Ubisoft vs EA. -Or- The Evil of Two Lessers.

[RJ 17]

Wow, Ubisoft has really been doing a crappy job lately, haven't they? And what makes things even better is the fact that they've taken the Microsoft PR strategy of insulting the intelligence of their consumer base in order to try and cover up for their screw-ups. And this isn't just about Assassin's Creed...remember a little game called Watch_Dogs? I almost don't.

A lot of people have been expressing their displeasure for Ubisoft lately and so I'm just wondering if they've officially taken the title of Most Hated Game Company away from EA yet. A couple of my friends have even argued that if Ubisoft was an American company, it - rather than EA - would have won two "Worst Company In America" awards rather than EA. Some people I've talked to even feel that EA might actually be getting a little better...but that might just be because they haven't had any major fuck-ups recently.

So what do you think? It's a bout between more recent, blatant, and insulting ("No really, 30 FPS is much better than 60, females are too difficult to program, and we want our reviews to have the full experience so we completely block them until the multiplayer is up at release!") screw-ups vs a nice long tradition of blatant and insulting screw-ups ("Beta players for Battlefield 4 don't know what they're talking about, our game is fucking perfect!" SimCity...need I say more? How about Sims 4?).

TLDR: Which company do you think is worse towards us consumers: Ubisoft or EA?

 

[Morgoth780]

Currently Ubisoft. EA has done some bad stuff, but this year it's mainly just been Sims 4 and the overhyped mess Titanfall was. They haven't released any games that have been straight up broken since BF4.

 

[Rozalia1]

Heel vs Heel match ups are very rare, and even when they happen one of them will usually play the face role before going to straight back to being a heel in the next match (or turn face if that was the intention of the heel vs heel match up).

In terms of workrate EA is a bit better than Ubisoft, however what makes it in this business is mic work (though there are exceptions), and with all the threads popping up of "EA is not that bad" its clear that EA can't draw and maintain heat as well as Ubisoft can.

In terms of current standing, EA hasn't got the crowd to pop big in quite a while. Ubisoft as we can see from the very recent event of Sega getting in slight offence in their matchup with Ubisoft popped the crowd huge, even more notable for the fact Sega is normally booed/met with silence and yet was extremely over in their match with Ubisoft (Think Del Rio vs Batista).

Ubisoft is a damn good old fashioned heel so to answer your question on who out of the two gets the most heel heat with the audience. Ubisoft.

 

[Trinket to Ride]

EA still sucks, but they do seem like they're trying to get better. Ubi is heading in the opposite direction, with lots of dishonesty and criminal amounts of over-hyping.

Plus Uplay is worse than Origin. At least Origin gives you free stuff and did that Humble Bundle once.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Ubisoft actually makes good games so Ubisoft. I don't give a shit about marketing and PR, it doesn't affect the game anyways. I saw everything I needed in full unedited walkthroughs of Watch Dogs' missions to know I was going to like the game, same with Splinter Cell Blacklist. Ubisoft shows you the truth if you're looking for it. And the Far Cry games are pretty awesome. Then you got The Division and new Rainbow Six that had the best shooter footage I've seen in over 5 years. Why pay attention to PR bullshit (from anyone) when you don't have to? Ubisoft can go 1v1 vs any big publisher just based on game quality alone, and that's all that matters.

Whereas EA only has Bioware. And I loved Mirror's Edge. There's barely any EA games that are good. I'd love to play a good football game as it's actually a great sport to play in video game form due to the seasons being only 16 games so you can really get deep into a franchise while playing every game but Madden is a lost cause, I haven't played it since 2001 because they still haven't fixed issues I had with Madden 2001, pretty sad.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

I'm not sure where Ubisoft got its bad rep. I remember a lot of backlash against Uplay and some silly DRM maneuvers but that's it. So Watch_Dogs was overhyped, and Assassin's Creed: Unity doesn't have the skins you want for multiplayer. Big fucking deal.

EA has a history of acquiring beloved studios (RIP Pandemic), laying off their employees and steering IPs into the wrong, forcing "always online" gameplay while continually shutting down servers, employing moronic and insulting advertising, developing less than satisfying licensed games... the list goes on.

 

[Thorn14]

Activision: Lawful Evil
EA: Chaotic Evil
Ubisoft:Chaotic Stupid

 

[stroopwafel]

Ubisoft is a dwarf compared to EA so they're hardly even in the same league. EA's rep for bad business practices(espescially the excessive reliance on microtransactions and DLC in their games) is well deserved though I do enjoy BF Multiplayer and their Burnout-esque NFS games.

Ubisoft always has a higher degree of ambition though it often falls apart in the face of not being able to fully realize what their marketing department tries to hype. I do however consider Ubi's games in general to be really enjoyable(even the 'controversial' ones like AC3, Watch Dogs and AC: Unity) though it's evident they can be overambitious in their approach. I don't think Ubi deliberately 'misleads' consumers though as the game you get is exactly the same as they show in these developer walkthroughs before the release of a game.

Yeah, marketing tries to portray things better as they are but you guys act like you've never seen a commercial in your life.

 

[Rozalia1]

I'm not sure where Ubisoft got its bad rep. I remember a lot of backlash against Uplay and some silly DRM maneuvers but that's it. So Watch_Dogs was overhyped, and Assassin's Creed: Unity doesn't have the skins you want for multiplayer. Big fucking deal.

EA has a history of acquiring beloved studios (RIP Pandemic), laying off their employees and steering IPs into the wrong, forcing "always online" gameplay while continually shutting down servers, employing moronic and insulting advertising, developing less than satisfying licensed games... the list goes on.

I believe Assassin's Creed 2 was where they started getting big time heel heat, and it seems to have snowballed from there.

Thorn14 just mentioned Activision which should really be mentioned. EA, Activision, and Ubisoft are really good uppercard heels whose good work is deserving of recognition. Their feud with Nintendo's Stable was excellent.

 

[Smooth Operator]

These topics are always a great display how quickly everything is forgotten, and the less people remember the better the standing of a company in their view.

 

[Lovely Mixture]

EA, Ubisoft, Capcom, and Blizzard-Activision have all ticked me off to the point that I don't ever buy any of their games.
That doesn't make them worse (or better) than the companies I do buy from, but I draw the line at certain places.

And before you ask, YES there are games from EA, Ubisoft, Capcom, and Blizzard-Activision that I would pay for if they mended their ways.

 

[Gunner 51]

Hmm, given a choice between the EA and Ubisoft as who is the worse publisher, I'd say it's probably Ubisoft presently.

I'm going to completely ignore all the games they produce and try to judge them on their own merits. Based upon my experience as a console gamer.

Ubisoft does that god-awful U-play thing, which tries to shoe-horn itself into the main menu of the game. (While EA's Origin hasn't been seen - as far as I remember.) Oh the halcyon days when you were not badgered into registering your game AFTER you purchased it. From my perspective, it treats me as if I'm a thief and I don't like it. Score: -1 to Ubi.

EA and Ubisoft do cut chunks out of their game to resell as a premium - I think EA tend to run with this ball more often and more conspicuously than Ubisoft. Score: -1 to EA.

When it comes to controvesy: EA reigns supreme on this. Espcecially when it comes to dunderheaded marketing especially given the "your mum will hate it" and "sin to win" idiocies. Ubisoft's "30 fps is better than 60" is just a storm in a teacup care of PC gamers. Score: -1 to EA.

When it comes down to making ammends, I think EA is trying to do good nowadays. It doesn't want a third golden turd and seems to be toning down it's money-grabbing. Whereas Ubisoft is going full retard with it. Score: -1 to Ubisoft.

Hmmm, after typing all that - it'd seem I have a tie. As a tie-breaker, I'm going to have to use the games. (Even though I'm a blazing hypocrite for having said I was going to ignore them....)

I think EA do have the better catalogue because I have more EA games in my collection than Ubisoft. I'm going to have to give my worst publisher to Ubisoft.

 

[Pr0]

I think Ubisoft is far more at fault and its because they've decided to emulate EA's business practices because apparently being toxic to the gaming industry somehow translates into good quarterly investor reports.

Overall it was already obvious that EA was not doing good business with the industry, a game production company that wins worst company in America twice running shouldn't be a role model and unfortunately it appears Ubisoft has chosen EA as its role model, its just even shittier at it than EA is.

This is unfortunate because if anything The Division looked like a pretty nice piece of tech, but given Ubisoft's recent issues, I doubt I'll be buying it.

 

[Nazulu]

Fucking Ubisoft, no doubt. At least Origin functions, and quite well. Uplay is a pile of incomplete shit that likes to crash whenever. And they've even made it so you have to use Uplay when buying Ubisoft games of Steam. That's just sick.

Don't think for a second that I like EA though

 

[Binkan]

Yea, I remembered buying Anno 2070 or whatever it was called, a good game but then came Uplay and pretty much made the game unplayable as it kept on crashing and all that.

Apparently you need Uplay to get to certain chests or whatnot in AC:U as well, either that or Ubisoft app which is complete BS if it's true...

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

Ea is the lesser of two evils right now, more due to them not having awful PR at the moment, and they haven't QUITE fucked up (we'll see once inquisition is out, I'm sure some poo will hit the fan. Sims 4 and battlefield 4 releases were pretty bad, but I think EA is more willing to earn back some rep by fixing those, especially with their 24 hour full refund policy on origin.)

ubisoft has been a train wreck nearly all year, from their buggy ass releases to flat out horrible misleading audiences (watch dogs) on what was actually offered and their god awful PR/stances, lest not to even mention u-play...

yeah, as far as this year goes, ubisoft is looking to steal EA's worst company crown, even if they aren't a US company.

 

[Seishisha]

I propose for the sake of convience that the two companies merge to become EAUSoft, this way people can waste less time trying to work out which company is the worst and just get on with things instead.

 

[Ambitiousmould]

Ubisoft. Although they have provided the most laughs as of late. As has already been said, they are trying to emulate what has been voted the worst company in America twice. That is foolish. I suppose EA'll be pretty relived though, and seem to be making the most of the opportunity they've been given.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

Hard to say. Right now I rank all publishers pretty along side kidney stones and migraines.

 

[Something Amyss]

As Jim said ages ago, EA isn't the inventor of these policies but it makes them ubiquitous.

I sort of expect the things Ubisoft has done to creep into EA's bag of tricks. I mean, this is EA. The company that told us they could do better and then launched Dungeon Keeper.