Topic: EA Buys Approximately 20% of Ubi Soft

[nickmitch]

Well EA still has the potential to buy the rest of Ubi Soft.

Quote
All that's left is a shell of what the game used to be, now covered in angst, blood, boobs, and awful godsmack songs.

Eeeewww! Godsmack! and I'm getting PoP:WW for Christmas!

[cmoney]

It's probably best to look at Ubisoft's publishing/development record on the PC in this case.

[Caillan]

The Younger Plummer's comment about respecting gamers' intelligence describes pretty well what makes Ubisoft a respectable developer. The only game of their's I've ever gotten into was Rayman 2, but that was enough. I would dearly like to play PoP: SoT, but unsuprisingly it cannot be located in my region.

I never got into BG&E, in fact it rather bored me, but I realise this is merely personal preference; I still respect it as a game. Having said that, comparing it to Zelda is unfair: as far as I'm concerned, games like Zelda are fine styled as myths with solid storylines that lay in the background. The thing that gets me about telling 'original' stories in games is that all too often cheap and predictable twists are relied on, and these detract from a game, not add to it. Playing Tales of Symphonia, I can predict pretty well most of the major twists, yet I have to suffer idiot characters making decisions for me: the story in these parts actually makes me not want to play the game because I fear it'll be a waste of time.

Ian Sane said he doesn't bother with stories in games because books and movies do it better. If anything, I'd say good books tend rely more on a sense of enivitablity than anything else in their plots. Presuming extra development in the area allows for greater depth to be displayed, why can this not be the case for games?  

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Mario, SpongeBob, Tom Clancy, Oldsen Twins, Hillary Duff...

YOU'RE NEXT!  GRRRRRRRR EA eats franchies for BREAKFAST!

[NWR_Lindy]

Huh.  Well dang.  EA is the 900-pound gorilla, now I guess it's eating all of the little bananas.

The reason why these companies go with EA is because of their massive distribution channels and marketing.  Heck, if I was the CEO of a small developer I'd love to be bought out by EA.  Number one, I'd be rich, and number two, EA has the ability to get my games out all over the place.  From a business standpoint it's huge.

I'm not rabidly anti-EA (although I think the NFL deal is ridiculous, don't even get me started), but it's scary how they're buying out/into smaller developers left and right.  They're really making aggressive moves and squeezing out the little guys.  The video game industry is becoming like the movie industry - a whole bunch of smaller studios owned by massive media conglomerates (Time-Warner, Viacom, etc.).

Last week I would have said the idea of an EA console is out of the question, but with the properties they have now, I wouldn't put anything past them.  After all, in 1994 the idea of a console made by Sony would have been dismissed as crazy too.  I don't think EA would want the hassle of going hardware (especially after seeing Trip Hawkins fall flat on his face with the 3DO), but who knows.  If their investors thought it would make the most money in the long run, they might consider it.

BTW - that comparison of EA to Hitler is the funniest thing I've read in a while.  Now THAT is hating.  hahaha

silks

[StrikerObi]

JonLeung. It doesn't matter if Link is fighting Ganon or Majora or anything else. What it boils down to is that the story is pretty much always "save the world Link!" It's tired. Nintendo says they are taking a slightly darker look into Hyrule with the new Zelda game, but I'm not sure I trust them. I could care less how dark they make it if the story is still the same. We need to look into Link and see what makes him tick. He throws on this mantle of hero every game, but I don't understand his motivation. Why does he do it? The answer seems to be "because he was told to" or "because it's his destiny."

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Because I want to do it.

~~~~~

There's a locked door; must unlock it.

There's a monster; must defeat it.

There's a puzzle; must solve it.

There's a challenge; must complete it.

~~~~~

I enjoy completing the intertwined series of challenges that defines the adventure of a Zelda game.  Link's not saving or wanting to save any world unless I want to as well.  Otherwise, I'd be playing another game or looking up "mature content" on the interweb.

[gally]

StrikerObi, most people do NOT care about story. Story is intensely popular in certain circles, yes, but how many people do you know who enjoy video games actually talk about the story? Look at the best selling games, including the best-selling single-player games (so you can avoid the "you don't need a story; it's multiplayer" argument). How many of them had a story, at least, one that people gave a damn about?

The Zelda games sell damn well; do they have stories? You say they don't; do the people who buy them care? The feeling of going on a grand adventure can be accomplished using gameplay and presentation, and diversity in world design. Story is just in the background; even if you're told that you're doing X because of reason Y, most people quickly ignore reason Y and concentrate only on doing X.

Seriously. Saying BG&E is better than Zelda and using ONLY story as your argument is like someone saying that Doom 3 is better than Halo 2 and using graphics as their argument. It's their opinion, yes, but it's retarded.

[Hostile Creation]

I've said it once and I'll say it again, if you want a good story, read a book.  A mediocre novel's story is generally superior to that of a good game story.  I play games because they're games, not because they have a heart-breaking love story in them.  I haven't played Beyond Good and Evil, so I have no beef against that, but most games people showed me that were supposed to have a "good story" were not only boring games, but the stories were crap, too.  Take Final Fantasy for instance.  Boring games, throw in a bad love story, predictable plot line, and the world coming to an end and you got yourself a game!
Any game that can pull off both is fine by me, and if BG&E did, that's grand.  I hope you had a good time.  But don't moan about Zelda having a bad story, because nobody cares if it does or not.

And I think duty and destiny have nothing to do with Link's reasons for saving the world.  If you were given the opportunity to go on an adventure and save the world, what would you do?  Zelda games bring out the child's desire, everyone's desire, to become a hero.  It's his own will, not anything else, that drives him to do it.
But now I'm just looking at it way too much

[PaLaDiN]

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

I don't give a crap about story. I don't play most games for their story. Unless the story is exceptional, I don't even notice it. The reason for this is that the average game's story, with very few exceptions, completely sucks, and BG&E is no different. You call that a good story? Please... you're reaching now. I could have crapped a better story out of my ass. If you want a good story, read a book.

"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."

Complex look at government, media and propaganda? What the...? Did you play the same game I did? I can't even remember the story, all I know is that the government was bad. It was that forgettable. And if you're playing Zelda for the story, you're playing the wrong game. Mario 1 didn't have a story, does that make it bad?

"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)."

Yeah, I actually enjoyed the first two. Slip of the tongue.

"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."

Are you even listening to yourself? Story blah blah... art blah blah... is that all you care about? I wouldn't even know what the story was about because Ubisoft didn't put any subtitles... but I don't care if it was a masterpiece, the gameplay was an atrocious piece of crap and that completely turned me off.

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

Why don't you show me where I said anything about any company except Ubisoft. Of course Nintendo isn't the only company that makes good games... but you haven't showed me one SHRED of evidence that Ubisoft makes any. Go back and look at your post... it's all about story and art. Where's the game? Why am I holding a controller?

[Aussie Ben PGC]

Quote
Originally posted by: Hostile Creation
I've said it once and I'll say it again, if you want a good story, read a book.

Reading that makes me cry and scream all at the same time.  Don't get me wrong, I love a paperback as much as the next person (even moreso, maybe?) but to say that a book is the only storytelling medium allowed?  The notion is incredibly short-sighted.  A movie can tell a story.  Poetry can tell a story.  Even a series of beautiful pictures can tell a story.  Why then, should a game not be allowed to do so?  Who's to say that just because the main focus of a game is interaction, no other method of enjoyment is allowed?  That's just dense.  I enjoyed Ratchet and Clank not only because of its gameplay, but because I was curious to find out what would happen next.  I loved playing LeChuck's Revenge because of its hilarious story, not just because I like Adventure games.  And Psychonauts compels me to play it, not merely because it's a 3D platformer, but because the characters have a depth to their history which you can discover if you only look for it.  In the same fashion, I love Beyond Good and Evil not only because of the style of gameplay, but also because it's got an excellent story which shows the power of the media.

I also liked it because you weren't limited to a maximum of three photos which then had to be taken to a specific place to be developed.  Instant creature identification - ingenious.

[PaLaDiN]

Ben, I don't think you get the point.

Sure a game can tell a story. But games generally don't tell any good ones, or at least not on the level of a good book or movie. So if you're looking for a good story in a game, you will as a rule be disappointed.

Eternal Darkness, for example, had a good story. Half Life 1 had a good story. Baten Kaitos (for one brief moment), Monkey Island, Grim Fandango, KotoR (also for one brief moment, albeit slightly predictable) ... all of these had good stories. But they're the exception. Therefore, if you're looking for a good story, you will more likely find one in a book.

BG&E, I'm sorry to say, was not an exception. The story was crap. Not only was the story crap, but the gameplay was a tired derivative of much better games.

Secondly, any game that sacrifices gameplay for story is on my sh!t list. The games I listed above don't just have good story going for them... they also have good gameplay. The reason I am holding a controller is to play a game, to directly interact with the onscreen details in order to get enjoyment that I cannot get from a book or movie. PoP falls under this category. It may have the best story in the world (I have no idea because I'm hearing impaired... thank you Ubisoft, I hope you burn in hell.) but I seriously don't care. The game itself, the reason I sat down and switched on my gamecube, sucked. I derived no pleasure from the experience and quite a bit of pain.

To sum it up, what I'm saying is this:
Good gameplay + crap story = good game. Crap gameplay + good story = crap game.

[TheYoungerPlumber]

Striker, I'm not sure we'll ever see why Link ticks, nor would I want to know why Nintendo thinks he is doing what he does.  Link doesn't talk--not even in textual form--save for the occasional player-chosen response to a question, because the player is supposed to use his/her imagination to fill in the holes (if that player even cares).  So I doubt we'll see a deeper storyline in the next Zelda, though anything is possible with a new director if Aonuma and Miyamoto give enough slack.

If Nintendo wants to make a Zelda-esque game with a real story, they'd best dust off their franchise invention hats.

[Deguello]

Quote
He throws on this mantle of hero every game, but I don't understand his motivation. Why does he do it? The answer seems to be "because he was told to" or "because it's his destiny."

And how exactly would finding out Link's "motivation" change the actions he takes?  Or the outcome?  Would anything change except that 10 minutes of reading text has passed?  What does it matter?  I'd rather they not tell me and let me decide for myself what his motivation is.  That, and make great dungeons and gameplay and whatnot.

Quote
Even a series of beautiful pictures can tell a story.

I think this says it all really.  Why must the stories in video games be presented just one way?  Why must they all be voice-acted to the nines and have all the cliched over-twisted convoluted storyline tricks of dime store novelists?  I think more story is conveyed through Link's FACE in Wind Waker than in several chatty RPG's.

But anyway... Hey EA sure is buying up a lot of companies, eh?

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

The Legend of Zelda, hmm

The Chronicles of Riddick, hmm...


...


The Trials of Marcus???

[Mario]

Zelda games have the best story's ever because I care about the characters, and I don't foghat everything they say and how they feel. The NPC's are the biggest part of the story telling for me, sure you have the "Link must defeat Ganon" part, but that just makes it Zelda-ish.

Metroid Prime should not have duel analog FPS controls.

The Mario Sunshine commercial was great.

Indigo is not kiddie.

Thanks, EA.  

[joshnickerson]

Just reported on GamerFeed that the NBA rejected EA's initial offer for an exclusivity deal like their NFL deal.
http://general.gamerfeed.com/gf/news/8094/
EA is also currently courting the MLB.
O.o

[Ian Sane]

Hooray for the NBA!  Sticking it to EA almost makes up for the Grizzlies leaving Vancouver.  Well I'll still not watch because I have no local team but still good for the NBA.

[KnowsNothing]

Quote
The Mario Sunshine commercial was great.

:rock:

I guess I'll put my two cents in here.  Concerning EA, there's not much we can do.  Buying 20% of Ubi-Soft is a major blow to the industry (although, the rights to the NFL takes the cake...) because Ubi-Soft had large amounts of potential to make great games, but what are we gonna do?  I have a friend who only like sports games, and one of his arguments for them is the fact that they're updated every year with new rosters.  There are a ton of people like this, and that's where EA got all the money to tap into other sure-sellers such as Bond or Harry Potter.

(btw, I didn't try to make this sound like the be all and end all  I'm just saying, just as Ubi has the potential to make great games, EA now has the potential to totally screw them up...)

So hay, I loved BG&E.  The gameplay was a tad repetitive, but the story, style and atmosphere AMAZED me beyond what I expected from a game that droped to 20 bucks in almost no shelf time.  I was totally immersed into the world of Hyllis and whenever I played I completely blotted out the real world from my mind. The game had its problems, such as the huge influx of pearls at the end of the game so you never really had to go looking for them, but I didn't mind that because I was Jade and I was trying to free people's minds from the illusion created by propaganda GOOD STORY.  I was just as immersed and fantasized by BG&E as I was with Wind Waker.

PoP: SoT, although I haven't spent too much time with the game, also had an amazing art style.  The most amazing part, though, was that this game succesfully brought 2D platforming into a completely 3D environment, something that is RARELY done succesfully.

Oh hay, Rayman 2 :rock:  Not gonna go into this, but I do have a question.  Rayman DS (which was pushed back to 2005 >=o [at least it was for game-quality purposes..]) looks, from the screenshots, to be basically a port of Rayman 2.  I haven't read anytinhg about this, but can anyone confirm/deny?  Also, for those who've played both Super Mario 64 DS and Rayman 2, how do you think the controls will work out in the DS version?  Evidently the D-Pad is the only way to maneuver in Rayman DS.  Will the more linear structure of Rayman 2 (assuming that they will be similar, if not the same) work better than what I've read about SM64DS's D-Pad controls?  

Oh [QI I can't even remember the story, all I know is that the government was bad
The government was setting up attacks on Hyllis.  The DomZ were "saviors" sent out by the same government to basically create a large "fanbase."  The DomZ were also kidnapping a whole bunch of Hyllians, but since the public was so blinded by their propaganda they never even considered the DomZ to be responsible.  The kidnapped citizens would be shipped to the moon to feed  their "lord" figure guy (iirc...).  As Jade, working for the IRIS network, it was your job to collect evidence proving the DomZ true motive and gaining support form the Hyllians in an attempt to overthrow the government and save lives.  Plus there were a couple twists too.

If you couldn't remember any of the story at all, it seems that you most likely played through a bit of the game, decided that you hated it, and kept that mindset throughout, thus blocking out the story with all your hate hate hate.  Or you didn't play/finish it.  Or you have a way short memory =p  Anywho, it's not the best story, but remember, this isn't some RPG that relies on hour-long cutscenes to tell a story; this game DID have decent gameplay, and for an adventure game like this, a good story just adds to it.

[JonLeung]

Quote
Originally posted by: StrikerObi
JonLeung. It doesn't matter if Link is fighting Ganon or Majora or anything else. What it boils down to is that the story is pretty much always "save the world Link!" It's tired. Nintendo says they are taking a slightly darker look into Hyrule with the new Zelda game, but I'm not sure I trust them. I could care less how dark they make it if the story is still the same. We need to look into Link and see what makes him tick. He throws on this mantle of hero every game, but I don't understand his motivation. Why does he do it? The answer seems to be "because he was told to" or "because it's his destiny."

POSSIBLE SPOILERS AHEAD?



I guess that's true too.  Funny, Link is my favorite character and I never really thought much about what goes on in his head.  My brother's favorite character is Samus, and she doesn't say much either, or do much worth personality-revealing.  Well, to avoid spoilers, there was that thing that happened near the end of Super Metroid, but what there IS of Samus is implied more than explicitly stated.

I guess the same goes for other Nintendo characters...why does Mario save the princess?  We assume he loves Peach, but aside from a couple on-the-nose smooches, it's rarely ever confirmed.  Why must Kirby save Dream Land again?  We see that King Dedede is rarely TRULY evil, but Kirby goes along with all that is cute and good for no reason.  Maybe Nintendo characters lack souls so that players can identify with them, but as games become more cinematic, these characters seem too...shallow?  I was going to say "quiet", but after Chalres Martinet took on the role of Mario, the guy won't shut up!  Not that that's entirely bad but he sure speaks a lot for a guy you'd think would be out of breath running around.  Again I digress.

Perhaps that's why people love or hate Nintendo characters.  So much is implied or imagined, and little is actually confirmed.  But we're talking about Ubi Soft & EA...

Ubi Soft seems more creative than EA...I haven't played much of any Rayman but at least Ubi Soft used their imagination caps for that franchise.  I don't think they did the original Prince Of Persia or Myst but they seem to be continuing them with some success.  EA's biggest games seem to be movie licenses or sports titles, not that there isn't some creativity in some of them, but they're mostly "cookie-cutter".  If EA wants to buy Ubi Soft and Ubi Soft lets itself be bought, fine, but hopefully this has no negative effect on Ubi Soft's output.  I guess time will tell, as always.

[PaLaDiN]

"If you couldn't remember any of the story at all, it seems that you most likely played through a bit of the game, decided that you hated it, and kept that mindset throughout, thus blocking out the story with all your hate hate hate. Or you didn't play/finish it. Or you have a way short memory =p Anywho, it's not the best story, but remember, this isn't some RPG that relies on hour-long cutscenes to tell a story; this game DID have decent gameplay, and for an adventure game like this, a good story just adds to it."

None of the above. I played the game all the way through to the end to give it a chance to impress me. It didn't. Therefore, waste of money and crappy game.

Now that you've posted the story I can see why I forgot it. It sucks even more than I remember. Seriously, if you think that's a good story you must not have read many books or seen many movies. No matter how much you delude yourself, government conspiracy stories aren't anything new.

Besides, you're still missing the point. Let's say hypothetically speaking the story was the best ever written. I still wouldn't be satisfied. You know why? Because the gameplay wasn't any good.

[Djunknown]

Man, tempers are flaring from all sides! Maybe I should hide behind the sandbags...

I won't argue about "game X vs game Y" since it'll be like a never ending game of Pong...

Gotta give it to EA to make headlines not once, but twice for what could be considered a slow time for game news. [/sarcasm]

As long as EA makes games that aren't sub-par a la Acclaim, and still support Nintendo systems, its all gravy by me.  Though it seems EA's been studying MS's mantra: If you can't beat 'em, buy 'em out (or buy them off...)

I wouldn't be surprised if someone decides to go for an Anti-trust suit; maybe not now but if EA keeps it up, we'll see in a few years.

[PaLaDiN]

"I won't argue about "game X vs game Y" since it'll be like a never ending game of Pong..."

I'm not falling for your subliminal messages. Pong sucks too.

No, I'm kidding. Strangely enough, Pong is fun. You'd never know though, what with the whole lack of any story which must absolutely cripple it according to some people.

[KnowsNothing]

Heh, tempers ARE rising =p

PaLaDiN, if you're going to stick by that Pong analogy than there's no use talking to you (not that there was much use before >_>).  I'm thinking you made that post out of pure obstinance.  If not, and you truley believe that you have a good argument there....well, we can just let you be on your merry little way.

Arguing "game x vs game y" IS pointless, but talking about "game x and game y" spereatley, by their own merits, works.

[Q}Now that you've posted the story I can see why I forgot it. It sucks even more than I remember. Seriously, if you think that's a good story you must not have read many books or seen many movies. No matter how much you delude yourself, government conspiracy stories aren't anything new.

Hold on a second.......did I SAY it was anything new?  No.  Government conspiracy has been done before, many times, I know.  The story isn't anything spectacular when compared to books or movies,  but when compared to other games like it, BG&E rise above its competition.

[PaLaDiN]

"Heh, tempers ARE rising =p"

Heh, dude, I hope you're not taking me seriously... for some reason I get that a lot. Maybe now is a bit too late to point out that I'm not angry at all. I just like arguing. Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean he's on the edge of his seat, nostrils flaring, cursing at the computer screen.

Here, have a cookie.

"PaLaDiN, if you're going to stick by that Pong analogy than there's no use talking to you (not that there was much use before >_>). I'm thinking you made that post out of pure obstinance. If not, and you truley believe that you have a good argument there....well, we can just let you be on your merry little way."

No no no, go ahead and tell me where I'm wrong. Are you implying that Pong sucks? Blasphemy! What about Tetris?

"Arguing "game x vs game y" IS pointless, but talking about "game x and game y" spereatley, by their own merits, works."

In that case, then most games you've ever played fall far short of your lofty art and story goals.

It's also not cool to contradict yourself in the same post, saying things like "The story isn't anything spectacular when compared to books or movies, but when compared to other games like it, BG&E rise above its competition.". Who's comparing games now? My point is that if you're looking for story, there's better to be had elsewhere. Games are not an industry where good stories abound. Judging their stories by their own merits, you'll find that most of them suck. It's only when you exclude books and movies and compare it to other games instead that your appraisal seems anything but ignorant. Given that most game stories suck, then, what's the reason I'm playing games? For the one thing I can get out of them that I can't get elsewhere... the gameplay.

"Hold on a second.......did I SAY it was anything new? No. Government conspiracy has been done before, many times, I know."

You agree with me, so why are you arguing? Your logic is selective and inconsistent.  I'm confused.