[ShockingAlberto]

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.

I absolutely think it's an absurd suggestion. But it has nothing to do with the quality of the games.

This is an argument that has more to it than just "Yeah, but X game was better so obviously X game's developer should listen/shouldn't listen to others without question." Being reductive does not aid anything here.

[Hot Coldman]

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.

Of course Gears 3 is a better product than Vanquish, the value for money proposition there is just too good for Gears compared to Vanquish. They have similar campaign lengths, plus Gears has its Horde mode, deathmatch modes, co-op, etc etc. Vanquish is just its campaign plus (single-player only) challenge modes. I'd argue Vanquish's campaign is more replayable than Gears 3's, but it's not far off. As a product, Gears 3 is a much more complete, satisfactory package.

Now, if you want to say Vanquish is the better game, I'll be the first to agree with you, but that's not really what he said. The phrasing is important.

EDIT: Or maybe he was on about quality. Never mind. :lol

[johnnysix]

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

It's a real shame how much Gears gets sh*t on around here.

[Haunted]

It's a real shame how much Gears gets sh*t on around here.

shot on?

please clarify

[bob page]

Cliffy says it like it is. Good stuff, and there's definitely a need for change.

[ShockingAlberto]

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

Before I continue further with this, is your mentioning of budget to suggest that Bulletstorm and Vanquish had similar proportional losses?

Otherwise I can't see the point of mentioning it, but I wanted to get clarification first.

[StuBurns]

I absolutely think it's an absurd suggestion. But it has nothing to do with the quality of the games. This is an argument that has more to it than just "Yeah, but X game was better so obviously X game's developer should listen/shouldn't listen to others without question." Being reductive does not aid anything here.

It has everything to do with the quality of the games. He's saying a game needs to be a broader product to be more viable, which means stretching even thinner the budgets for these games. Vanquish is six hours long as it is, and it's a far better six hours than Cliff has ever mustered, however, the compromise adding a multiplayer suite would have caused would have damaged that game.

The other option is increasing the budget accordingly, in which case you have to sell more. These games are being made with the assumption sales won't be high, so the budget is set accordingly.

Before I continue further with this, is your mentioning of budget to suggest that Bulletstorm and Vanquish had similar proportional losses? Otherwise I can't see the point of mentioning it, but I wanted to get clarification first.

Go further with what? You said it sold less than 50k, and it sold massively more than that. Unless you meant to a specific country or something.

I don't know how much either game made, I would imagine Vanquish made money and Bulletstorm lost money, but I don't know, or even care. The whole point I was making was I don't care if Cliffy's weaker games make more money, and I hope publishers don't either.

[ShockingAlberto]

It has everything to do with the quality of the games. He's saying a game needs to be a broader product to be more viable, which means stretching even thinner the budgets for these games. Vanquish is six hours long as it is, and it's a far better six hours than Cliff has ever mustered, however, the compromise adding a multiplayer suite would have caused would have damaged that game. The other option is increasing the budget accordingly, in which case you have to sell more. These games are being made with the assumption sales won't be high, so the budget is set accordingly.

This isn't the way game budgets are set in any instance I've ever seen. When Uncharted added multiplayer, additional resources and budget were allocated for the extra work. No stretching had to be done.

Can you provide an example where a budget for a single-player game was lessened or stretched when multiplayer was added?

[Mzo]

He wants everything to be multiplayer!

Do not want!

[StuBurns]

This isn't the way game budgets are set in any instance I've ever seen. When Uncharted added multiplayer, additional resources and budget were allocated for the extra work. No stretching had to be done. Can you provide an example where a budget for a single-player game was lessened or stretched when multiplayer was added?

Uncharted 1 and 2 both had budgets of $22M.

But that is irrelevant. Vanquish would have been a worse game if they had been forced to split what they had to add multiplayer, and would have been required to sell more to make money had they been given a larger budget to add multiplayer.

[Kazuma Kiryu]

Why do people always have to bitch about Gears and dudebro and huge characters? Anyone seen Predator or any other 80's action movie? He was making that type of game. People love it. Get over it and stop being so pretentious.

because everyone is entitled to his opinion? how is that being pretentious? i played through all 3 games (first one on pc, 2 and 3 on a friend's 360) and my opinion about the gears franchise is that while they're good games, they're just that, not OMG AWESOME like almost everyone in here will say. movement is too slow, i can't stand that sprinting fov, not being able to jump (yeah, i didn't like that in bulletstorm or vanquish either) and a few other things. i really think vanquish and uncharted did a better job than gears by being more nimble, which is something i really like.

about cliffy's ideas: the guy has some great stuff, really like the RE, fatal frame and uncharted ones.

[mhayze]

He has some interesting ideas! But I wouldn't want too many Japanese games looking like Dudebro games.

Please, NO. Really. NO. Last thing gaming needs is for someone to preach the glory of brodude-ism to the east too. He poisoned the wells enough in the west already this gen, visually speaking.

I don't think his actual post or suggestions had anything to do with 'dudebro' memes. I give Gears credit for staking out it's dudebro place in the universe, but I don't think that means that's all that Cliffy can think or do (as evidenced by the article quoted in the OP).

And if Dragon's Dogma is an example of a Japanese publisher trying harder to make a Western-friendly game Which it is, by all accounts, then - more, please.

[LiquidSolid]

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.

Get a clue.

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.

Agreed. Unlike Phil Fish, Jonathan Blow and Inafune, Cliffy comes across like he knows what he's talking about and is respectful with his criticisms. He doesn't sound like a 13 year old idiotic, insulting everything seen as flawed, he's putting his thoughts forward and encouraging reasonable debate. Pretty refreshing considering some of the Japan debates had over the last couple of years (especially from Inafune).

But yeah, I don't really see his point when it comes to multiplayer. He's got some cool ideas and isn't entirely focused on shovelling deathmatch into everything but how many games come out with multiplayer that are ghost towns within months? The majority I'd bet, especially from my experience. So if the plan was to stop people from reselling those games, was the effort put into multiplayer worth it? I don't really think so. I think the decision to trade in a game just comes down to value. If someone thinks a game was worth full price, they'll probably keep it but if not, they'll try to get some money back. So personally, I think lowering game prices would be a far more effective way of combating used sales. But that might just be me.

Oh and SH2 > SH1 > SH3, but I loved his opinions on the SH series anyway. He's right.

[Kazuma Kiryu]

If Dragon's Dogma is an example of a Japanese publisher trying harder to make a Western-friendly game Which it is, by all accounts, then - more, please.

how that game doesn't have co-op multiplayer is a mistery to me.

[ShockingAlberto]

Uncharted 1 and 2 both had budgets of $22M.

They had budgets in the $20 million range. I'm open to being wrong, but can you show me where they both had exactly $22 million budgets?

But that is irrelevant. Vanquish would have been a worse game if they had been forced to split what they had to add multiplayer, and would have been required to sell more to make money had they been given a larger budget to add multiplayer.

I do not recall suggesting Vanquish needed multiplayer.

[Teppic]

I'm only for multiplayer co-op if it doesn't take away anything from the single player experience. Resident Evil 5 is the horror example of how not to do it.

[StuBurns]

They had budgets in the $20 million range. I'm open to being wrong, but can you show me where they both had exactly $22 million budgets?

I'm sure if I was motivated to I could, I know it was a video interview with Amy Hennig around the release of 2, but no, I won't be searching for it, so believe me or not, I don't mind.

I do not recall suggesting Vanquish needed multiplayer.

Good. My point was very simply that CliffyB makes worse games than the people he is attempting to advise, and I find that obnoxious. I'm not saying Gears is crap or anything, I think it's an enjoyable series, just lacking when compared to something like Vanquish.

[johnnysix]

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?

Really? Lol @ comparing Cliffy B to Michael Bay and you think gaming has a Charlie Kaufman? I think game sales are as good a gauge of quality as any. Unlike the film industry, most top selling games are actually good. Seeing a movie is a much smaller investment than buying a video game.

This kind of thinking seems so pretentious to me. The idea that we should dismiss a game because it doesn't aspire to make some sort of social commentary or make us cry is just stupid. The same people wont think twice about exalting Resident Evil or a Mario game and the "stories" in these games are just as laughable, if not more. If a game is fun, then who cares? Not every movie needs to be Schindler's List or Citizen Kane. All of the ideas Cliffy B put forward in this interview are based around gameplay mechanics. I don't see him offering story advice. Give the dude a break.

Also, I don't think Cliffy B is suggesting the addition of multiplayer for the heck of it. He would have seen hard numbers that suggests that the addition of multiplayer modes increases retention and boosts sales. What other motive could he have for suggesting it? We may not like it, but I would wager a bet that he has the figures to back it up.

[StuBurns]

Really? Lol @ comparing Cliffy B to Michael Bay and you think gaming has a Charlie Kaufman? I think game sales are as good a gauge of quality as any. Unlike the film industry, most top selling games are actually good. Seeing a movie is a much smaller investment than buying a video game. This kind of thinking seems so pretentious to me. The idea that we should dismiss a game because it doesn't aspire to make some sort of social commentary or make us cry is just stupid. The same people wont think twice about exalting Resident Evil or a Mario game and the "stories" in these games are just as laughable, if not more. If a game is fun, then who cares? Not every movie needs to be Schindler's List or Citizen Kane. All of the ideas Cliffy B put forward in this interview are based around gameplay mechanics. I don't see him offering story advice. Give the dude a break.

Do you think Vanquish is attempting to make a social commentary? I am not dismissing anything. If you dismiss Michael Bay and for some reason just assume I do, that's hardly my fault.

The Bay/Kaufman compares was purely one of quality, not intent.

[User Name Here]

":
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"

Isn't that what they did in resident evil 4? I remember playing as Ashley at some point.

You do play as Ashley in RE4, yes.

So assuming he didn't say this before they made resident evil 4, he isn't suggesting anything new here lol....

The uncharted idea was a good idea though.

[StuBurns]

You do play as Ashley in RE4, yes. In Siren you switch to a girl who can't use weapons too.

[sublimit]

how that game doesn't have co-op multiplayer is a mistery to me.

I prefer the online system it has than the typical MP.

[Zampano]

A lot of posts in this thread discounting the innovations that Gears has introduced over the years because people can't see past the asthetics.

[johnnysix]

Do you think Vanquish is attempting to make a social commentary? I am not dismissing anything. If you dismiss Michael Bay and for some reason just assume I do, that's hardly my fault. The Bay/Kaufman compares was purely one of quality, not intent.

I do dismiss Bay. That's on me ;)

I guess I've misread you here and lumped your thoughts in with some others I've been hearing on podcasts recently. I don't see how Vanquish is any different to Gears in terms of quality though that's personal taste i guess.

[TucoBenedictoPacifico]

I essentially don't like any of his suggestions (well, almost) and I'm not even into Japanese games that much, but I guess that's just me, judging by reactions in this thread.

[Pinko Marx]

Coal Train
COLETRANE
GET IT?
CLIFFY U SO CLEVER

[StuBurns]

I do dismiss Bay. That's on me ;) I guess I've misread you here and lumped your thoughts in with some others I've been hearing on podcasts recently. I don't see how Vanquish is any different to Gears in terms of quality though that's personal taste i guess.

As far as pulpy action films go, I think The Rock is quite good, although I fear that may sway us further off topic. Unfortunately I'm out for the afternoon, so I can't reply to any replies, bye gents.

[KingItachi]

I don't like any of his suggestions especially the one about making their games more western friendly.

[Orayn]

I don't like any of his suggestions especially the one about making their games more western friendly.

Worked okay for Demon's Souls, and God knows the industry needs more games like that.

[noobasuar]

It's too bad that that he made one of the greatest third person multiplayer games of this generation with the first gears of war and then went on to royally fuck everything that made multiplayer in the first one great with gears of war 2. At least 3 was a better than 2 but still when the best multiplayer game you've made is the first one of the series than you really shouldn't be giving advice when you've pretty much ruined one of the best multiplayer games of this generation with each new game that's been released.

[KingItachi]

Worked okay for Demon's Souls, and God knows the industry needs more games like that.

Demon Souls is an exception,I'm glad the Tales dev's will do their own thing and not try westernize their games.

[Orayn]

Demon Souls is an exception,I'm glad the Tales dev's will do their own thing and not try westernize their games.

Well, Tales is predicated on being very "anime" and does well enough in Japan that Bamco barely feels the need to export them, so I don't see why you'd think anything Cliff said is even remotely applicable. He's not advocating making all Japanese games about muscular dudebros for the hell of it, but sharing his thoughts on games that are already designed with the overseas market in mind, but could do a better job of appealing to American and European sensibilities.

[Pupi18]

All the games do not need multiplayer.

Shadows of the Damn story is about 1 guy saving his girlfriend from hell so multiplayer doesn't really fit.

Vanquish by the way it plays it might have been a bit too crazy for it to work with Multiplayer and probably would have to skip the slow motion in order to have all working and still wouldn't be a fun experience.

Dislike completely Fatal Frame multiplayer idea. I dont want people trying to scare me to then rate them. I want a story focused game like the other games but with less slower gameplay.

Resident Evil I agree things can work divided but I would still prefer a single player horror over multiplayer experience since it takes part of the horror out since being helped doesn't make you feel so helpless.

Silent Hill has been dead after the 3rd game completely agree.

Overall he seems he wants multiplayer on everything and white it doesn't needs to be social

[Pachterballs]

great read. his vision of uncharted is a completely different sort of game. More like a mmo. Not sure how it would work with no story.

but I think his idea for resident evil sounds fucking terrible.

still; he probably flew by the seat of his pants on those questions and they're still interesting to read.

cliffy is good people

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

world wide?

so. you think we'll get a sequel? /heh

[NinjaBoiX]

I really rate this man. I think Gears is a masterclass in game design. I mean, yeah, it's basically just a linear, monster closet TPS with a Warhammer art style, but the underlying mechanics are just beautiful.

Still the greatest cover system out there (but goddamn they need to add sidle round a corner), perfectly weighted aiming, the ability to choose which side of the cover you blind fire from is a lovely detail, the criminally ignored active reload, vast and varied enemy set, ditto for the weapons (admittedly fairly generic, but each wonderfully designed) and loads of other stuff, brilliant audio cues, skipable comms calls, tac-com, meatshields, plugging emergence holes, I could go on all day.

I can see why it's not for everybody, with the art style, the cheesy tone and such, but it's one of my fav franchises this gen. So well put together, and bursting at the seams with wonderful design touches. Anything Cliffy is involved in automatically interests me now.

[charsace]

Please, NO. Really. NO. Last thing gaming needs is for someone to preach the glory of brodude-ism to the east too. He poisoned the wells enough in the west already this gen, visually speaking.

What the hell is this nonsense?

[digita1alchemy]

I can't say I agree with a single thing he said. Similarly, I don't own a single one of his games.

[Orayn]

What the hell is this nonsense?

[aeolist]

Sounds like his point is exactly what so many people have already said this generation, which is that games like Vanquish are great but when you charge $60 for them and put them on the shelf next to games that have much more breadth with various multiplayer modes, DLC, etc, the value proposition doesn't look so good.

I get that people like the game and don't want it to change but it shouldn't have been full price retail for a 6 hour SP-only title. That kind of game can't survive anymore.

[Riposte]

I respect dat cliffy.

I could see Vanquish multiplayer working and it wouldn't necessarily need slow-mo. The real question is what mechanics would you put in place to make the game playable in multiplayer. I think Armored Core would be the best place to look for inspiration. I think that game has a better "dodging" system with boosters actually.

Coal Train COLETRANE GET IT? CLIFFY U SO CLEVER

lol


EDIT: Dark Souls did not do any "westernization" (though they've might with the PC).

[Haunted]

A lot of posts in this thread discounting the innovations that Gears has introduced over the years because people can't see past the asthetics.

Active reload immediately comes to mind, what else?

[aeolist]

Uncharted 1 and 2 both had budgets of $22M. But that is irrelevant. Vanquish would have been a worse game if they had been forced to split what they had to add multiplayer, and would have been required to sell more to make money had they been given a larger budget to add multiplayer.

Wouldn't U1 have spent a lot on assets and tech development and wouldn't have a good bit of that been reusable for the sequel?

[KingItachi]

Well, Tales is predicated on being very "anime" and does well enough in Japan that Bamco barely feels the need to export them, so I don't see why you'd think anything Cliff said is even remotely applicable. He's not advocating making all Japanese games about muscular dudebros for the hell of it, but sharing his thoughts on games that are already designed with the overseas market in mind, but could do a better job of appealing to American and European sensibilities.

I don't want JP dev's going out of their way to appease western sensibilities.

[KingItachi]

A lot of posts in this thread discounting the innovations that Gears has introduced over the years because people can't see past the asthetics.

What innovations.

[Heavy]

That was one of the best interviews I've read in a while. Thanks for posting.

[aeolist]

I know some other (shitty) games did it first but making cover-based third person shooting approachable and fun was pretty huge, I'll definitely give Epic props for that even though I personally dislike the GoW games

[noobasuar]

Active reload immediately comes to mind, what else?

The best third person cover system available in any game to date.

A multiplayer mode that focused on not having respawns and excelled because of it.

The way chat was implemented in the multiplayer of the first game.

[Hcoregamer00]

As a Weeb I think that his suggestions are great for western-influenced Japanese games.

Especially for resident evil :)

[charsace]

It's too bad that that he made one of the greatest third person multiplayer games of this generation with the first gears of war and then went on to royally fuck everything that made multiplayer in the first one great with gears of war 2. At least 3 was a better than 2 but still when the best multiplayer game you've made is the first one of the series than you really shouldn't be giving advice when you've pretty much ruined one of the best multiplayer games of this generation with each new game that's been released.

You're crazy. Gears1 multi was a roadie running shotgun fest. Gears3 is a much better multi game than 1 or 2.

And the Gears series is innovative. At least the Uncharted, Vanquish and a ton of other devs seem to think so.

[NinjaBoiX]

What innovations.

Cover system (yeah, kill.switch whatever)
Active Reload
Hold button to zoom in on events
Roadie run
Dynamic clip SFX as it empties
Horde mode
...etc

I mean, are you serious?