N-Philes :: Forums - Great Bungie/Halo 2 interview from EGM

12-15-2004, 01:22 PM

Shadow540

Lakitu

Join Date: Feb 2003

Location: USA

Posts: 2,286 Shadow540 is starting to annoy people

Great Bungie/Halo 2 interview from EGM - cut features and ending discussed

Well Bungie has answered the questions that some people were wondering.. specifically about the cut features and the cliffhanger ending. This interview is really good, Tyson Green is very honest. It's worth a read.

http://www.1up.com/do/feature?pager...t=0&cId=3137254

here is the parts most people are wanting to know...

Quote:

EGM: OK, now lets get into what was cut from the game. What happened to the dash move?

TG: I'm probably not the best person to ask about the dash, because I personally thought that the dash was cool, and was maybe not the best thing to remove. But the way we approached everything in our game, and this includes weapons, is does it have a place in the game, is it executed well? And you answer that question by running it through playtests. And if the answer to that is no, and you don't have an answer for how to make it work, I've got to be responsible and say this doesn't add to the game.

Vehicles were one thing we wanted [more of] in Halo 2, because you're walking on foot a lot in Halo 1. Some of those places, the only reason it happened was because we weren't entirely conscious of how long it would take a player to walk from place to place. We were conscious of that in Halo 2, so if we're going to have this big long space here at the bridge, two kilometers long, we provide vehicles and make sure the player never ever has to walk across that.

In the case of sprinting, there were other things like how do you control sprinting, what triggers sprinting, what doesn't trigger sprinting. We didn't want to turn Halo into something that was really fast. A lot of PC first-person shooters right now are very fast, and a lot of that has to do with the player's movement speed. There's a fine line to walk between the player moving too slowly, where it's frustrating or stupid, and also the player moving slowly enough that tactics develop at a rate the player can wrap his head around. I think on our big multiplayer maps, the speed at which you move on foot allows some zone control, allows our vehicles to be important not just because they have guns on them but because they move around quickly.

The ATV is another example. The ATV was cool to drive around, but it wasn't necessary in any of the missions, and there were a lot of problems with it. In the end we said, it's cool, and maybe we'll come back to it some day. In this game we're going to let that one go, because that means we can put a little more time in the Warthog, make the Warthog better, make the Ghost better.

Quote:

EGM: Were there any single player missions the ATV was a part of for a time? Outskirts?

TG: The ATV was never actually part of anything that we designed. Right after Halo 1, [3D Artist Eric Arroyo], who modeled the Warthog, modeled the Ghost-he did a lot of our vehicle modeling, very talented modeler. Anyway he said hey, it would be cool if we made this ATV. So he made the ATV, I took the Warthog physics and tweaked them and changed them a little-this was at a point in the project where we were just prototyping the systems that eventually did make it into Halo 2. Sprinting was something that happened at the same time. [The ATV] was fun to drive around, but like a lot of things back then, we were just looking to see, what are the directions we can push this. When you announce a new game people want to know what's the new stuff, so okay, here's the ATV, and doesn't it look beautiful with all the bump-mapping. Eric did a bang-up job on it, but it was sort of a...it was shown before its time, I think. In a perfect world, if we had a mission design for it, we would have put it in the game, but we didn't really have that. It's of secondary importance to driving the Warthog around.

Quote:

EGM: Back to the cut features, what about timed grenades?

TG: Sure. One of the things I made was that if you threw a grenade and held the trigger down, the grenade wouldn't detonate until you released the trigger. I think the only reason that went outside our own walls was I threw a plasma grenade, stuck it to a grunt and held the trigger, and the grunt just keeps running around and around. The most awful, and at the same time, hilarious thing, this guy is just totally freaking out. Everyone saw that and thought, that's so funny, you need to do something like that in the game.

But when you think about it, timed grenades you would just lay a couple of grenades around a corner and just sit there on the trigger, and wait for someone to walk around the corner, and then wham. That's not a really fun tactic-fun for the person using it, but otherwise not. It was the same thing with the proximity mines in Goldeneye. The proxy mines were really fun when you were setting them, but when you put it into practice, what it turns into is the entire map is mined, and you die, and you die, and you die...Things just happen randomly.

Quote:

EGM: What about melee combos?

TG: Melee combos...they were something I thought about for a really long time. Jamie, our designer, I think he was the biggest proponent of melee combos. The reason he was fighting hard for melee combos was, when you play Halo 1, it's often a situation where you come into an encounter, kill all the grunts, and then the last one would be alive and you run up and go WHAM!, and you'd go WHAM! again, and just keep hitting them. The favorite example was Final Fight, it has these automatic combos where you go jab, jab, kick. It's so enormously gratifying in that game to pull off combos just by button mashing.

So, can you actually do that in a first-person shooter? We tried making these combos, and they looked pretty cool sometimes, but something like that requires a lot of resources, animation time, tweaking, making sure they all worked well in all situations. And there just came this point in the project where we said, y'know, we can have dual-wield weapons and the animations that go with those, or we can have melee combos. We came to the conclusion, with a lot of help, that the melee combos don't really add a lot to the game besides a little variation.

I believe it was Antoine de St. Exupery who once said that perfection isn't when you can no longer add something, it's when you can't take anything more away. There's this point where you say, okay, we have everything we'd like in our game, but it's not polished yet, so we're going to start saying that's cool, but the with the time we would spend doing that we could make what we already have even better. That's something that afflicts all developers, it's why you see games spend five years in development sometimes. There has to be someone responsible saying this is what really matters, and this is what doesn't matter. That I think is, in the final analysis, that's how you polish a game, make a game that's a little bit better.

Quote:

EGM: Speaking of New Mombasa, why'd didn't the demo level you showed at E3 2003 make it into the final game?

TG: That environment, that geometry for that demo, was a real mission, that was real mission geometry. We were designing missions that used that geometry, and we decided that hey, we can also use this for the E3 thing, set up this little sequence of events. The events that actually occurred there, like the Brutes being present [on Earth], were never really real, we just wanted to tell a cool narrative, show people what to expect from Halo 2. So we told them a story, but it's not necessarily canon, part of the "real" fictions. So we did that E3 [demo], which was very taxing, but as a result we got the geometry to a very "real" level. We were often saying is this gonna work, is it not gonna work, but at the end we looked at this geometry and said this is probably too much, this doesn't work well...this engine doesn't handle this specific sort of space very well. If you want to build a level using this geometry, you're going to be able to use only two Ghosts at a time, two vehicles, five guys, et cetera, and that was just unacceptable. We said it's a really cool looking level, and we'll retain our art assets from there, but we need to rethink this mission.

And we did that, and this is something most people won't know about, but there was an intermediate version between that version and Metropolis, and I think it was too far back the other direction-we made basically a canyon city with tall skyscrapers. It was more technically feasible, but it was less exciting. Then we came back and said, we can't do the first one, it's not really what we want to do anyway, and we don't want to do the second one, here's this third idea, more of an old-fashioned city. And I think that was influenced at the time by the Black Hawk Down game, seeing some of the guys next to me play it. We want to do this older city, with a more infantry-level feel to it, and let's do something crazy. Let's do the old city, a big long beach, a long tunnel section, a bridge that you drive across-a bridge, that's an enormous space, very difficult to pull off-and then let's do the main city, and kick it all off with a giant tank walking through it. Everyone said wow, that's so crazy, let's do it! We overhauled the mission, we said this is how you come in to the mission, this is how you play through the mission, this is how you go out of the mission. A very different feeling from what we started with.

Quote:

EGM: OK, so now let's tackle the big topic: the ending.

TG: The ending was...I think if we have a regret about the game, and it's not a regret that came unexpectedly...[pause]...it's something where we said we know people aren't gonna like that. Nobody likes it when something doesn't end completely. But the ending is the sort of situation where we said, we have this giant story that we want to tell, but we have this amount of time, we have this to make a game with. Either we're going to have to cut back on the story, [or we'll have to] dramatically simplify some things and cut some things out wholesale. Lord knows we already did a lot of that-I think the original script was cut down by 100 pages over the course of the project. [Basically] we have a big story to tell, and the game isn't big enough for that story. So we're going to try to bring it to the climax of a certain arc of the story, which I think we do, but we're going to leave it at that, and wait for the next generation (OMGWTF!

) . Thinking forward, we haven't burned any bridges, if and when we come back to the story there's a bit more of that to tell.

As soon as we made the decision that this was the game we were making, we were conscious of the fact that the ending wasn't as strong as a game that had a complete story arc. We certainly don't try to defend it, we don't say "We don't think we made a bad decision at all!" That's a terrible thing. It drives me nuts when I see developers do that...a good developer is conscious of everything developed in the game, and one thing we're conscious of is that the ending isn't really the ending, it's a "Hold that thought, we'll come back to it. Hope you enjoyed the game, but that's the game."

Had we all to do it again, I don't think we'd do it any differently. Time is finite, resources are finite, and our story is a pretty grand one.

Last edited by Shadow540 : 12-15-2004 at 01:48 PM.

12-15-2004, 01:40 PM	#2
~~Ninja Sole~~ E Street Banned Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 17	Theyre answer every question with too much "blablabla".

12-15-2004, 02:31 PM	#3
Joester Needle Mouse Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Kansas City, MO Posts: 14,643	GOD DAMN IT BUNGIE. I don't want a fucking ending next generation. I want to find out what happens on my current XBOX.... Screw Halo 3, I'm not buying an XBOX 2 just because it has the ending to Halo 2 on it. Bastards. __________________

12-15-2004, 04:30 PM	#4
zig drat Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 9,616	I don't understand. They had 3 years. Other developers have done more than they did in less time. Do they need to hire more people or get better managers or what? Should've asked them, "WHY ARE YOU SO SLOW?" Since that was basically the answer to every question, they didn't have enough time.

12-15-2004, 04:44 PM	#5
Mario Chief The one and only Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Somewhere where I don't know where I am. Posts: 1,302	I personally am ok with the cliff hanger and can not wait to be blown away by Halo 3 (or what ever it`s gonna be called) on Xbox2. __________________ In before the lock! MPH Friend code:3393-6997-6854 Username: Spykes

12-15-2004, 04:49 PM

ONI5

Lakitu

Join Date: Jun 2004

Location: NJ

Posts: 1,193 ONI5 is probably new

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joester Kickass

GOD DAMN IT BUNGIE.

I don't want a fucking ending next generation. I want to find out what happens on my current XBOX....

Screw Halo 3, I'm not buying an XBOX 2 just because it has the ending to Halo 2 on it.

Bastards.

Blah blah blah......If you didn't have a grasp on how big the story was from the first Halo and the Novel then you'll never be happy. Now you know how everyone who played ShenMue 1&2 felt. lol

__________________

Video Game Advantage

360 Bitches!!! F___ing you every which way!!

12-15-2004, 05:12 PM	#7
CJ Thunder Free Government Money! Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: SoCal Posts: 9,946	ITs not a cliffhanger first of all. Other then that it was a good game. But its not as replayibalbe as RS3, XBL had that for 5-6 months, I am done with Halo 2 a little more after a month. __________________ "A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools". - Douglas Adams -

12-15-2004, 05:43 PM

sonicblue

Thundercougarfalconbird

Join Date: May 2002

Location: South Florida

Posts: 20,156 sonicblue might want to think about buying stock in N-Philes

Quote:

Originally Posted by zig

I don't understand. They had 3 years. Other developers have done more than they did in less time. Do they need to hire more people or get better managers or what? Should've asked them, "WHY ARE YOU SO SLOW?"

Since that was basically the answer to every question, they didn't have enough time.

I completely agree. All those things that got cut should've been in the game. I mean melee fighting? Starbreeze pulled that off beautifully in Riddick. Either the guys at Bungie just aren't as good as we thought they were, or they literally needed two more years to finish this game.

And the proximity mines and dashing? Those all work very well in an FPS and would work very well in Halo. I don't know what the hell he's talking about. It baffles me that he could say that about those two things but then.. there's the fricking Energy Sword in multiplayer.

__________________

12-15-2004, 05:47 PM

Imp

Guest

Posts: n/a

Quote:

Originally Posted by sonicblue

And the proximity mines and dashing? Those all work very well in an FPS and would work very well in Halo. I don't know what the hell he's talking about. It baffles me that he could say that about those two things but then.. there's the fricking Energy Sword in multiplayer.

How does the Energy Sword have anything to do with players moving to fast? It's a short dash that can only be used when very close to an enemy. If you could just do it whenever Halo's gameplay would drastically change, probably for the worse.

12-15-2004, 06:45 PM	#10
sonicblue Thundercougarfalconbird Join Date: May 2002 Location: South Florida Posts: 20,156	My point was that the energy sword is a radical change of strategy in comparison to the other weapons. And that it changes the game much more than a short burst of running speed or time grenades would have. __________________

12-15-2004, 08:54 PM	#11
Pojo is it? Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 22,046	I also remember reading in EGM a few years back how dashing would work. They said you lowered your weapon and dashed for a bit, and brought it back up when you fired. I thought that sounded awesome, to be honest. I mean, they already have dual-wielding, why not throw in the kitchen sink? __________________

12-15-2004, 09:57 PM

#12

Wesker

Shepard...

Join Date: Jul 2003

Location: Idaho Falls, ID

Posts: 7,522 Wesker will one day invent something useful made from recycled shoe inserts

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pojo

I also remember reading in EGM a few years back how dashing would work. They said you lowered your weapon and dashed for a bit, and brought it back up when you fired. I thought that sounded awesome, to be honest. I mean, they already have dual-wielding, why not throw in the kitchen sink?

See: Killzone.

__________________

My Awesome Games TheWesker.com I write reviews for EndSights.com

12-15-2004, 10:51 PM	#13
SilvaHalo Make me smile.. Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Vantucky Posts: 10,159	You people are obviously in the wrong biz, I say it's time to start turning in those resume's to Bungie and other dev's cause you lot sure seem to know a whole helluva lot about game developement.

12-15-2004, 11:22 PM

#14

Imp

Guest

Posts: n/a

Quote:

Originally Posted by sonicblue

My point was that the energy sword is a radical change of strategy in comparison to the other weapons. And that it changes the game much more than a short burst of running speed or time grenades would have.

No, it really didn't. Imagine how radically different gameplay would be if you could dash whenever. The games pace would be greatly quickened(and if I wanted fast gameplay i'd be playing UT2K4), vehicles would become less useful, and we'd see people using it to dodge. Capture the Flag would borderline on impossible if you have to catch someone who is dashing.

It's just not a good idea, and it isn't as helpful as you make it sound. It was a practically worthless feature in Call of Duty United Offensive, it'd only add cheap tactics to online play.

And if you read the article(which helps you know), you'd have noticed what he said about the gernades. People would lay a bunch down and spawn camp with them, which is exactly what they don't want in Halo 2. There's a reason these things aren't in the game, Bungie didn't just throw it out with huge features missing.

12-15-2004, 11:50 PM	#15
Rocksteady Steady Rockin' All Night Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Minnesota. It's cold, I wouldn't visit. Posts: 14,133	Well I highly doubt you'd be able to dash with the flag, that or if they can dash with the flag, why couldn't you? It would be just the same as the original when someone would move normal speed with the flag, and you would have to chase them at normal speed, what's the difference? __________________

12-15-2004, 11:54 PM

#16

sonicblue

Thundercougarfalconbird

Join Date: May 2002

Location: South Florida

Posts: 20,156 sonicblue might want to think about buying stock in N-Philes

Quote:

Originally Posted by Imp

No, it really didn't. Imagine how radically different gameplay would be if you could dash whenever.

So how about making it so that you can't use it whenever? How about a meter that lets you quickly dash a few feet and then you have to wait for the meter to recharge before you can do it again. You didn't suggest that because it would work, right?

You chose the worst possible way to implement the dash in order to prove your point. You didn't even consider a way to make it work because you're hellbent on being right.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Imp

Capture the Flag would borderline on impossible if you have to catch someone who is dashing.

Players are already slowed down when holding the flag. Even with a dash they wouldn't be able to outrun enemies because those enemies' base speed won't be penalized and they can dash as well. And you could even take away the flag carriers ability to dash.

But no, these aren't options, are they? Becauseif they were then you'd be wrong. Can't let that happen.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Imp

And if you read the article(which helps you know), you'd have noticed what he said about the gernades. People would lay a bunch down and spawn camp with them, which is exactly what they don't want in Halo 2. There's a reason these things aren't in the game..

Lay down a bunch and spawn camp with them? Since when was he questioned about proximity mines? The question was about timed grenades and how they would've worked. Tell me how you'd throw multiple timed grenades if you'd have to hold down the L Trigger to keep one grenade from exploding. You can't throw anymore than one grenade if you're holding the L Trigger.

Being limited to a single Timed Grenade at a time doesn't throw the game mechanics out of whack.

Don't bother replying if you're just gonna do the same thing you did last time. You decide how to implement things in the worst possible so that you can prove them wrong. That's just sick.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Imp

There's a reason these things aren't in the game..

Because the game wasn't ready.

__________________

12-15-2004, 11:55 PM

#17

Imp

Guest

Posts: n/a

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rocksteady

Well I highly doubt you'd be able to dash with the flag, that or if they can dash with the flag, why couldn't you? It would be just the same as the original when someone would move normal speed with the flag, and you would have to chase them at normal speed, what's the difference?

Umm, the difference is you're trying to shoot them while they're dashing. Problem is you can't shoot while you're dashing. Makes for a bit of a problem. Plus let's say the person with the flag can't dash. They'd get literally gang banged so easily, so that even if they did kill someone they'd likely have to deal with them again before reaching their own flag.

12-16-2004, 12:07 AM

#18

Imp

Guest

Posts: n/a

Heh, I'm not even going to bother to argue with you after this post.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sonicblue

There you go again. Defining exactly how these features would work so that you can shoot them down. What if they didn't work like you say they would? Oh no, that wouldn't work for you, because then you'd be wrong.So how about making it so that you can't use it whenever? How about a meter that lets you quickly dash a few feet and then you have to wait for the meter to recharge before you can do it again. You didn't suggest that because it would work, right?

That's exactly what Call of Duty implements. Let's say it recharges every 3 seconds or so. It'd still be so incredibly different. People would be able to make getaways, come in for faster kills(swords would be an even bigger bitch to deal with, let alone the shotgun), and were you to make it any less frequent it'd just be a pain to use. It's a feature you don't want in your game obviously, or we would've seen it in a lot more.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sonicblue

You chose the worst possible way to implement the dash in order to prove your point. You didn't even consider a way to make it work because you're hellbent on being right.Players are already slowed down when holding the flag. Even with a dash they wouldn't be able to outrun enemies because those enemies' base speed won't be penalized and they can dash as well. And you could even take away the flag carriers ability to dash.

Like I already said. If you're dashing after someone you can't shoot. If they continue to speedily dash away I'd imagine this might become a bit difficult. You're also forgetting the fact of how much this speeds up the flags movement in general. Most maps aren't exactly huge, and flag captures would be almost too quick to stop in levels like Headlong and Collosus.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sonicblue

But no, these aren't options, are they? Becauseif they were then you'd be wrong. Can't let that happen. Lay down a bunch and spawn camp with them? Since when was he questioned about proximity mines? The question was about timed grenades and how they would've worked. Tell me how you'd throw multiple timed grenades if you'd have to hold down the L Trigger to keep one grenade from exploding. You can't throw anymore than one grenade if you're holding the L Trigger.

I'm not talking about proximity mines dip. I'm talking about normal grenades. It's rather simple really. Pick up grenades, kill yourself or a teammate who has said grenades or hell just find a pile of grenades, and trhow a time grenade on it. Bingo, instant death trap.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sonicblue

Don't bother replying if you're just gonna do the same thing you did last time. You decide how to implement things in the worst possible so that you can prove them wrong. That's just sick.Because the game wasn't ready.

It's not ready because they didn't include the dash and timed grenades?
God forbid Bungie forget things like that, I mean, think of how awful the game experience will be without a short little dash and timed grenades!

12-16-2004, 12:45 AM	#19
Rocksteady Steady Rockin' All Night Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Minnesota. It's cold, I wouldn't visit. Posts: 14,133	It's not jus the dash and the gernades Imp, those are just a few handpicked examples of the dozens of things that should have been in the game. They were originally planned to be in it, I mean how in the world does an ATV not fit into the game? The guy says right there that he would have wanted it in the game, but the fact that no mission would have been using it. Did the Spector ever have a main purpose in the single player mode? No not at all, yet they implemented it into the game, so why not a human ATV to match the uber covenant Ghost? You need to get passed what Halo 2 did right and you will see deep down it does have its flaws, to say they didn't have enough time to get all of this in there is crap. If you don't have enough time they should have just delayed it again (with Microsoft's restrictions out of this conversation). This game was in development for 3 years... 3 years, and it was kept secret for the mass majority of that time. During that period we were told things, things we later found out were never included in the game, which in the end would have spread a wider variety to the game and not so much the same as before. Don't get me wrong I like Halo 2, a lot for that matter, but looking back, I played the original until the fingers bled. To play a game for about 2 weeks and then drop it is something I never want to experience from a game I wait 3 damn years for. I wasn't even hyped for it - at all. Bungie had the time, the tools and the money to make this game more then just your average sequal, they had the chance to make it something outside of what I was expecting. A few days ago I stumbled across my old EGM which had the cover of Master Cheif for Halo 2. Nothing was really released about the game, besides the little teaser and some character art, and I remember them gathering up all this new information about destructable atmospheres, banshees in multiplayer, sprinting, and timed gernades, all of which were either not included in the final product or were not done properly. I hate to sound critical here but of all the disapointments this generation this and Mario Kart: Double Dash!! top the charts. Eh, my 2 cents. __________________

12-16-2004, 12:57 AM

#20

Joester

Needle Mouse

Join Date: Jun 2002

Location: Kansas City, MO

Posts: 14,643 Joester might want to think about buying stock in N-Philes

Quote:

Originally Posted by ONI5

Blah blah blah......If you didn't have a grasp on how big the story was from the first Halo and the Novel then you'll never be happy. Now you know how everyone who played ShenMue 1&2 felt. lol

I don't care if they haave a continuation i the story after Halo 2, infact I want there to be. The problem is the way they ended Halo 2, they never gave resolution to the whole thing. All they had was Chief saying he was going to take them out and that was it. I am sorry but that is bull****. The Matrixs had a cliffhanger as well but see... they didn't make you pay an extra 350 bucks to find out what the hell happens.

BTW. I have read the books.

__________________