-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Weird, according to the RE 5 gamepage on IGN....
- Thread starter Lakitu
- Start date
C- Warrior
Banned
These "game journalists" fuck up all the time. No, Mikami is not involved with RE5.
The same way he wasn't significantly involved with basically every RE game beside 1, 2 and 4.
The same way he wasn't significantly involved with basically every RE game beside 1, 2 and 4.
C- Warrior
Banned
Ceb said:
Nice catch. Kamiya (aka game directing god) is the one who directed RE2.
But given how Capcom (and most game developers work internally) I'm sure Mikami was involved.
â Narayan
Member
Haha, "kawaii" is really the perfect word to describe that.
ToyMachine228
Member
Grug said:
Since the completion of Resident Evil 4 on the GameCube, Shinji Mikami has been dead silent. He has moved to Clover Studio, where he is currently working on an original property with much of his Production Studio 4 team which moved to Clover with him.
No, he is not working on Resident Evil 5, and before the question arises again, he didn't work on the PlayStation 2 port of Resident Evil 4. He did give the go green light to "Separate Ways" however.
radioheadrule83
Banned
:lol
the dude sounds like he has liver sclerosis
the dude sounds like he has liver sclerosis
This is an old Inaba interview, but i think people should know this:
- Why did you choose Clover Studio as the name of the new company?
Clover is the combination of two ideas: creative and lover. This has been designed in a very similar way to Viewtiful Joe: view and beautiful. The number four was also very important, as it reminds people inside the studio about their common origins: Production Studio #4. The four leaves of the clover are also an image of happiness or healing. The idea is that creators are able to create games as they want and not under pressure from the market. This healing process benefits players who will be able to enjoy true gaming experiences.
-Is Production Studio #4 still active, or has the entire staff moved to Clover?
In fact, we split the department in two. There were about 120 people at Production Studio #4. We made a 50/50 split, 60 each.
There were a few people who wanted to follow us immediately. Then we asked each staff member if he or she wanted to try the Clover Studio adventure or not. It was just a simple and direct question.
-In many ways, this seems similar to Sega's restructuring a few years ago - forming 'independent' studios based on the in-house departments to shift the financial risk. Is this the same process?
No, it is very different in reality. In Sega's case, they transformed entire departments into companies. It was just the legal nature of the departments that changed; there was nothing different in terms of creativity.
With Clover Studio, the decision was made in terms of creativity. We decided to make something different from what you could expect from Capcom. Of course, you could argue that Capcom has difficulties. It is true but I would like people to understand that our decision is motivated by our creative approach. I mean something very positive.
-Previously, you had many successes inside Capcom, and had the freedom to develop a high-risk project like Tekki. Why create an independent company?
Yes, it is true that the company let me do many things. But I think that Capcom has become a huge brand. With this size and fame, it is not easy to move in terms of creation. At Production Studio #4 we had very special ideas that were not always in phase with what users would expect from a name like Capcom. Sometimes this played in favour of Capcom, but sometimes it was working against the company's image. So, with Clover Studio, we wanted to divide Capcom's brand. Users will not see our game as a traditional Capcom game, but as a 'Clover game' inside Capcom. When our games are too original, they will not hurt Capcom's traditional image and users will think: 'Ah, yes, that is a Clover Studio game'.
We want to bring original content to the game community. If we stayed inside Capcom we could not explore the creative ways we wanted to. This is the very base of our motivation in founding Clover Studio.
-How would you describe the fundamental differences between Capcom and Clover Studio, as developers?
First, I would say that we are working in a very difficult environment. When we were inside Capcom, we could take three years or more to develop a game. We were not that preoccupied by the financial aspects of our project - we could be in deficit, but we knew that the other departments would fill the hole for us, but this is not something we wanted to do. If we were only motivated by originality in the creation of Clover Studio, this would be seen only as a sign of our ego, our selfishness. We want to create, but at the same time be entirely responsible for our own actions.
Of course, inside Capcom, there are many people who want to make very great things, but their approach is different because of the gap in resources and size. So more than this difference in resources, I would say that our fundamental difference is the way we think.
-What difficulties do you foresee developing within Clover Studio, compared to within Capcom?
Well, I think that the 'risk factor' is going to become a big factor in our work. For instance, it is going to be impossible to make games like Tekki! That is for sure. But that does not mean we will be controlled by this risk. We have to think differently and this is one of our objectives right now. We will not be able to enjoy the same comfort now to develop our games. In this difficult environment, we will develop our strength. Our main objective is to prove our potential. So we have to define what can or cannot be done with the resources we have right now. I don't know how many years it will take, but I hope the time will come when our potential will be recognised, giving us more weight with Capcom. But for that, we need to make a succession of successful games. By then we would have been able to increase our staff and aim at bigger projects.
-Developers such as Mikami and Kamiya are associated with very popular, successful licences. Will Clover Studio continue these?
Well, absolutely no. We don't want to do anything with these licences. If we did, we could not possibly do other projects than these licences. I mean, there are about 60 people at Clover Studio, so you would need to use the entire staff and more to develop a new Biohazard. With a project like Viewtiful Joe, it becomes viable. We can have a certain balance in our working process inside the company. Now that does not mean I don't want to develop on some of our past licences, but our main desire is to deliver original content, new experiences.
-How does this affect Biohazard 4?
Well, this is a special case. Shinji Mikami is the director of the game and he will finish it in cooperation with Production Studio #4. We are actually sending some of our staff to work on the game with Mikami at Production Studio #4.
-And if Capcom decides to make a fifth instalment of Biohazard?
This would not be our problem any more. I think Production Studio #4 would be in charge of that.
-What position and priority will Kamiya and Mikami take at Clover?
They are 'simply' directors. They only wish to create games, nothing more. Of course, they add their personal aura to the games they develop and to our company. They will become the company's face in many aspects. I mean, I'm not creating Okami, it is Kamiya's creation. But inside the company, they are 'just' directors.
-As studio head, will you still be involved with creative work?
I will continue to produce games. That's for sure. I will be in charge of many aspects of the company simultaneously: president, finances, producer... but I will keep that way until I feel the company is stable. Plus, don't forget that there aren't that many of us at Clover. I think I will face quite a lot of stress! But I've accepted this. I think this leaves the others at Clover more comfort to do their job.
-Will you be running Clover differently than you would have run an internal Capcom studio?
Not much. I give a lot of freedom to the people working with me. As long as I get the expected result, it does not matter how the people get to it. It has been the case even when we were at Production Studio #4.
-Have you felt the need to respond to criticisms of the original Viewtiful Joe in developing the sequel?
With the first Viewtiful Joe, we started to work on the design and adapted play mechanisms around it. So, sometimes the priority given to the design 'jammed' the game experience. For example, the character had short hands and legs. That made fighting difficult because his punches or kicks would not easily hit adversaries. But this was a choice we made from the start. With Viewtiful Joe 2, we do not intend to correct this. To us, Viewtiful Joe is an accomplishment of one style we wanted to develop at that time. With the sequel, we want to introduce another experience.
-Have you been surprised by the game's positive reception in the west?
Oh, yes! We were so surprised! The game has even appeared and been awarded in USA Today. It got many awards, including an Edge Award! Thank you very much! When we went to E3, we saw that it was well accepted by gamers but we never thought it would be praised so much!
-Is Viewtiful Joe 2's multiplatform development a concession to the American market?
The market is as it is. I mean, PS2 is the main platform and releasing the game only on GC would be difficult in terms of business, especially in the US. We can't control hardware success. We can only choose the target of the game. Plus, we really want as many players as possible to enjoy our games to come. But that does not mean we will only develop for the largest platform on the market. Nintendo has been able to develop its console this far with games as its only strength. That cannot be dismissed.
-Okami has a strong Japanese theme. Is it intended chiefly for the Japanese market, or do you see it being a success overseas as well?
Basically, we want to make games for all the markets around the world. I think we've integrated a lot of Japanese soul into this game, but I don't see it as a barrier. I believe it will be understood overseas as well. It is obvious when you see how Miyazaki's Sen To Chihiro (Spirited Away) has been successful outside Japan and especially in the western world. I don't think we can speak of cultural barriers now as we used to do in the past. I don't feel the oriental touch as a wall to the success in the west, not any more. If the experience is great, it should be successful.
-Okami, like Viewtiful Joe, uses a cel-shaded visual style: will this be a characteristic of Clover Studio games?
Not at all. If you consider Biohazard 4, it has reached such a level of visual realism that we thought we could not make anything fun from this. We needed something very different. With Viewtiful Joe, we tested this approach. Using cel shading we managed to deliver an interesting game experience.
With Okami, we tested another form of cel shading, not because it has been successfully used in Viewtiful Joe, but to answer the project's needs. In Okami's case we wanted to offer a very special visual touch using Japanese traditional art. But cel shading is not our trademark.
-Okami seems highly original but equally high risk. How do you intend to manage the balance between originality and commercial success?
I think it is the same problem faced by Viewtiful Joe. We proved it can be done, and successfully. The risk has to be controlled by us. Having said that, I know that some of our games in the future may sell only 1,000 copies. If we develop several games like Tekki, it would be very difficult for the company to survive. That demonstrates the difficulty of establishing this balance between originality and business. This is what we wanted to learn. This is where we want to get stronger, as I explained before.
Being original is not enough. The game is original and may not be understood in its first version. So we need to think how to correct or develop that - in a sequel, for instance. We need to have the game enjoyed by as many users as possible, and this will result in better sales.
-Do you have any plans for Clover beyond Okami at this stage?
Well, it is the time when we are speaking a lot about what to do next, which way to go, etc... Of course, we can't say anything for the moment. What I can say is we are very interested by new hardware to come. I mean, this is no surprise.
But we really would like to try these new machines, even once, to experience it, to learn, to test things. I'm talking about both home and portable consoles. We don't necessarily exclude one console. We are interested by all of them.
-Many believe the next generation of consoles will require hundreds of developers to produce a single title. How do you plan to develop for these new consoles with a 60-person studio?
Of course there are things you can't do, but there are also things you can. We don't feel the desire to make games that need a large staff. With such games, costs are increasing as well as their scale. I don't think that the gaming experience gets anything from that. I really believe it is time to shift inside our head. We can make great games with a smaller staff. Okami does not require a huge staff, not at all. But I know that we will need to increase our staff with time. If needed, outsourcing will be an option for us.
- Why did you choose Clover Studio as the name of the new company?
Clover is the combination of two ideas: creative and lover. This has been designed in a very similar way to Viewtiful Joe: view and beautiful. The number four was also very important, as it reminds people inside the studio about their common origins: Production Studio #4. The four leaves of the clover are also an image of happiness or healing. The idea is that creators are able to create games as they want and not under pressure from the market. This healing process benefits players who will be able to enjoy true gaming experiences.
-Is Production Studio #4 still active, or has the entire staff moved to Clover?
In fact, we split the department in two. There were about 120 people at Production Studio #4. We made a 50/50 split, 60 each.
There were a few people who wanted to follow us immediately. Then we asked each staff member if he or she wanted to try the Clover Studio adventure or not. It was just a simple and direct question.
-In many ways, this seems similar to Sega's restructuring a few years ago - forming 'independent' studios based on the in-house departments to shift the financial risk. Is this the same process?
No, it is very different in reality. In Sega's case, they transformed entire departments into companies. It was just the legal nature of the departments that changed; there was nothing different in terms of creativity.
With Clover Studio, the decision was made in terms of creativity. We decided to make something different from what you could expect from Capcom. Of course, you could argue that Capcom has difficulties. It is true but I would like people to understand that our decision is motivated by our creative approach. I mean something very positive.
-Previously, you had many successes inside Capcom, and had the freedom to develop a high-risk project like Tekki. Why create an independent company?
Yes, it is true that the company let me do many things. But I think that Capcom has become a huge brand. With this size and fame, it is not easy to move in terms of creation. At Production Studio #4 we had very special ideas that were not always in phase with what users would expect from a name like Capcom. Sometimes this played in favour of Capcom, but sometimes it was working against the company's image. So, with Clover Studio, we wanted to divide Capcom's brand. Users will not see our game as a traditional Capcom game, but as a 'Clover game' inside Capcom. When our games are too original, they will not hurt Capcom's traditional image and users will think: 'Ah, yes, that is a Clover Studio game'.
We want to bring original content to the game community. If we stayed inside Capcom we could not explore the creative ways we wanted to. This is the very base of our motivation in founding Clover Studio.
-How would you describe the fundamental differences between Capcom and Clover Studio, as developers?
First, I would say that we are working in a very difficult environment. When we were inside Capcom, we could take three years or more to develop a game. We were not that preoccupied by the financial aspects of our project - we could be in deficit, but we knew that the other departments would fill the hole for us, but this is not something we wanted to do. If we were only motivated by originality in the creation of Clover Studio, this would be seen only as a sign of our ego, our selfishness. We want to create, but at the same time be entirely responsible for our own actions.
Of course, inside Capcom, there are many people who want to make very great things, but their approach is different because of the gap in resources and size. So more than this difference in resources, I would say that our fundamental difference is the way we think.
-What difficulties do you foresee developing within Clover Studio, compared to within Capcom?
Well, I think that the 'risk factor' is going to become a big factor in our work. For instance, it is going to be impossible to make games like Tekki! That is for sure. But that does not mean we will be controlled by this risk. We have to think differently and this is one of our objectives right now. We will not be able to enjoy the same comfort now to develop our games. In this difficult environment, we will develop our strength. Our main objective is to prove our potential. So we have to define what can or cannot be done with the resources we have right now. I don't know how many years it will take, but I hope the time will come when our potential will be recognised, giving us more weight with Capcom. But for that, we need to make a succession of successful games. By then we would have been able to increase our staff and aim at bigger projects.
-Developers such as Mikami and Kamiya are associated with very popular, successful licences. Will Clover Studio continue these?
Well, absolutely no. We don't want to do anything with these licences. If we did, we could not possibly do other projects than these licences. I mean, there are about 60 people at Clover Studio, so you would need to use the entire staff and more to develop a new Biohazard. With a project like Viewtiful Joe, it becomes viable. We can have a certain balance in our working process inside the company. Now that does not mean I don't want to develop on some of our past licences, but our main desire is to deliver original content, new experiences.
-How does this affect Biohazard 4?
Well, this is a special case. Shinji Mikami is the director of the game and he will finish it in cooperation with Production Studio #4. We are actually sending some of our staff to work on the game with Mikami at Production Studio #4.
-And if Capcom decides to make a fifth instalment of Biohazard?
This would not be our problem any more. I think Production Studio #4 would be in charge of that.
-What position and priority will Kamiya and Mikami take at Clover?
They are 'simply' directors. They only wish to create games, nothing more. Of course, they add their personal aura to the games they develop and to our company. They will become the company's face in many aspects. I mean, I'm not creating Okami, it is Kamiya's creation. But inside the company, they are 'just' directors.
-As studio head, will you still be involved with creative work?
I will continue to produce games. That's for sure. I will be in charge of many aspects of the company simultaneously: president, finances, producer... but I will keep that way until I feel the company is stable. Plus, don't forget that there aren't that many of us at Clover. I think I will face quite a lot of stress! But I've accepted this. I think this leaves the others at Clover more comfort to do their job.
-Will you be running Clover differently than you would have run an internal Capcom studio?
Not much. I give a lot of freedom to the people working with me. As long as I get the expected result, it does not matter how the people get to it. It has been the case even when we were at Production Studio #4.
-Have you felt the need to respond to criticisms of the original Viewtiful Joe in developing the sequel?
With the first Viewtiful Joe, we started to work on the design and adapted play mechanisms around it. So, sometimes the priority given to the design 'jammed' the game experience. For example, the character had short hands and legs. That made fighting difficult because his punches or kicks would not easily hit adversaries. But this was a choice we made from the start. With Viewtiful Joe 2, we do not intend to correct this. To us, Viewtiful Joe is an accomplishment of one style we wanted to develop at that time. With the sequel, we want to introduce another experience.
-Have you been surprised by the game's positive reception in the west?
Oh, yes! We were so surprised! The game has even appeared and been awarded in USA Today. It got many awards, including an Edge Award! Thank you very much! When we went to E3, we saw that it was well accepted by gamers but we never thought it would be praised so much!
-Is Viewtiful Joe 2's multiplatform development a concession to the American market?
The market is as it is. I mean, PS2 is the main platform and releasing the game only on GC would be difficult in terms of business, especially in the US. We can't control hardware success. We can only choose the target of the game. Plus, we really want as many players as possible to enjoy our games to come. But that does not mean we will only develop for the largest platform on the market. Nintendo has been able to develop its console this far with games as its only strength. That cannot be dismissed.
-Okami has a strong Japanese theme. Is it intended chiefly for the Japanese market, or do you see it being a success overseas as well?
Basically, we want to make games for all the markets around the world. I think we've integrated a lot of Japanese soul into this game, but I don't see it as a barrier. I believe it will be understood overseas as well. It is obvious when you see how Miyazaki's Sen To Chihiro (Spirited Away) has been successful outside Japan and especially in the western world. I don't think we can speak of cultural barriers now as we used to do in the past. I don't feel the oriental touch as a wall to the success in the west, not any more. If the experience is great, it should be successful.
-Okami, like Viewtiful Joe, uses a cel-shaded visual style: will this be a characteristic of Clover Studio games?
Not at all. If you consider Biohazard 4, it has reached such a level of visual realism that we thought we could not make anything fun from this. We needed something very different. With Viewtiful Joe, we tested this approach. Using cel shading we managed to deliver an interesting game experience.
With Okami, we tested another form of cel shading, not because it has been successfully used in Viewtiful Joe, but to answer the project's needs. In Okami's case we wanted to offer a very special visual touch using Japanese traditional art. But cel shading is not our trademark.
-Okami seems highly original but equally high risk. How do you intend to manage the balance between originality and commercial success?
I think it is the same problem faced by Viewtiful Joe. We proved it can be done, and successfully. The risk has to be controlled by us. Having said that, I know that some of our games in the future may sell only 1,000 copies. If we develop several games like Tekki, it would be very difficult for the company to survive. That demonstrates the difficulty of establishing this balance between originality and business. This is what we wanted to learn. This is where we want to get stronger, as I explained before.
Being original is not enough. The game is original and may not be understood in its first version. So we need to think how to correct or develop that - in a sequel, for instance. We need to have the game enjoyed by as many users as possible, and this will result in better sales.
-Do you have any plans for Clover beyond Okami at this stage?
Well, it is the time when we are speaking a lot about what to do next, which way to go, etc... Of course, we can't say anything for the moment. What I can say is we are very interested by new hardware to come. I mean, this is no surprise.
But we really would like to try these new machines, even once, to experience it, to learn, to test things. I'm talking about both home and portable consoles. We don't necessarily exclude one console. We are interested by all of them.
-Many believe the next generation of consoles will require hundreds of developers to produce a single title. How do you plan to develop for these new consoles with a 60-person studio?
Of course there are things you can't do, but there are also things you can. We don't feel the desire to make games that need a large staff. With such games, costs are increasing as well as their scale. I don't think that the gaming experience gets anything from that. I really believe it is time to shift inside our head. We can make great games with a smaller staff. Okami does not require a huge staff, not at all. But I know that we will need to increase our staff with time. If needed, outsourcing will be an option for us.