Epic Games VP bashes Revolution and it's controller.

[dbiersdorf]

http://media.cube.ign.com/articles/661/661405/vids_1.html

http://webpages.charter.net/clearacell/howmangcowners.gif

Discuss.

[TheRedEye]

That's a really huge video, do you think you could maybe tell us the highlights instead of posting a hilarious animated GIF?

[dbiersdorf]

- Claims next generation sales will depend on graphics and that's all that matters.
- The Revolution controller is a gimmick, and after buying it you will wish you never had.
- Nintendo is not considered part of the race.
- People apparently don't own GameCube's.
- The Xbox 360 controller is the perfect controller for every genre.
- The Revolution controller is not going to be the best for FPS, and whatever it can do the Xbox 360 can do as well.

[AMG]

That's pretty brutal.

[AMG]

Sorry, double post.

[kevin_psx]

People who don't study history are doomed to repeat it.

"Games are about the best graphics" has been proven wrong again-and-again:
atari = weakest graphics - best seller
nes = weakest graphics - best seller
stock snes (no coprocessors) = weakest graphics - best seller
ps1 = weakest graphics - best seller
ps2 = weakest graphics - best seller

Portables:
gameboy = weakest graphics - best seller
DS = weakest graphics - best seller


I like when the guy says, "Seriously no one owns a gamecube - who owns one?" And everybody raises their hands!

Nintendowned! LOL

[Ed Oscuro]

People who don't study history are doomed to repeat it.


ps1 = weakest graphics - best seller
Those who make weak generalizations are condemned to look foolish on message boards!

Genesis = best seller, best graphics for the price from '89-'91, and a strong seller for many years afterward.

Oh hey, I've been gone a while.

My take on this is that it...well...seems to hold some water, but asking why the NDS beats the PSP if graphics are key, and then going on to say that the Revolution will be "another" gimmick console...that doesn't quite make sense to me.

[googlefest1]

i think its the culmination of all the advertizeing done today and all the advertizing that was done in the past

thats what i think microsoft was doing with the xbox - shoveing it in your face untill the recognition is the same or better than the competition

i think better graphics does sell - so does advertizeing and name recognition. No one individual system has all the best games they all have crap, gems, and blockbusters. I think it all comes down to advertizeing and historical events.

yes a system wont sell only based on advertizeing if it has nothing but crap - but a system like that will never exist

right now the industry has a good idea why things are selling and they also are stumped as to why things don't

one of these days the video game industry market will probbaly become a huge part in some graduate study that will revolutionize a part of buisness. Some fancy formula will come out of all this bickering.

[dbiersdorf]

Watch the actual video, that cheap animated gif is just a joke.

[kevin_psx]

"Games are about the best graphics" has been proven wrong again-and-again:
atari = weakest graphics - best seller
nes = weakest graphics - best seller
stock snes (no coprocessors) = weakest graphics - best seller
ps1 = weakest graphics - best seller
ps2 = weakest graphics - best seller
Those who make weak generalizations are condemned to look foolish on message boards!

Ouch. Foolish? Ouch. It's the final tally that matters and by January 1996 SNES had firmly won the 16-bit war. It held 65% of the market.

[Spartacus]

I'm not chiming in to bash the Revolution. I'm just as curious about it as anybody else. I do wonder how much 3rd party support it can expect if the controller is way out there, but then I could see Nintendo offering support for more than one controller type so customers could play conventional games as well as ones it envisions.



"Games are about the best graphics" has been proven wrong again-and-again:

As much as I hate the title "graphics whore", I freely admit that IF I am given a choice of having a better looking game, no matter which system provides it, I will always choose the better looking, smoother running version. Games are REALLY about gameplay, true, but better graphics for the same game get's my money every time.

[Ed Oscuro]

"Games are about the best graphics" has been proven wrong again-and-again:
atari = weakest graphics - best seller
nes = weakest graphics - best seller
stock snes (no coprocessors) = weakest graphics - best seller
ps1 = weakest graphics - best seller
ps2 = weakest graphics - best seller
Those who make weak generalizations are condemned to look foolish on message boards!

Ouch. Foolish? Ouch. It's the final tally that matters and by January 1996 SNES had firmly won the 16-bit war. It held 65% of the market.
It's all about the gameplay. Yes, there's a long history of weak consoles dominating, but you can thank stupid/immoral/illegal business decisions for the dominance of the various pre-PlayStation systems on that list ;) I'm not so clueless as to say that the poster intended to make the link that weaker graphics = better sales, but y'know...it sure was set up that way.

And again, "stock SNES = weakest graphics" is definitely NOT true. Talk about skewing the data...

[TurboGenesis]

"Games are about the best graphics" has been proven wrong again-and-again:
atari = weakest graphics - best seller
nes = weakest graphics - best seller
stock snes (no coprocessors) = weakest graphics - best seller
ps1 = weakest graphics - best seller
ps2 = weakest graphics - best seller
Those who make weak generalizations are condemned to look foolish on message boards!

Ouch. Foolish? Ouch. It's the final tally that matters and by January 1996 SNES had firmly won the 16-bit war. It held 65% of the market.

at this time i was playing wipeout and twisted metal on Playstation and had long forgotten about my SNES. thought it gets more play these days than in Jan. 1996.

Anyways it doesn't matter how powerful, how good the graphics are, how many tasks it can handle, what media type it uses, if it can stand sideways, if it can cook your food and keep your drink cold, bla bla bla, yada yada yada.

What matters is software support - i.e. games!

Through recent video game history say since 1985 the consoles with software support are the ones that are successful.

[kevin_psx]

Wasn't the stock Genesis more powerful than a stock Super nintendo?


No not saying weakest graphics = best seller. Only that it's not the deciding factor when customers decide. Any "expert" such as the guy at that conference should know that.

[goatdan]

I'm not chiming in to bash the Revolution. I'm just as curious about it as anybody else. I do wonder how much 3rd party support it can expect if the controller is way out there, but then I could see Nintendo offering support for more than one controller type so customers could play conventional games as well as ones it envisions.

Expect about the same amount of third party support for it as the GameCube has now at the start. In other words, hardly anything until Nintendo either proves that the idea is workable or until completely everyone decides it isn't catching on. It'll only swing one way or the other, I think.


It's all about the gameplay. Yes, there's a long history of weak consoles dominating, but you can thank stupid/immoral/illegal business decisions for the dominance of the various pre-PlayStation systems on that list ;) I'm not so clueless as to say that the poster intended to make the link that weaker graphics = better sales, but y'know...it sure was set up that way.

The Atari 2600 didn't dominate because of stupid, immoral or illegal business decisions. I think it could be argued that the 2600 dominated in spite of stupid business decisions. The NES dominated because of those decisions... but only after the NES had become the solid number 1. Had Nintendo not sold gobs and gobs of consoles first, they would've never been in the position to do what they did. And the Genesis still rose up in spite of the practices Nintendo had in place in the late '80's.

Technically, the SNES didn't "win" its generation, as it was a pretty even split between it and the Geni. In fact, I've heard that the total numbers of both consoles are within 100,000 of each other. The SNES seems as if it has won because a lot of its games have aged better, as it had a lot of its hits at the end when it was gaining ground, while the Geni had them earlier.

But as for current consoles, the PSX dominated, even though it wasn't the prettiest for the majority of its lifespan. The PS2 has dominated even though it was nearly equalled by the Dreamcast before it and vastly surpassed by the consoles after it.

Marketing and great games... well, specifically "Games people want to play" are what spells success for a console.

[WanganRunner]

Meh, that guy's a tool.

People from the PC end of things just don't understand how the console market works, it's not even remotely as graphics and hardware-driven as the PC market.

He needs to go back to making Unreal Tournament games (which are admittedly fantastic), and leave the console gaming to people who know what the hell they are talking about.

[studvicious]

Wow, what can I say?? Those guys from IGN *really* impressed me. I just wanted to shoot those industry guys in the face though. The whole thing was basically.. graphics are the *only thing*.. blah blah... Xbox 360 is God.. blah blah Nintendo sucks.. you will hate the Revolution. BLAH.

But the best part was at the end when the dude from IGN on the right was talking about what HE was looking forward to in the next-gen - mainly the Revolution and online Smash Brothers, which the crowd firmly backed him on. Then he looked at the industry guy (Mark??) and said you should try the Revolution controller - it's great. 8-)

But seriously that Mark dude was a total geek. He had a 360 dev kit in his bag that he whipped out just to show off. :hmm: You're cool dude....

[Ed Oscuro]

The Atari 2600 didn't dominate because of stupid, immoral or illegal business decisions. I think it could be argued that the 2600 dominated in spite of stupid business decisions.
Well, okay, you can break it down: The VCS got the market first; it had many of the key (not "best") franchses (Pac-Man vs K.C. Munchkin, you know), and yes, I still say stupid business decisions - obviously not Atari's, but rather those of their competitors. Just read a company history...nobody had any funding, and tons of great systems went down the tubes because everybody was fixated on the VCS. :P


The NES dominated because of those decisions... but only after the NES had become the solid number 1. Had Nintendo not sold gobs and gobs of consoles first, they would've never been in the position to do what they did.
Sure, first to market helps. Oh, wait, there were those other consoles, like the Casio PV-2000...if I had to make a point and stand by it (God forbid!), I'd say that many factors trump graphics - and that business decisions, good and bad, are more important. In *my* zeal to show what a silly statement was made here, I made some oversimplifications myself. Ah, good times.


And the Genesis still rose up in spite of the practices Nintendo had in place in the late '80's.
Tell that to Namco, who ended up returning to Nintendo with their collective tails tucked between their legs.


The SNES seems as if it has won because a lot of its games have aged better, as it had a lot of its hits at the end when it was gaining ground, while the Geni had them earlier.
Oh please. I don't agree with that at all. The best Genesis hits have aged just as well - take Thunder Force IV, Comix Zone, Contra: The Hard Corps, Dynamite Headdy, Phantasy Star IV...and I do believe most all of these games were made in the '94-'95 era. Let's face it, many of the early Genesis games (Altered Beast, E-Swat; the Capcom ports considered "best" by most people such as Ghosts 'n Goblins) and were pretty lousy in comparision to these later titles, especially in terms of length of play, replayability and, dare I say it, graphically.


But as for current consoles, the PSX dominated, even though it wasn't the prettiest for the majority of its lifespan.
I think it's meaningless to point out that a console with as much momentum as the PSX had wasn't the most powerful for "much of its lifespan." It got to market first, and indeed it was the most powerful in many ways. Better than the Saturn in some areas - FMV was often better - and it had a CD-ROM drive which the N64 lacked (though I count that as a blessing of sorts...)

[CartCollector]

- The Revolution controller is not going to be the best for FPS
WTF? Sure, it might be harder to CODE for, but in the end, the Revolution controller makes for a more realistic FPS. I mean, shooting a gun does not feel like moving a mouse up and down or twirling an analog stick around. It feels like taking aim and pulling a trigger. And what does the Revolution controller allow you to do? In all likelihood, the "nunchuck" setup will be the BEST FPS control out of all the Big Three consoles slated for release.

[Ed Oscuro]

- The Revolution controller is not going to be the best for FPS
WTF? Sure, it might be harder to CODE for, but in the end, the Revolution controller makes for a more realistic FPS. I mean, shooting a gun does not feel like moving a mouse up and down or twirling an analog stick around.
Walking around with a gun in your hands doesn't feel like rotating your wrists and pointing a remote at a TV, either...

[bazariah]

i think the only reason that industry dude was bigging the 360 up so much is that first of all it's coming out first... and secondly if he has games in development and the 360's out first he'd gonna want to shift those before anything... short term thinking

[Ed Oscuro]

Or perhaps it has something to do with the fact that they like the idea of developing for the 360 more (cheaper, better tools), and don't like the Revolution's controller? LOL

[chrisbid]

the SNES didnt take over the lead until 1994, and only had the larger market share in the end becuase sega all but abandoned the genesis in early 95 when the saturn hit the market.

but the actual point is correct though, graphics do not equal market success

[Ed Oscuro]

but the actual point is correct though, graphics do not equal market success
Nor to bad graphics a market success make ;)

After watching the movie, Dbiersdorf really hasn't translated the Epic guy's guff very well ;) He said there will be some "I wish I hadn't bought this" gimmick games on the Rev, and there's already some on the NDS ;) He gets a bit more even-handed later on.

[gepeto]

I have just been getting a bad feeling about the nintendo direction. At first I was looking forward to the controller. and then once I saw the controller I got the bad ngage vibe and that vibe is undefeated.

I applaud them for trying something innovating but I think the controller will be the death blow for the revolution. I believe it should have been an accessory to complement a real controller.

I think most people play games to get drawn in and relax not to get drawn in and exercise. I think once the gimmick wears off people will want something close to the industy standard. I believe someone is afraid to go into the room and speak to the very top top top man at nintendo and tell him the true state of the union. I am staring to think everyone around him is lying to him like sadamms flunkies were to him.

I remember when the gamecube was being hyped. They was stating that the new controller would revolutionize FPS.
I am still waiting. I love all systems

I controller will appeal to the dance dance fans but not me.
yesterday I played a game and I had a remote in the other hand pointed toward the tv set just to check my stamina.
I was done after 15mins.
I can understand the n64 failure cartridges. I am still trying to figure out the gamecube total collapse it was discs based.

If I was king of nintendo I would put everyone involved on the development team in a room and lock the door and don't let them come out until a kick ass top dog all powerful machine comes out.

This madness must stop no excuses this time for nintendo or it is to the software development shed you go. Your room accomodations will be reserved next to sega.

I know I haven't played with it yet but I haven't played with the ngage either to know a turd is a turd is a turd.

I hope it does well. I could be wrong I have been wrong before. The Scooby doo movie made 54 million its first weekend.

Sorry for the rant.

Disclaimer
The veiws expressed are strickly those of gepeto

[NESVIDIOT]

it all just depends on who signs your paycheck- obviously Bill Gates signs his, the way he was totally crapping on Nintendo and supporting Microsoft. Very similar to big business and the government. A spokesman will say whatever he gets paid to say.

I think they will all have good points and bad. Honestly though I am really interested in the Revolution, especially after seeing the TGS video clip of the Rev and control, not just because I am a Nintendophile.

I know I will own a Revolution. I'm sure the other 2 system will have some games that Nintendo won't that will justify why I have to have all 3. And I'm sure a lot of other DP members and collectors out there will have all 3 as well.

[Ed Oscuro]

I have just been getting a bad feeling about the nintendo direction. At first I was looking forward to the controller. and then once I saw the controller I got the bad ngage vibe and that vibe is undefeated.
Well, for my part, I don't see what the stylus and second screen add to, say, the new DS Castlevania (haven't played it, sadly, as I can't even find a copy in town and don't have a DS yet anyway). The newest REmake has some new features, but I'm not sure they present deep and fun enough gameplay. If I want to play a dodgy minigame, I'll go check out some Flash game sites...

[Ed Oscuro]

it all just depends on who signs your paycheck- obviously Bill Gates signs his, the way he was totally crapping on Nintendo and supporting Microsoft. Very similar to big business and the government. A spokesman will say whatever he gets paid to say.
Wow, that's really deep. Where to I sign up to get your toilet pa...er, newsletter? Seriously though, of course Bill's gonna bash the other consoles.

His talk about the Blu-Ray being "anti-consumer," though - my immediate suspicions is that Microsoft, as a supporter and producer of media protection schemes, will have something of their own, let's face it. Nobody who makes DVDs wants you to copy them; it's that simple.

[rbudrick]

I'd like to punch that fat, smug, egotistical, know-it-all piece of shit dork right in the mouth. And most of you all know quite well I'm no Nintendo fanboy.

I guess he's got a crystal ball and knows the future. He'd better, because as someone said, he doesn't know shit about the past. What a dumbass.

What possible benefit is it to go ragging on a company and its product publicly like that? Completely unprofessional. That guy seriously reminds me of an immature, awkward, dorky teenager who is never, ever going to get laid. The guy needs to grow up and realize his shit truly does stink, contrary to his beliefs.

-Rob

[Ed Oscuro]

What possible benefit is it to go ragging on a company and its product publicly like that? Completely unprofessional.
Sure, but he does give a reason for the frustration (and admits the Rev will probably be great later on): Nintendo hasn't been "selling" the console to developers. But yeah, seeing how he backpedals wildly in a lower tone of voice later on, that's pretty damned grating.

Sad he dominated the conversation, or that the guy next to him was so damned equivocating.

[sabre2922]

PC guys (especially PC developers) just dont get console gaming and thats what these guys are just like many console gamers (and developers) dont get PC gaming (wich is what I am-gamer anyway ;) ).

These guys are full of shit.

[Mangar]

- Nintendo is not considered part of the race.
- People apparently don't own GameCube's.


All things considered: These two points are actually true. Especially the first one. The Revolution's **ONLY** hope of competing is if they come out at a significantly lower price.

The problem with having this discussion on a forum like this, is your generally dealing with people who own 15+ consoles. (Even more in many cases) It's not unusual for people here to buy every next-gen system. The average consumer however is much different, and unlike previous years the asking prices are much higher then usual. So when parents of children from the PS1,PS2, and X-Box generation are faced with the choice of dropping 400$+ on a console, they are going to pick just one. That one is more then likely not going to be the Nintendo. It's not the name they equate with quality and cutting edge games. Instead it's the name they equate with cutesy family titles.

Bottom Line: The Revolution is going to have to be marketed in a very very smart fashion, and priced very low in order to make a dent.

As for Genesis and SNES games aging well.. (shrug) - It's a pointless argument. Individual games from both librarys have aged well, and some haven't. For every Genesis game you pick, you can also dig up an SNES one. Simply depends on which type of games you enjoy the most. It's too individually subjective to make a real argument on.

[Ed Oscuro]

PC guys (especially PC developers) just dont get console gaming and thats what these guys are just like many console gamers (and developers) dont get PC gaming (wich is what I am-gamer anyway ;) ).
Well, what's it about, then? Getting third and losing money on your home consoles?


These guys are full of shit.
Of course, but hey, that's business.

By the way, when the Epic guy was honest, he mentioned that the Revolution will likely be a great machine (the IGN guys said that), and I think he lost a chance to really pound in the fact that IGN can say what they want, but if Epic and other companies don't see Revolution devkits, and don't hear from Nintendo about the console, they can't then be expected to be very enthusiastic.

[Griking]

The comment that the Nintendo Revolution wasn't really in the next-gen race had me thinking what it would take to get them in the race.

What's everyone's opinion of how the Revolution would sell if Nintendo went back to what made the NES, SNEs and Gameboys huge successes; include a killer game (not just a demo) with the console? In fact, what if the Revolution were pre-packaged with two controllers and a copy the new Zelda game at release? Would that sell enough consoles to make them a serious competitor? Wouldn't it be worth it to Nintendo to sacrifice the profits of a smash hit to get a huge install base to attract more 3rd party publishers?

[CrimsonNugget]

- The Revolution controller is not going to be the best for FPSIt feels like taking aim and pulling a trigger. And what does the Revolution controller allow you to do?
I'm pretty sure lightguns allow you to do that too, and offer a more realistic feel as well. =P

[CartCollector]

RE: Ed Oscuro and CrimsonNugget
Well, it's closer than the other two standards I listed. Also, current lightguns are not suitable for FPS gameplay, because there's nothing to control walking or the camera with. So, if this controller gets released, it'll be the closest thing we have to real aiming-and-firing.

[Ed Oscuro]

Also, current lightguns are not suitable for FPS gameplay, because there's nothing to control walking or the camera with. So, if this controller gets released, it'll be the closest thing we have to real aiming-and-firing.
You've got the aiming part down, but my point's with the walking and camera-movement. Personally the idea of having to do something odd with the controller to get it to move the camera seperate from aiming...that sounds like a bother and a cause for lost reaction time.

[calthaer]

First off: as much as that fatty from Epic was certainly as moronic as everyone is making him out to be, let's not make generalizations about "all PC game designers don't know how to make console games."

We'll see what happens when Blizzard releases Starcraft: Ghost. I'm sure there's lots of other evidence that PC designers can make good console games (Morrowind? Fable? Even to go back to the classics: Maniac Mansion? Sim City?). Lots of games ended up on consoles that enjoyed a perfectly successful previous life on PCs.

But yes - that guy was a complete tool. I hope that the Nintendo Revolution succeeds - if for no other reason than to make him eat his obnoxious words. "Graphics whore" doesn't even begin to describe him.

I can truly and honestly say that I have very little - if any - desire to ever play an Epic game ever again after hearing this dork. Their original Unreal was a stupendous game, but Cliffy B and his crew have not produced anything I've been terribly interested in playing since then. What does UT2004 do that the original UT didn't?

[CYRiX]

This whole topic is dedicated to fanyboys...


Anyways who wouldn't bash a competitor (well besides the people who just ignore competitors).

[Xizer]

Epic...Games? The only thing notable these PC-focused guys have produced is the Unreal series...yet they're criticizing a console?

Hahahaha.

[Ed Oscuro]

RE: Ed Oscuro and CrimsonNugget
Well, it's closer than the other two standards I listed. Also, current lightguns are not suitable for FPS gameplay, because there's nothing to control walking or the camera with. So, if this controller gets released, it'll be the closest thing we have to real aiming-and-firing.
No argument there, but I still see deficiencies. Ack. Well, it's a step in the right direction.

[Arkaign]

On the title topic, it's silly for a PC games company exec to flame aspects of a console that's a long way off anyway. Means nothing to me.

On the 'Nintendo isn't in the next-gen race' topic, I'd have to agree. I don't think people realize how smart Nintendo is by not trying to out-Xbox the 360, or out-PS the PS3. N64, Gamecube, and DS are all vastly different than their counterparts, and it's done very well for Nintendo over the years. They can concentrate on a variety of fun / family-friendly titles that don't rely on bleeding-edge graphics to be satisfying to those that like them, and also provide titles that the 10-and-under crowd can actually play, which is next to impossible on Xbox or PS series.

I don't think that the Revolution will overlap very much at all with 360 or PS3. 360 and PS3 will be in this huge mythic battle, and Rev will sneak right under the radar for a very stable and steady market of its own.

I don't see any of the next-gen systems going down in flames. Except in flaming posts by fanboys of various factions.

[lendelin]

I partially agree with the guy from Epic Games. Graphics are underestimated, they are very important to draw you into a game, they are and were always very importqant for new gen consoles, resolution and high polygon counts count, however, the technical aspects of graphics is a necessary but not sufficient condition to make good games. In this regard he overstated.

They are tools, nothing more; the other aspect of graphics is the artistic use of them, the mood setting, the right use of graphics to immerse you into a game as part of the gameplay, and last but not least, the right balance of them with other aspects of gameplay. Game developers should ask themselves how they can make good use of technical aspects of graphic engines to tell a good story, and not become enslaved in mere high polygon counts.

I share the guys skepticism about the Revolution controller. He didn't say in the video it is a gimmick, but it is an invitation for "gimmicky" games, and I think he's right. The statement has to be seen in the context of the discussion where someone else stated that N is looking for a very different audience, for different gamers to get part of their shrinking market shares back; and I think both are right, and I stated that a couple of times.

To make a final comment about the neverending discusion about the Revolution controller: lets wait, we don't know how the thing will work, we don't know how the interaction with games play out, we haven't seen it in action yet becasue they are no games out there. All we've seen are excited, paid actors jumping on couches waving the thing.

But I can't imagine the controller will be a revolution; it will be more of a tool to play short, simple, and esily accesible party games probably giving you a lot of eye-toy experiences. A tool which has to be seen in the context of Ns marketing strategy to survive the console wars by appealing to casual and non-gamers.

[Aussie2B]

I might care if I actually knew who the hell Epic Games are. :P

While this probably makes me look uninformed (and I having read through the replies, I know they're the Unreal guys, I just didn't know upon reading the topic's title), I think my comment makes a good point. Chances are, if you're a fan of Nintendo and Japanese-developed games, you probably don't give two shits about a company like Epic Games. So while their fans probably very likely agree with their sentiments about the Revolution and Nintendo as a whole, the Nintendo fans have entirely different tastes and see things very differently.

I also seem to recall that that Cliff guy was in Nintendo Power in NES Achievers back in the day, so if he's claiming that Nintendo is so crappy, he's clearly a hypocrite. Maybe it was a long time ago, but he too loved playing a Nintendo console at one point.


I believe someone is afraid to go into the room and speak to the very top top top man at nintendo and tell him the true state of the union. I am staring to think everyone around him is lying to him like sadamms flunkies were to him.

That's gotta be one of the worst analogies ever, and pretty offensive to boot.

[lendelin]

I also seem to recall that that Cliff guy was in Nintendo Power in NES Achievers back in the day, so if he's claiming that Nintendo is so crappy, he's clearly a hypocrite. Maybe it was a long time ago, but he too loved playing a Nintendo console at one point.


Gimme a break. First, it wasn't Cliff Blezinski talking, he wasn't on the panel; second, he was probably around ten years old when he was listed in NP in 'Nes Achievers.' Times change. Statements were made about the future. Noone stated the NES was a terrible system with short-sighted marketing in 1988 when Blezinski loved to play SMB (for which he was listed with a high score).

[Richter Belmount]

games are for nothing but graphics? Umm Grand theft auto 3 anyone? (a game with so so graphics , being praised for its gameplay and open endedness when it came out)
not to mention it becoming a household name and selling millions , he clearly has not done his homework.
Sure gta has brought bad copies , but it atleast brought something new and innovative and shows thats all it takes to sell a game like gta.

[Aussie2B]

I also seem to recall that that Cliff guy was in Nintendo Power in NES Achievers back in the day, so if he's claiming that Nintendo is so crappy, he's clearly a hypocrite. Maybe it was a long time ago, but he too loved playing a Nintendo console at one point.


Gimme a break. First, it wasn't Cliff Blezinski talking, he wasn't on the panel; second, he was probably around ten years old when he was listed in NP in 'Nes Achievers.' Times change. Statements were made about the future. Noone stated the NES was a terrible system with short-sighted marketing in 1988 when Blezinski loved to play SMB (for which he was listed with a high score).

Like I said, I don't know anything about Epic Games, so I wouldn't know if it was him speaking or not. I don't care about the company and I don't care what any of its employees have to say about anything in the industry, especially when it's a Western PC developer talking about a Japanese console developer. They may as well be talking about quilting because they are not in tune with the demographic Nintendo caters to at all.

Anyway, I assume Blezinski is the president Epic Games or some such? If so, he takes some responsibility for what the other employees of the company say. If the guy is claiming that ALL Nintendo products are gimmicks and that no one owns a GameCube, Blezinski needs to talk some sense into him before he further makes the company look foolish and Blezinski look like a hypocrite.

[Daltone]

After watching that I found myself thinking along the same lines as gepeto and lendlin. When I first heard about the speculation about the Rev controller I was quietly hoping that I'd see something that would blow me away. In the end, all I could think was that this looked like some sort of awful gimmick. Obviously I don't know anything about the games yet, so my opinion could change. Maybe this controller will be a revolution. At the moment though, I find myself doubting it.

I guess I view it as sort of an extreme version of the DS. Yes, it will have some fun games developed specifically for it but other developers will be compelled to make use of the gimmick in a way that, in the end, doesn't really add anything.

I hate the idea of having to buy add-ons for the controller to get full enjoyment out of games. I want something that I can plug into my TV and be able to

I don't see Nintendo as a player in the 'console wars' either. Maybe it's the lack of information currently available about the console, but the revolution seems to be more of a curio that something that I'm going to rush out and buy. Then again, maybe my view on all of that will change. Even if the console doesn't (or indeed can't) compete against the X360 or PS3 it could well find a niche market of its own.

Even if I'm totally wrong and the controller turns out to be the best thing since sliced bread, I won't be getting one (while the console is alive) unless it's going to have a relatively large lineup of stuff I may actually want to play. As such, if Epic's view is pretty widely held then widespread third party support isn't looking like it's on the cards.

As it is, just wait and see I suppose. First impressions aren't good, but they can be changed.

[kevin_psx]

- Nintendo is not considered part of the race.
- People apparently don't own GameCube's.

All things considered: These two points are actually true. Especially the first one.


Are they? First point is opinion. The second point is flat wrong. The number of Cubes sold is virtually equal to number of Xboxes sold. Why is Xbox labeled "success" and Cube labeled "flop" when both sold about 20 million units? Shouldn't they both get the same label?

[kevin_psx]

but the actual point is correct though, graphics do not equal market success
Nor to bad graphics a market success make ;)

Repeating myself: No not saying weakest graphics = best seller. Only that graphics is not the deciding factor when customers decide. Any "expert" such as the guy at that conference should know that. Maybe I should make my point different:

Intellivsion = best graphics but not #1 best-seller
Sega MS = best graphics but not #1 best-seller
Sega Genesis = best graphics but not #1 in 16-bit gen
N64 = best graphics but not best-seller
Xbox = best graphics but not best-seller


Anyone who thinks, "The console with the best graphics will automatically win" has not studied history.

[googlefest1]

- Nintendo is not considered part of the race.
- People apparently don't own GameCube's.

All things considered: These two points are actually true. Especially the first one.


Are they? First point is opinion. The second point is flat wrong. The number of Cubes sold is virtually equal to number of Xboxes sold. Why is Xbox labeled "success" and Cube labeled "flop" when both sold about 20 million units? Shouldn't they both get the same label?

i dont know about the figures but if the console sales were equal (like i thought they were) they may be considering how much money was made off of xbx live and how many games sold divided by the number of consoles. I remeber reading an article that Microsoft was pleased to see a good number of games sold per console. I dont realy know why they say XBX is a better success, im just guessing

[kevin_psx]

In terms of actual $$$$$, Nintendo definitely wins. Microsoft's Xbox division has lost several billion over the last 4 years.

Nintendo is the opposite - they make tons of profit on each Cube game sold & are rolling in dough.

[calthaer]

Gosh...I can't believe how many people here just don't know who Cliffy B is.

He was the level designer on the original Unreal - the one that was brilliant. His ideas revolved around pacing - slowing things down then speeding them up during the course of the game. Not really revolutionary - Miyamoto and others had done this for years - but he talked about this principle and really popularized it.

As a level designer, he was key in making the original Unreal so good.

As an executive producer / lead designer on the later games, he was also probably responsible for making those bad (Unreal 2 SUCKED!).

He's known for some flamboyent / colorful comments here and there, but I can't remember just what.

http://www.cliffyb.com/
That's his blog - inane most of the time, honestly.

http://www.somethingawful.com/jeffk/fpssurvivar/index.htm
A web comic that introduced many of the hordes on the internet at the time to some of the "big" names in PC game development: John Carmack, John Romero, Cliffy B, etc.


And keep in mind that Epic not only makes Unreal, but also the Unreal Engine - which powers several games for both console and PC (but was primarily a PC 3D graphics engine).

http://www.unrealtechnology.com/

Now, as many of us have realized, PC games are waning in popularity - and sales. Of course, now that the Xbox is becoming more popular, and because the Xbox is so similar in architecture to the PC, this opens up a lot of avenues for Epic to realize a LOT more money / revenue either from their own games or from games that license their technology.

This guy's effusive praise of the Xbox 360 and his obnoxious "fanboyism" is most likely motivated by one thing only: GREED. The more people have Xbox 360s, the more people are probably going to pour money into Epic's pockets. This also explains his promotion of graphics as the most important part of games - if people actually believe this lie, then that makes the Unreal Engine a much more valuable property.

The next version of the Unreal tech also works on PS3, so he probably doesn't care if people get a PS3 - BUT it doesn't support the Nintendo Revolution / Gamecube...which would explain very well why he doesn't think too much of that platform.

I think it should be plain and apparent to anyone that this guy cares far more about graphics (and, subsequently, his own company's profits) than about good quality games. Whether you agree or not with him that the Xbos 360 is the "best" next-gen console, you probably wouldn't agree with him for the same reasons - i.e., it's the best because it's going to make Epic the most money.

[kevin_psx]

This guy's effusive praise of the Xbox 360 and his obnoxious "fanboyism" is most likely motivated by one thing only: GREED.

I think it should be plain and apparent to anyone that this guy cares far more about graphics (and, subsequently, his own company's profits) than about good quality games. Whether you agree or not with him that the Xbos 360 is the "best" next-gen console - i.e., it's the best because it's going to make Epic the most money.

He should just say so.

LOL

Instead his "the best graphics will be the best selling" sounds stupid.

[Ed Oscuro]

Epic...Games? The only thing notable these PC-focused guys have produced is the Unreal series...yet they're criticizing a console?

Hahahaha.
Somebody hasn't played Unreal Championship 2, have they?


On the title topic, it's silly for a PC games company exec to flame aspects of a console that's a long way off anyway. Means nothing to me.
I also don't think it's stunningly brilliant for Nintendo do keep their console under wraps, and developers in the dark for so long...


games are for nothing but graphics?
This sort of lack of attention to what's being said is just embarassing.

[Xizer]

Epic...Games? The only thing notable these PC-focused guys have produced is the Unreal series...yet they're criticizing a console?

Hahahaha.
Somebody hasn't played Unreal Championship 2, have they?


Actually, I have played it, and I think it sucks ass. All it is is a typical "run-n-gun" at a fast pace. I'd take Goldeneye, Half-Life or even Halo over that mediocre garbage any day.

[Arkaign]

Epic...Games? The only thing notable these PC-focused guys have produced is the Unreal series...yet they're criticizing a console?

Hahahaha.
Somebody hasn't played Unreal Championship 2, have they?


Actually, I have played it, and I think it sucks ass. All it is is a typical "run-n-gun" at a fast pace. I'd take Goldeneye, Half-Life or even Halo over that mediocre garbage any day.

It's sorta apples and oranges there, Unreal Championship is a MP-centric game that concentrates on Deathmatch and other player vs player action.

Goldeneye, Half-Life, and Halo have a bit more depth because of their single-player campaigns, backstories, etc. The pace of play is a lot slower.

It's all kind of a matter of personal preference. I lean towards ID MP games on PC, myself. I'm admittedly spoiled by the superior hardware, detail, framerate, and response that you get from a decent gaming PC. I'm having a good time with Quake 4 right now .. and I hated Halo so much I sold my Xbox.

Just goes to show that not everyone wants to play the same games :)