Ubisoft Blames Industry Downturn on Lack of New Consoles

[The Imp]

To Mr. Ubisoft: No shit, Sherlock! Ofcourse the tech is outdated, it was outdated 4 years ago but thanks to optimization and only having to focus on one(or two if its x-platform) hardware architecture, seemingly demanding games still run well on old hardware. The devs could get Uncharted to run on a 1.5ghz/256mb AGP/512ram PC if they had the time for it. But they don't and thats one of the reasons PC games demand so much more power - because the devs have to broaden the optimization focus. They have to make sure the game runs on over 20 different graphics cards and even more CPUs and a RAM range from 1 to 10gb. Not even talking about DX9/10/11.

Economy: No, the economy did not take a hit. No, the middle-class did not suffer. No, the rich folks did not suffer either. The only guys who lost their jobs were the kind of last to hire/first to fire. Low-income jobs got terminated because their bosses where too afraid of a little less profit(which scares the crap out of investors). Go, ask your parents or neighbours or friends - no one saw a significant price hike in anything other than gas and no one saw a income cut either. As i said, the only ones who suffered are burger flippers, cleaning ladys, waitresses and assembly line workers. And thats a real fucking shame because these folks need the money the most. They are hit hard if they receive a $50 or $100 pay cut. The suits aren't. Michael Pachter said he lost a lot of money in the crash which is one of the reasons he agreed to the Pach-Attack show. Which means he lost more than a Mil otherwise he wouldn't even notice the whole ordeal. If i lose a Mil i'm about 970k in debt - if the brokers/managers lose a Mil they only have a little less spare change.

So, no, the bad economy card has no effect what so ever on a luxury product like video games or hardware.

 

[GoldenSquirrel]

So if new consoles were to be made, will Ubisoft stop making lame games?

 

[dalek sec]

I hope not, I just got my PS3 like two years ago or so and I'm busying playing catch up in terms of games so please don't make a new one anytime soon. D:

The reason the videogame industry is in "depression" is the same reason that EVERY industry is in "depression". The economy is shit.

This is pretty much what I was going to type next, you beat me to it Jonny.

 

[jpoon]

Ubisoft, the devs that haven't released a good game...in YEARS! Like what they say holds any water.

I sure as shit don't want to pay for another console, they (not Ubisoft, we all know they don't make good games) had better keep making quality games on whats out now.

 

[mew4ever23]

Sorry, Ubisoft, but no one's talking console hardware, so your complaints fall on deaf ears. MS and Sony just launched new addons for their current-gen consoles, which are probably a ploy to prolong their life, and Nintendo seems happy with the Wii, though they are looking into it's replacement. The newest tech on the market's the 3DS, so there's that, I guess. Also, gaming in general seems to be doing quite well, all things considered.

Looks like you'll have to find new ways to use the current gen hardware, or drop support for it, Ubisoft. Of course, you could always come out with your own console, if you're feeling brave enough.

 

[Negatempest]

So, if I get the OP well he is saying, "If life gives you lemons, complain about he lemons." Isn't the long standing theory that the more experience you get from a certain activity, the better and faster you can be at it? Isn't he kinda blaming their laziness in creativity on the lack of a new console? What will the new console even do at this point, make facial blemishes more realistic? Compare what the NES did in it's last few years compared to what the publishers/developers are doing now? How about NOW is a good time to be creative with what you got?

 

[TheComfyChair]

Ubisoft could just do what DICE is doing by making PC the lead platform, which allows them to stretch their creative (in gameplay and graphics) legs a bit and then take what they can and put it on the console.

Oooh, i remember, ubisoft still somehow think that every pc gamer is a pirate. *sigh* some companies still think it's 2007. Yup, vista did a real number on PC gaming and piracy was at it's peak too until steam got big, however thankfully PC's darkest hour so far is behind it (every platform around long enough has had a few off years), which is why more and mroe developers are starting to take notice again.

Actually, on reflection, the DRM in the latest ass creed was actually fine, just the usual online authentication. Combined with a game that was actually quite improved in a few ways over the console version. Now if they actually release their games on time on PC they may earn some respect.

 

[XT inc]

Bad sales practices are what are killing games atm, No one I know really wants to buy the new games and everyone's slipped into a "I'll wait til its done," posture. Waiting for games to finish releasing dlc and sell the GOTY edition, aka the no more content edition, aka the actual game.

Which is almost humorous as that edition comes out just before they slap a 2 on the title and ship it a month after.

 

[duchaked]

um...NO
lol seriously, the set up the 360 has with personal gamertag and achievements for me has it set
the PS3 and 360 both have room to be maxed out in games, can still improve while squeezing the most out of each piece of tech

 

[dragongit]

Honestly I'm fine if they don't release a new system within the next few years. Graphics are already at a point where they are still very nice and at times realistic. They can continue to develop this technology for a while if they wish to for the next generation, but now more then ever is a bad time for a new system. For one the economy is horrible, those who still have jobs are holding onto their cash if they are responsible. And with the move and kenect they just invested in, I should hope there be at least 3 more years before these things run their corse. Or in general.

 

[Irridium]

Publishers are the ones stifling creativity. All they seem to be doing is trying to sell games to the casual/mainstream/COD crowd. Which is probably doing its part in hurting the industry. All this same-y shooter/action crap definitely isn't helping anything.

Want to make new IP's? Make new IP's. Oh thats right, you won't, because your focusing so hard on sequels [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/98204-Ubisoft-More-Sequels-More-Often-and-More-Multi].

And you don't need to make a big blockbuster. Why must we choose between very cheap casual game, and AAA super-expensive action title? Why can't we have something in the middle? Something that doesn't cost so much to make, which would allow for more creative freedom, and would make back its budget easier than the very expensive games.

Oh, and if you release those games on the PC, a lower budget means less super-graphics, which means more people can run that game, which means more will buy that game. You could also charge cheaper for it, making even more money since Steam has proven that if you charge less money for something, it will sell like crazy.

Yves is just pissy because he has all this money saved up [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/91364-Ubisoft-Investing-In-Next-Console-Gen] and nothing to do with it.

Oh, here's an idea, take some money out of that fund, and put it towards making those mid-budget titles.

 

[Andronicus]

Sorry, but this is absolute rubbish. The only reason the industry's creativity might be "stifled" would be the developer's/publisher's unwillingness to take any risks. The longer a generation is out, the more creativity should be seen, not less; developers learn to use the tools at hand as time goes by, and can start implementing those tools in interesting ways. If you introduce a new generation of consoles, the developers have to learn a new set of tools, which takes time and money, and publishers don't want to spend any more money than they have to, so they'd insist on sticking to the tried and true.

What kind of new technology do they want to implement? Better graphics? Better graphics =/= innovation. Better graphics in games take time, time that could be better spent reinventing the format of the game itself, improving the experience, pushing the bar, so to speak. More motion control? Fuck that. We've only just got a whole new generation of motion controls. Why don't we learn what we can do with those things first. More networking ability? They're games consoles. Whatever networking we require in games, we already have. The only problem would lie in the games themselves, or the quality of the internet you have available. New technologies do not instantly mean creativity. Creativity stems from the daveloper's willingness to push the current technology to its limit, to see what it can do. We have not yet, by any stretch of the imagination, reached the limits of what the current gen can do, in my opinion. All we've seen is companies trying to make better graphics.

Until Mr. Guillemot can present a reasonable argument that these so-called "new technologies" can improve innovation and creativity, then I think I'll stick with PS3 and XBox.

 

[zombieeater6000]

i'd rather wait till they make a stable console,backwards compatible hopefully and just all round better than get a new console every 5-6 years

 

[Hungry Donner]

Platform =/= creativity. Whatever is stifling games, that's not it.

I think it's fair to say this is a factor, although I wouldn't say it's the primary factor.

A new console generation gives developers room to expand many elements of a game, not just graphics. For instance, low RAM prevents developers from making larger and more complex worlds; improved physics support would give developers many new and interesting tools for improving gameplay; a new console generation could also make the platform more open to modding something I know many console gamers would love to see.

Take large open sandbox games for an instance, if you want the game to keep track of numerous NPCs, scripts, quests, and your impact on the world itself soon the console has a whole lot of balls it needs to juggle. Over time developers may refine the ability to store this information thus getting more out of the same hardware but eventually the process of refinement is no longer cost effective particularly when a simple hardware improvement would greatly expand their opportunities.

Of course while static hardware is limiting in this regard it's no excuse for the mass production of samey titles and this seems to be the real problem right now. One could just as easily expect that stagnating hardware means we can expect more creativity as developers try new things as they're unable to progress down more tried and true 'more polys, better graphics!" advancement. Take a look at the age of Doom clones, it didn't take long before developers realized they had to do new things with this format or they're be indistinguishable from the rest and soon we had FPSs trying all sorts of things.

We may be on the cusp of that right now, there are a lot of titles being slammed as clones or lacking innovation and other developers are taking notice and putting effort in to more creative titles.

(Personally even as a PC gamer I'm not sad to see this console generation lag a bit as it's extended the life of my PC.)

 

[TheComfyChair]

Developers hate stagnant tech though. Since many advances in gameplay are made via more powerful CPU's.

If the next generation (and i mean next in the real sense of the word) has a '10 year plan', then console gaming will collapse into casual gaming and CoD only. The developers will flee to the now booming PC market. Which, may i add, is booming because of this stagnation, people are starting to see it as the 'next gen' due to the differences in quality now. Play crysis 2 on xbox, play crysis 2 on PC, the difference is huge and that's without the dx11 patch.

Although i've noticed this forum is a very very pro-console one, so may as well put on the flamesuit

 

[Speakercone]

Ubisoft is one of the big 3. They want the shiny new hardware because it grants them more of the control in the industry. Production values are already huge, often rivaling Hollywood, and new tech means even higher production values. If we see these rise or stay stable, the big players get bigger slices of pie. If we see production values (read barriers to entry) decrease, we see a broadening in the marketplace as more publishers enter the market.

It happened with recorded music in this way. In the 60s it cost crazy amounts to record an album. Today you can record an album, distribute your album, market your album, and organize a tour for what it cost The Who to rent a hotel room for a weekend. Who needs a record label anymore?

Of course Ubisoft wants the new shiny; they'd be able to control more of the market.

 

[TheComfyChair]

Ubisoft, activision and EA.

Ubisoft: We want new consoles! <---- at the stage before EA
EA: PC will be our lead platform very soon! <----- accepted the situation and are dealing with it
Activision: Herpa derpa moar CODz!!! $$$$$ <----- Have a cash cow to milk and no interest in what happens to gaming as long as they get their money, just like Atari before them.

 

[Broken Orange]

One would expect longer console lives would make it easier to make games, not harder.