Ubisoft profits

[TDK1044]

If you go to this link and click on the 'Download PDF' button, you can see that Ubisoft look to be in pretty good shape financially this year. Hopefully, this will encourage them regarding a possible Silent Hunter 5.

http://www.ubisoftgroup.com/index.php?p=59&art_id=60&vars=c2VuZGVyPUFMTCZzZW5kZXJfdXJsPWluZGV4LnBocCUzR nAlM0Q1OSUyNmFydF9pZCUzRDU1JmNvbV9pZD00OTEmZmlsdGV yX3R5cGU9JmZpbHRlcl9tb250aD0mZmlsdGVyX3llYXI9

[TDK1044]

Another Moderator is free to move this to GT if you feel it would be better placed there. :D

[Iron Budokan]

Good news.

[XLjedi]

Man, that ain't what I'm gettin from that report...

If I put on my CEO hat for a moment, I'm thinkin slash the meager PC line entirely and hire another 150 to make more console "casual games".

All their success in this report is stemming from next gen consoles. The only spec of dim light I see for their PC line is that it wasn't a negative contribution to sales. PC games as a percent of sales dropping from 43% to 6% in one year is a pretty telling story of where Ubi's attention is now clearly focused.

I guess we could hope for a dumbed down X360 or PS3 naval game.

[TDK1044]

Man, that ain't what I'm gettin from that report...

If I put on my CEO hat for a moment, I'm thinkin slash the meager PC line entirely and hire another 150 to make more console "casual games".

All their success in this report is stemming from next gen consoles. The only spec of dim light I see for their PC line is that it wasn't a negative contribution to sales. PC games as a percent of sales dropping from 43% to 6% in one year is a pretty telling story of where Ubi's attention is now clearly focused.

I guess we could hope for a dumbed down X360 or PS3 naval game.

I agree with your assessment, but you can afford to continue to produce PC sims if your company is flourishing in the console market and the PC games are not actually losing money.

[XLjedi]

Well... I guess they're not going out of business. In that sense, I guess it's good news.

I was pretty much sayin the same thing (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=598904&postcount=4)2 months ago... This update only confirms what I've suspected.

But yeah, you're right, could be worse, 6% isn't zero yet. I'd be surprised to see any PC releases from Ubi in 2008 that aren't console ports.

[Skybird]

If you go to this link and click on the 'Download PDF' button, you can see that Ubisoft look to be in pretty good shape financially this year. Hopefully, this will encourage them regarding a possible Silent Hunter 5.


More broken submarine software from UbiSoft? I may be seen as old-fashioned - but i think it would be more appropriate to fix the predecessor before messing up things with a fifth part again.

Sorry, but the general feedback here and on the web concerning SH4 does not make me put my trust in them regarding SH5.

[switch.dota]

Have to agree there - SH 3 & 4 were playable only months after release.

[SUBMAN1]

What this tells me is that you have a company that releases a much hyped and wanted product, and then reaps the benefit without supporting it. Great way to make money.

-S

[Capt. Shark Bait]

looks like we're gonna see a lot more toy games for toy machines:damn: :x

[STEED]

What this tells me is that you have a company that releases a much hyped and wanted product, and then reaps the benefit without supporting it. Great way to make money.

-S

cynical remark but true it's the old story bigger they are the less they care.

[ReallyDedPoet]

Not just an UBI thing, look at some of the stuff EA has put out. Lets hope PC Games don't die, Consoles just don't offer the same experience.


RDP

[Rockin Robbins]

You're a game company. If you put out a toy game like Ratchet and Clank, the kiddies lap it up and love it. The game company makes tons of money and everybody's happy.

If, on the other hand, you merely release the two best submarine simulations in the history of the planet, you get a crowd of customers who treat you like you just broke into their house. Their belly-aching kills your sales numbers and you vow to put out lots more cotton candy games that everybody pays for and nobody complains about.

We reap what we sow. We had posts complaining about the lack of periscope animations in the conning tower that dripped with hostility. When American subs' sonar worked on the surface, which was historically accurate, the vitriol from the boo squad sounded like someone raped their sister.

Ubi is not Nazi Germany. We are not in a concentration camp. They are a game company and we are playing the best subsim there is. Where's the gratitude? Is there such a thing as constructive suggestions? Do we actually expect a perfect cutting edge game? If you look at that report, Ubi is committing an act of charity just to produce such a limited audience game to a bunch of ingrates like us.

You know what? We're lucky to have what we have. Where's the gratitude?

[Tchocky]

Good post R_R

[TDK1044]

I think with the Silent Hunter series, when you purchase the game at the time it's released, you are investing in a game that will require significant patching over the following six months.

The metrics have shown Ubisoft that they can get away with paying a full Dev team for 12 months, instead of the 18 months required, as long as they pay a small Dev patch crew to offer three or four patches after release.

So if we get Silent Hunter 5, you can either pay $49 at the time of release and patch it as you go, or wait six months and buy it for under $20 and then add the latest patch.

There are obviously valid arguments to be made about releasing unfinished games etc, but when the PC Game market is shrinking at an alarming rate, this is how it's going to be.

[Skybird]

You know what? We're lucky to have what we have. Where's the gratitude?
There is SH3. I give them gratitude for that, and DWX also. concerning "you reap what you sow" - there were more complains than just what you mentioned with SH4, the thing obviously was published in poor shape, so: they indeed reaped the feedback that they had sowed. as long as a half-finished games comes not at at half-price, my compassion is limited. And if half-finished games are what you label as "we are lucky with what we have" - okay, you are spending your money, not mine. with that level of forgiveness and willingness to pay for even that little what you get - you will never get something complete, and better. Because they get away with it like it is right now, they see. so why should they do better?

Fact is it has become a rule that things get rush-released before being completed and finished, not too mention polished (let'S not demand too much: for example the standard we used to expect from every other kind of product that we usually buy...). Excuse that kind of customer-slapping, and pay for it, and they will continue to do so. Penalize them by keeping your money, and sooner or later they will see the need to perform better, or will leave business. If the latter, and PC games die, okay: let them die. Who wants to pay full price for half-finished things, and need to hope for another couple of months (even years!), and all too often even then being left behind dissappointed! that's a trip I do not book any longer, but maybe I'm just becoming too old for that kind of mediocre "fun". And there are example that illustrate that developoers could very well perform better, if only they want.

Releasing complete and finished games is possible. Strange that one must point that out.

[Rockin Robbins]

as long as a half-finished games comes not at at half-price, my compassion is limited.
...
Excuse that kind of customer-slapping, and pay for it, and they will continue to do so. Penalize them by keeping your money, and sooner or later they will see the need to perform better, or will leave business. If the latter, and PC games die, okay: let them die. Who wants to pay full price for half-finished things, and need to hope for another couple of months (even years!), and all too often even then being left behind dissappointed! that's a trip I do not book any longer, but maybe I'm just becoming too old for that kind of mediocre "fun". And there are example that illustrate that developoers could very well perform better, if only they want.

Releasing complete and finished games is possible. Strange that one must point that out.
What is full price? I would argue that we are getting games on the cheap now. We are not willing to pay the price of a fully developed game. Therefore we get what we WILL pay for: the best submarine simulators in the world.

Everything you buy for a good price is thanks to people with more money than sense who buy these products for twice what you paid for it before the product was even ready for market! Your whiz-bang graphics card that you bought for the European equivalent of $200 or less is because some yahoo paid the equivalent of $650 for it when it didn't work right! The computer you bought at a good price was made possible by the one who paid three times as much to be your beta tester. Pioneers get the cool stuff but they do so at the cost of paying too much for products that don't work right yet. Thank God for rich people! Wish there were more of them.

If the product were developed until it was perfect and ready for market, nobody would buy it because it would already be obsolete. Part of the successful marketing of many products is to release it before it is perfected to those who are the early adopters. They will provide the income stream necessary to optimize production, perfect the product and get unit costs down for the mass market. This works for kitchen appliances, automobiles, boats, electronic appliances and others I am not mentioning (brain fade....).

Compassion is misplaced when talking about simple economics. There are strategies that work and those that don't. What you desire just doesn't work. The result would be releasing the perfect game that nobody would be interested in buying. They would be buying the much jazzier, more feature rich, cutting edge game that wasn't perfect yet.

You are just not an early adopter, but you have engaged in early adopter behavior not coherent with your tolerance for imperfection. You would be much happier purchasing a game after the inevitable patches have come out, after the necessary mods have been made, and after the game is less than half the price of its initial release. Then you reap the benefit of those who enjoy being on the leading edge (that doesn't include me either, by the way. I just know who butters my toast and thank them for it.:up:) and who don't mind paying too much to be beta testers! I paid $15 for SH4 from someone who found they did not enjoy beta testing either. :rotfl:I got to be a pioneer on the cheap!

Holy cow! 7900 posts. My hat's off to you!:rock:

[Skybird]

"What is full price?"

To make it short, a PC game for 39-55 euros is considered to be "full price" these days. And there are games that get delivered in a state that show that for that money you can get a game with only so little flaws that they are not seriously hindering gameplay, and advertised features are not broken or missing. so, if the biggest companies cannot manage to get a completed product being delivered for that money, and patched in a reasonable ammount of time (everything beyond 3-4 months does not qualify for that descprition, I would say, because if it takes longer, the product was in a too poor shape for release), then this does not mean that it cannot be done, but indicates bad management and customer-hostile marketing practice.

As I said, you spend your money - not mine. And that is good so. So, go ahead spending your money, if you wish. One thing I am sure: it is a long time since I needed to wait long for a needed patch to a game that I already had wasted money on. I can only recommend everybody not to buy games in the release month, but to wait some weeks, maybe even 2-3 months - that will save you a lot of dissapointments and anger, and will deliver a strong message (voting by your wallets) to companies that thy can no longe rget away so easily with your money. Games that failed me over the last years were the few exceptions were I did not follow this my own rule - and these exceptions ALL failed me, as far as i remember. My losses serve me right, then.

[Rockin Robbins]

I can only recommend everybody not to buy games in the release month, but to wait some weeks, maybe even 2-3 months - that will save you a lot of dissapointments and anger, and will deliver a strong message (voting by your wallets) to companies that thy can no longe rget away so easily with your money.

Hear! Hear! on the first part. But the message will not be delivered or received. They are proceeding as economic experience dictates, with concern only for what works best for them. When results change, they will change. I am perfectly happy waiting 3 to 6 months after a game is published to buy.

Buy you and I will never be driving forces in the economy, because we insist the economy work for us. We do not work and spend for it. Economies are driven by those who from our vantage point appear to have more money than sense. :up: