Slashdot Mirror
Epic's Mark Rein Expounds On The Revolution
nb caffeine writes "Epic's Mark Rein is shooting his mouth off again, this time bashing the Revolution controller and EA's management style. This seems to be a recurring theme with him." From the article: "I guarantee you there's going to be lots of people who say the whole reason for this game is this controller, we made the perfect game for the controller. And all it'll be is about the controller, and not necessarily a great game...I've heard EA and Activision make absolutely ridiculous statements about, 'Oh, it's going to take 30 million dollars to make a game and we need 300 people' - that's just a bunch of bullsh... They're just covering up for their own management and incompetence. Or mismanagement I should say."
I'm glad the article has pictures, I've always wanted to know what a frightened troll looked like!
I read the script, and I think it would help my character's motivation if he was on fire. -Bender
Why do you have to make your business be only about those who own ONLY your console? That's like asking PS2 owners how many of them don't also own a gaming pc and saying it's hard for Sony to make a business on that percentage.
That's just what I want to think when I am going to drop half a grand on a new video game console. Just fine is another way of saying, "nothing new." And that begs the question - why not just stick with the current XBox?
Another gem on the completely unscientific sampling method of who in attendance only owned Gamecubes: "Hard to make a business on less than 10 per cent,"
Nintendo is in the black. Sony and MS have not made money with the PS2 or the XBox. I would say that making a business doesn't have to be measured by market share - instead focusing on profitability. Nintendo profits. That's a good business.
He says it's hard to make a business on 10 percent of people owning your console exclusively. Why? If all the people from the first call paid Nintendo their money for the Gamecube, what does Nintendo care if they own other consoles? To claim you need to be the exclusive console to be successful is asinine.
The Braying and Neighing of Barnyard Animals Follows.
That's what I thought too, but there is the issue of cross-platform games. Odds are that most of those won't properly utilize the Revolution controller. Soul Calibur 2 did great on the Gamecube, but the next big cross-platform game probably won't do so well on the Revolution.
[PowerPoint] is a tool for capitalist presentation
So, the company that basically MADE the controller what it is today is getting flak about its new controller? Don't you think you should give Nintendo just a LITTLE credit?
You know that D-pad on the 360 controller you're holding? Nintendo did that. Vibration? Nintendo. Shouder buttons? Nintendo.
Just a thought.
"Apparently so, but suppose you throw a coin enough times. Suppose one day, it lands on its edge."
His comment on the FPS's I'm not so sure about. All the consoles currently handle FPS's relatively the same, the XBox trigger buttons may give it a slight advantage. As for the Revolution though, companies could make their own attachments for FPS's. The shotgun mockup from IGN is an example of something companies could (in theory) do. Hopefully game companies will take advantage of controller add-ons, but somehow I doubt it will be as magical and widespread as I hope. I'm worried that without the right addon for the controller the user will get a "magic wand" feeling with Revolution FPS's.
In the end I will side with the majority of the comments, and agree that he is just trolling anyways.
Oh crap, I'm on fire again.
Rein then conducted a quick audience survey to find out how many people present owned a GameCube - and found that rather a large number of hands were raised.
He then asked everyone who also ate at McDonald's in the past week to put their hands down - and concluded that under ten per cent of the audience were Cube owners who hadn't eaten at McDonald's recently.
"Hard to make a business on less than 10 per cent," Rein said.
Of course, the next big cross-platform game could always be a FPS or some sort of RTS-type game that would work better with the Revolution controller than an analog stick setup.
For that matter, if more developers start making these types of games for next-gen consoles, it's possible that the Revolution version could be the version created first and then the PS3 and 360 versions are just ports with higher res textures/higher poly models. I'd imagine that'd make it a bit easier to go cross-platform instead of then having to try and downgrade the visuals for the Revolution (if it does turn out to be graphically inferior), then just change the controls for looking around/selecting units to work with an analog stick and you'd have a prettier but (most likely) more difficult to use version of the game.
This of course is just speculation, but at least for me I'd probably pick up a cross-platform FPS on the Revolution over the PS3 or 360 if the controller works as well as is being claimed.
Does anybody else think that all the hype about the new controller is reminiscent of y2k vapourware? 2-Handed D-Pads are a tried and proven concept, whereas pointing an IR light at a TV screen seems to be a very difficult method of controlling anything other than an options screen. Nintendo's optical Duck Hunt gun looks far more accurate than the Revolution controller. Judging by the way most people rest the TV remote on their beergut, I don't see this vapourware as something that's going to bridge the gap between console salesmen and the non-gaming public. In fact, the Revolution controller looks like something that's going to be damned uncomfortable to hold in ones' hands for games that rely on the normal D-Pad configuration, vastly increasing the incendence of 'Nintendo Thumb' syndrome (a.k.a. carpal tunnel)... your thoughts?
his poiunt is that if you have a GC and a Xbox then you are likely to games for the x-box, not the GC. Only 10% of the people in the room ONLY had a GC and thus would buy all games for the GC.
Epic Games today announced that its Unreal Engine 3 technology will be used in games from Microsoft's internal development team, Microsoft Game Studios ...
While no specific titles were mentioned, Epic confirmed that the technology will be used for "the next-generation Xbox platform." ...
"We are hugely excited that Microsoft Game Studios have selected Unreal Engine 3 for its next generation Xbox platform games," said Epic Games president Mark Rein.
QUOTE
/QUOTE
... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
Rein then conducted a quick audience survey to find out how many people present owned a GameCube - and found that rather a large number of hands were raised.
He then asked everyone who also owned a PS2 or Xbox to put their hands down - and concluded that under ten per cent of the audience were Cube owners only.
"Hard to make a business on less than 10 per cent," Rein said.
Who would listen to someone who has such poor logic skills? If he were to switch the systems around would he be saying "Hard to make a business on less than 15 per cent" (in reference to the PS2 or XBox) because that is the reality; if you throw in a gaming PC I bet the number would be under 10% for any system you choose. [And don't say that the PS2 has sold uber-billions of units more than the XBox or Gamecube, If you look at the number of PS2s that have had a new game (rented or purchased) played on them in the past 12 months it would likely only be 1.5-2 times as many as there are Gamecubes/XBoxes. This is because a lot of PS2s were sold as cheap DVD players, are only used by pirates, or have died from the famous disc-read error]
Any developer who is worth listening to should be supporting Nintendo (at least in spirit); at one point in time every new game style was just a gimick.
Grand Theft Auto was just a gimick
The Sims were just a gimick
Tomb Raider was just a gimick
Mario 64 was just a gimick
Starfox was just a gimick
Wolfenstein 3D was just a gimick
Super Mario Bros. was just a gimick
Donkey Kong was just a gimick
Pong was just a gimick
It is through time and refinement that a gimicky game becomes a whole new genre all to itself
I'm sure if you took a poll of the audience, a similar percentage (if not less) would exclusively own either a PS2 or an Xbox as well... nowadays, hardcore gamers will have more than one system. The fact that 10% of the audience own ONLY a Gamecube means nothing. The fact that the majority of them DO own a Gamecube DOES mean something. Sounds to me like this guy just has a grudge against Nintendo. (and/or, is an Xbox fanboy... scary when the developers themselves become fanboys)
This reminds me of my old Everquest days where your guild was looked down upon because you used too many people to take down a MOB. Why is it that the more games come to be for "adults" the developers act more like children?
/yawn
I'm in no way a fan of EA, but but if they want to use 300 people to make a game that only requres 25, then let them do it. EA is one of the few companies who CAN do something of this magnitude.
It's going to be interesting to see what happens when the slew of revolution games come out with the controller as a feature. Some will fail, and others will succeed. BUT it's those small (realistically) few that succeed that make the other failures worth their while. The most horribly crappy game ever made can still lend some insight as to how a game can and perhaps should be made.
So what we're seeing here is a remarkable time in console gaming. We should thank Nintendo for the new controller. we've got some incredibly horrible and crappy games to look forward to now!! But along with them will be some real hits that just may change the face of gaming for the better. In my eyes the risk is all worth it.
Or.. we could just keep on playing FPS games with game pads, mice, and keyboards...
The eternal struggle of good vs. evil begins within one's self.
"IR light"?? You're the perfect example of the dumbasses who rant about the controller and assume things without factual knowledge. Yeah everyone keeps comparing the device to a remote control, but it's NOT A REMOTE CONTROL. It doesn't use IR LIGHT to point. It has full 360 angle tracking. Read up on the specs. Then come back and delete your post.
I'm having so much fun with my DS I'm going to have to try out the Revolution. The Metroid demo is just amazing, it works so much better than I expected. I'm very curious to see if they can make that TV remote like controller work.
"I guarantee you there's going to be lots of people who say the whole reason for this game is this controller, we made the perfect game for the controller. And all it'll be is about the controller, and not necessarily a great game."
:)
Really Mark? That never happens in the world of game technology, eh? People using technology for technology's sake, and still build a crap game. How many of the games that utilize your company's Unreal technology are clunkers? See: Unreal Technology. There are some great games in there (mostly the UT games) but some REAL CRAP as well.
Perhaps he should do his engine licensing the same way he segmented the GC playing audience: full UT Engine price for a game on a single platform, half price for 2 platforms, a third for 3 platforms, etc. Seeing as how most developers target 4 platfroms, let's see how well you do with 25% of the market
But I think he's right, that in the beginning the controller will simply be a gimmick, much like Sony's Eye-Toy. Yes, it's fun and yes they are fun diversions, but these aren't "great games." They are party gimicks.
That's not to say the controller won't eventually be used well, just that launch titles will likely be gimicky.
Second of all, his comment about the 10% of Game Cube owners seems to be missed by everybody here. He has a valid point - if you own a Game Cube and a PS2 and an Xbox, yes you certainly have given Nintendo money, but you haven't increased their market share at all since you have negated that by buying their competing product as well. Since only 10% of the audience had ONLY a Game Cube, he's inferring that Game Cube has about a 10% marketshare. As a shorthand, it works. The same would be true if he did the poll for Xbox and found that only 10% of the audience owned ONLY an Xbox. These are competing products. They compete in the same market. If you own only a PS2 you are helping to boost Sony's marketshare. However, if you own all three, you aren't.
Also, I personally have no qualms with the existing Xbox controller (or GameCube controller) when I've used them, but if his comments about FPS sales are false, then feel free to disprove them. He said: "It [Xbox controller] works just fine for playing games, and it works fine for first-person shooter games, as evidenced by the fact that they sold more first-person shooters on consoles than anybody's ever sold on PCs." Show how this is wrong if you believe it is false. Obviously people don't much mind playing Halo on the Xbox or they wouldn't be buying it.
In the end, his comments aren't really controversial and the only "troll" as I see it is the OP he said he was "shooting his mouth off." He's a company exec. They prognosticate all the time. They compete with other firms. He may have better insight into the industry than any of us.
God Bless America. Why? Did it sneeze?
> Sony and MS have not made money with the PS2 or the XBox.
Wrong. MS have lost $4billion on XBox, but PS2 is Sony's biggest earner.
It is not a matter of true/false, it is a matter of logical fallacy - it's a call for stagnation based on an appeal to popularity: The number of people using a thing has no direct relation to the quality of that thing, while he's using the number of users as proof of this quality, and a reason to stagnate in development.
If you're still confused, let's state it this way:
"ashlee simpson is a great singer, as evidenced by the fact that 10 billion people bought her new album, and therefore pop music has no need for singers who can hit a note."
or
"AAC sounds better than FLAC,as evidenced by the sales figures of IPODs, and therefore we don't need to improve digital audio quality"
or
"The earth in 1300 was flat, as evidenced by the beliefs of the masses... so we don't need new thoughts about that" Thing X was the most popular kind of thing ever, therefore it's good enough and no improvements are welcome. In fact, my last post was the best ever, as evidenced by the page hits on slashdot. I'm not sure why I'm even continuing to post here...
He may have better insight into the industry than any of us.
The same thing could be said about Generals in WWI. Just because this is your profession, may not automatically mean you know what the front line conditions are like unless you participate in it.
When he has actually played a Nintedo revolution FPS game using the controller then he may judge it.
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
I don't disagree that the Revolution controller could be better or that (in this VP's opinion) it could be worse. And perhaps he is saying there's no reason to improve the controller (that's not the way I read it). However, the way the article is written, with the selective quoting, he could just be saying the Revolution controller won't be good for FPS' (his opinion) and that the Xbox controller has been good because people are playing many FPS' on the Xbox, indicating at least satisfaction with the input method."
But you are right, sales alone do not indicate quality. But, again, if the PS2 or GameCube controller were better for FPS', you'd think they'd sell more FPS games, right?
God Bless America. Why? Did it sneeze?
Right?
Steering controllers? Gimmick.
Analog thumbsticks? Gimmick.
Sure, it's DIFFERENT. And it might not work and then again it might and if you corner the market with it.. that makes you a GOOD businessman, which is not generally of the "me too" variety.
First of all, they are competing products in the same way a BMW and an SUV are. Can you drive them both to work? Sure, but many people own both. However, one appeals to higher quality and the other appeals to utility. BMW makes money. GM loses money. Guess which one sells more vehicles? Want an example in the software world? Apple computers. Apple's software/hardware product offerings (other than iTunes, whose main purpose is a marketing device for the iPod) compete on quality rather than purely volume. Go take a look at their stock chart or even their PC division shipping numbers and compare that to, say HP's margins. Most people who own a Mac or an iPod have a PC as well.
Of course Nintendo won't make more revenue, but revenue has little to do with profit; they'll spend less on the graphical fancies and processor power, recouping the unspent R&D money to fund game development. I bought Paper Mario the other day, it was still $50 years later, and still worth playing (thus differentiating their platform). With little first party game development and nearly identical interfaces (e.g. controllers), Sony and MS will be locked in totally undifferentiated products in a price race to the bottom, benefitting consumers, but hurting their margins and bottom line (MS may win this, since Halo 1/2 is the entire reason many people have an X-box). Both of them, by the way, are losing money. Nintendo makes a profit.
-- Political fascism requires a Fuhrer.
Oh, I don't disagree at all, but I think the point is that the Xbox controller is at least suitable for FPS' and that if the, say, PS2 controller were more suitable, FPS' would have done way better on PS2, considering it is a far better selling console.
100% incorrect. What FPSs outside of the Halo franchise has sold better on Xbox vs. PS2? People played Halo because is was amazing at the time, not because the cake pan sized controller was superior in any way, shape or form.
Multiple console ownership in an audience comprised of gaming geeks -- you don't say... What stunning revalation will he come up with next, only 10% of Harry Potters read only Potter, the rest read other fantasy as well, better watch out JK Rowling those billions aren't billions unless you can enjoy them alone?
Help poke pirates in the eyepatch, arr.
is the fact that Nintendo hasn't licensed the Unreal Engine for the Revolution.
IIRC, the only announced launch title for the Revolution so far is the new Smash Bros, which will almost certainly be more than a gimmick, given the quality and depth of the Gamecube version. Also hinted at as a launch title is the new Mario. Again, practically guaranteed not to be just a gimmick.
So I think that the gimmick argument won't hold up when we actaully see the games, given that we're at least about a year out away from the launch, and there is already one (if not two) games slated for launch that have every reason to be great. That's not to say there won't be gimmicky games, meaning simple games that use a unique new gameplay mechanic but leave out things like depth and story which you would expect in a more mature title. But at least they'll probably be fun to play (for a short time at least, which is more than can be said for some of the 'gimmicky' (i.e. pretty graphics) games we'll surely be seeing on ps3/xbox360), and some of those gameplay mechanics could be good enough to spawn new genres and become fully developed franchises in their own right. Lost Garden talks more about this development of genres here.
I don't mean to come off a Nintendo fanboy here, I am looking forward to both other next-generation systems (and yes, they are all next-gen Mr. Rein). But, I think that Nintendo is getting a lot of undeserved flack when the only games they've announced for Revolution so far sound like gold.
but the next big cross-platform game probably won't do so well on the Revolution.
Except that traditional Gamecube controllers can be plugged into the Revolution, so cross-platform games can run exactly as well as they ever did.
When Nintendo said this industry was in a glut, I didn't really beleive it, until now. The only other thing I can think of is this guy is very insecure. To say gaming is diven completely with graphics is bologna. I think he is bashing Nintendo only because he sees them as a threat. My opinion is that 1) The revolution controller will work as described, 2) The system will not be underpowered (Without all the HDTV at those widescreen resolutions, Im sure it will be much easier to keep up the frame rates at the lower resolutions), 3) It will be more affordable than any of the systems, 4) The games will be among the very best, 5) Nintendo will find great success when its games finally go 'Online'.
I'm a lost customer cuz I refuse to buy FPSers for consoles. The controllers really do suck. If other people like playing slowly than that's their business, but no developer is going to get my money unless the controls can be as accurate as a keyboard and mouse.
In my personal opinion, this dude is talking out his ass.
The Revolution controller is a massive improvement over the current controller designs when it comes to first person shooters.
First person shooters are 3D games. That means that somehow, the player has to have access to a at least a 4D pointing device. They need to be able to move in two dimensions (at the minimum) to move along the ground, and they need a second 2D locator in order to pick an angle at which to fire. In total, you need two separate 2D pointing devices to play an FPS, for a total of 4D. (really you need a 5D locator to play FPS's because your character moves in three dimensions (i.e. they aren't stuck to the ground.) Your average console or PC cannot emulate a 5D locator. However, this issue is avoided in most FPS's because there is normally some sort of gravity in the level to limit the amount of motion your character can have in the third dimension. In most FPS's, walking occurs in two dimensions, and you can achieve limited motion in the third dimension by using your jump button.)
There are a few ways you can get 4D location. On a PC, you use your left fingers to press WASD for movement (with thumb on spacebar for jump) and your right hand on the mouse to control aim. On consoles, this problem has been solved by having two 2D control sticks used for moving and aiming respectively. The Revolution nunchuck controller is better because it emulates a 5D pointing device.
In addition to having the left-handed control stick to replace WASD, the right-handed pointer will be able to locate a point anywhere on your television screen. What's even cooler is that the pointer will also be able to point at points inside your TV since it can determine its own distance from the TV's screen. This doesn't easily solve the problem of true 3D character movement, but it opens up interesting potential for tasks that would actually require you to reach into your TV screen to do things.
In short, the Revolution controller provides all of the necessary parts needed to control an FPS. It is more intuitive since you really are pointing where you are aiming, and its unique features actually add more degrees of control than you could get on a PC or a current console. For example, in order to emulate the Revolution controller on your PC, you would have to lift your mouse up and have it be able to detect its distance to the mousepad, and it would still have to detect sliding, even when not in contact with the mousepad. There are 3D mice out there for PC's, but they are certainly not as mass-consumption as the Revolution controller will be.
Here is the second reason the Revolution Controller is superior for FPS's. Go find a laser pointer or a flashlight and sit down facing a relatively blank wall in your dwelling. Turn the laser or flashlight on set it comfortably in your lap. Now, point at a spot near the left end of the wall, pretending that you're playing an FPS and that the light is your targetting reticule. With your eyes, pick out a spot on the right side of the wall. Quickly move the light to the spot you picked, and then move it back to where it started. Now, point at the spot on the left side of the wall, but extend your arm. Do the same thing with your arm extended - move to the right side and back to the left.
The first thing you did is the Revolution controller. The second thing you did is a mouse on your PC. When using the Revolution Controller, you can make very large motions with very small movements of the wrist. On a PC with a mouse, you have to move your entire arm when dragging the mouse all the way across the mousepad. Using a PC mouse is comfortable since your wrist is probably resting on a wristrest or on your desk, but the fact that such little motion can have such a big effect on the Revolution Controller means that playing FPS's with it will be much faster and more accurate than on
Light is filtering down from above. Would you like to use DIVE?
What about this....Halo was bought because it's a fun FPS on a console...not because the controler was "amazing"....The only time I buy FPS for the controler is when I chose PC over console...
Your description of the failings of any control system other than the Revolution controller is filled with such marvelously amusing hyperbole that I could not help but laugh. All these years I've been playing Descent, with it's 6D control scheme, I never thought to question the fact that what I was doing was impossible! To be fair I must admit that I needed to use a shift function or two to fit all of D3's miscellaneous functions onto a gamepad (although not with keyboard or KB/M).
As for mice, I would point out that at least one of the problems you noted is actually an advantage. We do not pick up mice because we have to, we do it because absolute mouse control works better for first person shooters than relative control. You say you want the control system that allows you to spin around in circles forever without lifting your hand. Are you sure that's better than the one that can only do one and a half spins, but will never drift or overturn, and which responds instantly and accurately to your hand movements?
Oh... And that bit about excessive arm movement is, at least for some of us, complete bull. I, for one, never lift the back of my hand from the pad while playing.
I reserve judgement on whether or not the Revolution controller sucks until it hits the market and we can get our hands on it in the real world. It might effectively replicate the mouse for console gamers, but insisting that it will make the standard PC KB/M setup obsolete is stretching a bit far.
Mark Rein> But the big thing is graphics. It's all about graphics. Graphics give me a boner. I love boners. It's all about boners. Omg I've got a boner right now. Who wants to see it? It's all about my boner. It's all about looking at my boner. Look at my boner. I love it when people look at my boner. Who wants to touch it? Touch my boner. It's all about touching my boner.
I'm not scared of anonymous cowards.
Because lucas arts will be unable to resist making some crappy light saber dueling game, And every Star Wars geek will have to own it, No matter how bad it is. On another note I will buy an XBOX-360 PS3 and Revalution. But the only one im realy excited about is the nintendo.
Holding up an Xbox 360 pad, to whoops and cheers from the audience, he proclaimed: "This is the Xbox 360 controller, and there's nothing wrong with it.
He then held up a first-gen XBOX and said: "This is an XBOX, and there's nothing wrong with it, it works the same as a 360. To hell with all this next gen crap, I'm sticking with this generation!"
His point is fundamentally flawed. If he believes the gaming experience can be improved by better graphics, then the same is true with an improved interface.
I'll be damned if two hundred years from now, noone has found a more natural way to play games than pressing buttons and rotating sticks on a small block of plastic.
A real businessman would side with the company whose product was pulling a profit. That eliminates Sony and MS.
Nintendo is the only real business in the bunch.
You are going to fucking love the revolution controller. It puts the mouse and keyboard to shame in fps.
no
Or maybe you missed it. The point against this point is that the 10% quote holds true for all consoles, since most households own more than one console by now. If he had asked his audience who owned an Xbox, and then discounted those who also owned either a PS2 or a Cube, he'd have gotten the same 10% result.
And yeah, you can play FPS with current gamepads. It's just that you can play them better with a keyboard and a mouse.
Lastly, as others have pointed out, Epic gets money from Microsoft. So maye you're right about his being a businessman.