Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Halo 3 Cinematics To Be Great Improvements on Halo 2's

Posted by Zonk on Tue May 08, 2007 09:45 AM
from the one-would-hope dept.
XBox (Games)
1up is reporting that Bungie has admitted to not having the time to do cinematics right for the best-selling Halo 2. Along with statements they made earlier this year about flaws in Halo 2's multiplayer, the folks at Bungie seem quite willing to own up to previous mistakes. Their call to arms this time: everything will be better. "With Halo 3, they have artists and designers who've worked on epic Hollywood projects like The Lord of the Rings and King Kong, not to mention a former Industrial Lights & Magic guy (read: Star Wars) working out the details on an 'amazing space battle ... there's a bigger team, a team that has had the final cinematic script for much longer, and now has access to vastly more tools, resources and technology than ever before. These range from new tools for rigging facial animation, to better lighting and camera controls. Most of the improvements are a solid blend of technology and manpower this time around, and we hope the fruits of that labor end up as succulent as they look now.'"
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Inside Bungie - Living The Spartan Life 58 comments
Straight from the latest issue of Edge, a great feature all about the life inside Bungie studios. The article gets into a good bit of detail on the mindset of this insular part of Microsoft's development network. Interviewed developers discuss what it is like working for Microsoft, and how hard it is not to be hard on themselves. Specifically, the developers have some surprisingly harsh criticism of their own opus - Halo 2. From the article, comments by technical lead Chris Butcher: "One of the things that stuns me when I think about it, and I can't believe this is true - we had [no time to polish] for Halo 2. Take that polish period and completely get rid of it. We miscalculated, we screwed up, we came down to the wire and we just lost all of that. So Halo 2 is far less than it could and should be in many ways because of that. It kills me to think of it. Even the multiplayer experience for Halo 2 is a pale shadow of what it could and should have been if we had gotten the timing of our schedule right. It's astounding to me. I f***ing cannot play Halo 2 multiplayer. I cannot do it. And that's why I know Halo 3 is going to be so much better."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Halo 3 Cinematics To Be Great Improvements on Halo 2's 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • considering you could watch the halo 2 cinematics be drawn while it was playing this shouldn't be hard to do. Or they might be smart enough to stick with pre rendered instead of doing them on the fly.
    • If they're going to do a gigantic battle, then barring the use of multires, they'll have no choice but to prerender if they want it to look like anything other than pure crap.
      • having a beefier engine doesn't automatically solve the problem because the art direction will always want more than it can provide. It's very possible that bungie will once again insist on sticking to in game rendering to the determent of the game because their art needs outstrip their engine capability (a la Halo 2)

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by Darundal (891860)
          They ARE sticking to in game rendering, just like they did in Halo 1. It's just that this time around, they actually have the horsepower to not have it look like crap like it did in Halo 2...

  • fun (Score:5, Insightful)

    by John Nowak (872479) on Tuesday May 08 2007, @09:59AM (#19037017)
    Is there anyone here that would actually claim "improved cinematics" can make a game more fun? None of my favorite games (Fallout, STALKER, Civ) have anything approaching fantastic cinematics, yet they're still brilliant. This is an example of everything that's wrong with games nowadays.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Sciros (986030)
      To claim that it's an "example of everything that's wrong with games nowadays" is a bit harsh and shortsighted IMO, no offense intended. It depends on what games one enjoys. One of my favorite games of the last generation, Ninja Gaiden for Xbox, had fantastic cinematics throughout the campaign and they most certainly didn't take away from the game. Rather, they were almost like a "reward" of sorts between chapters.

      This year I played through Final Fantasy XII, and its biggest drawback (assuming one likes t
      • Oddworld: Stranger's Wrath- awesome cinematics. Looked incredible.

        My wife would actually watch these cinematics! The game gave you the option to replaly them once they were unlocked. This was the first time she was even remotely interested in this sort of thing.

        I loved it too.
    • Fallout and Civ (I haven't played STALKER) had some great cinematics, but they were used very sparingly. For example, seeing the faux-news intro to Fallout was amazing, setting the feel for the entire game. With Civ, you saw your Wonders built and in the end the rocket launch, which was a tasty reward for your efforts.

      What should be avoided is lots of cutscenes that take control away from the player. And yes, I learned that the hard way after being a bit too cutscene-happy with my own game development [adamandjamie.com]
      • I actually found the civ4 cinematics to be lacking. I think Civ2 did a great, with much more in-depth wonder movies and a much longer winning movie.
        • I really miss the filmed advisors that CIV2 had -it was clever, and by the time it got annoying, you could turn it off. That was the best use of filmed actors that I can recall in a game.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by nomadic (141991) *
      Is there anyone here that would actually claim "improved cinematics" can make a game more fun?

      Ico.
    • Most of my favorite games don't have cinematics, but one of them had the best cinematics for the day, and I really liked them. I guess I even played the whole way through the game an extra time or two because of them (to get them back after a Windows reinstall). That was Red Alert 2.

  • Cinematics (Score:5, Informative)

    by MeanderingMind (884641) * on Tuesday May 08 2007, @10:06AM (#19037149) Homepage Journal
    Cinematics =/= Prerendered.

    They aren't talking about extended CGI sequences we all know and hate, they're discussing the in-game cutscenes Halo and Halo 2 were riddled with. Supposedly Halo 3's will be better.

    • Re:Cinematics (Score:4, Interesting)

      by kestasjk (933987) on Tuesday May 08 2007, @10:27AM (#19037457) Homepage
      Halo was great because it was so simple; it set up a simple world where you could run from cool looking scene to cool looking scene and kill some aliens.

      Halo 2 sucked because it tried to have a rich storyline and character development that I don't think anyone cared about. One minute I'm killing some alien spider on earth, next minute I'm on some second halo or something, next minute I'm in a floating temple and there's some infighting amongst aliens for some reason.

      In Halo 1 it's just "regroup, find the control center, go to the control center, save the captain, get the index, destroy Halo", none of this "prophesy" bullshit. K.I.S.S!
        • I had the attention span to play through the entire game. I completed it and quite enjoyed it, but I couldn't even give you a gist of what the storyline was. In Halo 1 you storyline simply framed the game, but in Halo 2 you felt like they were trying to make you "play the movie".
        • It was also all ripped off of Stargate, but that's a different story.

  • In Other Progressive News! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by GodInHell (258915) * on Tuesday May 08 2007, @10:08AM (#19037173) Homepage

    Next generation of technology said to be more advanced than last! (Who knew?)

    Shouldn't this article be met with a resounding "DUH!" ?

    -GiH

  • They should have talked to the guys behind the Command & Conquer cut-scenes. They were (and still are in C&C3) absolutely amazing.

    Although, I don't think the whole live action thing would work too well with Halo.
  • I, for one, enjoyed the Halo 2 cutscenes, I didn't feel they were too obtrusive and the extra detail they were able to pump in was certainly a nice touch. Given the additional power of the 360, I look forward to seeing what they can pull off.

    On an unrelated note, am I the only one who had a problem with apparently the texture detail jumping during the cutscenes in Halo 2? As soon as someone or something appeared on-screen it'd have a relatively low-res texture applied to it for as long as a second or so, th
  • ...have you so easily forgotten the cinematics to Diablo II? Easily the best collection of cutscenes in any game EVER.
    • 2-5 minute cut scenes are one thing... having to wait 30 to 40 minutes till I can play again are another.

      Xenosaga has amazing cut scenes... but I would have to watch for almost 40 minutes till I could play again.. that is not a game, that is an Anime episode where you get to move a charcter once and a while.

  • Why is everyone dissing cutscenes? I'm not a huge gamer but I remember with the old Blizzard RTS games like Warcraft and Starcraft, I thought the pre-rendered CGI cut scenes were rippin' good fun, made for a nice break between the action and a cool "reward" for finishing a level. Didn't detract from the game play at all, at least not for me.
    • I don't think it's so much that people are dissing cutscenes, per se. It's the fact that they are using cutscenes as like a selling point for the game. Like they have nothing else to tout except for their new more-awesome-er cutscenes which has absolutely no bearing on whether the game is fun.
    • Eh? Warcraft and Starcraft were great games. Why would I want to take a break by watching some cheesy cut scene? If I wanted to stop playing I'd just get up and do something else. Thankfully I just pressed the Esc key every time yet another cheesy render appeared on my screen.
      • Honestly, I think that you missed out on a lot then. Starcraft, especially, had some good cutscenes, in my opinion. I've always felt that they added a lot to the story, and were in general a great example of how to get it right.
    • I for one welcome our new cutscene overlords.
  • All this "We know we screwed it up last time...but this time it will be AMAZING" crap reminds of the promotion for the movie "Superman IV." I can still vividly remember interviews with Christopher Reeve, Margot Kidder, et. al. where they talked about how badly they had screwed up "Superman III" and how IV was an apology for that mistake, how amazing the new movie looked, etc.

    Of course, the insight here is not lost on anyone who had the misfortune of seeing the abysmal abortion that was "Superman IV" (by a

  • The question is - Why are they bothering?

    Unless I've been reading all the wrong message boards it appears that most Halo players are by far more interested in the multiplayer deathmatches than the story. The backlash over the "story" in Halo 2 was all over Halo 2 boards for months following the game's release.

    I wouldn't put too much stock in the story neither since I doubt they'll be lifting ideas from an Iain M Banks novel [bungie.org] this time...

    • Unless I've been reading all the wrong message boards it appears that most Halo players are by far more interested in the multiplayer deathmatches than the story. The backlash over the "story" in Halo 2 was all over Halo 2 boards for months following the game's release.

      Halo 1 had a decent story that was COMPLETE on release.

      Halo 2 had a deeper story that was more involving.. and then stopped suddenly half way through.

      The story is important to me, and most of my friends - but anecdotes aren't evidence. I don't know if anyone is bothering to survey gamers to find out either.

      -GiH

    • While the multiplayer aspects are certainly Halo's holding point over the long term, the single-player campaigns are fun as well. The arguements against the Halo 2 plot was not that it was bad, or lacking, but because the story arch fell apart at the very end -- The plot was never concluded, it simply stopped. Basically, they botched an attempt at a cliff-hanger ending.

  • "Requires" DX10 => requires Vista
    As I will not ever purchase Vista (DRM-ridden bloatware)
    I will unfortunately not get a chance to play Halo3.

    On the Xbox 360? Nein, meinherr. I have one,
    but FPS with thumbstix suxxors.
    • That's my same knee jerk reaction as well.

      But then I remember the intro to Quake 2 and the Boss introductions for Ninja Gaiden and I realize that it can be done right and can add to the immersion of the game. However, that "done right" part seems exceedingly easy to "do wrong" as proven by so many other games.

    • Re:Garaunteed Failure (Score:5, Funny)

      by GrayCalx (597428) on Tuesday May 08 2007, @10:01AM (#19037063)
      Garaunteed Failure. That's all I have to say.

      Just to clarify, you're saying Halo 3 is going to be a guaranteed failure? Out loud, to other people, you're saying that? Alrighty then...
      • Maybe not the entire game, but I'm pretty sure that the money spent on making the cinematics will be a complete waste.

          • Because every game should be mindlessly shooting anything that moves and nothing more, right?
            Certainly not nothing more! You're missing more than half the gameplay unless you shoot things that don't move, too.

            How does it go? "If it moves, kill it. If it doesn't move, shoot it until it does, then kill it."
          • The Half-Life games had a storyline that goes just as deep as Halo's but they did it with much less "cinematics". They did it by putting the storyline all around you.

    • Garaunteed Failure.

      Yeah! I mean, look at how cut scenes brought down that nickel and dime Final Fantasy franchise.

      Maybe it's just me

      Wait, are you suggesting your opinion is not a universal absolute? The deuce you say!

      • Yeah! I mean, look at how cut scenes brought down that nickel and dime Final Fantasy franchise.


        Well, the cut scenes were one reason I never finished FF VIII and stopped playing the series after that. Generally, the best thing about cut scenes is that you can usually skip them.
      • Final Fantasy is terrible. I remember FF 7 and 8, where you had to sit through a 2 minute cutscene every time you attacked your opponent. Fun to watch the first 2 or 3 times, but after that it got pretty frustrating.

        • Final Fantasy is terrible.

          Not the point. They were successful.

          And summons were for pussies anyway. :)

          Actually #12 was fun. The Gambit system was a hoot. All RPGs should let you program your other characters like robots. Eventually you could refine and optimize your gambit scripts until you barely had to take an active part anymore. As contradictory as this may sound, that was sort of cool.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Tofystedeth (1076755)
      If you were paying to the article at all (why would you? this is /. after all) you'd know that they said they were sticking with doing all the cinematics with in the game engine.
      • Parent needs to be modded up.

        To reiterate:

        If you were paying to the article at all (why would you? this is /. after all) you'd know that they said they were sticking with doing all the cinematics with in the game engine.

        It's using the IN-GAME ENGINE. No pre-rendered scenes.

        This isn't the PS3 - no need to fill the useless space of a Blu-Ray disc to make Sony execs and fanboys feel good.

    • Re:Hmmm... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by tlhIngan (30335) <slashdot@ w o rf.net> on Tuesday May 08 2007, @10:02AM (#19037075)

      And here I thought they gave Master Chief the helmet so they wouldn't have to bother with pesky things like facial animation...


      They could also just do it Half-Life style, where all the cutscenes and stuff are rendered such that Gordon never talks nor appears (short of turning on third-person view on the original Half-Life). Heck, it leads to the great Half-Life mystery of the helmet...

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by Xtravar (725372)
        Like the GTA protagonist never had a name and never talked... until Vice City and San Andreas.

    • Immersion (Score:5, Interesting)

      by GodInHell (258915) * on Tuesday May 08 2007, @10:35AM (#19037579) Homepage

      And here I thought they gave Master Chief the helmet so they wouldn't have to bother with pesky things like facial animation...
      You might think that, but everybody else in Halo 1 had a face (seargent, cortana, etc). I think it serves as an immersion tool - because the avatar dosen't have a face you can identify with the avatar as self - or if your subconcious works differently - the avatar as your favorite kind of hero. It eliminates the desire in the player for an avatar that reflects their own identity without forcing them to build in custom avatars (which would have been a stretch back in H1).


      -GiH

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.