Epic's Mark Rein Not an Episodic Fan

Next Generation reports on comments by Epic Games VP Mark Rein, a man who doesn't like the phenomenon of episodic content. At the Develop Conference in Brighton, England he railed against the trend in game design during a keynote speech. He also covered topics such as the costs of next-gen game design, and the ways in which Intel has done disservice to the game development community. From the article: "He said that episodic games could never compete will full-priced products. 'They're competing against massive marketing budgets. Distribution without marketing is worthless. You can't buy retail marketing with a wholesale price of $15.' He added, 'Full-price games have a cohesive start, middle and end.' Rein acknowledged that the game industry already has an episodic model through game sequels, such as Madden, Zelda and Final Fantasy. He said these work because they are full-price and backed by marketing."

Comments

Episodic content isn't new

[Turn-X Alphonse]

Episodes are just a buzzword and we need to stop listening to it. For years PCs have had expansion packs, these usually continued the story or did a side story. How is this any different than episodic content?

And before anyone says "but this is continueing the same story, so it's new!!", Diablo 2's expansion pack did just that.

Stop buying into this crappy hype and open your eyes. It's the same thing we've had since the 80s (at least) with a new name to make the headlines.

Re:Episodic content isn't new

[HoboPirate]

The thing with expansion packs is this: the full retail game usually offered closure, if it didn't, people were dissatisfied and especially dissatisfied if it didn't offer closure by the next iteration. Expansion packs may have continued the story of the previous but you could still be satisfied with playing the original game on its own. Not necessarily as much the case with episodic content. I won't bash them however, they have their pluses asnd minuses and we will see where the market takes them. I do think it's harder to market episodic games (people like hard copies of the title they are buying, not always purely digital versions). Even if they box the individual episodes in stores there's always more cost for extra packaging and advertising for *each* episode...that equals less net profits. I think episodic games have great potential but we'll just have to wait and see how the market responds. Just my 2 cents.

Marketing? That's it?

[Dr. Eggman]

Episodic games can't compete against the mega bucks marketeers like EA can bring to the table? I had a hearty laugh! In a market as closly tied to technologies like the internet, word of mouth will always be king. It doesn't hurt that internet distribution of episodic content makes advertising cheaper too.

When I put down a game, I pick up a new one too. But with years of development between the one I put down and it's sequel, the chances are a lot less that the game I pick up is going to be one of yours. I happen to think that recycled content is a symptom of uncreative developers, something that happens is games already anyways. Maybe buyers will wise up faster in episodic and not tolerate that crap so much and then the real creative developers can increase their market share.

Full price is much lower than $15...

[krell]

"You can't buy retail marketing with a wholesale price of $15.' He added, 'Full-price games have a cohesive start, middle and end."

I usually wait about 8 months for that $49 game I want to go down to $9.99 at Gamestop. Best Buy, Software Etc, etc... And these are the (formerly) full-price games that have a cohesive start, middle, and end. Even if the end is just like John Dvorak described: when it all comes down to the end of the game, you have to fight a giant bug.

Wolfenstein 3d

[Jakhel]

Taking this a step further, I remember back when the original wolfenstein 3d came out, you could play the shareware (remember shareware?) version, then choose to buy the next bit of it, and after finishing that, then buy the final portion of the game. They were literally called episodes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfenstein_3D

I remember this being done for several computer games of that time.

The only difference is you couldn't download the episodes, and if you were from a small town you had to order them and have them sent to you.

I think there is room for both.

[Rifter13]

There is room for blockbusters, and Episodic content. I think Rein is wrong, there. But, the episodic content will be built on engines like the Doom, Source, or Unreal engine. The blockbusters or bigger games, that come from Epic or iD or Valve, will have the time and money invested in an engine AND a game. While, a small publisher, like Ritual will take the engine, and develop an episode on it. I DO kind of find Valve jumping into Episodic content, odd. I think it is a good fit for Ritual.

Where Episodic content reigns surpreme, is to create a more constant revenue stream for smaller developers. Spending 3 or 4 years building a game can REALLY tax resources. If you can divide that by 2, or even 4, all of the sudden you have a shorter development time, and can start making money. The other advantage I think that episodic content gives you, is the ability to have a nimble storyline. Developers can add cool new "features" to test the water. If it goes well, future episodes can get that feature. If it falls flat on its face, well, they don't have to include it in the next release. Ultimately, as consumers, we ALL win, with multiple styles of game creations. Think of episodic content as those short summer run TV shows on the cable channels. They are entertaining, and short. That is a good thing.

I DO think that Mark hit the nail on the head, when it comes to marketting though. Valve can get away with producing an episode, and realsing it retail. I don't think a lot of that type of content will be distributed on physical medium. There are a LOT of people that do not like "virtual" assets. It also makes it more difficult to sell a "used" game, if you just downloaded it. Episodic contnet is in its infancy. I think it is an exciting concept, and I expect more innovation to come from that type of content, than I will from EA/Vivendi/Activision, and their much more costly (in terms of time AND money) blockbuster hits.

Simple Executive Summary

[fastgood]

The second page of the story is 12 bullet points and the following paragraph which is hardly controversial:

He also accused Intel of killing the PC games market
with its integrated graphics laptops and desktops.
"Intel is evil, we need to kick its ass. ...
The difference in price in offering better graphics
chips is negligible. You couldn't buy a meal for
that price [difference]. We're talking five bucks."

Episodic content has built in marketing

[Atroxodisse]

You market the original title extremely well, then the rest is all gravy. If your game is good, gamers will flock to the next episodes until it gets bland. Regardless, he doesn't have a leg to stand on. He assumes by default that episodes won't be properly marketed. Whose to say a company can't market each episode well?