Ubisoft is Lying About ZombiU's Performance

#1GodofLazinessPosted 7/12/2013 9:59:54 PM
http://gaminrealm.com/2013/07/12/ubisoft-lying-about-zombiu-performance/

Apparently Ubisoft got caught lying about how well ZombiU sold.
---
Official Guardian Knight Slacker of Safe Haven.
Light blinds us and forces us to stumble about in ignorance - Altair
#2BuretsuPosted 7/12/2013 10:03:52 PM
Eh, that's a lot of speculation based on no real information...
---
no i tried resetting game i even start violent slamming cartridge on wall but all it does make static noise when i put into DS, the problem not fix! -ReconUnit
#3GodofLaziness(Topic Creator)Posted 7/12/2013 10:08:22 PM
Buretsu posted...
Eh, that's a lot of speculation based on no real information...


Have you read the article? The guy brought up alot of good points.
---
Official Guardian Knight Slacker of Safe Haven.
Light blinds us and forces us to stumble about in ignorance - Altair
#4Faceman_Posted 7/12/2013 10:08:56 PM
Scumbag Ubisoft?
#5Golden MavenPosted 7/12/2013 10:09:58 PM
So it seems to me that Ubisoft may be trying to cop-out here from making a ZombiU sequel, and also falsely using this title as justification for delaying Rayman Legends and turning it multi-platform as well.

Right. They allegedly made a killing off Zombie U, but decided to lie about its performance cause they can't be bothered to make a sequel...

Typical Nintendo fanboy logic. Completely out of touch with reality. If Ubisoft says Zombie U didn't perform, then Zombie U didn't perform. If Ubisoft decides to cool off on the Wii U, then there's financial reasons for it. Period. That simple.
#6BuretsuPosted 7/12/2013 10:10:00 PM
GodofLaziness posted...
Buretsu posted...
Eh, that's a lot of speculation based on no real information...


Have you read the article? The guy brought up alot of good points.


But in the end, at best it's a "Yeah, maybe.."
---
no i tried resetting game i even start violent slamming cartridge on wall but all it does make static noise when i put into DS, the problem not fix! -ReconUnit
#7The_HyphenatorPosted 7/12/2013 10:13:29 PM
Interesting. I thought I remembered something about Ubisoft stating that ZombiU didn't cost them much to make. So either they were lying then, or they're lying now.

Personally, I'm inclined to believe Guillemot is lying now; after all, we know for a fact that Ubisoft Montreal was working on a prototype for ZombiU 2 as recently as May. Why on earth would Ubisoft greenlight an expense like that if they knew the original game was a financial flop? It just doesn't add up...
#8The_HyphenatorPosted 7/12/2013 10:15:36 PM
Buretsu posted...
GodofLaziness posted...
Buretsu posted...
Eh, that's a lot of speculation based on no real information...


Have you read the article? The guy brought up alot of good points.


But in the end, at best it's a "Yeah, maybe.."


Well, yeah, because there isn't any definite proof. He doesn't have a document from Ubisoft stating, in black and white, "this is what the budget was, and this is how much we made." Unless he has hard proof like that, he has to couch it in indefinite terms, otherwise he leaves himself wide open for Ubisoft to hit him with an expensive libel suit.
#9EmeralDragon23Posted 7/12/2013 10:17:48 PM
if it sold 500,000 for 60 each, that's 30 million


did it really take over 30 million to make ZombiU?
---
El Psy Congroo
Currently Playing: Fire Emblem: Awakening, Metroid: Other M, Phoenix Wright Ace Attorney: Justice For All, Devil Survivor: Overclocked, Madworld
#10The_HyphenatorPosted 7/12/2013 10:20:57 PM
EmeralDragon23 posted...
if it sold 500,000 for 60 each, that's 30 million


did it really take over 30 million to make ZombiU?


Publishers don't take home the whole $60 price of a retail game. When you take into account the retailer's cut, the platform licensing fee and other expenses, publishers only get about $27 out of that $60 price tag.

Still, if you do the math, Ubisoft still would have taken home about $14 million. That's a lot more plausible than $30 million, but still, ZombiU does not look like it cost $14 million to develop and market, which is borne out by Guillemot's claims in 2012 that it was not very expensive to make.