The high stakes world of triple-A gaming has moved from the console to the courtroom this week. Marc-Alexis Côté, the longtime figurehead and executive producer of the Assassin’s Creed franchise, has officially filed a lawsuit against Ubisoft in the Superior Court of Quebec. Seeking approximately CAD $1.3 million in damages, Côté alleges that his departure from the company last October was not the “voluntary exit” the studio claimed it to be, but rather a calculated case of constructive dismissal.
For over two decades, Côté was a foundational pillar at Ubisoft. He rose through the ranks from a software engineer to become the architect of some of the industry’s biggest hits, including Assassin’s Creed Syndicate and Odyssey. However, his long tenure came to a jarring halt in late 2025 following a massive corporate restructuring that he claims stripped him of his authority and professional dignity.
The Rise of Vantage Studios and the Tencent Connection
The roots of this legal dispute trace back to the summer of 2025, a period when Ubisoft was undergoing significant internal shifts. With a fresh €1.16 billion investment from Tencent, the publisher launched a new subsidiary known as Vantage Studios. This entity was designed to centralize the management of Ubisoft’s crown jewels: Assassin’s Creed, Far Cry, and Rainbow Six.
According to the legal filings, this new hierarchy effectively “hollowed out” Côté’s influence. While he previously reported directly to CEO Yves Guillemot, the creation of Vantage Studios placed a new layer of management above him. Specifically, the subsidiary was led by Christophe Derennes and Charlie Guillemot, the son of the Ubisoft CEO. Côté alleges that during this transition, his role as the “captain” of the Assassin’s Creed ship was essentially handed over to others without his consent.
A Choice Between Demotion and Departure
The lawsuit provides a rare, unvarnished look at executive level negotiations. In a summer meeting, Côté learned that Ubisoft was looking to hire a “head of franchise” to oversee the entire portfolio. Despite his years of leadership, Côté was allegedly told he was ineligible for the role because it was based in France, whereas he was committed to his base in Quebec.
Instead of the promotion he felt his track record deserved, Ubisoft reportedly offered him two alternatives:
- Head of Production: A role that would require him to report to the new franchise head, a significant step down in seniority.
- Creative House Lead: A position overseeing smaller, second-tier Ubisoft properties.
Côté viewed these offers as “unacceptable demotions” designed to force him out. In the legal world, constructive dismissal occurs when an employer unilaterally makes substantial changes to the terms of a contract, such as a drop in pay or status, giving the employee no choice but to resign. Côté contends that this is exactly what happened, calling the process a “disguised dismissal.”
The “Voluntary” Narrative vs. The Reality
One of the most contentious points in the suit is how the public was informed of Côté’s exit. After he rejected the demotions and requested a formal severance package, he claims Ubisoft asked him to stay home while they considered their response. The very next day, the company issued a press release and internal emails stating that Côté had “voluntarily departed” to pursue new opportunities.
Côté quickly took to LinkedIn to set the record straight, stating that he did not walk away and only left when he was asked to step aside. He argues that by labeling the exit as voluntary, Ubisoft was attempting to dodge severance payments and keep his non-compete clause active. This clause currently prevents him from taking his two decades of expertise to a rival studio, a restriction he is now asking the court to strike down.
Breaking Down the $1.3 Million Claim
The financial demands of the lawsuit reflect Côté’s senior status and the alleged damage to his reputation. The total claim of $1.3 million breaks down into two primary categories:
- Two years of salary: To compensate for the severance he believes he was owed upon his forced departure.
- Moral Damages: Approximately $75,000 for what he describes as an abuse of power and the resulting harm to his professional standing.
This case is being closely watched by industry analysts and labor experts alike. It highlights the growing tension between veteran creative talent and the increasingly consolidated, corporate structures of modern gaming giants. As Ubisoft prepares to fight the claim with the help of the law firm Fasken, the outcome could set a major precedent for how executive transitions are handled in the future.