Mark Rein says no Unreal Engine 3 for Wii

Man, that sure is a big head, must be due to all those ideas that man has! maybe he's Gazoo. How come nerds like those golfer polo shirts so much?

"Darkness, Gears of War does not sell +3 million copies on just being a pretty game... Grand Theft Auto is not graphically impressive, but it is also fun. Then there's Halo... the list goes on and on."

Well there you go then. If those who say that just because the PS3 and 360 push higher graphics quality that it doesn't mean they can't have fun games, then the same can be said about the Wii being weaker but can still deliver some pretty good graphics And fun, which is basically the whole point isn't it?

So it seems to me that people are making too much of a big deal with this whole graphics debate, where some justify the Wii's weaker because it promises to provide fun games while others will make an even bigger deal that it is too weak as if that's all they focus on, hence the obvious confusion and seemily one-sided one-tracked mindedness of some people's arguments.

If just a couple of years ago people were heralding such games like GTA, Ninja Gaiden, etc. for their graphical excellence and/or fun then what's changed? The Wii theoretically should be able to do that. Short of developers being "lazy" on the graphical front of that system, I don't see why most games shouldn't look at least marginally improved over last gen's games. And if that's so, then it's not so much the hardware, but the developers. And if fun was had last gen, then what's changed that a slightly more powerful system like the Wii can't have fun games. Personally, I think again the answer is the game devlopers.

It seems to me that many developers got carried away to make their games so graphically amazing that they're not even trying with the Wii. Konami making Elebits for the Wii while putting their best foot forward by making MGS4 on the PS3? Tell me that doesn't look suspect to anyone else. Tecmo gives the Wii Super Swing Golf, but the 360 and PS3 get not only more games, but arguably better franchises. I mean c'mon, Ninja Gaiden from the Xbox for the PS3 but not for the Wii? Capcom's delivering more for those two other systems but the Wii can barely get an idea about one game called RE:UC aside from the possiblity it's just being Resident Evil Recap. How do you even sway the hardcore gamers' interest when third-party efforts are so sublime. Personally, if there's anyone to blame, 90% would be because of these third-party developers. How can I think anything else when even games like GRAW or Mercenaries get PSP and PS2 versions. PSP even gets an Oblivion game version. Yes, yes, it's not exactly the same, but so what, then make a Wii "not exactly the same" Oblivion game. Frankly I think power is only a small part of the equation from this neglect cuz the PS2 sure got a lot of good stuff. There always seems to be an excuse; kiddy, demographic, userbase size, online, power, etc. There's always a scapegoat it seems. Cube more powerful than PS2, stil got neglected; Wii seems to have a bigger userbase, PS3 stil get more of the goods; then there's the "let's put more kiddy stuff on the Wii because that's our perception of the system hence that's what the system will be because that's what we made it to be with the types of games we make." Where's the effort huh? Maybe people are right, maybe people buy Nintendo systems solely for Nintendo made games. Maybe that's why people keep screaming at them to make more mature games, maybe people who want Nintendo systems instead choose to ignore other games hence solely rely on Nintendo to cover everything. On the other hand, maybe it's because third-parties don't offer all that much to the Nintendo fanbase apart from following Nintendo on everything that does well on their end instead of setting up the other end of Wii town. Frankly, companies should cater where their are gaps in the lineup. Nintendo covers the "kiddy" side, so logically, others are free to cover the other side. So why shouldn't that be the case?

"The Wii is taking a beating this week at GDC by American developers."

Exactly; AMERICAN developers. And that is why in the end, most of the greatest games one generation after another come from Japan. The typical American "bigger is better" mentality comes to play here. The American developers care more about the highest technology; the Japanese about the highest they can get out of the existing technology. Don't get me wrong, graphics and technology must improve, but I agree with Nintendo: we've reached a point where graphics will only improve games MARGINALLY. Once again, photography never killed painting.
Should the Wii have been more powerful? Yes, it would have been great. But to then escalate its price by hundreds of dollars? No thanks, it's only videogames afterall; my life does not revolve around it. Now a computer, though, that could make sense. You see, a computer you actually WORK with, a utility device, an investment that brings returns.

And why does Rein think the gaming world revolves around UE anyway?

@#47, "the wii is irrelavent to the console race", if so, why did the all mighty bill gates himself state that nintendo is now it's competitor? or was that statement he made irrelevant lol!!!!
link:http://www.joystiq.com/2007/01/11/gates-now-sees-nintendo-as-primary-competition/

I'm not buying the Wii to play Unreal 3 engine games. I already have the 360 for that. I'm buying the Wii so I can have access to games I wouldn't be able to play on the 360 (like the mario games). Who cares if it can or can't do Gears of War?

Gee, who didn't see that coming?

@#54
"And why does Rein think the gaming world revolves around UE anyway?"...because every one likes space soilders with big guns and body armor that look totally badass!!!!!lol

I think a lot of people are missing the point. Mark Rein was asked a question and based on his expertise answered it as best he could. He did say that another company may be able to squeeze it onto the wii, just that Epic has no plans to put the time and effort into it. And the Unreal Engine is just a means for developing games quicker and for less money and hopefully allowing devs to focus on other aspects of the game and make it more enjoyable. It does not create a good game just provides the tools in order to do so more efficiently.

man, these people are lame. Who Cares if the ur3 doesn't run on the Wii???? We've known about the Wii not being able to produce cinematic graphics since.......

I'm no one when it comes to even knowing what the ur3 is capable of (doesn't GoW utilize this engine?). I'm sure it's beautiful whatever the outcome. But if a suck ass dev. uses the engine to make a game that totally blows....but looks good...what would be the point of using it?

I don't even know if Wii can handle ur2...but if it's a sweet game....who cares what engine uses it?

People who think that anything from Nintendo is automatically a good game, or that anything from Japanese developers is automatically better than something from Wester developers...grow the hell up and stop spending all your time watching anime.

I want to thank the well qualified guy for the technical input truth. Basically the Wii sucks, so last gen in nature. PSP just gain a star.

I hate when people compare the Wii of this generation to the PS2 of last generation. The distance that the PS2 Technology was behind the Xbox and Gamecube technology wasn't even close to the major gap between Wii - 360/PS3.

Yes you can rant and rave that the Wii is almighty and powerful right now. (Obviously not in terms of hardware) But what goes up, must come down. And with a product like the Wii, coming down is inevitable, and the splash, or explosion, will be huge.

Someone explained earlier that the same thing happened with the N64 for being behind PS in technology (Cartridge vs CD) same deal. You have one great console in the Wii, but, if you're an Olympic runner, and you get a head start, and the guy that has started 5 seconds after you is faster... he'll catch up, and you know he will win. (Sales, and inevitably, the Gold Medal on the Tri-Podium.)

The Wii is a novel idea but it will wear out it's welcome fast. You really can't say it's a revolution at all. A revolution should in ALL respects be a step forward. The wii is actually a step back in most every way. It's online service is nonexistant, and lets be honest thats where much of the future of gaming lies. It's graphics are not even on par with the PS3 or 360. I understand this sounds a little extreme but lets look at it this way, a Wii with better graphics is still a Wii. The Wii really can't be a paradigm shifting experience if it can't match or exceed the competition in all fields.

I understand the Wii gives developers a chance to spread their wings in the gameplay department but things like this could have been done by the developers themselves. Look at Guitar Hero, it uses a non-standard controller and sells for a larger price than other games but still managed to be a breakout hit. The idea Nintendo has is to capitalize on the disconnected gamers ideals by selling them the same system with a simple controller attachment. They arn't letting developers make up their own minds but forcing innovation down their throats. This is a good idea but will ultimately fail because forcing something like this down the devs throats will cause them to churn out cookie cutter games using the same basic framework for every game. The cycle won't end with the Wii at all, in fact it could end much worse.

@63, "They arn't letting developers make up their own minds but forcing innovation down their throats."


Developers can make up their own minds. They don't HAVE to make games for the Wii ...
... unless they want to make an assload of money.

So no gears of war on the Wii??? *cries*

I thought the Wii (and gamecube) had a pretty good programable "shader" system.. its just its not like the systems on the other consoels and PC so developers don't know how to use it. Factor 5 managed to do pretty much every "next-gen" shader effect on the Gamecube with only 9 months to develop a game.

I realise that Mark's personal taste doesn't run to the Wii.. but surely his business sense tells him that it he was a good enough programmer to make his engine scale to the Wii then he'd license a heck of a lot more copies. Think of the MONEY Mark!!

It is funny that a lot of the commentors here didn't even realize that Western developers have taken the lead in quality game development. Sure, there are 1 or 2 Japanese games a year that are fun and unique. But, look at overall sales charts and overal ratings charts. It is fairly close, but overall Western is leading the way. I bet that is why the Capcom guy said so a while ago.

http://www.metacritic.com/games/xbox360/scores/
http://www.metacritic.com/games/ps3/scores/
http://www.metacritic.com/games/wii/scores/

http://www.gamespot.com/pages/unions/read_article.php?topic_id=25376637&union_id=286

I'm definately more of a fan of Gears of War than Okami. But that is different kind of fun. There is no way I could have gotten 100 hours of enjoyment out of Okami. I've gotten that and counting on Gears.

Heh, stupid programmers. Y'know even when working with a machine which favors less power, a well defined and well programmed engine can still function smoothly. Sounds to me like Epic is just unwilling to try other avenues of thinking.

paul246 -

You're right, of course. Nintendo is no more revolutionary then another Halo, Doom or Unreal Tourney game...

Except, of course, for the very different WAY of playing games through the Wii. That's the point.

Is it perfect? No. But at least Nintendo is trying something new, and not just charging us $400 - $600 for another good-looking FPS....

Another thing I take issue with: The idea Wii gamers are not "hard-core." Because I'm sick of playing the same type of games, I'm not hard-core?

I've played Doom. I've played Unreal. I've played Halo.

Been there, done that. If the fact I've decided to move on to other games makes me a "soft-core" gamer, I'll wear that badge with pride.

didn't we all already know this, what I'd really like to see is retro studios licencing out the prime 3 engine in a similar way, that way there will be tons of great looking games on the wii. With UE3 getting used all the time it starts to make games that look and FEEL simliar to play, and thats a bad thing too.

I think what people are trying to say about the american devs vs. the Japanese ones is that although the american games (like Madden) are selling better, there not always better games and a lot of the different inovative games come out of japan. Not to say there all BETTER games, but certanly more inovative. And thats why they don't like the wii as much

"sigh... more developer hubris... dumbasses"

sigh... more fanboy hubris... dumbasses

"Optimus...specs don't mean crap everything was more powerful then the PS2 and where did that sit?"

PS2, GCN and XBOX were all pretty close together.
They were all roughly capable of doing each others games.

PS3 and 360 are miles beyond anything Wii is capable of. And PS3/360 game put on Wii would be stripped down/crippled, where any Wii game put on 260/PS3 would be instantly better than what it was.

A lot of people are talking about how more CPU allows for more AI, as well as more Graphics.

There was a game a few years ago, Black & White, that had more complicated AI than most of the games today. There was another, Revolution: The Republic, with similar levels of AI.

Black & White did OK, but the sequel did very little. Revolution: The Republic bombed.

Much as prettier graphics don't make a better game, more complicated AI doesn't make a better game.