remember quand Ubiart devait être un moteur public....

(maybe just do an audit first to figure out what went wrong with PoP and why Splinter Cell takes so long)

Honnestly, if I'm Ubisoft I'd start remaking my entire catalogue at this point. Scrap the new IPs, the ambitious sequels. Focus on execution speed, empowering a new generation of developers.

People just want the same games they played 10 years ago, it's a fraction of the risk, so why not?

Best game ever

Artists have the perks of having enough specialties and tangible output to show, but imo it hurts game design & programming students since they don't have much to show in their portfolio.

Idk, maybe I'm just old-fashionned but I'd prefer less polish and more prototyping/creativity/learning

There's a trend in recent years for game schools to have 15-20 students on a single final-year project and I don't get how this is helping them to find jobs?

Seems like they're instructed to optimize for beauty in order to get awards and release on Steam, but does that teach them well?

Après on sait pas quels actifs avaient Spiders avant rachat, et quels bénéfices ils auraient eu précédemment sur steelrising mais pour moi c’est juste la limite du AA, un échec sur un projet d’envergure te met à risque direct car ton burnrate est super haut

Greedfall a dû générer dans les ~2M depuis sa sortie en EA (pour Nacon si ils prennent toute la trésorerie), donc ils ont déjà largement absorbé les pertes. Si le studio était indé il serait probablement déjà fermé, avec un potentiel rachat ils ont une chance de s’en sortir (sans dettes)

2 -> cool success, BUT watch out, continuing updates could be risky
3 -> unless we're getting a surprise boost, no chance of recoup, unsure if the extra cost is worth the investment
4 -> everything we add extra is increasing our losses

My point is that we rarely know which case we're talking about

Here's my scientific explanation: let's assume the total cost of the game is climbing slowly, then fast (production before release), then steadily (post-launch updates).

If the revenues look like the curve #:
1 -> fantastic, keep working on the game forever, it's printing money

Also, gamers are exposed to lots of games with vastly different cost & revenues structure, so it's hard to tell what's costly or not.

(I'm not saying that some publishers aren't greedy and try to increase margins on already profitable products, but I don't feel like it's the majority).

My guess: players mostly hear about and know about the big successes, including those from teams that found success through continuous improvements over time.

So, they feel like any game could be the same, given time and resources, and any time a company cuts their losses, they're wrong.

Am I the only one noticing an increase in « we’d be fine if publishers/investors weren’t so greedy » as of late ?

It has become sort of a norm on social media to claim that a game isn’t a failure but a mild success or that it was going to climb back up if given the time.

Hoping the people there (that didn’t leave in the last few years of « natural attrition ») can bounce back quickly

My time working on the VR games with them was amazing, some of the fondest memories of my experience at Ubisoft. Wish I had the opportunity to visit them, almost happened but the trip was always pushed back.

Les joueurs et pros de l’industrie sont blasés des récompenses en tous genres, mais vu de l’extérieur c’est quand même assez fou de monter sur scène pour recevoir un prix pour son travail, 99% des gens n’auront jamais ça dans leur vie professionnelle.

Parce qu’ils savent bien que vu le nombre de votants et l’engagement que ça demande de tester tous ces jeux, ça tourne au concours de popularité (encore plus que les Césars)

C’est sympa d’être nommé (et encore plus de gagner j’imagine 🥲), ça permet de partager ce moment avec nos familles et amis qui ne comprennent pas grand chose au milieu du jeu vidéo par ailleurs. Les « Césars du jeu vidéo » c’est parlant, plus que n’importe quel autre chiffre ou accomplissement

It warms my heart to imagine my game being a shared family experience ❤️ Never got any success myself trying to make my parents try video games

bah pour moi oui, ou alors une VS avec disclaimer. Mais le principe de la VS c'est d'être répresentatif du résultat final, donc si certains éléments centraux ne le sont pas, ça va faire tiquer en mode "ah ouais sur ce sujet ils sont pas très bons"

Un proto quand même, jusqu’aux touches finales de polish c’est pas encore une VS

Se présenter et expliquer à quoi vont servir les fonds c'est pas la base de la base? Il y a bien des stretch goals, mais pour les projets de lancement ils sont tellement vagues, impossible de se projeter.

Très dommage car l'idée d'investir des petits tickets dans des projets de JV est séduisante!

J'étais intéressé par @gamevestor.bsky.social (qui propose de l'investissement participatif de jeu vidéo) mais le lancement m'a pas mal refroidi. Les pages des projets se content de recopier les infos Steam, aucun détail sur la vision, la production, l'équipe portant le projet, le budget, etc.

As you requested Greg!

And I understand why, I’m not pointing fingers. With limited money, of course gamers favor a sure « not great but not bad » than a « I might dislike it »

But if you want things to change and devs to shift mindset, you need to support original games even when they aren’t top-notch like Clair Obscur

The data constantly proves that gamers are more willing to support mid « safe bets » than decent « risk-takers ».

So, why would game developers gamble their jobs away?

Cheaper prices don’t make the critics go away, free/discount players are just as much prone to leave negative reviews

You can have intuitions, of course, we all do. But you can’t confirm until after doing the work, not even wishlists are a great indicator these days.

There are more consistent « intuitions » for what sells: bigger scope, IPs, remake, better graphics, post-launch additions, etc.

But you can’t plan around this, no matter how much you try. There’s so much that goes into what makes a game desirable and million ways the development could go wrong.

You just have to make a game the best you can, and cross your fingers that the concept and execution are good enough to resonate

Gaming is a winner-take-all industry, players gravitate towards games that are already popular.

Word of mouth/algorithms/influencers have the power to turn some fantastic games into viral hit that break genre boundaries and sell 10x what the others in the same segment do

Steam Charts Top selling and top played games across Steam

If you look at Steam 2025 top sellers, there’s a wide range of prices 20/30/40/50/60/70 and even 80€ and varied discounting strategies 6 to 12 months after release

So it does very much seem like there are games at all sorts of prices out there

store.steampowered.com/charts/besto...