that numerous other games, on platforms I've already owned for years, don't?  While I don't consider it Ubisoft's responsibility to sell Wii U's, they didn't release anything that would.  They didn't help themselves and pretty much relied on Nintendo to attract the userbase.  Again, that is mostly Nintendo's responsibility, but some third parties take that sort of thing into their own hands for their own benefit and Ubisoft did not.

[broodwars]

What percentage of Wii U owners bought ZombiU?  Ultimately that would determine if Ubisoft or Nintendo deserves the blame.  A high percentage would mean that the game sold well within the Wii U userbase and was restricted by low console sales, which would be Nintendo's responsibility.

Zombies are very common in entertain these days.  I'm sure the suits look at that and think "Zombies are the hot thing right now!  We need to make a zombie game" and figure that that familiarity is the key to a certain hit.  I never for a second gave the slightest **** about ZombiU and it was precisely because zombies are the hot thing right now.  I'm sick of zombies!  I could wait at least a decade before I would have the slightest interest in zombies again.  And Capcom alone already nailed zombies in videogames TWICE with both Resident Evil and Dead Rising and then you also have games like Left 4 Dead and Dead Space.  There is no need to experience zombies in a videogame setting.  It has been done.  That itch has been scratched.  Ubisoft was really entering a saturated market.  The subject matter is so commonplace right now that it makes it harder to stand out.  Going with what's hot ironically makes the game less visible than something out-of-nowhere would have.

I haven't bought a Wii U because it feels like it offers nothing new that other consoles with years under their belt have not already done.  That also applies for third party games.  What does ZombiU truly offer that numerous other games, on platforms I've already owned for years, don't?  While I don't consider it Ubisoft's responsibility to sell Wii U's, they didn't release anything that would.  They didn't help themselves and pretty much relied on Nintendo to attract the userbase.  Again, that is mostly Nintendo's responsibility, but some third parties take that sort of thing into their own hands for their own benefit and Ubisoft did not.

Just as a slight counterpoint to your argument, the game that likely topped the NPDs in June was a game that prominently featured Zombie-like creatures (The Last of Us).  According to Sony, it sold 3.4 million copies in 3 weeks.  While that game is not a "Zombie" game like Zombie U is, it certainly shows that the subject matter still sells quite well (and far better than Zombie U did).

[TJ Spyke]

Sold 3.4 million copies to a fanbase of 70+ million, so not quite as impressive.

As for making a profit on the game, maybe they should have tried to have a lower budget? Based on how much Nintendo gets and retailers get, Ubisoft still made $14 million from the game based on the 450K number I see for sales of it.

[Luigi Dude]

Ubisoft really can't be blamed here. Ubisoft previously released new releases on a new Nintendo system and they sold quite well. This time that didn't work out. I hate to see Ubisoft shift their focus, but unlike EA they have a good reason to. Had EA tried a little harder then WiiU would have looked like a better platform from the get-go and Ubisoft would have sold more units. A console is like an ecosystem. All the factors need to be there for it to be successful. Nintendo needs to drop some of its regularly policies temporarily in order to bolster their system.

Red Steel was a traditional FPS that that didn't try anything crazy like perma-death that would scare away most gamers.  You can not compare the success of Red Steel with much wider appeal to a something like Zombi U.  Niche games will always sell lower which is why they're niche in the first place. 

If Ubisoft honestly thought this game would be as successful as Red Steel then they only have themselves to blame.

[ThePerm]

I bought ZombiU, but didn't much like it to be honest. It basically sold me because of Zombies were in it. I've never played red steel, but its always looked interesting. Last of Us looks cool as ****. It also looks better than a next generation games like ZombiU.

To put it in perspective...Last generation games on ps3 look better than WiiU games, and that is why WiiU is doing poorly. Nintendo did little to correct this trend at e3. Its hard to understand why a multi billion dollar studio is putting out the equivalent of a handful of indy developer class games on a platform that is quite powerful.

[broodwars]

Sold 3.4 million copies to a fanbase of 70+ million, so not quite as impressive.

It was a New IP at the end of a console life cycle & a massive seller in a year where nothing outside Tomb Raider & Bioshock Infinite have been selling well.  I'm not going to sell that short just b/c Ubisoft sold a few hundred thousand copies of a Rogue-like during a CONSOLE LAUNCH, when New IPs generally sell the BEST b/c standards are so low and options so few.

[pokepal148]

I bought ZombiU, but didn't much like it to be honest. It basically sold me because of Zombies were in it. I've never played red steel, but its always looked interesting. Last of Us looks cool as ****. It also looks better than a next generation games like ZombiU.

To put it in perspective...Last generation games on ps3 look better than WiiU games, and that is why WiiU is doing poorly. Nintendo did little to correct this trend at e3. Its hard to understand why a multi billion dollar studio is putting out the equivalent of a handful of indy developer class games on a platform that is quite powerful.

nintendo isnt doing that because making a game look that good brings us to the 3 million copies sold= failure  territory

those types of games have huge budgets and Nintendo isn't really in a position to hemorrhage money like that....

[Luigi Dude]

To put it in perspective...Last generation games on ps3 look better than WiiU games, and that is why WiiU is doing poorly. Nintendo did little to correct this trend at e3. Its hard to understand why a multi billion dollar studio is putting out the equivalent of a handful of indy developer class games on a platform that is quite powerful.

Mario Kart 8 and X surpass anything of a similar scope the 360/PS3 and were made with a fraction of those games budgets.  If you can't see the different then go see an eye doctor because your eyes are terrible as **** and you're a danger to everyone on the road while driving.

[Ian Sane]

Luigi Dude mentions the permadeath but I honestly did not know about it until now.  I wonder what percentage of people not buying the game even know about that.

I think it is worth noting that ZombiU averaged in the high 70% range.  Videogame reviews tend to have inflated scores to begin with so if your game is getting reviews in the 70s that is like a big stamp stating "this game sucks".  In comparison Last of Us is scoring in the mid 90% range.  That's what Ubisoft has to compete with - the TOP games with zombie themes.  Why bother getting ZombiU when there are many zombie games that get considerably better reviews?  Would ZombiU even be considered one of the top ten zombie games available on current systems?  The HD generation seemed to be characterized by devs trying to make their own killer FPS and going broke as the game flopped.  While the market loves FPS games the competition is Call of Duty, Halo, Resistance, Bioshock.  That's lots of interest but also some big players to compete with.  Same with zombies.  Lots of competition so the middle-of-the-road quality game on the brand new console that has yet to establish a userbase is pretty much fucked.

[Evan_B]

I disagree. A 70 usually means you have a lot of mixed opinions about a game. A 90 usually means that a game has had some ridiculous paid reviews or that it's a "Triple-A" title.

Anything in the 50-60 range means your game sucks.

[broodwars]

I disagree. A 70 usually means you have a lot of mixed opinions about a game. A 90 usually means that a game has had some ridiculous paid reviews or that it's a "Triple-A" title.

Well, at least we're in agreement that Nintendo has a lot of "ridiculously paid reviews".

[nickmitch]

ZombiU currently sports a 77. And (for games) a 74 is considered "mixed".

[MegaByte]

Using the term "mixed" doesn't even make sense in that context. Scores in that range could actually mean a mix of good and bad or just a lot of okay. And likewise, with aggregate scores, it could be mixed because of a wide range or bimodal review scores, or it could just be a lot of okay.

[ThePerm]

To put it in perspective...Last generation games on ps3 look better than WiiU games, and that is why WiiU is doing poorly. Nintendo did little to correct this trend at e3. Its hard to understand why a multi billion dollar studio is putting out the equivalent of a handful of indy developer class games on a platform that is quite powerful.

Mario Kart 8 and X surpass anything of a similar scope the 360/PS3 and were made with a fraction of those games budgets.  If you can't see the different then go see an eye doctor because your eyes are terrible as **** and you're a danger to everyone on the road while driving.

the little I used was referring to mario kart

I bought ZombiU, but didn't much like it to be honest. It basically sold me because of Zombies were in it.

I bought Mario Kart 8, but didn't much like it to be honest. It basically sold me because it was Mario Kart

i hope ya'll see the irony. The last of Us looks good, not because it is a high budget game, but because it looks like they gave a damn when making it. It wasn't some silly Zombie game rushed for a launch in order to make a quick profit(and back firing) Hell, when it was Killer Freaks from Outer Space it looked more interesting. Can you imagine some suit telling them "zombies are profitable, lets do that instead" halfway through making the game?

I can see making a comparison of X to last of Us, but not Mario Kart. Mario Kart is a tried and true simple formula. You go around in a circle. If you are first place you get bananas, if you are in last place you get blue shells. Maybe you can go on the walls in this one, but that's their gimmick going right now(don't mean to sound like I don't like it though)