PS4 built with feedback from Ubisoft, Guerrilla helped build Dualshock 4 for FPS

February 28, 2013

PS4 built with feedback from Ubisoft, Guerrilla helped build Dualshock 4 for FPSDuring Sony’s PS4 event, Sony spent some time near the beginning talking about how the company listened to the developers on what they wanted in a PS4. While this may seem like some sort of marketing hype, several developers have confirmed that requested features have made its way to the next gen console.

As reported by The Guardian, after the PS4 event there was a round-table discussion where Guerrilla Games co-founder, Herman Hulst revealed that PS4 systems architect, Mark Cerny vested the studio several times for feedback on the next gen console design.  Hulst stated:

We got the entire group of core developers together and gave deep feedback on everything system-related. It’s no longer designed in an ivory tower somewhere in Tokyo, it’s shared with us, with Naughty Dog, with Sony San Diego – and together we’ve built the machine.

Apparently most developers were focused on two things: better social connectivity and a design in line with PC innards. Hulst echoed Cerny’s point about faster development time on the PS4 due to its PC-like design.

Shadow Fall’s game director, Steven Ter Heide believes that the rate of evolution on the PS4 will be accelerated as the gap between PS3 and PS4 will widen very quickly.

It wasn’t just first party developers Sony reached out to for feedback as Ubisoft’s CEO, Yves Guillemot revealed features he [Ubisoft] requested made it into the PS4. He stated:

We want social, we want all the things that exist on PC to be possible on a console. We want the mobile capacities to play short-term and to play from anywhere you want.

Guillemot is very pleased with the capabilities of the PS4 and seemed to take some pride in the fact his requests made it into the console.

In a detailed interview with CVG, Heide also revealed that Guerrilla Games took part in the design of the Dualshock 4 to make it more FPS friendly.

It sounds like a lot of really simple features that we’ve put in there but they make all the difference because it’s in one comprehensive package. For example, there are little tweaks to the indentation on the sticks, where you have your thumbs on them, we’ve slightly raised them so there’s a little bit more precision. They’re slight changes but they make a huge difference.

The analog sticks are somewhat unique as they aren’t fully concaved like the Xbox 360 gamepad, but have a ring around the edge with a slight bump in the middle creating a valley of sorts. This design seems to help prevent your thumb from slipping forward or backwards off the stick.

Evolution Studios also took part in the controller’s design by providing feedback on various aspects of the DS4 to make it “racing friendly” as well.

Be Sociable, Share!

47 Responses to “PS4 built with feedback from Ubisoft, Guerrilla helped build Dualshock 4 for FPS”

  1. Roca.:

    The next Xbox was created by this guy

  2. phranctoast:

    LOL. The title of that picture is half the laughs.

  3. Roca.:

    super douche LOL

  4. Roca.:


  5. CaptBirdman:

    I never got how ‘douche’ was such an all inclusive insult… I guess you have to be a yuppie to be offended by that…

    Anyway, until Guerrilla proves they can make a good FPS, I don’t want their input on PS4 controls.

    Their idea of innovation is to make the characters ‘heavy’ which could possibly translate into making the DS4′s analogs stiffer. Ugh… do not want.

    Rather have the input of Bungie.

  6. CarlB:

    Worth a read:

  7. oldschool1987:

    “Anyway, until Guerrilla proves they can make a good FPS, I don’t want their input on PS4 controls”


    Killzone 2 – 91%

    “Killzone 2 received critical acclaim upon release with a GameRankings score of 90.44%,[35] and a score of 91 out of 100 on Metacritic”

    That means it isn’t good? Please just say in your opinion it isn’t good because the facts show that the majority enjoyed it

    “Their idea of innovation is to make the characters ‘heavy”

    Don’t remember them saying it was innovative, its just their style choice. Heavy is more realistic, ask Carl. Cutting about with your rifle, full ammo and spares, grenades, backpack, rations, water, etc tends to make you heavy. Realism isn’t cutting about the battlefield like Sonic in the CoD games.

  8. MAK:


    “I never got how ‘douche’ was such an all inclusive insult… I guess you have to be a yuppie to be offended by that…”

    THANK YOU!!!!

  9. Godless:

    I played COD black Ops 2 for the first time last weekend, and I have to say I love the way it plays.

    Oldie, Killzone games play like shit by comparison.
    They are slow, cumbersome, with such a narrow field of view, that they make your fucking head spin.

    That’s why the sell so badly, they just ain’t as good as you seam to thing they are. And I don’t give a toss about how many polygons or whatever other technical barriers you think the game is breaking. the fact is it doesn’t sell well, and the primary reason for that is that it just doesn’t play well.

    I would rather any FPS played more like BO2 than any of the killzone games.

    Lucky KZ4 looks to have fixed some of the issues the previous KZ games have.

    Field of view for one is way better (from the movie), and the gameplay looks a bit smoother & faster, more like Gears 3 than KZ3. And yes, I know Gears is not as slick or smooth as BO2, but it’s better than any of the KZ games to date. And yes I also know Gears is 3rd person, but KZ2 & 3 both play kind of like a FPS version of gears. Kind of like Gears with tunnel vision, or viewing out a pair of binoculars strapped to your head.
    Killzone is one of the highest profile Sony first party games, it has no excuse for not selling well.

    Killzone = poor gamplay = poor sales

  10. phranctoast:

    Sounds like a rehash from two years ago.

  11. twilight:

    First of all, I told you that Cod 2 was cool. Yes, the shooting mechanics of Killzone are different in comparison to the games you mentioned. The goal with Killzone was to make a more realistic shooting game which resulted in many people not liking the shooting mechanics like yourself because they were more used to the shooting styles of games like Cod. Killzone is not a bad game by any means but it this game is not better then games like Cod, Halo, and Gears Of War.

  12. oldschool1987:

    Are you seriously going to use sales as an indication of quality? Ffs godless are you really that naive?

    Metacritic 91% FACT!

    “Killzone 2 received critical acclaim upon release with a GameRankings score of 90.44%,[35] and a score of 91 out of 100 on Metacritic”


    Stop using your opinion as fact. Remember you’re the guy who thinks Kameo is amazing. It you think CoD is better than that’s fine (although it says a lot about you) but to totally bash Killzone and pretend that its a poor game due to sales shows how retarded you actually are. I can’t believe Xbots still use the sales defense after the PS3 has put the Xbox in LAST position this gen, the same as last gen.

    Just because you’re shit at Killzone doesn’t mean its shit. Let’s face it, the game is too hard for you. You’re not superhuman and indestructible in it like CoD. You always hate games you suck at, like Littlebigplanet, another game you say is totally shit and claim it as fact.

    Twilight, Killzone is totally better than Gears.

    I’m still laughing to myself at Godless’ use of sales as a quality indicator! I suppose he adores the Twilight movies then, gotta be fact because they sell extremely well.

  13. oldschool1987:

    Godless you met up with that stalker Squishie yet? She’s a bit strange adding all your friends. She told me you two were going to meet up for sex at one point, don’t do it! She’s seems like a bunny boiler and will tell you wife about it after. Strange lady.

  14. phranctoast:

    “Worth a read:”

    LOL. I’ve been hearing more from CliffyB now that he’s retired.

    I recall Epics Mark Rein wanting Gears of War DLC to be free but MS had other ideas. Epics Unreal Tournament 3′s DLC was free for the PS3 though.

    This practice was prevalent in the PC world but not so much in the console world.

    The ideas was, by treating your fanbase good with free DLC, you’d create customer loyalty, and your future titles would sell that much better.

    I agree with a lot of what Cliffy B said there however, but there is a fine line and many shades of grey when dealing how to release that DLC, where the company doesn’t appear to be taking advantage, and the gamer/customer doesn’t feel entitled.

    Day one DLC: Should it exist. Sure. As long as it wasn’t content cut from the original disk in order sell something to you later.

    DLC on the disc that you have to purchase: Absolutely not. (This was why Gears 3 was criticized, and countless Capcom releases). Nothing makes a gamer feel cheated more knowing the content is there, yet behind an additional pay barrier after they dropped ($60 ) of the game.

    Micro transactions like Dead Space 3 did: I have absolutely no problem with how EA handled DS3. If you want to pay for the most powerful weapon up front without all the legwork to upgrade, you were able to. If you didn’t the same weapons were obtainable by collecting power ups. This type of DLC was there for people that didn’t feel like bothering to fully play it all for that stuff. This DLC is sometimes referred to as “pay to win”, which I believe is an unfair title, as “winning” is still possible without the DLC.

    Micro transactions in Free to Play games. Again. This seems fair, as they need to somehow retain some funds for the game provided. With this method, it’s my opinion that you should be allowed to pay one price, and get a full unlock though.

    I would like to see the practice, of the first DLC content to be released free of charge, a few weeks to a month after the game comes out. This I feel would go miles with customer loyalty, while simultaneously helping out the developer/publisher to keep the game from the used market as long as possible, as that’s one of their primary interests. The DLC should also not be something removed from game in order to create but new content.

    After that, Publishers should continue with handling DLC how they see fit where the market seems willing to pay.

    Jim Sterling on Cliffy’s blog.

    “Bleszinski’s points are absolutely compelling, as have been the points of basically every game journalist I’ve argued with about Electronic Arts this week. There’s been a lot of defense for the company, and that’s fair enough. So far all the arguments are rooted in the now, however, and that’s my problem. I don’t believe the “we make money now, there’s no problem” attitude is the right one to have, especially in a console market so tumultuous and at risk of falling apart. A crash is looking set to happen, if it’s not happened already, and the companies with an eye on the future, not the ones scrabbling to make money immediately, are the ones I feel are going to succeed.

    As far as calling for people to stop being angry, I just don’t agree. When people think of games they care about being twisted to suit the psychological warfare that is a “freemium” model, I believe they’ve every right to be unhappy, and should voice their disapproval. Even if they are a vocal minority, and even if EA doesn’t give a shit, I defy anybody to see something they’re passionate about get broken and not want to say something.

    I mean, the people making memes about EA on Reddit probably don’t care about what Cliffy’s got to say on their behavior, but he still said it! None of us are very good as just shutting up and ignoring things we don’t like, and there’s a lot to dislike in the mainstream game industry right now.

    Read more at…Gg8Vvo5JEy7.99″

  15. Roca.:

    Killzone’s gameplay is different but it is not a bad game…it’s a great SP campaign and story.

    Online: Battlefield is way better than COD
    Single player: KZ > COD > Battlefield
    Guns: Killzone wins
    Graphics: Killzone wins

    Comparing COD’s style of gameplay to KZ’s is just wrong. It’s like hating Gran Turismo because it doesn’t play anything like arcade racers such as Need For Speed or Forza

  16. Roca.:

    This game looks awesome, PS3 is going out with a bang…unlike the Xbox 360

  17. oldschool1987:

    Completed Crysis 3 earlier. Fantastic game, a lot better than the second. Even the story is great, Prophet becoming more machine than man. It’s told really well. Recommend it to everyone.

    Best online: BF3>COD>Killlzone
    Campaign: Killzone>COD>BF3 (reversed from above)
    Graphics: Killzone>BF3>COD

  18. CarlB:

    Yeah, I’ll take today’s DLC over yesterday’s quarter munchers anytime.

  19. oldschool1987:

    I don’t mind micro transactions at all. It doesn’t affect the game for me, they’re there but just a feature I won’t use. No idea why people are up in arms about it. Content locked out of discs like Phranc said is a big no.

  20. CarlB:

    If the standalone game isn’t worth buying, people won’t buy it. However, if the game is quality, the people who made it have every right to decide what they will charge separately for. As Cliff said, people decide whether or not it is worth it to them, and the industry adjusts appropriately if they desire to survive. Regardless of improvement in games and pricing, certain gamers will always find something to be angry about or think they are entitled to.

  21. ncaissie:

    “If the standalone game isn’t worth buying, people won’t buy it. ”
    Umm I have bought many games not worth buying.
    You don’t know until you have paid for it.

  22. CarlB:

    That’s why I like rentals, trials, reviews, etc.

  23. oldschool1987:

    I’ve bought many, many games not worth buying:

    World at War, Black Ops, Modern Warfare 3, Black Ops 2, Splinter Cell Conviction, Alan Wake, FEAR 3, etc. Its my own fault like, I don’t do rentals. Point is if a game isn’t worth buying, people obviously still do. Not all of us rent. Some of us get pulled into the hype train, I admit to being one of those.

  24. ncaissie:

    Reviews and even demos can be way off. And most of them are.

  25. CarlB:

    Okay… good point, so I’ll amend the sentence: if the standalone game isn’t worth buying, at least people have the option of trying it before they buy it.

  26. CarlB:

    And yes, reviews can be off, which is why I prefer aggregates, and then only as an indicator that I might want to try the game. An MC score of 90 or above on MC is a better indicator of a fun game than 33 (CoDBOV).

  27. CarlB:

    The first hour trials are fairly good as well.
    All of these taken together, not by themselves, pretty much guarantees you never have to buy a game you don’t like.

  28. oldschool1987:

    Thanks Carl lol. Agree with aggregates as well. Always use metacritic as a point of reference.

  29. CaptBirdman:


    Not really looking to get into a shit slinging match here, as I mildly liked Killzone 2, but review scores mean fuck all to me AND YOU KNOW THIS lol

    As a game, it works fine. As a shooter, it’s clunky. If you want to see a shooting game that got ‘weight’ down, try Area 51 on PS2 or any Gears of War. The sense of weight in Killzone translates in to being slow as hell.

    And I like how you believe the small number of reviewers constitutes a majority. I can easily find more people that disliked the game, as we far outnumber any amount of reviewers that liked it. Doesn’t mean anything though, because at the end of the day they’re all just opinions mate, and I welcome yours.

    But I firmly stand against GG’s input on the PS4 controller. Sorry.

  30. oldschool1987:

    Fair enough dude but you can find more negative reviews than positive? That I do doubt. You don’t like the game then that’s fine but to say because you don’t like it means most don’t either seems wrong, especially when the (vast) majority of reviews say otherwise.

  31. CaptBirdman:

    “Fair enough dude but you can find more negative reviews than positive? That I do doubt.”

    I’ve made it abundantly clear in my two (or what, three?) years of posting here that I DO NOT CARE FOR GAME REVIEWS. That being said, I clearly stated…wait let me quote myself:

    “And I like how you believe the small number of reviewers constitutes a majority. I can easily find more people that disliked the game, as we far outnumber any amount of reviewers that liked it. ”

    This is stating that I’m talking about gamers…I can find gamers that will disagree with the reviewers. Gamers outnumber the reviewers. We all have the same complaints about the KZ series.

    Take note: I’ve admitted to liking KZ2 actually. 3 and 1 were utter shit in my opinion. 2 was OK.

  32. oldschool1987:

    Funny because I know a lot if gamers who love Killzone and no one who don’t like it except for my best friends 12 year old little bro who only plays COD.

    What you think if Crysis 3? Definitely my favourite one.

  33. CaptBirdman:

    Haven’t bought it to be honest.

    I’m frankly a little exhausted with shooters. Perhaps I’ll get it for a bargain.

    Currently running through RE6, and I’m not enjoying myself.

  34. phranctoast:

    Did you ever play through KZ3? Last we heard, you played a little at a LAN party and then moved to MP. The SP is more varied than KZ2, and better in many ways.

    The MP int he game got a second breath of life when it went free to play with a level cap.

  35. Kushy:

    “Currently running through RE6, and I’m not enjoying myself.”

    Then just stop! Resist the inner gamer to complete what you started and just let it go! If you are not having fun with a game then it’s likely not fun and crap and you should kill it with fire! lol that’s how I see it!

    I just finished up with Far Cry 3! I had a blast with that game, until the ending! The ending slighty made it fell like it was all for naught! Felt kind of ripped off for all my hard work I put into it!

  36. Kushy:

    feel like it was all for naught*

  37. CaptBirdman:


    I hate not finishing a Resident Evil. This is the only one that I do not like very much. It has it’s moments, but overall this game deserves its poor reviews. Too many small problems…


    I’m not exactly sure if that was directed towards me, but KZ is just not my thing. It’s beyond clunky and slow. I don’t mind slow shooters but this one is slow AND clunky. I’m willing to keep an open mind about KZ4, but that game looks boring too. We’ll see.

  38. oldschool1987:

    I liked RE6, well I liked it during co-op. it’s a brilliant co-op game but a poor Resident Evil game. If it never carried the RE name it would be better i suppose. Apparently Capcom said after the panning of 6 that they want to return to their roots. We need a good survival horror game, Silent Hill 2 is and always will bet the best for it but the last two SH games were not upto its high standards. The Last of Us might provide some good survival horror, who knows. Dead Space was a brilliant survival horror with great atmosphere, DH2 became a brilliant action game and the third became a good co-op game but less and less survival horror.

    I miss the last gen survival horror games and the Final Fantasy of last gen.

  39. phranctoast:

    “I’m not exactly sure if that was directed towards me, but KZ is just not my thing. It’s beyond clunky and slow. I don’t mind slow shooters but this one is slow AND clunky. I’m willing to keep an open mind about KZ4, but that game looks boring too. We’ll see.”

    Yeah it was. Sorry for not quoting you or saying your name first. KZ is a bit clunky and slow, but my point in bringing up KZ3 is you did say you liked KZ2 and 3 isn’t all that different in a way that would deserve ire. The missions are more varied. Different landscapes, not always grey Helghast. It was an upgrade in graphics. Gameplay was a lot better too and more like COD than KZ2. If I had one problem with it, it was the frequency the story interrupts the action. Cutscenes were too often and during the missions unlike Blops2 where it was primarily between missions. This hurt the pacing IMO.

    My point being, you seem to have a fairly negative opinion about a game you just scratched the surface of. Give it an honest shot. Complete it, and I think you would have enjoyed it more than the initial reaction. The nail gun with explosive projectiles you can detonate after they hit onjects is pretty awesome. Damn. I just talked myself into replaying. ;)

  40. CaptBirdman:

    ” …it’s…a poor Resident Evil game.”

    Well said. I agree that if it weren’t named Resident Evil it would perhaps be slightly better received.

    Key word though: slightly.

    My issues with the game are thus:

    1. Cheap deaths/ overall cheapness. What do I mean by cheap? Well, there are way too many instances where something comes out of nowhere and kills you without any warning. Also, you can be damaged during cutscenes. Read that again.

    2. Damage scaling is disproportionate as hell. Zombies take off a block of heath just by grabbing you. This is before they’ve damaged you if you fail the ridiculous…

    3. …quicktime events. (Yes that was a continuation of that sentence. These deserved their own number though.) Capcom: stop it. There are way too many and a lot of them are mundane tasks. I mean, seriously, fiddling around the left analog stick to look around inside a car for keys to start it? Come the fuck on.

    4. Genre confusion. If ever there was a game that didn’t know what it wanted to be, this would be it. It clearly is *trying* to be action, but you cannot, I repeat CANNOT be a shooter whilst simultaneously limiting ammunition. That is the stupidest thing I’ve ever seen in Resident Evil. Survival…action? WTF

    5. Graphics. It’s ugly and too dark. Far cry from RE5.

    6. The bloody cover system. How do you fail at copying a system that has been a staple of TPS for over 6 years? My god, I can’t explain how rubbish the cover system is. You have to experience it, it’s that bad.

    7. The controls are not tight at all. There are a variety of impressive moves you can do, but they are all clunky at best, and downright horrible at worst. Enemies do too much damage (I play professional) for the controls to not be a fluid as even RE5′s were.

    8. The A.I. Look, I think making the partner invincible and giving them unlimited ammo was a stellar idea, but they take WAY too long to revive you and are always off somewhere tickling their bum when you need to open a (stupid) co-op door to progress further. Chris’ chapter 5? OH MY FUCKING GOD.

    RE6 deserved the 4.5 (out of 10) Gamespot gave it. Just wasn’t ready for release, and it’s obvious.

  41. Kushy:

    “I never got how ‘douche’ was such an all inclusive insult… I guess you have to be a yuppie to be offended by that”


    Well let me describe it! By calling someone a douche or douche bag you are basically saying the person is akin to a liquid that goes in a dirty and stinky vagina only to be flushed away! :P

  42. CaptBirdman:

    Well, a name that describes anything that inserts into a vagina is a compliment to me haha…

  43. Kushy:


    Dirty Birdy!!! ;)

  44. Roca.:

    This is why I don’t enjoy or care for for the lastest RE games

  45. CaptBirdman:

    Lol @Roca

    Yes. I’m glad I’m not the only one who didn’t care for RE4 (it’s a good game, but I’m a huge fan of the original style).

  46. phranctoast:

    “Well, a name that describes anything that inserts into a vagina is a compliment to me haha…”

    I see the logic, even if I feel it’s a bit misplaced.
    Then a tampon would be a compliment to you?

    Birdie reminds me of the guy who after you call a pussy, turns around and says “you are what you eat” ;)

  47. CaptBirdman:

    Lmao I probably wouldn’t say something like that, but I like that though, even if it doesn’t apply to me.

Leave a Reply:

You must be logged in to post a comment. Don't have an account? Register today!

Recent stories

Latest game reviews

RSS Technology news

RSS Windows news

RSS Mac news

RSS Iphone & Touch

RSS Mobile technology news

RSS Green tech

RSS Buying guides

RSS Photography news


Reader poll

Is the PS4 a day 1 purchase for you?
View Results



Copyright © 2014 NS