Splinter Cell: Double Agent interview

[Everlost_MI]

Shacknews (http://www.shacknews.com/) has posted an interview (http://www.shacknews.com/extras/2006/011706_splintercell4_1.x) discussing the single and multiplayer aspects of Splinter Cell: Double Agent with two of the game's producers.

Here's a bit from the interview...


Splinter Cell Double Agent on current-gen consoles and on the X360 are actually two different games altogether. It was the only way we felt we could create a truly next-gen experience on the X360 without feeling restrained by the current-gen hardware. Also, this way, we could create the current-gen version without worrying about scaling it up after. Both games follow the same overall storyline, and share a number of environments, but the level design is unique in both cases.

For instance, both games feature the Jail level, where Sam must break out Jamie Washington. The current-gen team spent a lot of time developing clever tricks to simulate a full-scale riot, using graphical effects to give the feeling of a chaotic environment. On the X360, we can recreate the riot in a much more consistent way, by actually going out and showing 20 characters at the same time rioting and fighting. It's the difference between using current-gen hardware to its full effect in one game, and actually using next-gen hardware without holding back on the X360.
This interview has got me pretty really stoked about this latest chapter in the franchise.

[Tricky Thumb]

I don't have my 360 yet and I really haven't needed one so far. However I already have the 360 version preordered and will be getting a system sometime by or before the street date.

I'm completely psyched for this installment of the series.

[GrinR]

So now Splinter Cell gets the PGR treatment with background "figures" to flesh out the graphics. I wonder if I'll be able to shoot out windows and crawl through them or... *sigh* nevermind.

[Kagger]

Is the PC version going to be a "current gen" version, or is that for the 360 only?

[Savok]

Christ, as if gaming wasn't getting confusing enough these days.

[eeje13]

I'm not doggin' EA, but maybe UbiSoft could teach them a lesson or two.

[Kagger]

I must say that this concept is garbage.

I understood the ps2 version alwasy getting the shaft, it is a weaker console, and they were primarily an xbox/pc developer. But sticking PC in the same boat as the current generation is just garbage. I was looking forward to when I finally got a gaming ready computer I could enjoy the online game to the fullest (instead of the dumbed down version the ps2 got).

[earthworm48]

It seemed that, according to the Shack interview, the PC version is classed as "this gen". I was wondering myself, but if they are making the 360 version quite different without worrying about what they are outting in and performance e.t.c. rather than just graphical features the PC version will be like the current gen one as they have to worry about minumum specification.

I was quite surprised that the 360 version is a "completely different" game, as this is one of the first times the console version has been at the forfront of teh games releases, at least on a technical level.

EDIT: It may be irritating to some that the PC version is in the current gen bag, but thats what happens when you must have as small a spec as possible to reach the largest audience on the platform.

I was looking forward to when I finally got a gaming ready computer I could enjoy the online game to the fullest

I wouldn't feel to bad. I had the Xbox and PC version of CT and decided to try the PC version of CT online as it was pretttier on my PC, and there was basically no one online playing it. This was in the first 2 weeks of release as well when I kept checking. Much like most PC games, great features but not a lot of players. (The mod Defense Alliance 2 would be a blast online, if ANYONE played it).

[Reanimated]

Can't fucking wait!

Xbox Live play ftw.

[thecrazyd]

Well, fuck. If they are gonna give PC the short end, then this will be the first Splinter Cell I won't buy. Ubisoft can go fuck them selves.

[Deadend]

The interview started off good, but towards the end, the subject went into total marketese.

[earthworm48]

Well, its not like they are sitting there going "Hahaha FUCK those PC cocksuckers!!" is it? They are making the game for the PC still and it wil probably be very pretty and a great game, but they have a higher base spec they can use for the 360 so they are.

It seems unlikely that, if there is as much different as they say (more than just graphics), the PC version will just scale up to being just like the 360 version. There may be a chance of an "enhanced" version that requires greater specs, like King Kong which is from Ubisoft. We can't really say yet but at the moment I'd put my money on it not happening.

[Stooby]

Yeah, it is stupid to release the dumbed down version for the PC. They should just do what they normally do and spend a few more months making the PC version badass. All they would have to do is take the XBox 360 version and add some scalability.

The XBox 360 really isn't much more capable than my PC. Hell, Call of Duty 2 looks better and runs better on my PC than it does on the XBox 360.

[earthworm48]

The 360 has more potential power for them to tap into around a base spec. (I don't like that last sentence but I can't be bothered to change it).What percentage of the people who will buy the game have totally wicked awesome PCs?

CoD may have looked better, but that was a port to the 360. It sucks that the PC version won't be able to have as much as the 360 one, but its not necessarily stupid.

Well, if the 360 version is made around the 360 they could port it over, with little trouble possibly, dependng on how optimized for the 360 and the 360 CPU it is. They would have to wait a few months though, or lose sales. The problem is the scalibility. The things is they are saying that things like the prison riot have much more things going on, and other scripted stuff or whatever that might be more difficult to scale. It depends on how different the versions are and where the changes are placed. We've yet to see any solid 360 screens yet I believe.

[Paranoia]

Next-gen console +1

PC version -1

[Wonka]

This doesn't surprise me at all. The base PC spec is always as low as they can make it (and still manage to sell the game). The fact is that the lower the spec for the PC, the more people that will be able to run it.

The number of people who will get upset by this very old arrangement is fairly constant and also fairly small. In contrast, the number of people who will be able to run the game on an older PC is going to be a lot larger with last generation specifications. This is a business decision, pure and simple. Expect at large number of other games to follow this exact same pattern of development over the next few years. This will flip around in a few years from now, PC games will start to be made to the next gen specifications, and will start to consistently look better than their console brethren once again (with fancy enough hardware).

If you are unwilling to understand why developers need to make money when they make a PC game, then I have no sympathy for you.

[Paranoia]

The number of people who will get upset by this very old arrangement is fairly constant and also fairly small. In contrast, the number of people who will be able to run the game on an older PC is going to be a lot larger with last generation specifications.

More proof:

http://www.steampowered.com/status/survey.html

[Kagger]

I understand that its a money standpoint, get it to the most people, but if they have the ability, they should make the product the best they can. PS2 is a limited front compared to the 360, but a PC can run as good as a 360 if it is done right.

I'll probably just hold off getting it for a long time...

[H.Bogard]

It may be irritating to some that the PC version is in the current gen bag, but thats what happens when you must have as small a spec as possible to reach the largest audience on the platform.

Tell that to Chaos theory...it had plenty nextgen graphical features ...

Well, fuck. If they are gonna give PC the short end, then this will be the first Splinter Cell I won't buy. Ubisoft can go fuck them selves.

You show em tiger!

[earthworm48]

*sigh* its not just the graphics this time though, its supposed to be more than that. The graphics can be scaled, as CT shows. It may well not be much (the non-grahical enhancements), but I' m going to say that the PC verision will have the next gen graphical features that can be turned on and off or whatever, the changes on the 360 version aren't just graphics aaccording to Ubisoft.

[Wonka]

I understand that its a money standpoint, get it to the most people, but if they have the ability, they should make the product the best they can. PS2 is a limited front compared to the 360, but a PC can run as good as a 360 if it is done right.

I'll probably just hold off getting it for a long time...


It's not a question of ability. It's a question of economics. It would be irresponsible for them to port the game twice to the same platform (meaning to port both the old gen and the next gen versions). That's twice the work to please a few fans, and to MAYBE get marginally more sales. That's just not how sucessful businesses are run.

[the9trekid]

I don't think irresponsible as much as not feasible, but I get what you are saying. Who here would spend the money to port a game twice for sales that probably wouldn't even generate enough profit to fund the effort? I know ethically what some guys are saying is true, make the best game possible, but that's not the capitalist way...

[mister_slim]

More proof:

http://www.steampowered.com/status/survey.html
I didn't realize ATI and Nvidia had released so many different video cards.

[Kagger]

I don't think irresponsible as much as not feasible, but I get what you are saying. Who here would spend the money to port a game twice for sales that probably wouldn't even generate enough profit to fund the effort? I know ethically what some guys are saying is true, make the best game possible, but that's not the capitalist way...


That's my point. They should be making it the best game they can. However, I understand that doesn't make sense from a money making perspective. It's just aggrivating. I was really excited about playing the real splinter cell online mode.

As long as it's not a port from CT...(ps2 had PT online for CT)

[Reanimated]

Why anyone would even want to play a game like this on the PC is beyond me.

[thecrazyd]

Why anyone would even want to play a game like this on the PC is beyond me.
Umm... I perfer the controls, and don't have an XBox? Why anyone would not understand why people would want to play a game like this on the PC is beyond me.

[InstaPete]

The number of people who will get upset by this very old arrangement is fairly constant and also fairly small.

If you are unwilling to understand why developers need to make money when they make a PC game, then I have no sympathy for you.

I don't think you know very much about how game developing companies work, honestly. 99% of business and game-related decisions are made solely in order to "screw over" or "shaft" one platform over another. They also try to make people who have been "loyal" to them unhappy at any cost. Economics has nothing to do with it, since making video games actually doesn't cost anything. The companies are just being jerks for no reason by not catering to the top 10% of PC specs. You need to keep in mind that people on the internet don't bitch and moan without justification.

Now is it clearer?

[thecrazyd]

I don't think you know very much about how game developing companies work, honestly. 99% of business and game-related decisions are made solely in order to "screw over" or "shaft" one platform over another. They also try to make people who have been "loyal" to them unhappy at any cost. Economics has nothing to do with it, since making video games actually doesn't cost anything. The companies are just being jerks for no reason by not catering to the top 10% of PC specs. You need to keep in mind that people on the internet don't bitch and moan without justification.

Now is it clearer?
That makes sense. Everyone knows, PC gamers are anything but hardcore, and like for their games to be shittier versions of console games. If you look into what PC gamers want, "inferior graphically," "gimped," and "the short end of a console port" top the list. Plus, past performance has shown how horribly games that push the boundaries on the PC do. Plus, scalability is hard to do, and may make a developer cry at nights.

Now blow.

[absolut taco]

I must say that this concept is garbage.

I understood the ps2 version alwasy getting the shaft, it is a weaker console, and they were primarily an xbox/pc developer. But sticking PC in the same boat as the current generation is just garbage. I was looking forward to when I finally got a gaming ready computer I could enjoy the online game to the fullest (instead of the dumbed down version the ps2 got).
Why should they bother developing a superior PC version when piracy will make damn sure very few people buy the game.

[Reanimated]

Umm... I perfer the controls




Wow....................

[thecrazyd]

Wow....................
Nothing beats the beauty that is mouse look.

[LilAbner]

Wow, such hatred for the current gen. I just beat SC:CT for Xbox and had to pick my jaw up more than once as I admired the graphics.