Ubisoft talks up the benefits of developing Watch Dogs with PC as lead platform
By Tim Colwill on February 28, 2013 at 5:36 pm
The Dutch gaming site InsideGamer has been speaking to Ubisoft’s CEO Yves Guilllemont about Watch Dogs (as you do, naturally), who revealed that the PS4′s new x86 architecture makes it really easy to develop for the PC as the lead platform and then quickly port across.
“We have, in my opinion, but a game that had really had problems with a port and that’s Ghost Recon: Future Soldier,” reads Guillemont’s comments, translated from Dutch by Google. “The PC project could be better managed. But with the other brands there is a lot of time and effort in which all platforms have the perfect game.”
“We also expect fewer problems with porting games to the PS4 than the PS3, which had a completely different infrastructure. It is now easier. Previously, we developed first games on the Xbox 360 and which were then translated into the PS3. It took a lot of time and money to make that port. Now we develop from the PC and which versions are translated into a console like the PlayStation 4.”
The news follows the reveal that the excellent-looking Watch Dogs trailer used at the PS4 announcement event was actually running behind the scenes on a high-end PC.
Source: Blue’s News
Watch Dogs multiplayer brings together “millions” of players – but you might not notice
Stab everybody, just to be safe.
Six minutes of Watch Dogs PC gameplay footage appears
Nobody knows where this video came from.
Ubisoft working with Kaspersky Labs on hacking mechanic in Watch Dogs
No Hollywood Hacking here, thanks.
You can use the following bbCode
[i], [b], [img], [quote], [url href="http://www.google.com/"]Google[/url]
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
facebook
twitter
google+
rss
Sounds good to me, just dont bork it up. (Y)
In the past I don’t believe I have ever seen one of these “PC as lead platform” claims actually come to fruition. But with this new console architecture (Which the Xbox is bound to have as well) I have pretty high hopes that there’ll finally be some follow through come next gen. Things are looking grand for PC gamers.
Remember when BF3 was touting the PC as the lead platform? Also remember when it was later revealed that development was switched over to consoles half way through? Yeah…
One step forward (PC as lead platform), two steps back (excess baggage in the form of uPlay).
that was because consoles were lacking way behind to what the PC, so that’s a bit of a bad way to compare this. Atleast with next gen stuff it won’t be so far behind technology wise (and making games for the ps has always been abitch for developers), and if making the games is alot easier with the new ps4 and that! happy days!
Elitism isn’t a step forward.
All this stupid ‘lead platform’ nonsense is honestly moronic. It’s going to be on all platforms, it has to be runable on all platforms, and no matter what crap they say (or you believe) the game’s going to be the same.
BF3 isn’t ‘PC first’ either; it still runs on 512MB of RAM. Hate to break it to you.
The only news here is that the PS4 architecture isn’t as radical as the PS3 one was that had developers straining to even take advantage of it as the extra effort required just wasn’t worth it, especially with a multiplatform release.
This parallels linux’s problem an awful lot too.
I lol’d.
Hard.
BF3 Was switched over because consoles couldn’t keep up. Yeah it runs on 512mb shared RAM, but the maps are smaller and less players.
The game is not the same, at all.
The reason I’m quietly positive about the claim of PC being the lead platform is that is suggests that the PC version won’t be a last minute, outsourced pile of hogwash suffering from consolitis. eg – menus and UI not designed for a mouse and keyboard, no ability to change graphics options etc. There’s been too many examples of that since the current gen consoles came along.
This is, of course, not necessarily true, but it’s a positive step.
In the end, it doesn’t really – or rather, it shouldn’t – concern me which platform is “lead” so long as each is given equal treatment and time and effort to make sure it is optimal for that platform.
forumrabbit,
You made me log in.. Thank you.
No the PC version does not run on 512 MB of ram (that being either normal ram or vram). The only reason why it does on the console is because that’s all the ram they get. Hell, it doesn’t even run at 512mb on the console, it runs at maybe 3/4 of that. (That obviously means texture quality/sampling is reduced. Which you can tell)
If it was running on 512 MB of ram on the PC you wouldn’t have: TXAA, FXAA, AAX16, MSAAX16, Advanced Tessellation, 5S, etc. (Not to mention Large maps/player count)
Also Pal’s comment was hardly elitism, Its better if PC is the lead platform rather then a console simply because you can’t achieve high end graphics on a console and its easier/better to reduce overall quality
(Also I’m a little confused as to your comment about how this parallels Linux’s problem…? Linux runs opengl, it natively compiles c/c++, The architecture is the same in Linux as a PC..The only reason why people had trouble developing for ps3 was because of its CPU and how its calls and instructions are completely different.)
…I think more to do with using the PPE and all the SPUs efficiently together (Cores). :)
They patch it as if it were the same game which is more of a crime than changing lead platform.
Luckily this time the architecture and power is fairly similar between high-end PCs and PS4/Xbox 3 so I can see the PC staying as lead.
LOL, that’s like saying a computer from Hardly Normal is good. The consoles are going to be underpowered compared to average computers from last year when they release at the mid-end of this year. They aren’t even close to the league of high-end PC’s. Not saying this as part of the PC master race crap, it’s just basic damn logic. An i7 3930K @ 4.2Ghz will kick either of the X720 or PS4′s CPU’s into touch, not to mention a 7970, GTX 680 or GTX Titan are going to munch them graphically.
Their only selling point will be they are relatively cheap PC’s, even then it’s going to be tough to market them against PC’s at the end of the year, when they are probably going to be going up against faster PC’s for the same money…
From another article (GON, please add “search for my posts button” so I can find it easier ^_^ ):
To de-marketing the phrase “lead platform”:
“PC is lead platform” = PC will look significantly better, PC specific features.
“Console/no lead platform” = PC will look about the same as console, no/minimal PC specific features.
It’s just a way of wording “we’re going to give a crap about PC” or not.
presumably ps4 also opengl so hopfully linux/steambox is also eaisly doable
shinanigans,
As a PC fanboy I have to say that’s an excellent post.
Anyhow if the PC version of the game looks good and plays good, that’s all that worries me. All this fluff about which platform is the “lead platform” doesn’t bother me too much, as they say say the proof is in the pudding. If I can play it well on my PC and enjoy it, if my console playing brethren can play the game well and enjoy it, then anything else is immaterial.
vcatkiller,
Agreed with shinanigans, and completely with you. If they can prove that it’ll play well on any hardware combination I can muster, then I’ll (and PC gamers) be happy. So long as the game works well and is optimised across the 3 (or more) platforms, gamers as a whole will be happy.
Looking forward to the end product, especially if they plan to push this PC lead platform campaign.
I hate it when a PC gamer expects their version of the game to be superior they are considered an elitist. I admit there is some of that attitude. However…
If the PS3 version of a game was as pixilated as the X360 version you’d hear about it, and if the X360 version of a game was as pixilated as a Wii you’d hear about it.
If people spend a little extra, they expect it to look better.
cyrinno,
Actually it just seems to be vogue to throw around the word elitism because it’s cool. It bugs me a little, you complain because a game isn’t optimised properly for PC and all of a sudden you’re a PC elitist. I’d almost respond to that with a “must be a console inferiority complex” but that’s just throwing fuel on the fire.
(note – no I don’t think console owners are inferior – we’re all gamers right?)
vcatkiller,
Entitled is another word people throw around a lot these days because it’s cool.
Do you really think that the selling price is the only reason people buy consoles instead of PCs?
I’m a huge PC gamer, but I can definitely understand how people want the simplicity of putting their new game in the shiny box next to their TV and just playing the game.
Plus shin is completely correct when it comes to power. On the consoles you can code to the metal, whereas PCs are full of overheads and crap that gets in the way and slows them down. Plus you have to target and test a multitude of hardware configurations while the consoles have a single build.
Also the PS4 CPU is a custom job, rumoured to be a 2GHz overclock of the 8 core model. Plus 8GB of memory is amazing and will lead to a lot of better ported games for PC.
Also I find it hilarious when people compare the new consoles to things like the GeForce Titan and top end i7 CPUs. That system would cost you around $2,500 to build, of course it will be better than a $500 console haha
jambo,
> Implying you can’t build a better PC for the same price as a console…..
Also just because it has 8gb of shared ram doesn’t instantly mean its going to be better. The only thing the ram is going to do is allow for better texture quality and more tessellation.
Tim you forgot the underscore Tim. Timmmmmmmmmmmm.
There is no underscore, and you’re fired.