In a recent interview with Gamepro, Ubisoft game designer Phil Therien announced that Ubi's focus on hardcore FPS titles would soon soften, saying that the genre no longer makes enough money to be a "viable business practice." I feel like every time I turn around, ten of my friends are enjoying a game of Halo 3 or Call of Duty 4, so what gives?
Therien went on the comment that the market for shooters had become "too narrow", and that compromises had to be made in order to appeal to all consumers in the gaming market. His bottom line, as stated in the interview:
"Keep in mind however that we want our games to be accessible to as many people as possible, otherwise we just couldn't keep making games."
The funny thing here is, I feel as if FPS is the genre that most non-gamers would be open to (at least, as far as young men are concerned.) While the meat of Ubi's concern is obviously financial, I can't help but think the FPS genre has suffered since the superstar ascent of Halo has saturated the market with other titles trying to seek out similar claims to fame. What's your take: good move on Ubi's part, or glaring error?
[Via Aussie-Nintendo -- thanks, Jonathan]
| BBcode help |
| [b]Bold text[/b] |
Bold text |
| [i]Italic text[/i] |
Italic text |
| [url]http://www.dtoid.com/[/url] |
http://www.dtoid.com |
| [url=http://www.dtoid.com/]Web link[/url] |
Web link |
|
| [img]http://www.example.com/robot.jpg[/img] |
 |
Post a comment! You can also post a photo below:
Comment with Facebook
Click connect and comment instantly!
|
Comment with Dtoid
New? SIGN UP - it takes 5 seconds
|
51 comments | showing # 1 to 50
|
Comment with Facebook
Click connect and comment instantly!
|
Comment with Dtoid
New? SIGN UP - it takes 5 seconds
|
Comments policy
Destructoid is an open discussion community. You don't need to "audition" to post a comment - just speak your mind. We respect differing opinions on the site, so have at it. Be smart, funny, insightful, clueless, or cute -- but back it up with substance. Keep your cool, keep it fun. We only ask that you act respectfully and above all: don't be a troll and ruin it for everyone else. Don't bring down gamers or we'll, you know, gently shoot you in the face and stuff you into a flaming mailbox. Each comment is your opportuntity to make this community awesomer. Is that even a word?
Avoiding the banhammer only requires common sense: spamming, trolling, racism, NSFW stuff, and other forms of sucking will not be tolerated. If anyone is griefing please report abuse. Be good. Don't suck!
Contest:
10:32 AM on 03.18.2008
| 
Actually, in all honestly, the primary thing I associate Ubisoft with is horrible PC ports, so I may be a bit biased to comment on this.
However it does seem like they're doing the right thing for the wrong reasons.
As long as I get my Vegas 2, I couldn't give a flying monkey's anus what they do next
I play a lot of TF2, which makes me not want Halo 3 or COD4. I want UT3 mostly for Nostalgia purposes because I used to play the first couple at LAN parties in HS way back in the day (I'm old). So I can see the problem, your competing against something that is persistent because of it's replay value. It's like competing against WOW in a way. Where if you are competing against a game like Prince of Persia you can just wait till everyone's beaten it.
It's like television, if someone owns a time slot you don't compete with them even if you have quality programming. You just try and dominate a different time slot and wait till it wears out.
But this sounds like a PR spin on "Tom Clancy games sell way better than our FPS efforts".
Actually, I'm not sure the non-gamer population in that particular demographic is very large. I think what Ubi is doing makes sense as there has been a recent glut of FPS titles that fail to differentiate themselves. I just hope this isn't their way of saying all future development talent is going into Rayman Raving Rabbids 3 and 4
(except Black- needs a sequel)
Hate if you want but people that argue the controller is just as good or better simply have never played a FPS on a PC. Pure and simple.
It's about time developers moved past Super Mario 64 and Quake. I don't fathom the reasons cited but, whatever. 3D for 3Ds sake should stay on the PC where players can have an emotional Crysis every time they hafta fork over $500 dollars for a video card. The new generation of consoles are mature enough to start fielding less generic titles.
Give your developers some room to breathe rather then making them churn out update after update or rehash after rehash.
I'm firmly against doing something just because someone else did and was successful at it. If you are doing it because you think you can do it better, or bring something to the table that lifts up the genre as a whole, then go for it but if your whole motivation is "Well they sold a million doing this, lets copy it" then you will never be as successful.
It seems that a console vs. PC war can be started in just about any thread, eh? Nice try.
Many of us will concede that you can aim faster using a mouse. However, I will not pay thousands of dollars to experience that ease. Also, moving around with a keyboard does not sound like fun, sorry.
lavalant asks: I'm a longtime fan of the old Ghost Recon 1 games on Xbox 1 and PC, mainly becuase they were more realistic, with one-hit kills, no recharging health-bars and massive levels. The newer Ubisoft shooters seem geared towards a mass market. Are there any plans to release or re-release any of these old super-realistic shooters on next-gen consoles?
Phil Therien: I doubt we will ever go back to really hardcore only shooters. The market was too narrow for it to be a viable business choice. We would like to be able to please both sides but compromises have to be made. We have some ideas to improve on the situation though - keep in mind however that we want our games to be accessible to as many people as possible, otherwise we just couldn't keep making games.
Source: http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=94737
It's nice to see people READING the comments before adding their own.
What ubisoft focuses on is games with tom clancys name on the frount.
I`m ok with one or two every now and then, but when every big budget game is an FPS I get kind of pissed off.
That is, assuming they make good games in other genres. The absolute worst thing that could happen if they put out a bunch of shit, it doesn't sell, and then they run around bemoaning the fact that you have to make an FPS to sell games and people listen to them.
I can't stand the current vogue of recharging health bars, neigh endless ammo, and magical cover systems!
What's happening to first person shooters is what happened to platformers in the 1990s. The market has become super-saturated with titles trying to cash in on the success of a few stellar titles. And, like platformers, I predict that all but a few stellar first persons shooters are going to disappear from the market and a new genre is going to rear it's ugly head. Right now it looks to be casual games and MMOs.
A man can only dream.
Look at Portal. Great use of a First-Person view.
Okay! its not a shooter, but it was definitely a different use of the Half-Life 2 engine.
The problem with FPSs are that they are still mostly Military shooters, realistic or scifi.
They need to move away from military action and create a new atmosphere. Bioshock was definitely a change in that kind of sense.
We need less generic military shooters and more Bioshocks and Portals!
also R6V > Halo 3 all day as far as I'm concerned
Fighter
Racer
and eventually the
FPS
Yet those are the main games I give my time to.
He did not say they would be making less shooters people! You can read what he actually said here: http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=94737
FPS games have had to change from what the PC was offering, unfortuntely its not PC games that are selling like hot cakes, so this is understandable. I too own a PC, but its this that most PC hardcore gamers don't seem to grasp. Waving the flag of nostalgia for PC days gone by does little.
So long as i get me some GRAW2 I'll be happy. Perhaps now would be a good time to revive a BGaE type game.
Just further evidence that the average gamer has become too lazy and too stupid to appreciate the sort of sophisticated experience that Rainbow Six (through Raven Shield) and the first Ghost Recon and its expansions provided.
you think they are insinuating that they'll be jumping on the 'casual'-bandwaggon pretty soon? ( as every developper seems to think there's some kind of hidden money-pot to be found... )