[Feb 15, 2007, 12:37 am ET] - Share - Viewing Comments
Mark Rein Q&A on TeamXbox
follows up on a couple of long-debunked rumors
) with the first semi-solid
confirmation of plans for a PC port of Gears of War, which the Epic veep now
says is inevitable, eventually (thanks
). After answering one question reaffirming the game as an Xbox 360
exclusive, Mark offers the following response to the question of whether it will
stay that way:
’Til there’s something else. (chuckles) People ask me, “Are
you going to do it on PC?” Yeah, eventually…I don’t think that’s any great
secret that we would like to do it on PC, but for now it’s a 360 game.
Eventually we’ll get around to a PC version. I just don’t know when.
That’s worked successfully for Halo. Halo was a big seller on PC long after it
kind of peaked on the original Xbox, and they’re doing the same thing now with
Halo 2. We work at the pleasure of a publisher who thinks both of those are
their platforms, so I think it’s ultimately inevitable, and obviously we’re a PC
The big challenge is to make a game that was designed solely for the console…to
take advantage of every last little corner of that console, to fill every little
crack and run as many threads as we could and do as much to exploit the power of
that machine, and make it run well on enough PCs to be worth releasing. That’s a
challenge. UT will help us there, because Unreal Tournament 3 will be kind of
our vanguard PC product, and it’s helping us get optimization on the PC. So it’s
just a matter of, now, can we make Gears run on enough PCs that it’s worth
selling…or do we have to wait in five years until everyone has a PC that can run
It’s inevitable, but it’s just not there today.
Enter the details of the comment
you'd like to post in the boxes below and click the button at
the bottom of the form.
||Re: Crysis again--
||Feb 18, 2007, 18:33
If you say it has a feature better then most, its not innovative.
Then what is it? To say something is "innovative" means there is a basis for it already. "Innovative" over what else? Otherwise it could be called "original." And good AI isn't exactly original. So yes, it was definitely innovative how the AI worked in F.E.A.R., especially when PC FPS's generally have crappy enemies that are just fodder for mowing down.
a game cant be both sorry.
Why not? NOLF (and esp. NOLF 2) really pushed the PC FPS genre forward in several areas, most notably just how entertaining that kind of game can be. It took preexisting notions players take for granted in the genre and put innovative twists on them.
As for console games in general being innovative, that is only due to the sheer numbers of them being produced rather than anything native about the platform
Not at all. The PC game platform isn't fixed, and whether or not you take that as a negative/positive point, you have that sheer relativity with PC components and performance that doesn't exist on the console. Developing for a static platform (the console), the developer already establishes what can be done on the console and such, content can be concentrated on.
Yes, there is the sheer number of titles produced for consoles. There was once for the PC platform too, a number of years ago. Now, that shelf isn't so big.
That's 16. Or say 15 if you want to ignore Dawn of War. Let's see your 30 titles.
The only problem with that logic is that the PC platform is awesome for spawning originality, but not keeping it going.
Because dumbfucks in japan will buy any game that has gundam in the title
Really now, you think those kinds of people are only native to Japan? There are plenty of people you can spoon-feed shit to on a continuous basis in NA, Europe, Australia, South Korea...Ever heard of Electronic Arts or Activision?
While I'm not one of those people who are blindly impressed with Crysis (Far Cry with hyper-pretty graphics, woo-hoo), but I'll play it anyway because I enjoyed Far Cry so much.
JRPGs are glorified adventure games. Completely linear and stats are only a factor in combat. Oblivion is a completely different type of game. Do JRPGs have better stories and character development? Probably. Do they have better gameplay? Hardly.
Oh, yes, I agree with you there. Not to use a cliché, but it's a good example where East differs from the West. Such as most games developed in America/Europe rely on the overall design formula of having to obtain some result or end in the game. Be it overcome some enemy, baddy, neutralize something or someone, whatever. You have a beginning, you have an end, and the in-between is the "meat" so to speak.
The JRPG's are linear as hell, but as you said, tell excellent stories. Its mostly the contextual experience that's important. And that's probably where a lot of Americans get hung up on the highly rated JRPG series like Final Fantasy and Kingdom Hearts. Compared to a lot of American offerings, you really don't do a lot.
I'd say GoW definitely looks better than R6: Vegas.
Really should reread what I type sometimes.
This comment was edited on Feb 19, 19:23.