I've been boycotting Ubisoft for a decade now. Shower of wankers. Won't be missed when they go bankrupt.
Now, I cannot think of a more creatively bankrupt game studio. (Maybe Naughty Dog? They've been releasing the same games for like 12 years) I don't understand how they can fall so low and also remain in business. Who buys/plays their games?!
Watch this and remember the glory: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOp_GM3ihrU
They see Assasins Creed and that’s good enough
It's never perfect, of course. But who else is even trying to offer the same experience? *
I also play lots of indie games (shout out to CrossCode, Soma, Signalis, and Tangledeep particularly) and lots of JRPGs and puzzle/detective games. Never bought any Call of Duty (I will admit to renting CoD4 on Wii once).
Sometimes people like things you don't like, and that's OK. You don't need to feel superior about it.
* While the question is intended as rhetorical, I would like to hear of other games in this particular space.
Some of my favorite gaming memories are from the AC series.
I get every Pokémon game even though they’ve been awful for a while now, but the fact that it’s Pokémon is enough for me.
OP was asking how ubisoft stays in business, and that’s how. People just really like AC and get each game.
I worked for Ubisoft for 6 years and theres a combination of:
* the business reality being harder than you think
* certain peoples ego. (notably Serge Hascoet, and his pressure to push games to be the same; towers to unlock the map etc)
* Good intentions being misconstrued (uplay is designed to give people cheaper games while staying within the letter of the law of valves distribution platform)
The majority of people are really doing their best for the players: even the people you think are doing stupid things.
I think AAA game development has to end to be honest, the risk is so high that most publishers play it so safe that in the end everything is milquetoast and overpriced
This may have been the official line but I don't buy that the reason that Uplay was created was to "give people cheaper games" or that it had to do anything with "good intentions". No player ever asked for yet another launcher.
> The majority of people are really doing their best for the players: even the people you think are doing stupid things.
The majority of individual developers, sure. They don't call the shots when it comes to deciding the anti-features put into the game though. And some individual developers end up implementing those anti-features.
> the business reality being harder than you think
> I think AAA game development has to end to be honest, the risk is so high that most publishers play it so safe that in the end everything is milquetoast and overpriced
The ever-increasing scope (especially graphics wise) is something that game development studios and/or their publishers decide on though. They could instead choose to have multiple more reasonably scoped but less risk adverse games though. For all its checkbox design in the main titles Ubisoft does do some of that though.
It's also hard to empathize iwth the business reality being harde when the leadership of these giant game companies rake in ungodly amounts of money. That's really the main problem with the AAA industry: the ones in charge generally only seem to care about increasing their own net worth rather than have any pride in the games they create.
Behold the Prince of Gosplan written in 1992 and inspired by the original Prince of Persia game published in 1989 by Broderbund. There was no Ubi back then and that the franchise is still being "owned" is an insult.