In the interview, Guillemot claims that Ubisoft has developed fewer new IPs of late because there is no more room for new franchises on this generation of consoles: Sequels rule the roost, and Ubisoft has plenty of established series to work with until PS4, Xbox 3 and Wii 2. That said, Guillemot wishes that the consoles would get an update so that the developer can move forward.
“When a new format launches, we look to use the new technology to bring new games and new ideas to our consumers. We would always hope to be more successful on new formats than our competitors… It is part of the DNA of the company. Each time there is new hardware it gives our creative teams more freedom and they don’t have to follow the same rules. They can try new things because the consumer expects and wants new things… and that’s part of the reason why the industry is in depression. Consumers like the current formats, but there is not enough creativity at the end of a cycle to really spark the business.”
This generation has had the longest life-cycle of any console generation to date. It’s been five years since the release of the PS3, and six since the 360 hit store shelves. On the other hand, Guillemot’s reaction is a self-fulfilling prophecy: Regardless of how the current generation is doing now, withholding new ideas will eventually cause this generation to become obselete. Do you think it’s time for a new set of consoles, or is the current generation still running strong? More importantly, do you think that developers should be holding back content for a new platform that, as far as we know, doesn’t even exist yet? [MCVUK]
Stevorooni
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 8:36 AM“When a new format launches, we look to use the new technology to bring new games and new ideas to our consumers”
Like Rayman 3D!
I’m in no rush for new consoles (apart from a HD Wii), there’s still amazing stuff being pumped out for the PS3 and 360.
Jimu Hsien
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 10:11 AMHA HA …GOLD!
Jack
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 8:42 AMThey’re holding back the dev’s console games too,
The same thing they’ve been doing to the pc for a few years.
NotoriousR
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 8:56 AM“and that’s part of the reason why the industry is in depression.”
As opposed to, you know, annualised sequels?
“They can try new things because the consumer expects and wants new things”
No, you can try new things whenever the hell you want. If anything, it’s towards the end of a lifecycle when you can create and try new stuff, considering most companies would already have cheaper dev kits, and created their engines, as well as gamers getting bored of the same old stuff. Established franchises will have pumped out a game and a couple of sequels, people (well, me) would be ready to try something new. Look at Heavy Rain. Pretty different, and that came out last year.
Alinos
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 10:19 AMBut thats the issue they could greenlight a new ip today, and in 18 months they run the risk of A new console being announced, then having to weigh up the chance of the ip releasing 6 months before a new gen or revamping the entire property for the new console
The fact that this is the longest generation gives them an edge of concern because while they speak of a 10 year cycle as soon as one side decides theve changed there mind the other will too
It’s why consoles are obsolete and always have been, the ability for tech to move on constantly and the developers to choose there tech requirements is much better
James Mac
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 12:02 PMThat’s a nice idea… but here’s the thing:
I’m not a developer… I’m a consumer.
I don’t give a damn if the developers wish to choose their own specs, I give a damn that I would continually be spending my money on hardware and not games.
And it’s not just the hardware… it’s the back end software (drivers, patches, emulators) and the peripherals too.
Crab Nicholson
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 9:11 AMIf they just want more powerful hardware why don’t they just start making more PC games? They’re only holding themselves back.
David Ryan
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 7:37 PM+1
Rawjava
Friday, April 15, 2011 at 8:31 PMBecause then they would be missing out on a very large target segment when they have no reason to. Its not just about the how great the games are, its about how well they sell. Most people do not take into account the business side of things. Although i do agree that new consoles do need to be made but, as with any major move, its risky. CEO’s nowdays do not take enough risk and that is why gaming is in depression.
PC
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 9:11 AM(bursts into the room, soaking wet from the rain)
What about meeeee, it isn’t fair, I’ve had enough and I want my share!!
(nobody notices because PC is on an ignore list)
Shane
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 9:12 AMIsn’t the industry experiencing unprecedented boom?
Fiscal troubles are coming about because already ridiculous production costs are escalating.
I would have thought that a new console would push production costs even higher.
Leper
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 10:07 AMTrue, next-gen consoles will have higher development costs, which will lead to developers becoming more risk averse and favouring existing franchises, which leads us to endless sequel land. Yay for innovation through better technology.
Tony
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 9:19 AM“Consumers like the current formats, but there is not enough creativity at the end of a cycle to really spark the business”
so the artists blames the paint and brush for his lack of creativity not his own closed minded approach.
so if they bring out a PS4 does ubisoft promise not to make another assasins creed?
James Mac
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 12:05 PMAren’t they still making PS2 games for cripes sake?
Nick
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 9:27 AMI sorta agree with Guillemot. Games seem to have hit their peak a while ago, and not much is changing between games from two years ago to current, eg. Far Cry 2 (2008) has far better visuals than some current games.
Don’t agree that the games industry is in any sort of depression, though.
v4next
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 9:51 AMYeah, Ive been thinking of Farcry 2 lately – I still reckon it looks better than Crysis 2! Crysis 2 didnt blow me away graphically – it had some nice textures but thats about it, and the 3D models were pretty blocky (on console at least). I feel there’s about 2 years left of the current generation, any longer is beating a dead horse to me. And after seeing the latest videos of Unreal Engine and Cryengine 3 (on PC of course), really shows how far ahead PC technology is at this time. Time for the consoles to catch up – same as it always happens. The PC pushes the limit, then the consoles catch up. But their is still a bit of juice left in the current consoles.
v4next
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 10:00 AMSimple things are starting to show on console, though. Like I’m playing Castlevania: Lords of Shadow, and I was trying to figure out why the game looks beautiful with cinematic camera, but rough as guts in realtime! Simple thing – the realtime graphics have no anti-aliasing at all, except maybe your character which looks alot clearer than the rest of the scene. And one thing I’m also sick of in the games of the last 2 years, is screen tearing – whats the point of creating beautifuly detailed and solid graphics, not using V-Sync, and having the scene turn into a total mess?! I understand FPS optimisation, but its gettting a bit rediculious.
Kizaru
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 8:42 PMYou guys are definitely high. I don’t know if you guys are confused between ‘art direction’ and ‘technical graphics’, but there is just no way Far Cry 2 looks better than Crysis 2.
Art Direction, yes. Technical Graphics, hell no.
Tali
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 9:41 AMTbh I’m happy this generations consoles are sticking around. A console is a luxury item that takes some justifying considering the cost of living these days so I want to get my money’s worth.
5footassasin
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 2:55 PMhas there ever been a decade in human history where we didn’t bemoan ‘the cost of living these days’ :D
Dire Wolf
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 9:53 AMThe problem is most devs want to create a franchise like COD. Something they can keep bringing out sequels for every year and have millions buy them.
This means that instead of taking a risk and coming up with something different they try to immulate other popular games in the hope they can make it slightly better then the original and take over from them.
Even Ubisoft is trying to create a COD like franchise with Assassins Creed but at least AC is different to the flood of FPS we’re getting at the moment. I can’t help but wonder though how long it will be till other devs start bring out their own assassin/stealth based games with multiplayer focussing more on swords then guns.
Jimu Hsien
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 10:13 AMThat’s the pisspoorest excuse I have ever heard.
Marathon
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 10:19 AMHow many devs and publishers have said this in recent months? Ubisoft, Crytek…
I think with Ubisoft saying this, it means there’s no new console announcements at E3 this year. How about moving back to a PC focus until a new console comes out?
C-mac
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 10:34 AMWhat a load of crap, as if Ubisoft couldn’t implement new ideas on the current consoles and PC if they wanted to.
Maybe they should spend less time on DRM like Assassins Creed 2 uses, and more on actual game ideas.
Wade
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 10:41 AMI think that the life span of the PS3 and 360 is fantastic considering the implications of the Global Fanancial Crisis and the impact on consumers. The life span makes the console more adoptable by consumers when the hardware isnt changed every 5 days – like that of the PC. However in saying that, seeing that the NGP is capable of PS3 esq graphics is definately a warning that the tech on a PS3/360 has been out developed and packaged into a smaller frame. I think that 5 years is pretty a pretty good life for a console however… Im always up for new platforms with new tech, but if consumers cant afford it – whats the point of making it?
Braaains
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 11:11 AMIf they want to give the business a much-needed kick in the pants, I reckon a price cut would help. The current consoles have been at their current price levels for a while… a cut is probably overdue. They’d sell more consoles, and as a result they’d also sell more games.
Mr Adam Smolkowicz
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 12:11 PMlol this is really funny
Azza
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 12:23 PMI don’t think any consumers are complaining about a longer lifespan of their consoles. There is plenty going on with them still and there haven’t been any official announcements of plans for any next-gen ones – yeah they’re getting a bit outdated but lately I think there’s been more focus on gameplay over graphics (I credit Nintendo with this).
I’d imagine the next-gen ones will be pretty epic though, and will likely have an even longer lifespan.
Nick
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 12:29 PMSeems like a poor excuse for a lack of creativity – god of war and shadow of the colossus came late in the ps2 lifecycle. What about the recent/upcoming IPs like Vanquish, Bulletstorm, LA Noire, Child of Eden, Brink? Even if a new IP was released late in the lifecycle before x amount of sequels were made, I’m sure you could get an ultra HD holographic collection on ps4
doubleDizz
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 12:30 PMModern-day proverb: The car does not make the driver.
metalisticpain
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 12:42 PMCause Ubisoft were so creative with their wii shovelware…
Asuron
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 12:56 PMEven if they made a new console, the graphical improvements just wouldnt be enough to make it worth it
Plus the current costs are already making them a loss on each console sold
improving it would only increase that
Personally Im fine until such a time where technology leaps in such a way to make it worth it
Random
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 2:19 PMThis far into a console’s life cycle, everyone already has all their tech in place – this should be the time when creativity is at its peak, instead of at the start when your programmers are still getting to grips with new hardware. What he really means is: “There’s never been a console generation last this long before, so we don’t have any sales trend data to tell us what game to make next.” or “Its only at the start of the cycle that we can get away with selling any old crap because there aren’t many other games to buy”.
Considering the kind of cheap RUBBISH they’ve been throwing out for the Wii since day 1, I’m surprised he isn’t here telling us how the recent release of Move and Kinect have ‘saved the industry’ or some such nonsense.
Thomas Ingram
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 3:04 PMBabe, start making some high end PC games.
Aaaaaaaalso, when in the hell did this sort of stuff restrict ingenuity? This is stupid.
Jason Padgett
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 3:29 PMGraphic’s do not make the game ffs.
You could still make the best game in the world on a N64 right now if you really wanted to.
Milton
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 8:01 PMDon’t be so naive. While gameplay and ‘fun’ isn’t completely dependent on grahpics, they are another important pillar of gaming. Bad graphics can potentially stop a good game from being a great game. I’m sure you’ll find, while old games can be fun, you can’t help but notice how much they’ve aged. So to answer your question, graphics are a core facet of games, and they do make the game. If you wanted to make the best game in the world on n64, you could, but consider the limitations of the console especially aesthetically.
Also, if you made the best game in the world on an n64, the best part about it is that your n64 probably still works.
Dunnowhathuh
Tuesday, April 12, 2011 at 5:30 PMAs a PC guy, I’m biased and am inclined to agree with him. Too bad no one is willing to go back to the PC and push its limits.