Slashdot Mirror
Assassin's Creed Not a PS3 Exclusive?
Gamespot revisits a rumour that was floating around last month, which claims Assassin's Creed won't be a PS3 exclusive. From the article: "Further doubt of PS3 exclusivity was thrown into the mix this week when Web sites began reporting that Ubisoft confirmed at the Interactive Digital Entertainment Festival last week that the game would be coming to the Xbox 360 and PC. Which Web sites? It's not quite clear yet, though the rumor appears to have spawned on European-based Web sites. For those of you who predicted that Ubisoft would deny any other platforms for Assassin's Creed, pat yourself on the back. A rep told GameSpot News: 'Assassin's Creed is coming to the PS3. No other announcements have been made.'" Given the costs of next-gen game development, I don't think we're going to be seeing very many exclusives this time around.
But I don't really care. I don't plan on playing it anyway; it's looking profoundly mediocre in my opinion. And it's not like Sony's fate rests on this one game's exclusivity. Sure, it's building a lot of hype, but it certainly isn't as high calibur as MGS4, for instance. It's no big deal.
"Keep dreaming Zonk you sad little Xbox whore."
Sad is *getting angry over the internet* for god's sake about a fucking videogame. Jesus christ, get out of the house fanboy nerdlings.
Given the huge cost of software development, let alone the cut throat world of games, it is probably too expensive for them to go "console exclusive" for any console. I view it as more of the fallout from the complexity of creating games in the new "game race" than a failure or success of anyone in party in particular. The producers of Assissin's Creed may simply not have gotten the finacial backing if they only promised to sell it on *one* platform.
Demoing AC on PS3 hardware was a good thing. Using it as proof of some exclusivity (ie no demos where avialable on other platforms) was a logical and seemingly falacious assumption.
It's sim-ship on 360 and PS3. Ubi's just being paid a small amount not to discuss the 360 version for a while. The next generation of exclusives: not exclusive at all! Whee.
Hey, wake up! GTA4 went cross platform.
Sad is not logging into a website so you can insult people on it anonymously.
Then again, sad is also responding to the AC troll.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
The Wii's unique hardware and gameplay style will keep their games from being able to be ported to PS3 or the 360. Not to mention that a lot of the Wii's games will feature Mario, Zelda, Metroid, etc...
"Hey, wake up! GTA4 went cross platform."
Hey dipshit, GTA was always a multiplatform game!
I think this game has lot of potential, like alot of things theese days; however, being exclusive to one console this "generation" wouldn't be a good strategy. Players like being able to play games on their favorite system, and not providing that game to the people who want to play it is basicly throwing money out the window.. that being said i don't think we'll be a seeing a Wii port for many games on the PS3 of 360 becaue of the difference in specs. I hope they at least try though, it'd be sad to see the Wii be another GC. I myself think this game could be great because i think ubisoft did a great job with the new prince of persia games. To me it sounds like a great mix between PoP and Thief... which could only be a fun premise. I just hope they fill out the game to meet the potential they have.
He whom you called four-eyes yesterday, you call Sir tomorrow.
Don't get me wrong, I loved the first MGS for PS1 and thought it was extremely innovative (switching the controller when fighting Pscyho Mantis was simple but BRILLIANT), but MGS2 lacked these clever tricks and had too many long CG cutscenes which kind of turned me off from it (didn't even pick up MGS3). Final Fantasy has always been hit and miss for me (enjoyed VII and X, but hated 8 so refused to play 9 and then DESPISED X-2 so won't be picking up XII), while GT is just another racing game (albeit a VERY nice looking one).
While Assasin's Creed may not be a "great" game, it also probably won't be a terrible game, and at least its new. Besides, it's not like MGS won't (after 2-3 years) end up on the other systems any way (MGS1 and MGS2 did...) GT never will as Sony makes it themselves, FF is just a matter of SquareEnix deciding they want to put their eggs in more than one basket (or choosing to jump ship like they did from Sony to Nintendo back in the day).
Any way, the important thing is that in order for Sony to win over consumer's wallets with a $500-600 system and games ranging from $60-(no more than) $100 they need as much exclusive content as they can get and not just a small handful of "exclusive" games (exclusive is in quotes because 3rd party titles are never guaranteed to remain exclusive unless the contract specifically states that). So if some of the big publisher's (Ubisoft is in the top 5) are reconsidering the exclusivity of titles then that does not bode well for the PS3.
Read my blog posts on usability.
Yes, we are. Not on the PS3 and Xbox 360, but definitely on the Wii.
Not at first. There was always several months of exclusivity
I keep forgetting people are buying the PS3 to play games. I wish they would hurry up and release it. My Inline IPS project is getting cold.
Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
Yeah, why would anyone want to be anonymous.
I love this duality on slashdot- half the people here think people who stay anonymous are fools, and the other half think anonymity is king.
Posted anonymous to annoy the half I don't like.
My first system was a playstation because GT was the first game I was good at, and I loved it so. But now GT is just too long, complicated and unfriendly. It's no longer a system seller. It's a hard core simulation and that can't appeal to a broad audience. Unfortunately, and Sony can't dial back the realism now. And it's stuck in a 6 car, Japanese-centric rut.
... and get a sequel.
MGS is something the Japanese get excited about and the rest of the world mostly shrugs. Most of the game's target audience in the U.S. play Tom Clancy games and own an Xbox or PC. It was a big deal, in other words, pre-Splinter Cell.
Final Fantasy...I have a love/hate relationship, but my sense from the hard core fans are that it's played out. It doesn't attract the dungeons and dragons type like it used to, and no real man can get excited about X-2. And WoW basically eats it's lunch in the MMO world (not commenting on the game itself, just membership). So what's left? It seems they can't reach the heights of FF7, and I don't consider that unattainable by any means. And where was Tactics on the ps2? They've gotten too bored with their own formulas, but can't seem to truly break with their past. So we have sequels to FF7, but they aren't RPGs. We have an online game, but it lacks the key characters their fans have come to know and love. They release the snowboard mini-game on the cell phone, but no avalanche of their other mini-games. I think Squaresoft was completely knocked off their game between the merger and the failed movie. It's so sad.
As for the Assassin's creed, I find it unlikely that this will appeal to a broad GTA audience, which seems to be the crowd Ubi is fishing for. It will be relegated to the artsy crowd with Shadow of the Colossus. That isn't a bad thing, because Sony isn't going to sell many systems at their price for a while anyway, so it will still look successful with lowered expectations
X360 has the first RTS, it will get the Tom Clancy games first (always developed for the PC), it will get GTA on the same day, it will have a zillion arcade games soon.
So here's the key thing about exclusives no one says: if your system has a 1,000 games and their system has 500, you have at least 500 exclusives, even if they're all sequels or separate years for sports titles.
Among the actual announced 32 ps3 games are a few exclusives actually. But there's no way Vision Gran Turismo is coming out on time. Each of the last games took an extra year and had features dropped (remember Gran Turismo 2000 changing it's name? Remember the online mode for GT4?). So I'm betting this list is also more hype than reality.
Huh? At the TGS 2005 which was the start of Sony's PS3 push, Sony showed some work by Ubi's Monteral Studios simply known as "Project Assassin". Assassin's Creed was *demoed* at E3 on PS3 hardware. It got plenty of press because it was actually a functional demo instead of some looping trailer which was what many had expected. Heck it got "Best PS3 Game" from 1Up.
Granted people for some reason forgot something was mentioned at Microsoft's X05 developer convention as well but a lot of public indicators were leading people to jump to the conclusion that it was always a PS3 exclusive. This was frankly a bit too much since I don't think Ubi ever claimed this. I believe they only promised it would be on the PS3, not that it was some sort of exclusive.
Yet. "No other announcements have been made [yet]."
Face it, as far as anyone knows, Assassin's Creed was just a trailer. There was no gameplay, no word on whether it would use the motion sensor and anybody who compared the graphics from the 360 and PS3 knows its not hard to imagine the game running on the 360 (at least in the graphics department.)
I hope they at least try though
Nice idea, but this is not going to happen. There's been a lot of debate about how the PS3 and XBox 360 compare in power, but one thing is clear: the Wii is a lot weaker.
This isn't a failing on Nintendo's part. They've made it clear the Wii's supposed to be a whole different kind of product. I very much hope it succeeds, but if it does so it won't be by carrying ports of all the PS3 titles.
So Ubisoft got some extra dough from Sony to hold back release of other ports until after launch. Good for them. Glad to see someone will be making money off this crazy console war.
I've heard that many times, but it still makes no sense. 8 and 9 were not similar. If anything, 8 and 10 are closer in style to each other.
There are (or at least were at the time) two devteams inside Square that make Final Fantasy games. They staggered the releases, so the team that made FF7 also made FF9. The team that made FF8 made FF10. FF11 kinda screwed up the pattern, but there you go.
[PowerPoint] is a tool for capitalist presentation
I did it more out of protest against how bad 8 was than anything against 9. Plus at that point FF had begun to really show it's age, I mean they didn't even bother getting voice actors or changing the battle system at all (7 was sort of my introduction into RPGs and by the time 9 came out I had played enough to know that the FF way was not a very fun way). I picked up 10 because they had FINALLY gotten voice actors and supposedly had revamped some of the play (it had changed, but it was still a bit too slow for me... Grandia II is a great example of a semi-turned based battle system that works well). Any way, it was just my way of protesting. Now I have little time for RPGs and the FF series seems to have gone even further down the tubes in terms of playability (at least if its true that the battles more or less fight themselves...) Plus FF X-2 was so much of a cheap tactic to milk the franchise I need to sit out at least 2 or 3 installments in protest. I'll probably play the Crystal Chronicles for Wii though because my girlfriend liked playing the first one with me on the GameCube (although the first CC was really annoying due to that chalice or whatever it was that you had to carry all the time...)
Read my blog posts on usability.