EA Montreal General Manager Alain Tascan revealed today that they are having problems with some groups of people who are rather affected by the subject matter Army of Two (Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3) tackles. He said, however, that they are not trying to make any political statements. The rest of the story after the jump!

Soldier of Fortune-esque title with a next-gen polish, Army of Two will be making its way to the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 sometime this 2007. If you've grabbed the team briefing vid trailer we handed to you a week ago, you'd know this title doesn't just pack tactical, team-based gameplay; it's also about all the lovin' in-between.

Now here's a game that gets right down to the innards of actually being teamed up with a living, breathing and talking partner. Unfortunately, with the wrong combination, you could catch a case of the "Abbott and Costello" syndrome. Such is the case with Tyson Rios and Elliot Salem - two former Army Rangers who now provide their much needed skills as souped up bodyguards or military reinforcements.

Now while the trailer did sport a good pack of one-liners to fill a box of large fries, Alain Tascan, Electronic Arts' Montreal Studio General Manager, says that characters might not be as chatty as the one-and-a-half minute trailer. In fact, he said in a phone discussion with Newsweek's N'Gai Croal that the game's dialogue is still being tinkered with. Like the game's music, the character's dialogue will be added in the end.

But will they keep the humor? That's a definite yes. The constant interaction in a game that screams teamwork is enough to warrant some form of bond between the in-game duo, but not in the context that MTV thinks it to be (laugh it up MTV). Tascan said once to Level Up, "Humor is one of the most difficult things to get right. We want to add some humor to the game to differentiate it from the competition. Because shoot shoot shoot and hide is not all we want to do."

Fresh from the 2007 D.I.C.E. Summit in sin city Las Vegas, Epic Games and Microsoft Game Studios sported big grins on their faces after Gears of War won eight awards, including the Game of the Year award from the Interactive Achievement Awards hosted by the Academy of Interactive Arts and Sciences.

 "This is incredible," said Epic's CEO Michael Capps. "Getting sales is great, making the game we wanted and having people buy it and enjoy it is fantastic. But having our peers say it's the best game of the year? That's insane. We beat the Wii." Nintendo's Wii Sports came second, taking only three awards home.

Lead designer Cliff Blezinsky also added:

The thing is, being on the outside of this industry looking in as a kid, and wanting to be part of it, and then being able to be here and get an award from all of these talented people ... is absolutely unbelievable. We could not be honoured more.

The game was designed for implementation, based on the EA Montreal's Alain Tascan's idea of "zero innovation strategy." It was never meant to have any features, except be fun.

"I think there's a lot of iteration and a lot of polish that went into the game," Blezinsky added. "I've actually heard a compliment from people saying it has a learning curve. Which, as a designer, that actually means the game has some cool new features in it."

Epic Games and Microsoft? What a combo! Now we really can't wait for UT3.

This comes a bit weird after we mentioned yesterday that industry veteran Ian Livingstone has been pushing developers and publishers to focus on gameplay and new IPs. Gaming giant Electronic Arts seems to have been listening, as the company just admitted that game franchises could only take them for so far.

EA is known for annually making various sports game, which when you really think about it, are all quite the same. They came up with Superman Returns for the Xbox 360, yes, but it is still based on a well established pop culture icon. EA Montreal General Manager Alain Tascan acknowledged this and then mentioned that its time to take bigger risks:

We think this is something that people are going to react well to, because EA is not known for this. I mean, if you look at the comments of people on some of the things I've said and they say 'How can you dare talk about innovation?' And that's what we want to prove that as a company we can do it.

Currently, EA has various upcoming titles for different consoles over at the Montreal Studio. Some of these include SSX Blur for the Wii, Army of Two for X360 and PS3 as well as one unannounced new IP.

Gamasutra has an in-depth feature on Alain Tascan, the EA Montreal General Manager who is most famous for having said that Gears of War brought "nothing in terms of innovation to the shooter... Like, zero,"

Yes, comments about innovation from an executive of EA, a huge company known for annual sports titles. It's very much an understatement to say that some people got a bit miffed about what Tascan said. Judging from the Gamasutra feature, it's probably safe to say that he knows it. Here's Tascan's words:

We are around 300 people now including EA mobile upstairs, and there is space to grow. We are working right now on three things: Army of Two, the new IP which better be good, otherwise people are going to kill me after my comments about Gears of War; SSX on the Wii, which is due in March; and another new IP which I’m not able to talk about.

The feature goes on to emphasize that EA has heard the complaints, and that it has realized that in order to say on top they really have to start betting on original IP. The feature also goes on to explain why the EA original IP move is set in Montreal. Tascan says that there's just this energy about Montreal. There's this air of creativity in the area. Here's how Tascan explains it:

It couldn’t be done in Portland or somewhere like that. But at the same time it couldn't have been done in Dusseldorf or Paris; it’s this understanding of the North American culture, and at the same time this little twist that makes it special. And that’s why we’re here. That’s why Ubisoft are here, A2M are here, all of the animation companies are here; this energy that is understandable at a worldwide level but at the same time with a little twist.

Oh, and speaking of Ubisoft, crazy rabid, acrobatic prince, killer assassin Ubisoft, here's Tascan's take on Ubisoft Montreal vs. EA Montreal:

We're both big companies for different reasons, I guess. You have a family based French company, started by five brothers, against an American company who belongs to nobody. Ubisoft was until recently completely owned by the people who started it, and I think they still own about 90% of it. Compare that to a company that is about 95% public. So while in EA everyone has to report to somebody, at Ubisoft, there is a level where if they want to do it they could do it, and nobody can tell them different, so sometimes they’ve reacted differently to the market than EA would.

The interesting thing that I notice is that now Ubisoft sounds like it’s trying to be more like EA, to be more aware of the market, while EA is trying to do more original things, like Ubisoft.

For more on the feature, feel free to use our read-link below.

Either they're doing all of this on purpose to get our attention, or EA just has that arrogant, eherm, charm that only a special few acquire. Most memorable WTF-EA-quote so far? Well, for me it is EA senior VP Glenn Entis asking people to improve motion physics during the Montreal Games Summit and making the tactical error of citing Final Fantasy (of all things) as an example of "bad motion" in games. In his words:

In Final Fantasy, the modelling fidelity was really better than the motion fidelity. In other words, when you looked at the models, they signalled an expectation to the audience that the motion couldn't deliver upon.

This, right before he says that EA's amazing attempt at achieving realism is Tiger Woods PGA Tour. His proof that the golf game is achieving realism? Tiger Woods couldn't tell he was looking at CG. Yep. A certified "WTF-EA?" Moment right there.

Other recent WTF-EA moments include EA CEO Larry Probst saying that before, gamers were complaining, but now, after they've done some alterations, players are now happy about their microtransation-pay-for-simple-cheat-codes business model. In his words:

We did a better job on Need for Speed Carbon, and we're not hearing those same kinds of complaints or negative feedback about that product. It's generating a lot of money through microtransactions. So it's a learning process, it's iterative and we'll get better about it as we go. Need for Speed is the first example of getting smarter about it.

He said this to Newsweek. Perhaps he actually meant the fact that they started to release free downloadable jerseys for Madden and NCAA Football, but to imply that all the complaints happened before the cheat-codes for money fiasco just is just plain... oh never mind.

Get the rest of the article after the Jump!

No doubt, people spend a lot of money on games. Making ultra-awesome replicas of reality, or fun, innovative games don't come cheap, and that's not the end of it. You got marketing rackets to worry about, and other financial matters to think of to make your head spin.

So you know general manager of EA Montreal Alain Tascan wasn't kidding when he said that "the cost of making games is 'crazy.'" He adds that things will turn out differently due to the "booming budgets" for games.

But that doesn't mean larger budgets always have to equate large teams. He adds that the teams over at EA Montreal are composed of around 35-85 members. After all, "bigger budgets don't necessarily mean that smaller games companies are left struggling."

Fellow writer Chris C. had the perfect comeback when he saw this story in Eurogamer. "In other words, pot calls kettle black, more at 11!" (Chris L. chuckles silently). EA Montreal General Manager Alain Tascan, speaking during the Montreal Games Summit, said what he thought of Epic Games' Gears of War.

What is Gears of War? I mean Gears of War brings nothing in terms of innovation to the shooter... Like, zero. Only two very brave UK-based journalists said, 'You know what, Gears of War is a great game but it's like what Quake was a few years ago.

Sour-graping much, Mr. Tascan? But, kidding and catcalls from Gears fans aside, his comments can be read as either the kind of putdown you'd expect from a competitor gaming company, or that he's trying to point something out lost amidst the shuffles of War. Something a few radical, if very much-booed, commenters in our Gears coverage mention in reaction to the string of 9/10s or 10/10s the game's been getting.

Tascan: I'm not talking about my tastes, I'm just saying, when you go to metacritic and you see a 96 for Gears of War, then you read the critics saying, 'Okay, storyline - there's none, gameplay is not innovative...' Then I say, why did they give this 96? They were blown away by the high quality of the graphics... Myself, I prefer something more creative.

This writer's not a fan of FPS/TPS titles himself, as he readily admits. The gameplay may not be that innovative - we found "strategic" infantry play in the not-really-an-FPS Full Spectrum Warrior, for example - but it is quite refreshing. Suffice to say, I can give Gears its props, it rocks, even if it's same old, same old.

Gears of War is a beautiful shooter, especially for shooter fans, and non-shooter fans can even admit it does "look pretty". There will always be a next step, marrying the high quality of digital image work Epic's pulled off with even more new ideas for gameplay, story, and so forth. Whether or not the scores Gears of War received are well deserved, or just all hype, we'd like to think that this is just the beginning of the next step in video gaming.

How about this for a radical idea along your lines, Mr. Tascan? Epic + Hironobu Sakaguchi or Tetsuya Nomura? How's that for creative?