Support NeoGAF

[Stumpokapow]

For what it's worth, I do use the ignore function. I clicked on this thread because it was an interview with the publisher, which are interesting.

The interview talked about:
- How THQ turned itself around
- How working with Eastern European devs lowers costs
- The lawsuit with Jakks/WWE
- THQ game quality and how it will change in the future
- Deadly Creatures and the Wii situation
- De Blob platform discussion
- The iPhone/iPad
- The restructuring with Rainbow / Juiced
- MX vs ATV
- Digital distribution of full retail games
- Hardware price cuts
- Next-gen hardware
- Arc support
- Saints Row 3 and how expectations are different now that GTA4 has come out

... so if I complain about the direction the thread took, it's not because I clicked on a thread marked "Let's rehash the Wii third party software situation", it's because I clicked on a thread that launched with a whole bunch of interesting stuff that got ignored in favour of the exact same line of discussion that's been exhausted for so long.

 

[avatar299]

So, what you're saying is, you genuinely enjoy the constantly rehashing of the same argument and again? Well, unlike core game publishers looking for Wii success, this thread has found its audience.

What should we talk about instead? THQ shutting down 5 studios. Is that more entertaining?

 

[spats]

Wasn't expecting 2 pages of bitching coming in here. Cannot wait to see SR3, I loved SR2 a lot despite all the bugs.

 

[Agnates]

I don't really think THQ of all companies will have a big say about what happens with arc, digital distribution, ipad, etc. If you wanna talk SR3, make a thread, if there isn't one.

 

[schuelma]

If I remember correctly, Gamecube numbers were comparable to Xbox and it wouldn't have taken a significant investment to port the PS2 version to the cube. The practice of leaving the GCN out started long before there was any significant difference between the it and the Xbox.

I have no idea if that is true or not, but assuming it is, the Wii s still a different situation. It isn't selling comparably- it selling so much as to represent a market about as big as the other two platforms combined. My argument, which hasn't been refuted aside from "the world hates nintendo", is that the Wii numbers were so overwhelming that publisher execs and shareholders would have DEMANDED ports of all popular software.

 

[avatar299]

For what it's worth, I do use the ignore function. I clicked on this thread because it was an interview with the publisher, which are interesting.

The interview talked about:
- How THQ turned itself around
- How working with Eastern European devs lowers costs
- The lawsuit with Jakks/WWE
- THQ game quality and how it will change in the future
- Deadly Creatures and the Wii situation
- De Blob platform discussion
- The iPhone/iPad
- The restructuring with Rainbow / Juiced
- MX vs ATV
- Digital distribution of full retail games
- Hardware price cuts
- Next-gen hardware
- Arc support
- Saints Row 3 and how expectations are different now that GTA4 has come out

... so if I complain about the direction the thread took, it's not because I clicked on a thread marked "Let's rehash the Wii third party software situation", it's because I clicked on a thread that launched with a whole bunch of interesting stuff that got ignored in favour of the exact same line of discussion that's been exhausted for so long.

No one is stopping you from talking about this. If you don't want to see anything nintendo, then ignore the posters who talk about Nintendo. Everyone wins.

 

[Stumpokapow]

What should we talk about instead? THQ shutting down 5 studios. Is that more entertaining?

The fact that THQ is publishing a game made by an Eastern European studio and claims it's a great experiment for them because it massively lowers operating costs for producing the game? That's interesting to me, because there are a lot of niche PC games by Eastern European studios--Cryostasis, for example, is a really good one from last year--that could do well on consoles or provide opportunities for top shelf publishers.

And yeah, they just canned two studios. Those two studios are now going to produce digital download content. Think it'll be iPhone, Facebook, or XBLA/PSN/WiiWare? Think this is the emergence of the $20-30 "premium" downloadable title or will they just do regular $10-15 affairs? Who knows.

Or there's the fact that THQ as a studio always depended on its strong stable of licenced titles, including Disney titles. Now Disney has taken the Disney licence back. THQ, on the other hand, has branched out a little bit into a few directions, and last year they got an IP that was such a surprise success that it literally turned the company's finances around 180 degrees (UFC).

Or there's Saints Row 3. Last gen's spate of GTA-clones has largely calmed down, and yet Saints Row, a franchise that is basically described by "Like GTA3, but more mindless and stupid!", is a smash hit for THQ. It's on the third installment. The first two did well supposedly because they were "filling a gap" left by no GTA for the first few years of the generation. GTA is come and gone and it was a very different, more serious, less manic experience than GTA3. Will Saints Row 3 end up being a genre king because Rockstar isn't interested in havoc and insanity anymore?

There's plenty here to talk about.

 

[BattleMonkey]

I *really* hate this argument- its akin to telling sports fans they can never criticize coaches.

Shitty comparison since your describing something in which statistics and everything is laid out on the table. Publishers know FAR more than your average gaffer does. We can critique all we want, but it is generally always just a bunch of mud slinging with no real facts and nothing but conjecture on both ends.

 

[avatar299]

The fact that THQ is publishing a game made by an Eastern European studio and claims it's a great experiment for them because it massively lowers operating costs for producing the game? That's interesting to me, because there are a lot of niche PC games by Eastern European studios--Cryostasis, for example, is a really good one from last year--that could do well on consoles or provide opportunities for top shelf publishers.

And yeah, they just canned two studios. Those two studios are now going to produce digital download content. Think it'll be iPhone, Facebook, or XBLA/PSN/WiiWare? Think this is the emergence of the $20-30 "premium" downloadable title or will they just do regular $10-15 affairs? Who knows.

Or there's the fact that THQ as a studio always depended on its strong stable of licenced titles, including Disney titles. Now Disney has taken the Disney licence back. THQ, on the other hand, has branched out a little bit into a few directions, and last year they got an IP that was such a surprise success that it literally turned the company's finances around 180 degrees (UFC).

There's plenty here to talk about.

Then talk about it. There was no need to come in here bitching about a conversation concerning Nintendo

 

[Agnates]

I have no idea if that is true or not, but assuming it is, the Wii s still a different situation. It isn't selling comparably- it selling so much as to represent a market about as big as the other two platforms combined. My argument, which hasn't been refuted aside from "the world hates nintendo", is that the Wii numbers were so overwhelming that publisher execs and shareholders would have DEMANDED ports of all popular software.

But the Wii is selling because it is what it is... if they had launched it with double the specifications then that would have affected both its price and possibly other factors (maybe they'd, misguidedly, made Wii Sports and the like more sim-like, and therefor not so mainstream). People keep acting like Nintendo would have sold just as good regardless of how they handled the generation so it was a mistake that they handled it in this way or something...

 

[AceBandage]

Shitty comparison since your describing something in which statistics and everything is laid out on the table. Publishers know FAR more than your average gaffer does. We can critique all we want, but it is generally always just a bunch of mud slinging with no real facts and nothing but conjecture on both ends.

Apparently not, since everyone here could see Deadly Creatures bombing from a billion miles away, yet THQ is still going "Wah 'appened?"

 

[Vinci]

There's plenty here to talk about.

And yet between all the 'stupid publisher' comments, the vast majority of posts are 'omg SR3! SR2 is awesome!' Do you find that more intellectually stimulating? I'm not suggesting there aren't things to talk about, but let's be honest... no one is doing it outside of you trying to prove a point.

Shitty comparison since your describing something in which statistics and everything is laid out on the table. Publishers know FAR more than your average gaffer does. We can critique all we want, but it is generally always just a bunch of mud slinging with no real facts and nothing but conjecture on both ends.

Western publishers are simultaneously doing nothing but shit on the two best-selling systems of this generation - something that has never been done before, I might add - and are losing money and tossing thousands of people out of work... and you think they know what they're doing? If anything this generation proves, it's that 3rd parties are (by and large) woefully mismanaged, whether you want to ignore the Wii complaints or not.

 

[schuelma]

Shitty comparison since your describing something in which statistics and everything is laid out on the table. Publishers know FAR more than your average gaffer does. We can critique all we want, but it is generally always just a bunch of mud slinging with no real facts and nothing but conjecture on both ends.

No, it really isn't "shitty". Coaches know far more about their athletes and coaches and the dynamics than fans do. They also know a ton more about formations, etc.


I agree with your point that pubs have more information than we have. However, there is enough floating around that some statements and decisions can be fairly critiqued and criticized no matter how much inside information is missing. It doesn't take an industry insider to predict that a game about giant insects with no advertising was going to sell poorly. It doesn't take an industry insider to say that a company stating that an audience isn't on a particular platform because of said insect game is either wrong or a misdirection.

On a related note, it doesn't take an industry insider to conclude that Dead Space Extraction should have sold more, or that Darkside Chronicles should have sold more. Etc.

 

[Stumpokapow]

And yet between all the 'stupid publisher' comments, the vast majority of posts are 'omg SR3! SR2 is awesome!' Do you find that more intellectually stimulating? I'm not suggesting there aren't things to talk about, but let's be honest... no one is doing it outside of you trying to prove a point.

I do feel like one one thread of discussion dominates a thread, particularly when it's such a morass as this particular subject, it takes away from other people being willing to talk about other things, yes.

 

[schuelma]

But the Wii is selling because it is what it is... if they had launched it with double the specifications then that would have affected both its price and possibly other factors (maybe they'd, misguidedly, made Wii Sports and the like more sim-like, and therefor not so mainstream). People keep acting like Nintendo would have sold just as good regardless of how they handled the generation so it was a mistake that they handled it in this way or something...

I've had this discussion with other posters before, but given what we know about Nintendo's initial profit margin, I don't think its a stretch to suggest they could have came out closer to the 360 and still came in at 300 or so.

And I still do not see the logic that if Nintendo had gone HD their whole strategy and development would have changed as to render its unique appeal obsolete.

 

[Vinci]

I do feel like one one thread of discussion dominates a thread, particularly when it's such a morass as this particular subject, it takes away from other people being willing to talk about other things, yes.

Fair enough. But I highly doubt people were going to go on some intellectual journey about the subjects you brought up earlier in either case. Why don't you grab the comments that the guy said that you find particularly interesting - cutting loose of all Wii talk - and create a thread about them? The discussion, given it gets going, could in fact be interesting.

 

[Lonely1]

What platform is De Blob 2 coming for? I'm also glad that they are still into to the PC.

 

[AceBandage]

What plataform is De Blob 2 coming for?

Unknown.
Likely Wii, DS and iPhone though.

 

[schuelma]

Unknown.
Likely Wii, DS and iPhone though.

This was discussed earlier, but I got the impression it was coming to PS360 as well.

 

[avatar299]

I do feel like one one thread of discussion dominates a thread, particularly when it's such a morass as this particular subject, it takes away from other people being willing to talk about other things, yes.

Could it be no one is talking about other things, such as the points you mentioned because there is nothing interesting in an eastern bloc developer making cheap games. It's not a new concept

THQ making iphone studios is just them catching up to other larger publishers like EA, reinforcing the B-tier stigma. Not that interesting either. SR is a niche franchise. Most people outside of fans don't care, etc etc..

I mean, the same day Headstrong games has to publicly come out and call their game a success, despite constant claims of contrary from journalists you expect people not to talk about Nintendo 3rd parties?

 

[Agnates]

I've had this discussion with other posters before, but given what we know about Nintendo's initial profit margin, I don't think its a stretch to suggest they could have came out closer to the 360 and still came in at 300 or so.

And I still do not see the logic that if Nintendo had gone HD their whole strategy and development would have changed as to render its unique appeal obsolete.

You don't see the logic that diff specs would lead to diff games but you see logic in that they'd be willing to completely change their business and sell the platform at less profit, or even a loss, to match the specs of the other systems at a similar or lesser price? OK.

 

[AceBandage]

This was discussed earlier, but I got the impression it was coming to PS360 as well.

I could see it being a DD release, but as a retail release, I can't see it doing well.

 

[The Technomancer]

You tell me.



It doesn't strike me that he means the inevitable DS/iPhone versions. It strikes me that he's talking about PS360.

That would make no sense at all to me. Upon hearing that, this is my thought process:
Wait so...you produce a good, quality game, and put it on Wii, targeting one of its strong userbases (younger kids). It succeeds. And you're moving it to the PS360?.
I mean, usually the excuse is "we put out a 'test game', it bombed, we're done on Wii"
When you're test game succeeds, you still say "were done with Wii"?
WTF?

(yes, they're probably talking about releasing it on Wii as well as PS360, but what do you think the odds are that the Wii version will get the budget or work behind it as the others?)

 

[schuelma]

You don't see the logic that diff specs would lead to diff games but you see logic in that they'd be willing to completely change their business and sell the platform at less profit, or even a loss, to match the specs of the other systems at a similar or lesser price? OK.

I'm saying I don't necessarily think it had to be either or. Nintendo could have attempted right from the start to both expand the market while also serving traditional gaming tastes (as they seem to be attempting to do now). Yes, it would have meant a lesser profit at first and I'm not necessarily saying going HD would have been the wise decision, but I think they could have done it.

And I'll repeat- how would better graphics have changed Nintendo's approach? Would the casuals not liked Wii Sports if it had been in HD? Would they have been intimidated? Would Zelda have been less popular if it looked better?

 

[AceBandage]

That would make no sense at all to me. Upon hearing that, this is my thought process:
Wait so...you produce a good, quality game, and put it on Wii, targeting one of its strong userbases (younger kids). It succeeds. And you're moving it to the PS360?.
I mean, usually the excuse is "we put out a 'test game', it bombed, we're done on Wii"
When you're test game succeeds, you still say "were done with Wii"?
WTF?

(yes, they're probably talking about releasing it on Wii as well as PS360, but what do you think the odds are that the Wii version will get the budget or work behind it as the others?)

Again, I think it would be fascinating to do a psychological study on these publishers.
It must be like studying a well paid child.

 

[Agnates]

Maybe if you actually respond to what I'm saying instead of make shit up you'll understand it better. I didn't say Wii Sports + HD would be different. I said they could have different development goals for them if they had far more processing power available for the games. It's not hard to see that a game may vary even if it has similar goals on paper. Ie, see Tiger Woods frisbee golf versus the frisbee golf in WSR. Same thing, but not really. And that's with the same specs. Or how about the different development goals publishers have for PS360, and Wii? Clearly specs are the cause for part of the differences. Nintendo wouldn't be somehow immune to it. If they had saw fit to go after graphics in the same manner Sony and Microsoft did, then they likely wouldn't have had the same development philosophy they do now. Feel free to disagree, I'm done with it. Though, I'll add that Zelda was hardly the system seller software in order to bring it up in this discussion. I find your arguments weak too btw.

 

[Vinci]

I've had this discussion with other posters before, but given what we know about Nintendo's initial profit margin, I don't think its a stretch to suggest they could have came out closer to the 360 and still came in at 300 or so.

And I still do not see the logic that if Nintendo had gone HD their whole strategy and development would have changed as to render its unique appeal obsolete.

They apparently felt the entire HD strategy was dangerous. Maybe not simply to them, but to the industry at large. They had, in fact, been warning about how things were going for quite a while - long before the Wii announcement.

 

[Swittcher]

Dr. THQ

Stop all development on everything.

And devote all assets in making The Punisher 2.

Hugs and Kisses,
Swittcher

 

[schuelma]

Maybe if you actually respond to what I'm saying instead of make shit up you'll understand it better. I didn't say Wii Sports HD would be different. I said they could have different development goals for them if they had far more processing power available. ...

And I am saying i think that's a weak argument. Why would Wii Sports have been any different if there was more processing power? I'm pretty sure it didn't use all of the Wii's processing power, so I struggle to see why it would have been different with even more power available. This strikes me as a red herring designed to make it seem like the ONLY chance for success Nintendo had was to ignore the system's power. There is no logical reason to assume Nintendo's design philosophy would have changed with the addition of more power, given how many titles don't even use the power that the actual Wii system has.

 

[schuelma]

They apparently felt the entire HD strategy was dangerous. Maybe not simply to them, but to the industry at large. They had, in fact, been warning about how things were going for quite a while - long before the Wii announcement.

I can buy that, in terms of development costs, etc. I'm certainly not arguing it would have been the right choice. What I'm arguing is I don't see any inherent reason why Nintendo could not have attempted to do both at least to a bigger extent than they did(and I'm relatively sure you're going to see Nintendo try and do that next generation).

 

[Jokeropia]

Clearly there is no audience for T-rated core games on Wii.

 

[Swittcher]

Clearly there is no audience for T-rated core games on Wii.

Yeah, cuz those are excellent examples.

 

[AceBandage]

Yeah, cuz those are excellent examples.

Better examples than a bug fighting game.

 

[Vinci]

I can buy that, in terms of development costs, etc. I'm certainly not arguing it would have been the right choice. What I'm arguing is I don't see any inherent reason why Nintendo could not have attempted to do both at least to a bigger extent than they did(and I'm relatively sure you're going to see Nintendo try and do that next generation).

I think any resemblance in power between the Wii's successor and the PS4/720 will have nothing to do with Nintendo trying to do anything on that front and will have more to do with MS and Sony holding back after the ass-kicking this generation.

 

[Doorman]

To Stumpokapow: There are some other topics that can be drawn out of this interview, yes, but content-wise how big can those discussions get? People have said they're looking forward to Saint's Row 3, but is there any real information about the game coming yet, other than that it exists? The same situation is here with de Blob 2, but there's the added wrinkle that people aren't sure what platforms it's coming to, and that has been garnering more discussion.

I kind of feel like complaining about Wii 3rd party discussion is like complaining about how much the news talks about murders or celebrity couples. Yes, it's brought up far too often, but if that's the sort of thing that bring in ratings (or posts, in this case), then so be it.

I wonder if de Blob would really do very well on PS360, compared to the Wii version. Thinking about it, the first de Blob was a character-focused platformer with wide age-appeal and a unique sense of style. Isn't this exactly the sort of game that has always historically been successful on Nintendo systems, since the NES days? People are quick to jump on the Wii audience when their niche core efforts don't perform well, but nobody seems to want to give them credit when something does go right, and they seem to assume that it just means that their core game would do even better elsewhere.

I think most Western third parties just wish that Nintendo didn't exist at all. Then there wouldn't be any uncertainty left around their business model. :lol

 

[Beardz]

Text

I just want to let you know, that you are one of my favorite users in this site.

 

[AceBandage]

To Stumpokapow: There are some other topics that can be drawn out of this interview, yes, but content-wise how big can those discussions get? People have said they're looking forward to Saint's Row 3, but is there any real information about the game coming yet, other than that it exists? The same situation is here with de Blob 2, but there's the added wrinkle that people aren't sure what platforms it's coming to, and that has been garnering more discussion.

I kind of feel like complaining about Wii 3rd party discussion is like complaining about how much the news talks about murders or celebrity couples. Yes, it's brought up far too often, but if that's the sort of thing that bring in ratings (or posts, in this case), then so be it.

I wonder if de Blob would really do very well on PS360, compared to the Wii version. Thinking about it, the first de Blob was a character-focused platformer with wide age-appeal and a unique sense of style. Isn't this exactly the sort of game that has always historically been successful on Nintendo systems, since the NES days? People are quick to jump on the Wii audience when their niche core efforts don't perform well, but nobody seems to want to give them credit when something does go right, and they seem to assume that it just means that their core game would do even better elsewhere.

I think most Western third parties just wish that Nintendo didn't exist at all. Then there wouldn't be any uncertainty left around their business model. :lol

I get that feeling a lot, too.
Nintendo makes them actually have to think about what they make, rather than just slapping a new gun onto a space marine.

 

[schuelma]

I get that feeling a lot, too.
Nintendo makes them actually have to think about what they make, rather than just slapping a new gun onto a space marine.

Jesus, the sense of persecution is like blinding me.

 

[CamHostage]

How many times does that have to be said?
Dead Space extraction had NO chance of selling :
those who were aware of its exisence : it's a cheap crap game onrail that's showing how EA thinks we are morons

resident Evil? people bought Umbrella Chronicle and expected RE4 : 2, they got burned and didn't buy the sequel

How hard is it to look at the actual facts instead of trying to latch a shitty narrative of Wii games that sells are only nintendo games?

How hard is it for you not to understand that playground and GAF chatter isn't the total picture in the wide world of business and fandom? People can say that such and such game failed just because it was on-rails and because "everybody" thought it sucked, but even with quality factored in (and by the way, both RE Chronicles games average a 75 on GameRankings, Dead Space Wii an 83), products usually don't fail so spectacularly unless there are other reasons.

When you release a game at Christmas with a major brand name on the cover, it usually sells. The Resident Evil Gun Survivor games sold (and, at least in the first game, RE GS was a thousand times worse than RE UC.) Spyro and Crash are still two viable franchises even though the quality and fan support has dropped right off the map. Hell, people still bought Pepsi Clear for a second there.

A person is smart, but people are dumb. Publishers can usually trust a certain amount of sheep-factor when they put out a name brand product for a platform with an exponentially growing market base (especially, again, at Christmas when gifts are being given and reviews are not being factored in.) Sheep will even eat shit a time or two, and as long as there are a lot of sheep and more being added every day, you can count on a certain amount of shit being eaten each and every time. The point where the sheep-factor fails is when those sheep have a different appetite than what you are giving them...

 

[AceBandage]

Jesus, the sense of persecution is like blinding me.

Hmmm, maybe it is a bit much, but honestly, I haven't seen a single big western developer ever actually try anything on the Wii (or any Nintendo console).
And, let's face it, the biggest things from them are shooters.

When you release a game at Christmas with a major brand name on the cover, it usually sells. The Resident Evil Gun Survivor games sold (and, at least in the first game, RE GS was a thousand times worse than RE UC.) Spyro and Crash are still two viable franchises even though the quality and fan support has dropped right off the map. Hell, people still bought Pepsi Clear for a second there.

Except that Dead Space isn't a major brand name.
Nor did it get any real advertising.

 

[scitek]

Boy oh boy I wish I could complain about THQ's treatment of the Wii but I'm too busy having the next Red Faction and Saint's Row to look forward to.

You're too busy looking forward looking forward to coming games? I'm just too busy not giving a shit.

 

[Vinci]

Jesus, the sense of persecution is like blinding me.

FWIW, I gave up on the persecution angle. I just think they're mostly idiots or interested in a business model that is poisonous in this particular industry.

 

[Lonely1]

Jesus, the sense of persecution is like blinding me.

Yesterday we had a thread about how a professional analystt was saying that 2010 Nintendo decline was beneficial to third parties. Sadly, looks like stuff like that is not far from the truth ...

 

[Enosh]

I'm also glad that they are still into to the PC.

Would be nice to get SR3 on the PC, but I doubt it

Darksiders port would also be awesome

 

[schuelma]

FWIW, I gave up on the persecution angle. I just think they're mostly idiots or interested in a business model that is poisonous in this particular industry.

Yeah and a few years ago I was probably full of righteous indignation, but really, its time to move on (not directed at you). It is what it is.

My anger has moved to dumbass analysts.

 

[cacildo]

I just wish i could interview these guys

I think that´s what everybody always wanted to ask anybody from THQ


"Do you understand that you released a game featuring a SPIDER and a SCORPION killing bees and ants?

Do you understand that nobody wants this type game and that´s why it just dont sell?

DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE WORDS COMING OUT OF MY MOUTH?"

 

[Vinci]

Yeah and a few years ago I was probably full of righteous indignation, but really, its time to move on (not directed at you). It is what it is.

My anger has moved to dumbass analysts.

I consider analysts such a non-issue that it's hard for me to hate on them. It's the people with any actual say in the industry's momentum sounding like morons and costing people their jobs that I get irate with, but I'm trying really hard to bottle it up.

 

[A Twisty Fluken]

I can buy that, in terms of development costs, etc. I'm certainly not arguing it would have been the right choice. What I'm arguing is I don't see any inherent reason why Nintendo could not have attempted to do both at least to a bigger extent than they did(and I'm relatively sure you're going to see Nintendo try and do that next generation).

It's goofy to think about now, but I wouldn't completely discount the idea that the efficiency/size/noise advantages of the Wii were probably part of the design objective in the first place. Putting aside the obvious cost savings on both the hardware and software side, I don't think they ended up with a small, sleek, quiet and unintimidating box by accident. So yes, they certainly could have done more, but there are tradeoffs there too.

Spoiler

I'm not claiming that the noise was the primary reason they stayed with SD, just one factor

 

[poppabk]

I think most Western third parties just wish that Nintendo didn't exist at all. Then there wouldn't be any uncertainty left around their business model.

I get the feeling from this interview, and some of the other commentary recently, that a lot of these companies will be happy to serve the 'Wii audience' with some quality titles as soon as they buy a 360, because they think that quality titles regardless of genre sell on the 360 and that the only reason that certain genres do poorly on 360 is because the audience for them is currently on the Wii.
Or to put it more succinctly they think that the 360 userbase is predictable and if the 'casual' audience was on 360 it too would be predictable.

 

[AdawgDaFAB]

I never really read up on it much, but how was the Saints Row 2 PC port? I'm thinking of picking it up sometime since I never played any SR games and this interview got me interested in looking into the series.