Ubisoft CEO Speaks out Against EA Move 365
Gamespot is reporting that Ubisoft CEO Yves Guillemot has spoken out against EA's "hostile action". From the article: "Considering the industry practice of communicating informally about such decisions, we were disappointed, to say the very least, that EA chose not to inform us of their specific plans beforehand." Further, Voodoo Extreme is reporting that a financial report may suggest the French government is going to assist Ubisoft in staying out from under EA's thumb.
Just Talk (Score:2, Insightful)
WTO? (Score:5, Insightful)
Article submitters and Slashdot editors, please .. (Score:5, Insightful)
Who, what, where, when, why, and how
Re:Article submitters and Slashdot editors, please (Score:5, Insightful)
It wouldn't have taken much to clarify that the "hostile action" was the sudden purchase of 20% of Ubisoft's shares by EA.
I've often been frustrated by similar submission, so I sympathize.
EA isn't about games (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:unexpected limelight? (Score:3, Insightful)
Josh
Re:unexpected limelight? (Score:4, Insightful)
Or in the words of Eddie Izzard:
Re:unexpected limelight? (Score:2, Insightful)
Debt repaid. With interest. Thanks!
Note To Business Owners (Score:3, Insightful)
Everyone likes to play by the rules as long as they're in their favor, but as soon as someone else gets the upper hand and threatens your (insert precious item here) the rules suddenly become unfair and need to be circumvented. Human nature I guess. Hooray for "free" markets though - greed really is the best motivation for human endeavors, right?
Re:From the second article... (Score:5, Insightful)
Think about that next time you reach for the cheap and ignorant jibes or the next time you celebrate Independence Day.
Simple reason-lost French jobs / lost French power (Score:2, Insightful)
It is good that EU countries are now subject to the same buyout and then layoff trend that the USA went through in the 1980s.
The loss of companies that move out of France + the loss of jobs from buyout/layoffs will force France to actually support a pro-business environment instead of a entitlement burdened nanny state.
The euro has greatly facilitated free trade, free capital, and personal freedom.
Re:French Government? Totally unnecessary! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:an explanation about France... (Score:1, Insightful)
France wears its pride on its sleeve a lot these days, and the fact that the U.S. does not have to go to the same desperate measures in order to avoid being humbled every day- b/c it knows that if IBM fails it'll be because of an Intel or a Microsoft, and if Intel fails it'll be because of an AMD...- explains a lot about international relations over the last 50 years, including how today's U.N. security council votes go. It's bad enough when you have to give 110% just to not fall behind, but when the other guy looks like he's going to lap you and isn't even trying or cares about it, that can lead to insane jealousy...
Re:Yes - the US is already upset over planes... (Score:5, Insightful)
Airbus receives Launch Aid in the form of interest based LOANS. These loans must be paid back to the respective government within 17 years of its inception, and must account for no more than 33% of the total development cost of the aircraft. This was agreed in the 1992 trans atlantic agreement, as was the clause that states that Airbus doesnt have to repay these loans if the aircraft fails to ship. So far, every loan lent to Airbus has been paid back within the terms laid down. Airbus does lease factories off of local governments at a favourable rate tho, but this isnt covered under hte 1992 agreement, and so is a gray area. This is not the same as getting tax cuts for relocating production tho.
Boeing isnt exactly the pure virgin dressed in white you think they are.
Re:From the second article... (Score:1, Insightful)
I'm not sure whether it was EA's fault or not, when half of Bullfrog's creative force in the form Peter Molyneaux left the company and started his own studio, that probably didn't bode well. Dungeon Keeper 2 was one of their last games, and it was an utter flop, a good game yes, but just a new face on the exact same previous game. To make matters worse, they released patches that made the game unplayable and never fixed them. Try playing the 1.7 patch on any modern machine: the sound artifacts are merely the beginning of the problems.
Molyneaux didn't exactly do any of us a favor either with the utterly excreble interface in Black and White (to say nothing of the game's fixation on excrement). The wretched gesture interface turned an otherwise enjoyable game into an exercise in frustration. I wonder how many people actually threw their mice across the room. He's become another Richard Garriott or Sid Meier: his programming days are over, and his creative contributions have gotten stale and retreaded...
Re:Yes - the US is already upset over planes... (Score:1, Insightful)
Please, PLEASE don't talk about WTO when USA gov isn't even respecting it.
USA got lumber disputes with Canada, they've lost at EVERYT instances they've appeales and they are trying to buy some more time and play every legal card they can, going clearly against the spirit of the WTO agreement. US ppl will cry out loud WTO WTO only when it's going to be in their protectionist nature's advantage. So if I were you, this would be the last thing I'd bring up as an argument.
All those anti-france comments on
What upsetted me the most recently is when that arrogant jerk from cross-fire (the one that got nailed by John Stewart) said "we don't need you other countries, you guys needs us more than we need you". I think that reflected exactly what I'm seeing here. and It's very VERY sad because not all USA citizen are like this, but those loudmouths are what the rest of the world see and hear.
Clearly, nothing positive nor constructive to bridge up the gap. Nobody needs this. If you don't have positive OR constructive comments to make, at least don't show your lack of education or manners to a world-wide forum.
Re:The French commitment to Afghanistan (Score:2, Insightful)
"Mostly, their troops are glorified police officers. Their troops did not see anything like the action the US Special Forces saw in Afghanistan."
I fail to see how you can say something like this, and not realize you're shitting on any serviceman whose job isn't exactly "first wave, front line, point."
It almost seems like some people are afraid of finding any reason to respect the French. Or something like that. There seems to be a subculture that carries some value assumption that the French are somehow bad, counter to American interests, or generally deserving of hostility or criticism. But that idea is only held within that subculture, and the rest don't even understand the premise.
But the important thing to me, is if you want to dismiss the contribution of anyone who is your ally in combat, who has soldiers in your military operation, you might as well be wiping your ass with the flag after you shit on the grave of a soldier. In my opinion, that is precisely what you did when you tried to squirm out of accepting that the French sent soldiers to fight alongside your army in Afghanistan.
If you can tell me what unit YOU were in, and what combat YOU personally saw in Afghanistan, and if you can give an eyewitness account of the cowardice and lack of contribution by the French, maybe I can hold a higher opinion of you. Somehow, I think you won't be able to do that, but I'll keep the option open.
Re:The French commitment to Afghanistan (Score:2, Insightful)
You have a funny way of expressing that:
"Mostly, their troops are glorified police officers."
That sounded to me, a whole hell of a lot like criticizing soldiers, not governments.
I'm just sick and tired of hearing about France this and the French that, as if they are some sort of enemy of the US. I don't know where it originated (maybe something Pat Robertson said, who knows), but what's strange is that the anti-French sentiment *persists*, and seems to be persisted by people who, if pressed, would not be able to make a cogent argument of what exactly is the matter with France. Whatever it is, was supposed to be so terrible that we can't even eat French Fries (A New Jersey invention, correct?), and we weren't even supposed to drink Champagne. But that idea was also supposed to be some kind of self-evident, obvious fact. Nobody has ever explained it to me, just repeated the whole "cowardly, surrender-monkeys" thing.
So when I get to your message, where you claimed to know the contribution of the French troops to be nothing more than glorified police officers, it raised my blood pressure a bit.
I still wonder where you're coming from. You're a soldier yourself. Seems like you of all people should know better. What are, for instance, MP's in Iraq supposed to think about that sort of thing? After all, they really *are* nothing but glorified police officers. Think about this please.
And maybe somebody can explain to me what makes France such an obvious goddamned scapegoat? I really don't get it. It will never be appropriate, in my ethos, to hold contempt for a nation that is supporting your own in a time of war. If they have boots on the ground in Afghanistan, they are to be held in precisely the same regard as any US soldier. They are, after all, in the same force, on the same side, taking risks and making sacrifices.