[News Bot]

Cliff's a creative guy, it's a pity his most notable production doesn't show it.

The problem with a lot of his ideas (some of which I've thought about in the past myself, particularly on Resident Evil) is that a single fuck-up is enough to doom them. If a game doesn't sell well the idea is pretty much dead in the water. Have a look at Operation Raccoon City and Revelations. The former sold blasphemously well because of its simplified action shooter gameplay and marketing budget, despite the fact that it was pounded by critics. The latter sold poorly because it was on a handheld with less of the series' established fanbase, and had virtually non-existent marketing, but was highly praised by critics. Despite the latter being the better game, it's unlikely that it will see any "sequel" because it simply didn't sell as well.

That's my main grievance with the industry. High production costs lead to the almost inevitable fact that ideas will be sacrificed in order to make a game more marketable to the "casual" audience, or the "CoDience". I don't see the situation ever improving anytime soon either, which is why horror games are pretty much fucked in most cases. For example, the horror-focused version of Resident Evil 4 was scrapped because its high production costs weren't expected to generate a sufficient return in sales, so they ordered Mikami to make it more marketable or the series would end right there.

I'm trying to get into the industry myself, but stuff like this is pretty creatively crippling.

[Endow]

A lot of this obsession with multiplayer and the purely "entertainment!" side of videogames saddens me.

[Daante]

Great read, and he has great ideas for almost every game he talks about.

Developers, take note.

[Mithos]

Nintendo has the publishing rights. The press release never said it was just for one game, or limited to a certain platform. And Nintendo is just about to release the third Fatal Frame title since 2008.

And if I remember correctly from back then it was even that Nintendo is cosigners on the Copyright for the series now or at least on the FF4 game.

[TriGen]

That was a good read, I think all his ideas were pretty reasonable, and not disrespectful to the original devs. The Uncharted multi-player idea sounds really cool, also closing your eyes to be invisible would be really intense.

[Cheech]

I'm not too into multiplayer but I do agree with him with it. Multiplayers not only add replay value, but also encourage people to actually replay them with a friend to explore what the game has to offer, people doesn't mind playing on higher difficulty and replaying the game again, and they will talk about it with the friends, encouraging other friends to try it, etc. With a game like Vanquish or Bayonetta, a lot of people probably just play through normal, sell it, and tell his friends "lol it's short and easy, story sucks, rent it."

Exactly. I think it's been proven beyond a doubt that multiplayer sells games at a higher price point, and for some of these Japanese pubs/devs, they can embrace it or die.

There are very, VERY few action focused games that can get away with exclusively single player experiences. Uncharted had multi but it really was detached from the campaign's DNA, and his suggestion for the series was fantastic. That's the Uncharted I would play.

[Captain Tuttle]

Interesting interview, I've always liked Cliff, he loves the industry.

Sounds like he's getting closer to his goal of being a power creative.

[KarmaCow]

Maybe it's because it's too early but that Fatal Frame idea seems like it would just be dumb jump scares. And frankly with the way most games become barren 2 years months down the line, having "mingle-player" being a big part of the experience sounds awful.

[Raide]

Maybe it's because it's too early but that Fatal Frame idea seems like it would just be dumb jump scares. And frankly with the way most games become barren 2 years months down the line, having "mingle-player" being a big part of the experience sounds awful.

Maybe a more Journey style horror, where you only see people but cannot communicate in any meaningful way. Venture together in some horrific land, only to watch your friend get brutally murdered by some unseen monster.

[ponpo]

Not understanding why Vanquish couldnt be done in multiplayer and in essence focussing on the single player is what made it so good with no "this would be too fast to ever work across servers" compromises has made me think sufficiently less of Cliffy.

I don't know, I think the challenge mode with multiple players could have been feasible and fun. It's not like it would have taken away from the single player experience.

[jimi_dini]

I agree on most things, but Fatal Frame? Leave Fatal Frame alone. Fatal Frame does not need multiplayer. Fatal Frame needs EU/US releases.

Scary + multiplayer doesn't work.

[Jac_Solar]

What?! He wants more multiplayer, and make it part of the core of a game?

Dark Souls and Demons Souls are 2 extreme examples here, and its online features will be very hard to balance for most games. If a western game tries to do something similar to Dark/Demons Souls, I wouldn't be surprised if you had to purchase ingame accounts, or that you wouldn't be able to play if the servers were down, or that you wouldn't be able to play the game at all when it's not popular anymore/didn't do as well as they hoped. (Mercenaries 2 has been down for several years. Yes, the single player. Can't even play offline.)

And Cliff wants more games to feature this, in addition to integrated multiplayer? I'm pretty sure he does realise that more multiplayer = more online activations/sign in stuff/DLC, more nickle and diming. So why does he suggest it? The log in passports and sign in authenticators, or the overall forced online play scheme is detrimental to the current and future state of gaming.

And multiplayer has more or less been the same since Quake -- it's usually a competitive sport, not relaxing whatsoever. Even co-op tends to feel competitive; who gets the most kills, the best/most loot, etc.

A single player game doesn't have to worry about all the netcode for online gameplay and mechanics, and, it 'can' tell a fantastic story and take you on a wonderful adventure. Multiplayer games, or gameplay modes, besides some MMO's (Asherons Call.) are all extremely similar; competition, whos the better player, comparing stats, getting better stats, a few select game modes, etc. It's part of gaming yes, but it isn't cheap to develop multiplayer, so it'll take a bite out of the single player aspect. And that shouldn't happen.

And in any event, multiplayer has been perfected, more or less, in several Call of Duty Modern Warfare versions/black ops, Battlefield -- yet people will still find a reason to whine when a new game doesn't have multiplayer, and if they could, they'd whine until they forced the developers to cut down on the single player quality just for another chance to play a new multiplayer game for a few days before they return to their favorite multiplayer of choice.


Multiplayer doesn't have a lot of room for variation in mechanics; it's about the most efficient playstyle, and the mechanics are already more or less in place for that in most games.

I suppose people want new multiplayer games cause of better/different graphics, different models, and different playstyle? There are already several series dedicated to that though.

Like, recently, with Dragons Dogma, people complained a lot about the lack of co-op, and many people flat out insulted the brand itself and said they refused to buy it -- some people might think that the difference between an online and offline game is a toggle button or something, but it's not. It'd probably be extremely hard to let people play together (Simultaneously in the same world.) in Dragons Dogma -- I think they'd be forced to cut out a lot of mechanics/gameplay just to make it online.

Perhaps the multiplayer people are just so bored with the same gameplay, and want more; this is why they complain about games not featuring Multiplayer. But multiplayer is multiplayer, it won't change a lot -- I think the MP developers are more worried about balancing classes, maps and weapons.

And the level up aspect of multiplayer is just far out ridiculous. Like, what? It's actually in many games nowadays. Many BIG games.

Also, I thought he was a very reasonable guy cause of this article;

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=469345

But the idea of wanting more multiplayer 'almost' goes against that other idea. On one hand, he's suggesting much more integrated multiplayer, more multiplayer, make multiplayer a part of the core of the game itself, and on the other he wants more non-linear/less scripted games. His article on non linear/unscripted gameplay doesn't sound very sincere after reading the multiplayer article, it just doesn't fit -- arguing for multiplayer will just push the industry further away from non-linear gameplay/unscripted, I think. (Cause of all the issues with netcode/multiplayer coding/online gameplay component of a game, I doubt they'd ramp up development difficulties by making an entirely different game, which would require, most likely, a different or atleast edited engine, and more; like how people do their jobs, or who does what, or when, or where. On top of that, making a succesfull non linear game would also be a challenge, since it'd be new territory for a single player, scripted events development studio. Non linear games function differently than linear games, and are probably much harder to make.)

While the 2 CAN go hand in hand, the recent industry trends have shown that it's unlikely (The developers often focus on linear, scripted games with huge setpieces, large explosions and such to draw in audiences, and hook em with a simple but addictive multiplayer system of 'levelups'.) when well known people speak out like this, developers might have less of an issue with implementing multiplayer to satisfy the 'masses' while losing out on single player quality.

[Durante]

Some of the more outspoken "indie" devs could take a page or three out of Bleszinski's book when talking about other developers. He criticizes while still appearing informed and respectful. Parts like his appreciation for the "Souls" games and their innovations in multi-/singleplayer integration show that he actually has some knowledge of what he's talking about.

I still believe that his position is a bit too influenced by his success with Gears, which is primarily multiplayer focused. Skyrim shows that multiplayer -- or even any online features at all -- is not an absolute necessity for reaching a huge audience.

[Messofanego]

I agree on most things, but Fatal Frame? Leave Fatal Frame alone. Fatal Frame does not need multiplayer. Fatal Frame needs EU/US releases. Scary + multiplayer doesn't work.

But Fatal Frame with ARG stuff sounds great.

[Relaxed Muscle]

Vanquish wouldn't worked as a competitive multiplayer game. A horde mode where players could destroy waves of robots in well designed arenas... that's another history. Just add a few new mechanics like special moves performed with various players, for example.

[alexandros]

Really? The creator of Gears of War, the most negative videogame stereotype this generation, the game that gave birth to the dudebro generation... He feels that he's qualified to give advice to others?

Let japanese developers do their thing. What we need is more diversity in games, not generic shooters coming from the east as well as the west.

[ShockingAlberto]

I'm not sure how one could make a multiplayer mode in Vanquish without significantly compromising on either the single-player or the removing core mechanics for the multiplayer.

[RooMHM]

Cliff is the PR dude at Epic, he never did anything remarkable in game development. We all know who are the bosses of Epic. Shut your mouth dude.

[Pranay_]

Really? The creator of Gears of War, the most negative videogame stereotype this generation, the game that gave birth to the dudebro generation... He feels that he's qualified to give advice to others? Let japanese developers do their thing. What we need is more diversity in games, not generic shooters coming from the east as well as the west.

wut

[ShockingAlberto]

Really? The creator of Gears of War, the most negative videogame stereotype this generation, the game that gave birth to the dudebro generation... He feels that he's qualified to give advice to others? Let japanese developers do their thing. What we need is more diversity in games, not generic shooters coming from the east as well as the west.

This is a really ignorant post.

[TheSeks]

One of the options I've thought of was what if I left Epic right now, and became a consultant to help Japanese developers make games that are more Western-friendly -- not only from an IP perspective, but also from the game mechanics and features perspective. I could seriously have a very healthy consulting gig doing that, right?

VADERNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.mp3

They don't need to be "western friendly" they just need to find their voice and difference since the PS2 era isn't cutting it in the PS3 era.

I mean, FFS, Cliffy you even admit that with the "Dark Souls was pretty innovative, and it CAME FROM JAPAN!" bit. If Japan can get shit like that together they'd have it. We don't need more Marcus and what'shisface in Lost Planet shooters, dude.

[Anteater]

I don't know about you guys but I would probably love that title if I was Cliffy

"The Father of the dudebros gaming"

[Orayn]

Someone didn't compare all the fancy talk in the interview with his games.

Cliffy producing a certain type of game for Epic doesn't invalidate any of his advice, especially when most of it has no relation to the "brodudeism" you fear so much. Do you think that one guy giving his thoughts on gameplay will somehow taint pure Japanese developers with the entire art direction of Gears of War?

My official recommendation is to chillax.

VADERNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.mp3 They don't need to be "western friendly" they just need to find their voice and difference since the PS2 era isn't cutting it in the PS3 era. I mean, FFS, Cliffy you even admit that with the "Dark Souls was pretty innovative, and it CAME FROM JAPAN!" bit. If Japan can get shit like that together they'd have it. We don't need more Marcus and what'shisface in Lost Planet shooters, dude.

One might argue that Dark Souls and Demon's Souls had a head start in Western appeal due to their aesthetics, combined with the fact that they're just fucking brilliant games mechanically.

[dygiT]

Cliff is the PR dude at Epic, he never did anything remarkable in game development. We all know who are the bosses of Epic. Shut your mouth dude.

Cool post. I really liked it.

[kruis]

I really hope Cliffy stays the hell away from Japan. I don't want every single game to become a co-op or multi player experience. I *like* single player games and I'll likely quit gaming if multiplayer is not just tacked on a game but it's all there is.

I'm not the only one who feels like this. Just look at the complete and utter sales failure that was Ratchet & Clank: All Four One.

[Cheech]

Cliff is the PR dude at Epic, he never did anything remarkable in game development. We all know who are the bosses of Epic. Shut your mouth dude.

Hah hah hah. I am 99% sure this is Cliff. Anyway, Unreal Tournament is all I played for about two years, and Gears is another superb multiplayer experience. You shouldn't be so down on yourself.

[Cheech]

I really hope Cliffy stays the hell away from Japan. I don't want every single game to become a co-op or multi player experience. I *like* single player games and I'll likely quit gaming if multiplayer is not just tacked on a game but it's all there is. I'm not the only one who feels like this. Just look at the complete and utter sales failure that was Ratchet & Clank: All Four One.

Well, if Japanese devs continue cranking out good games nobody buys like Vanquish, it's irrelevant because they'll be out of business. That's the whole point. Guy who sells insane amount of games advising those who aren't due to bad design decisions. Makes perfect sense.

[thehypocrite]

Mingle-player. I like the sound of that. I've never heard too much out of Cliffy B prior to this, but this has made me like the guy a lot. Really good ideas, and a respectful attitude towards other properties.

This.

[jay]

I'm not sure how good his advice is but I am definitely impressed by his breadth of knowledge of Japanese games. Though, it's disappointing he didn't have advice on how to reform Human and buy the Clock Tower rights from Capcom.

[StuBurns]

Well, if Japanese devs continue cranking out good games nobody buys like Vanquish, it's irrelevant because they'll be out of business. That's the whole point. Guy who sells insane amount of games advising those who aren't due to bad design decisions. Makes perfect sense.

Only as long as the quality of those games isn't negatively affected. If Vanquish had to be as bad as Gears to sell as well, that's not an inherently positive change. It's a positive commercial change, but that wouldn't really benefit the end user.

[Pranay_]

Hah hah hah. I am 99% sure this is Cliff. Anyway, Unreal Tournament is all I played for about two years, and Gears is another superb multiplayer experience. You shouldn't be so down on yourself.

you havnt read his halo posts and no thats not cliff :lol

[Cheech]

Only as long as the quality of those games isn't negatively affected. If Vanquish had to be as bad as Gears to sell as well, that's not an inherently positive change. It's a positive commercial change, but that wouldn't really benefit the end user.

In what universe is Gears a "bad" game? Neither the sales nor critical reviews reflect this. The issue isn't that Vanquish is a bad game, it's that it feels like half a game.

[Haunted]

Hah hah hah. I am 99% sure this is Cliff. Anyway, Unreal Tournament is all I played for about two years, and Gears is another superb multiplayer experience. You shouldn't be so down on yourself.

CliffyB is a GAFer and that's not him.

In what universe is Gears a "bad" game? Neither the sales nor critical reviews reflect this. The issue isn't that Vanquish is a bad game, it's that it feels like half a game.

Half a game because the campaign should be longer or because it should have MP?

[Korigama]

And I think the proper way to do that -- if I were to work on an RE game, hypothetically -- would be to alternate between those moments. Maybe do an RE game where there's two kinds of characters -- you know, you've got a Leon-type guy, and then mix in a scared little girl, and so you alternate between the empowerment and the fear

Pretty sure that RE4 already did this, if only briefly (yes, I'm aware that Ashley isn't exactly a little girl, but she does fit the bill for a damsel in distress).

[Hot Coldman]

I feel like this guy is wasted at Epic. Not that I'm sure he minds, given that that company has made him crazy money, but it's clear he wants to get out and do something different.

Is FortNite his baby, or someone else's? That seems like a good outlet for him. I still say Cliff needs to make a platformer though, I would be all over that.

Also: "mingle-player", now that's a good term.

[KittenMaster]

I find it interesting that CliffyB wants RE to go back to its horror roots when RE5 felt like it wanted to try and capture some of Gears' success in the wrong way (steroid Chris, forced Coop, not being horror enough).

And then do Resident Evil: Special Victims Unit. Where it's the stories of the ordinary people, where you see one zombie and that's scary and maybe you can fend that one off, but you get more than two or three and you do nothing but run, Walking Dead style. And see it from both sides.

Isn't this basically RE Outbreak?

[Tylahedras]

Fatal Frame ARG sounds like a really cool game.

[Trigger]

His ideas for RE are basically the concepts that Outbreak needed.

Someone didn't compare all the fancy talk in the interview with his games.

I thought about this too when reading the interview. I'd love to see him actually implement these ideas.

[StuBurns]

In what universe is Gears a "bad" game? Neither the sales nor critical reviews reflect this. The issue isn't that Vanquish is a bad game, it's that it feels like half a game.

Bad was a poor choice of word, inferior would be more accurate.

It's like suggesting Michael Bay should be telling Charlie Kaufman how to make films because his films make more money. If it's a weaker product, as a user, why would I want that to happen?

[dark10x]

"Why don't I have an augmented reality version of Fatal Frame for the Vita, in which ghosts hang around the world?" Because it's a Nintendo IP, Clifford. And they just did an AR Fatal Frame. Nobody bought it. ;) I agree that multiplayer survival horror could work, though. Not necessarily the way he described, I think there are much better solutions, but yeah - I believe it's possible.

Yeah, but the 3DS Fatal Frame was absolutely awful and barely a game at that.

Bad was a poor choice of word, hugely inferior would be more accurate. It's like suggesting Michael Bay should be telling Charlie Kaufman how to make films because his films make more money. If it's a weaker product, as a user, why would I want that to happen?

That's kind of a matter of opinion.

[TheBigG753]

Japanese titles need less Western influence. The whole "this is what we think western gamers want" approach is sapping a lot of the innovation and uniqueness from these games. Make the games you would want to play, and for gods sake market it!

[StuBurns]

That's kind of a matter of opinion.

Yes, it is. It's true commercial success can be very accurately measured, and quality is wholly subjective, that doesn't change my mind at all though.

[Pakkidis]

One of the options I've thought of was what if I left Epic right now, and became a consultant to help Japanese developers make games that are more Western-friendly -- not only from an IP perspective, but also from the game mechanics and features perspective. I could seriously have a very healthy consulting gig doing that, right?

Am I the only one who thinks this is a bit insulting? Why do Japanese developers need more western influence? For some people it should be the other way around.

[ShockingAlberto]

Bad was a poor choice of word, inferior would be more accurate. It's like suggesting Michael Bay should be telling Charlie Kaufman how to make films because his films make more money. If it's a weaker product, as a user, why would I want that to happen?

Gears 3 was a better product than Vanquish.

[Jigsaw]

didn't bulletstorm bomb as hard as shadows of the damned or vanquish?and this game had a great co-op mode

explain,cliff?

[StuBurns]

Gears 3 was a better product than Vanquish.

I don't think it is, or even close. So I think the idea of Cliffy guiding Mikami is embarrassing, and presumably you don't.

[Derrick01]

Too much focus on multiplayer for me to take any interest in what he's saying. It's the worst current-running myth in this industry, that everything needs it.

[ShockingAlberto]

didn't bulletstorm bomb as hard as shadows of the damned or vanquish?and this game had a great co-op mode explain,cliff?

It did not bomb anywhere near those games. By orders of a magnitude. It failed to make a significant profit, but comparing it to sub-50k bombs like Vanquish and SotD is significantly diminishing the term "bomb."

Nevermind the facts that Bulletstorm was developed by People Can Fly, did not really have significant multiplayer, and is a bad counter-argument in general.

[Xater]

didn't bulletstorm bomb as hard as shadows of the damned or vanquish?and this game had a great co-op mode explain,cliff?

Bulletstorm's MP was the very definition of tacked on.

[StuBurns]

It did not bomb anywhere near those games. By orders of a magnitude. It failed to make a significant profit, but comparing it to sub-50k bombs like Vanquish and SotD is significantly diminishing the term "bomb." Nevermind the facts that Bulletstorm was developed by People Can Fly, did not really have significant multiplayer, and is a bad counter-argument in general.

Vanquish sold 830k, and it's budget was tiny.