EA Trying to Buy Ubisoft Shares

jujubees writes "What is going on with Electronic Arts these days? This morning it was revealed that EA is trying to acquire 19.9% of the Ubisoft shares owned by Dutch investment company Talpa Beheer B.V. If approved by the US Antitrust department, the buyout would instantly make EA the biggest shareholder, ahead of the Guillemot brothers. Whether this is a hostile takeover attempt is not clear at this point, no financial terms were disclosed." An anonymous reader also wrote in to mention a GamePro Editorial about the company, regarding its past as an honorable games-maker and its current reputation.

Comments

Strong Moves

[Zinic]

Looks like EA trying to knock out competition the way every other company out there would. They see a threat and want to nullify it before it becomes a serious problem to their income ratings.

Re:EA disease is spreading

[Blue-Footed Boobie]

I wish I could mod you down.

To STOP supporting Ubi now is just stupid, and will hurt Ubi (who I feel make great games).

Stop buying from them if EA ever owns/buys Ubi.

Stroke, Stroke

[retinaburn]

Simple reasoning, EA just needs fresh rowers, and Ubisoft has proved to have some pretty good oarsmen. Avast ye scurvy dogs!

Re:Hostile

[harrkev]

Gaming is the one thing that, in my opinion, open-source cannot conquer.

How many hours per YEAR do you spend with your OS? How many hours with a word processor, web browser, or spreadsheet? The average geek needs all of those things. It is worth the effort to make those essential tools. And if a geek makes it, then he can use it. The last RPG that I played lasted all of 80 hours. I doubt that I will ever touch it again. I will just buy another one.

This is the reason that nobody can truly monopolize game creation: you only need ONE word processor, ONE web browser, and ONE operating system. But games have a high turnover rate. I would not be surprised to find people who buy more than one game a month.

So, let's assume that an awesome FOSS game came out. People would download, play, and conquer. Within two months, they are back at Best Buy looking for another game to play.

One more thing: If somebody make a game, they would likely not play it for fun, since they already know all of the quests, plot twists, etc. The only exception would be multi-player games where the challenge comes from beating other peple, instead of beating the game.

And don't forget that a word processor is a matter of programming. Making a game also involves: 2D art, 3D art, voice acting, music, and writing talent. No one person can possibly have ALL of the skills needed to make a modern game by themselves. Since you now have a lot more diverse skill mix, it becomes harder to recruit talent and to manage everything.

For all of these reaons, FOSS might be able to generate a respectable title or two, but it will NEVER replace commercial games.

The games industry is the movie industry

[Infonaut]

Expect a lot of this sort of hardball behavior to become the norm in the games industry, if it isn't already.

As we all now know, the games industry is huge - bigger than Hollywood. Well, look at how Hollywood studios have acted over the years, and recognize that the halcyon days of the games industry are gone. It's Big Business, and if you look at how games are marketed and distributed, it's a sophisticated moneymaking machine where creativity runs a distant second to pulling in big dough.

People complain about movies being derivative, formulaic, and obsessed with sequels. The movies have nothing on the games industry. It's becoming more and more risk-averse every day.