Ubisoft Shareholder Irate Over French Firm's Failure to Disclose IP Acquisition Discussions with Microsoft, EA, and Others

Feels silly to do this now. Wouldn't it be better to protest after the review embargo and initial sales numbers for AC Shadows? But Ubisoft management has long been building to this resentment with shareholders and employees.

Shareholders might be happy to know Microsoft and EA are asking Ubisoft for the sale of certain IP’s. No one will buy the whole company. That would be pointless. But i could see MS paying big for Tom Clancy and EA going after a few others if Ubisoft is willing to accept. The story i think broke today on that.

Could sadly see the Saudis buying up some of the IP, especially with them buying Pokémon Go even if that’s almost certainly a smokescreen to acquire the AI mapping data unwittingly generated by players. What a time we live in!

@HonestHick @nessisonett There is Tencent, MS, Saudi. A lot of potential buyers for certain IP. AC, TC and Far Cry are still extremely valuable.

Microsoft and EA just like to sit on IP until they lose all value. Why on Earth they would be talking to anyone about buying more to do nothing with is beyond me. (Incidentally, Brute Force and Kung Fu Chaos remakes when???)

Definitely some egregious desperation on Ubi's part if true. IPs are essentially the second biggest source of value for a video game company — first being, ya know, actual quality developers. And it's not like they have much valuable IP besides the big ones they wholly depend on. Are Brothers in Arms or Driver gonna bring in much? Could they sell AC or Far Cry and still stay relevant?

@breakneck America, Saudi or China. Might as well just chuck Russia and India in there and that’s the plot of a Tom Clancy PS3 game.

@HonestHick I wouldn't say Microsoft has much reason to go for Tom Clancy's when they have Call of Duty.

Obviously TC has more range than CoD, but they both mostly overlap with the same audience. And TC's value has really narrowed to just Siege at this point. Microsoft could try revitalizing other TC series, but they really haven't proved to be good at that sort of thing. And I dunno who they could even get working on dramatized military action games; really only the CoD mine developers fit that job, but they're busy in the mines.

@breakneck for sure, i agree. Just read the story today that MS and EA are actively asking. But i am sure some of their IP will be off loaded. I would assume they will try and keep most of the heavy hitters. But it’s hard to say. Money talks.

@RoomWithaMoose not sure what will happen if anything. I just read the report today. I mean COD is COD and not going anywhere. But I’d love to see MS grab splinter cell and do someting with it. Would be a solid pick up. As for EA who know’s what they would be after. I am sure as time unfolds we will hear more about what’s for sale and what isn’t.

@RoomWithaMoose “Microsoft and EA just like to sit on IP until they lose all value”

Who isn’t doing that in the industry right now? Ubisoft did it and thats why they have so many duds. Instead of giving us some of those classic IP’s we got skull and Bones. Sony is sitting on a treasure trove of IP’s we all ask for on this site and we get more Horizon and Spider-man and Last of us and Day’s Gone remasters. The list goes on and on, it’s not a EA or MS problem. It’s an industry problem. As no one wants to sell “smaller” ip’s they all want to try for the heavy hitters over and over.

@HonestHick I would love Microsoft to grab TC and bring back Rainbow Six, Splinter Cell, Ghost Recon, and — heck - even EndWar. But I just don't think any of those specific series hold much value these days; even the Tom Clancy name, specifically, really doesn't mean anything to contemporary gamers. I think that's a little damning for the IP given that nothing's stopping anyone from making a spiritual successor to any TC series, as there's nothing that really differentiates them from any generic dramatization of war (Spec Ops: The Line might as well have been a Tom Clancy game). Even in Micro's case, they can just do a CoD spin-off with gameplay akin to any TC series and get way more brand recognition out of it. Which is all to say, the Tom Clancy brand really means nothing and Microsoft would be stupid to waste money on it.

And that really goes for any prospective buyers apropos Ubi IP. Half the industry is already Far Cry clones, some of which have more brand recognition than Far Cry proper. Watch Dogs is mostly forgotten. Rayman is too esoteric (and must never not be French-coded). Beyond Good & Evil never really reached beyond cult status, even with all the hoopla about its maybe nonexistent sequel. Assassin's Creed is really the only IP worth anything, but that's likewise the only IP Ubisoft couldn't afford to lose. I absolutely agree Ubisoft's IP are devalued due to a lack of upkeep and nurturing (though I think I would stop short of saying it's an industry-wide issue. Plenty of publishers have found success in their legacy IP).

When it comes to offloading IP, it just doesn't make much sense as a business move. I get why rich companies in barely established markets would be interested, but any other publishers are better off trying a new IP or delving into their legacy IP rather than buying up another company's barely relevant IP that they couldn't figure a way to utilize. And even for those small name, big wallet conglomerates, since they're often aiming for Chinese markets, they're much better off making a new IP that targets that market rather than trying to appeal to Western nostalgia. There's a reason Ne Zha 2 became the highest grossing animated movie ever, and it wasn't because Americans and Europeans have fond memories of its inspiration.

Ubisoft is doing fine hurting its brand on its own.

@RoomWithaMoose i agree with most of that. But in MS’s case they have to pick up the phone and ask. If sold for peanuts and they have a creative idea behind it then why not. EA sort of the same. Ubisoft IP’s at large don’t interest me at all and the ones that do like you said are a little more boxed in than mainstream giants. I still think it’s worth a phone for both EA and MS. That’s just smart business.

Capcom has been really great at leveraging their older IP. I want Konami to get there as i love some of their older stuff. But at large most companies have ran from its past or tried to put a live service spin to them. Only to fall on their face as gamers haven’t taken the bait with the once popular IP name behind a much different game or method of pay and play. I will say Ubisoft needs this upcoming AC game to do well. At the very least not lose money and i just don’t see it doing much better than breaking even. To much drama around the title.

Apart from Assassins Creed Shadows I'm just not interested in anything Ubisoft put out anymore, I think people are just fed up of thier re used formula. Selling their biggest IP will just speed up their downfall, they will lose value rapidly and eventually acquired by Tencent or the Saudis.

@HonestHick I just disagree about grabbing Ubi IP. Seems like a waste of money for any prospective buyer, and like it wouldn't garner enough money to be worthwhile for Ubi to devalue themselves. No one really wins. Maybe the gamers dying for new entries in these IPs, but just ask Banjo-Kazooie or Mass Effect fans how well they're eating to get a sense of how Micro or EA would bungle it.

Capcom does a great job. Nintendo, SEGA (in general, but also with their new initiative), Square Enix, Bandai Namco, Atari (literally their whole brand is obscure legacy IP), 2K,etc. I wouldn't even say Sony is doing completely terribly in that regard, they just don't give pre-PS3 enough love. And, to contradict myself a little, Microsoft's acquisitions are utilizing IP fine. Just Microsoft proper doesn't seem to remember any of the IP they built from the ground up themselves...or anything from Rare.

And as a small note about AC Shadows, I think the internet might be surprised to see how little general audiences care about internet hysteria over nothing. Though, at the same time, there's a lot of other things going against Shadows besides angry interneters, so we'll see how its sales turn out.

@RoomWithaMoose Japanese dev’s as of late has done well with older IP for sure. Really excited for some of the Sega titles they have planned. I love me some streets of rage and golden axe. Nintendo is just light years ahead of the industry at this point.

I am not saying it’s a done deal that Ubisoft will sell and if the price is right for either side. That’s for the suites and ties to determine. Often times one side wins that deal over the other. However i stand on it’s smart business to at least call and start to plant that seed if and only if you have a plan to do something with said title.

Assassins Creed isn’t really a mainstream audience game these days. So sure mainstream gamers aren’t following the hate looming the game but they aren’t going to be the ones footing the bill. The ones that are are the ones doing the complaining. So i am just not sold on it doing enough to really help Ubisoft’s pockets all that well. Again time will tell and I’d like to see it do well for them as i don’t wish for games to fail. But i think the game has a slight uphill battle going against it with the core players.

Can Ubisoft just sell the Beyond good & Evil IP already, I'm sure another dev would make it amazing and the more important thing actually RELEASE the game!

@RoomWithaMoose MS have said in the past that the main reason they haven't done a new Banjo is they just haven't found the right team at the right time to make it. They don't want to force Rare to make it, and Rare seemingly have little interest in it.

Overall it's a good approach, you can't force art. On the other hand, we want a new Banjo!

Also, they are working on a new Perfect Dark, so they haven't entirely forgotten Rare's IP

Everyone sits on IPs, because they pretty much have to. You don't want to sell the IP as its an asset and money in the bank for a later date. At the same time if companies use all these IPs then they get accused of milking a franchise. Horizon gets it and they have only released 2 mainline games in 7 years with 2 spinoffs. Whilst the older IPs are just not guarenteed to do great outside of remasters as it means rebooting.

Its just classic gamer mentality to be unhappy either way

I dont usually comment much on things like this, but Ubisoft just seem to be in such a mess at the moment, and only seem to be digging deeper.

I swear, Prince Of Persia: The Lost Crown flopped because it’s a Ubisoft game. That name on a game is now a scarlet letter.

At least Microsoft will release the games on all platforms

Maybe they can sell the abk cloud rights back to microsoft, i want to play diablo on my phone!

Couple things here. One, I completely understand the anger from shareholders at the diminished value of the company. Two, this particular shareholder sounds a bit unhinged. I don’t know too much about laws for this kind of thing, but Ubisoft doesn’t have to disclose talks with potential buyers do they? I know they do have a tendency to lie to their shareholders, but in this instance I feel like they aren’t wrong to not disclose this. Can someone enlighten me here?

@nessisonett A rare moment of agreement! I, too, would be seriously troubled if Savvy purchased IP from Ubisoft. I can typically separate games from their governments, but the royal family’s direct ties to Savvy make that distinction very hard for me.

@AhmadSumadi I think if Ubisoft didn’t publish it, it wouldn’t have been considered a flop. It sold very respectably for a side-scroller Metroidvania. Ubisoft just wanted more pop from the name, but I don’t think that was realistic on their part.