Ubisoft: Financial facts

[TDK1044]

http://www.ubisoftgroup.com/gallery_files/site/270/1042/1297.pdf

It looks to me like Ubisoft can afford patch 1.3. If you read the full document, Ubisoft are in very good shape for 2007/2008.

Come on Ubisoft, don't forget us PC Gamers. Do the right thing with Silent Hunter 4!

[KrvKpt. Falke]

Ofcourse they can!
They are the second publisher in PC market (EA is still the first).
Cmon! :lol:

[TDK1044]

Still interesting reading though.:D

[GakunGak]

Just look at those millions....
Man!
:o :o :o
Who wants to help me hack UBI money?:arrgh!:

[StandingCow]

Well, yea they certainly could, but that report doesn't name Silent Hunter 4. So if one game isn't selling well, instead of pouring more money into it they would rather cut it.

Out of all the successful games, how many have not been and been cut?

[GakunGak]

I think GRAW2 is their next major BOOM!:rock:

[SteamWake]

Ofcourse they can!
They are the second publisher in PC market (EA is still the first).
Cmon! :lol:

EA holds a controlling interest in UBI. Explains alot really.

[LZ_Baker]

Really? EA is like the bubonic plague, slowly killing off PC gaming.

[KrvKpt. Falke]

Yea. I remember that in 2005 (may be wrong) there were news all over the net that EA wants to buy Ubi. (i was like "hell no!" back then :) but now it wouldnt matter to me...)

[mookiemookie]

I was unsure of this until I looked it up on Bloomberg. Unfortunately it's true...EA is the largest single shareholder...they own about 16% of the outstanding Ubisoft stock. Next is Yves Guillemot's family which owns about 13%.

[gg.]

I Understand why Ubi had this financial peformance...
They economized on game development and patches, but sold their products at full price...

[MONOLITH]

I would personally like to make an 'under the table' deal with Elanaiba and the dev team to give us an 'unofficial' patch that fixes the hardcoded issues.

Look, we're all stuck, right?

Chanting I hate UBI may still never get us the 1.3.

I'd personally pay the dev team for the patch they could do "on the side" outside of their deal with UBI.

Faced with little other options, I'd like to think some of you guys would as well.

Remember, it's the publisher UBI we have issues with, not the guys that actually made the game.

If UBI won't pay them to finish the job, maybe the subsim members would.

I know I would.


A few bucks from every member. Think about it....

[KrvKpt. Falke]

MONOLITH, it would be even better than to sue Ubi :)
I'm with you :up:

[TheBrauerHour]

Yeah, I would have no problem with paying for that, as long as it is a thorough patch.

[TDK1044]

This would be a breach of contract, and any Dev trying it would be fired very quickly. If we are to get a patch, it will be a Ubisoft authorized patch.

[MONOLITH]

If a 'mod', created by an anonymous player, found it's way onto subsim.....

[Dowly]

If a 'mod', created by an anonymous player, found it's way onto subsim.....

...it would be thrown into the recycle bin faster than you can say 'boob'. :yep:

[Uber Gruber]

@TDK

This would be a breach of contract, and any Dev trying it would be fired very quickly. If we are to get a patch, it will be a Ubisoft authorized patch.

Just curious, can you prove this ? Wouldn't it depend on the original contract ?

[joea]

This would be a breach of contract, and any Dev trying it would be fired very quickly. If we are to get a patch, it will be a Ubisoft authorized patch.

Well yes, it is impossible now, still there is one way. I am thinking of something like the deal NWS guys made to add patches to Fighting Steel, they keep the code they got from err forget who originally made FS...anyway it is not for public but the patches are and are free. But it happened long after Fighting Steel was left by the company.

[-Pv-]

Dowly and TDK are correct. Major software companies and their lawyers are not dummies and create contracts to protect themselves from being shafted by their employees and sub-contractors. These things are spelled out in very lengthy and detailed print. What you guys are asking for is legally impossible without a formal agreement with UBI.

Patience.
-Pv-

[MONOLITH]

Okay, so let's take one more look at this.

I'm a real software wiz, and I crack the game without the SDK, I make a mod that fixes the chronometer and radar.

Or....

The SDK gets leaked....accidently.


Or, the dev team slips me the above mentioned mod to claim it was made by me.


Not much UBI could do about any of it as far as I see. And unless the item was being sold publically, why would UBI even care if someone fixed the broken stuff?

No one is talking about a public deal where the dev team sells a UBI product without permission.

[DirtyHarry3033]

I would personally like to make an 'under the table' deal with Elanaiba and the dev team to give us an 'unofficial' patch that fixes the hardcoded issues.

Look, we're all stuck, right?

Chanting I hate UBI may still never get us the 1.3.

I'd personally pay the dev team for the patch they could do "on the side" outside of their deal with UBI.

Faced with little other options, I'd like to think some of you guys would as well.

Remember, it's the publisher UBI we have issues with, not the guys that actually made the game.

If UBI won't pay them to finish the job, maybe the subsim members would.

I know I would.


A few bucks from every member. Think about it....
Anything is possible :hmm:

Way back in 1998 I was playing Grand Prix Legends from Papyrus, fantastic game but with problems of course.

IIRC, after the last "official" patch 1.2 was released, the devs weren't satisfied with the final product and gave their own time freely to fix bugs/add features in "unofficial" patches such as D3D support, a "fix" to allow running on "fast" cpu's and so on. With their work and the work of the mods, the game is still alive and well nearly 10 years later :up:

Wouldn't it be great if the SH4 devs could follow the example of the GPL devs...

DH

[hamburger]

that is annoying, they have also my money and sun their asses on the bahamas :down: