Watch Dogs backlash started a policy change at Ubisoft, says company’s CEO Yves Guillemot

[Bouzoo]

We all know the story of Watch Dogs. Game looked great at E3 2012 but wasn't even close when it was released and didn't run well so the internet exploded. Now Ubisoft's CEO claims they changed the policy because of that. Or rather started changing it.

“It’s a real challenge to create those types of games,” said Guillemot. “When they come out, especially the first iterations, they are not perfect on everything. We think we launched a good quality game for a first step in a new brand with a new technology. It’s just so complex – seamless multiplayer, connectivity with mobile and tablets, so many things – it was maybe a bit too much for a first iteration.”“With E3 2015 we said, OK, let’s make sure the games are playable, that they’re running on the target machines. When we show something, we ask the team, make sure it’s playable, make sure gamers can immediately see exactly what it is. That’s what we learned from the Watch Dogs experience – if it can’t be played on the target machine, it can be a risk.”

Do you believe them? Well as far as I can tell they haven't downgraded a single game after that, but games like AC: Unity or Far Cry 4 had problems (and still do for some). Now if this is true and they did run the games on "target machines", I'll be the first to ask what exactly are target machines? I couldn't find that info. Is it a i7+980, a i5+280 or something else? And what does "to run" mean for them? 1080p 60 FPS? 720p 30 FPS?I want to trust them but I can't just based on the words of their CEO. Let's wait for AC: Syndicate and few other AAA titles and then we'll see what's what.
If they did learn something I hope others can too.

Sources: 1, 2

[mvitkun]

@Bouzoo unless the game is pc exclusive the target machine will most likely be one of the consoles.

[bcredeur97]

umm... problem is they downgraded it AND IT STILL WASNT PLAYABLE, if anything IT WAS WORSE

 

 

so they cant really say they downgraded it because it was too much work and they wanted it to perform well. 

 

 

And then they release an update after everyone discovered the better performing but also better looking game files from the E3 demo. Now they are saying this. PAHAHAHAHAHA 

[CommandMan7]

Soooooooooooooo, Ubisoft admits they can't do their damn job so they will make less ambitious games. How about rather than stepping the trailer down a notch, they step their game up?

[Murdoch]

Here's a policy change. Make games that are fun to play.

[Bensemus]

Cut out all the mobile crap and go from there. No one really wants to have to switch to a phone or tablet to do something ingame.

[patrickjp93]

Soooooooooooooo, Ubisoft admits they can't do their damn job so they will make less ambitious games. How about rather than stepping the trailer down a notch, they step their game up?

Getting the old guard college dropout lead developers to step their game up is like asking an economist and accountant to agree on costs. It will either never happen or take forever.

[Misanthrope]

It's gonna take more than a stupid fucking press statement to convince me, so no I don't believe him. I believe he is just scared of steam refunds tbh.

[Humbug]

Downgrading controversies are the lesser of ubisoft's problems IMO.

I don't know what the exact technical issues are but they fail to get their games running smoothly/ stutter free. Even Compared to other AAA devs they really struggle. Maybe they need to hire better people. If you take their big 2014 games- watchdogs, AC unity, FC4 they tend to have intermittent hitches even for people with decent average framerates.

If they lack the technical competence would it help to license a 3rd part engine rather than use in-house tech? They would still need to optimize though.

[Nowak]

How about if you actually make sure that your games work before releasing them, stop screwing over PC gamers and make your games fun with less buzzwords and outright lies to justify shitty things, Ubisoft?

[Beskamir]

umm... problem is they downgraded it AND IT STILL WASNT PLAYABLE, if anything IT WAS WORSE

 

 

so they cant really say they downgraded it because it was too much work and they wanted it to perform well. 

 

 

And then they release an update after everyone discovered the better performing but also better looking game files from the E3 demo. Now they are saying this. PAHAHAHAHAHA 

Exactly! The better graphics performed and looked better. Their entire explanation of how they needed to make the game run better is bs with that fact. Also Ubisoft's explanation seems to be inspired by, if not a direct copy paste of, CD Projekt Red's explanation for why TW3 didn't look as good as they showed off a few years before launch.

 

Although from a developer stand point I still believe it makes complete sense for a game to get "downgraded". It's just easier to have high quality assets which can be easily downgraded later than lower quality ones which would be very difficult to upgrade if the game takes longer than expected to be released. All the while you also need to make the game run on as many systems as possible to make the entire process profitable and to provide funding for future projects. Of course they should still give the player the option of downloading the high quality assets that are created and not force them to only have the downgraded version. But then a situation similar to ACU could happen (I know ACU was a coding problem not an art problem which is why I said "similar") and you might get public backlash anyways.

[Alurit]

molynuex cycle: "our prev game was shit, next game will be much better" -> [next game comes out and is shit] -> [start over]

[Dabombinable]

Bullshit.

[Dabombinable]

Exactly! The better graphics performed and looked better. Their entire explanation of how they needed to make the game run better is bs with that fact. Also Ubisoft's explanation seems to be inspired by, if not a direct copy paste of, CD Projekt Red's explanation for why TW3 didn't look as good as they showed off a few years before launch.

 

Although from a developer stand point I still believe it makes complete sense for a game to get "downgraded". It's just easier to have high quality assets which can be easily downgraded later than lower quality ones which would be very difficult to upgrade if the game takes longer than expected to be released. All the while you also need to make the game run on as many systems as possible to make the entire process profitable and to provide funding for future projects. Of course they should still give the player the option of downloading the high quality assets that are created and not force them to only have the downgraded version. But then a situation similar to ACU could happen (I know ACU was a coding problem not an art problem which is why I said "similar") and you might get public backlash anyways.

Didn't Ubisoft also release an update that re-locked the hidden settings, then try to pretend that they never existed?

[Rohith_Kumar_Sp]

No wonder AC Syndicate looked garbage piece of crap at E3 2015, they are downplaying the game at E3 to make it look like they did not downgrade at launch. 

[Bouzoo]

Getting the old guard college dropout lead developers to step their game up is like asking an economist and accountant to agree on costs. It will either never happen or take forever.

I know nothing about this guy so won't comment on that, but someone being an "old college dropout" doesn't necessarily mean he doesn't know how to step up their game. As long as someone has good ideas and knows what he's doing it's all good.

[Kamina]

Ubisoft anticipated next gen's hardware with Watch Dogs, the 2013 E3 build was before they had any knowledge about the 8th gen's hardware.

 

In my opinion, PC should get its own build.  B)

[Beskamir]

Didn't Ubisoft also release an update that re-locked the hidden settings, then try to pretend that they never existed?

If I recall correctly yes they did. As a result pirates had the best experience since they had the nonupdated game. Since I'm pretty sure the update was automatic thanks to Uplay being the worst game distribution platform possible.

[JuztBe]

No wonder AC Syndicate looked garbage piece of crap at E3 2015, they are downplaying the game at E3 to make it look like they did not downgrade at launch. 

 

What the heck. Is this Xbox 360 version? Those building textures looks atrocious 

[Rohith_Kumar_Sp]

What the heck. Is this Xbox 360 version? Those building textures looks atrocious 

that's PC footage released on ubisoft's own website, they hid that game play in Ubisoft's press conference, if you remember they only showed the CGI trailer and did not show any game play, its like they wanted to hide it so people won't talk about the graphics. 

[Humbug]

^^ya honestly some of those textures look like ps3 or xbox360 level.

Doesn't look at all like a modern PS4/Xbone/PC release. Maybe this time they can 'upgrade' before release.

[Blebekblebek]

they desperately need new IP because Assassin Creed series is already getting staled.

They knew it.

[Rohith_Kumar_Sp]

^^ya honestly some of those textures look like ps3 or xbox360 level.

Doesn't look at all like a modern PS4/Xbone/PC release. Maybe this time they can 'upgrade' before release.

they seized working for Old gen, so yeah, its withoter PS4 or PC 

[Blebekblebek]

said the one that PC gamers are 95% pirates? yeah... right.

http://www.pcgamer.com/pc-gaming-has-around-a-93-95-per-cent-piracy-rate-claims-ubisoft-ceo/

[Humbug]

I know nothing about this guy so won't comment on that, but someone being an "old college dropout" doesn't necessarily mean he doesn't know how to step up their game. As long as someone has good ideas and knows what he's doing it's all good.

Well I guess there are college dropouts and then there are college dropouts. Gabe Newell, Bill Gates, John Carmack etc are dropouts because they were driven to do something worthwhile in a different direction and made conscious career choices to leave.