Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Ubisoft Would Consider Hollywood Buyout

Posted by Zonk on from the going-to-the-dogs dept.

GamesIndustry.biz has the word that Splinter Cell and Prince of Persia developer Ubisoft may consider a buyout by a Hollywood studio. Intriguing, after the back and forth between Ubisoft and EA earlier this year. From the article: "The CEO told the paper that an acquisition by a large multinational entertainment firm - such as Walt Disney Co. or Time Warner - 'is a solution which could be, for us, fairly interesting.'" Interesting would be to see how such a development would affect the franco-phone-tastic relations that Ubi has with Quebec.

27 comments

  1. ugh by Monkeman · · Score: 0

    Interesting perhaps, but wholly stupid.

  2. Visions of the future... by Sylver+Dragon · · Score: 3, Funny

    I can see it now, Disney buys out Ubisoft. A little over a year and a half later we get "Splinter Cell:The Movie". It will be all animated, and we will be subjected to a showstopping musical number, wherein the main protagonist is singing while sneaking into the evil enemy fortress. He won't actually kill anyone, simply distact them at opportune points in the musical number with the most over-the-top stunts ever seen by man. During this whole time the villian's minions will be singing backup for the protagonist.
    Evetually, the story (what little of it there is) will degenerate into a heroic duet as the protagonist and the villian fight it out to the last.
    This movie will be followed by "Splinter Cell:The Movie 2", followed shortly by the direct-to-video release of "Splinter Cell:Kids" The story of the children, who just happen to be agents, rescuing their parents from the evil villian, with silly antics and blindingly obvious traps.
    And, of course, we'll get the accompanying games, which let you "play the movie." Which will, according to the laws of the universe, suck.

    --
    Necessity is the mother of invention.
    Laziness is the father.
    1. Re:Visions of the future... by Guy+LeDouche · · Score: 1

      Sam Fisher: Oh would you like to swing on a star, carry moonbeams home in a jar! And be better off than you are. Or would you rather be a fish?

    2. Re:Visions of the future... by some+guy+I+know · · Score: 1
      [blah blah blah disneyfication of "Splinter Cell" blah blah blah]
      I just watched "Shrek II" on HBO today.
      "Shrek II" is produced by Dreamworks, which, like everything else in Hollywood, is owned by Disney.
      The movie depicts:
      • a homocidal, drug-using, manic-depressive cat,
      • implied beastiality between a male frog and female human (how does that work?),
      • explicit footage of a humanoid character getting his arms ripped off,
      • disintegration of another humanoid character,
      • police (well, knight) brutality,
      • the crushing to death of a small poodle in a supposedly humorous manner,
      • theft, vandalism, and armed robbery by the supposed "good guys", and, worst of all,
      • a guest appearance by Joan Rivers.
      So I wouldn't worry too much about a disneyfied movie being too tame.
      --
      Those who sacrifice security to condemn liberty deserve to repeat history or something. - Benjamin Santayana
    3. Re:Visions of the future... by Blurredplacebo · · Score: 1

      dreamworks isnt owned by disney at all, infact they are in pretty serious competetion with each other

    4. Re:Visions of the future... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the words of Winston Churchill: "Whoosh!"

  3. Well... by PhotoBoy · · Score: 1

    ... I suppose having to put up with Sam Fisher wearing Mickey Mouse ears and infiltrating Big Thunder Mountain is preferable to EA getting their hands on Ubi.

  4. Is the market saturated? by acidrain · · Score: 3, Interesting

    One would think that a company with as many good games as Ubi would have found a buyer by now. Apparently they have been looking for a long time. I guess it could reflect their large size and the fact that all non-publishing game companies have been trying to sell themselves lately... Anyhow, just as long as it isn't EA I wish them luck. I wonder why EA is too stupid to see that the employees of a French company with cool IP wouldn't stay long if they were bought out by an American company that grinds out shovel-ware? Of course being part of a company that can't seem to sell is not a morale boost either.

    --
    -- http://thegirlorthecar.com funny dating game for guys
  5. Disney buys Ubisoft => no Lumines for you by tepples · · Score: 3, Informative

    Disney has a poor track record with regard to respecting the intellectual commons, even more so than other MPAA studios. If Disney buys Ubisoft, then advocates of the intellectual commons will have to buy Verticube instead of Lumines.

  6. quebec by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Interesting would be to see how such a development would affect the franco-phone-tastic relations that Ubi has with Quebec.
    Don't know that much about it, but this sounds a little idiotic to me. Seems like there's a lot of software that happens in Quebec. I doubt Avid lost employees to rampant anti-americanism when it became a MS subsidiery, for example.
  7. Rofl... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Babblefish translation from French:

    "We don't have a plan for next gen, and we're hoping people with more money than smarts want to take a swing at video games."

  8. Sorry, No Quebec Change... by FozzieCDN · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The province of Quebec unfortunately offers some of the best incentives in the world for game development studios with various funds, incentives and tax grants for R&D as well as technology employment. This is the only reason why anyone sets up there, not because of their training, education or talent (which is good but wasn't anything special). So to answer Zonks question, no there wouldn't be a change, not unless someone wants to spend more money doing the same thing at least. As a side note, I am a bit pissed at this deal since I live in one of the Canadian provinces that supports the other freeloading provinces and have lost numerous contracts and gigs to Quebec firms because they utilize my tax dollars to undercut me. It's most definately not right and it is 100% bullshit that the only place on this continent with the intelligence to see what a boon this industry is has to be Quebec :(

    1. Re:Sorry, No Quebec Change... by EulerX07 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So the guys that created Splinter Cell are "good but nothing special". If they were nothing special, the games wouldn't have been huge successes that prompted Ubisoft to increase their involvement in Montreal.

      Your really think the auto industry that makes southern ontario rich gets no subsidies? Get real. For every Honda or Toyota sold anywhere in Canada a tariff is taken and funneled back to the companies that hasn't given a job to canadians living outside of the southern ontario peninsula for 40 years. Wait that's not true, we had a plant that was one of the most productive ones for GM, out in Boisbriand, was closed down when the F-bodies productio where stopped (camaro and firebird). The TCA was really cool with the Boisbriand plant closing, as long as all ontario plants where safe.

      You think Quebec has no income other then the money given to us by the almighty Ontarians? Hydro-Quebec by itself generated 2.4 billion in profit, and gave the government a 1.4 billion dividend, not counting all the secondary benefits from being able to provide cheap electricity to companies like Alcan, Alcoa et al.

      If you're from Alberta, well, sorry, we ain't pumping pure money out of the ground like you guys are, wish we where. But my experience has told me that people that go out on the web to slander quebecers are usually from southern Ontario. Which is kinda fitting, since your elite has spent the last 25 years scaring american investors into putting money into Toronto and not the evil french province, even when it costs way more to do something in the GTA then in greater Montreal.

    2. Re:Sorry, No Quebec Change... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Here here. I moved to southern Ontario from Montreal for work last year, and if I hear another uninformed jackass here opine about transfers to Quebec, honestly I'll flip. Funny it's never transfers to Manitoba or Sasketchewan that raise a word of protest here. It's constant, relentless bullshit about Quebec.

      By way of disclosure, I'm an old Montreal anglo, never been more seperatist inclined in my life than I am now living here.

    3. Re:Sorry, No Quebec Change... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you live in some other province, there is no use of your tax dollars, since it's the provincial government that is using its money and tax credits to help this industry. So it's the quebequer's tax money that is used, not the canadian's.

      Also, if your province leaders are not wise enough to see that this kind of investment is a great idea, it's them you have to blame.

    4. Re:Sorry, No Quebec Change... by FozzieCDN · · Score: 1

      Ya I hate to say it but the talent you find in Quebec is no different than what you would find any other location in North America. The difference is like I said that the Quebec provincial government is the only one with any intelligence to invest early into this stuff. Which I must say I am quite envious and jealous, I wish we had non inept technology ministers here who knew how to do their dammed jobs and invest in its citizens properly. As for Quebec provincial income, the only figure worth pointing out is the 20 billion the place takes in with transfer payments from everyone else. Spout your hydro quebec crap elsewhere since it's power that they got for a song and a dance via good intentions of sharing from Newfoundland and Labrador and then stab them in the back by reselling it to the US power grids. If that money went back to the people who gave it to you that might be another story worth sharing, but we all know doesn't happen. In regards to investing in Quebec or not, I couldn't care, what I do care is a use of the nations tax dollars to create unfair markets. It's stupid that we have trade agreements to counter this stuff with other nations but within our own country its OK to screw one another over by taking advantage of our nature to share and look out for one another. FYI: I don't hate Quebec, I just hate the people from Quebec who think that they are treated unfairly because of some BS about being a "distinct and seperate society" and don't realize how good they have it. Guess what guys, you're Canadians so bloody well act like it.

    5. Re:Sorry, No Quebec Change... by atezun · · Score: 1

      Considering there is no Sasketchewan, I'm not surprised. Now Saskatchewan, there's a bunch of bastards if I've ever seen one.

      Yes, I do live in Saskatchewan.

    6. Re:Sorry, No Quebec Change... by EulerX07 · · Score: 1

      Listen "Buddy", at the end of the day the developpers in montreal where asked to do games and they did EXTREMELY well with the Prince of Persia and Splinter Cell series. And by extremely well I mean smashing successes. Keep singing that you could have done it as good, we all know the tune.

      And as far as your further disinformation spread about my province regarding Labrador, here's a lowdown for people that want the real facts. In a nutshell, Labrador was part of Quebec (called Lower Canada back then) until 1806, when the british empire gave it to newfoundland, a separate country. The borders were never clearly established back then (hilarity ensues). When newfoundland joined Canada in 1949 part of the deal was that the constitution of Canada would give them Labrador, so the feds gave it away and ended the territory dispute.

      This being said, anyone not totally ignorant like the parent knows that the majority of the power is being produced at the LG plants in James Bay, and all the different rivers leading to Lac Saint-Jean, that have NOTHING to do with Labrador. See here for a little map. Yes, the churchill falls dam produces a lot of energy that is sold to Quebec. That's been income for newfoundland for decades, and the construction was spearheaded by us. You tell me, what would they do with the power? There is no way to get power to the US or the rest of Canada except if you go through Quebec. The deal was mutually profitable, as will be the further development in Labrador that have been proposed by a joint venture from Hydro-Quebec and OPG. And also, please note that Labrador is still being disputed by the native tribes that have always live there, it's status is not set in stone yet.

      To even try to undermine Hydro-Quebec's success by saying it's all because we're stealing energy from labrador is the most worthless piece of crap I've ever read off the internet.

      And about your "unfair tax markets", you're gonna have to crawl out of your reality-altering bubble and see that government subsidies are also given to companies to make them invest in the GTA, and everywhere else. Hell, even RIGHT NOW, the city of London is trying to entice the Shriners Hospital to move from Montreal to London (Ontario) by using public money to entice them. These guys have been in montreal for 80 years.

      And as far as distinct society, we are not the same at you, deal with it or can it. We don't share the same history, the same ancestors, the same culture, the same language. Our ancestors were given away to the British empire and then lived centuries where they were told they were inferior and expected to lose their culture. After enough was enough, we kicked the church out of the state and took control of a territory where we were the majority, you might want to read up on the quiet revolution.

      Stop dissing us on the internet.

    7. Re:Sorry, No Quebec Change... by Nosferax · · Score: 0

      Spout your hydro quebec crap elsewhere since it's power that they got for a song and a dance via good intentions of sharing from Newfoundland and Labrador and then stab them in the back by reselling it to the US power grids That was only one project and it was scrapped (Churchill). Ironnically Ontario-Hydro approached Quebec and Newfoundland latelly to restart it. All our dam and station are within our border. As for giving back the money to the people we are already doing it. The profit from Hydro-Quebec are split with the bigger chunk going back to the government budget. The rest is reinvest into the system to pay for the upkeep and new project. And by the way we are in a federation of provinces, it's ok to consider yourself a Quebecer or an ontarian. Canada is only a paper construct.

      --
      Remember... A boomerang IS NOT the best way to deliver a bomb.
    8. Re:Sorry, No Quebec Change... by EulerX07 · · Score: 1

      Actually there is a plant in Churchill Falls right now, it produces 5500 MW, so it's a pretty big one, but LG-1 through LG-4 by themselves produce 8800 MW, and there's 6 more plants in the James Bay alone, and that's just one of 13 regions where HQ produces power.

      So Churchill Fall does produce a good amount of power, but saying that Quebec is getting rich because we're screwing Newfoundlanders is totally fallacious. Besides, if they hadn't taken the deal there would be 0 MW being produced there because Newfoundland would not have been crazy enough to dump tons of money into buying a huge dam by themselves and then hope the people they turned down would buy the power from them.

  9. Re:Disney buys Ubisoft = no Lumines for you by superpulpsicle · · Score: 1

    There is really two Disney in one. There is the "corporate Disney" and the classic "Disney" which is slowing fading away.

    I don't see any reason for the classic Disney to incorporate a company like Ubisoft. And the corporate Disney has had serious management problems in the past years.

    Anyhow, that is a pretty good trash-Disney link.

  10. Freeloading provinces by atezun · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    As a side note, I am a bit pissed at this deal since I live in one of the Canadian provinces that supports the other freeloading provinces

    Something tells me you're from Alberta.

  11. The Growing Trend by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This may solidify the reality that game movies are the modern day "B" films. Yes...that includes all you people making the DOA film.

  12. Clearly seeking a White Knight by sesshomaru · · Score: 1
    In finance speak, the term for what UbiSoft is looking for is a White Knight. Basically, a White Knight is a company (or rich financier, like Warren Buffet) who comes in and saves your company from being taken over by someone who you find unpleasant. There can be lots of reasons for this, such as a fear of change in the corporate culture or a fear by major investors that the people trying to take over will run the comapny into the ground.

    Of course, the "white knight" can turn out to have a black heart, but in this case, UbiSoft sees the movie studios it is courting as far preferable to being taken over by EA (or as I like to call it The Destroyer).

    --
    "MIT betrayed all of its basic principles."