Re: Ubisoft change in strategy?

On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 08:41:55 +0100, JAB <noway@nochance.com> wrote:

On 28/09/2024 16:31, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

Yeah, this is another fascinating development. But it isn't all as
rosy as it appears. It isn't about Ubisoft wanting to make better
games and giving players a better experience.

>
My optimistic, and possibly naive side, says that even if they do it for
the wrong reasons it may at least open the possibility of them realising
that trying to screw customers for every penny they can maybe isn't the
be all and end all that they think it is instead maybe there is a place
in their line-up for other games.

Yeah, I do tend towards the cynical with regards to business
decisions, don't I? But -especially with Ubisoft- it's hard not to.
They have a history of briefly swinging towards customer-friendly
policies when its expedient, and then immediately swinging back as
soon as they can (my favorite example of this is Ubisoft's brief fling
with "No DRM!"... which lasted all of two games before they reversed
themselves and went whole-hog into online authentication).

One of the problems I do see is where as it's relatively easy to
implement the more mechanical parts of the strategy trying to change the
internal culture (at least those who are best able to effect change)
away from what they currently do seems to be a hard. Do they really have
anyone working for them that evens understands what putting the player
first actually means?

Especially since Ubisoft reputedly has an extremely toxic culture,
both for employees and generally in attitude. These current changes
aren't really for the benefit of the company either; instead, they're
made to strengthen the Guillemot's control of the company by forcing
short-term profits (and stock gains!) rather than the long-term health
of the company. Because -as much as we gamers despise them- Ubisoft's
strategy of live-services and DLC have been _extremely_ profitable for
the company. It just takes longer for that money to trickle in. This
new policy will give Ubisoft higher day-one sales, but probably come
at a cost to the life-time revenue from its games.

Which is why I've no confidence that after Yves Guillemot stifles
these challenges from his investors, he's going to pivot Ubisoft right
back to its old ways... and perhaps make things even worse as he
chases after any 'lost profits' forced upon him by this policy change.

Still, I'll agree with you on this much: for the immediate future,
this _is_ an improvement for gamers. We'll be able to buy new Ubisoft
games on Steam from Day One; there'll be less nonsensical "silver,
bronze, gold, diamond, ultimate, premier, super-ultra-bestest" edition
nonsense, and they'll be a deprecation of focus on 'live service' as
opposed to giving players a rich experience right from the start. All
are to the good as far as I'm concerned! And who knows, it may
actually inspire me to buy more Ubisoft games!

I just don't have any confidence this beneficience on Ubisoft's part
will last very long.