Finally: Bungie discusses the Halo 2 ending
- Thread starter GhaleonEB
- Start date
Ferrarisimo
Member
SantaCruZer said:
Guess you never played Beyond Good & Evil.
Inline LOLlerblades!
MarkMacD said:Or maybe 'Hey, people freaking out about the ending: Just fucking RELAX. We gave you 100s of hours of the best console online multiplayer shooter to make up for it.'
But some of us- at least one anyway, namely me- don't play online shooters. The single player story was what I wanted. Lack of online co-op sucked, but I understood the technical difficulties. So, I ended up really anticipating a solid, epic sci-fi experience... Bungie delivered the goods on 80% of that, but the ending was a serious letdown. Online implementation, no matter how well they pulled it off, doesn't affect my frustration with the ending whatsoever.
I'm honestly impressed that they pulled off the online stuff, and I'm glad alot of folks are getting so much out of it, but it's worth noting that not everyone gets into Halo for that.
I'm still kinda torn on the arbiter. I've come around to the character, and some of those levels are good, but damnit....call me shallow or whatever; I missed the Master Chief.
Date of Lies
Banned
COCKLES said:
no it doesn't, halo 2 sucks, just another commercialized over-hyped and overrated game.
even the multiplayer isn't worth Xbox live.
Fixed2BeBroken
Member
Ironclad_Ninja said:
heh....
ironclad ninja = the only guy in ga clan games to actually initiate conversation about other games while playing halo 2.
:lol
i think im in the minority amongst the gaming community in thinking halo 2 is goty.
Most gamers this year are split on thier GOTY.
minus the ending (that did suck, but i didnt really care about it cause i didnt care about the story) the game just did everything Right. There was just such a great balance.
multiplayer is also solid although there are some Tweaks that need to be applied......
like getting rid of timer in head to head, get rid of rocket slayer, fix all the glitches, have people start with battle rifle instead of smg, and add some new maps....some mid sized maps.
Each map now, either relies heavily on who controls short ranged weapons, or who controls the long ranged weapons.
peace
XS+ said:
I personally wanted:
1) To see the MC and Guilty Spark reunited and watch the, um, sparks fly
2) To kick Truth's ass
3) To Save Earth
I'm pretty happy with what I got, but I am surprised that GS and MC didn't meet, given their relationship in the first game and the fact that they are both in this one.
tahrikmili
Member
I finished Halo 2 for the second time today, and the second time the ending didn't sound as lame to me..
The game ends with the Arbiter's story finished - Elites taking their revenge on the Brutes and stopping Halo, no small feat.. and now all that's left is for Chief to stop the Prophets form remote-destructing the remaining halos, and that can be left for a reasonable sequel. The ending seems to suck less
1. the more you like the Elites/Arbiter storyline
2. the more you forget about the E3 / billboard stuff that's about Earth.
Actually, if they never made a big deal about Covenant coming to earth, I doubt many people would have whined about Halo 2's ending.
The game ends with the Arbiter's story finished - Elites taking their revenge on the Brutes and stopping Halo, no small feat.. and now all that's left is for Chief to stop the Prophets form remote-destructing the remaining halos, and that can be left for a reasonable sequel. The ending seems to suck less
1. the more you like the Elites/Arbiter storyline
2. the more you forget about the E3 / billboard stuff that's about Earth.
Actually, if they never made a big deal about Covenant coming to earth, I doubt many people would have whined about Halo 2's ending.
The Faceless Master
Member
even knowing that at some point they had a different, "more complete" ending in mind, and had to change it due to time constraints, i still liked the ending...
Mr_Furious
Member
Halo 2 is NOT representative of 3 years work. There's was obviously poor planning involved which resulted in a bunch of cuts (including the ending). Bungie may try to spin it that they intended to cut the ending but no one should believe the controversial cut was planned from the beginning. They had to do what they did in order to ship the game in 2004.
Mr_Furious
Member
I did read the interview and your quote. Bungie, just a week or 2 ago, addressed the horrible ending by stating that "it was intentional" but now they're kind of admitting that it wasn't intended but more forced in order to get the game out. Well, which is it Bungie? Truth is, Bungie will never flat out state that they had to ship an incomplete game and will always put some spin on it so that people don't feel jipped so whatever. To be honest, it doesn't matter to me anymore anyways. I choose to not believe them but you go right on ahead.
DrForester
Kills Photobucket
Well, you can see the movie that acts as a side story to one of halo 2's big plot twists.
FEED ME MASTER CHIEF!
FEED ME MASTER CHIEF!
Someone want to photoshop master chief and arbiter into it's arms, it'd be appreciated
My avatar doesn't mean that I am biased towards Metroid. I appreciate what Halo 2 is, and the online multiplayer is keeping me from getting to my backlog. :lol Plus, you have to admit, it's not too shabby. Don't you love the screw ball?Nerevar said:
Hey, what's wrong with that. As long as it doesn't distract anybody away from the game. If it is starting to affect me or my teammates I stop talking, and then try to rekindle the convo. after the game. :lolFixed2BeBroken said:
Mr_Furious said:
The statement from Frankie was, "The ending is a cliffhanger. Intentionally."
Now one of the lead designers is basicly saying, "we decided some time ago to end the game this way, but the story we have to tell is bigger than just this game."
I don't see a contradiction there. They decided to end the game where it did, because that was all they could cram in. They polished, buffed and shined what they hand and stopped the story where they did on purpose. Back when they started the project, did they plan to end it that way? Probably not, given that they cut 100 pages of script out (and kept 160). Does any game turn out exactly like the designers planned? Probably not.
As for your claim that the game should not have taken three years to make, again I don't see your point. Bungie took a long time on the game, but the results show it; what is in the game is polished, deep and balanced. The fact that their ambition is greater than the scope of the game to my mind is less a knock against the game and more a credit to their ambition.
I don't think Bungie is spinning anything - Tyson (whose interview I quoted) says that most of Bungie wishes the game ended differently. How's that for spin?
The weapon controlling is horribly evident in the majority of the games I have played. Some really bad examples would be whoring the sword on midship, or the banshee on ascension. It's really unbalanced.Fixed2BeBroken said:
Oh, and don't you like my riveting discussions. You missed the Jade Empire discussion Wario and I were having. It was cut off because we started getting our ass kicked. We still won the game though. :lol :lol
Mr_Furious
Member
GhaleonEB,
Yeah, cutting content out of any given project is par for the course. A level or two here, a play mechanic or character there but when is it ever a good idea to cut the ending? If the game had originally intended to have a cliffhanger then maybe, just maybe, wouldn't the end of the game have been even partially climactic? The last level and so-called boss fight are a joke for such a highly anticipated AAA title. Bungie was stupid for their choice in what to cut but in the end it doesn't matter because you people are eating it all up anyways and they've already got your (and my) money. Now, it sounds like Bungie is ever so slightly fessing up just a tiny bit but it still doesn't change the fact that it's contrary to what they said a couple weeks ago. If the game was originally intended to have some kind of climactic battle back on or around Earth but got cut halfway through development due to time constraints, that's not "intentional", that's "oh shit, we have to ship and we don't have enough time to get the ending in there".
My beef is the way they're slightly changing their tune as time goes by. Either confess up front or simply shut the fuck up and don't say anything.
Yeah, cutting content out of any given project is par for the course. A level or two here, a play mechanic or character there but when is it ever a good idea to cut the ending? If the game had originally intended to have a cliffhanger then maybe, just maybe, wouldn't the end of the game have been even partially climactic? The last level and so-called boss fight are a joke for such a highly anticipated AAA title. Bungie was stupid for their choice in what to cut but in the end it doesn't matter because you people are eating it all up anyways and they've already got your (and my) money. Now, it sounds like Bungie is ever so slightly fessing up just a tiny bit but it still doesn't change the fact that it's contrary to what they said a couple weeks ago. If the game was originally intended to have some kind of climactic battle back on or around Earth but got cut halfway through development due to time constraints, that's not "intentional", that's "oh shit, we have to ship and we don't have enough time to get the ending in there".
My beef is the way they're slightly changing their tune as time goes by. Either confess up front or simply shut the fuck up and don't say anything.
Kabuki Waq
Member
I tend to put the story near the bottom of "things i need to worry about" when i play action games.
but i guess thats just me.
but i guess thats just me.
Mr_Furious
Member
If that's the case then why do they even bother? The thing is, storytelling is becoming just as important nowadays and developers are investing more money than ever on it because it's a vital element that helps absorb the player in to the "experience" of the game. Halo 2 is a story driven game isn't it?Kabuki Waq said:
Kabuki Waq
Member
story is a nice thing to have and does help atmosphere but i mean im not gonna get bent out of shape over it if it has great gameplay .Halo2 has decent story that just happens to have a bad cliffhanger ending.
I couldn't agree more. After reading the three Halo books(not a bad read, but the writing was definetly below my level :lol ) I was expecting so much from Halo 2's story. The problem is that they didn't even bridge Halo and Halo 2. I read The First Strike so I know what happens, but they could have at least given us the liberty of retelling it in their own form. Even if is just a three minute cinematic.Mr_Furious said:
Kanbee-san
Member
Bad ending ? It makes you wanna play halo 3 right ?
Date of Lies
Banned
Kanbee-san said:
Bad for the consummer, good for Bungie and MS. More $$$
Here is Halo 3's story by the way (VARNING: SPOILERS AHEAD)
After a very long and gruling battle with the convenant to save planet earth, Master Cheif wakes up from his dream.
"Master Cheif! What are you doing!?"
"Finishing this battle, sir"
-start upbeat music-
-ROLL DA CREDITS-
MightyHedgehog
Member
I, for one, was disappointed with the ending, but like JetJevons said, the developments in the story, however seemingly unimportant while you're actually playing the game, cover a lot of new ground for the universe. Certainly, I prefered H2's ending to HL2's... Roll on Xenon and H3.
Dr Zhivago
Member
Just finished HL2, and whilst neither ending is their respective game's strongest point, at least HL2's felt like a proper conclusion.
In HL2 you actually prevent bad stuff from occurring, whereas in Halo 2 you're just about to do this when the game ends.
In HL2 you actually prevent bad stuff from occurring, whereas in Halo 2 you're just about to do this when the game ends.
Dr Zhivago said:
Did you though? You stopped the one, single immediate event...but...
You simply do not find out what happened to anyone else. I was disappointed in that they setup this interesting world with plenty of unique characters and you may never find out in detail what occured. At least in Halo's case, you KNOW Bungie will continue to the story. HL2 ends in such a way that they could simply move Gordon onward to another area with a new story to fight through. You will likely receive some details about what has occured, but at this point, it seems difficult to connect the end of HL2 to anything else. It's like Valve only addressed the most basic and central plot element (stopping Breen and the Combine), but every other detail that I was interested in (more interested, actually) was left unfinished and we never get a proper answer. When you get right down to it, Halo 2 ends in a very similar fashion. ONE major plot thread was ended (the firing of the Halo)...and everything else was left for a sequel. Like I said, the difference is that there are fewer questions left for Halo 3 AND we KNOW they will be answered. HL2 feels like an entirely incomplete work. You show up in the middle of something and leave in the middle of something...and they may never truly give us the answers we want!
Dr Zhivago
Member
Maybe it was just the execution of HL2's ending I preferred.
Flinging plasma death popcorn at Breen felt more climactic than beating up Tartarus. Tartarus felt like a sub-boss.
Also, don't you stop Delta Halo from firing rather than the whole Halo network? Is one Halo enough to wipe out the galaxy?
Also, don't you stop Delta Halo from firing rather than the whole Halo network? Is one Halo enough to wipe out the galaxy?
tahrikmili
Member
Dr Zhivago said:
The problem with Tartarus is twofold:
1. Ganging up on one person with 5-10 (exceptionally stupid) allies isn't exactly a very climactic battle.
2. Tartarus is just way too strong to defeat on a 1-on-1.
Maybe it should have been 5-10 Brutes with Tartarus against 5-10 Elites with the Arbiter and Tartarus having a more reasonable shield, like maybe two overcharged shields or something instead of taking all the shots from three sets of twin plasma rifles.. The last fight was a definitely the wrong way to set up a final boss. Compared to the fight against Regret, it felt boring.. And even Regret wasn't exceptional.
Anyway, the last level up until the final boss fight was exceptional, the pacing is great, so I won't complain anymore.
Mr_Furious said:
I agree about the last boss fight, but that's not really the issue. I don't think they changed their tune significantly, and feel they have offered up enough of an explanation for the reasons behind the truncated ending for me. I still believe it could have been handled better, even with the same game content, but it's a small point.
As for the "they've already got your (and my) money" comment, all I can say is that I'm happy with the game. The ending does not make the game - I was disappointed by it, but it's like eating an entire multi-course gormet meal and then having the dessert swiped from you before you can taste it. Yeah, it sucks but goddamn that was a tasty meal.
tahrikmili
Member
GhaleonEB said:
Bingo, we have another winner. I'm actually quite irritated by Gamespot nominating the game for 2004's biggest letdown. I mean, come on..
tahrikmili said:The problem with Tartarus is twofold:
1. Ganging up on one person with 5-10 (exceptionally stupid) allies isn't exactly a very climactic battle.
2. Tartarus is just way too strong to defeat on a 1-on-1.
Maybe it should have been 5-10 Brutes with Tartarus against 5-10 Elites with the Arbiter and Tartarus having a more reasonable shield, like maybe two overcharged shields or something instead of taking all the shots from three sets of twin plasma rifles.. The last fight was a definitely the wrong way to set up a final boss. Compared to the fight against Regret, it felt boring.. And even Regret wasn't exceptional.
Anyway, the last level up until the final boss fight was exceptional, the pacing is great, so I won't complain anymore.
My problem with the Tartarus battle is that you are not in control of it. On the LE DVD, one of the designers makes the comment, "We want the player to feel that they are the only person than can accomplish what has to be done in the context of the game."
But in the Tartarus fight, you are not in control of the battle. No matter what the cool moves you pull off, what weapons you use, what tactics you employ, it all boils down to wating for Johnson to snip him and take the shield down so you can hit him. For me, it sucked the fun out of that fight because it just became a game of waiting for Johnson to fire, not a true battle that I was in command of - like everything else in the game.
GhaleonEB said:
You, sir, are right on the money in this thread.GhaleonEB said:
As far as the ending sequences in HL2 and Halo 2 are concerned, what both games made clear to me is that cliffhangers suck. Considering the wait involved in AAA titles these days, they just feel like a rip-off.
Mr. Lemming
Member
I think another major event is seeing
which is possibly a larger part of the whole humanity vs. Covenant war than the Halos not firing.
the Covenant starting to unravel