Ubisoft Montreal head explains annualized Assassin's Creed

Ubisoft Montreal head Yannis Mallat explains why the sales response to Assassin's Creed games hasn't slowed its annualization, and how a yearly game doesn't mean a yearly development cycle.

7

The Assassin's Creed series is a consistent money-maker for Ubisoft, and that has turned the series into an annualized juggernaut. That can run the risk of franchise fatigue, but Ubisoft Montreal head Yannis Mallat doesn't think that's a problem for the series.

"The players will tell us. Right now there are more and more coming into the franchise, so I don't see that day," Mallat told Eurogamer. "It's our breakthrough. When you have quality content, the frequency of coming out with the game is not an issue at all. On the contrary, people expect more and more of that content. So it's natural to be able to provide that content. The gamers are happy and it's our job to make them happy."

In other words, as long as players are buying Assassin's Creed games, the message to Ubisoft is that fans want more of the series. Mallat also noted that making the games occur yearly doesn't mean the churning development cycle that the term often implies.

"When we say we are annualising the franchise, we don't say the teams only have one year to work on a project," he said. "It's mature enough in growing the talent and the core teams so we can have several core teams working on the next one and other projects on the brand. That's why every Assassin's Creed has one dedicated core team working more than one year on their projects. We call that a roadmap. It takes into account the creative content - the settings, the where and what - the technology and the team."

Editor-In-Chief
From The Chatty
  • reply
    April 1, 2013 8:00 AM

    Steve Watts posted a new article, Ubisoft Montreal head explains annualized Assassin's Creed.

    Ubisoft Montreal head Yannis Mallat explains why the sales response to Assassin's Creed games hasn't slowed its annualization, and how a yearly game doesn't mean a yearly development cycle.

    • reply
      April 1, 2013 8:43 AM

      Call me a fuddy-duddy, but I still think annualizing games in general is crap, and a bad idea for this franchise.

      • reply
        April 1, 2013 8:51 AM

        Agreed, every other year should be the most it happens, even that is cutting it thin sometimes.

      • reply
        April 1, 2013 8:58 AM

        Even the king of annualization, Call of Duty, is running into a headwind. Earlier this year, Activision Publishing president Eric Hirshberg told financial analysts to not expect another "biggest entertainment release ever" announcement for this year's Call of Duty release. And Call of Duty has been running on a "leapfrog" development strategy of "two teams rotating, with each team getting two years of dev time" since 2003. And the past three releases, Activision has been calling in help from side studios like Sledgehammer and Raven. Even then, many gamers and critics have been complaining of Call of Duty running out of steam creatively, becoming stale competitively, and watering down the single-player campaign to a QTE-laden roller-coaster railshooter.

    • reply
      April 1, 2013 8:50 AM

      Am I misreading it, or is he basically saying they're going to treat it like how Activision does Call of Duty, where they have multiple companies developing games under the same title. That way a game can get over a year of development while still having a new, annual title?

      Sounds shitty.

      • reply
        April 1, 2013 8:51 AM

        Pretty sure thats what they have been doing.

      • reply
        April 1, 2013 8:54 AM

        pretty much.

      • reply
        April 1, 2013 10:06 AM

        I don't mind. I buy Call of Duty at launch and get a good 80-100 hours out of each game. I know I'm pretty much paying for yearly maps but that's worth my $60. Assassin's Creed has consistently been pretty good, though it shares some complaints about repetitiveness like Call of Duty, but if you're enjoying it then there's little problem.

    • reply
      April 1, 2013 9:21 AM

      Usually I can't stand this business model as the games suffer horribly, but I have yet to be disappointed by an AssCreed yet.

      • reply
        April 1, 2013 9:57 AM

        III was the first game I didn't really like since the original.

        • reply
          April 1, 2013 10:01 AM

          same here

        • reply
          April 2, 2013 11:34 AM

          Hopefully with 3 over and done with they can lose the massive lameness that was the present day story line and move on with cool adventure sotries and less scifi end of the world bullcrap.

          More swashbuckling less aliens.

    • reply
      April 1, 2013 9:59 AM

      Yet another Call of Dollars

    • reply
      April 1, 2013 10:16 AM

      Annual releases will destroy the franchise. I have to assume they realize this, but they just don't care.

      • reply
        April 1, 2013 11:03 AM

        I say keep em coming. This is one game I don't mind yearly releases. We're constantly seeing new story and more ways to kill etc.

    • reply
      April 1, 2013 12:19 PM

      LOL! Bah! Everyone knows it's April's Fool day today.

    • reply
      April 1, 2013 8:02 PM

      I'm not a big fan of the franchise, but I still wonder how much better, deeper, richer and fulfilling each AC game so far would have been with an extra year of development. Regardless of what Ubisoft heads say, an Assassin's Creed game every year makes the franchise seem more predictable and less important. At least with the Call of Duty: Modern Warfare and Call of Duty: Black Ops there's a distinctive theme to both franchises that differentiates them, and there are camps that gravitate towards one or the other, or both.

    • reply
      April 2, 2013 1:51 AM

      I'm so burnt on the series, Revelations was a chore to get through and III well don't get me started on III.

      They may not think it's a problem but I for one am done with the series all together. I won't be so much as renting IV, let alone buying it.

    • reply
      April 2, 2013 7:51 AM

      This post is complete bullshit. Every gamer knows that annualizing a freaken franchise makes it boring in under 3 years. Assassins creed is no different. Looks like they will have to learn the hard way by loosing more money on each game.

Hello, Meet Lola