Ubisoft Considers Beyond Good & Evil a Mistake

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

So what the guy's saying is. Go indie.

That's not really his message. What he's saying is that managed to get his idea greenlit with a major publisher with thanks to those Indie success stories. Every Indie success story therefore contributes to getting similar, original, "risky" ideas published through the larger companies on account that the execs will start to pay attention. Ubi saw BG&E's failure, he showed them Indie success stories.

"If that Indie game succeeded on a small budget, a similar title with larger budget and better marketing may do the same". He's saying that if you can't get your idea published traditionally, go indie anyway and succeed or fail, it will still teach & inform the industry.

 

[Frankster]

snip

Don't put words in my mouth please I'd rather 4 good games over 40 mediocre ones but that's not what I was getting at, not least because this line of thinking depicts ubisoft as a high quantity/low quality publisher which is just even more BS, from my point of view ubisoft have produced not only better games, but across more varied genres whereas I don't like any blizzard games and just 2 valve games (l4d1 and alien breed). I am not advocating a yearly churn of rereleases and hashed in sequels as I'm feeling you're implying.

What I'm getting at is valve is in a very unique self sustaining position (blizzard too actually, funny you bought them up as your 2nd example of high quality dev...) which other game studios can't replicate, it's a rather unfair comparison that lionizes valve for its circumstances rather then it's actual games and this deification is rather annoying.

That however still isn't what I was implying when I responded to scriveners statement, but rather pointing out it's much easier to not shoot yourself in the foot when you only had a handful of chances to do so against another case that has 1000s of such opportunities to happen, basically one is much more likely to shoot themselves in the foot regardless of the actual quality of their shoes. Or something, I kinda got lost with this metaphor.

"Another way to look at it is this. How many copies of the next AssCreed or Dead Space or whatever will sell? Now, how many copies of Halflife 3 would sell, if it ever came into existence?"

Ok here's another way to look at it that is a bit more true: I don't like half life , so wtf should I be excited about?
But I don't like AssCreed or Dead Space either (actually that's a lie, i like dead space but for the purposes of this example i don't), but ubisoft/ea also has a lot of other games out too, across more varied genres, unless you're going to keep with the line of thinking that a publisher that has put out more games=automatically lower quality, then chances are I'm far more likely to find a niche title in the ubisoft library then I am in valve or blizzard's catalogues.

Incidentally I find it weird you start out with an argument for quality over quantity, yet at the end go back to using sales figures as an indicator of quality.

Variety is the spice of life, and blizzard has been allergic to genuine innovation for some time whereas valve prefers chilling on its throne made out of steam money and do whatever the heck it wants simply because it can, a position no other gaming company can imitate.

I mean jeez, ubisoft here despite the pr faux pas is the dev still taking the most risks out of those we listed, they were the ones who put out BGAE in the first place for starters. Valve's biggest risk of the last few years was what, DOTA 2? Yeah real step forward in the future of gaming there (not that im ragging on mobos, i play them).What about blizz? Starcraft 2, diablo 3, yey totally threading new ground and diablo 3 had its fair share of problems.

Anyways I can't help but think your position is reflective of a positive bias towards valve/blizz (your list of "genre defining games"..valve and blizz hasn't genre defined anything for over a decade so this is indicative you have strong feelings about these devs likely dating back to their glory days) which is why you're so inclined to lash praise upon them even if they don't deserve it.
Valve and blizz however have done very little for me or satisfying my gaming needs, only reason I give valve an easier time then blizz is because I heavily use steam and I reckon it's a good service. So why should I want companies that do provide me my gaming needs to be more like the companies who don't? Ubisoft's practices might be abbhorent and I wish they did things differently, but "be more like valve" is kinda useless advice to them.

Oh and regarding bioware/ea... I'm not entirely sure EA is to blame here. But that is an entirely different topic.

 

[Holythirteen]

if it didn't sell enough copies to turn a profit then it is a failure in that sense

They didn't say that... so I assume it did turn a profit, just not a big fat one like if they made another assassins creed or splinter cell. But it's hard to say since the people who worked on the game would have been working on other projects concurrently. That plus the fact that they would have been paying those people the same amount of money anyway...

Funny how Jim Sterling just made a video about companies staying tight-lipped and not revealing information, but when they do open their mouths THIS is what they decide to say?! What a nice way to say "fuck you" to the people who bought that game and enjoyed it. Is it cool to point and laugh at people for liking your product now?

And even if the game did lose money, which they didn't say it did, it's not like they spent millions upon millions on advertising just to have it get crap reviews and completely tank like other games.

It's nice that assassins creed is making you so much money Ubisoft, but just how many numbers can you keep adding on to the franchise before you rehash it to death and people stop caring? Might not be a bad idea to have a critically acclaimed IP in the closet somewhere. And yes, sometimes a great series has a rough start or a rough patch and then goes on to do great things later on. The point is to keep trying new ideas even while you have other products that are making you tons of money.

And just because they consider Beyond Good and Evil a lost cause doesn't mean they won't sit on the ip until nobody remembers what it is anymore.

I read this article and I hear "We're out of ideas, so we're just gonna stick with Assassins Creed and Splinter Cell because that's all we know how to make."

I can appreciate the arguments that Ubisoft has to to try to make smart plays with what the titles they develop, but that still doesn't explain them coming out and trolling their own fans, I think that should tell you how fucking smart they are.

"Although sales were initially disappointing, we're thrilled that BG&E found its audience. We spend a lot of time making modern titles that meet or exceed our expectations that we forget about the underdogs of yesteryear that made us what we are today. I think its important to not just look at BG&E's sales or what the numbers say but to look at its legacy and its popularity now. That's a good indicator to me that we need to do a better job marketing our innovative new IPs. We need to look at fresh new ideas and characters as challenges and not risks. It's crucial that we don't let our next Jade take as long to be appreciated as our previous one."

Wow fuck dude that was awesome, but you forgot to add a part like "sorry for cockteasing you guys with a sequel we were never going to make for so long" etc.

 

[Frezzato]

If Beyond Good and Evil was a mistake, then why did Ubisoft find it necessary to advertise with an image of Pey'J on their Facebook page during E3 [http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2013/06/08/beyond-good-amp-evil-39-s-pey-39-j-makes-an-appearance-on-ubisoft-39-s-facebook-page.aspx]? What the hell was that all about then? Why reference a character from 2003--to get people interested in a "mistake"?

Using that image of Pey'J just pissed me off once I realized there was no news for a BG&E 2, and this recent news confirms my theory that Ubisoft management and their marketing department are both intensely, almost blindingly stupid. I lost interest in the Prince of Persia sequels and the Animus in Assassin's Creed was moronic. So maybe they'll still get my money with Watchdogs.

On second thought I'll just buy it used.

 

[DjinnFor]

Maybe Ubisoft shouldn't have faffed around and tried actually marketing the game so it would get some sales. There's nothing wrong with the game, you just didn't do shit to sell it and you suffered for it, you twats.

 

[The Bandit]

I had to read the title twice after reading the article, because I could swear the article was about EA. Between their crappy steam rip offs and their franchise management, you'd think Ubisoft was trying to become EA.

This makes me laugh so much. The hate against EA is so ridiculous.

Let's make this clear. Every single publisher wants to make money. Period. That's what they care about. All of them. EA is no different from any other publisher out there. It's not special in any way.

 

[KB13]

This is where I crawl in a corner and cry. I have been waiting years.... YEARS!!! for Beyond Good & Evil 2. Please Ubisoft this was not a mistake. Don't cancel the squeal. please?

 

[XX Y XY]

Any shred of respect I had for Ubisoft just died. BG&E was amazing. It's 100% Ubisoft's fault it failed due to bad management of the IP. This is the kind of idiocy you get when you have suits that have likely never played a video game before running a video game company. If anything, the huge cult following the game has garnered years after it's release should be enough to tell Ubisoft how good of an IP BG&E is. But because of the elitist attitude of video game company executives,even if they did realize BG&E was a great game and there's money to be made in a sequel, they would never make one because that would be an admission of their own ignorance and fallibility and god knows that's out of the question.

 

[MaximumTheHormone]

Oh. I'm sorry.. I thought well thought out with complex female characters would sell and it was just a misogynistic games industry holding them from being produced.
You mean women don't actually hold the conflated 48% market share of the audience share once games like farmville and bejeweled are discounted?
You mean games targeted at women don't sell (to the same degree as those aimed at men)? no. that'd just be sexist.
b-b-b..but-but Ubisoft is just a bad company! I mean it was only released during the christmas-holiday period where the highest frequency of games are sold to a string a rave reviews. I mean it would've sold dramatically more if they sold it right! I mean even though the game was continually brought up in the gaming media as subject of praise people mustn't have known about it! That must be the reason it ranked 878th in all time sales and sold BELOW THE MEAN SALES OF A PS2 GAME a console notorious for its masses of shovel ware.

 

[Grampy_bone]

Oh. I'm sorry.. I thought well thought out with complex female characters would sell and it was just a misogynistic games industry holding them from being produced.
You mean women don't actually hold the conflated 48% market share of the audience share once games like farmville and bejeweled are discounted?
You mean games targeted at women don't sell (to the same degree as those aimed at men)? no. that'd just be sexist.
b-b-b..but-but Ubisoft is just a bad company! I mean it was only released during the christmas-holiday period where the highest frequency of games are sold to a string a rave reviews. I mean it would've sold dramatically more if they sold it right! I mean even though the game was continually brought up in the gaming media as subject of praise people mustn't have known about it! That must be the reason it ranked 878th in all time sales and sold BELOW THE MEAN SALES OF A PS2 GAME a console notorious for its masses of shovel ware.

Yep. 100% agree. Beyond Good and Evil is hipster garbage. Shallow gameplay, short, lacking content, incongruent design (what genre is it?) stupid name (does it have anything to do with Nietzsche?) shallow, generic character (who cares about Jade?) Just another mediocre, throwaway title, not worth remembering.

But somehow it's become the game for all the wannabe gamer snobs to declare was just "sooooooo amazeballs" and didn't get it's fair chance because of blah blah blah. Whatever. Don't listen to them, they probably never actually played it anyway. The audience is never wrong.

 

[Vegosiux]

Oh and I was just about to start considering to maybe think about buying AssCreed Revelations and 3.

Well, no. Fuck you, Ubisoft, from me, too.

BG&E was great, except for that control input screw games always do at some point where left becomes right and front becomes back. So yeah, well, if you say good games are mistakes, then why don't you just keep churning out the bloody PLAIN AVERAGENESS OF BLAND MEDIOCRITY shit.

Honestly, I love tomato soup, but I don't bloody want to eat tomato soup every fucking day.

 

[Jezzy54]

Here's a crazy idea: Make a good game with a less extravagant budget, and promote it like you would one of your precious franchises. Tell people why your game is worth playing.

 

[Griffolion]

A game being a mistake profit-wise does not mean a game is a mistake design-wise, I suppose.

That's the problem here, though. Ubisoft is implicitly saying the only metric to judge a game's success is the profit margin. BG&E was a huge success in terms of critical acclaim, and nowhere near a mistake judged on those terms.

 

[sdfasdfhfgfgjtyisdgdfdfj]

A game being a mistake profit-wise does not mean a game is a mistake design-wise, I suppose.

That's the problem here, though. Ubisoft is implicitly saying the only metric to judge a game's success is the profit margin. BG&E was a huge success in terms of critical acclaim, and nowhere near a mistake judged on those terms.

I get the idea that when Plourde pitched Child of Light, it was in front of your stereotypical businessmen who perhaps barely play games themselves. Is that a big problem? I think it might be far from ideal, but it seems those are the kind of people who judge a game by its profit margin (which they have to, if profit margin was ignored they'd go bankrupt).
I know, not a good excuse, but I'm not trying to make an excuse I suppose. It's a company, which has to make money. I do think it's a bit of a shame it is like that, but I'm not surprised by such a statement at all.
And yes! I get the idea that BG&E is a huge success in terms of critical acclaim (love the game as well) =)

 

[Neurotic Void Melody]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!

*crosses ubisoft off christmas card list*

Ubisoft you absolute ********ing ******ing *******ing twats! I always felt an EA presence ever since that whole passport thing appeared which i assumed you only needed to get once, you know, like an ACTUAL passport. But fuck no. For every damn game just in case they missed out on a little profit with their pittance of a budget and all. Was paying for the game not enough to get what the game says it does?? Dont even get me started on those assassins creed 4 micro transactions just to customise your characters!

Now this...this is a true kick in the balls. That game was a fond memory on my xbox and have been planning on getting it on xbla. But they dont want to make anything 'new' and 'different' like that because of money?! which they obviously have hardly any of! Ugh! I feel ill.

Need to calm down now, wheres those skins?

 

[EvilRoy]

I don't know why people are finding this to be so tremendously awful, or even really all that surprising.

They just have to make money, that's all there is to it. It seems callous and awful that they 'don't give smaller games a chance' or that 'they stifle artistic creations', but there are some pretty serious consequences to choosing a different route. Ubisoft isn't a single entity, nor is it a zord - a huge machine controlled by a few people in the head - its a business made up of hundreds if not thousands of individuals.

When a game does poorly, decisions about how much people get paid and who gets to keep their job have to be made. When the people at the head of the company say 'we want franchises and huge commercial successes', they're basically saying 'we would really like to not have to fire anyone/cut anyones pay'. Its all well and good to want artistic endeavors, or projects not driven by any sort of profit ideal, but I sure wouldn't want to be the guy who has to go from office to office telling people that there will be no year end bonuses, raises, or company events this year because someone upstairs wanted to do an art project.

 

[Allspice]

I don't know why people are finding this to be so tremendously awful, or even really all that surprising.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I don't find this surprising. I know it didn't sell very well and at the end of the day, they do need to make money. I understand that. And if that was all there was to it I wouldn't be upset, just a little sad.

But that's not all there is to this. They keep getting our hopes up that there might be a chance to see a sequel. They have brought it up multiple times over the years, saying it's in the planning stages, it's in development, showing a teaser trailer, showing screenshots...hell there was even a picture of one of the main characters, Pey'j, on their Facebook page for E3 this year. That's what I'm upset about. If it's not worth the money to invest in a sequel, fine. Just stop jerking us around pretending you might actually put one out, Ubisoft.

 

[otakon17]

The hell? Beyond: Good and Evil was a brilliant game. Yes, it had its flaws but the only reason I can think of that it failed to meet expectations was because I never saw a damned advert for the thing. You can't expect something to spread on the word of mouth alone.

No, they mean a mistake in business terms.

OT: Welp videogames are business nowadays. We can't have fun anymore, we need EFFICIENCY AND PROFITS or it's considered a failure. Look at Tomb Raider, sold 2.5 million or so in the first weeks. It was considered a financial failure by Square Enix while on the same note Dark Souls sold roughly the same amount and was considered a financial success. The point of the matter is game publishers keep thinking EVERY release needs to be a blockbuster sale to justify it getting made. What happened to making games that were good and the success of them was a byproduct of that?

"AAA" game publishing is killing the industry. They all need to re-focus, make games as good as possible and stop fucking thinking of it in terms of profits alone. For some reason "Too big to fail" comes to mind when I think about "AAA" development games now...

 

[otakon17]

Oh. I'm sorry.. I thought well thought out with complex female characters would sell and it was just a misogynistic games industry holding them from being produced.
You mean women don't actually hold the conflated 48% market share of the audience share once games like farmville and bejeweled are discounted?
You mean games targeted at women don't sell (to the same degree as those aimed at men)? no. that'd just be sexist.
b-b-b..but-but Ubisoft is just a bad company! I mean it was only released during the christmas-holiday period where the highest frequency of games are sold to a string a rave reviews. I mean it would've sold dramatically more if they sold it right! I mean even though the game was continually brought up in the gaming media as subject of praise people mustn't have known about it! That must be the reason it ranked 878th in all time sales and sold BELOW THE MEAN SALES OF A PS2 GAME a console notorious for its masses of shovel ware.

Yep. 100% agree. Beyond Good and Evil is hipster garbage. Shallow gameplay, short, lacking content, incongruent design (what genre is it?) stupid name (does it have anything to do with Nietzsche?) shallow, generic character (who cares about Jade?) Just another mediocre, throwaway title, not worth remembering.

But somehow it's become the game for all the wannabe gamer snobs to declare was just "sooooooo amazeballs" and didn't get it's fair chance because of blah blah blah. Whatever. Don't listen to them, they probably never actually played it anyway. The audience is never wrong.

Oi, I played it all the way through and dammit I enjoyed the experience. Yeah it had it's flaws but everything does.