Valve ought to acquire Ubisoft. What do people think?
Valve ought to acquire Ubisoft. What do people think?
Microsoft acquired Activision Blizzard and Sony Bungie, clearly aiming to boost their cloud services. In ideal scenarios, this could let us purchase games at a discount—2 to 3 times less than current prices. How can smaller studios like Valve compete? Let’s examine the independent players. The most accessible among them is Ubisoft, which recently indicated it wouldn’t be opposed to a takeover. Valve might not have sufficient funds for a full purchase (Ubisoft would likely sell for roughly 3.5 to 6 billion dollars), but a share swap plus a few billion could make it work. Imagine a deal where all their titles run under Proton and include exclusive rights for a short period. Picture a 14-day exclusivity on SteamDeck, plus a Steam-exclusive window for a couple of months. That would be highly lucrative. The analytics and synergies would drive both companies toward creating more engaging, polished games. Exclusives on SteamDeck would encourage more purchases, prompting game developers to focus on Linux, AMD, Intel support, and ultimately making Vulcan the go-to platform. It’s a bold move, but for the IP—Assassins Creed, Far Cry, Tom Clancy titles, and more—it could be transformative.
Oh no, Ubisoft is a big mess. They're already huge on their own. If they truly need to be acquired, they should approach Epic, Microsoft, or Sony. Also, Valve isn't known for purchasing studios, particularly ones as large as Ubisoft—mostly indie developers.
Ubisoft's online features didn't perform as well as Steam's, especially with login problems, strange savegame behavior when cloud backup is on, and connectivity issues if I can log in. Their IP address seems heavily exploited, which makes it unclear why Valve would invest in buying Ubisoft. It might actually be Ubisoft gaining benefits from Valve's systems. Some other company does this to draw users to their platform, a strategy we're all familiar with.
It was already tough enough when Microsoft acquired Blizzard. (Sony's take on Bungie is just a small detail). It would be the same as asking why Intel doesn't buy Nvidia. LISTEN UP! You should understand what a monopoly really means. More businesses competing for consumer spending is far better than a few companies dominating their own spaces, charging high prices for products that only offer part of the value. Competition drives down costs, pushes firms to enhance quality, and ensures improvements in areas like customer service (EA vs Steam), game overall quality, or other aspects.
Purchasing studios could be a smart move, but why would they choose one of the least successful developers? It wouldn’t align well with their values or culture, and it might just hurt Valve further. Many PC gamers accepted exclusives and free content, which shows they’re used to that model. Valve seems more focused on building a large PC game storefront and managing DRM, with many so-called exclusives available only through Steam. This suggests they could acquire studios for more exclusives, but it’s not essential. Their occasional hardware experiments and steamOS don’t make them a high-risk investment. In fact, Gabe N isn’t among the wealthiest Americans for any reason.