Estimated date?

[NeoSuperior]

EDIT: -

[Cronky]

I assume that Ubisoft doesn't always use the top of the line version of an engine because their other games already use the version they're using so everyone is accustomed to it.

Or because their games are in production before the newer versions are released, and they don't have the luxury that PS Devs have to go and rework things at random.

Or because perhaps it costs more for a license to use a newer version of an engine for big named companies?

[NeoSuperior]

EDIT: -

[SteveTheCookie]

No way, I terrorize Ubisoft on Facebook, criticizing them on every wall post they make. Like, they had a celebration in Chine or Japan was it? For some other Ubisoft company they had, and I just asked them what hell they are celebrating because their games suck.

I really doubt they care about your (or anyone's) opinion; they're still making money.

[Jordan]

Well I am demanding my test copy of PS this October. Chop chop.  :P

Not gonna lie, if PS is good, the team will be the first people I will have ever e-donated to. I'll be more than happy to pay for my copy.

[Cronky]

nooo.... not you too Cronky :'( don't add more fuel to the dreagent fire!


the estimated release date for "something playable" is summer 2012.
Question answered...

then why are you talking about the Engine, that Ubi will, or will not use for SC6? Isn't it offtopic?


Oh... if I just had a "key" for the thread door  ::)

Pshhhhhhhh. Everyone likes to talk about SvM and Ubisoft. Jordan mentioned SC6 in the first post in this thread, and the discussion has then veered more towards it as his first question was answer Looooooong ago.

Dread and Agent aren't doing as bad as they have been in other threads. Hell, they actually had a legit discussion in this one that didn't end in:
"You suck at CT!"
"No, YOU suck at CT you hacker!"
"I don't hack, I'm just good"
"Good at hacking maybe"
"Don't be mad because I beat you cause you suck even though you've played the game since forever"
"Children shouldn't be allowed to play PS. Nobody hacks once they hit the mature epiphany age of 18"

[DreadStunLock]

No way, I terrorize Ubisoft on Facebook, criticizing them on every wall post they make. Like, they had a celebration in Chine or Japan was it? For some other Ubisoft company they had, and I just asked them what hell they are celebrating because their games suck.

I really doubt they care about your (or anyone's) opinion; they're still making money.

I know they don't, I would not either. Money is all that matters for everyone anyway. At the end of the day it's money.

[Wh1tE_Dw4rF]

I assume that Ubisoft doesn't always use the top of the line version of an engine because their other games already use the version they're using so everyone is accustomed to it.

Or because their games are in production before the newer versions are released, and they don't have the luxury that PS Devs have to go and rework things at random.

Or because perhaps it costs more for a license to use a newer version of an engine for big named companies?

I think they want to cut costs and go with the older engine they already own. Also, a new engine would probably need a lot of tweaking to get it to work for consoles. Look at Assassin's Creed for example, they all use the same engine and that's been going for some time. What ever Revelations may bring it's just a bucket load of glossiness covering up the signs of ageing of the engine. A new engine in this case would slow progress. Meaning they can't pump out sequel after sequel every 1,5 to 2 years thus reducing profit.

To top it off, I believe Ubisoft is one of the most stubborn companies out there I came across. They do what they want even though the general public (fans) disagree.

[DreadStunLock]

I assume that Ubisoft doesn't always use the top of the line version of an engine because their other games already use the version they're using so everyone is accustomed to it.

Or because their games are in production before the newer versions are released, and they don't have the luxury that PS Devs have to go and rework things at random.

Or because perhaps it costs more for a license to use a newer version of an engine for big named companies?

I think they want to cut costs and go with the older engine they already own. Also, a new engine would probably need a lot of tweaking to get it to work for consoles. Look at Assassin's Creed for example, they all use the same engine and that's been going for some time. What ever Revelations may bring it's just a bucket load of glossiness covering up the signs of ageing of the engine. A new engine in this case would slow progress. Meaning they can't pump out sequel after sequel every 1,5 to 2 years thus reducing profit.

To top it off, I believe Ubisoft is one of the most stubborn companies out there I came across. They do what they want even though the general public (fans) disagree.

Agreed about the fan thing.

How many companies actually do listen to their fans? Anyone got any experiences?

[frvge]

Valve AFAIK.

[DreadStunLock]

Valve AFAIK.

Valve and that's it? Got to be more :|

[NeoSuperior]

EGOSOFT!

[Tidenburg]

Capcom.

[DreadStunLock]

EGOSOFT!

Get out of here, I don't think Egosoft should even be counted as a company with only 20-ish of people xD

[NeoSuperior]

EGOSOFT!

Get out of here, I don't think Egosoft should even be counted as a company with only 20-ish of people xD

never played some of the X games? :D well they got not many people, compared to other companies, but their games are of way better quality, than many other "big" companies... let's just look at ubisoft or square enix :o