Die Squirrel Die
Member
M1t7rAnd7r said:
Yeah I got that feeling as well. It almost seemed like the E3 demo was the first actual thing they got around to doing.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
What went wrong with Halo 2?
- Thread starter M1t7rAnd7r
- Start date
Yeah I got that feeling as well. It almost seemed like the E3 demo was the first actual thing they got around to doing.
Apharmd Battler
Member
Die Squirrel Die said:
This is what really annoyed the heck out of me simply because it's something I'm going through right now at my job. I have a person managing a project into the ground, and won't the team do what needs to be done due to the inability to fess up that we're on the wrong track and also due to pride and ego. (Also the fact that this team hasn't had a deliverable in 2 years). I could feel the frustration of the Bungie team as they were sitting around waiting for the green light and the leadership to give them the needed focus. The major decisions weren't up to them, but that how things go on these big project teams. Trust me I speak from experience (and I'm not even in the gaming industry).
MrAngryFace
Banned
The use of The Reason for their behind the scenes dvd is criminal. I hate that song
Die Squirrel Die
Member
ManaByte said:
I noted that.
Yes that was awful.
The only thing that's dissapointed me about Halo2 is the LE "tin" (I use those "__" as sneeringly as possible. In fact, let me add "tin, pah!" as well).
Great game, amazing multiplayer.
Dissapointed by:
Stupid as hell ending to single player campaign
Still has the annoying 'Where's the damn exit to this room!' syndrome on occasion in single player, still an improvement on the original
too bad about the huge amount of stuff they cut.
Overall still worth it due to multiplay, visuals, and added tweaks to gameplay (hijacking vehicles and dual wield rocks).
Dissapointed by:
Stupid as hell ending to single player campaign
Still has the annoying 'Where's the damn exit to this room!' syndrome on occasion in single player, still an improvement on the original
too bad about the huge amount of stuff they cut.
Overall still worth it due to multiplay, visuals, and added tweaks to gameplay (hijacking vehicles and dual wield rocks).
Die Squirrel Die
Member
ManaByte said:
The ATV/buggy/whatever looked cool, even if it was totally useless. Maybe they can DLC it later just for shits and giggles.
Anyway IIRC the flamethrower was cut (again).
There was a human hovership type thingy.
There were a couple of other things but not a hell of a lot.
That's all I can remember off the top of my head. I think the reality is that there wasn't so much actual stuff cut as it was people expecting the vast majority of the game to be on earth and imagining that there was a lot of stuff that was cut.
ToyMachine228
Member
In my opinion...Nothing. Love Halo 2 down to the nitty gritty.
ManaByte said:
I haven't watched the whole DVD yet, but judging by what I saw, everything they cut out was simply due to time, balance, or lack of fun. Though according to an Entertainment Weekly article, Microsoft lawyers did force them to change a Covenant character's name because it "sounded Muslim."
Halo 2 >>> Halo >>> *
E3 demo level would have been boring to play after I watched the damn movie 400 times. Don't forget this is also in Africa. In 500 years, Africa might not be still up to par with the rest of the world, but compare it to now... It makes sense.
E3 demo level would have been boring to play after I watched the damn movie 400 times. Don't forget this is also in Africa. In 500 years, Africa might not be still up to par with the rest of the world, but compare it to now... It makes sense.
There is plenty of stuff that is missing, but no way to determine whether they were forced to remove it, whether they ran out of time, or whether it got taken out because they didn't think that it was "working" to make the game fun. The goofball that wrote this editorial just thinks that Evil Micro$oft made them take out everything....which is complete speculation.ManaByte said:
Apharmed Battler has hit on my feelings. I watched the DVD and was a little shocked after doing the math. It sounds like they really worked on this game all of 9-11 months. I kept hearing how Halo1 was great and was only done in 9 months, imagine how great Halo2 will be with 3 years. Halo2 is very good but I think Bungie has let the stardom go to their head or they are poor managers of projects. I'm not disappointed in the game at all, I'm a little disappointed that these guys waited till their nuts were in a vise before they got going.
Hitler Stole My Potato
Banned
How the hell can anyone beat this game on legendary? It doesn't even seem possible.
if you're interested in how the game changed over the course of its development, what was cut, and why, you should really watch the LE dvd. it's surprisingly frank about that stuff. seems cuts were mainly due to overambition and deadlines. perhaps poor planning as well, though given how well the game actually turned out, the planning can't have been that poor. and thankfully bungie had enough sense to cut neat-sounding ideas that just weren't fun in practice.
Bleh, I don't agree with that guy at all...
First of all, he is simply bitching about the fact that it isn't an all out Earth battle. The ads were intended to "fool" people in the same way Kojima hid Raiden (though, I don't think it was a good idea). I don't believe they ever intended the game to be all about the Covenant invasion (though that was certainly meant to play a small role).
Fact is, if you go back and actually read a lot of the information about the game, Bungie said that the game would end up visiting other Halos as well as the Covenant homeworld. That's what they were saying back when the game was newly announced and that's what happened. They didn't just decide to throw that stuff in there for shits and giggles.
He makes too many assumptions about what really occured, and I think he is way off base on most of it.
What's his deal with the power lines, though? That first section of the city is Old Mombasa, and while we couldn't possibly predict what a city might look like around the year the game suppoedly takes place, the city is noted to be older. The other portion seems much more up to date. I happened to enjoy those city levels quite a bit. They were linear in progression, but then again, most of Halo was as well. What does he think you DO in Halo anyways? Run around freely? It's a point to point game...
I just rewatched the E3 2003 demo today, and quite frankly, I see little in there that didn't make it into the final game (from a gameplay and visual perspective). The actual level isn't present, but I believe the E3 demo was simply intended to demonstrate what the game will play like. That demonstration was accurate.
I do feel that Bungie's new found stardom may have had a negative impact on the game. I also believe that their existance as Microsoft's top team resulted in that cliffhanger of an ending.
Thing is, I really think the game is fantastic (both in multi and single player). The level design is great, the action is great, the mechanics are better than ever, and everything comes together in a tight package. The game is more complete feeling that Halo 1 and was more enjoyable (outside of the ending).
Do cut features really matter that much? I think it was a mistake on Bungie's part to discuss the ideas that they did so early on. Ideas like that are common when developing a new game, but the public generally never gets wind of those features and won't complain when they aren't there. Still, those extra features DO NOT make the game. Most of the missing features mean nothing to me and have had no impact on my experience.
There are a few of those features that I would have enjoyed, of course. For example, sprinting was an idea that would have been great. While the game certainly can't compare quality wise, Killzone's sprinting feature works damn well. Being able to quickly rush for cover or to run in for a melee attack is great and fits perfectly within Halo's gameplay systems.
Halo 2 is a great game that stands well above your average first person shooter. It's one of the best FPS games I've ever played. I mean, I'm a bit annoyed that the game ended with a cliffhanger as I actually wanted to know what happens...but if Far Cry had also ended with a cliffhanger (and hell, there might have been one...but I don't remember clearly), I sure as shit wouldn't have cared. Oh no, I wonder what crazy adventure await generic man next?!
Still, the split really suprises me. Some people really hate the single player game...while others absolutely love it. It's very bizarre...
Oh, and for those that think that Bungie just sat around for a while before starting the game...please consider the amount of time required for content generation in other games. Retro Studios admitted that, as of E3 2002, only the very first level of Metroid Prime was complete. The rest were simply ideas or early models and such. The vast majority of the (ultra detailed) levels were created between E3 2002 and the time leading up to the launch later that year. Remember where Half-Life 2 was back around September 2003? Yeah, it wasn't even close to being finished (as confirmed by that new Gamespot article). Most of the actual game was assembled and completed after that point. The ideas and general direction were in place, but the levels weren't even close to being finished.
First of all, he is simply bitching about the fact that it isn't an all out Earth battle. The ads were intended to "fool" people in the same way Kojima hid Raiden (though, I don't think it was a good idea). I don't believe they ever intended the game to be all about the Covenant invasion (though that was certainly meant to play a small role).
Fact is, if you go back and actually read a lot of the information about the game, Bungie said that the game would end up visiting other Halos as well as the Covenant homeworld. That's what they were saying back when the game was newly announced and that's what happened. They didn't just decide to throw that stuff in there for shits and giggles.
He makes too many assumptions about what really occured, and I think he is way off base on most of it.
What's his deal with the power lines, though? That first section of the city is Old Mombasa, and while we couldn't possibly predict what a city might look like around the year the game suppoedly takes place, the city is noted to be older. The other portion seems much more up to date. I happened to enjoy those city levels quite a bit. They were linear in progression, but then again, most of Halo was as well. What does he think you DO in Halo anyways? Run around freely? It's a point to point game...
I just rewatched the E3 2003 demo today, and quite frankly, I see little in there that didn't make it into the final game (from a gameplay and visual perspective). The actual level isn't present, but I believe the E3 demo was simply intended to demonstrate what the game will play like. That demonstration was accurate.
I do feel that Bungie's new found stardom may have had a negative impact on the game. I also believe that their existance as Microsoft's top team resulted in that cliffhanger of an ending.
Thing is, I really think the game is fantastic (both in multi and single player). The level design is great, the action is great, the mechanics are better than ever, and everything comes together in a tight package. The game is more complete feeling that Halo 1 and was more enjoyable (outside of the ending).
Do cut features really matter that much? I think it was a mistake on Bungie's part to discuss the ideas that they did so early on. Ideas like that are common when developing a new game, but the public generally never gets wind of those features and won't complain when they aren't there. Still, those extra features DO NOT make the game. Most of the missing features mean nothing to me and have had no impact on my experience.
There are a few of those features that I would have enjoyed, of course. For example, sprinting was an idea that would have been great. While the game certainly can't compare quality wise, Killzone's sprinting feature works damn well. Being able to quickly rush for cover or to run in for a melee attack is great and fits perfectly within Halo's gameplay systems.
Halo 2 is a great game that stands well above your average first person shooter. It's one of the best FPS games I've ever played. I mean, I'm a bit annoyed that the game ended with a cliffhanger as I actually wanted to know what happens...but if Far Cry had also ended with a cliffhanger (and hell, there might have been one...but I don't remember clearly), I sure as shit wouldn't have cared. Oh no, I wonder what crazy adventure await generic man next?!
Still, the split really suprises me. Some people really hate the single player game...while others absolutely love it. It's very bizarre...
Oh, and for those that think that Bungie just sat around for a while before starting the game...please consider the amount of time required for content generation in other games. Retro Studios admitted that, as of E3 2002, only the very first level of Metroid Prime was complete. The rest were simply ideas or early models and such. The vast majority of the (ultra detailed) levels were created between E3 2002 and the time leading up to the launch later that year. Remember where Half-Life 2 was back around September 2003? Yeah, it wasn't even close to being finished (as confirmed by that new Gamespot article). Most of the actual game was assembled and completed after that point. The ideas and general direction were in place, but the levels weren't even close to being finished.
Particle Physicist
between a quark and a baryon
Ghost said:
wait. so people were hyped from a shitty level ?
quadriplegicjon said:
People didn't play the level...
The level was simply a collection of features designed to demonstrate the game. It was mostly a cinematic affair that got people hyped for the game. The gameplay shown in that trailer was not the gameplay that made Halo special...
Not only that, people had seen that section many times over. Of course it COULD have been integrated, but really, what's so incredibly special about that level? It looks nice and did a good job showing off the kind of stuff that was being worked on, but it is just a small section.
Particle Physicist
between a quark and a baryon
dark10x said:
oh.. i thought a bunch of journalists got to play the level .
quadriplegicjon said:
No, I mean people as a whole. That level was playable, you could say, but it wasn't public and virtually everyone playing the final game most likely never touched that level themselves.
Still, what's so important about it? That's what I don't understand...
Almost every gameplay element made the final cut and most of the technology did as well. The final game has many levels that play much better than what that cinematic interlude suggested.
arhra
Member
It wasn't exactly scripted - they were playing through it live, but it wasn't nearly as free-form as it first appeared (they had to do certain sequences in a particular order, and the AI drivers were on a linear set of waypoints (they were free to drive between them as they saw fit, so they could avoid debris, and whatnot, but they were programmed to go through a particular set of points to make sure the 'narrative' of the demo worked - they had to be in the right place for the brutes dropping out of the phantoms, for instance), etc), so it wouldn't really have worked as a proper level.
And frankly, compared to the Mombasa levels in the actual game, it looked, well, a bit crap, really.
Nope. IGN had a great article up a few months back that discussed it, basically, Bungie had to prove that the demo was real-time on the last day of the show. So they let journalists "call the shots" to prove that it was interactive, but the Bungie guys still controlled everything.quadriplegicjon said:
edit: I found it.
http://xbox.ign.com/articles/546/546425p2.html
One thing about the AI drivers...
My younger sibling just played through half the game today and she opted to try the gunner seat during all warthog runs. It was quite interesting to see the AI at work...
Overall, the driver AI is really quite impressive and is something that really hasn't been done in a game before (being able to realistically navigate complex, obstacle filled terrain while allow combat to occur efficiently). They worked out very very well almost the entire time in several different levels.
There were exactly THREE times that the AI got stuck on something, and it usually involved an object that landed in front of a pathway and nearly blocking it. In each of the three cases, though, the AI managed to find a way out. There was one point where it pulled up to a dead wraith tank that blocked a passage. It tried to pass it by slowing down and driving up to the left, but couldn't quite make it. Then, it backed up and started to drive in that same direction only to stop and sit for about 5-10 seconds. Then, it promptly reversed the warthog and turned hard to the right and found its way through the open passage way. Similar events occured during the other two times. The AI was able to successfully navigate every object tossed in its path...
On that note, each of the warthogs and those riding in them managed to survive to the end of each and every scene involving them. Heck, in the highway tunnels, BOTH warthogs and a ghost managed to survive the entire ride. Impressive.
My younger sibling just played through half the game today and she opted to try the gunner seat during all warthog runs. It was quite interesting to see the AI at work...
Overall, the driver AI is really quite impressive and is something that really hasn't been done in a game before (being able to realistically navigate complex, obstacle filled terrain while allow combat to occur efficiently). They worked out very very well almost the entire time in several different levels.
There were exactly THREE times that the AI got stuck on something, and it usually involved an object that landed in front of a pathway and nearly blocking it. In each of the three cases, though, the AI managed to find a way out. There was one point where it pulled up to a dead wraith tank that blocked a passage. It tried to pass it by slowing down and driving up to the left, but couldn't quite make it. Then, it backed up and started to drive in that same direction only to stop and sit for about 5-10 seconds. Then, it promptly reversed the warthog and turned hard to the right and found its way through the open passage way. Similar events occured during the other two times. The AI was able to successfully navigate every object tossed in its path...
On that note, each of the warthogs and those riding in them managed to survive to the end of each and every scene involving them. Heck, in the highway tunnels, BOTH warthogs and a ghost managed to survive the entire ride. Impressive.
Mike Works
Member
:lollevious said:
edit: I will say that it was nearly... hypocritical how Bungie both showed gamer's awe in the E3 booth with that fucking terrible Hoobastank song playing, and then went right on to proclaim that the level wasn't fun (which is now being chimed by the usual folk in this thread). It's pretty sad that the same people who watched that video time and time again, and went nuts for it all those months back are now proclaiming that it was terrible, just to fit their argument.
The Earth level(s) is personally my favorite in the whole game, and while I am disappointed with having to play in the Library, having to fight the stupid fucking Flood, and getting slapped with the "ending", Halo 2 is still a fucking god awesome game, and complaining about Africa having powerlines in the year 2552 isn't going to help your argument one bit.
i wish Bungie would just stop it with the cyrptic hints. i'm so damn tired of this stuff, especially the conspiracy theories. they mean well and all, but remember ilovebees? remember August 24th? "OMG EARLY RELEASE." "DUDE IT IS TEH DOWNLOADABLE DEMO."
alternatively, the whole of the internet could chill the fuck out and realize that it's only going to result in another tease, but i'm going with the more likely of the two options.
/jaded
alternatively, the whole of the internet could chill the fuck out and realize that it's only going to result in another tease, but i'm going with the more likely of the two options.
/jaded
Justin Bailey
------ ------
So Halo 2 pulled a Mario Sunshine?Catchpenny said:
I'm still making my way through the first level (the space station or whatever) and so far I'm not so thrilled at how Halo1-esque it is.
Didn't they say this game was going ot have real-time lighting/shadowing, deformable terrain, the ability to peak around corners, etc?
Didn't they say this game was going ot have real-time lighting/shadowing, deformable terrain, the ability to peak around corners, etc?
I remember when I sat down to play Halo 2 at E3 this year, I asked the Bungie guys how to sprint. They gave me this weird look, and I restated the question. Then, as if talking down to a child, they informed me that there was no sprinting, and backed it up with a look that indicated they didn't have a clue as to what I meant.Wario64 said:
I think sprinting and melee combos might have been cool, but might have really messed with the multiplayer mode. A true combo means that a series of attacks has to be near-unstoppable after the first hit.....is it really fair to let someone nail an opponent three times in a row with a fairly powerful attack? If someone can sprint towards you at full speed at do a 3-hit melee combo that kills you (or very nearly does), then it introduces a lot of balance issues. And how do you activate a sprint on a controller that already has all of its buttons in use?
I have to agree though, that from the video it appears like the whole development of the game was not very well-managed. I am very surprised that they decided to put together such a negative portrayal. I guess they thought all the gloom n' doom would make the feature more "dramatic"...
I have to agree though, that from the video it appears like the whole development of the game was not very well-managed. I am very surprised that they decided to put together such a negative portrayal. I guess they thought all the gloom n' doom would make the feature more "dramatic"...
border said:
I'm glad they were as honest about it as they were. I thought the most telling bit was the moment of introspection where they were wondering if they could continue making games 'the Bungie way', because their production philosophy just doesn't seem to be working out as well as it used to. Halo 2 is the second game where they've had to rush to assemble a playable game out of the assets they had in the latter half of the production cycle. It's reassuring to see that they realize this isn't a good thing, which gives me hope that they'll actually address the problem.
Or they thought it'd be clever to include an hour of damage control with every copy of the LE they sold.border said:
By the way, there was speculation that sprint would be activated by holding the analog stick at its threshold for a certain time limit, say, five or six seconds. That way, it wouldn't activate till you pushed the stick forward (and were moving as fast as you could, not creeping) for five seconds, which would likely only occur if you were trying to traverse a distance. Any other input (strafing, turning) would cause the timer to reset, and you could only move in a straight line while dashing.