Heavy Rain Creator Praises Sony's "Balls"

[squid5580]

Didn't mean it to sound as if I didn't support innovation, or admire Sony for doing what Microsoft seems to be scared of. But it's certain that new titles along the Heavy Rain line are more likely to be published, purely because it makes sense from a financial standpoint. Though it by no means means [I need to learn some new words.] that Sony will abandon innovative IPs. I just don't think they'll have the precedence of tried-and-tested formulae.

Still, really admire Sony for this. Given the choice, though, I would have built myself a PC instead of buying an Xbox. Regrets..

Don't worry, I wasn't trying to paint you as not supporting innovation. It's the people like Judas Iscariot above me here that I was directing to mainly. Infact, I'll quote him;

If only Sony had had a little less balls and a little more brains and actually made sure the fucking game actually made sense before churning out another worthless turd that makes other developers want to play it safe even more.

A "worthless turd that makes other developers want to play it safe even more" that was critically and commercially successful. How does that even make sense? Did you even read the article or did you base that since you didn't like the game that meant nobody else did and therefore it was a flop?

Honestly how is Heavy Rain so new or innovative? Struck me as a long string of QTEs just like Dragon's Lair or Space Ace. Just upgraded for the times.

Really, point me to any other game (Not developed by Quantic Dream of course) that could in any way be described as similar to Heavy Rain. There's you're "new"/"innovative" part.

Honestly, it's one of those games that you really have to play to understand. It may look like nothing but QTE's on the surface, but that's like saying that Shadow of the Collosus is nothing but boss fights and wandering around nothing. It isn't really fair to the game to brush it off as "nothing but pretty QTE's" when, from what I'm assuming here, you haven't played it. I've personally played it, and platnum trophy-ed it, and I loved every second of it despite it's flaws.

Sure, not everyone is going to like the game, and you're completely in your right to dislike it. But it's still something different from the other games out there, that's what's important.

Ok first off I did play it I did beat it with the "good" ending and I stand by my opinion of it (if there was a chance the killer would have changed through multiple playthroughs I would have platted it). I am still ticked off about the fire scene where you are controlling the girl. Who the hell jumps out a second story window headfirst??? And sure it is different from games on the market right now. That doesn't mean it doesn't borrow from past games. They just didn't have the technology to pull off something like this to the degree Quantic did back then.

And SOTC did feel like a game of wandering through an empty world looking for the next boss fight to me. I will say the one part almost made me cry like a little schoolgirl and it would have made a great movie. It just lacked substance for me in the gameplay dept. Atmosphere, story and graphics all spot on. I just hate travelling through an empty world for long periods of time. That is why I will never beat Deadly Premonition either. They force you to drive forever through empty streets. It is boring.

 

[Jumplion]

Ok first off I did play it I did beat it with the "good" ending and I stand by my opinion of it (if there was a chance the killer would have changed through multiple playthroughs I would have platted it)

Okay, that's good, I thought you were bashing the game without playing it. It's fine if you didn't like it, you reserve the right to not like it, that's fine. Though I don't find the complaint of "The killer doesn't change with multiple playthroughs!" a valid criticism, why does it matter?

I am still ticked off about the fire scene where you are controlling the girl. Who the hell jumps out a second story window headfirst???

Eh, suspension of disbelief. Though hiding in a fridge to escape from a moderate explosion is more plausible than hiding in a fridge to avoid a nuclear bomb.

And sure it is different from games on the market right now.

Yes, that is undeniable...

That doesn't mean it doesn't borrow from past games. They just didn't have the technology to pull off something like this to the degree Quantic did back then.

...but I don't see where you're going here. We weren't talking about borrowing from other games, and why would it matter?

And SOTC did feel like a game of wandering through an empty world looking for the next boss fight to me. I will say the one part almost made me cry like a little schoolgirl and it would have made a great movie. It just lacked substance for me in the gameplay dept. Atmosphere, story and graphics all spot on. I just hate travelling through an empty world for long periods of time. That is why I will never beat Deadly Premonition either. They force you to drive forever through empty streets. It is boring.

I'm sorry, I have to respectfully and completely disagree. Shadow of the Collosus would not have made a great movie (though I pray it will since supposedly a movie is under development), there is too much within the gameplay to successfully transfer to a passive medium like film. The feeling of climbing up the collosi, stabbing the sword in the weak point, and the solitary feeling of wandering around in the wasteland, and so many other factors would be absolutely ruined if condensed to a 2 hour movie. Some video games are video games because you can't do the same thing on any other medium.

Again, if you didn't like the game, that's fine, but you cannot deny that both Heavy Rain/SotC are games that were different, unique, and innovative in their own ways.

 

[squid5580]

Ok first off I did play it I did beat it with the "good" ending and I stand by my opinion of it (if there was a chance the killer would have changed through multiple playthroughs I would have platted it)

Okay, that's good, I thought you were bashing the game without playing it. It's fine if you didn't like it, you reserve the right to not like it, that's fine. Though I don't find the complaint of "The killer doesn't change with multiple playthroughs!" a valid criticism, why does it matter?

I am still ticked off about the fire scene where you are controlling the girl. Who the hell jumps out a second story window headfirst???

Eh, suspension of disbelief. Though hiding in a fridge to escape from a moderate explosion is more plausible than hiding in a fridge to avoid a nuclear bomb.

And sure it is different from games on the market right now.

Yes, that is undeniable...

That doesn't mean it doesn't borrow from past games. They just didn't have the technology to pull off something like this to the degree Quantic did back then.

...but I don't see where you're going here. We weren't talking about borrowing from other games, and why would it matter?

And SOTC did feel like a game of wandering through an empty world looking for the next boss fight to me. I will say the one part almost made me cry like a little schoolgirl and it would have made a great movie. It just lacked substance for me in the gameplay dept. Atmosphere, story and graphics all spot on. I just hate travelling through an empty world for long periods of time. That is why I will never beat Deadly Premonition either. They force you to drive forever through empty streets. It is boring.

I'm sorry, I have to respectfully and completely disagree. Shadow of the Collosus would not have made a great movie (though I pray it will since supposedly a movie is under development), there is too much within the gameplay to successfully transfer to a passive medium like film. The feeling of climbing up the collosi, stabbing the sword in the weak point, and the solitary feeling of wandering around in the wasteland, and so many other factors would be absolutely ruined if condensed to a 2 hour movie. Some video games are video games because you can't do the same thing on any other medium.

Again, if you didn't like the game, that's fine, but you cannot deny that both Heavy Rain/SotC are games that were different, unique, and innovative in their own ways.

Ok what pissed me off about the fire scene was the stupidity of it. It killed me and forced a reload. Why? Because the stupid crazy ***** jumped out headfirst hoping to use her grey matter as a pillow. That I felt was a very cheap move on their part. And don't get me started on the dream. I almost snapped the disc in half when I found out it was just a dream.

The killer not changing ruined any replay value for me. I can't unknow who it is. That is where I had the most fun with the game. Trying to deduce who the killer is and the motive behind it. Even if they did blow the identity a bit early IMHO. I didn't have much fun playing the game. Waiting for the kid's schedule when he visits and just walking were both annoying. And whoopie I am being told exactly what buttons to press and when. Not by on screen actions but by text. There is no strategy, no brain power required. Just play Simon Says. Which by the way is hardly original since there was games like Dragon's Lair that did the same thing back 15 - 20 years. And the story was a blatant Saw rip off starring Jigsaw's retarded brother. That is why I don't believe it was either different or unique.

SOTC on the other hand was very unique, original and quite innovative. Unfortunately that doesn't always translate into a fun game. And for me it just wasn't. When I said make it into a movie I didn't mean take it and make it into a movie. I meant find some way to capture that emotional impacting junk and put in something more entertaining so I don't feel bored bored bored shock and awe bored bored bored shock and awe rinse and repeat. I would have felt just as isolated and alone with random monsters running around. Heck even a quick travel function would have saved it. Don't force me into 15-20 minutes of driving through nothingness to get to my objective. Bothers me in sandbox games and bothered me in SOTC.

 

[Jumplion]

Ok what pissed me off about the fire scene was the stupidity of it. It killed me and forced a reload. Why? Because the stupid crazy ***** jumped out headfirst hoping to use her grey matter as a pillow. That I felt was a very cheap move on their part. And don't get me started on the dream. I almost snapped the disc in half when I found out it was just a dream.

Wait, the game forced you to reload or you yourself reloaded? That's sortof the cheap way out. And there's not many ways you can get out of a 2nd/3rd story room that's on fire while you're panicking.

The dream, however, was complete bullshit, that much I agree with.

The killer not changing ruined any replay value for me. I can't unknow who it is. That is where I had the most fun with the game. Trying to deduce who the killer is and the motive behind it. Even if they did blow the identity a bit early IMHO.

Heavy Rain isn't much of a game on replay value, that I'll admit, it's main value for replay is to see the rest of the endings. It's like watching a movie, specifically a mystery, again (har har, movie comparison with Heavy Rain), it's usually not as good the second time you watch it but it's still interesting to watch. I still don't see why the killer's identity should have changed, there's no reason for it to do so and it wouldn't make any sense in the logical world.

I didn't have much fun playing the game. Waiting for the kid's schedule when he visits and just walking were both annoying. And whoopie I am being told exactly what buttons to press and when. Not by on screen actions but by text. There is no strategy, no brain power required. Just play Simon Says. Which by the way is hardly original since there was games like Dragon's Lair that did the same thing back 15 - 20 years. And the story was a blatant Saw rip off starring Jigsaw's retarded brother. That is why I don't believe it was either different or unique.

Again, point another game to me (not developed by Quantic Dream) that can be compared to Heavy Rain almost directly. Dragon's Lair, fine, but Dragon's Lair did not have multiple characters, a mature story to tell, or branching story paths. It was about a guy going through a castle to save a princess.

If you're going to compare the game to a movie, pretty much every game in creation is a blatant ripoff, or takes queues from, a movie. Stick to the same medium right now, that's what's important.

I don't think you're getting my definition of "different" or "unique". Again again, whether or not Heavy Rain was a bunch of QTEs, point to another game that can directly be compared to Heavy Rain in storytelling, gameplay, graphics/visuals, etc... God of War is compared to Devil May Cry/Ninja Gaiden. Call of Duty is compared to Bad Company/Loads of other FPSs. Heavy Rain is compared to....Shenmue I think? That's a pretty good thing to be compared to.

SOTC on the other hand was very unique, original and quite innovative. Unfortunately that doesn't always translate into a fun game. And for me it just wasn't. When I said make it into a movie I didn't mean take it and make it into a movie. I meant find some way to capture that emotional impacting junk and put in something more entertaining so I don't feel bored bored bored shock and awe bored bored bored shock and awe rinse and repeat.

I dislike the term "fun" when it comes to "artistic" games like SotC/ICO/Limbo/Whateverthehell the new "artsy" game is out now. Not every game has to necessarily be "fun". TF2 is fun. God of War is fun. Shadow of the Collosus is more "entertaining" than fun in that it puts more than just "shock and awe" emotions in you, at least for me.

I would have felt just as isolated and alone with random monsters running around. Heck even a quick travel function would have saved it. Don't force me into 15-20 minutes of driving through nothingness to get to my objective. Bothers me in sandbox games and bothered me in SOTC.

So Lonely Together [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/LonelyTogether] then? That's already accomplished with Agro/Argo, your horse. And where the hell would you quick travel to? It's not exactly the game with a bustling city to upgrade your weapons, the travel and exploration in the game is supposed to make you feel isolated, like you really stepped into a forbidden valley that once had life within it.

I suggest reading Yahtzee's recent article on SotC and exploration [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/columns/extra-punctuation/8002-Extra-Punctuation-On-Exploration], some good stuff.

 

[squid5580]

Ok what pissed me off about the fire scene was the stupidity of it. It killed me and forced a reload. Why? Because the stupid crazy ***** jumped out headfirst hoping to use her grey matter as a pillow. That I felt was a very cheap move on their part. And don't get me started on the dream. I almost snapped the disc in half when I found out it was just a dream.

Wait, the game forced you to reload or you yourself reloaded? That's sortof the cheap way out. And there's not many ways you can get out of a 2nd/3rd story room that's on fire while you're panicking.

The dream, however, was complete bullshit, that much I agree with.

The killer not changing ruined any replay value for me. I can't unknow who it is. That is where I had the most fun with the game. Trying to deduce who the killer is and the motive behind it. Even if they did blow the identity a bit early IMHO.

Heavy Rain isn't much of a game on replay value, that I'll admit, it's main value for replay is to see the rest of the endings. It's like watching a movie, specifically a mystery, again (har har, movie comparison with Heavy Rain), it's usually not as good the second time you watch it but it's still interesting to watch. I still don't see why the killer's identity should have changed, there's no reason for it to do so and it wouldn't make any sense in the logical world.

I didn't have much fun playing the game. Waiting for the kid's schedule when he visits and just walking were both annoying. And whoopie I am being told exactly what buttons to press and when. Not by on screen actions but by text. There is no strategy, no brain power required. Just play Simon Says. Which by the way is hardly original since there was games like Dragon's Lair that did the same thing back 15 - 20 years. And the story was a blatant Saw rip off starring Jigsaw's retarded brother. That is why I don't believe it was either different or unique.

Again, point another game to me (not developed by Quantic Dream) that can be compared to Heavy Rain almost directly. Dragon's Lair, fine, but Dragon's Lair did not have multiple characters, a mature story to tell, or branching story paths. It was about a guy going through a castle to save a princess.

If you're going to compare the game to a movie, pretty much every game in creation is a blatant ripoff, or takes queues from, a movie. Stick to the same medium right now, that's what's important.

I don't think you're getting my definition of "different" or "unique". Again again, whether or not Heavy Rain was a bunch of QTEs, point to another game that can directly be compared to Heavy Rain in storytelling, gameplay, graphics/visuals, etc... God of War is compared to Devil May Cry/Ninja Gaiden. Call of Duty is compared to Bad Company/Loads of other FPSs. Heavy Rain is compared to....Shenmue I think? That's a pretty good thing to be compared to.

SOTC on the other hand was very unique, original and quite innovative. Unfortunately that doesn't always translate into a fun game. And for me it just wasn't. When I said make it into a movie I didn't mean take it and make it into a movie. I meant find some way to capture that emotional impacting junk and put in something more entertaining so I don't feel bored bored bored shock and awe bored bored bored shock and awe rinse and repeat.

I dislike the term "fun" when it comes to "artistic" games like SotC/ICO/Limbo/Whateverthehell the new "artsy" game is out now. Not every game has to necessarily be "fun". TF2 is fun. God of War is fun. Shadow of the Collosus is more "entertaining" than fun in that it puts more than just "shock and awe" emotions in you, at least for me.

I would have felt just as isolated and alone with random monsters running around. Heck even a quick travel function would have saved it. Don't force me into 15-20 minutes of driving through nothingness to get to my objective. Bothers me in sandbox games and bothered me in SOTC.

So Lonely Together [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/LonelyTogether] then? That's already accomplished with Agro/Argo, your horse. And where the hell would you quick travel to? It's not exactly the game with a bustling city to upgrade your weapons, the travel and exploration in the game is supposed to make you feel isolated, like you really stepped into a forbidden valley that once had life within it.

I suggest reading Yahtzee's recent article on SotC and exploration [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/columns/extra-punctuation/8002-Extra-Punctuation-On-Exploration], some good stuff.

Ok I am the first to admit I am not an artsy person. SOTC, the Campbells soup can. twisted pieces of metal I don't get it. I am a literal type. Give me a deep story by telling me a deep story with words not pictures. Lost Oddessy (ya I know my spelling sucks right now) had an epic story for a game as far as I am concerned. That to me is art. So you put me in a game where I am supposed to be swooned by the hills and the sun and the landscape I am not impressed. It isn't SOTC it is me. So if they had put in a fast travel system so I could just bounce from one collussi to the next (optional of course) I might have enjoyed playing it more. But after 10 minutes of riding around I was done exploring. Unfortunately for me the game had other ideas. Becomes hard to appreciate it when you are annoyed by it.

Now for the Heavy Rain rant. Are you kidding me? You don't think someone could survive that drop by swinging their legs out the window, turning around and using your hands to hang and drop. That was the reaction I was expecting. Sure you might break a leg or ankle but at least you would live.

I don't watch movies more than once unless I have to (friends house, date whatever). For my own enjoyment life is too short and there is so much new and interesting things I haven't seen it seems like such a waste to throw away time like that. Not very often do I even bother replaying a game (unless it is a game that I love and want to platty/1000) once the credits roll. And those are rare and usually involve choices (like Mass Effect or DA:O) where I can change it up from my first time. Heavy Rain allows you to do that but I felt satisfied with the ending I got so I didn't feel the need to play through it again. And since I knew that you couldn't change the major players and he would always be the killer. I had hoped before I knew that you could change that by choices. Although I have no idea if current technology is even close to what I had in mind.

The story was interesting at first. Then it lulled for a while then you start going through the trials and this is what bothered me the most. If you are going to borrow from a movie like that don't pussify it. Go balls to the wall. Crawling through glass? Really? That is the best you could come up with? Oh here is a knife now cut off your finger? C'mon get creative. Make some elaborate trap. Put a key in a box with a trap that you know if you stick your hand in you will lose a finger. That is what I meant by Jigsaw's retarded brother.

You are right though. There really isn't any other game like it on the market right now. I hope to see more but with more oomph and less "press X to Jason". And none of this the most exciting scene in the game being a stupid effin dream. Come to think of it that may be one of the major reasons I didn't appreciate it. Pulling that so early in the game left a bad taste in my mouth for the rest of it. Would like to know WTF they were thinking when they decided to include that.

 

[Jumplion]

Ok I am the first to admit I am not an artsy person. SOTC, the Campbells soup can. twisted pieces of metal I don't get it. I am a literal type. Give me a deep story by telling me a deep story with words not pictures. Lost Oddessy (ya I know my spelling sucks right now) had an epic story for a game as far as I am concerned. That to me is art. So you put me in a game where I am supposed to be swooned by the hills and the sun and the landscape I am not impressed. It isn't SOTC it is me. So if they had put in a fast travel system so I could just bounce from one collussi to the next (optional of course) I might have enjoyed playing it more. But after 10 minutes of riding around I was done exploring. Unfortunately for me the game had other ideas. Becomes hard to appreciate it when you are annoyed by it.

And that's totally within your right. I agree, I'm not always the "artsy" kind of person. I hate "modern" art and I don't get why it's so "deep" and "complex" when it's just a room's light turning on and off. [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TrueArtIsIncomprehensible] So, yeah, it's fine if you didn't really like the game, but you do have to admit it's different, which you did, so yeah.

Now for the Heavy Rain rant. Are you kidding me? You don't think someone could survive that drop by swinging their legs out the window, turning around and using your hands to hang and drop. That was the reaction I was expecting. Sure you might break a leg or ankle but at least you would live.

Eh, again, suspension of disbelief. I don't suppose you've been in a burning apartment of a serial killer while trying to navigate through the smoke after being stuck in a room and on the 2nd/3rd story of a building. But neither have I, so I have no idea how I'd react if that ever happened to me. Probably scream and run around in circles.

I don't watch movies more than once unless I have to (friends house, date whatever). For my own enjoyment life is too short and there is so much new and interesting things I haven't seen it seems like such a waste to throw away time like that. Not very often do I even bother replaying a game (unless it is a game that I love and want to platty/1000) once the credits roll. And those are rare and usually involve choices (like Mass Effect or DA:O) where I can change it up from my first time. Heavy Rain allows you to do that but I felt satisfied with the ending I got so I didn't feel the need to play through it again. And since I knew that you couldn't change the major players and he would always be the killer. I had hoped before I knew that you could change that by choices. Although I have no idea if current technology is even close to what I had in mind.

The technology is there for sure, it's just the implementation of it that's extremely difficult. You'd have to think of multiple backstories and multiple motives to make multiple serial killers viable in the story, not to mention how you would find the evidence and how your choices would affect the outcome. It's hard enough to make branching story paths on one serial killer, making the serial killer dynamic would be ungodly difficult.

The story was interesting at first. Then it lulled for a while then you start going through the trials and this is what bothered me the most. If you are going to borrow from a movie like that don't pussify it. Go balls to the wall. Crawling through glass? Really? That is the best you could come up with? Oh here is a knife now cut off your finger? C'mon get creative. Make some elaborate trap. Put a key in a box with a trap that you know if you stick your hand in you will lose a finger. That is what I meant by Jigsaw's retarded brother.

Creative? Balls to the walls? Pussifying? I believe you were going into the game with completely different expectations than you should have. The game is not torture porn like the Saw franchise, it's not meant to show off the blood and gore and the hugeass insanity of the killer, it is not meant to be an extreme trials of crazy contraptions to let the guy blow up.

The key thing here is subtlety. Ethan Mars, and in turn the player, has to choose to chop his own finger off. And after choosing to do so, he as to act on it. Sticking your hand in a box is easy enough, you just wait for it to happen, try holding a big-ass cleaver and see if you can bring yourself to chop your finger off. Yahtzee says it well, actually [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/1528-Heavy-Rain] despite his negative criticisms of it.

"None of these fancy metaphorical torture devices, just hack of an extremity where I can see you, *****."

It's a much more realistic portrayal of what a father would have to go through to save his son if this happened. Would you drive against highway traffic for risk of crashing and killing yourself? Would you kill someone, drug dealer or not? Would you sacrifice your own body just to save him? The butterfly trail, in retrospect, was really the only trial that was sort of out of place.

You are right though. There really isn't any other game like it on the market right now. I hope to see more but with more oomph and less "press X to Jason". And none of this the most exciting scene in the game being a stupid effin dream. Come to think of it that may be one of the major reasons I didn't appreciate it. Pulling that so early in the game left a bad taste in my mouth for the rest of it. Would like to know WTF they were thinking when they decided to include that.

Yeah, the dream sequence was a kick in the balls, but I still forgive it. And finally we have come full circle here, where despite how good the game is or how you felt about it you have to admit that there's nothing like it. Good show, cheerio(s), and marmalade.

 

[Blackjack 222]

Marketing ploy, I guarantee it.

 

[nipsen]

Mirror's Edge was similar, wasn't it? Who took the risk on that one?

..A first person game made with the Unreal Engine, with a relatively small production - is not "the same" as Heavy Rain.

And.. I kind of doubt that anyone else except DICE would have earned any sort of leeway to do a project like this, even if it was on the backburner in between several other first person shooter projects..

As far as reception goes - many people in the industry, including the head of EA, has criticised the game for being "difficult to control", and "that it didn't really work". Misers also constantly complain about the story, although it is high art compared to most shooter-games made over the last 10 years.

But all of this suggests that if a sequel is ever made, it will not be as unique or original as the first game. That's the fate of most games made now - that if something is a commercial success, it will instantly be turned on the head and consolified.

Sony is as guilty as everyone else when it comes to this, though, with several of their other projects. The nightmare that was MAG and Killzone 2 being perfect examples of two games with unique and extremely characteristic styles. But when the first initial reactions came along, and the first whining turned up, Sony caved instantly and forced a number of changes on the games that were - to put it mildly - not good for either the game or the franchise in general.

Sony have also got rid of two very good developers since the ps3 launched, after they made a good ps3 exclusive title each. Factor 5 (maker of Rebel Assault, for example) with Lair. And then Studio Liverpool and WipeoutHD. What the story was with Studio Liverpool I do not know - but both of these games received less than stellar press. And a small deluge of "mainstream" and "casual" gamer complaints made Sony insist on several changes to either of the games. Lair had controller tweaks made to neuter the original use of the sixaxis control. WipeoutHD ended up as a testing grounds for Sony's internal advertising firm, for a still active project geared towards placing dynamic in-game advertisement in loading screens and other game assets.

It stinks to high heaven, and there's no reason to pretend otherwise.

Similarly, the initial positive reactions from people who were interested in things with stories in them - massively surprised Sony's publishing gnomes that looked after Heavy Rain. You've all forgotten it now, but initially, Sony wanted to market Heavy Rain as something completely different from what the game actually was. There were also rumours regarding suggestions for censorship edits purely regarding the usual "decency" standard, something the lead designer all but directly confirmed on his blogging later. I can also tell you for certain that Sony's feelers were extremely concerned that the title would give Sony an artsy-fartsy image.

If you read what Cage actually says as well, he states plainly that Sony didn't believe the title would earn any money. Something that ironically may very well have given QD more leeway than if they were developing a title with any expectations.

Along the same vein - if you have played the Killzone 3 beta by now, you'll know that Guerrilla Games and Sony have now taken in all the "criticism" from "people" about Killzone 2 - and finally produced Halo for the ps3. There's absolutely nothing characteristic left - any description of a feature is "like in.." a different title. And if there is something unique there - like the plot in Killzone 2, for example - it is certain to be downplayed.

Sony is just part of the industry, just like everyone else, and just as frightened of advertisers and industry sponsors as everyone else.

Meanwhile, the reason why they have things like Flower, flOw, and Riff - is that they had a smaller project specifically built up from the bottom to support new development of titles for the ps3 platform. This was, however, apparently done before certain restructuring and reprioritization took place. In fact, as you see these "indy" titles start to become commercial successes, you see more and more efforts from Sony HQ to sell these titles specifically. Which brings along with it the usual baggage.

It's all right to give a nod to Sony when they do have a hand in producing brilliant titles. Or when they supply the equipment, tech, staff and gear to raise the production value of a game to a very high level - as they did with Heavenly Sword, Heavy Rain, Killzone 2's tech and single player, Lair, WipeoutHD, etc. But suggesting that Sony is something out of the ordinary by default - that there's some rule going on that produces good titles - that is the same bullshit fanboyism that makes people literally fall in love with Microsoft and their xbox, genuinely believing that if they do, Microsoft will create great and original games for them out of charity.

The industry does not work like that.

 

[lacktheknack]

Mirror's Edge was similar, wasn't it? Who took the risk on that one?

..A first person game made with the Unreal Engine, with a relatively small production - is not "the same" as Heavy Rain.

I didn't say that. I said that Mirror's Edge was a well-executed innovative idea (a complete focus on running), and that it's up there with Heavy Rain in the successful risk category. I was disagreeing with Cage when he said that publishers who are not Sony are way too conservative. By his standards, EA is as well.

In other words, I put up a rhetorical question.

 

[Thunderhorse31]

And my next question for Mr. Cage, how does Sony's baby batter taste?

Seconded. This sounds like little more than sucking up to the hand that feeds. It's more than a little pretentious to think that Sony is the only company taking risks or green-lighting new ideas; why would they put out a game not expecting it to make any money?

Keep nursing on that teat Quantic, I look forward to your next ground-breaking cabinent-opening simulator whenever it comes out.

 

[ForensicYOYO]

Wo. Not what I thought this thread was about lol. Anyway I agree with him about needing more risk but your right not to blame them for not wanting to throw away money. But you can never gain if you can't learn from mistakes.

 

[nipsen]

Mirror's Edge was similar, wasn't it? Who took the risk on that one?

..A first person game made with the Unreal Engine, with a relatively small production - is not "the same" as Heavy Rain.

I didn't say that. I said that Mirror's Edge was a well-executed innovative idea (a complete focus on running), and that it's up there with Heavy Rain in the successful risk category. I was disagreeing with Cage when he said that publishers who are not Sony are way too conservative. By his standards, EA is as well.

In other words, I put up a rhetorical question.

:/ What you did, was to suggest making a small title with Rhianna Pratchett and DICE on the credits, on a relatively small budget - was risky. Heavy Rain -- even if you've played Fahrenheit -- is completely unknown, and has a philosophy about immersion that could fall ridiculously flat on it's face. It tries to branch out into the kind of interactive media we've seen attempted many times before - but which has always failed.

Sony then sponsors it with a full production, and raises it so that everything from sound to motion capture along with mechanics and so on is incredibly high. And that's just a completely different risk from what EA took with Mirror's Edge. It's just not in the same league.

..Of course, Sony then wanted move-support rather than extra playable chapters of outtakes.. still, Heavy Rain is a good game. But I mean, it's pretty unbelievable that anyone would sponsor it - no matter how good that game actually turned out.

 

[nipsen]

Marketing ploy, I guarantee it.

..you think Sony gives people money for saying nice things about them.. and reward them with exclusive access and, say, blogging contracts.. like certain other companies do..?

I wish. Sony are stingy with that kind of thing, let me tell you that much.

 

[lacktheknack]

Mirror's Edge was similar, wasn't it? Who took the risk on that one?

..A first person game made with the Unreal Engine, with a relatively small production - is not "the same" as Heavy Rain.

I didn't say that. I said that Mirror's Edge was a well-executed innovative idea (a complete focus on running), and that it's up there with Heavy Rain in the successful risk category. I was disagreeing with Cage when he said that publishers who are not Sony are way too conservative. By his standards, EA is as well.

In other words, I put up a rhetorical question.

:/ What you did, was to suggest making a small title with Rhianna Pratchett and DICE on the credits, on a relatively small budget - was risky. Heavy Rain -- even if you've played Fahrenheit -- is completely unknown, and has a philosophy about immersion that could fall ridiculously flat on it's face. It tries to branch out into the kind of interactive media we've seen attempted many times before - but which has always failed.

Sony then sponsors it with a full production, and raises it so that everything from sound to motion capture along with mechanics and so on is incredibly high. And that's just a completely different risk from what EA took with Mirror's Edge. It's just not in the same league.

..Of course, Sony then wanted move-support rather than extra playable chapters of outtakes.. still, Heavy Rain is a good game. But I mean, it's pretty unbelievable that anyone would sponsor it - no matter how good that game actually turned out.

"Heavy Rain is completely unknown."

lolwut?

Seriously, which rock did you just emerge from? This forum had tons of coverage before it was released, and I have a bunch of non-gamer friends who know about it. It's even more well-known then Fahrenheit!

 

[nipsen]

"Heavy Rain is completely unknown."

lolwut?

Seriously, which rock did you just emerge from? This forum had tons of coverage before it was released, and I have a bunch of non-gamer friends who know about it. It's even more well-known then Fahrenheit!

:/ "even more well known than Fahrenheit!".. jesus.

Also, I read your comment. Maybe you can read mine now?

 

[lacktheknack]

"Heavy Rain is completely unknown."

lolwut?

Seriously, which rock did you just emerge from? This forum had tons of coverage before it was released, and I have a bunch of non-gamer friends who know about it. It's even more well-known then Fahrenheit!

:/ "even more well known than Fahrenheit!".. jesus.

Also, I read your comment. Maybe you can read mine now?

I did, I see your point, I see mine.