Ubisoft CEO Explains the Avatar Effect

[RatRace123]

Wow that's alot of words for "because the game was utterly average"

 

[duchaked]

"...movie tie-ins in the future, saying that they are not the license to print money that one might think"

um...duh?

 

[Playbahnosh]

Actually, in the case of X-Men Origins: Wolverine, the game was much better than the movie, even story-wise. They could pull it off, there is hard fucking evidence! So don't tell me the failure of the Avatar game had anything to do with the release date of the movie, that's a fat lie.

The Avatar game is shit, plain and simple, don't try to blame on anything on anyone else, it's your fault Ubi, live with it.

 

[ffxfriek]

Game adaptations of movies and vice versa don't work! So stop doing it.

this and book to movies most of the time too.

 

[Gladion]

Booooooooooo!

I was expecting something along these lines:

"We finally understand that movie tie-in games are a bad idea. Especially if they have little to no relation to the movie's spirit other than characters and setting. We will stop producing piss-poor games and concentrate on a quality games."

So, I suppose you're expecting Santa Claus to come in through your chimney once a year, bringing presents and the spirit of christmas (an aeroplane-model, inspired by the old planes from the 40's) to your home. ;D

A man can dream, can he not?

A man can dream...

I was going to say something sophisticated, but this moved me so much I can't think of anything. Now please excuse me for I need to go to bed and cry before having my last smoke and then hanging myself - I have experienced true beauty and therefore do not need to live any longer. I thank you.

Edit: Fuck, this has gone way off topic. How did we get from "Avatar game sold like shit" to this?

 

[RvLeshrac]

The game was roundly panned by every critic for being a poor quality title, in a season filled with other games that were better made. And Ubisoft is SURPRISED that the game didn't sell? Give me a break.

 

[murphy7801]

Here's the long and short of it: Cameron hired the wrong guy to make his game. (he did practically no meddling at all)

Yes he should hired epic games

It wouldn't have mattered. Making a game that needs to come out at the same time as a movie is a virtual guarantee that it will be toss.

Notice how the movie games that are being cited as not toss have come out anywhere up to twenty years after the movies they tie into.

Not meaning to like bastard but in this you entirely wrong ubisoft had over two years to make the game. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7IsfjoxheUU .

 

[MorteSphere]

I like to say they got what's coming to them.

 

[DarkSaber]

Game adaptations of movies and vice versa don't work! So stop doing it.

*Except for Goldeneye, and Chronicles of Riddick: Escape from Butcher Bay (although the latter may not technically count, since it was an entirely different event from the movies).

EFBB Still qualfies as a Tie-In Game though.

 

[GeneralGrant]

Movie tie-in games are pointless-game companies need to realize this. The only people who buy them are people who can't see the obvious pattern-that they mostly fail.

 

[mambodog]

its kind of a shame because i reckon this is like the perfect movie for a game tie-in (either this or district 9) but i, like most people i think, automatically assumed it would be shit because of the overwhelming precedent set by, like, every other movie game ever.

 

[DeathQuaker]

You'd think publishers would have learned after Atari's E.T. game back in the 80s, but no, they just make the same mistake over and over again and then go, "Gee, maybe making movie licensed video games doesn't work after all."

And then they go and make them anyway.

 

[Ankhwatcher]

Game adaptations of movies and vice versa don't work! So stop doing it.

golden eye

Technically you're right, but I would argue that it wasn't Goldeneye it was Rare.
They were at the time, a very good studio working on a very good console from inside the company that owned it.
If they hadn't been making a movie tie-in they would have made something just a good that wasn't one.

I know this doesn't really jive with Movie Tie-In = bad game, but the real problem is game studios tend to not put the effort in to tie-ins. And not every movie has a plot that is detailed enough (and includes enough opportunities for bloodshed from the first person) to make a game.

 

[DanDeFool]

Well, at least he's SAYING that Ubisoft is going to go after crap movie-license games less. Gotta give him some credit credit for that.

Let's hope this means we'll see less Avatar's and more "rince of Persia: Sands of Time's in the future.

 

[Sh0ckFyre]

Captain Bland's Monotonous Adventure, anyone?