×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Bungie Vs. Miyamoto - Fight!

Zonk posted more than 6 years ago | from the not-that-combat-heavy dept.

Games 379

Last week Gamehead's Geoff Keighley interviewed Shigeru Miyamoto, and the well-known designer tossed off a mildly controversial comment. Keighley asked him if he felt as though he was losing touch with the American audience as a result of the popularity of games like Halo. GameDaily reports on Miyamoto's response: "I could make Halo. It's not that I couldn't design that game. It's just that I choose not to. One thing about my game design is that I never try to look for what people want and then try to make that game design. I always try to create new experiences that are fun to play." Bungie took exception to that, and Frank Connor retorted in his interview with Joystiq: "Yeah, well. I just want to go on the record and say that Bungie is hard at work on a side-scrolling platform game featuring some plumbers -- I'm not going to say what their ethnicity is, it's none of anyone's business -- but we took that as a gauntlet, a sort of glove slap, and we're going to respond in 2D scrolling style. That's all I'm saying." We discussed that article, along with several other pieces of Halo 3 coverage, this past Saturday.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

379 comments

Well... (5, Funny)

j0nkatz (315168) | more than 6 years ago | (#19115877)

This this story is about trolling let me be the first to say HI!

Re:Well... (2, Funny)

Detaer (562863) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116297)

Good thing Square wasn't mentioned, with their tight dev schedule it would be a shame for them to make anything but over inflated graphics demos you sort of "lead" through combat. /troll

The thing is that it's true (4, Insightful)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 6 years ago | (#19115885)

Halo is not a revolutionary game by any stretch of the imagination. One could have had the same result trivially by starting with any of the common first person shooter engines, and working from there. The fact that the same is true of Super Mario Brothers, a game made years and years ago (an eternity in video game land) is not even interesting.

Re:The thing is that it's true (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19116239)

Halo isn't really even new. It's very much a lot like the game Marathon, only with better graphics and physics. In fact if you look at the design of the Master Chief, he bears a striking resemblance to the cy borg you play in Marathon. They even left the words SPNKR on the side of the rocket launcher, another Marathon weapon.

Re:The thing is that it's true (1)

OECD (639690) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116945)

They even left the words SPNKR on the side of the rocket launcher...

Added them, actually. The graphics weren't good enough to show it in the original Marathon. It was shown in the accompanying booklet, IIRC.

That said, I would totally love to see a Halo done side-scrolling style. That could be a hoot.

Re:The thing is that it's true (4, Insightful)

ePhil_One (634771) | more than 6 years ago | (#19117445)

Halo isn't really even new. It's very much a lot like the game Marathon, only with better graphics and physics.

It is by and large Marathon 4/5/6, there's plenty of evidence it takes place in the same Universe, etc, and is only separated by a large amount of time. Since they also created Marathon, this isn't a huge shock. Marathon was groundbreaking mostly in that it brought an interesting storyline to a FPS game, other than that it was really Mac;s answer to Doom. Of course, Doom was just a revampled Castle Wolfenstien 3-D, which was a 3-D version of an old Apple II game, which probably traced its roots back to the old Bezerker game (which never bothered to explain why you were in a maze running from deadly robots), which probably draws inspiration from an old movie, which was inspired by an old story, which was...

Re:The thing is that it's true (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19116385)

I'd say that Pikmin was pretty original (a modern Miyamoto creation). Not to mention that SMB, much like Donkey Kong, Zelda, and a lot of other Nintendo properties were original when they were created.

Speaking ill of a legend like Miyamoto is not something I would do, and I think the guy at Bungie comes off a little arrogant for doing so.

Disclaimer: The last Nintendo console I bought was an SNES, so I don't think I could be counted as a Nintendo fanboy.

Re:The thing is that it's true (2, Insightful)

theStorminMormon (883615) | more than 6 years ago | (#19117143)

Disclaimer: The last Nintendo console I bought was an SNES, so I don't think I could be counted as a Nintendo fanboy.

Well you could just be looking at the question through the lens of nostalgia.

Re:The thing is that it's true (1)

omeomi (675045) | more than 6 years ago | (#19117559)

Speaking ill of a legend like Miyamoto is not something I would do, and I think the guy at Bungie comes off a little arrogant for doing so.

It's not like this is a startling comment from Miyamoto. He's said similar things in the past, although perhaps not about a specific game. He's always been more of a proponent of "games the whole family can enjoy", and not a big fan of first person shooters. He's welcome to his opinions, as far as I'm concerned...they've served him well enough in the past.

Re:The thing is that it's true (2, Interesting)

BeansBaxter (918704) | more than 6 years ago | (#19117969)

Speaking ill of a legend like Miyamoto is not something I would do, and I think the guy at Bungie comes off a little arrogant for doing so.
Here is his job title.

I lead a small writing department that does game script, combat dialog, some of the Marvel graphic novel, the comic book series, the books, the marketing, whatever. Anything that involves writing.
So who cares if a writer from Bungie pokes fun at making a side scrolling game involving unknown ethnicity plumbers? I think it is freek'n hilarious and I only buy Nintendo systems so I'm a fan boy.

Re:The thing is that it's true (2, Insightful)

aichpvee (631243) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116417)

Halo isn't even particularly good. The multiplayer is rather uninspired, filled with tiny levels, uninteresting weapons, a pitiful player cap, and run-of-the-mill game modes. The single player is simply horrid with some of the most lazy, pedestrian level design ever put in a game that lasted more than a week outside the bargain bin.

The fact that Miyamoto, clearly one of the most inspired game designers to ever live, even bothered to compare his work to theirs should be more than they could ever want. From their game designs they clearly don't deserve that much respect.

Maybe Miyamoto should start up a "hardcore" FPS game, though. Because even if it were the worst game he'd ever designed it'd still mop the floor with anything Bungie has put out this century.

Re:The thing is that it's true (1)

C0rinthian (770164) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116949)

*cough* Metroid? *cough*

But seriously, Bungie does make very good games. The Marathon series is proof, and laid the groundwork for the likes of Half-Life.

Re:The thing is that it's true (2, Insightful)

7Prime (871679) | more than 6 years ago | (#19117163)

Miyamoto has never had any dealings with Metroid... original series or Prime.

And seriously, MP is NOT a first person shooter. It may technically fit the bill, but that's only a technicality. The types of skills it requires and the fanbase are nothing like Halo or Counterstrike. It's basically a sci-fi Zelda where the camera happens to be first person... One look at the tastes of its fanbase will cue you in.

Here's a clue, if something's commonly called "the first-person shooter for people who hate first-person shooters". And people who love FPSs hate the game... then maybe it really ain't a first person shooter at all, it just looks like one.

Re:The thing is that it's true (3, Informative)

revlayle (964221) | more than 6 years ago | (#19117313)

Wrong: Miyamoto was a design consultant and sort of a long distance project director on behalf of Nintendo to monitor the design and development of Metroid Prime (at least the first game). In fact is, I think Miyamoto was the one that told retro to make the game first-person instead of third-person which caused some amount of the development, up to that time, to be scrapped.

A couple other Nintendo people helped with the game design also, not just Miyamoto, including the original designer, Yoshio Sakamoto.

Re:The thing is that it's true (1)

xenocide2 (231786) | more than 6 years ago | (#19117387)

I love FPSs. Counter-Strike, Battlefield, Day of Defeat, Unreal Tournament, they're all fine games.

I also like Metroid. Should I be worried about spontaneous explosion at any moment?

Re:The thing is that it's true (1)

aichpvee (631243) | more than 6 years ago | (#19117273)

Yeah, I liked Marathon. Not the most original game either, but it had some neat things going on (first with dual wielding, if I'm not mistaken) and was fun. And the first two Myth games (the ones made by Bungie if I'm not mistaken) actually were pretty innovative at the time and were fun to play.

But both of those were made a long time ago, definitely not this century. Now all Bungie makes as Halo, which I don't find to be a particularly good game. It's decent, maybe even a whole half-step up from mediocre, but that's about it. I'd say 5.4, tops. As a purely co-op game it does a lot better, though, since there is sadly just about no competition on that level.

Re:The thing is that it's true (2, Insightful)

spocksbrain (1097145) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116595)

It's true, and the reason Halo has become so widely popular is because it's x-box platform release and simple controls/interface has made it more easily accessable to a larger and more diverse audience than superior (or regarded by critics as such) PC FPS games.


It's a similar situation to the Final Fantasy franchise, more specifically FF 7. While everybody and their sister who grew up in the 90's will swear that FF 7 was the greatest RPG ever made, they probably never even heard of Baulders Gate, Fallout, or NETHACK.

Re:The thing is that it's true (1)

Das Modell (969371) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116769)

FF7 is a terrific game, no matter what you compare it to. But yeah, it's not much of an RPG, if you want to compare it with games like BG and Fallout.

Re:The thing is that it's true (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 6 years ago | (#19117455)

Final fantasy 7 was terrible. First of all, it was extremely linear. You couldn't venture off on many side quests, and you couldn't even get lost of make bad decisions on the main quest. Not only that, it required that you sit through a 2 minute cut scene every time you attack your opponent. It wasn't even as good as the original final fantasy. The graphics were better, but that's about it.

Re:The thing is that it's true (3, Funny)

arodland (127775) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116781)

Actually I suspect that most people who care about RPGs not only have heard of Baldur's Gate, but can actually spell it.

Re:The thing is that it's true (1)

aichpvee (631243) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116839)

They never heard of FF6, Chrono Trigger, or just about every other game made by Squaresoft either. The popularity of FF7 is very similar to that of Halo though. Most people who love FF7 had never really played a console RPG (or any RPG for that matter) and for most who love Halo it was similarly their first FPS. Of course there's probably the same argument out there ready to be made about all of us who don't think that highly of those games, but obviously I'm going to disagree.

Re:The thing is that it's true (4, Insightful)

7Prime (871679) | more than 6 years ago | (#19117027)

Different genre. There are really two different RPG genres out there and they have almost COMPLETELY different fanbases. Trying to compare the two is really absurred. I'm not particularly defending FF7 here (I think it's highly overrated, myself... although I am a fan of the rest of the series).

Where you might say, "Think FF7 is a real RPG? Try playing Baulder's Gate or Nethack", I might say, "Think FF7 is a real RPG? Try playing Tales of the Abyss or Ar Tonelico". Seriously, we're talking apple's and oranges here.

East vs. West, Console vs. PC, RPG vs. jRPG... each side takes a different spin on tabletop gaming... jRPGs concentrate on the story element, western RPGs capitalize on non-linearity. Whichever you think works better is up to the audience.

I personally would fall asleep 10 minutes into Baulder's gate. Ar Tonelico might make you do the same.

Re:The thing is that it's true (4, Insightful)

theStorminMormon (883615) | more than 6 years ago | (#19117363)

East vs. West, Console vs. PC, RPG vs. jRPG... each side takes a different spin on tabletop gaming... jRPGs concentrate on the story element, western RPGs capitalize on non-linearity. Whichever you think works better is up to the audience.

Excellent observation.

And for what it's worth, I'd like to point out that popularity is a pretty complex issue. We seem to operate under the assumption that it's some kind of direct relationship to quality or some other simplistic explanation (e.g. like how good the controls are). The modern narrative about popularity when it comes to art is that blockbusters are kind of mundane and inoffensive with enough explosions/sex/(pick your easily reproduced element to look down on) while the *real* talent shows up in indie/niche creations that you have to be intelligent/free-thinking/(pick your vaguely cool counter-cultural trait) enough to really get.

And while I'll agree that Creed and Nickelback basically suck, the Beatles and Pink Floyd were really good. So sometimes the popular stuff really is good, and sometimes the niche stuff really isn't (no example here: not looking for a flamewar).

FWIW, Halo is my favorite game of all time on any system. From NES, Sega, SNES, PS, XBOX, GC, Wii, 360 (consoles I've played) and over a decade of PCs, I prefer Halo. Why? The story. Just visit ILoveBees.com and you'll get a glimpse of the thought and talent that goes into the world creation. Does this have anything to do with how popular the game is? There's no way to know. Did they get the gameplay just right? Hit the market at just the right time? Was the story good enough to develop an initial core of fans who pushed the game to the frat boys that made it a blockbuster? We'll never know, in my opinion, and the only lesson is that oversimplifying popularity is for fanbois and trolls.

Now go listen to "Indier than Thou."

Re:The thing is that it's true (1)

flyingsquid (813711) | more than 6 years ago | (#19117629)

I'm sure the X box is part of it, but Halo is just a great game, whatever platform we're talking about- I played it on the PC. No, Halo isn't original. The one man army against an overwhelming force has been done hundreds of times in video games, alien invasion is one of the most clichéd scenarios out there, the alien force is ripped off from Bungie's own Marathon series, the ring structure is ripped off from Ringworld, and the Flood are basically just space zombies. So it's a walking cliché... but it does a good job of setting up a believable world, telling a story, the gameplay is just fantastic, and the main character is cool. Multiplayer for the original Halo was just a blast, the weapons were really well balanced. It's not as good as Half-Life, but it's a damn fine game. It didn't set out to be a revolutionary game, just a fun first-person shooter, and it did that about as perfectly as you could ask.

Re:The thing is that it's true (1)

jma05 (897351) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116779)

OK! Obligatory question. Was Donkey Kong revolutionary?

Re:The thing is that it's true (1)

vertinox (846076) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116983)

Halo is not a revolutionary game by any stretch of the imagination.

True. Halo isn't a bad game per se, but it isn't very imaginative compared to the FPS coming out these days. When it came out a few years ago, it was quite interesting to a game that used a vehicle system not seen since Tribes.

But these days, we've got games out the wazoo with vehicles and lots of fire power.

However, games like Crysis [wikipedia.org] make me actually want to go out and buy a new computer just to play it while Halo 3 just looks like it is just an upgrade to the prior games.

Re:The thing is that it's true (2, Insightful)

Bob-taro (996889) | more than 6 years ago | (#19117175)

Halo is not a revolutionary game by any stretch of the imagination.

Not the graphics, or story, or control scheme, but as I understand it the physics engine was pretty advanced. I was following Halo 1 development and one of their mottos was "better gaming through physics". I was very disappointed when Bungie was bought by MS. I didn't play Halo until it came out for the PC and by then it was definitely nothing new. I just can't bring myself to play a FPS with a gamepad. I mean, that's just WRONG!

Re:The thing is that it's true (1)

iocat (572367) | more than 6 years ago | (#19117395)

Halo wasn't revolutionary in any area, except having best in class controls, graphics, story, multiplayer, VO, weapons, level design, physics, etc.

No ONE element of Halo stands out against the competition, but Halo taken as a whole is a masterpiece, especially compared to what was available when it first shipped. Once that first game is the sweetness, people are into the franchise, and that's why we're talking about it still.

Not news (4, Insightful)

Turn-X Alphonse (789240) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116051)

Stuff like this belongs in drivel like "Hello" and over celebrity gossip magazines, NOT Slashdot.

It has no merit what so ever.

Lost in transaltion (4, Informative)

HappySqurriel (1010623) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116053)

This story is "old" (as in a couple of days) and from what I have seen the general consensus is that what Miyamoto said was poorly translated and taken out of context.

Essentially, when Miyamoto said he could "make Halo" what he meant was "He could make a game like Halo" ...

I could be wrong but I think Miyamoto was saying he makes the games he does because they're the kinds of games he wants to make; he is not influenced by the popularity of a genre or series to attempt to make games like them.

Frank Connor Missed the Point (5, Insightful)

Swordsmanus (921213) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116091)

If Miyamoto has heard Connor's "retort", I'm sure he laughed. Connor could be taken seriously if he said he was coming up with something new and fun that will sell just as well as Halo. Instead he said he intends to make something that he already knows people want, by implying he's going to copy Miyamoto's years-old idea, Super Mario Bros. Given the sales of New Super Mario Bros., I don't blame him. But he reaffirmed Miaymoto's comment, not countered it.

Re:Frank Connor Missed the Point (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19116279)

> implying he's going to copy Miyamoto's years-old idea, Super Mario Bros

That's okay, it seems to work for Miyamoto too.

Re:Frank Connor Missed the Point (1)

Swordsmanus (921213) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116421)

Who doesn't make sequels? Even Katamari Damacy has a sequel. The difference is that Miyamoto takes chances here and there. Sometimes his new stuff is successful. Sometimes it isn't. He doesn't only reiterate game designs to make $$.

This is irrelevant... (4, Insightful)

creimer (824291) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116123)

Bungie was compromised after Microsoft bought it out. Microsoft's design theory is to copy everyone else, re-package it as something brand new, and get it right in version three.

Is Halo really that great? (3, Interesting)

Anarchysoft (1100393) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116181)

I played Halo and Halo 2 to completion and I don't understand why they are held up as excellent FPS games. They were good, but I don't recall a single innovation and even where they were good, they were not great. The original Half-life, FarCry, Deus Ex and several others were much better. That's totally just an opinion and it doesn't mean much, but I'd like to know why Halo is considered by a fairly large population to be a great game. Perhaps more useful: would they have been considered great games if they were released on the PC but not the XBox?

Re:Is Halo really that great? (1)

revlayle (964221) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116301)

I played them also, good games, but not breakthrough games, What I find MORE interesting about Halo is the whole back story and universe continuity that has been created for Halo. While the games are OK to play, I find reading about the fictional universe even more interesting.

Re:Is Halo really that great? (1)

Anarchysoft (1100393) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116351)

What I find MORE interesting about Halo is the whole back story and universe continuity that has been created for Halo. While the games are OK to play, I find reading about the fictional universe even more interesting.
Is there a book/comic/fan fiction series related to this or do you mean the in game storyline?

Re:Is Halo really that great? (1)

revlayle (964221) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116835)

Both.... but there are, IIRC, three books and a graphic novel (a series of short stories by different writes/artists, published by Marvel, again IIRC). A lot of information online has been gathered around Halo's "mythos" (a lot can be found on Wikipedia as a quick example, and is rather interesting to read, official or not). Thee may be more, but I am just getting into it myself, so I am not the best authority on this (yet).

Re:Is Halo really that great? (2, Informative)

FerociousFerret (533780) | more than 6 years ago | (#19117263)

And if you like the Halo story, you might also like the Marathon story as well. Although I believe Bungie said that Halo was in a different universe than Marathon, it was originally believed that Halo was a prequel to Marathon that happened during a hole in the timeline between "Pathways into Darkness" and "Marathon". [bungie.org]

Marathon's Story [bungie.org]
Marathon Trilogy [wikipedia.org]
Marathon / Halo link [bungie.org]

Of course, there are those that don't think the games are tied together at all [bungie.org]

Re:Is Halo really that great? (1)

C0rinthian (770164) | more than 6 years ago | (#19117079)

Bungie is known for generating a significant amount of backstory to their games, and if you pay attention while playing Halo there are a lot of details hinting at that backstory. There are novels and such that explore the setting more than the games do, and are considered 'canon'.

For in-depth story analysis and speculation, check out halo.bungie.org

Re:Is Halo really that great? (1)

Canthros (5769) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116435)

Halo, at least, is very polished. The interface is a bit stripped down and the controls simplified to facilitate playing on a console, but the gameplay is very smooth and well-refined, at least in the single player portion. The story was nice (not great, but nice), the graphics were very good for the day, and the gameplay, as I said, very polished and refined. Because it was designed for a console, the interface and interaction are simpler, and the depth of gameplay doesn't stack up well in my memory to, say, Unreal Tournament, which preceded it by about two years. Still, very well polished.

Re:Is Halo really that great? (1)

toleraen (831634) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116663)

Because it was designed for a console

Halo was designed for the PC. It was dumbed down to console level when MS purchased Bungie.

Re:Is Halo really that great? (1)

C0rinthian (770164) | more than 6 years ago | (#19117159)

re-designed, not dumbed down. Halo started out as a RTS/3rd person shooter for the mac. It was fundamentally changed at least twice in it's twisted development cycle. (From 3rd to 1st person, then from desktop to console)

Re:Is Halo really that great? (1)

wilgibson (933961) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116465)

IMHO there are 2 reasons I think Halo became as big as it is today...

1. Microsoft hyped it beyond any and all imagination when the first one was coming out.
2. Before Halo there wasn't a single decent FPS on a console, just a whole bunch of shitty ports of PC FPS games.

I honestly couldn't give a rats ass about Halo or Bungie for that matter. I never found Halo to be interesting, and I've always had a decent PC to play my FPS games on. I played Halo on PC and it was tolerable. I still play the original Call of Duty and would much rather play that over Halo any day.

Re:Is Halo really that great? (5, Insightful)

SetupWeasel (54062) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116619)

2. Before Halo there wasn't a single decent FPS on a console, just a whole bunch of shitty ports of PC FPS games.

Except, of course, for Goldeneye.

Re:Is Halo really that great? (1, Interesting)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 6 years ago | (#19117775)

An still, to this day, I don't understand why people like playing Goldeneye or any other console FPS. The control you get with the gamepad is about 1000 times worse then what you get with a keyboard and mouse to the point where I find it completely frustrating and, and am unable to play almost all console FPS games. The only exception is Metroid. This is because although it is a FPS, it isn't about twitch reflexes, and being able to aim perfectly. My only real complaint about Metroid is that there's too much jumping. Which is really hard in a game where you can't see your feet.

Re:Is Halo really that great? (1)

7Prime (871679) | more than 6 years ago | (#19117901)

I knew somone was going to say that. But in the PC world, Goldeneye doesn't count because it doesn't use double input style control (keyboard/mouse or dual analog), which allows for similtaneous movement and aiming. Basically, anything, after Quake, which uses the older control scheme is regarded as highly inferior and not able to accomidate more advanced styles of play.

Basically, GoldenEye, while extremely popular among console gamers, was very frowned upon by hardcore PC gamers. As a console gamer myself, this is my biased perspective, but that's the impression that I've gotten, and I can kinda understand it, a bit.

Re:Is Halo really that great? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19116647)

You're forgetting goldeneye, but i still agree with the main points you're making.

Re:Is Halo really that great? (1)

moderatorrater (1095745) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116493)

One of the big reasons that I love Halo 2 is that it's simple and, imho, has the best co-op campaign among FPS's. When I play with my friends or girlfriend, none of us want to do a deathmatch, we want to work together, and Halo does that very well.

Re:Is Halo really that great? (3, Insightful)

Notquitecajun (1073646) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116513)

For me, it's the multiplayer. It's easier to get some of your boys and their XBox's together on 2-3 tv's than a LAN party where you have to tote around a PC or worry over a laptop. Setup and takedown are faster on a console.

Gameplay is relatively easy, cheating is minimal, and there are TONS of customizable options to set up whatever competition you want to do easily (the BIGGEST bonus).

Re:Is Halo really that great? (1)

cowscows (103644) | more than 6 years ago | (#19117781)

You're right on that. Besides being one of the first console FPS that was comfortably playable, it was one of the first console games with a really well designed and integrated online play. That aspect was mostly old news to much of the PC gaming crowd, but it was definitely a big step for consoles.

Re:Is Halo really that great? (5, Insightful)

Knuckles (8964) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116857)

but I'd like to know why Halo is considered by a fairly large population to be a great game

It came out for the Xbox and found a large population of teens that never had played another FPS.

Re:Is Halo really that great? (1, Insightful)

grumbel (592662) | more than 6 years ago | (#19117357)

Halo added the automatic recharging shild to the FPS genre, so no more collecting health packs, it also added a realistic limit on how many weapons you can carry, vehicles and separate buttons for melee attacks and grenades, thus making them actually usable instead of rotting in your inventory as in so many games before. It also was also a very important title for console network gaming and had a nice original setting (no WWII, no hell with monster). You might not like Halo and I am not a big fan of it either, but it did add plenty to the FPS genre, some of which are considered standard elements today, which they however weren't back then when Halo was released.

Compared to HalfLife2 I found Halo pretty original and innovative, compared to the likes of DeusEx, OperationFlashpoint, Riddick or HalfLife1 not so much, but its still far from the shovelware WWII shooter.

Re:Is Halo really that great? (1)

p4rri11iz3r (1084543) | more than 6 years ago | (#19117995)

Compared to HalfLife2 I found Halo pretty original and innovative

Are you kidding me? Lets take a look at the facts:

Level Design:
Halo - make one room, repeat 500 times (e.g. Library) or Go all the way into some building, then have to come back out the same way, with new, re-spawned enemies.
Half Life 2 - Each level is unique, differant, and has its own feel. Even though the game was fairly linear, techniques were used so it didn't feel like it.

Weapons:
Halo - Same old boring pistol, generic machine gun, rocket laucner, plasma gun formula thats been done 1,000,000 times before.
Half Life 2 - New and unique weapons like the crowbar, gravity gun, crossbow, laser-guided rocket launcher (first time this was ever done).

Graphics:
Half-Life 2 > Halo 2 > Halo

Story:
Halo - Aliens invade earth, its up to one man to save earth. Yeah, that's original.
Half-Life 2 - Aliens invade earth, actually win, and you are now held up as the leader of the resistance. A nice twist on an old classic.

Storytelling:
Halo - cinematics
Half-Life 2 - In game dialogue and active storytelling

I've played Halo, Half-Life, and Half-Life2 all the way through on the PC. Halo doesn't even hold a candle to the Half-Life series. Not. Even. Close. Halo is just to bland and generic. I feel like I've played this game before... Half-Life 2 innovated and brought some cool new toys to the table and made some awesome levels.

And as for multiplayer, using the gravity gun to kill someone with a crap-stained toilet is single-handedly the most l33t way to hand someone their ass.

It's sad that you think Halo is "original." There are some truly great FPS games out there, and you won't find them on the X-Box. Half-Life 2 and Far Cry both rocked my world. And when it comes to Balls-to-the-walls action, throw as many enemies at you as your processor can handle, screw-the-storyline, snappy one-liners games, Serious Sam: The Second Encounter delivers and then some. One of the most underrated games of all time.

Re:Is Halo really that great? (0, Flamebait)

morari (1080535) | more than 6 years ago | (#19118011)

They weren't that great. It's just an example of some watered down console FPS pleasing all the buzzed frat-boys playing Xbox. They've never played any of those innovative (or even any of the older, must-tries) of the genre, so the stale animations, fuzzy textures, cliche story and annoying enemies just impressed them all so much.

What's the big deal? (2, Insightful)

mjbinon (1099409) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116259)

What did he say that's supposedly so controversial? He spoke the truth, nothing more.

All but the most diehard fanboys will admit that Halo was never anything truly revolutionary, but rather just a so-so generic sci-fi FPS that just happened to come out for hotly hyped up-and-coming new console. The first game suffered from HORRIBLE interior design and bland gameplay, and the second had a nearly-universally decried terrible ending.

If not for the fact that the Halo series succeeded so well in making the first enjoyable console FPS multiplayer experience since Goldeneye, complete with fairly (compared to some games) balanced multiplay, and the fortunate happenstance of colliding with the excellent idea that was XboxLive!, the games would have been destined to be little more than a footnote in gaming history, rather than the sales juggernaut into which obscenity-screaming 12-year old gamers have turned it.

Personally, I'd rather play Half-Life 2 or its multiplayer components on my PC, but that's just me, and I don't begrudge Halo for the successful niche it has carved for itself.

abuse? (1)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116261)

Interesting comments from Bungie, considering one of their early projects was porting the side-scrolling platform game Abuse [wikipedia.org] to the Mac...

Re:abuse? (1)

GeekDork (194851) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116797)

one of [Bungie's] early projects was porting the side-scrolling platform game Abuse to the Mac...

Now that would make for one badass Mario!

Re:abuse? (1)

nomadic (141991) | more than 6 years ago | (#19117421)

Interesting comments from Bungie, considering one of their early projects was porting the side-scrolling platform game Abuse [wikipedia.org] to the Mac...

Lord knows why. I found Abuse to be the most mindnumbingly boring game I've ever played. And I had an Atari 2600.

Argument That Will Never End (3, Insightful)

_bug_ (112702) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116281)

Halo is like the Porsche 911 [wikipedia.org]. The next incarnation will feature a few new tricks to give the die-hards something to talk about, but to the average Joe they just look like the same thing over and over. If you've played one Halo you know what the experience is going to be like for all the others. It's just being tweaked a bit here and there to improve the performance.

Bungie is the Porsche of the gaming world.

Miyamoto seems to look for something new with each game. Trying to find new ways to engage the user. He comes at each one with a flair and a passion. He's not doing the same thing over and over. Some games work. Some don't. But you do have a wide variety of games to choose from that caters to your particular interests.

Miyamoto (Nintendo) is the Ferrari of the gaming world.

Rounding out the analogy Blizzard is the TVR [wikipedia.org] of the gaming world. Love-it or hate-it design, completely insane and riddled with problems, yet you can't help but keep playing.

Re:Argument That Will Never End (1)

illegalcortex (1007791) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116553)

I think you have a very poor analogy on your hands. Cars are as different from video games as they are from movies and books.

It's even less appropriate considering we've been producing cars, books and movies a lot longer than video games. Repetition with slight variation is not enough to make a "great" game this stage.

Re:Argument That Will Never End (3, Insightful)

moderatorrater (1095745) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116579)

Miyamoto is Da Vinci to Bungie's Bob Ross - both do excellent work, and while Bungie has much better hair, Miyamoto's work is more varied.

Re:Argument That Will Never End (1)

aichpvee (631243) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116725)

Bungie is more like a guy doing paint-by-numbers on cable access. I'd say either a valve or an Epic are the Bob Ross of the industry. They both do pretty damn nice work within established bounds but show the watchers at home how to do it themselves, at least enough to make a mess in the living room.

Re:Argument That Will Never End (1)

C0rinthian (770164) | more than 6 years ago | (#19117247)

Learn some history. Marathon did first on Mac what Half-Life did on PC, (Story driven FPS) and did it very well.

Re:Argument That Will Never End (2, Informative)

aichpvee (631243) | more than 6 years ago | (#19117633)

A) We're talking modern Bungie. That being "microsoft presents Bungie." I would have thought anyone who had played Marathon or Myth and then Halo would have realized that the Bungie of old is long gone.

B) I was referring to the Bob Ross analogy. You would know this if you...

C) Learn to read.

Who said you can't like Marathon and respect Bungie's history but hate what they've become? Read just about any of my comments on the topic of Bungie and you'll see a healthy respect for their previous work, even if it wasn't always the most revolutionary it was still pretty good and introduced new ideas where it could.

For what it's worth I don't particularly like half-life either, and I hate valve as a company. Their coding quality is shit (there's a reason their games get hacked so much), their company ethic (getting owned for running beta outlook is ridiculous, as is putting out a game every 7 years and living off the poorly compensated work of volunteers), and Gabe Newell is a fucking idiot.

That being said, and boring story aside, half-life provided an excellent platform for modding, the Worldcraft editor valve bought was also excellent in the pre-Unreal2 world, the vanilla deathmatch was well balanced one-on-one (as in I'm 2-0 life time at it, so it must be awesome!), and TFC owned.

And I realize that you can read and just jumped to a conclusion.

Re:Argument That Will Never End (1)

Sciros (986030) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116671)

Nah bro TEAM NINJA (Ninja Gaiden, DOA) is the TVR of the gaming world. Blizzard is so popular, it's more like Toyota.

hrm.. (1)

vga_init (589198) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116309)

It sounds like that he's really trying to say is that he doesn't want to change his style just to please a particular audience. It doesn't sound to me like he's saying Halo is poorly made or easy to pull off, but that he won't make games like that because it's not his thing.

They all have good points (4, Interesting)

orclevegam (940336) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116437)

All the game companies are good at certain things, it's just that the markets are reflective of what each company is basing their priorities on.

Microsoft was intialy trying to make the X-Box into a platform to try to force the convergence of console and PC gaming. Later when it became clear that they were really on to something with X-Box Live, they switched tactics and focused on providing top shelf online content (although the latest half hearted attempt to bring Live to Vista bodes poorly for Microsofts learning abilities).

Sony on the other hand has always been focused primarily on graphics performance. Yes they had some good games, but nothing ever revolutionary, but pretty and often fun. The primary hallmark of the Playstation platform is a shotgun approach to game development. They make as many games as they can, throw them out there and see what sticks. This approach can lead to some very good games, but also leads to some very very bad games. The primary failing of Sony is in not providing any new innovation in the latest generation of consoles. The Playstation 3 was positioned to be a multimedia convergence device, but so far the market for said devices has proved to be rather poor, and what little there is is primarily dominated by inexpensive PCs. The good news for Sony is that historically the Playstation consoles really only hit their stride after a year or two on the market, so it has the potential to outperform the competition in terms of raw power. There is also some rumbling of Sony taking online content more seriously, although whether or not they can provide a credible challenge to Live remains to be seen.

The last player on the market, and the most relevant to this article is Nintendo. Nintendo realized a long time ago that fun games, and innovative systems will out sell fancy graphics. A clear cut example of this is the origional Gameboy versus the graphically superior Gamegear. The Gamegear had a color screen and more processing power, but was more expensive, slightly bulkier, and was much more demanding on power (which resulted in it eating batteries left and right, I should know, I had one). Nintendo has always been middle of the road in terms of graphics and processing power, but what has set them aside has traditionally been their willingness to try new and innovative controls and games. Sometimes this has hurt them, and they have made more than a few products that failed spectactularly (Virtualboy anyone?), but on the other hand they have released a number of products that show some genuine innovation. I think the relative failure of the Gamecube served as a wakeup call to Nintendo, they realized that they weren't able to compete on graphics and if they were going to survive they needed to embrace the creative aspects of their game and console design more fully (prior to the DS and Wii most Nintendo products were less daring in departure from the norm of console gaming). It will be interesting to see if Nintendo can pull off the online portion of the gaming puzzle (which will be critical for all three consoles) sufficiently to keep Wii ahead of X-Box 360 and Playstation 3, of if they will fumble it and have to settle for second place.

Re:They all have good points (1)

mjbinon (1099409) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116795)

The last player on the market, and the most relevant to this article is Nintendo.
"The last player on the market"?

In what crazy Bizarro-world do you "no live"? Seriously though, I get what you meant there, but your wording could easily be taken another way.

What really kept the Game Gear (I had one too) back, though, was less the battery consumption and weight than it was the fact that with the exception of Defenders of Oasis and Sonic(not a fan myself, but I acknowledge its popularity) there were no good games for it, a problem the Game Boy NEVER suffered from.

Re:They all have good points (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19117505)

Holy shit are you dumb.

lol bungie (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19116463)

Let's make a third person shooter which has shitty maps, lame weapons but lots of fluff.
At least Miyamoto makes no bones about the games he creates and the fact that his games are fun. Bungie's just beating a dead horse that passed away back in nineties. Plus id did it better than Bungie.

"Rather touchy aren't they" (4, Insightful)

u-bend (1095729) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116527)

Wow, he really comes off as downright peevish, no? I mean, even if Miyamoto's comment wasn't out of context, and he meant exactly what he said, the response turns out feeling really childish. Get a grip, dude. Your game's *really* popular. Just because somebody else says he wouldn't make it, doesn't mean you need to get your panties in a twist. And then, as a previous poster says, he basically affirms Miyamoto by saying he's going to copy an old design. Huh. I guess his PR fluffer didn't have him ready.

Re:"Rather touchy aren't they" (1)

nomadic (141991) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116871)

Wow, he really comes off as downright peevish, no?

Not really. If you read the response in the context of the entire interview it's not really that big a deal. Furthermore it's not like he came out with it on his own, he was specifically asked for his response to Miyamoto's words.

Re:"Rather touchy aren't they" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19117909)

Dude's probably touchy about being stuck making Halo sequels and spin-offs for as long as he works for Microsoft.

Re:"Rather touchy aren't they" (2, Insightful)

Osty (16825) | more than 6 years ago | (#19118099)

Wow, he really comes off as downright peevish, no? I mean, even if Miyamoto's comment wasn't out of context, and he meant exactly what he said, the response turns out feeling really childish.

Holy crap! It was a joke, people. A joke! He was essentially saying that they don't care, and was having a little bit of fun with it, having a little bit of fun with people like you who take this crap so seriously.

Frankie is the guy who draws Mister Chief [wikipedia.org] as a parody of Master Chief. He's the guy who usually does the weekly updates at Bungie.net [bungie.net], in which he takes sarcastic potshots at Bungie, community members, etc. along with providing serious news about what's going on at Bungie.

In short, if you're complaining that Frankie came off as "childish" in this interview, you totally missed the point. Moreover, you probably ought to take a close look at yourself, if your reaction to a little fun poke at Potatamoto [vgcats.com] is to think the guy making the joke is childish and peevish.

Different strokes for different folks (5, Funny)

aztektum (170569) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116543)

I would imagine Miyamoto's games do appeal to a more broad audience. I have a hard time imagining my parents playing Halo for any period of time. However, they did sit and take a stab at Mario back when I got my NES (which I still have).

Bungie's response sounds like, "Oh yeah well... You're a poopy head!" Given cultural differences and the possibility of a hokey translation, I wouldn't take this as a slam. Just another persons opinion.

Sounds like Bungie has been an MS company for too long. If it's not the MS way, it's wrong, you suck. Look out, flying chair!

Re:Different strokes for different folks (1)

Tatisimo (1061320) | more than 6 years ago | (#19117761)

If it's not the MS way, it's wrong, you suck. Look out, flying chair!

Don't forget that if MS could, they'd have bought Nintendo a long time ago, and Miyamoto would be working with Bungie's designers to come up with an uber-game about Alien Plumbers shooting psychedelic bunnies.

Re:Different strokes for different folks (1)

MS-06FZ (832329) | more than 6 years ago | (#19117881)

Bungie's response sounds like, "Oh yeah well... You're a poopy head!" Given cultural differences and the possibility of a hokey translation, I wouldn't take this as a slam. Just another persons opinion.
Well, to Bungie, Halo isn't just some 3-D FPS out there, a game that happens to sell quite well. They made it - and it's done damn well. Design decisions that may seem unimportant to outsiders are issues that must have been the subject of a lot of careful consideration within the development group. For someone to write all that off as pandering to the audience is a bit of an insult.

Personally, I think Miyamoto was just saying that he's not out to specifically create popular games - games that sell large numbers. ("I mean, Led Zeppelin didn't write tunes everybody liked. They left that to the Bee Gees.") He's interested, I guess, in making games that interest him. The bit where he says "I could make Halo" is a bit confusing in a way - why the need to assert that? I think that might be a translation issue - something that just reads differently in English I'm guessing.

As for Bungie's challenge - I think it's a funny idea. I think to outsiders something like that could look like a bitter rivalry - and that could be unfortunate - but if the people involved look at it from a more light-hearted perspective something like that can be a lot of fun. Kind of like pro wrestling - the wrestlers probably don't really hate each other, but it's a bit more fun for everyone involved if they act as if they do - generates a lot of excitement, you know?

bias (1)

Gogo0 (877020) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116565)

Im sure that with all the rabid halo/anti-nintendo kids on the net, the bungie mario bros clone will be better than any mario game.
Mario is for kids, bungie games arent -and all that.

It also seems kind of unbalanced.
Miyamoto claiming he can make something like a complicated "next-gen" fps, and bungie guy claiming he can make something like an uncomplicated-by-design sidescroller that could be just as easily done on an NES.
yeah, i would take that challenge too.

Re:bias (1)

nomadic (141991) | more than 6 years ago | (#19116655)

Im sure that with all the rabid halo/anti-nintendo kids on the net,

Uhhh...huh? The pro-Nintendo crowd vastly outnumbers the anti-nintendo crowd on the net right now.

Wait a minute... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#19117041)

So Bungie jokingly takes Miyamoto's comment as being a shot at them, and then in joking response they imply they're going to make a Mario game? Isn't that just working against them? As in, Miyamoto's "too good" to make a Halo clone but Bungie's not "too good" to make a Mario clone?

So bungie owned themselves... (4, Funny)

Rakishi (759894) | more than 6 years ago | (#19117199)

I mean how else can you take that comment except that Bungie owned themselves. They essentially admitted that the best they could do as a response is to remake a 20 (?) year old game that's been remade more time than I could even count. I mean who in god's name responds to being called unoriginal by saying they will do something unoriginal.

I mean it's like watching some idiot try to debate online.

Re:So bungie owned themselves... (1)

penp (1072374) | more than 6 years ago | (#19117391)

like how we're all contributing to this argument ourselves? oh wait... shit.

Miyamoto you wuss (4, Funny)

Sciros (986030) | more than 6 years ago | (#19117333)

Psh! *I* can make Halo. I can probably make Halo with an added-in gatling gun that fires ninja bees.

Miyamoto is talking small potatoes here with his "I can make Halo" boast. Miyamoto can probably make Ocarina of Time if he tries hard enough.

Christ. (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 6 years ago | (#19117351)

I'm no fanboy (owned consoles from multiple companies each generation) but I think the Bungie team is getting their panties in a bunch over nothing.

Miyamoto never said Halo was bad, nor did he ever say that it wasn't a great game. He simply said that he could have made it, but chose not to. He wasn't necessarily refering to Halo SPECIFICALLY, what (IMHO) he meant was he makes his games the way that he thinks they should be made, which is not always based on what the public wants or thinks they want. He was merely using the Halo franchise as an example due to the fact that Halo 3 could be a steamy pile of crap and people will still buy it simply because of the name, if for nothing else.

I read this as.. (3, Funny)

JustNiz (692889) | more than 6 years ago | (#19117473)

I read this as.. Bungle vs Miamoto.

I hope Zippy and George get to kick some ass too.

Any Brits will know what I'm talking about.

Can anyone really make Halo? (2, Interesting)

MaWeiTao (908546) | more than 6 years ago | (#19117825)

I completely understand both Nintendo and Bungie's position. They're in the business of selling games and they need to come off as confident about what they do. Some of these guys have too big an ego and deserve to be taken down a few notches, but the fact remains that they do need to convey a certain level of confidence.

I'll start by pointing out that I'd choose almost any game Nintendo has produced over Halo or anything else Bungie has developed. That said, I don't think Nintendo is the pinnacle of innovation like some incessantly claim. I like Nintendo's games not because they're innovative but because they're fun as hell. Nintendo knows what's fun almost better than anyone else. They know how to make a game that's balanced and engaging.

But to call their games innovative is a stretch. The DS and Wii both have unique control devices, and I agree that some level of innovation was involved. However, I see both more as evolutions of the mouse and I think many of the games available for those platforms reflect that. Many of these feel like glorified Flash games.

In fact, one of the reasons I like Nintendo is because of a sense of familiarity. Super Mario Bros, Mario Kart, Pokemon, etc don't really provide any innovation over past games, but I like that. I know what to expect and I know it's going to be good. If we're going to start looking at innovative games I think the best console to look at is the PS2. That system has countless innovative games some of which have even spurred the development of new genres.

I think this is an important point because ultimately the implication behind Miyamoto's comment is that Halo is not innovative; it's a game anyone could make if they felt like it. Well, anyone could make that argument about anything Nintendo has made. Developing a good FPS isn't something that can just be cobbled together on a whim. Hell, Nintendo didn't even develop their own FPS, Metroid Prime. They had Retro Studios develop that game. So apparently, for one reason or another, they couldn't do it themselves even if they wanted to.

I myself don't think Halo is anything special, in terms of gameplay anyway. But I will give them credit where it's due. One thing they did well is presentation. The game is well-paced and presents a story that's involving. And it provides a pleasant contrast to most other FPSs which are mono-chromatic and bland, at least visually. Bungie offered an FPS that didn't involve blasting demons, gang members or nazis.

Perhaps anyone could make Halo, but the fact is that nobody else did. Just like anyone could make a Wiimote but nobody else did.

Um,but Halo isn't popular... (1)

kabocox (199019) | more than 6 years ago | (#19117913)

I've never been into FPS. I've played Doom, Quake, and a few others, and I came to the conclusion that I suck at them. Halo may be popular with some people, but that crowd isn't the target market for main course of Wii games. Um, is Halo popluar compared to any game played with a deck of cards? Not really. I like video games as much as the next person, but really I have to admit that games like Halo aren't popular. Games like Tetris are popular. My mom, my wife and my kids will all happily play tetris and actually like it. Will they all play Halo? Not really.

What's the next slashdot headline? Xbox losing the Japanese audience because it doesn't have Legend of Zelda, Final Fanstay or Dragon Quest?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...