[Pyrokai]

What if I don't care about multiplayer?

[Orayn]

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

Well, lots of them have been doing it for a long-ass time, and many are quite good at it. Should they stop and make sure their games don't appeal dirty gaijin?

[KingItachi]

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?

Winback 64 actually,can't really argue with those but I care for none of them.

[Lucentto]

Binary Domain had mulitplayer, and we all know what happened to that game.

[NinjaBoiX]

Winback 64 actually,can't really argue with those but I care for none of them.

So Winback had a cover system before kill.switch?

[RedSwirl]

if Gears is the kind of Wild, Wild West coal train chugging along, then Vanquish is the Japanese bullet train

You heard it from Cliffy.

So Winback had a cover system before kill.switch?

Yes it did. Winback came out around 2000. Though you could argue that Metal Gear Solid did the cover system before that.

[KingItachi]

Well, lots of them have been doing it for a long-ass time, and many are quite good at it. Should they stop and make sure their games don't appeal dirty gaijin?

I gonna assume they did not go out of their way when those games were made, lol sure why not JK.

[Orayn]

So Winback had a cover system before kill.switch?

It did, actually. Both Kill.Switch and WinBack are surprisingly influential games that kind of went under the radar.

And yeah, what RedSwirl said is also true. Gears didn't invent cover at all, it just did a really good job of codifying the mechanic.

I gonna assume they did not go out of their way when those games were made, lol sure why not JK.

You are absolutely deluded if you think that action games from Capcom and Konami from the late 80's onward weren't designed with either global or Western markets in mind.

[Derrick01]

Yes it did. Winback came out around 2000. Though you could argue that Metal Gear Solid did the cover system before that.

Really poorly. I'm playing the HD collection now and the controls are...ugh.

[BattleMonkey]

He has some good ideas, but would be hard to do. His ideas for Uncharted just seem not possible, it would have to be a pretty massive game, almost MMO like

[Haunted]

Operation Winback was like a direct-to-DVD version of Die Hard/Under Siege.

Cover-based third person shooter with a mediocre campaign. But its multiplayer was probably ahead of its time.

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

Already said that Active Reload is great.
Not sure how good of an innovation that hold button to focus camera is.
Not interested in horde mode and don't know if other games have done that before, but I'm certainly willing to give that to Gears.

If you can expand on that etc. that would be great.


Active Reload and Horde Mode are the innovations Gears brought to the table, I'd say. That its success inspired many other games to copy them and the other features that defined Gears (even if it didn't invent them) is an achievement - though like with most copied features that turned out to be a double-edged sword.

[Brera]

That was an awesome interview.

This Cliify B has shitloads of immense ideas. He's just given lots of freebies out for developers to hog up! I don't understand why these ideas haven't been implemented.

Loved the Uncharted ideas!

[Angry Fork]

Cliffy seems like a really cool nice guy that cares about gaming and has lots of great ideas, but why doesn't he implement them in his own games. Gears is the farthest thing from any of the cool ideas presented in this interview. Make a horror game cliffy and show us some new shit.

[charsace]

Cliffy seems like a really cool nice guy that cares about gaming and has lots of great ideas, but why doesn't he implement them in his own games. Gears is the farthest thing from any of the cool ideas presented in this interview. Make a horror game cliffy and show us some new shit.

A lot of that stuff wouldn't fit into Gears, which is a modern day Contra.

[gogogow]

Not interested in horde mode and don't know if other games have done that before, but I'm certainly willing to give that to Gears.

Horde mode? Isn't that basically round-based Mercenaries mode from RE4?

A lot of that stuff wouldn't fit into Gears, which is a modern day Contra.

It's true though, if he has so many ideas he should implement them in their own games, a new IP, instead of constantly making Gears games.

[Orayn]

A lot of that stuff wouldn't fit into Gears, which is a modern day Contra.

It'd still be nice if Epic were to take the Gears war chest and make something a little more ambitious. If there's anyone with the financial, artistic, and technical chops to make a game that really pushes the envelope, it's them.

[Baconsammy]

ideas are cheap

No they're actually not. Great ideas are worth a fortune.

[RedSwirl]

It did, actually. Both Kill.Switch and WinBack are surprisingly influential games that kind of went under the radar. And yeah, what RedSwirl said is also true. Gears didn't invent cover at all, it just did a really good job of codifying the mechanic. You are absolutely deluded if you think that action games from Capcom and Konami from the late 80's onward weren't designed with either global or Western markets in mind.

Actually, a ton of last gen games used cover systems. Gears was just the first game of any real notoriety to do it. Everything or Nothing had cover, Enter the Matrix did it, the first Red Dead game had cover, just to name a few. Technically speaking Call of Duty 2 emphasized cover just as much without actually having a cover system.

The tragic thing is that when Winback came out people passed it off as a Time Crisis ripoff. Looking back now though, I'm actually surprised at how much Winback cribbed off of Metal Gear, Time Crisis, and Resident Evil. It's flow is surprisingly similar to that of an adventure game. A lot of the fire fights are essentially puzzles. Remember that roof with the lasers?

": 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. 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.

I think Cliffy was suggesting they have you play as Ashley (or a similar character) for half the game.

[aeroslash]

I know i might be in the minority here, but i really don't like the trend of multiplayer in every game.

What i do like about gaming is to experience and live in some fantasy worlds where everything can happen. I understand that there are some games on which the multiplayer is awesome and adds a lot to the experience, mainly sports games, shooters and some others like MH and demons soul's, but in some other games, i don't want the developer to gimp the experience by adding multi...I do not game because i want to be the most hardcore of my friends...

[PowderedToast]

shut the fuck up cliffy.

[RooMHM]

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.

Don't insult me. I'm serious. CliffyB as you call him is just a guy who has embodied the "Epic" brand because he's easy with the media and charismatic (some people think he is at least, don't really know why). The guys behind Epic are those in the shadows that you see less often such as Rein, Sweeney, etc...

No they're actually not. Great ideas are worth a fortune.

Not in this industry. Nobody is willing to buy them and take the risk.

[Orayn]

I know i might be in the minority here, but i really don't like the trend of multiplayer in every game. What i do like about gaming is to experience and live in some fantasy worlds where everything can happen. I understand that there are some games on which the multiplayer is awesome and adds a lot to the experience, mainly sports games, shooters and some others like MH and demons soul's, but in some other games, i don't want the developer to gimp the experience by adding multi...I do not game because i want to be the most hardcore of my friends...

I think the key to extinguishing the "DON'T RUIN IT BY ADDING MULTI!" sentiment is by doing more of what Demon's Souls and Dark Souls did. Playing with or against other people are really the low-hanging fruit of multiplayer in general and there are many more ways of having players interact, both direct and indirect, that developers have barely begun to explore.

[AAK]

This game meets all your criteria Cliff! Now everyone purchase this when it comes out!

[KingItachi]

It did, actually. Both Kill.Switch and WinBack are surprisingly influential games that kind of went under the radar. And yeah, what RedSwirl said is also true. Gears didn't invent cover at all, it just did a really good job of codifying the mechanic. You are absolutely deluded if you think that action games from Capcom and Konami from the late 80's onward weren't designed with either global or Western markets in mind.

A few games come to mind but I stand by what I said they do not need to go out of thier way to appease the West.

[NinjaBoiX]

Operation Winback was like a direct-to-DVD version of Die Hard/Under Siege. Cover-based third person shooter with a mediocre campaign. But its multiplayer was probably ahead of its time. Already said that Active Reload is great. Not sure how good of an innovation that hold button to focus camera is. Not interested in horde mode and don't know if other games have done that before, but I'm certainly willing to give that to Gears. If you can expand on that etc. that would be great. Active Reload and Horde Mode are the innovations Gears brought to the table, I'd say. That its success inspired many other games to copy them is an achievements (and like most copied features, a double-edged sword).

I agree that active reload and horde mode are the main innovations, and that they weren't that first guys to do a cover system, but they perfected and championed it. The latter two have had a huge influence, and it's a crime that active reload didn't get stolen more.

As for the others, yes, they were maybe a little tenuous, but each is relevant IMO. The "hold to view" thing is particularly good as it's signaled by a simple audio cue, is entirely optional, and works well without the intrusive HUD elements, it's more of a shame that most other games simply snatch your view regardless. MS:Apocalypse did it right too.

The roadie run is another one I think is a genuine call. Yeah, you can run in most games, but gears had that awesome "war correspondent POV" style that others have since emulated. Same with the dynamic emptying clip SFX, it allows you to focus on your enemy rather than your clip count.

I didn't claim they were all game changers, but nice, simple mechanics that were fairly innovative.

[Orayn]

A few games come to mind but I stand by what I said they do not need to go out of thier way to appease the West.

Do you really think Japanese developers continue to design games with only Japan in mind when more of their sales come from overseas? I guess I should restate what I said earlier - It's not so much about appealing to American and European culture as it is about appealing to the people who buy your games. In some cases, the majority of those people aren't from Japan.

[PowderedToast]

western arrogance is a funny thing. by saying this cliffy is also pushing design homogenisation, is he aware of that?

[Orayn]

western arrogance is a funny thing. by saying this cliffy is also pushing design homogenisation, is he aware of that?

Pushing design homogenization by suggesting that the now-homogenized Resident Evil return to its horror-based roots?

[Baconsammy]

western arrogance is a funny thing. by saying this cliffy is also pushing design homogenisation, is he aware of that?

Teaching Japanese devs how to make games that have a better chance to sell to westerners is arrogance now? Sounds like good business to me.

[Haunted]

I agree that active reload and horde mode are the main innovations, and that they weren't that first guys to do a cover system, but they perfected and championed it. The latter two have had a huge influence, and it's a crime that active reload didn't get stolen more. As for the others, yes, they were maybe a little tenuous, but each is relevant IMO. The "hold to view" thing is particularly good as it's signaled by a simple audio cue, is entirely optional, and works well without the intrusive HUD elements, it's more of a shame that most other games simply snatch your view regardless. MS:Apocalypse did it right too. The roadie run is another one I think is a genuine call. Yeah, you can run in most games, but gears had that awesome "war correspondent POV" style that others have since emulated. Same with the dynamic emptying clip SFX, it allows you to focus on your enemy rather than your clip count. I didn't claim they were all game changers, but nice, simple mechanics that were fairly innovative.

Yeah, there's no doubt that the game is well executed and does a lot of things right. It didn't invent most of them, but still. They've put their own spin on some of these. Something like the roadie run isn't special (there's a sprint in every other game), but combining the sprint with an established filming technique - the shaky cam with a low camera angle - makes it uniqe.

I just thought of another one, the guitar riff audio cue when an encounter is over. Such a simple thing, but very well done.

No they're actually not. Great ideas are worth a fortune.

What I meant is that everyone has them so they're easy to come by. Everyone's an armchair game designer these days. "If I were in charge of..." etc etc

[AB12]

Usually dont like MP, but when it works well it adds a lot of replay value to the game. For example ME 3 didnt really need MP, but it is somewhat fun, and has made me forget the SP, which is a good thing. Some of the ideas CliffyB is suggesting are good, if developers are deciding on including MP, they should think outside the box.

[KingItachi]

Usually dont like MP, but when it works well it adds a lot of replay value to the game. For example ME 3 didnt really need MP, but it is somewhat fun, and has made me forget the SP, which is a good thing. Some of the ideas CliffyB is suggesting are good, if developers are deciding on including MP, they should think outside the box.

The way they implemented MP was horrible.

[PowderedToast]

Pushing design homogenization by suggesting that the now-homogenized Resident Evil return to its horror-based roots?

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?

it's a pretty disgusting practice that's supported everywhere. from a gamer perspective, why would you want this? - i suppose if you believe in games as product it sounds appealing. to me it's not.

the feature set and approach to mechanics are part of what give japanese games their verve and energy, that cultural imprint is what makes them worthwhile forms of expression. why support a desire to remove it? the west's unrelenting need to iterate isn't felt in japan, that's what makes them different. and that design individualism is what makes gaming a diverse, fascinating hobby.

[RoylAsult]

his idea for Uncharted :O

[2San]

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.

Cliff created a better six hours experience if you like playing with other people. Quality isn't just measured by it's single player campaign.

Honestly stop talking like Vanquish is better like it's a damn fact. Since they offer totally different experiences. Gears offers way more deliberate gameplay and is based around team play.

I agree that active reload and horde mode are the main innovations, and that they weren't that first guys to do a cover system, but they perfected and championed it. The latter two have had a huge influence, and it's a crime that active reload didn't get stolen more.

Gears has the wall sliding/canceling mechanic. Pretty sure no other game has that. It's that in combination with the feel and weight of the weapons and movement is what makes the games great.

[PowderedToast]

Teaching Japanese devs how to make games that have a better chance to sell to westerners is arrogance now? Sounds like good business to me.

believing that they need changing at all is arrogance. cliffy's fixation on sales confirms what most already believe, he's certainly no artist.

[KingItachi]

Do you really think Japanese developers continue to design games with only Japan in mind when more of their sales come from overseas? I guess I should restate what I said earlier - It's not so much about appealing to American and European culture as it is about appealing to the people who buy your games. In some cases, the majority of those people aren't from Japan.

I believe so. they don't need to pander to anyone just make a great game it will sell itself.

[captmcblack]

I expected to hate this thread, and came away here digging it. Cliff has a lot of really great ideas and comments, actually.

If anything, at least he understands when and why MP should occur as well.

[NinjaBoiX]

Yeah, there's no doubt that the game is well executed and does a lot of things right. It didn't invent most of them, but still. They've put their own spin on some of these. Something like the roadie run isn't special (there's a sprint in every other game), but combining the sprint with an established filming technique - the shaky cam with a low camera angle - makes it uniqe. I just thought of another one, the guitar riff audio cue when an encounter is over. Such a simple thing, but very well done.

Audio cues in Gears are some of the best around. As you say, the riff to end an encounter, the nice little sombre music cue when you pick up a tag, the metallic clank when your bullets are hitting armour, the aforementioned clip emptying thing, new enemies getting announced by your squad "wretches incoming!" and such, big enemies calling out before a big attack, "boom", "grind" so you can take evasive action.

Anyway, I'll stop waxing lyrical like a rabid fan boy. I just think that pretty much every aspect of it's design and execution are top notch. It's one of the most satisfying and visceral (sorry, but Gears is like the dictionary definition) games you can play.

[Heavy]

Operation Winback was like a direct-to-DVD version of Die Hard/Under Siege. Cover-based third person shooter with a mediocre campaign. But its multiplayer was probably ahead of its time. Already said that Active Reload is great. Not sure how good of an innovation that hold button to focus camera is. Not interested in horde mode and don't know if other games have done that before, but I'm certainly willing to give that to Gears. If you can expand on that etc. that would be great. Active Reload and Horde Mode are the innovations Gears brought to the table, I'd say. That its success inspired many other games to copy them and the other features that defined Gears (even if it didn't invent them) is an achievement - though like with most copied features that turned out to be a double-edged sword.

When you 'don't count' stuff like the cover functionality of Gears because a game that 3 people bought had a similar mechanic you're just going into semantics. Gears popularized, evolved, and revolutionized the cover mechanic in shooters. I guess that would be a better way to say it. Was Gears the unquestionable FIRST game to use it? No, but years from now when people think what game started the cover revolution they'll say Gears not Kill.Switch and that's because Gears popularized it and evolved it into an easy-to-use, intuitive mechanic.

[Orayn]

it's a pretty disgusting practice that's supported everywhere. from a gamer perspective, why would you want this? - i suppose if you believe in games as product it sounds appealing. to me it's not. the feature set and approach to mechanics are part of what give japanese games their verve and energy, that cultural imprint is what makes them worthwhile forms of expression. why support a desire to remove it? the west's unrelenting need to iterate isn't felt in japan, that's what makes them different. and that design individualism is what makes gaming a diverse, fascinating hobby.

I'm having a bit of a hard time seeing where you're getting a cry for homogenization from Cliff's quotes, to be honest.

I mean, I support homogenization in control schemes perhaps, but I find it distasteful in general.

[Retro_]

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.

Yeah

Some of his ideas read like focus test feedback rather than insightful commentary from an industry figure

This game meets all your criteria Cliff! Now everyone purchase this when it comes out!

yessir :)

[Muchi Muchi Pink]

He should hire PG to make some awesome game.

[Sophia]

When you 'don't count' stuff like the cover functionality of Gears because a game that 3 people bought had a similar mechanic you're just going into semantics. Gears popularized, evolved, and revolutionized the cover mechanic in shooters. I guess that would be a better way to say it. Was Gears the unquestionable FIRST game to use it? No, but years from now when people think what game started the cover revolution they'll say Gears not Kill.Switch and that's because Gears popularized it and evolved it into an easy-to-use, intuitive mechanic.

I must admit, the Cover System and Active Reload were the first two things (besides the VGA cable letting me play in ZOMG HD!!! for the first time on a CRT) that I recognized as awe inspiring when I first got Gears and my 360 back in 2006.

[Tiktaalik]

Lots of great ideas by Cliffy here. He's dead on about multiplayer. It needs to be in more games, but if it's simply tacked on it's always going to fail and developers should never do that.

[lunchwithyuzo]

The upcoming FF2 remake actually has something like this.

Likewise isn't Spirit Camera essentially the FF ARG he's lamenting Vita not having?

[Sophia]

Likewise isn't Spirit Camera essentially the FF ARG he's lamenting Vita not having?

From what I've heard and what I've read, Spirit Camera is pretty bad.

[Neiteio]

I was most interested in the ideas for horror game mechanics. A first-person game where the monster is most clear in your peripheral vision and becomes more and more vague as you focus on it -- that sounds awesome. The "close your eyes to turn invisible" mechanic sounds interesting, too. Like an inverted Enemy Zero.

[Baconsammy]

believing that they need changing at all is arrogance. cliffy's fixation on sales confirms what most already believe, he's certainly no artist.

Oh good lord.

Lots of great ideas by Cliffy here. He's dead on about multiplayer. It needs to be in more games, but if it's simply tacked on it's always going to fail and developers should never do that.

Horde mode has changed how I approach shooters. I used to rent or borrow them, bet the campaign and then be done with it. PvP bored the shit outa me and made me hate my fellow gamers. Horde mode changed that in a huge way.

[Arklite]

I respect this guy, and I'm a huge fan of the Unreal titles, but I stopped reading when he started off with "Shadows of the Damned needed multiplayer".

No it didn't, neither did Vanquish, and I don't even see how the hell that is a remedy to anything. Dead Space 2 had multiplayer, what has it done for it? Mass Effect 3 seems to have a great multiplayer, but who the fuck bought it for that? Everyone bought these games for the SP, a multiplayer competent is a an added value with little lasting appeal. Is this added value worth the time and cost when it'll be a cheap two or three week thrill for the end user? Uncharted 3 has multiplayer, but is that what's selling it? MGS4 has an awesome MP component and it has never had a major impact in its overall rating or perception.

Epic are masters of multiplayer but Cliff is trying to staple what sells his games onto completely different titles and audiences.