Ubisoft doesn’t want another long console life cycle, says Guillemot

Of course they don’t and I don’t expect this console cycle to last more than 6 years before they show us PS5

Pc ftw

“Guillemot expects Ubisoft developers to create titles at a much quicker rate with PS4 because the device is similar architecturally to PCs.” Hope this doesn’t mean: “Guillemot expects to launch at least 2 Assassin’s Creed games per year”

NO FUCK YOU.

I don’t want to buy a new console every 3 or 5 years.

Also should I tell you how inferior GRFS was on the PS3 ?!, cause you couldn’t really develop well on it, or even how messed up your network was “connection to servers lost”, fix your stuff before talking.

Let me remind you how you messed up the PC crowd as well, how you casualize every single Tom Clancy title you got.

Your opinion holds no merits, so just Shut Up.

The best games comes in the last console cycle, like Dishonored, The Last of Us, Batman Arkham City, Skyriem, BioShock Infinite, Tomb Raider, and alot more, if you are creative, then you can do great things, you can push stuff, you can make great games, don’t blame it on the consoles when you still didn’t full use them.

Ubisoft don’t want another Long Life Cycle.

- MS and Sony don’t care what Ubisoft wants.

No, pipe down Guillemot. I don’t want short console cycles.

Trust me, Microsoft and Sony DO care what Ubisoft wants. They’re fast becoming a bigger games company than both of them. They’ve overtaken Activision now and sit just behind EA in third-party terms.

This guy is idiot, has it occurred to him that maybe, just maybe consumers don’t want to force themselves into spending $500 bucks every 3 to 5 years over a new machine?

Personally I want a new console every 5 years, this generation went way to long…

I agree that 3 years is too short but 5 to 6 years is just right, anything past 6 years is too long.

But in 6 years, will cloud gaming actually make consoles the way they are now obsolete as many are predicting. I think not but its what we hear all the time.

To those that disagree, no one is making you buy a new console after the next gen hits, you can always wait 2 more years, you don’t have to get it.

The ideal thing would be a shorter life cycle for the consoles. We would get better looking games faster.

But the average console gamer do not want to have to buy a new machine so often. Maybe they would if all games was guarantied to be 100% backward compatible

But if gamers care so much about improved graphics why not just take the jump to a pc?

“because after four years of people using all the capacity”

Except you never did, huh.

Every generation tends to be longer than the previous one because of diminishing returns. The tech is already good enough to allow the realization of just about anything that can be displayed on a screen. Noticeably better fidelity takes much longer to achieve now than it did 20 years ago.

@5 AMEN BRO… if they’re lazy to make a game than shut down UBISOFT…plain N Simple

After pushing Rayman back that sounds like a dumb statement. It’s the publisher’s who gotta inject life into a generation.

This could be the last gen of consoles anyway.

But I most certianly do not want a long console life cycle either. 4-5 years in I was dreaming about moving on. And I did. I went to PC gaming. Long console lifecycles don’t benifit the industry as a whole, a lot of people(talent and gamers alike) loose interest and enthusiasm.

Why do Ubisoft execs keep allowing Guillemot to speak?

Everytime he opens his mouth bears ruin to the company…

Guillemot is speaking as a developer, wanting to see the console makers up the specs and add new features that their teams can work with, not as a consumer that really doesn’t mind consoles keeping the same specs for longer.

That said, I feel like the PS3 has been around more than long enough, and I got my PS3 in 2008. I’m really ready for a new console.

I’m fine with getting the most out of a piece of hardware, so the next console generation isn’t just an incremental step. That makes a console reveal all the more special.

I also think that around five years is enough. The generation could live on and be supported for a longer time, like sony did with the PS2 while the new generation is out. One could almost feel, how PS360 lost core gamers to the PC.

“One could almost feel, how PS360 lost core gamers to the PC.”

*thumbs up*

Ironically… while outdated tech is a big reason why I initially switched to PC, I have been playing exclusively indie games for the past months (actually… there was one exception – Sleeping Dogs). I either want to have great gameplay or be wowed. Or even better – both. Which almost never happens. And I haven’t REALLY been wowed in quite a while. The Witcher 2 was impressive but that’s about it. After that, it’s already games like Mass Effect 1 and Crysis 1. Which was quite a while ago.

Right now, people are talking about how “beautiful” Crysis 3 is and I can’t help but wonder whether that’s just desperate justification for their $500 graphic cards. I recently sold mine for a decent price and could get a new, better one for a small amount but… not for this game. Something much more impressive would have to come along.

As next gen takes off the standard of graphics will once again rise to a new height, this will speed up the process of PC development as a significant boost in GPU & CPU performances to surpass the console leap. PC gamers should be excited for the next consoles because in the end they win.

I predict 2015 will be the year when we’ll see a game that’s so advanced that it’ll be on the same caliber as Crysis when it launched in 2007.

Odd from a company that has arguably made their best games in years on consoles which have gone on too long.

He may be disappointed, Sony didnt put all that RAM the PS4 and buy gaikai for a laugh.

All I can say is I’m excitedfor whats coming.