Ubisoft recently announced that they are capitulating to Steam and will release their (Ubisoft's) games on Steam again, after some years of having left Steam in regards to their (Ubisoft's) new games, which was clearly because Ubisoft isn't happy with Steam taking 30% of their income per game sold.

But now Ubisoft must have realized that they were losing too much money by snubbing Steam, so they (Ubisoft) decided to hold their nose and go back to Steam anyway, even though absolutely nothing has changed in terms of how Steam treats them, and they (Ubisoft) surely still object to Steam's 30% cut.

So...with this background in mind, Ubisoft's newly-changing mindset means that right now is the best opportunity for GOG's dealmakers to re-solicit Ubisoft and encourage them to release some more "new" (but those games are not really new) games on GOG.

Ubisoft's willingness to hold their nose and go back to Steam despite objecting to & resenting Steam's 30% cut is probably a reasonable indication that Ubisoft would likely now do likewise for GOG too, and begrudgingly accept GOG's 30% cut too, just like they do for Steam, and hence be more open to releasing more games on GOG then they were previously, whilst they were adamantly objecting to and proactively resisting Steam's 30% cut, which they (Ubisoft) have now given up on trying to do.

It might work that way (as it does with some Epic exclusives being more likely to do a dual GOG/Steam release after that year is up vs the 'up to 10 years' it often takes for Steam exclusives to come here (if at all)). Or it might not (due to Ubisoft's ongoing "we love our 4 layers of DRM" fetish). As a reality check, even simple board games like Monopoly Plus are Denuvo'd on top of needing Ubisoft Connect on top of needing Steam, so when there's 3x layers of DRM on an 87 year old board game you probably still have in the back of a cupboard somewhere, the chance of seeing Far Cry 54 here (or whatever they've reached now) is slim...

I'm more inclined to believe that Ubisoft left Steam not because of the 30% cut, but due to their exclusive deal with Epic.

Epic at the time was shouting about the 30% cut vs the 12% they take, and Steam was the main target, so it would be logical that Ubisoft would jump on that discourse after signing the deal.

It's possible that GOG suffered colateral damage from that deal, even though those games that Ubisoft released during the exclusivity period would never come to GOG day one anyway (if ever). But it's possible that the deal with Epic meant they couldn't release any game (new or old) on any other competing store during the duration of the contract.

If i remember correctly, the Brother in Arms series were the last Ubisoft games released on GOG, and that was January 2019. The exclusivity started with the Division 2, who came out March the same year. So it's possible that was I said is true.

Anyway, let's see what happens in the future now with their return to Steam. After all, there are still lots of old Ubisoft games, that don't require Ubisoft Connect, that are still not released here.

DID SOMEBODY SAY CHILD OF LIGHT?!?

I don't want to be the negative nelly here, but I don't think Ubisoft's decision will have an effect on GOG getting more and newer Ubisoft games.

Looking into my tea leaves, here's what's going to happen. Ubisoft attempts to force Steam users to still install their crappy launcher. They earn a hell of a shitstorm by year's end and will, say, mid next year, make it possible for their games to run without the crappy launcher.

Ubisoft 0, Valve 2.

In that moment, Ubisoft has fully surrendered to Valve's market position. They may even stop developing their crappy launcher further. As soon as their clients understand that buying at Ubisoft directly gets them an inferior experience, they're on Steam and nowhere else. So that's actually a development that I expect.

Ubisoft 0, Valve 3.

This surrender might have an effect on other AAA developers that still use their own launchers. It costs them time and money to develop something with an unsatisfying customer experience while the Steam launcher works almost perfectly. So Electronic Arts could give it up. Rockstar maybe. Heck of the fuck, CDPR/GOG could give up development of their launcher.

Industry 0, Valve 23.

This all strengthens the monopoly position that Valve already has. And that's a really really bad thing. If anything, GOG will become even more of an afterthought.

Customers 0, Valve 1000.

Except that Steam has the market share and audience to actually matter. What does GOG have to offer Ubisoft that would make them even consider releasing here? They'd have to rework their games to be DRM-free. They don't have to do that for Steam. In other words, GOG has way more disadvantages than Steam when it comes to these negotiations.

Answer: Ubisoft releasing their games here would give them some income from otherwise-dead games that are not receiving sales on Steam any more, since everyone on Steam who wants those games has already bought them there.

Granted, releasing them on GOG too probably wouldn't result giant profits for Ubisoft or anything like that, but at least it would be something, some amount of new income for them, which is better than nothing.

EA still does. I doubt that Ubisoft would feel the need to remove their launcher. EA is catching shit for breaking compatibility with the Steam Deck. Doesn't matter. Again, EA shows the way here. Why would Ubisoft's addition suddenly change EA's successful path? They have been developing and making their launcher "better." However, I think it's overkill. Launching Mass Effect Legendary Edition requires my Steam Launcher to launch my EA launcher to launch the Mass Effect launcher to finally choose one of the games. It's too much. But EA won't change, no matter the feedback.

Then again, we would have said the same thing about Ubisoft last week.

I certainly won't be right with every prediction up there (and haven't followed up on EA's shenannigans since Mass Effect 3), but the rule of law kind of is that Valve prevails against everyone. Because Valve can't fuck up. If holy Gabe decided to explode every Steam user's PC tomorrow, the customers would put their computer on an altar, cover it with roses, then go on reddit to violently defend the decision as reasonable. EA and Ubisoft are dealing with negative customer reactions that are actually to the detriment of their sales – hence Ubisoft's surprising decision.

I just wonder how far the realisation process can and will go. You're probably right: Not THAT far. ;)

I agree that Valve prevails. I'm just saying EA has already been here doing this same thing when they decided to crawl back to Steam with their tails between their legs. I imagine Ubisoft will do much like EA has, sadly, and use launchers for launchers.

now wouldnt be the best time.

the best time would be when uplay goes bust and they start removing them from all their games.

Now, why in the world would Ubi be losing money? Couldn't possibly have anything to do with the fact that Ubi has hammered the point home, again and again, that if you buy their garbage, you buy at your own risk and they're perfectly ok with shutting down servers, rendering the games you paid for unplayable. Eh, I doubt it'll happen. Then again, no big loss there, as they haven't released anything worth playing in about a million years. Still baffles me why anyone would willingly subject themselves to the arduous torture of something like Asscred Vol. 3124907520497.

I'm pretty sure Steam adapted their percentage-take scheme after Epic launched their store and threw everything into an uproar with their low, low cuts. AFAIR, Steam started taking a lower percentage of sales from titles that sold very large numbers of copies, and/or from sales of games whose publishers' past releases there had done the same. (I heard something back then about GOG changing their percentages, too, but never any specifics. And I'm sure other stores adapted to try to stay competitive, as well.)