-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Ubisoft survives stockholder meeting, prepares for hostile takeover
- Thread starter mocoworm
- Start date
IceDoesntHelp
Banned
Please leave ubi alone. Sure they dont make the best games and milk cows like theres no tomorrow, but I dont want them to lose the control on their creativity.
Siege, Rayman and Zombi are some of the best games this gen in their respective genres.
Siege, Rayman and Zombi are some of the best games this gen in their respective genres.
It makes more sense in the context of the previous article.
Polygon was talking to Ubisoft senior management, and the meeting was expected to end one of two ways (from Ubisoft's senior management perspective):
1.) Vivendi would formally request board seats at the meeting reflecting their 23% ownership of the company.
2.) Vivendi would say nothing at the meeting to signal their intention for a hostile takeover.
The only scenario Ubisoft believed would actual signal an end to Vivendi's plans would be them announcing they were selling off their 23% today.
Clint Beastwood
Banned
StrikeNinja24
Banned
So Ubisoft will be a mobile only company in about a year's time at this rate.
I'm surprised the government hasn't jumped in to help yet. Ubi is a huge creator of jobs and there are quite a few school programs in place that are funded by the government. The Quebec and Canadian governments definitely seem proud of the company, but I guess there's a reason they haven't jumped on the chance to help.
Vivendi used to own Activision Blizzard, which was anything but.
This would require them to believe that Vivendi wouldn't create even more jobs, or at least maintain the current ones.
Like what do people thinking is happening here, Vivendi paying $5+ billion for the right to fire 10,000 people? They want to run the company and make money off of them.
CriterionDog
Member
Jesus. I hope Ubisoft can get past this. I love them!
Nah. Yearly AC/Far Cry/WD will be back on the schedule though, instead of letting those games gestate.
StrikeNinja24
Banned
That was before companies started jumping into the market feet first.
(Was partly kidding)
IceDoesntHelp
Banned
Overall, they dont make the best games, but they still release fantastic games. Thats what i was going for.
TimeEffect
Member
Please survive. I love Rainbow 6 Siege too much, and the team is awesome
The main presumed change will be that the Guillemots are forced out.
The Guillemots would have you believe that Vivendi intends to cancel all of the remotely risky projects from the publisher before an inevitable shutdown a few years later while pointing to Disney as an example of a multimedia company in gaming that did just that.
Vivendi, for reference, owned Blizzard from 1998 through 2013 and Activision Blizzard from 2008 through 2013, so based on their output through then (and the games released in the following three years, which is the development time of a modern title, and thus the games were greenlit under their reign), you can feel free to judge whether or not you feel Vivendi is anti-risk and anti-creative.
good company fucked me over too many times, even recently. Let someone better come in. Sick of bad ports and bad security on the pc platform. Might start buying more DLC once they take over too.
Vivendi did well with some of the companies they have owned for instance blizzard. Clean house of garbage and let the real skill shine.
Vivendi did well with some of the companies they have owned for instance blizzard. Clean house of garbage and let the real skill shine.
Well, Vivendi greenlit Destiny at $120+ million, Skylanders at a $100+ million budget, and games like Overwatch, while Ubisoft hasn't released a sequel to Beyond Good & Evil since 2003 and hasn't released a $20+ million budget fantasy or hard sci-fi game since the Prince of Persia reboot in 2008, so who do you feel is more likely to actually ship BG&E2?
CraigerGamer
Member
Its crazy to me that you can start a company and have it taken out from beneath you once you set the brand and success for decades.
Yeah, I know that's the risk of going public but there is just something shitty about the whole thing.
Yeah, I know that's the risk of going public but there is just something shitty about the whole thing.
Conkerkid11
Member
Is he wrong?
In my opinion there is zero proof that a Vivendi acquisition would damage their creativity and overall, the company.
Ubisoft is already as it is a big publisher focused on maximizing profits and mass manufacturing sequels.
Chances of Vivendi buying an expensive company whose core business is developing AAA games to force them to make mobile games are low, the restructuring costs would be too high and it would make sense to target other companies since the beginning in this case. Vivendi doesn't want to change their business, they just want their future profits.
So this seems to be pretty much Yves Guillemot's fight to keep the company independent as a founder and I can understand the frustration at a personal level, but the market has rules and he's not bringing valid reasons as to why a takeover should be bad for the employees and the future of the company.
Ubisoft is already as it is a big publisher focused on maximizing profits and mass manufacturing sequels.
Chances of Vivendi buying an expensive company whose core business is developing AAA games to force them to make mobile games are low, the restructuring costs would be too high and it would make sense to target other companies since the beginning in this case. Vivendi doesn't want to change their business, they just want their future profits.
So this seems to be pretty much Yves Guillemot's fight to keep the company independent as a founder and I can understand the frustration at a personal level, but the market has rules and he's not bringing valid reasons as to why a takeover should be bad for the employees and the future of the company.
Mr. Poolman
Member
Save for the ocassional bullshot, I have no ill feelings for Ubi.
letmetrythisname
Member
This is just what I feared: the prospect of Ubisoft becoming more creatively bankrupt.
TimeEffect
Member
I just want Rainbow 6 Siege to grow and grow. I dont care about anything else.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
No, they are evil and want to destroy the creative freedom that characterizes Ubisoft major releases because they hate gamers. #WeAreUbisoft
I'm not sure I have a horse in this race anymore. I like Ubi, in general, but they could use some new management. AC has been fucking trash for years, Far Cry is too rehashed to release again for a while, Wildlands looks like shit so far, Watch Dogs was a disappointment, we haven't seen a new Rayman in a good while. I'm not sure what there is to root for with the current management. I love Far Cry, but I'm not playing a 4TH/FOURTH/MORE THAN THREE IN A ROW game with the same skill tree, animations, etc.
Hmm, so the impact would be felt roughly post-2000?
Vivendi anti-risk and anti-creative confirmed.
they had hopes for this good scenario? I thought Vivendi was pretty clear on the takeover to actually believe they would back off.
they don't have any reason to back off, right?
A Grizzly Bear
Member
They haven't jumped in to help because Ubisoft hasn't formally asked for it. They only informally asked to see what interest the Quebec Government would actually have in helping them out. If anyone else gets involved I would think it would be Ontario and not the Federal Government.
This is the company that owned Activision Blizzard, purveyor of many the industry's biggest service games.
This was all before the new CEO took over and started on a acquisition spree that hasn't ended well for the companies it acquired as of late. I don't think we should look at how Vivendi acted when they were holders of Activision-Blizzard. The situation has changed too much I believe.
They are much more dangerous now then before and could completely gut Ubisoft. Unlike the Vivendi of the past which was relatively hands-off. This Vivendi is super dangerous.
This is my most important part of this but really the entire Tom Clancy Catalog. The Division was a bit of a misstep but there aren't many Tom Clancy games that I have not liked.
I Wanna Be The Guy
U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A!
I hate comments to like this. Ubisoft are anything but creatively bankrupt. They're pretty much the most creative third party publisher out there with a very high quality and diverse lineup of games. There is no third party publisher better than Ubisoft, and this takeover would be horrible for the industry. Ubisoft are one of the only major third party publishers I still like and care about.
sixteen-bit
Member
Wonder what this means for BGE2
GregLombardi
Member
Yay another giant mega conglomerate consolidates power under their umbrella in order to funnel the most profits away from the workers and toward their ridiculously large bank accounts.
Capitalism so great though.
Capitalism so great though.
Maintenance
Member
Zero sympathy for Guillemot, still have some for the employees though.
BronsonLee
Member
I'm wondering if this is why they're trying to hold back AC & Far Cry
OUR GAMES BE HOSTAGE
*cocks shotgun*
OUR GAMES BE HOSTAGE
*cocks shotgun*