You're right in that Ubi develop some of their own games, and the problem with that is that they inherently focus on making money and not making art. I assumed that by hurting the devs you meant other companies contracted by Ubisoft to develop games which are then published by Ubisoft themselves. I countered this by saying that these developers know full well what kind of game Ubisoft want made (ie money making hits, not original or ground-breaking games) and therefore I don't care if they are hurt in the process. They chose to hurt themselves by partnering with a fiend of a company like Ubisoft.
Ubisoft are not in the business of making great games that push boundaries anymore. They aren't 'By gamers, for gamers' like some other companies are, they are 'By businessmen, for suckers' and their main directive is to make money and I'm sure you can guess the best method to do that: console-focus and water down games as to not scare away any potential customers. So yes, I'm saying they will water down their games and dump them when they prove not to be profitable anymore, just as any firm would do when a segment of their business isn't performing.
I have not seen the video, but I will watch it now. It's a shame that website has about four million scripts running in the background, people need to learn to just use Youtube.
Alright, the main point he seems to make is that boycotts don't work because gamers can't unite and that developers suffer because companies like Activision can them. Firstly, I already stated before that I have no love for companies that decide to work with terrible, terrible companies so I don't see how that is relevant. I'd much rather see them go indie (yes, it does work) than go work for Activision or EA or whoever. Secondly, I never recommended a boycott. I was just advising someone not to buy bad games, and, if he did like one particular game, it just means less money for said bad company. Nobody can do anything about the rest of the horde buying into their crappy games, but at the very least said bad company is down ~50 dollars or whatever the game retails for.
Some of this is just untrue. Developers taking what they can get? Inexile didn't settle for an FPS, Fallout-3 style abomination for Wasteland II, BF waited until he could make the game he wanted and would rather delay a good game than sell out and make a terrible one. And I agree, I have no warm feelings for people who would give up and turn to someone like Activision for monetary support when making the game of their dreams because it won't and will not ever come out as the game of their dreams. I have played indie games, self-funded games, even demos that were hundreds of times better than the filth that Activision constantly churns out and I would much rather keep it that way than spending MY money on a game that suffers from stupid flaws.
I'd much rather pirate the game and mail money to the developers themselves. Thankfully, crowdfunding has proven to be an outlet for people that don't want to have the life sucked out of their games, so all this is a bit of a moot point.