Source

Epic Games has revealed it's "constantly pushing" platform holders to make their next-generation consoles as advanced as possible.

Meeting with Epic's always well-spoken VP Mark Rein at GDC this week, CVG highlighted the growing concern among gamers that next-gen consoles could turn out to be technically underwhelming - especially with Wii U's reportedly modest specs and the next Xbox rumoured to be utilising a year-old graphics card.

The affable Unreal Engine exec assured us that, just like it did with Gears of War and the Xbox 360, it's "constantly pushing" platform holders with stunning demonstrations like itsSamaritan demo, in an attempt to persuade them to make their next-gen platforms as "bleeding edge" as possible.

"Don't worry. We are absolutely every day [pushing platform holders]," Rein told CVG. "This is why we did Samaritan and why we're doing a really high-end demo in the room here. We really are pushing these guys, because if they don't, Apple will go right past them."

In 2006 Rein revealed Epic cost Microsoft $1 billion with an impressive Gears of War prototype, which persuaded the platform holder it should include increased 512MB of RAM inside the Xbox 360.

In a move that harks back to the persuasive Gears demo, Rein called Epic's Samarian demo its "love letter" to hardware manufacturers, emphasising the studio's passion for high-end gaming.

"We really like the big screen, home console experience and we really like iPad gaming. We like all these gaming experiences and we don't think consumers want them to go away.

"The only way they're going to go away is if they don't stay true to what they are. The console gaming experience is about delivering something that's way out past the bleeding edge and subsidising it through the software royalty model - just like Apple does with the phones. It's not that much different."

He added: "That's the console gaming model, and if you don't do that - if you don't stretch just far enough, you don't just have enough of a difference to make people want to take the leap with you... it all falls down.

"Now, I don't think that's going to happen - I think the console guys are going to blow us all away. But as you say, we're on them.

"There's no end in sight for what we can do with unlimited technology. So we're always going to be pushing and I'm sure we'll be pushing for more than is possible to give. But yes, we feel that's kind of our duty. That's what Epic is here for.

"Not everybody in the games business is going to use our technology and that's OK. But if we can help the games business as a whole then we help the people that use our technology, we help ourselves, we help consumers.

"So for us that's something that we work very, very hard on. That's something that I'm personally involved in. [Epic founder] Tim Sweeney is really the guy at the front of the ship, but I'm rowing right behind him. We're constantly contacting these guys and constantly pushing them."

Epic showcased its next-gen Unreal Engine 4 demo behind closed doors at GDC, adding that it hopes to showcase the tech publicly later in 2012.

How transparent can you possibly be?

Edit: meaning Epic, not the OP

Well...... Firstly, Apple would need some actual buttons xD

This.

In a world where Apple dominates the gaming, I'm gonna quit gaming altogether.

Mr. Khan, here is where your usual arguments make total sense. These people are completely deluded. Allow me to nitpick:

The console gaming experience has never been about delivering bleeding edge. The N64 was bleeding edge and failed relative to the Playstation. It's Nintendo's games that kept them afloat (thankfully).

The Playstation was high-end, but not cuttin-edge, not even bleeding edge for its time.

The famicom/NES was a good system, but I can't see how it could be called bleeding edge. It was mainstream VG hardware (a tad above Master System), but it was the games (Mario), the quality of service (accepting to service damaged units), the marketing and targetting (toy stores in NA) and the policies (licensing model) that made its success.

In NA, the SNES, released end of August 1991, a great console, launched roughly around the same time as the Phillips CD-i launched: October 1991. Which is more bleeding-edge and which failed more miserably? The CD-i. Priced at 1000$ with all kinds of CD playback, it failed to sell more than 570 000 units lifetime. The SNES sold 49.10M.

That's totally true. It happened with the HD market with the Wii...

However, there is a baseline required for the leapfrog. With gen5, it was optical compatibility and 3D graphics (at a minimum, PSX sufficed). With gen 6, it was updated graphics (PS2 sufficed). With gen 7, it was HD (high quality 480p would have sufficed).

In gen 8, 1080p at 30fps suffices, some games can have a lower resolution and faster framerate if needed. That is the needed difference, with obviously sufficient processing power for AI and displaying multiple on-screen objects. Anything more than that is...

OVERKILL.

And as we've seen it countless times, overkill can hurt, even destroy a platform's strategy. PS3's cell processor, PS2's emotion engine, N64's expensive cartridges as compared to CDs to save loading times... , XBox 1's overly powered system, with little return, the Game Gear, the CD-i, and so on and so forth.

The title should have been "If the next consoles aren't bleeding edge, Epic is going to be in trouble".

I'll add to that.

 "If the next consoles aren't bleeding edge, Epic is going to be in trouble".

 "If the next consoles are bleeding edge, everyone is going to be in trouble".

1. No, Apple is no threat to console gaming. With increasing resolutions and increasing 4G data prices(and eventurally increasing game prices), the average consumer(console gamers) can't afford an iPad as a gaming device.
2. Yes, next-gen consoles can't play it safe but they can't go all out either. We can not have a repeat of the $599 incident. Both Sony and Microsoft will need to either release a bare-bones model of their next consoles for cheap or just take a huge loss on a fully featured console. The choice is obvious.

I did not feel the need to go into depth because Epic's argument is merely a veil for a desperate attempt to pitch a product. If one wished to read into this more deeply, Epic might be signaling that Unreal Engine 4 might actually be a little much for what Wii U and the rumored NextBox are pitching (not sure if enough is known of PS4 even in rumor), and so are making hyperbolic statements like this to try to actually have a middleware market next gen. Odd statements like this could be signaling that Epic has overshot the market.

And the leap required isn't big. Even gen 7 is stretches ahead of the iPad3.

A gen to gen jump is required due to consumer expectations. Thing is, not much is required to keep the console to tablet gap there. WiiU will have it, Sony and MS don't need too much more, and should rather look for profitability than any bleeding edge. If they give in to Epic, they will Epically get demolished profit-wise and market-share wise (either nobody will want to pay for it, or nobody will really care).