Cliff Bleszinski Responds To Critics

[cooloola]

I personally find that overly melodramatic. If a game you're interested in is being made for a console and not the PC, how is playing it on console settling for less? Not playing it seems like the real "less" option.

I'm a student and I just bought a gaming laptop, and I can't really afford to buy a console+HDTV, and it's especially not worth it when there's only one X360 exclusive I'm interested in (Gears 2). So it kinda pisses me off when devs act like it's absolutely no big deal to shell out 1000$ dollars (that includes console price+TV) just to play one game. I'm also assuming that a lot of gamers are in the same position as me, most gamers interested in games like gears are between the ages of 18-25 or something of the sort. And there's the argument that consoles are cheaper than PCs, that's bull**** because consoles aren't really necessary but PCs are. And you could say that instead of buying a gaming laptop i could just buy a normal laptop save a few hundred dollars and a buy a console, but then I'd have to buy a new one next year because the one i have would have become outdated.
I just needed to rant a bit, i hope to see a reply from you.

 

[_Zd_3s_]

I'm not saying that Epic's business strategy is incorrect. I totally agree with them that consoles are where the 'easy' money is nowadays.

Not sure the guys putting in 80 hour weeks on Gears crunch would agree with that 'easy' part .

I didn't mean 'easy' as in 'you don't have to work hard', but 'easy' as in 'obvious, low-risk'. What I meant is that Epic have always been a company bent on innovation. Always being just that small step ahead of the competition. If it's not in terms of audiovisual prowess and engine development, then it's in spotting the immense power of communnity-driven development, online gaming and competition, customizability. This innovative attitude is what we've come to expect from the company.

And now here they are. Not trying to find new ways of getting us excited with new online features. No surprising integrations of their games with online communities. No novel ways of exploiting the next-generation in PC gaming: the power of online connectivity. No new ideas that make the competition jump up from their seats, thinking "Why didn't we think of this first?!" and that make us fans rave with excitement on the new universe that has opened up.

Instead Epic's gone where a lot of companies have gone before: making predictable FPS's for consoles that play as interactive movies. And no matter how much you think that us fans just need to adapt to this new platform and that it'll all be okay, we're just not excited about the products. At least I know I'm not. It's not where I'd thought we'd be right now when I was fantasizing about the future eight years ago.

 

[WarTourist]

I didn't mean 'easy' as in 'you don't have to work hard', but 'easy' as in 'obvious, low-risk'. What I meant is that Epic have always been a company bent on innovation. Always being just that small step ahead of the competition. If it's not in terms of audiovisual prowess and engine development, then it's in spotting the immense power of communnity-driven development, online gaming and competition, customizability. This innovative attitude is what we've come to expect from the company.

And now here they are. Not trying to find new ways of getting us excited with new online features. No surprising integrations of their games with online communities. No novel ways of exploiting the next-generation in PC gaming: the power of online connectivity. No new ideas that make the competition jump up from their seats, thinking "Why didn't we think of this first?!" and that make us fans rave with excitement on the new universe that has opened up.

Instead Epic's gone where a lot of companies have gone before: making predictable FPS's for consoles that play as interactive movies. And no matter how much you think that us fans just need to adapt to this new platform and that it'll all be okay, we're just not excited about the products. At least I know I'm not. It's not where I'd thought we'd be right now when I was fantasizing about the future eight years ago.

I respect your opinion, but disagree with virtually everything you said .

In particular Epic is a massive innovator, bringing mods to consoles with UT3 and loads of cool stuff coming in Gears 2 I'm not sure is announced or not. The cover system for Gears for instance had the industry take notice and has become something of a WASD standard for cover mechanics. It sounds like you meant PC innovator (correct me if I'm wrong, though arguing what's innovative isn't my intention).

Believe me, I'm not trying to convince platform jihadis to switch their thinking (and I'm not claiming you're one of them). But folks who like playing video games will be depriving themselves of some (maybe most) excellent titles in the years to come by skipping consoles.

 

[UndeadRoadkill]

loads of cool stuff coming in Gears 2

I remember Mark Rein saying the same thing about UT3 sometime after release, but we haven't heard anything since. Can you give us more details about that?

The cover system for Gears for instance had the industry take notice and has become something of a WASD standard for cover mechanics.

I played it on PC, and found it to be difficult to get it to work right. Sad, because the keyboard has so many keys, it would have been nice to bind separate functions instead of "one-key-fits-all." No more diving head first against walls when I just want to take cover.

But folks who like playing video games will be depriving themselves of some (maybe most) excellent titles in the years to come by skipping consoles.

I think that remains to be to be seen for a lot of folks.

 

[_Zd_3s_]

In particular Epic is a massive innovator, bringing mods to consoles with UT3 and loads of cool stuff coming in Gears 2 I'm not sure is announced or not. The cover system for Gears for instance had the industry take notice and has become something of a WASD standard for cover mechanics. It sounds like you meant PC innovator (correct me if I'm wrong, though arguing what's innovative isn't my intention).

Don't worry, I'm not a platform fanaticist: I own an Xbox360 and I own Gears of War. I agree with you that people should be willing to switch to console if they want to play the newest games; that's just where all the big players are at, nowadays.

Still, I think that focusing on consoles is simply a step back in terms of innovation and development. Sure, the eyecandy and cinematic experience may be unrivaled by anything on mid-range PCs, but other than that console games are simply nowhere near where PC games were 5 years ago. The fact that you mention mods on consoles as 'innovative' illustrates this fact nicely. We are seeing things appear on consoles that were already a given in PC gaming years ago. Even worse, PC games have suffered from this. People have mentioned UT3 a couple of times in this thread and I think it's a perfect example of how consoles are holding PC gaming innovation back. The menu system, server browser, online capabilities in the game were a step back compared to the games that were released in the years prior to UT3.

Games have become an established part of entertainment business. And somehow this success (and the investments involved with developing games) has halted true innovation. It's all about bringing games to the masses. Early adapters, such as most people on these forums, are left wondering when the masses will catch up with them.

A first-time console gamer may be excited about downloadable mods, us UT99 nuts sure as hell aren't. All we can do is wait and play the products that are on the market now. Don't get me wrong, these products are very beautiful and well-produced, but they're not what we thought would be the next step in gaming.

 

[Noobnugget]

Companies that bitch about piracy on the PC aren't using it as an excuse, but as a possible explanation for where all the sales are going.

Yes. Cause we know a game being bad, being bug ridden, or being so poorly coded and unoptimized that nothing can run it very well, and so on(not naming any specific games in any aforementioned list) aren't other possible explanations why sales on a said product failed... riiight . I forgot those are never possible reasons in any companies eyes.

Whether you like it or not the game industry and its devs are beating that same horse that the music industry is on why their sales are supposedly sucking. It's not because they did anything wrong. oh no, it couldn't be! It's supposedly cause of so many pirates. Always. There's never any other reason given.

 

[MonsOlympus]

Because that shelf space sold more used console games that new PC. It's not some conspiracy, but straight forward business. You can bring in 4k a week for your store if you dump returned copies of Halo 2 up there or 1k a week with shrinkwrapped PC titles. You're saying if it was your livlihood on the line, you'd go PC? If so, I'm not sure how long you'd be in business .

Ive been a gamer for well over 15yrs now and I have not once seen PC games up the front of the shop unless they were in big tubs for quick sales at tax time. More recently there is more empty boxes for preorders on the shelves than full titles so I dont believe its all about used game sales.

I would go on PC, Im well aware of the risks but companies going exclusive on console (like Epic) just leave more room for developers like me who want to take the gamble. The hardest thing for us is getting that shelf space up the front and the marketing coverage so as many people who see AAA console games will see ours.

Not sure I follow you here. Are you saying you can for console games?

Pretty sure Mr Bleszinski was out there on emergence day signing copies of Gears along with acouple of others. Never heard of anything similar for PC games. They are always talking about these "events" but Ive never seen one.

So you don't buy video games that you would normally enjoy playing because of how you perceive retail is treating your platform? That sounds really crazy to me. I was a hard-core PC gamer for 15+ years, and when the titles I wanted to play started migrating to consoles, I had no choice but to follow.

Thats the difference between you and I then! You always have a choice, I made mine and Im not following. Thats not to say I dont own or never owned a console, I just prefer one to the other and I will not be forced.

Again, I think I missed something. Are you saying that people are moving away from retail? PC people?

How about everybody? Live arcade is pretty damn successful as well. Digital distribution might be where its at, that doesnt mean you cant have retail events but you gotta be smart about it. Crank open the cases and sell those games with developer signatures at E3!

 

[-=WolverinE=-]

I suspect that if your real passion is FPS, and the best FPS are being made on consoles, you'll get over that feeling.

Now how did you decide that? What do consoles have? Halo 3? Lawd. This is just a bunch of sh1t. Halo 3 suffers the same fate UT3 does. A game that had to redeem it's self from the previous failure, but couldn't do it. The spirit of both games has been lost somewhere in the mix of money and plans for dominating the consoles.

But folks who like playing video games will be depriving themselves of some (maybe most) excellent titles in the years to come by skipping consoles.

If you consider Epic's games, then I wouldn't call them "excellent". I bought every U/UT game except UT2k3, but if they plan on going console all the way, then I'll just find someone else to give my money to. And I do anticipate the next Clive Barker's game (and a bunch of other titles for PC) unlike any of the console games Epic Mega Fail has to offer.

 

[Mozi]

How about everybody? Live arcade is pretty damn successful as well. Digital distribution might be where its at, that doesnt mean you cant have retail events but you gotta be smart about it. Crank open the cases and sell those games with developer signatures at E3!

I stayed away from this thread, just usual stuff and opinions that stir up flames and whatnot but I read bits and pieces but this confuses me... and feel free to elaborate or correct me here.

So you are saying PC games should be signed by the team then be sold? How does that help sales?

Sure it is an incentive to go and pay a little more for something like that but that's why collector's editions exist, to go out of your way and pay for a game you like with extra goodies you can't get online (legal or illegal, what ever your cup of tea is for that)


And just a side topic (with a little showboating) I agree having signed stuff is cool, I got the games I worked on signed by the teams I was on, got my free skateboard from tony hawk proving grounds signed by the team. Additionally got Mike Capps and Jeff Morris to sign my UT 3 art book at GDC (props for that) Got Ken Levine to sign Bioshock again at GDC, Mike Portnoy (drummer of dream theater) signed my copy of Systematic Chaos and a poster.... all of that looks bad ass on my self at home but still I don't think having signed games from the getgo will boost sales...

Then again I probably misunderstood what you mean... then again I think rambled too but anyways I am in this thread now

 

[cooloola]

Mike Portnoy (drummer of dream theater) signed my copy of Systematic Chaos and a poster....

Lucky bastard.

 

[elmuerte]

Hi El Muerte. It sure simplifies installation and for all intents and purposes LOOKS like a browser game. What's the downside from your perspective?

instantgames.com or quake live are not really more accessible than for example Steam, GameTap, (good old MPlayer.com,) or other "dedicated game launchers".

There are quite some technical issues related to running games from within a browser. Mostly memory and performance related. It works for small games or good systems. But it works much less for older systems. But there is also a usability issue, you could say there is no good separation of concerns. I use a webbrowser to browse the web, why would I need to start a webbrowser to play a game, couldn't I just start the game right away?
There are really a lot of points of failure to play a game through the webbrowser:
- the webbrowser has to start
- a network connection has to be established
- launch page has to be loaded
- game launcher needs to be started
- which runs the game which was already cached on the user's system
For a stand alone game you'd either have 1 or 2 points of failure (2 for online games).
Also the browser game is subject to the stability and security of the browser (besides it's own). In Vista I can change the volume per application, but not for browser games.

If the whole purpose is to start a game from a browser, this could easily be established by delegation. For example through the use of a special url. Then you can start a game from a webbrowser, but also by other means.

I just don't see the whole point of getting my browser involved when I want to play a game. Specially not in case of games with a significant magnitude.

That's not a fair comparison, of course. If we consider the gaming landscape at the time, it would be more like Epic suddenly not developing games for PCs (whether it being DOS or Win95) anymore, but directing all their attention towards the brand new Playstation2. Telling people that this new console is the way to go.
[...]
Don't try to act as if we are being unreasonable for being upset about this clear change of course of the company we've come to love so much. It's not like moving from DOS to Win95. It's like moving from Internet to Television. Moving from interactive community-based fun, to passive mass-produced entertaiment. It's big.

I wasn't aware this thread required fairness. Windows 95 was released in 1995, the PS2 was released in 2000. Playstation 1 would be more suitable.
There is a major difference between the PS1 and normal PCs. There is a much smaller difference between a current PC and PS3. The PS1 couldn't do much except boot a game or play an audio CD. The PS2 could even play movies. The PS3 can do much much more, in fact, you don't even boot games, you simply start games. A PS1 is more like the personal computers from the early 80s. I think the next generation of consoles (PS4, XBox720) will replace even more functions of PCs (or at least, if sony and microsoft are smart enough), things like IM, email, following news, ... will probably move to the "consoles". and the PC will become the business machine again. And it's not just up to the console manufacturers to move into that direction. Various consumer electronics companies are also looking into that (just not with a powerful gaming console backing it). PCs are going embedded. There are actually quite some people walking around with mobile phones more powerful than the PC I was Duke3D on.

erm... I think I'm going a bit off topic.

Moving from interactive community-based fun, to passive mass-produced entertaiment.

Erm... PS3 allows mods, the PS3 game LittleBigPlanet has interactive community-based fun, etc.
A lot of PC games don't allow mods, not a lot of PC games have interactive community-based fun.


However... clear change of course... afaik GoW was initially XBox360 exclusive. And the PC port could be considered as a fluke. It's not like GoW was the first console exclusive from Epic.

 

[fuegerstef]

Many felt the way you do, but don't any more. I suspect that if your real passion is FPS, and the best FPS are being made on consoles, you'll get over that feeling.

I might agree... ...the day M/KB are standard on consoles.

 

[RennyManJr]

Believe me, I'm not trying to convince platform jihadis to switch their thinking (and I'm not claiming you're one of them). But folks who like playing video games will be depriving themselves of some (maybe most) excellent titles in the years to come by skipping consoles.

I can already predict how those excellent games will turn out. Slow paced first or third person shooters (and they must be slow because you have a joypad) with little to no Z-axis fight. More advanced cover sistems, because taking cover in a predefined spot and shoot people from a place where the enemy can't hit you is the epitome of tactic. What about an entire building that follows you like a dog and throws itself in front of you when you're approaching enemies to let you shoot to them from across his windows? It's great, saves you from the burden of looking around in search of cover! (and you're using "windows", so you're also making a subliminal message to remind the user wich operating system is the right choice for him, and microsoft should be happy).
Hours and hours of cutscenes, because it must reach hollywood standars. Who wants to play a game when you can watch a cutscene instead? Think about final fantasy! It must be the way to follow since it sold millions of copies.
And he's so advanced graphic-wise so that 3 years in the making will result in 5 hours of playtime... BUT YOU HAVE ACHIEVEMENTS! Oh, thanks god for the achievements, now i can make my 5 hours game last 10 hours.
And i haven't even thought about the thrill of the multiplayer, battling against hordes of 10 years old kiddies squealing on the microphone against better players. Aaah, the elation.

No thanks. FPS on consoles are the shadow of what they could have been if they were on pc. If there will be excellent titles in the future they will not be FPS.

 

[Hideinlight]

Until the Nali saves UT3 I have no one to play UT3 with
Can't you guys make some weekends f2p like inTF2 and now Crysis Warhead.

 

[Wunderbar_007]

lol, I love how every question about UT3 is being completely skipped over.

 

[elmuerte]

Epic is moving away from the platform that made us love them. They are moving away from community-driven, online-competition, pro-league gaming. They are moving away from the area in gaming that made us love them.

(Forgot to reply to that part.)

Maybe that's true for you. But I didn't love Epic because they make/made PC games. I love Unreal, I liked playing UT. I love messing around with the UnrealEngine. I also enjoyed Jazz JackRabbit 1&2, didn't like messing around with JJ2's editor.
I never lover the online-competition/pro-league stuff. I actually kind of loathe it. I prefer to have fun in games, if I wanted to work I could simply could go to work. Also, way too many ass-hats online these days, or at least people that take things way to serious or have some other issues with communication. I haven't played an 15+minute online game against people I didn't know before hand since 2001.

But also community driven... not really sure about that. Sure, the community does drive some part it, but it couldn't be done without a lot of driving done by Epic. Besides, it's not like Epic doesn't release mods tools and stuff for their games. Epic even released a dedicated server package for the PS3 version of UT3 which you could run on normal PCs. Granted, Epic hasn't released much/anything for their XBox360 games. But that's not their fault, it's simply a closed network. (ps, didn't Epic release a free bonus pack for GoW?)

 

[Hideinlight]

lol at TAGS

 

[Hideinlight]

Until the Nali saves UT3 I have no one to play UT3 with
Can't you guys make some weekends f2p like inTF2 and now Crysis Warhead.

 

[MonsOlympus]

But folks who like playing video games will be depriving themselves of some (maybe most) excellent titles in the years to come by skipping consoles.

Alternatively we could say developers will lose customers because they arnt bringing those "excellent titles" to their preferred platform.

I know where youre coming from, why should we miss out on fun right? Well see thats the thing about entertainment as a whole, they assume people will just lap everything up without giving a second thought to where the industry is going.

Did the movie biz get better cause everyone went AAA cg special effects in the cinema? Sure it might have pulled some more money for the titles that actually made a bit of an impact but I dont think it made the industry better. There are certainly some damn good AAA cg movies out there as well but theres also a sea of **** ones.

Look at what happened with TV during that time, is reality TV that much better? or does it just bring in more money, hell we could even call it 'innovative'.

So you are saying PC games should be signed by the team then be sold? How does that help sales?

Its more about 'events' as people like to put it and getting people at a massive retail event all at one time to make it well worth it for the people that go. It wasnt purely in regards to boosting sales but its about selling to those people who want the retail, anyone can buy digital without the box. So in effect retail as a whole has gone the way of 'collectors edition', might as well get it signed if youre gonna have a physical copy hey.

Also, GDC isnt the easiest to get to here in aus if they still even hold it

Move it to Perth pretty plz, flights to perth from singapore are cheap as

 

[KaiserWarrior]

In particular Epic is a massive innovator, bringing mods to consoles with UT3 and loads of cool stuff coming in Gears 2 I'm not sure is announced or not. The cover system for Gears for instance had the industry take notice and has become something of a WASD standard for cover mechanics.

http://www.gamespot.com/ps2/action/...0/exclusive-killswitch-movie-moves--abilities

Hi there, my name is Kill.Switch and I invalidate just about any claim to 'innovation' Gears has by doing everything it did years before it came out. If only I had been funded and marketed by Microsoft to sell Brickbox360s, maybe I would have gotten all the credit instead. Oh, and a chainsaw, which has never been done before.


I'll give you "bringing mods to consoles", but I'd prefer to use that example to point at you guys saying you need to focus on Gears 2 as a 100% 360 game to make it the best it can be, and then point to the abortion that was UT3 and its multi-platform console-oriented development and say "lolwut". And yes, despite what people may say, when you demo a game at conferences and such with a PS3 controller from the start, it was console-oriented.

As far as business sense goes? Yeah, consoles are where the money's at. Doesn't stop Valve from being a PC-oriented developer and doing quite well for themselves. Heck, they even put HL and HL2 and, soon, even the mighty Portal on consoles. Now why does nobody rag on them for doing it?

Because unlike certain employees at Epic, they don't just say "ZOMG PIRACY KILLING PEECEE" and then say that everyone with a high-end PC is a pirate.

Not that they need to, because they make PC games that don't blow chunks, like Gears Arena (sometimes called UT3).