Ubisoft: We Can Beat EA, Activision

April 8, 2011 -

Ubisoft CEO Yves Guillemot claims that his company has what it takes to overtake EA and Activision at some point in the future to become the world's leading publisher. Speaking to MCV, Guillemot said EA's decision to sell its stake in Ubisoft has left the company in a stronger position to grow its business.

"When they left it changed lots of things for us. We had a competitor owning a share of the company and we were always wary that they could decide they would go for the company - and that wouldn't have been welcome," Guillemot said. "The problem is that when you have the number one player in your company, you can't buy another company that would be in conflict with them or their strategy.

"So now we are totally independent again, we feel a lot better, we are number three and our goal is to beat those guys, EA and Activision, at some point. We got from number 25 to number three, so we think that we can continue and that it is possible to be number one. It's not certain, but we are taking the steps that we think will get us there."

Ubisoft is certainly a stronger company than it was even a few years ago, but it's debatable that it could overtake EA or Activision. EA has Madden, Tiger Woods, The Sims and countless best selling franchises. Activision has Call of Duty, Starcraft and World of Warcraft. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that both companies are tough to beat.

Source: MCV by way of C&VG


Comments

Re: Ubisoft: We Can Beat EA, Activision

Yes development houses need to protect their software. However Ubi implemented their DRM while thumbing their noses at their paying customers.

Thats not how you do it Ubi. How do you do it? I'm not sure yet, but I know you don't do it the way you did Ubi.

Re: Ubisoft: We Can Beat EA, Activision

Not with your BS DRM, Ubi.

Re: Ubisoft: We Can Beat EA, Activision

they won't overtake anyone with the shovelware they're pushing and that always on DRM.

without the financial backing they had, i bet they begin to fall fast given the way they'll milk every top name they have on below quality games.

Re: Ubisoft: We Can Beat EA, Activision

I dunno, they have a couple of excellent franchises on their side, as well.

Assassin's Creed, Tom Clancy, and Just Dance come to mind right away, while Michael Jackson: The Experience is selling like hotcakes on the Wii alone. No telling what's going to happen when it releases on the PS3 and Xbox next week.

And about the always-on DRM... Meh. Gotta protect your stuff somehow. It's annoying and mostly useless, yes. But better than nothing.

If you can think of a way to guarantee against piracy, while providing zero inconvenience to the people who buy your product... Well, that idea will make you a very rich individual.

"Power means nothing without honor and pride."

http://grifsgamereviews.blogspot.com My video game review site.

Re: Ubisoft: We Can Beat EA, Activision

"If you can think of a way to guarantee against piracy, while providing zero inconvenience to the people who buy your product... Well, that idea will make you a very rich individual."

This is all assuming that piracy is the problem and not a symptom of a larger problem.

-Greevar

-Greevar

"Paste superficially profound, but utterly meaningless quotation here."

Re: Ubisoft: We Can Beat EA, Activision

Considering piracy and other copyright infringement is the main reason for the existence of DRM in the first place, yeah, I'd say it's the problem.

I don't see how piracy can be a symptom, let alone what a larger problem would entail, but I'm sure you'd love to enlighten me.

"Power means nothing without honor and pride."

http://grifsgamereviews.blogspot.com My video game review site.

Re: Ubisoft: We Can Beat EA, Activision

piracy itself is both a problem and a symptom.

in its original form its the problem, but when the companies throw down impossible or just BS copyright protection it becomes a symptom as the consumers begin to rebel against this over zealous and often annoying block of their legitimate rights to the product that was purchased.

hence the debate on the ownership of a game/program, and how officially we only "lease" them rather than actually purchase.

so basically its a symptom of its own creation by the companies attempts to stop it.

Re: Ubisoft: We Can Beat EA, Activision

Getting pretty off topic here, but we have never been able to 'own' a game that you fork out money for over the counter of a high street store.  Because ownership of the game itself would mean ownership of the copyright that goes along with it.

 

Thats not to say that the EULAs these days arent getting laughably ridiculous, largely unenforceable and feel anti-consumerist, of course.

Re: Ubisoft: We Can Beat EA, Activision

not the title, or resale rights no.

but at one time modifying the games however we felt was pretty permissible as long as it didn't get sold or damage some other aspect of the title or is proprietary holders.

now its outright illegal to even consider such a thing unless given signed and noterized permission.

Re: Ubisoft: We Can Beat EA, Activision

Well, its never illegal to CONSIDER anything. And US courts have already found in favour of modification and even reverse engineering of other people's code if and when it falls under 'fair use'.  Waaay back in the 80s people didnt put particularly lengthy copyright statements on their games but that didnt mean we owned them either.  But to be quite honest modification is not the first thing that springs to my mind when I think of the rights of ownership anyway.

 

Re: Ubisoft: We Can Beat EA, Activision

Going back to the original topic, if it weren't for piracy, would we really need DRM in the first place? Would it be fair to say that if we eliminated piracy altogether, any sort of DRM would cease to be necessary?

"Power means nothing without honor and pride."

 http://grifsgamereviews.blogspot.com My video game review site.

Re: Ubisoft: We Can Beat EA, Activision

on the DRM, Ubi's method is pretty much the exact opposite of what will prevent piracy in most regards as it serves primarily to piss off the consumer rather than stop the pirates.

 

as for the AC and TC titles, thats what i meant when i said they're milking their big name titles.

they'll slap Tom Clancy on just about anything these days just to squeeze sales out of sub par or really bad games, and who knows what's going to happen with the AC name next at this rate.

AC2 to ACB is a fine example, granted they did a good job this round with a rushed out sequel, but it'll get stale fast if they keep it up and continue to try the Activision/CoD thing by trying to push a new sequel out every 12 months.

 

 

Re: Ubisoft: We Can Beat EA, Activision

I'll concede the DRM thing, since I don't use my PC for gaming that much, and don't have to deal with it nearly as much as most others.

But I stand by my point that Ubisoft has some good franchises behind it. I personally think they could get away with milking AC like Activision does. Firstly, because all the single-player campaigns are longer than 6-8 hours long, and secondly, the multiplayer in ACB is both more balanced, and much more fun than any CoD I've played. Tom Clancy is getting back into the groove, as well. Ghost Recon: Future Soldier looks like it's shaping up fairly nicely, GR for the 3DS is a pretty cool strategy game, as well. The last Splinter Cell was freaking awesome, too. All they have to do is keep up the momentum they've regained recently.

If Activision and EA can get away with making the same game year after year, Ubisoft can get away with making the same BETTER game year after year.

"Power means nothing without honor and pride."

http://grifsgamereviews.blogspot.com My video game review site.

Re: Ubisoft: We Can Beat EA, Activision

may not be 'pirate proof' but persson might be on to something with the way he set up minecraft.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Will Target Australia sell the next GTA game upon its release?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
MattsworknameAndrew: Sorry im so late in responding to your earlier question abonut sargons video, but basicly, he went through 3 phases. He first looked at the cited reasearch the articles used, by somone named shaw, and proved that the research shows that gamers, in07/31/2015 - 6:35pm
benohawk:( Well, that's crappy news James07/31/2015 - 6:29pm
james_fudgeRIP Roddy Piper :(07/31/2015 - 5:39pm
Andrew EisenI told Sega if it releases Yakuza 1&2 HD and Yakuza 5 in North America, I'll buy them. So far, they don't seem to be swayed.07/31/2015 - 5:11pm
Craig R.Too many gamers were harassing and abusing long before Baldwin decided to 'legitimize' the lunatic fringe, but that term certainly made the lunatics easier to pick out of the crowd07/31/2015 - 4:58pm
Craig R.Which is why the entire GG crowd looks like a giant bad egg07/31/2015 - 4:55pm
Craig R.Irony: the people who are feeling hostility toward their 'gamer' identity are often those who are most hostile to everybody else07/31/2015 - 4:55pm
Andrew EisenIt's not about gamers at all, it's discussing the harassment and abuse that Sarkeesian and Quinn had suffered. So yeah, not a great title but not an attack on gamers either.07/31/2015 - 4:48pm
Andrew EisenI agree than many of the titles are kinda bunk though. For example, Ars Technia's "The death of the 'gamers' and the women who 'killed' them" doesn't really work for the article.07/31/2015 - 4:47pm
Andrew EisenAnd I still don't see how articles like Polygon's "An awful week to care about video games" can be construed as an attack.07/31/2015 - 4:25pm
Andrew Eisen18 total? I've seen several lists and the total has never been above 14. The most popular collection seems to be 9 on Aug. 28 then three more on Aug. 29, Sep. 2 and Sep. 3.07/31/2015 - 4:24pm
Infophile@Goth_Skunk: Your distaste for TMS is noted and given exactly the respect it deserves. The fact that you don't like a site doesn't mean they can't be right. In the linked article, they are.07/31/2015 - 4:06pm
Goth_SkunkAnd the worst volleys are the ones being fired by the kind of people who should be standing up and saying 'Hey! This isn't cool! Stop that!'07/31/2015 - 4:05pm
Goth_SkunkNow let's come full circle: One such confrontationally titled article is easy to dismiss. Within a day, nine similarly titled articles are written. Within 4 more days, nine more articles are written. This can't be ignored. This is a blatant attack.07/31/2015 - 4:04pm
Andrew EisenAnd that's totally fine. I too often skip articles and videos based solely on an unappealing title.07/31/2015 - 3:56pm
Goth_SkunkPersonally, I would not waste time reading an article with such a blatantly confrontational title.07/31/2015 - 3:52pm
Andrew EisenGoth - Depends on how the article was written and what it actually said.07/31/2015 - 3:49pm
Goth_SkunkThis is like going fishing and castign a HUGE net that captures tuna, dolphins, sharks, cod, and salmon when all you really want to capture are clownfish.07/31/2015 - 3:48pm
Andrew EisenPerm - If the specific make and model are made clear, I have no problem with the article saving space by refering to them as "these cars" or whatever.07/31/2015 - 3:47pm
Goth_Skunk... Hasbro's widening horizons..." would it not make sense that some would object there is no distinction being made between a reactionary brony and a stable-minded brony?07/31/2015 - 3:47pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician