After Patrice Desilets short-lived return to Ubisoft, the Assassins Creed creator promised to seek legal action against the publisher for his termination and to retrieve the rights to 1666, a brand new IP that was initially owned by THQ before their collapse and had Desilets working hard to develop it.
After THQ closed its doors, Ubisoft acquired THQ Montreal along with its current works and staffing, which meant 1666 and Desilets were a package deal, however shortly after this pairing Ubisoft stated that the two could not reach a creative compromise and that Desilets chose to leave.
Desilets soon made his views vocal and claimed (in rather blunt fashion) that he had simply been fired and escorted out of the building by guards.
According to a filing captured by La Presse, Desilets is looking to get $400,000 from Ubisoft and the rights to purchase 1666, this apparently includes quoted statements from Yves Guillemot, CEO of Ubisoft explaining his position on the new IP
“[I] loved 1666: Amsterdam and wanted to conduct its development”
Supposedly THQ had agreed that Desilets would have complete creative freedom on the title, something that Ubisoft was not willing to grant once ownership was transferred which lead to the publishers falling out with Desiletes.
This isn’t the first time that Ubisoft and Desilets have battled in the courts, after his initial departure which was quickly followed by his hiring by THQ, Ubisoft sued the Assassins Creed creator in a bid to prevent others from following.
Obviously all of this mess now means that all work on the title 1666 is on-hold, which could quite easily become an indefinite state of affairs.
Ubisoft spoke with Game Informer recently about the problems with Desilets and his work.
“As stated before, the acquisition of THQ Montréal in January allowed Ubisoft to welcome 170 experienced developers to our existing and renowned workforce. Unfortunately, the discussions between Patrice Désilets and Ubisoft aimed at aligning Patrice’s and the studio’s visions were inconclusive. We received Patrice’s legal request and will address it in court. We will make no further comment at this point”
So what do you? is this all petty squabbling or unfair business?