Epic VP Slams Episodic Content

[Kefkataran]

According to this report from Next Generation (http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3396&Itemid=2), Epic Games vice president Mark Rein slammed the idea of episodic games during his keynote at the Develop Conference in Brighton, England.


Regarding the hot topic of episodic, he said, “I’ve heard a lot of insane talk about episodic content. Very little of it makes any actual sense. It’s a broken business.“

He explained, “Customers are supposed to buy half a game for $20, then wait six months for an episode? When I put a game down, I want to try a new one. Episodic games that offer faster turnaround will inevitably be using a lot of recycled content, walking through the same environments and shooting the same enemies with the same weapons.”

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.”


However, his opinions did not go down well with all the audience in this busy seaside town.

“Mark, you are a dinosaur, you are wrong,” yelled one delegate. Another exclaimed, “Your brain is locked,“ and yet another accused him of self-serving arguments, saying that promoting the full-priced model best serves a company selling game engines such as Epic’s Unreal Engine 3.

Rein makes some interesting points, although whether or not episodic content is going to mean re-used content (i.e. same levels, weapons, enemies, etc.) remains to be seen. If this is the case, though, isn't it likely that people won't pay for it?

[Goronmon]

Episodic content is great for people who don't have the time to invest in a 20+ hour game while not forcing them to pay the normal $50+ for a regular title.

[Kamalot]

Mark Rein slams anything that isn't his. He is closed-minded, arrogant and thinks the only thing that is important is graphics.

[Savok]

While I have problems with episodic content, his reasons are shithouse, full games recycle stuff to excessive amounts as it is, I don't see breaking the game up doing anything to alter that for worse.

Hey and thanks for calling the general public a bunch of market slaves, that was real kind. Episodes suck because it'll make marketing's job harder, big fucking whoop, those assholes are overpayed for lying to us anyway.

[Kamalot]

Episodic television has re-used content (i.e. same sets, actors, enemies, etc.) for generations. What is more important is what you do with the content.

[Salesmunn]

There is so little episodic content on the market right now that Rein is pretty much slapping those isolated games in the face.

It's way too early to judge whether it's a quality business model.

[Bad_Buddha]

“They’re competing against massive marketing budgets. Distribution without marketing is worthless."

Here's the problem right here! He's not talking gameplay or story or player immersion - He's talking marketing. It's not about the game to him. It's about the money.

Tool! :p

[Kefkataran]

Episodic content is great for people who don't have the time to invest in a 20+ hour game while not forcing them to pay the normal $50+ for a regular title.

That's always been one of its bigger ideas, that hopefully it would help people finish games more often. Valve's early HL2: Ep1 stats suggest that may not be the case, but hopefully we'll find out more.

Mark Rein slams anything that isn't his. He is closed-minded, arrogant and thinks the only thing that is important is graphics.

This is actually my first encounter with the guy. Have links to other stuff he's said?

Episodic television has re-used content (i.e. same sets, actors, enemies, etc.) for generations. What is more important is what you do with the content.

Extremely good point.

It's way too early to judge whether it's a quality business model.

That is exactly what I think.

[MSUStud911]

Episodic content is great for people who don't have the time to invest in a 20+ hour game while not forcing them to pay the normal $50+ for a regular title.
That's one of the more compelling arguments for episodic gaming, at least to me, someone with a limited amount of time for game playing.

As for Rein's comments, I understand his criticisms from a value standpoint ($20 for a 4 hour game), but I'm a little leary of his motivation. Both of the big episodic games to come out (SiN & HL2:Ep1) use the Source engine, which competes with the Unreal engine for dollars.

[jeffbax]

I have a feeling that Half-Life 2 Aftermath is going to prove him wrong.

I could go for HL2 Ep 1 being a little longer, but I enjoyed every minute of it and feel I got more out of it than I do a lot of $50+ games (many which end up being so redundant I can't bring myself to finish them)

[Roc Ingersol]

Meh, that TV thing is a passing fad. It can't hold a candle to feature films.
:rolleyes:

[Kamalot]

This is actually my first encounter with the guy. Have links to other stuff he's said?
http://evilavatar.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5547

http://humaninbox.blogspot.com/2005/11/matt-casamassina-responds-to-mark-rein.html

[Kamalot]

Mark Rein has built his company off of re-building the Unreal game again and again in shinier versions. Episodic games don't fit into his model of making money, therefore they must be crap.

[Varsity]

Another big benefit for episodic is lower entry levels for indie developers: another thing that Rein doesn't seem to be able to, or perhaps want to, understand.

I am proud of my countrymen in the audience. :)

[Mike Jones]

I'd rather pay $15 bucks for a few maps

[Norse]

I find episodic content to be a good idea, not just for developers, but for us gamers as well. With Sin: Emergece I got to try the series out for a low cost. I didn't like it to much so I'll skip the rest of them. In the end I don't feel ripped off for buying an expensive game I didn't like.

[Kamalot]

Mark Rein does not want people buying $20 used games.

Mark Rein does not want people buying $20 episodes of games.

Mark Rein wants to sell people $60 games on a regular basis.

[Mason]

HL2:Ep1 was a way more gameplay-dense experience than the original game, so he's flat wrong there. If anything, episodes give developers time to reflect on what worked in earlier parts and add new mechanics, instead of spreading the same mechanics over a full game.

Also, he's ignoring the fundamental problem with getting people to lay down $50-60 for new content. That works fine if it is already a well-known title in a series established back in gaming's less cluttered youth, but gamers are wary about taking that financial plunge for something unknown, regardless of how well marketed it is.

Also, aside from Unreal 2 (65% on the XBox, 75% on PC) and Gears of War (unreleased), Epic hasn't been big with the single-player content lately, so I'm not sure why their VP thinks that they have the authority to lecture about the "insane" and "broken" business practices of guys like Valve, who keep setting the standard in PC single-player gaming.

[Roc Ingersol]

Mark Rein does not want people buying $20 used games.

Mark Rein does not want people buying $20 episodes of games.

Mark Rein wants to sell people $60 games on a regular basis.
Accurate. Concise.

Mark Rein should FOAD.

[Mason]

Meh, that TV thing is a passing fad. It can't hold a candle to feature films.
:rolleyes:
Your "movies" lack the subtle artistry of a good radio drama.

[GunnyMo]

Mark Rein slams anything that isn't his. He is closed-minded, arrogant and thinks the only thing that is important is graphics.

Exactly. The guy has never impressed me. He complains about anything that doesn't make him money. What a tool.

[The Continental]

Tim Sweeney is probably the only member of Epic with something to say that merits istening to. He's basically the Unreal Engine's Carmack. Rein is a moron, more akin to a Steve Balmer who doesn't really know much about what his company actually does, but rather how to spew buzz words for investors. Cliffy B, is nothing more than a glorified hype man at this point.

[Wonka]

1) The higher and higher cost of game development means that episodic content is the future. Under the current conditions, only HUGE studios can afford the risk, and only to make sequel games.

2) Game prices are currently set too high for true mass market adoption. $50 was pushing it, but $60-$70 is REALLY out of line with what joe sixpack wants to pay for some quick entertainment (remember that quick is all he has time for - see point 3).

3) Games are too long. Most people do not have the time to get to the end of a 50 hour saga. Sure its a better value for your $50, but this also gets in the way of mass market adoption.

4) All games recycle content, and moreso lately as the cost of that content has gotten higher so epic style games actually encourages more content recycling than episodic games do.

Therefore I also agree that Mark Reins opinions have dino-claws. He is just making the arguments that favor a big studio (makes sense from a business standpoint).

[digitalErich]

Episodic games that offer faster turnaround will inevitably be using a lot of recycled content, walking through the same environments and shooting the same enemies with the same weapons
Yes, but as long as you bump up the polys and reskin said content, then that is perfectly acceptable *cough* (UT, 2k3, 2k4, 2k7)

They’re competing against massive marketing budgets. Distribution without marketing is worthless. You can’t buy retail marketing with a wholesale price of $15
There are serveral, successful entertainment industries that offer real world proof against this statement. You can't buy retail marketing or have a successful business model with a $15 wholesale price? Ever buy a CD Mark? Anyone that says games need to be $60 and there's no way around it is either an idiot or a game publisher.

[Captain Awesome]

He explained, Customers are supposed to buy half a game for $20, then wait six months for an episode? When I put a game down, I want to try a new one. Episodic games that offer faster turnaround will inevitably be using a lot of recycled content, walking through the same environments and shooting the same enemies with the same weapons.

Oh, the fucking irony.

[Deadend]

I think the problem with episodic gameplay is that everyone wants to make them FPS games, which are poorly suited it seems to being episodic do to the large amount of time it takes to make new episodes.

I think a better idea for an episodic game would be Phoenix Wright, as the game already has episodes inside of it that arc into the season. Just split them up, keep them cheap AND make them weekly.

I would much more enjoy episodic games if the turn around time was higher. Maybe if a studio was willing to sit on an episode for a few months to make the delay shorter, it would be better.

As I think episodic, I think "regular release date" where a new one comes out once a month. I really think that Adventure games are much better setup to be episodic than FPS games.

[The Continental]

I think the problem with episodic gameplay is that everyone wants to make them FPS games, which are poorly suited it seems to being episodic do to the large amount of time it takes to make new episodes.

I think a better idea for an episodic game would be Phoenix Wright, as the game already has episodes inside of it that arc into the season. Just split them up, keep them cheap AND make them weekly.

I would much more enjoy episodic games if the turn around time was higher. Maybe if a studio was willing to sit on an episode for a few months to make the delay shorter, it would be better.

As I think episodic, I think "regular release date" where a new one comes out once a month. I really think that Adventure games are much better setup to be episodic than FPS games.

*cough* Oblivion *cough*

Granted the episodic content isn't nearly as much "content" as say the Half-Life episodes, but they are delivering more frequent content at a much lower price point.

[Wonka]

I think the problem with episodic gameplay is that everyone wants to make them FPS games, which are poorly suited it seems to being episodic do to the large amount of time it takes to make new episodes.

I think a better idea for an episodic game would be Phoenix Wright, as the game already has episodes inside of it that arc into the season. Just split them up, keep them cheap AND make them weekly.

I would much more enjoy episodic games if the turn around time was higher. Maybe if a studio was willing to sit on an episode for a few months to make the delay shorter, it would be better.

As I think episodic, I think "regular release date" where a new one comes out once a month. I really think that Adventure games are much better setup to be episodic than FPS games.


I think it will be a while before you see weekly episodes. Massive technical challenges aside, you also have to allow for the fact that these guys are still in the process of getting people to pay for content this way. I think that episodic content is a better business model in that it provides a more desirable product to more consumers at a more desirable price, but consumers are still new to the idea. This will take some time.

[AntB]

I support episodic content all the way. I think it's a great way to try a fairly large portion of the game, see if you are really into it, and see if you want to finish the game. If it offers nothing new, don't buy the rest of the episodes. How many of you here finished 100% of your games? Probably nil.


On second note, why is this farktard complaining? He makes multiplayer games anyway, doesn't he?

[Mason]

I think the problem with episodic gameplay is that everyone wants to make them FPS games, which are poorly suited it seems to being episodic do to the large amount of time it takes to make new episodes.

I think a better idea for an episodic game would be Phoenix Wright, as the game already has episodes inside of it that arc into the season. Just split them up, keep them cheap AND make them weekly.
Game development just doesn't work like that, though. You don't have people write and finalize all the code and assets, and then sequentially produce gameplay bit-by-bit. Development is too chaotic, very thorough testing is required, there can be major setbacks, etc. I just wouldn't hold my breath about the small periodic releases. Games are unlike other media, in that they can contain crippling flaws that aren't apparent in a casual viewing, so deadlines are kryptonite.

If we're talking about a regular long development cycle of a game that is released in chunks, then that loses a lot of the benefit of episodic content for developers. And if they're developing to weekly deadlines, I think we'd end up killing off our already-overworked game developers.
I would much more enjoy episodic games if the turn around time was higher. Maybe if a studio was willing to sit on an episode for a few months to make the delay shorter, it would be better.

As I think episodic, I think "regular release date" where a new one comes out once a month. I really think that Adventure games are much better setup to be episodic than FPS games.
Adventure games? Did I wake up in 1993? They're still a ways from full resurrection, I'd say.

I agree, though, that periodic content would work well or better for other genres, but on the PC FPS tend to be the trend-setter.

[Captain Awesome]

How many of you here finished 100% of your games? Probably nil.


Me, me, me! I've even finished games I disliked. Because im an annoying and persistent jerk-off like that. Plus I like to know what was "so bad" and "so good" about anything I play.

But as for short and long gams I have really liked? I definitely finish every single one of them. This is probably why I still actively play Ninja Gaiden Black, im a masochist and that is one of the best videogames ever.


:D

[KNOTE]

I gotta disagree with Mark on a few points. I agree that fast turnaround means less unique content. To say that they'll never compete with standalone products is incorrect. Someone just needs to come out with compelling episodic stuff and people will buy it. No doubt in my mind. Standalone games may be blockbusters, but episodic games are going to start making strong revenue streams for developers. No more betting the farm on a single product 2-3 years from now. This will help you keep the lights on. I don't think he's naysaying to sell more lisences of UE3, I just think it doesn't align with what he sees as the best business model for his company.

[Kamalot]

I'd buy 2-hour adventure episodes. Think Longest Journey episodes.

Hell yeah!

[Neverborne]

I might just be displaying my own ignorance, but isn't "episodic" content basically the same as expansion packs?

[SexualChoc]

Of what I can tell from this thread, another thread and the interview, Mark Rein needs to shut the hell up.

[Paranoia]

How come its ok to praise paid episodic content on PC, but anything like download paid content on console gets bashed?

Strange..

[Varsity]

Game development just doesn't work like that, though.
That is why game development is changing. Ask an episodic developer.

[Pixhell]

Episodic games that offer faster turnaround will inevitably be using a lot of recycled content, walking through the same environments and shooting the same enemies with the same weapons.

How is this any different at all than all the sequels and clone games we've seen in the last 5-10 years? I don't see the distinction.

Full-price games have a cohesive start, middle and end.

MMOs are full-priced games and they do not have a choesive start, middle or end ... and they are a proven business model. I'd venture to guess he hates MMOs also.

[Heretic Machine]

If he doesn't like episodic games, he doesn't have to make them. But I don't want to hear him bitching when I decide to buy a four hour game for $20, instead of a six hour game for $60.

[Pixhell]

If he doesn't like episodic games, he doesn't have to make them. But I don't want to hear him bitching when I decide to buy a four hour game for $20, instead of a six hour game for $60.

I agree. Besides how many times have you gotten 1/3 or half way through a 6-10 hour game and thought to yourself "You know this could end right now and it would be perfect." and instead it DRAGS on for another 4-8 hours and you're running through the same environments, using the same weapons, killing the same monsters ... because length is precieved value ... bleh.

[Varsity]

OK folks, it's time to play "Spot the supportive blog post" (http://www.technorati.com/search/Mark%20Rein%20episodic)! I'm still looking!

[Gedd]

While I own both EP:1 and Sin Episodes (and both were decent) I'd still rather have the whole story than just 5 chapters of it. Sure some of you only have time to sit and play for so long, but there's still plenty of us PC users who have the time to enjoy and immerse. IMHO, stick with episodic for broadband connected consoles. Leave the pc games at full length please.

Deus Ex was a long game, I loved every inch of it and still have it installed. To this date i've probably played it about 20 or more times and I am STILL finding things and hearing conversations i've never seen in it before. System Shock 2; another long game but enjoyable from start to finish.

But like I said, both EP-1 and Sin Ep. were good so I'm not against it entirely, but my preference = full length > episodic

Here's to Bioshock; hopefully it will provide with many nights of immersion. /cheers

[jacktion]

Mark Rein sounds kind of close-minded. I think episodic content will be the way of the future. Think of this. Instead of gambling and buying one game for 70 dollars and maybe it is good maybe not, instead you can buy 7 "first levels" of 7 different games. Then the ones that really grab you, you can keep buying levels as you progress. They are all cheaper and each have several hours of gameplay versus 20 to 40 hours of game that most people never will finish. It seems a much better system. People are much more likely to buy a starting level of a game for 8 dollars then they are to buy a full game for 70 dollars. Lots of weird games will get more exposure because it is not such a big investment to try them. Smaller game developers can make just one level to a game and then if a ton of people buy it they will be more likely to get support from a big publisher and keep going making new levels. It seems to be a win-win for everyone. Everyone that is except people who hate when things change. Like Mark Rein. He loves when things stay exactly the same as they always have been. Mark "change is bad" Rein.

[Morangie]

Instead of gambling and buying one game for 70 dollars and maybe it is good maybe not, instead you can buy 7 "first levels" of 7 different games. Then the ones that really grab you, you can keep buying levels as you progress. They are all cheaper and each have several hours of gameplay versus 20 to 40 hours of game that most people never will finish.

I've read a few people in this thread say cheap episodes of games will let you buy and try out the first level to see if you like it, saving you money over the full game. We already have something like that, its free and called a demo. The people who don't finish games now are not any more likely to finish them if it comes in chunks, the only difference between episodes and full games is with episodes you lose the choice to decide in what chunks you play the game.

Also, can we please stop kidding ourselves episodes will be cheaper? We'll end up paying more overall than we would in one go because publishers know they can get away with splitting a game into four parts and charging $20 for each, instead of charging $60 for the full thing.

[kraemer]

This is all thinking from "inside the box". Stop re-inventing the game engine for every game and games wont take 4 years and 100 million dollars to crank out. Imagine if Hollywood had to re-invent the camera and all the actors every time they made a movie.

Imagine the time and money saved by having a re-usable library of geometry like chairs, trees, cars, houses, you name it. Why rebuild this every time? The problem is polygon budgets necessitated by new engine designs. Someday this has to stop.

[Kefkataran]

but there's still plenty of us PC users who have the time to enjoy and immerse.

I'm one of those people who usually has the time to pass a game too, but I'm not gonna lie and say there are 'plenty'. You might percieve it as that way, but statistics suggest the number of gamers who actually fully complete games is staggeringly low.

[Varsity]

The best bit: he was speaking at an address called "Avoiding the pitfalls of the next generation".

We already have something like that, its free and called a demo.So demos are incompatible with episodic now?

The people who don't finish games now are not any more likely to finish them if it comes in chunksNo comment necessary. Just the quote.

publishers know they can get away with splitting a game into four parts and charging $20 for eachPublishers? Publishers are like Mr. Rein here. Episodic is the developer's model.

[RMan]

Yea, Mark Rein is a completely average marketing rep who’s opinion would be dismissed as the garbage that it is if it weren’t for being fortunate enough to latch onto Epic in it’s early years. Episodic content is not significantly different than sequels, just a more accelerated release schedule. As far as competing against huge marketing budgets, that’s pretty stupid, every new distribution model has to compete with the existing norm in the same way, but if they’re superior or offer something significant, they thrive, period (for instance, MMOGs seem to be doing well). And lets suppose that many episodic games do reuse content more than a ‘normal’ game, so what, if it means they spend more time tweaking the props and elements because they know they’re using them longer, then I fail to see the downside. The idea that consumers demand new sets and props flies in the face of practically every TV show in existence, I mean, who really cares that you see Seinfeld’s living room for 50% of the freaking show and it hardly changed for almost a decade, the events/dialog is what made the experience. So games that rely on a stream of pretty new environments and sky high budgets to carry the game (a fair assessment of Epic’s current business model) can’t exist in episodic form, I can live with that, and so can the vast majority of the market.

[destoo]

All I see right now is another nice fork in the road for devs and distributors. The problem is that right now, people who would normally make a difference (the potential buyers) are stuck on planet Azeroth and don't care about what is happening outside of their world.

In the episodic content games vs full games, Mark clearly sees who the winner is. And he's affraid because it will mean less money in his pocket.

[Mason]

That is why game development is changing. Ask an episodic developer.
You honestly think that a game that would take a year to design, develop, and test, could be released in that same year as 52 weekly episodes? That'd be a niner. The first few minutes of a game would necessarily require a disproportionately large percentage of its assets and code, which throws the whole concurrent development schedule out of whack.

This isn't an argument against episodic development, but rather the reasonable frequency of episodes. A couple small releases a year is possible, but it wouldn't be in the financial or operational benefit of developers to chop that up any finer. I'd postulate a "sweet spot" between giant monolithic projects which require a huge time/money investment before seeing a single dime at retail and impossibly tiny smidgens of gameplay that require far too frequent design/development/testing cycles.

[Varsity]

This isn't an argument against episodic development, but rather the reasonable frequency of episodes.
Well, that makes all the difference. :p The original guy was talking about things like Phoenix Wright for such short cycles, so I was going on that. Stuff like HL2Ep1 obviously takes longer - although of course, Valve already had the hard graft out of the way in HL2. A regular game followed by episodes on the same tech and assets is a very sensible model for people like Valve.

On your first para though, I did just say that development was changing...

[Captain Awesome]

Mark Rein sounds kind of close-minded.


Sounds? you should of read is retarded diatribe about "used games" and them being sold again. The guy is nothing but a marketing-mouth for a company who recreates the same license with new eye candy.

He should watch his mouth before critizing others of re-hashing content much less ideas or things like "weapons".

The game market is open enough for everyone to do what they want when they want. Instead of this moron shooting his mouth off like he usually does in this ignorant manner. How about he just releases his BS and let other devs do what they want? Or how about this crazy-insane notion of leting people choose how they want to purchase their titles?

[Tel Prydain]

Mark Rein has built his company off of re-building the Unreal game again and again in shinier versions. Episodic games don't fit into his model of making money, therefore they must be crap.

Firstly, this is crap. Episodic games need engines too - his company would do fine by pumping out a new engine each year.



I hate episodic games. I want to pay $50-60 for a whole game, put in the CD/DVD and then immerse myself in their world for the next 80-100 hours. I don’t want to have to pay over and over again. I don’t want to wait for part two (or three or four).
I don’t mind episodic content (like the Oblivion add-ons), but a whole game in episodic form?!? It’ll be Lost/Firefly all over again. The moment the series gets popular it’ll be drawn out to ridiculous lengths until everything that made it good is gone. Or if part 1 doesn’t get a huge audience from day one the series will be cancelled and you can say goodbye to any hope of having an end to your story.
The Neverwinter Night's episodic content (Witches Wake) is a great example. Want to see where that story goes? Well get bent - that is never going to happen.

[Kamalot]

Firstly, this is crap. Episodic games need engines too - his company would do fine by pumping out a new engine each year.



I hate episodic games. I want to pay $50-60 for a whole game, put in the CD/DVD and then immerse myself in their world for the next 80-100 hours. I don’t want to have to pay over and over again. I don’t want to wait for part two (or three or four).
I don’t mind episodic content (like the Oblivion add-ons), but a whole game in episodic form?!? It’ll be Lost/Firefly all over again. The moment the series gets popular it’ll be drawn out to ridiculous lengths until everything that made it good is gone. Or if part 1 doesn’t get a huge audience from day one the series will be cancelled and you can say goodbye to any hope of having an end to your story.
The Neverwinter Night's episodic content (Witches Wake) is a great example. Want to see where that story goes? Well get bent - that is never going to happen.
Looks like there are other people as closed-minded as Mark Rein... :rolleyes:

[Heretic Machine]

Also, can we please stop kidding ourselves episodes will be cheaper? We'll end up paying more overall than we would in one go because publishers know they can get away with splitting a game into four parts and charging $20 for each, instead of charging $60 for the full thing.

I paid $50 for Ultimate Spider-man on my XBOX when it first came out, and it lasted four hours. I could go out and buy Half-life 2: Episode One for less than half that price, and it would last me longer. Ultimate Spider-man is not the only one guilty of this, it has become the norm it seems, so I am perfectly fine with cheap episodic content that gives me MORE content than I have come to expect from full games.

It’ll be Lost/Firefly all over again

Firefly had 12 episodes, total, plus one feature length movie.

[drakkarim]

dunno, although i don't buy his justifications, i do agree with the overall 'ruling'. I personally own both the platinum and gold versions of Half Life 2 (i'm a collector), loved the game immensely, but won't be buying any episodic content from anyone.

mainly because I don't believe in paying retail prices for less then OEM product. I.E. no game box no sale.

also, i don't like to play a game for 5 hours and then wait 6 months to continue playing it.

i thinks its a stupid model because they're trying to release 3 episodes (correct?) each at $20... I believe if they released a full retail product (even at the total price of $60), they'd get AT LEAST the same initial sales of the game as they did of the first episode. BUT, what they get instead is that initial $20 from say the base 100% of whoever was going to buy it anyway, then on the next episodes they're going to lose people, i.e. not everyone that bought episode 1 will buy episode 2, and even less will buy episode 3, whether because they didn't think they got their money's worth from the first or second episode or because they don't care anymore about the particular story/game.

i know the episodes are available at retail stores, but quite frankly the quality looks about as good as a rip i could buy on the streets of russia/taiwan.

[Captain Awesome]

i know the episodes are available at retail stores, but quite frankly the quality looks about as good as a rip i could buy on the streets of russia/taiwan.


what the fuck are you talking about again?

[Kefkataran]

I hate episodic games. I want to pay $50-60 for a whole game, put in the CD/DVD and then immerse myself in their world for the next 80-100 hours. I don’t want to have to pay over and over again. I don’t want to wait for part two (or three or four).
I don’t mind episodic content (like the Oblivion add-ons), but a whole game in episodic form?!? It’ll be Lost/Firefly all over again.

Okay, so episodic content doesn't appeal to you, but why would you hate the model cause of it? The types of games that are trying episodic currently (FPSes and adventure games primarily) are not going to be anywhere close to 80-100 hours of gameplay to begin with, so what's it matter? Also, comparing it to two of the most-loved TV series of the last couple years (one of which wasn't drawn out at all) doesn't help your case too terribly much.

[Dr Quincy]

I hate episodic games. I want to pay $50-60 for a whole game, put in the CD/DVD and then immerse myself in their world for the next 80-100 hours.

Psh! Nerd.

[Morangie]

So demos are incompatible with episodic now?

Not what I said at all. I pointed out that people saying a cheap first episode being a good way to try a game is stupid when a free demo is usually available.

Publishers? Publishers are like Mr. Rein here. Episodic is the developer's model.

Do you really think the developers, who I'm sure love and care for you VERY much, won't charge the same prices as EA and Ubisoft? The big publishers are not going away. If they have to move to digital distribution, which you seem to be confusing with episodic content here, they will. The money they save on printing discs will buy some lucky executive a new mercedes.

I paid $50 for Ultimate Spider-man on my XBOX when it first came out, and it lasted four hours. I could go out and buy Half-life 2: Episode One for less than half that price, and it would last me longer. Ultimate Spider-man is not the only one guilty of this, it has become the norm it seems, so I am perfectly fine with cheap episodic content that gives me MORE content than I have come to expect from full games.

I paid £50 for Oblivion and it lasted me 180 hours. Simple solution? Don't buy the extremely short games.


Also, comparing it to two of the most-loved TV series of the last couple years (one of which wasn't drawn out at all) doesn't help your case too terribly much.

Hes trying to say that if the episodic game doesn't sell well it'll be cancelled before it finishes it's run and people will never get an ending. Or if it does very well it may end up being dragged out to make more money. Season 3 of Lost will hopefully be as good overall as 1 and 2, but I think it may start to show a bit more filler.

I suppose it just comes down to the fact I would rather buy a game and play it at the pace I want to play it, rather than playing four hours and being forced to wait months before I can play the next four. For me episodic content just doesn't appeal. If it does for you, great. I'll wait for all the episodes to be released and buy the inevitable special edition. :)

[Tel Prydain]

Looks like there are other people as closed-minded as Mark Rein... :rolleyes:

Oh, bite me! :D

I’m not close-minded at all – Witch’s Wake is proof of the problems episodic gaming can and will face. I’m a big supporter of episodic content, and a big detractor of episodic games – I don’t want to be left hanging.
Imagine if Witch’s Wake was actually a full game. How disappointing would that be?

Firefly had 12 episodes, total, plus one feature length movie.
*sigh* Yes, I know - but it was cut off before it's time, little had been resolved and there are still huge plot-holes.


Okay, so episodic content doesn't appeal to you, but why would you hate the model cause of it? The types of games that are trying episodic currently (FPSes and adventure games primarily) are not going to be anywhere close to 80-100 hours of gameplay to begin with, so what's it matter?

Actually, that would be fine! As long as they stick to their own genres and keep out of mine. :D
But again: Witch's Wake.

Also, comparing it to two of the most-loved TV series of the last couple years (one of which wasn't drawn out at all) doesn't help your case too terribly much.

I think you missed the point.
Firefly (like Witch’s Wake) was cut off before it even got going. It was an analogy for a great game getting poor sales with part one and then getting discontinued.
Lost is the analogy of a great game getting artificially drawn out. It takes AGES for anything to actually happen in that show.

The idea was to show two great TV series that were both harmed by the episodic nature of television – one cut off too early, one kept alive too long.


Psh! Nerd.

Yes, sir - I am!!! :cool:

[Wasson_]

Episodic television has re-used content (i.e. same sets, actors, enemies, etc.) for generations. What is more important is what you do with the content.



Extremely good point.



Ditto.

I would rather have 3 HL2's that have roughly the same eneimes, weapons and setting types than 1 brand new HL3. I find the gradual expansion of content and story to be very appealing.

[Neverborne]

"Episodic" content still sounds like, "shareware," or, "expansion pack," to me, and, if those haven't killed the industry yet, then episodic content won't.

[digitalErich]

This is a long thread so I'll try to keep it short...One person's opinion of whether they like the epidic model one way or the other does not justify said model, again one way or the other. Just because you hate or love episodic content, this does not validate the viability of the model; sorry to bruise your ego. To be sure, how the gaming community as a whole responds to this model is relevant. However, I highly doubt anyone out there has any substantial data such that they could make a claim as to how the community is reponding or will respond in the long run to the episodic model, yet. You hate episodes? Great, but this doesn't in itself mean the model is broken. Lots of people don't like RTS games...I don't think Blizzard is going to forego more StarCrafts or Warcrafts.

The problem people (myself included) seem to have with Mark's comments is that he is saying this (still very young) model is somehow inherently broken or bad for the industry. He backs this up with what amounts to nothing more than anecdotal evidence and economic thought experiments. If this model is as bad as Mark seems to think it is, the market will sort it out just like it did with Divx. I think it's much too early to say one way or the other.

[theguido]

I think that there are both good things and bad things about episodic gaming.

The bad things could include people who play games getting nickel and dimed even more than they already do, as well as the possibility of too many resources being put towards something that may or may not do well. If you take into account the need to get it into B&M stores, a lot of resouces may be wasted on a small amount of content. And if you only do online distribution, you're severely limiting your customer base.

Furthermore, giving small "bites" of games to people who play games could have the effect of damaging the goodwill the company has built up, especially if the people who are buying the games don't understand that what they're getting is a small piece of a bigger puzzle. Also, if you go too far with episodic gaming, you run into the potential of people having to hunt down all these individual episodes to be able to understand what's happening in chapter 8. Again, distribution comes into play here---if a certain person doesn't have access to it via digital distribution they'll have to try and find it in stores, and since many stores have EXTREMELY limited shelf space, they're unlikely to have it.

And honestly, in the end, we all know that it's just another way of extracting more money from people who play games.

The good point is the ability to try a small part of a game for a lot less than you would be able to try a whole game, as well as the ability to allow developers to change more based on what the audience likes or doesn't like about the game. Being able to change things that a game player doesn't like before the next episode could be highly beneficial to both the industry and to those who play games.

Also good in that developers can get a steady cash flow working through periodic game releases rather than blowing your proverbial wad on one huge game and then it tanking and you having nothing to show for it. Acceptance for smaller games at lower price points could be a good thing for everybody.

[das_butcher]

Yeah repackaging content is bad? How about 5 different versions of Unreal over the past few years that always reused content from the previous version? Pu-lease! Remember Unreal Championship...UT 2003...UT 2004...all of them reused serious amounts of content from each other.

I gotta think this is an attempt to slam on Valve. IMO an engine like Source is a better technology solution for developers wanting to do shorter development schedules and bring games to market faster at a good price for gamers. I played episode 1 and I loved it! Someday guys like Rein will 'get it'.

If this was the movie business it would be like Michael Bay complaining how guys like Coppola are ruining movies with all their stoopid dialogue and stuff, more explosions, make it louder!

[Kefkataran]

I'll wait for all the episodes to be released and buy the inevitable special edition.

See, and like with people who wait for TV Shows to be collected into DVD packs, you totally have that option.That's why it's a feasible model even for the haters.


Actually, that would be fine! As long as they stick to their own genres and keep out of mine.
But again: Witch's Wake.

I have no idea what Witch's Wake is, actually


The idea was to show two great TV series that were both harmed by the episodic nature of television – one cut off too early, one kept alive too long.

Saying that Lost has been kept alive too long at this point is crazy. X-Files is probably a better example, and even that's arguable, especially whether or not it relates to this stuff.

[Savok]

I have no idea what Witch's Wake is, actually
Official NWN modules, long story.

And Lost won't stop having fucking clip shows and dragging every little thing out, not to mention the wall of advertising that pummels you, hell it's just pissing me off now.

[Kefkataran]

And Lost won't stop having fucking clip shows and dragging every little thing out, not to mention the wall of advertising that pummels you, hell it's just pissing me off now.

That's cause you're silly. I assume by clip shows you mean the flashbacks? According to some of the actors the writers are strongly considering either severely lowering the number of flashback episodes or getting rid of them altogether next season.

[digitalErich]

...And it's been confirmed by Lindelof that Lost will only run for 5 seasons. It was in some recent interview err, somewhere. But this is all way off topic.

[RMan]

I’m not close-minded at all – Witch’s Wake is proof of the problems episodic gaming can and will face.
Sorry, this always ticks me off. Please, do not pick bad implementations of anything and hold them up a proof, or even examples of something's potential. This suggests that it's acceptable to hold up the worst non-episodic game I can find as proof that non-episodic games are worse. I don't know how bad that game is, but I can almost assure you that I can find a worse game :). Only the best examples of something are relevant when gauging it’s potential, any technique can be used at near infinite ineptitude.

[Savok]

That's cause you're silly. I assume by clip shows you mean the flashbacks? According to some of the actors the writers are strongly considering either severely lowering the number of flashback episodes or getting rid of them altogether next season.
No those are annoying in their own way, I mean the narrated shows that start "What if you were on an island...". We've had two within fucking weeks of each other here.

[gawaintheblind]

I've never liked the idea of episodic games. I like my games like my books: long, with a cohesive beginning, middle and end. I don't like waiting for the next "chapter" and once i've invested my time into the characters and plot, I don't like running up against some shit cliffhanger ending leading to the next book.

Mind you, I do like series. I have no problem with sequals and such, even though they normally turn out to be ass. But I want all the game all at once. I play too many hours at a time to get any enjoyment out of something thats going to end by the time im supposed to go to bed to be up for work the next day....

{old man rant}
And hey, why the HELL are we complaining about game length? That's what the damn save feature is for. We've had a save feature for what, 20 years? You have a limited amount of time for playing, so you need a short game? How does that make sense? If you don't finish a game in one sitting, you feel lesser?
{/old man rant}

[Kefkataran]

No those are annoying in their own way, I mean the narrated shows that start "What if you were on an island...". We've had two within fucking weeks of each other here.

Oh. Well, those are done by ABC, not the actual creators of Lost. And they do suck, but you can't really blame the show's creators. That fucking narrator, though.

[Savok]

Either way, it's damn near unwatchable between the endless dissapointment of anthoer clip show and the ads quite literally happening every couple of minutes. TV has ruined TV for me.

[Kefkataran]

Either way, it's damn near unwatchable between the endless dissapointment of anthoer clip show and the ads quite literally happening every couple of minutes. TV has ruined TV for me.

Recommendation of buying the episodes of iTunes and/or just watching them for free online from ABC's site (or other places of only slightly less legal origin) if the ads bug you so much.

[Savok]

!0Gb a month limit. My doctor says I have answers to everything as well :p

[Kefkataran]

Shit, I keep forgetting about that. That sucks way too hard for me to wrap my head around. I'd offer you housing with me if I wasn't so terrified of you hitting me with your cane. :(

Although it would probably make for a pretty amusing "Odd Couple" scenario.

[Savok]

Crazy part is I actually have a cane... two actually. My knees are ratshit.

[Evil Avatar]

Also, aside from Unreal 2 (65% on the XBox, 75% on PC) and Gears of War (unreleased), Epic hasn't been big with the single-player content lately, so I'm not sure why their VP thinks that they have the authority to lecture about the "insane" and "broken" business practices of guys like Valve, who keep setting the standard in PC single-player gaming.

Just a couple of quick points to clear something up...

Unreal 2 wasn't developed by Epic.

The bulk of Unreal Tournament, UT2003/UT2004 players play the game in the SINGLE PLAYER MODE against the bots. Single player has always been the biggest part of their market share even if that isn't what it seems like to people like you and I who play these games online. What is more... Mark is perfectly aware that most of the people playing his game play single player.

---
Personally, I see Episodic content like movie sequels. Every time you release a new episode LESS people will buy the new episode than purchased the first episode. So, unless your game is Half-Life 2 and sold millions of copies to start with - it is a market doomed to failure and I think the recent statistics on how few people even bothered to finish HL Episode 1 kind of bears that thinking out.

While I doubt we will hear any statistics - the real test would be to see how many copies of SiN sold and how many people return for the next chunk o' game. I'm guessing that by the time they hit the third chunk of SiN, it won't be worth the development costs to make a fourth one.

Now, I don't think ripping people off for $60.00 a pop for games is the answer either. I'll bet that the $60.00 price point is going to end up just killing a lot of titles before they even launch over the next few years. When you take a B- or C+ title like The Outfit or Full Auto, I'll bet the $60.00 entry fee will translate into poor sales right off the bat.

[Kefkataran]

I think the recent statistics on how few people even bothered to finish HL Episode 1 kind of bears that thinking out.

Those stats were very distressing news for proponents of episodic gaming. One thing worth pointing out, though, is that Steam's stat collection was broken and didn't collect stats for the WHOLE first week the game was out. For such a short game (and with many hardcore fans purchasing immediately and blasting through) this week could have been a significant percentage missed.

[Savok]

There's a high chance they gave up with that zombies in the dark shit, I know I almost did.

[RMan]

Personally, I see Episodic content like movie sequels. Every time you release a new episode LESS people will buy the new episode than purchased the first episode.
I’m sure that will be true to a degree, of course it’s even more true of the traditional sequel/expansion approach, so it’s not a negative if considering the comparison of Episodic to ‘normal’ releases.
While I doubt we will hear any statistics - the real test would be to see how many copies of SiN sold and how many people return for the next chunk o' game.
Agreed, but there are other factors that are harder/impossible to track. For instance, how many people buy the ‘gold’ versions of games that are a re-release of the game and it’s 1 or possibly 2 expansion packs? These are gamers that, for whatever reason (like unwillingness to pay full price), missed the first game and actually wouldn’t have bought the product at all if it hadn’t been for the re-release. With episodic content, how many people later buy the first episode as a direct result of the impact of later ones (like discussion, reviews, etc.)? With episodic content, as opposed to movie box-office draws, the fact that the earlier episodes will always be just as easily available (assuming digital distribution) means that future releases will spur sales of older episodes. Also, if even remotely well designed, an episodic game can be repackaged after a number of episodes are made (in the case of Sin, say 3 episodes) and sold at a discount, very much like the traditional bundle packs, and would be comparable length wise to a standard release. In the end, I think if handled properly, an episodic game can actually satisfy those interested in episodic products as well as those interested in traditional, longer/bigger games.

Personally, I actually like the idea of shorter releases better, but it’s worth noting that from a marketing point of view, it can have the best of both worlds.

[Tel Prydain]

Neverwinter Nights: Witch's Wake
http://nwn.bioware.com/premium/module_witchwake.html