• Majorllama
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1463 months ago

    I remember when they said “players should get used to not owning their games”.

    Well Ubisoft. You should get used to not getting a penny outta me forever.

  • The Picard Maneuver
    link
    fedilink
    English
    633 months ago

    Goodwill with your playerbase doesn’t show up on a quarterly report, but without it your company is sunk.

    It’s incredible that a company with the resources of Ubisoft couldn’t figure that out, even with people shouting it at them daily.

    • @rottingleaf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      183 months ago

      I think when all these famous studios were interesting, they still by inertia functioned the way people with actual skills founded them. I’m thinking of BioWare, Black Isle, Obsidian, but reading the history of any famous video game studio gives that impression. It was a rather personal business in 90s and early 00s, it seems.

      Then the “professionals” came and started “fixing” everything, and something about today’s computing makes me personally deeply disgusted of anything advertised there.

      I don’t want a shooter not better than a hundred Q3 clones, but taking 50GB disk space. I don’t even want it with “photorealistic” (no they aren’t) graphics. I don’t want CK3 because it’s slow and has too much bullshit happening, the secret of success is in quality of content more than amount, and more is not always better if a player gets bored with small events. I admit, I haven’t tried Hogwarts Legacy, put from what people say its open world is as useful as Daggerfall’s map the size of England, because most things on that map are all the same, though as a dungeon crawler Daggerfall is still better than typical modern game. And Star Wars - its Expanded Universe mostly came into existence in the 90s, it’s designed the way very convenient for all kinds of video games, or any entertainment and any secondary art at all, and George Lucas approached that theoretically before making the first movie (the “obscenely huge profits” part he may or may not have considered, but it came as a welcome bonus, I suppose), and still every modern time Star Wars game is just not interesting to me ; my favorite one is KotORII, so there is, of course, a gap between me and the majority, but it’s still baffling how didn’t they even try to make an X-Wing remake.

      One can go on. People want to play interesting games. Very few people play games because of “more, better, wider” in ad. The whole idea of a game is to be interesting. It’s entertainment. It’s not “I’ve got a new iPhone and you don’t” dick size contest. Some game being very technically cool, but absolutely bullshit in gameplay, writing, UI design, character design, location design etc, - is not entertaining. Some other game being technically a visual novel (not necessarily), but with all those things done well, - it is entertaining.

      So, making a good game doesn’t even require a lot of very competent and very stressed CS heroes working since dawn till dusk to the extent of their ability.

      • @kautau@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        103 months ago

        Simplified: capitalism made these studios shitty, just as it’s done for gestures broadly

        • @rottingleaf@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          13 months ago

          I live in the midst of something that can be very carefully called capitalism. It was called socialism once and then the “socialist administrators” did sort of a rebranding.

          Point being - yes, this is simplification.

    • @eronth@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      123 months ago

      I think the big “issue” is that there’s a notable lag between loss of goodwill and loss of income/profit/value, and there’s an even bigger lag between trying to fix goodwill and returns on that. It makes it too hard for any profit-first company to get right.

      • The Picard Maneuver
        link
        fedilink
        English
        73 months ago

        I think you’re absolutely right. When these studios go public and start having pressure from shareholders, it starts the gradual decline in quality.

  • @qx128@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    633 months ago

    If their customers are going to have to get used to not owning games they paid for, I guess Ubisoft is going to get used to not having money 🤷🏻

      • @OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        73 months ago

        In addition to Steam not being subscriptions, Valve has so far not screwed over their users. The way the Ubisoft exec suggested that we should change our attitude really showed what they in plan

  • @Nilz@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    623 months ago

    “review and pursue various transformational strategic and capitalistic options to extract the best value for stakeholders”.

    Ah there it is. That’s the only thing that matters anyway.

    • @9bananas@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      53 months ago

      fyi, in case someone isn’t clear on the difference:

      stakeholder ≠ shareholder

      stakeholders are basically all people involved, including staff, and even stuff like landlords, janitors, citizens (sometimes things like parents), etc.

      it’s anyone with a stake in an organizations operations!

      example: a city decides to create a new bus route. in this case, stakeholders include the local residents, the companies involved in creating the route, the companies supplying the buses, the mechanics needed to keep the fleet running, etc., etc.

      there’s a usually a LOT of stakeholders, and typically you don’t always include everyone in every little decision because it quickly becomes unmanageable. so only the most relevant ones are included in most decisions, and who exactly that is depends on the project.

      shareholders on the other hand are what everyone is probably thinking of, and that’s the people (“people” being used generously here) only interested in next quarters profits. you know! the parasites!

      of course the message is still bullshit and nothing but coded corpo-speech for “shareholders”, but i thought some folks might be interested in knowing the difference anyhow.

      even if, in this case, it’s only important to highlight the extra special bullshit they put into the statement…

      • @Nilz@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        43 months ago

        Good point and thanks for pointing it out, I misread it. A shareholder and stakeholder aren’t (necessarily) the same indeed.

        • @9bananas@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          33 months ago

          actually good point on your part too, cause i should have mentioned that as well:

          shareholders can also be stakeholders!

          totally not confusing or anything…

          i really hate basically all the language around finance…

  • Agent Karyo
    link
    fedilink
    English
    51
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    It feels like a complete bloodbath with the job situation in the gaming industry in the west.

    The worst thing is none of the executives are getting fired (in a proper manner, no golden parachutes and clawbacks on any stock based compensation).

    • @Ledivin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      103 months ago

      The worst thing is none of the executives are getting fired (in a proper more manner, no golden parachutes and clawbacks on any stock based compensation).

      lol, welcome to the west

    • @novibe@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -1
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Yeah? The executives are firing people, to lower costs, make the numbers look better…? Which makes the owners of the business money?

      Why wouldn’t the executives get bonuses or golden parachutes if let go? They are doing exactly what they are supposed to do.

      Executives don’t make products, provide services, or add any productive value. They are just the face of the owners, and will do the “hard” things for them.

      Like lie, commit crimes, do mass-layoffs etc etc.

      • Ech
        link
        fedilink
        English
        53 months ago

        Do you always argue with people that agree with you? How is that helpful?

  • dinckel
    link
    fedilink
    English
    303 months ago

    I feel horrible for the people affected, because for a lot of them, this was probably a dream job, but Ubisoft will get 0 sympathy from me

    • @essteeyou@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      143 months ago

      All the people making the shitty decisions will be fine. Everyday people will be the ones to lose their jobs, as is always the way in these things. :-/

  • _cryptagion [he/him]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    183 months ago

    I like to think I had a very tiny hand in this, since I never pay for Ubisoft games I play.

  • @emax_gomax@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    23 months ago

    Wow AC shadows pre sale levels must be really bad. Not too surprising tho. For a studio that basically said “there’s way more interesting time periods we want to focus on” the fact they finally went to feudal Japan felt more like they ran out of interesting ideas. Doesn’t help ghost of tsushima beat them by a few years and was basically the best AC game since black flag.

  • @Hyphlosion@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    23 months ago

    “We are deeply grateful for their contributions and are committed to supporting them through this transition."

    So like a fruit basket and a pat on the head?

  • Yerbouti
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -313 months ago

    Gamers won. No executives will lose a dime but 185 workers are screwed because Ubisoft bad and Steam good.

      • Yerbouti
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -113 months ago

        Steam is just another soul-less capitalist business. They employ less then 100 people but take 30% on every game sold. They would do the exact same things as Ubisoft if the estimate they could profite more from it.

        • @ampersandrew@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          103 months ago

          Right, they profit more by being good. Ubisoft profits less by being bad. That’s how it’s supposed to work.

    • @P00ptart@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      53 months ago

      Yeah, just go ahead and blame the consumer because the company makes shit product. They keep pushing stuff that the people don’t want. Any business doing this is going to go tits up. That’s just how it works. Are you out there buying 30 extra versions of Far cry to help them out? If not, stfu about it and blame the people in charge, definitely not the consumer.

      • Yerbouti
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -93 months ago

        That’s a stupid analogy. The employees are not responsible for the bad management déecisions, they just want to be fairly paid for doing a job they like. Meanwhile “gamers” are fucking obsessed about trashing a game that isn’t out yet because “nO bLaCK SaMuRai iN my HiStorIc vidiyaGame aBout ficCtiNal chArcTers RuNNInG oN wAlls”. Just dont buy their games.

        • @greenashura@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          53 months ago

          The travelers of the titanic were not responsible either for the crashing of the ship. Either way you’re missing the point. I didn’t mention a single game, the company which has taken a bad direction because of greed is to blame that developers have now lost their jobs. Not gamers.