[Anteater]

Looking at the success of RE:Racoon City, I'd say he's on to something. I know it's something some people don't want to hear, but in this day and age, multiplayer really affects the average buyers incentive. I hate tacked on multiplayer modes as much as the next guy, but it can be done right. Personally, I think multiplayer in Vanquish would've been pretty neat.

Well that's what it's about to begin with, it's not whether or not the game will be as good with MP, but how people will accept it because they could play it with their friends, vanquish doesn't need to be fast, precise online, people only care they could rocket slide and shoot shit in the face.

[TheSeks]

i know a lot of people who spent more time with the MP of mass effect and uncharted than with the main game. COD used to be a single player franchise with tacked on MP. Having good MP increases the value of your product. Few are willing to pay 60$ for a 8 hour campain when so many games give so much better value.

And that's fine. But then you get a Dead Space 2 situation where it dies within a week, so what was the point of putting dev time and money into that venture? Might as well have spent the time giving more of a single player experience.

Tacking on multiplayer to singleplayer franchises is always a gamble and in general most series lose that gamble.

[SatelliteOfLove]

And that's fine. But then you get a Dead Space 2 situation where it dies within a week, so what was the point of putting dev time and money into that venture? Might as well have spent the time giving more of a single player experience. Tacking on multiplayer to singleplayer franchises is always a gamble and in general most series lose that gamble.

My only guess is that Cliff was thinking in terms of bulletpoint on the back of the box? That was the thinking back in 2004 when this trend started, I'd think.

Also, Monster Hunter, Dragon Quest IX, X.

[specialguy]

I'm very familiar with Cliffy's "multiplayer or 40+ hour campaign is a must, 6-8 hour single player games are dead because of piracy and redbox" philosophy, and I tend to agree with it, but OTOH I've noticed it doesn't save games. There are plenty of games with MP that bomb just the same.

The thing is it's very hard to get critical mass in a MP shooter. 80% of MP people are playing COD and BF. The other 20% are probably mostly playing Gears and Halo. So if you just release a B level shooter with MP, a good example being say Crysis 2 (well I think C2 is triple A, but it's sales were B level), who's going to play the MP?

[Air Zombie Meat]

About vanquish multiplayer, it's not something I want but people keep saying that slow mo would be impossible online. Didn't Killing Floor do just that? Never played it but how did it work out there?

Slow mo would probably be pointless in versus because you'd be giving your opponent the benefit of slow mo as well. Unless you artificially slowed their reactions during it which could make for a frustrating experience. For co-op though, I don't see how it would be a problem at all.

[TheSeks]

I'm very familiar with Cliffy's "multiplayer or 40+ hour campaign is a must, 6-8 hour single player games are dead because of piracy and redbox" philosophy, and I tend to agree with it, but OTOH I've noticed it doesn't save games. There are plenty of games with MP that bomb just the same. The thing is it's very hard to get critical mass in a MP shooter. 80% of MP people are playing COD and BF. The other 20% are probably mostly playing Gears and Halo. So if you just release a B level shooter with MP, a good example being say Crysis 2 (well I think C2 is triple A, but it's sales were B level), who's going to play the MP?

Ding ding. And we're mostly done with this thread.

When lightining does strike and your tacked-on multiplayer does work, you don't want to split the fanbase or change what worked. Unfortunately, that memo wasn't given to Ubisoft or Naughty Dog in time to where they killed their own multiplayer modes that were fun before they started.

"Brotherhood has two free maps and people seem to be enjoying it. We should totally charge for new maps to get in on that cash money! We'll do it in Revelations as well!"

*tumble weeds in base mode, maybe people playing with all the maps I can't say and I can't care. Fuck Ubisoft.*

"Gee, our multiplayer is fun. Let's ruin it with lag shooting hit detection and making the game "stay in your spawn and kill anyone stupid enough to come out!"
*tumble weeds as player base in U2 get sick of this shit and leave*

So U3 comes out. Can't care. Revelations multiplayer comes out, sort-of care. New maps come out, drop care. Really, developers that want people to break from BF/CoD need to:

-Release maps for free. I'm sorry, but the DLC money gravy train is over and the only way to build your community is to go the Valve approach and SUPPORT it.
-Don't mess with what works. Don't pull the rug from under people once they go "shit, this is pretty fun for a tacked-on mode! I gotta tell my friends!" because they won't give you the time of day the second time around with "fool me once..."
-And if the multiplayer doesn't work, axe it. Put that money into singleplayer and lick your wounds and try again at a later date. Because leaving it there simply won't help you.

[jett]

Cliff gives good advice and has sound ideas, didn't know he was a SH and FF fan either. Bonus points for that. Additional bonus points for considering the SH franchise over after #3!

[Pranay_]

Was wondering why was uncharted brought upon in between japanese games ? O.o.

Finshed reading everything in the op. Some really good points he made.

[gabbo]

The last paragraph is really telling of why he doesn't just lead a small team at Epic and cobble those ideas together himself. Some of them sound really interesting, but I don't see any need to preach to Japanese developers about them.

Maybe if Epic didn't have fist-pumping as its core mantra it could happen.

[MuddyDonut]

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.

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

Usually when you present an argument you present your ideas as fact and support it. However, common sense tells you that it's still an opinion. I see nothing wrong with someone expressing their opinion and I don't understand why you are so upset about it.

As for Cliffy B, I like his ideas. So that's good I guess.

[2San]

Honestly stop talking like Gears is better like it's a damn fact. Since they offer totally different experiences. Vanquish offers faster gameplay and is based around twitch based play. Usually when you present an argument you present your ideas as fact and support it. However, common sense tells you that it's still an opinion. I see nothing wrong with someone expressing their opinion and I don't understand why you are so upset about it.

I never said Gears was better. Just pointing out they have different strengths. The poster I responded to seems to think that the creator of game can learn nothing from another dev, because they are supposedly worse devs. You like your game that's fine, no need put down others or look down others while liking the games you like. Especially when they offer entirely different experiences. The way the poster in question talks seems to say that people in general think that Vanquish is the better game.

[MuddyDonut]

I never said Gears was better. Just pointing out they have different strengths. The poster I responded to seems to think that the creator of game can learn nothing from another dev, because they are supposedly worse devs. You like your game that's fine, no need put down others or look down others while liking the games you like. Especially when they offer entirely different experiences. The way the poster in question talks seems to say that people in general think that Vanquish is the better game.

Gotcha.

Edit: But that's like his opinion bro.

Edit 2: I hope Cliffy puts some of these ideas to use. Maybe there is something in Fortnite to look forward to.

[kayos90]

Great to see that Cliff understands that Japanese developers are struggling a bit. At least in the west. Doing great on their side.

[pickle]

cliff is a bright guy. i like his ideas.

[Apdiddy]

I agree with Cliff on most of his ideas except for Shadows of the Damned. Such a steaming pile of shit that one was. "Fun" and "Shadows of the Damned" shouldn't be used together.

[Teknoman]

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 dunno man, his ideas posted seem pretty well thought out, and not necessarily about giving eastern games a western aesthetic paintjob.

I agree with Cliff on most of his ideas except for Shadows of the Damned. Such a steaming pile of shit that one was. "Fun" and "Shadows of the Damned" shouldn't be used together.

Big boner sections? Sure. But everything else was pretty entertaining. No where near shit quality whatsoever, even if there were some sections you didnt enjoy.

[Dacvak]

Cliffy has a lot of insight and some great ideas. But it's a lot easier to sound smart and creative when dealing with hypotheticals. A lot of the games and scenarios he was describing realistically would have a very difficult time coming to fruition.

Still, his head's in the right place, which is always refreshing to know.

[Teknoman]

I'd still like to see what he could do as far as making an actual Unreal 3.

[Apdiddy]

Big boner sections? Sure. But everything else was pretty entertaining. No where near shit quality whatsoever, even if there were some sections you didnt enjoy.

Some sections I didn't enjoy? There were a LOT of sections I didn't enjoy. For every interesting idea (and the Big Boner section wasn't THAT bad once you got the hang of it), there were others that were just bad. Anytime you had to be chased by Paula for instance. I think a NG+ would have helped this game just a little bit.

The whole game had shit quality IMO.

The aiming was just atrocious. The weapons unless powered up fully were fine. The enemies were nice and dumb and it wasn't that difficult to face.

But the bosses in this game....oh the bosses. The three sisters were ridiculous to face and I'm forgetting some other sections. And the fight with Fleming is one of the worst, 'fun' battles I've ever seen. I still haven't beaten the game due to the battle with Fleming! Everytime I try the battle I just end up thinking, "I'm not enjoying this AT ALL" and stop. Which is about as far from fun as you can get.

I'm sorry, but I don't get the love this game is getting. I feel like there's something I'm missing when playing it. How anyone could have fun with this I don't know, other than a masochistic appeal. Cliff from Epic enjoyed it or at least enjoyed it enough. So I'm not going to fault him for liking something that I didn't. I just don't see what is so great about SOTD.

[ZombiePlatypus]

Honestly, all his suggestions (while fun) just sound like typical-westernified versions of Japanese games into the usual online-centric games that are dominating right now in the west. A lot of times, the experience offerd in single-player just cannot be replicated in a multiplayer online mode without losing a lot of what makes it fun.

If these are offered as a seperate optional mode, then sure, why not. If it's gonna eat into the main, single player option though, then no, I'd rather not have these implemented.

[codecow]

And that's fine. But then you get a Dead Space 2 situation where it dies within a week, so what was the point of putting dev time and money into that venture? Might as well have spent the time giving more of a single player experience. Tacking on multiplayer to singleplayer franchises is always a gamble and in general most series lose that gamble.

When I looked a year ago we had someone on Xbox 360 who played > 12 days played on it, he/she got quite a bit of value.

[Teknoman]

Some sections I didn't enjoy? There were a LOT of sections I didn't enjoy. For every interesting idea (and the Big Boner section wasn't THAT bad once you got the hang of it), there were others that were just bad. Anytime you had to be chased by Paula for instance. I think a NG+ would have helped this game just a little bit. The whole game had shit quality IMO. The aiming was just atrocious. The weapons unless powered up fully were fine. The enemies were nice and dumb and it wasn't that difficult to face. But the bosses in this game....oh the bosses. The three sisters were ridiculous to face and I'm forgetting some other sections. And the fight with Fleming is one of the worst, 'fun' battles I've ever seen. I still haven't beaten the game due to the battle with Fleming! Everytime I try the battle I just end up thinking, "I'm not enjoying this AT ALL" and stop. Which is about as far from fun as you can get. I'm sorry, but I don't get the love this game is getting. I feel like there's something I'm missing when playing it. How anyone could have fun with this I don't know, other than a masochistic appeal. Cliff from Epic enjoyed it or at least enjoyed it enough. So I'm not going to fault him for liking something that I didn't. I just don't see what is so great about SOTD.

Well I do agree about the final boss and the game needing new game plus, but didnt really have that much trouble with the sisters. Maybe its just a thing I have about a game being called shitty when it really isnt. Sonic 06, Rogue Warrior, stuff like that is shitty quality.

[TGO]

he make good points but

Gamers : developers shouldn't ignore single player, "in a disc-based market

fix

that's the biggest crime this gen

[Sushen]

Talk is cheap. Ideas aren't. What's cheap is cranking out the same game you've been making since the PS1. Why aren't we encouraging out of the box thinking? If we're not seeing ideas like these come to fruition then we need to look at why not, instead of discouraging discussion.

Ideas are cheap until it gets molded into something great, and that's what really takes skills. Try to think of all those games with awesome ideas with meh executions.

[HK-47]

Cliff needs to play Amnesia

When did Amnesia do that?

[GSR]

Holy shit, he just earned some major respect points for whipping out a Clock Tower reference.

[RooMHM]

Ideas are cheap until it gets molded into something great, and that's what really takes skills. Try to think of all those games with awesome ideas with meh executions.

You're right but there are a lot of studios which do great in execution but so few with soome risk taking behaviors and fresh ideas. See Bungie, Epic, Infinity Ward, Treyarch, DICE (even though they have some nice ideas), etc. Those developpers just don't take any risk and they release new games without any new idea, without the will to bring something new.

[Dark FaZe]

Game is going to have to be RE4/Skyrim levels of greatness for me to buy it unless it has MP.

Bought the Witcher...such an unbelivable game, but its just hard to swallow paying 60 for a game that I won't be playing again.

[Riposte]

Game is going to have to be RE4/Skyrim levels of greatness for me to buy it unless it has MP. Bought the Witcher...such an unbelivable game, but its just hard to swallow paying 60 for a game that I won't be playing again.

Everyone should play the Witcher 2 twice lol.

[Fudgepuppy]

I feel so out of touch with the world when I buy singleplayer games day one.

Were there people that actually looked at Dead Space 2 and felt "I don't know, oh, it's got multiplayer, I'M IN!".

Vanquish and Shadows of the Damned didn't sell because they were niche titles that to most people didn't stand out. I didn't care for either of them because Shadows of the damned seemed to be really boring, and Vanquish' demo just wasn't very fun.

[ArjanN]

I don't think a MP mode for Vanquish would work at all for a number of reasons.

I don't think every game needs multiplayer either, even if it's not tacked on and actually good, because most people will just stick to the same 3-4 big MP titles anyway.

When did Amnesia do that?

Any time you look at a monster in Amnesia.

[reptilescorpio]

I don't agree with him on a lot of things and haven't enjoyed his games in a long, long time now but it is fantastic that he can put all this out there. Absolutely hate when developers have to tow a company line and not say anything negative. Without this kind of constructive criticism a lot of developers will live life in a bubble and not see the end coming for their company/job/series.

I think he is overselling multiplayer though, nowhere near as big a selling point as it used to be. Syndicate and Homefront had really well developed MP modes but still sold poorly and were unappreciated.

[Kusagari]

Game is going to have to be RE4/Skyrim levels of greatness for me to buy it unless it has MP. Bought the Witcher...such an unbelivable game, but its just hard to swallow paying 60 for a game that I won't be playing again.

If you love the Witcher I have no idea why you would not play it again. You're supposed to.

[alexandros]

I think japanese developers are falling behind precisely because they're trying to "westernize" their games. They have lost their unique identity and have become "me too" games creators.

[Pachterballs]

he make good points but fix that's the biggest crime this gen

Oh hell yes.

co signed. the quotes gone AWOL but you guys can see it up the thread.

[Anteater]

Were there people that actually looked at Dead Space 2 and felt "I don't know, oh, it's got multiplayer, I'M IN!".

Yes there are, my friend who doesn't care about some of these games would tell me "lets get it!" whenever there are any rumors of multiplayer in any of the games.*

*Doesn't apply to anarchy reigns

and another friend would not ever buy any SP games for full price, yes I know get new friends and all that, but it's a legitimate issue because it's always fun to play games with friends especially when people don't have the time games alone.

[Pachterballs]

^ I didn't even realise (well its been awhile) dead space 2 has MP and I've played through and loved it - 2-3 times.

:P

MP is not neccassary. Games can be MP - the scourge of developers/pubs; 2nd hand games be damned!!!

[subversus]

When did Amnesia do that?

you can reread what I have quoted in that post and think about the main Amnesia mechanic.

[subversus]

Game is going to have to be RE4/Skyrim levels of greatness for me to buy it unless it has MP. Bought the Witcher...such an unbelivable game, but its just hard to swallow paying 60 for a game that I won't be playing again.

do you know that you skip like 10-15 hours of content if you played TW2 once?

[luka]

If I were to rate the Silent Hills in the order of the best ones... The Silent Hill series for me was like Highlander, which for me stopped after the first one. So in regards to Silent Hill, after Silent Hill 3 for me there are no Silent Hills. And that sounds really mean; I apologize to anybody who works on the Silent Hills.

respect for cliff +100

although i think he's far to lenient on the current caretakers of the franchise

[Vandiger]

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.

Quote: I'm afraid people will see my big advice as "just tack on multiplayer." No, don't ever just tack on multiplayer; it's a huge mistake. Make the multiplayer soar and make it relevant to the game, and make it key to the DNA of what the experience is.

He has some great ideas to enhance games and add value, best for gamers

[Truespeed]

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.

Yeah, I was thinking the exact same thing. Perhaps if it was Warren Specter or Will Wright this "How To Makes Games" guide would have been more palatable, but he's living in a glass house and hindsight is always 20/20. So many clichés to draw upon - much like his games. That said, I really respect Cliff and his views - which I may not always agree with.

[IrishNinja]

i don't know how many cliffy interviews ive read that i can say this about, but i agree with a lot of what he's saying here.

with the RE split/evolution thing: i'd posit there's still room for girl running from giant scissors games, but i can't really argue with him on the likely $20-30 price point for it.

that said, id like to play a lot of the games he pitched ideas for.

[djtiesto]

I kind of don't get the "No, Japanese console games are fine as they are now," position. I mean, I can see why someone would be fine with that creatively, but so far it's resulting in a heavily dwindling number of Japanese console games, and a lot more are being canceled by the day. If there wasn't any sales problem, we wouldn't even be having this discussion. These days, we're getting to the point where it's more a question of "How many of these things will continue to exist?" I mean, there's nothing wrong with 95%+ of the Japanese industry switching to handheld and social games, but Cliffy's advise strikes me as more targeted at keeping their console titles profitable enough to stay alive.

Because the reasons I like Japanese games are (very) rarely replicated in western titles... and making them into clones of western games (of which there are enough of out there) means they might just as well all be gone at that point.

Also, Gust is apparently extremely profitable. ( http://neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=473753 )A small, niche company who makes obscure turn-based RPGs for consoles. Just the kind of game I want as a JP game fan who dislikes handheld and mobile gaming. Other Japanese companies should be following what Gust is doing than what western devs or Inafune say they should be doing. No offense to CliffyB.

[Combichristoffersen]

Well, as long as the multiplayer part doesn't shit up the single player part I'm fine with it being there, as I can just ignore the MP part then.

Also, I like his SH ranking even though I'd put 1 before 3.

[malfcn]

They could have gone a more horror route with Gears..

[kodecraft]

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.

Theres an interview with Cliff that he claims he didn't mean for the Gears characters to come out so huge.

Cliff needs to play Amnesia

I'm pretty sure he knows about it, one of Cliffs strengths is taking good ideas from other games and putting his own spin on it and repackaging it in his own games for us to play.

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.

This. If Vanquish were to have multiplayer this is the way to do it. Instead of several ARS clones fighting each other.

[abasm]

I think his idea isn't that Japanese games aren't inherently inaccessible, but that they are often ignored for offering no avenues for player creativity to justify the $60. The idea is that, if you're spending that much on the game, you're spending money on how much time you could theoretically draw out of the experience, not how much you actually do. Choice and multiplayer build stories from the game that give it life beyond its story and campaign. Even a long game is a hard sell if everyone plays it the same way.

[HawksWinStanley]

Oddly enough I like a lot of Cliff's horror ideas yet I thought Gears had some awesome dark horror elements that slowly faded out during the course of the trilogy and just went straight dudebro. I thought those horror elements really helped make the first game successful. It's a shame they got rid of them.

I still have the stained underwear from when the berserker first made an appearance in Gears 1.

[steveovig]

Know-it-all, overrated hack. How about giving me a fun game that I actually want to play, instead of the usual?