Forum • Gaming • PC

New Ubi AAA finally on Steam UK

  • Page

    of 2 First / Last

    Previous
  • StooMonster 11 Dec 2012 09:09:40 18 posts
    Seen 3 minutes ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Last night Far Cry 3 and Assassins Creed 3 became available on Steam in UK, like they've been available on Valves platform for last couple of weeks in USA and Europe.

    Are we going to have this wait for every new Ubi title?

    Online since 1984

  • midnight_walker 11 Dec 2012 09:14:45 1,162 posts
    Seen 9 minutes ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    As long as you still have to sign in to UPlay to play them anyway they may as well still not exist as far as I'm concerned.
  • vizzini 11 Dec 2012 09:39:03 1,015 posts
    Seen 7 hours ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    @StooMonster

    Short answer yes.

    But I'm sure it is part of the small print in one of the console (UK) publishing contracts :
    Must be better or equal on platformX, or release X weeks later on PC.

    Anti-gamer publishing kickbacks are sadly part of console gaming now with all three platform holders so unevenly matched in strategies, wealth + technology wealth. The PC just gets caught in the crossfire of the region that EG and DF operate.

    If LoT and DF didn't exist, there would be no mileage in withholding a version, or adding tearing, popup and reducing resolutions in other versions. It is all just to control marketing.
  • Kostabi 11 Dec 2012 09:42:48 3,920 posts
    Seen 47 seconds ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    I bought Farcry 3 off Steam UK at the weekend and I think it's the first new game I've actually picked up that way as for once the price wasn't ridiculous compared to Amazon or Shopto.
  • Mr-Brett 11 Dec 2012 09:45:05 11,493 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    You're "sure" but that's really quite a vague statement. I can't see why ubi would have a clause in contracts to delay Steam (not PC because these games were available on other services for PC) by a number of weeks and only in the UK. It doesn't make any sense.

    Please don't use the delete button, think of the children.

  • PenguinJim 11 Dec 2012 09:45:57 3,552 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    vizzini wrote:

    ...or adding tearing, popup and reducing resolutions in other versions. It is all just to control marketing.
    All those poor PS3 versions were intentionally sabotaged?! o_O
  • vizzini 11 Dec 2012 09:48:23 1,015 posts
    Seen 7 hours ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    @Mr-Brett

    It makes perfect sense. The UK is mostly a console gaming region for AAA games, and of PC gamers, Steam is the biggest.

    Being able to control consumer perception or when they can buy a product on a more powerful platform has major implications for what people go and buy, what headlines a UK based company like EG write, when the charts roll in.
  • StooMonster 11 Dec 2012 09:57:22 18 posts
    Seen 3 minutes ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    @vizzini
    If LoT and DF didn't exist, there would be no mileage in withholding a version, or adding tearing, popup and reducing resolutions in other versions. It is all just to control marketing.
    Actually, i would've thought it's to do with sticker price.

    It's my understanding that in retail there is a perception (rightly or wrongly) that significantly cheaper PC versions harm the sales of more expensive console versions, thus certain retailers may wish to suppress PC version to ensure people buy the console version.

    However, IMO it wouldn't be the likes of a dedicated game retailer that would benefit most from such a strategy it would be a supermarket who didn't sell PC games at all.

    Online since 1984

  • vizzini 11 Dec 2012 09:59:36 1,015 posts
    Seen 7 hours ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    @PenguinJim

    I can't say for all of them, but recent CoD performance and NFS on PC suggest something is going a miss with kickbacks. And how's about Dark Soul sub-HD pc edition.

    I can also confirm, that after pointing out that the PS3 version of AC3 running from SSD had virtual no popup or slow down in the faceoff (when I finished the game). Ubi kindly added a new patch when I went back to play. Fixing that problem and added slowdown, and popup galore, but without fixing the infrequent obvious bugs.

    Edited by vizzini at 10:21:30 11-12-2012
  • StooMonster 11 Dec 2012 10:02:12 18 posts
    Seen 3 minutes ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Mr-Brett wrote:
    You're "sure" but that's really quite a vague statement. I can't see why ubi would have a clause in contracts to delay Steam (not PC because these games were available on other services for PC) by a number of weeks and only in the UK. It doesn't make any sense.
    It makes perfect sense.

    If I was a buyer at a supermarket, who sold only console games and not PC games, but I worried that cheap PC sales would affect the volume of my sales — my customers shop with me because I am the cheapest — I would say to likes of Ubi "I'll buy your games at £X if you delay Steam release, but I'll buy them at £X-10% discount if you don't" or maybe they pay a premium for delaying Steam release.

    Either way, supermarket (or other retailer) wins because they eliminate their perceived competition to high margin console game sales, no cheap PC alternative, Ubi wins because they get paid more (or discounted less) per console unit sold.

    Once the initial sales spike passes, they can then sell on Steam as the threat to console versions sales margins is gone.

    Edited by StooMonster at 10:05:13 11-12-2012

    Online since 1984

  • Mr-Brett 11 Dec 2012 10:31:43 11,493 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Suggesting that poor performance is intentional is some mental conspiracy theory nonsense. Anyone who's ever been involved in game development will tell you that this is absolutely nuts.

    As for the supermarket stuff that's a bit more realistic although I'd have thought that would constitute price fixing. Also it's strange that only Ubi would subscribe to this too, if anyone would be gagging for a slight increase in profit it'd be Activision.

    Please don't use the delete button, think of the children.

  • nickthegun 11 Dec 2012 10:33:48 44,587 posts
    Seen 18 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Mr-Brett wrote:
    Suggesting that poor performance is intentional is some mental conspiracy theory nonsense.
    Not just that. They go back and retrospectively patch out good performance.

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    AGP.SRPT

  • vizzini 11 Dec 2012 11:03:59 1,015 posts
    Seen 7 hours ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    @Mr-Brett

    Next you'll tell us that they didn't get fined for using PS3 footage in 360 adverts. Hardly conspiracy “theory” is it?

    Anyone that's worked in games development, knows that most of the developers are just happy to have work and a pay cheque, hence why they are unable to defend and refute factual inaccuracies in faceoff comments about their work.

    Oh wait, only Square did, because the complete lies in the faceoff might have killed sales in Japan, where the 360 had a non-existent install base for them to sell to.

    Most major publishers get kickbacks from platform holders for all number of things. Why would effectively ini file changes by a publisher be any different, if it just changes the 10% sales trend of forum readers instead of losing sales?

    And what about Dark Souls sub-hd pc, NFS and Cod performance on GTX670?
  • Mr-Brett 11 Dec 2012 11:04:13 11,493 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    I knew it wasn't just nostalgia! Damn you lizard people!

    Please don't use the delete button, think of the children.

  • nickthegun 11 Dec 2012 11:05:16 44,587 posts
    Seen 18 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    So what youre saying is that they knew internal affairs were setting them up the whole time?

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    AGP.SRPT

  • Mr-Brett 11 Dec 2012 11:13:44 11,493 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    I think you'll find that 99.99% of game developers couldn't give two shits about face offs and even less care about the comments in face offs.

    They are proud of their work though and aren't going to go sabotage it just so some tech porn articles that have such a tiny affect on sale that's it's not even worth acknowledging are going to have a different outcome.

    I account for crappy performance with rushed ports and the age old problem of PC's being tricky to develop for.

    That or the reverse vampire aliens in the new world order are trying to fight an underground battle against the illuminati via digital foundry.

    Please don't use the delete button, think of the children.

  • Dirtbox 11 Dec 2012 11:17:52 73,717 posts
    Seen 51 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    You'd be wrong about that. At last as far as devs wanting their game to run well.

    More time goes into optimisation than asset creation, but there is always a one size fits all thinking and that almost always means that the lead platform gets the best version.

    The PC is by far the easiest to dev for btw, but it's the least profitable to concentrate on.

    Ubi are worthless shit though and give publishers a bad name. They're to ones to blame for poor optimisation because they refuse to fund or have the time taken to develop a good version on all platforms.

    Edited by Dirtbox at 11:26:16 11-12-2012

    +1 / Like / Tweet this post

  • andytheadequate 11 Dec 2012 11:24:49 7,080 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    I really hate morons that see conspiracy theories instead of good old human error. Developers release glitchy games either due to errors, the scale of the game, or time pressures, not because they want to make another version of the game to look better.

    Ubisoft wanting to delay the launch of the game on steam is probably due to royalties. If people buy it on uplay instead of steam then they cut the middle man out (valve).

    Edited by andytheadequate at 11:27:04 11-12-2012
  • vizzini 11 Dec 2012 11:35:42 1,015 posts
    Seen 7 hours ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    @Mr-Brett

    The highly educated people that they are, most certainly do care. But they aren't going to risk their mortgage for the truth.

    Go look at a PC game like Lost Planet, that pre-dates much of the face-off funded bullshit.

    It uses all eight of the logical processors in my Sandybridge-Extreme workstation, and technically better use of the CPU than half the double core crap being shovelled on PC today, like Metro 2033. But that's because it was released at a time when Xbox had more important red ring problems, and a much smaller installation base with no PS3 competition, to worry about gimping PC ini files for games.

    PC Mods aren't exactly reverse-engineering and recompiling source code on PC to improve those versions. They are just change settings that were already in the engines, like Dark Souls.

    You are very gullible, if you believe that the lack of options in Pc games isn't to show the full gulf in performance between the 360 and a proper PC.
  • Venatio Gaming Manager, Gamer Network 11 Dec 2012 11:37:30 4,359 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Amazing.

    "sounds like a public school ponce"

  • nickthegun 11 Dec 2012 11:40:35 44,587 posts
    Seen 18 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    And you are very mental if you believe that the lack of options in pc games isnt developers thinking 'fuck it, thatll do'.

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    AGP.SRPT

  • andytheadequate 11 Dec 2012 11:41:05 7,080 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    What a clown he is. Maybe its just because the pc version isn't the priority as the market is smaller, so there are more performance issues with it?

    Or it could be an industry wide conspiracy theory where developers intentionally make their games look bad so the 10 people who read face offs buy the 360 version instead.
  • Mr-Brett 11 Dec 2012 11:46:16 11,493 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    @vizzini
    You are clearly a nutter and I shall bow out of further encouraging you to spout such utter fantasy bollocks.
    Dirtbox wrote:
    You'd be wrong about that. At last as far as devs wanting their game to run well.

    More time goes into optimisation than asset creation, but there is always a one size fits all thinking and that almost always means that the lead platform gets the best version.

    The PC is by far the easiest to dev for btw, but it's the least profitable to concentrate on.
    As always I'll defer to you on this, you have a lot more experience in this stuff than I do.

    I was under the impression that it was the old closed versus open issue, I guess the PC is easier to develop for but I thought the open nature made it much harder to get overall good performance across the board.

    As for lead platforms, that's something I overlooked.

    Please don't use the delete button, think of the children.

  • vizzini 11 Dec 2012 11:50:54 1,015 posts
    Seen 7 hours ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    Yet 99% of AAA games use highly complex off the peg middleware engines that all sell themselves on being scalable to multi-core and multiple GPUs out of the box.

    Why would Lost Planet or Unreal Tournament 4 have all these better features, but now all games just about need an i3 or i5 (Celeron edition)?
  • nickthegun 11 Dec 2012 11:55:23 44,587 posts
    Seen 18 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Because the games you mention are older and recent polling has indicated that the majority of PC gamers, who run these average computers, couldnt give a fuck about them?

    What drugs are you on and can I have some?

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    AGP.SRPT

  • Dirtbox 11 Dec 2012 12:16:03 73,717 posts
    Seen 51 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Mr-Brett wrote:
    I was under the impression that it was the old closed versus open issue, I guess the PC is easier to develop for but I thought the open nature made it much harder to get overall good performance across the board.
    You can't down port very well to consoles from PCs without a heap more optimisation work, so you're right in that respect.

    +1 / Like / Tweet this post

  • INSOMANiAC 11 Dec 2012 15:57:30 3,071 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Its extremely simple really, Ubisoft wanted people to buy it directly from them or places where they get a greater cut of the profits, then released it a while later on Steam where they could mop up all the people waiting for it on that platform. Can't blame them.

    They probably think that Steam with its huge discount sales devalues their product and to be fair, it probably does.

    Trials Evolution

    Add me

    iN5OMANiAC

  • Mr-Brett 11 Dec 2012 16:18:59 11,493 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    That's a fairly logical theory but the weird thing is the restriction to just the UK.

    Please don't use the delete button, think of the children.

  • Dirtbox 11 Dec 2012 16:22:03 73,717 posts
    Seen 51 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    And Steam sales are with the cooperation of publishers and huge discount sales don't devalue shit.

    Ed: And I only just read vizzini's spastications.

    What a fucking rube. The fact is, the PS3 is a heap of shit that's technically and programmatically inferior to the 360, hence the fact that what should be a direct port is woeful 9 times out of 10.

    Edited by Dirtbox at 16:26:31 11-12-2012

    +1 / Like / Tweet this post

  • Venatio Gaming Manager, Gamer Network 11 Dec 2012 16:34:44 4,359 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Well, you clearly didn't read the bit about Lost Planet and his Sandybridge-Extreme workstation.

    "sounds like a public school ponce"

  • Page

    of 2 First / Last

    Previous
Log in or register to reply