Metal Gear Solid 4 post:#1067

[deepbrown]

Even though he is the lead designer/director I don't like it when 1 person gets to be called the "creator" of a game.

I actually really dislike the way gamers and the media latch on to certain people while many many key people behind the scenes get totally ignored. I guess people just need their heros to put on a pedestal.

I think in this respect it's very valid to call Kojima the creator of MGS, doesn't mean we're ignoring everyone else.

 

[deepbrown]

IGNinsider: Now that you're going into the final stretch of making the game, what do you think of your development experience so far? Are you still happy with your choice of PlayStation 2 for a development platform?

Hideo Kojima: It isn't the hardware's problem it is our problem, we will never find hardware that can live up to our expectations.

GS: Now, obviously I don't think you can say much about 4, but maybe we can talk a little bit generally about what excites you about the new hardware and gameplay potential of the new system?

HK: I said in the Sony conference I would like to concentrate on what we cannot see.

Well up to the days of today of game creating, if you...if I give an example of movie creation, it's like everyone was trying to raise...to make a better, prettier set. If you compete to make that set bigger or maybe prettier, it still doesn't make a difference. A set is a set. Meaning, you know, the back side is hollow, or it's all fake. For instance, if you were to create a fake jungle, the trees necessarily don't have to be trees. They could be plastic.

And with the next gen coming up, I think that most of the creators are thinking, oh, why don't we expand the size of the set or make the set prettier or concentrate on the things that the players can see. This direction will probably be the trend even in the next-gen console. And I think that no one can win or no one can make a breakthrough doing this. Therefore I would like to take a different approach, and that's why I said I want to concentrate on the things we cannot see.

So an example is, I do not want to create a set anymore. I want to create the environment from scratch. So if I were to continue the example of a jungle, I don't want to create fake jungles anymore. I would like to plant a tree, put a life-form in there, life program in there, so that in the game, when you water the plant, it will grow. If you don't water the plant, it will die. What I would like to present to the user is now play our hide-and-seek game in this real world, not the set jungle that everyone competes on.

It's also up to the user's decision on the next-gen games, meaning they have a decision to make, if the creators create something, a larger set, a larger jungle, but only it looks like a jungle, it looks like the real thing with the visual graphics enhanced. The users can select that "yes, I would like to play in the fake world or the set." Or, it could be smaller since we put the machine specs on concentrating on what we cannot see, the whole playground itself might get smaller, but we will create the world, and you can play in this real world. It will be a decision to use this, which you like to play.

So that is kind of the key concept to MGS for the hide and seek in the real world, which I think probably answers most of your questions.

GS: A piece of the larger puzzle?

HK: Yeah. Of course I'm not saying that I'm going to create jungles again. But I can say, if I created this real world, and it happens to be--so small garden or so--it looks so bad, even badder than a PS2 platform, then I might throw away this idea.

This makes sense - the Cell didn't allow this.

 

[Darkon]

This makes sense - the Cell didn't allow this.

How so ? It's more of ram issue like I said above.

Possibly, but Kojima likely knows what he's talking about and he didn't say RAM.

I remember saying three years ago that we wanted to create something revolutionary, but in reality we couldn't really do that because of the CPU. We're using the Cell engine to its limit., actually. Please don't get me wrong, I'm not criticizing the PS3 machine, it's just that we weren't really aware of what the full-spec PS3 offered - we were creating something we couldn't entirely see.

I don't think anyone can accurately second-guess the man. Someone needs to hit him up with an interview. After the game's release! A postmortem would go down well in the industry though, I think.

Well lets hope we get document of mgs4 then or that one of junkerHQ/kojima worshippers interview one of his programmers and perhaps I'll and up being right after all .

perhaps his team thought they could use cell for some heavy compression/decompression, although it doesn't matter what kind of compression cell is capable of if the RSX doesn't support it or am i wrong ?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

This makes sense - the Cell didn't allow this.

I can see the point, but that specific example sounds like he's focussing his energies in the wrong direction. I'm a big fan of raytracing, having spent years loving the idea of simulating light properly. It's great to be able to create an object made of 'glass' and have it refract naturally. But at the end of the day, if a fake looks as good and is ten times faster, there's nowt wrong with it. Why have a living jungle simulated for a shooter if the player's experience in that jungle environment spans all of a few hours? The jungle doesn't need a growth model for that. Instead a fakery set is used. I mean, if they wanted movies could plant a jungle and film it after a hundred years, but there's good reason why they don't...

So if he really was trying to add realism beyond what was necessary for the actual game, that's a bad call. If, let's say, Kojima has implemented a true, natural weathering simulation where textures are affected by weather and can erode over hundreds of years, but the game itself takes place over only a few days, he'd have been better off not bothering. If, on the other hand, he's talking more about AI and battlefield simulation, then that's probably fair enough. Though in that point, the AI demonstrated so far isn't particularly advanced, or at least certainly isn't realistic. Which I think is good for the game, but it's more of a 'faked set' than 'real life' sort of design.

 

[deepbrown]

How so ? It's more of ram issue like I said above.




Well lets hope we get document of mgs4 then or that one of junkerHQ/kojima worshippers interview one of his programmers and perhaps I'll and up being right after all .

How so? Creating a fully destructible world, and one that grows etc - is very CPU heavy. Of course Ram will be included, but saying the Cell didn't meet his expectations in this area is a valid interpretation.

 

[deepbrown]

I can see the point, but that specific example sounds like he's focussing his energies in the wrong direction. I'm a big fan of raytracing, having spent years loving the idea of simulating light properly. It's great to be able to create an object made of 'glass' and have it refract naturally. But at the end of the day, if a fake looks as good and is ten times faster, there's nowt wrong with it. Why have a living jungle simulated for a shooter if the player's experience in that jungle environment spans all of a few hours? The jungle doesn't need a growth model for that. Instead a fakery set is used. I mean, if they wanted movies could plant a jungle and film it after a hundred years, but there's good reason why they don't...

So if he really was trying to add realism beyond what was necessary for the actual game, that's a bad call. If, let's say, Kojima has implemented a true, natural weathering simulation where textures are affected by weather and can erode over hundreds of years, but the game itself takes place over only a few days, he'd have been better off not bothering. If, on the other hand, he's talking more about AI and battlefield simulation, then that's probably fair enough. Though in that point, the AI demonstrated so far isn't particularly advanced, or at least certainly isn't realistic. Which I think is good for the game, but it's more of a 'faked set' than 'real life' sort of design.

Perhaps this is the conclusion they met. But what I also think he's getting at is being able to create a set of rules etc that will build dynamic environments that stretch beyond linear gameplay. And an environment you can destroy, and will also grow back (MGS3 is incredibly linear, but gorgeous and exciting nonetheless) - this is somethig the Far Cry 2 team are doing and have achieved. I've yet to see what it really looks like on console platforms though. Far Cry 2 looks graphically great on the PC hardware they have set up, and though they say the console versions will have exactly the same gameplay and physics etc - they do say the graphics won't be as good.

If Kojima was trying to achieve similar, but felt the environments had to be too small, or the graphics reduced too much, then he would go for your fake propped up world.

Remember Kojima was thinking out of the box, and always has - hardware will always hold him back, as he said in reference to MGS3.

 

[Darkon]

...

 

[Darkon]

oh please, both cell and Xecpu could handle it, one better then the other of course.

If Kojima was trying to achieve similar, but felt the environments had to be too small, or the graphics reduced too much, then he would go for your fake propped up world.

MGS4 isn't a graphical showcase to begin with, and kojima wasn't aiming for mgs4 to be a graphical showcase what he wanted was, i quote myself yet again

Remember the interviews, kojima wanted the world to be ala Far Cry 2 and have complex artificial intelligence routines giving characters their own set of emotions and mood swings.

AI seems to be very, very good but not what he wanted, so far it seems the sound was the only thing where koji is pleased about.

If ubi can achieve the world he was aiming for or close to it then he has no excuses and it certainly isn't cells fault, ram sure, cell no, frankly i highly doubt mgs4 is cpu or gpu demanding i mean look at it ......1280x1080 res and 60fps would somewhat redeem mgs4 though.


Now i have to go give myself a whipping and 20 hail kojimas

 

[Neb]

...this is somethig the Far Cry 2 team are doing and have achieved. I've yet to see what it really looks like on console platforms though. Far Cry 2 looks graphically great on the PC hardware they have set up, and though they say the console versions will have exactly the same gameplay and physics etc - they do say the graphics won't be as good.

I am not sure if Far Cry 2 will implement the real-time vegetation regrow system (more offline sector?). I remember a video tech talk with a dev saying it wont be used ingame IIRC. Though that shouldn't be so hard on system or? I mean settlers 6 has visible accelerated 3D vegetation regrowth of quite high quality.

But looking at the early MGS4 videos he Kojima and team aimed quite high, Snake with 6000 vertices for mustache and 60000 vertices for hair.

 

[Neb]

...frankly i highly doubt mgs4 is cpu or gpu demanding i mean look at it ......1280x1080 res and 60fps would be somewhat redeem mgs4 though.

It uses quite some post-processing effects aswell as shadowing, high polgyon amounts etc. that at (if really 60fps and true 720p) then it is quite some rendering to do.

 

[deepbrown]

I am not sure if Far Cry 2 will implement the real-time vegetation regrow system (more offline sector?). I remember a video tech talk with a dev saying it wont be used ingame IIRC. Though that shouldn't be so hard on system or? I mean settlers 6 has visible accelerated 3D vegetation regrowth of quite high quality.

But looking at the early MGS4 videos he Kojima and team aimed quite high, Snake with 6000 vertices for mustache and 60000 vertices for hair.

Well I was at a demonstration and they showed off the ingame growing and said all platforms will have it ingame. And it looks very impressive.

 

[deepbrown]

oh please, both cell and Xecpu could handle it, one better then the other of course.



MGS4 isn't a graphical showcase to begin with, and kojima wasn't aiming for mgs4 to be a graphical showcase what he wanted was, i quote myself yet again



If ubi can achieve the world he was aiming for or close to it then he has no excuses and it certainly isn't cells fault, ram sure, cell no, frankly i highly doubt mgs4 is cpu or gpu demanding i mean look at it ......1280x1080 res and 60fps would somewhat redeem mgs4 though.


Now i have to go give myself a whipping and 20 hail kojimas

I don't think Ubi has achieved the world he's looking for and I don't think anyone will for a long time.

And I'm doubtful the console version will look as good as MGS4. MGS4 will be a graphical showpiece - I have no doubts that its varied locations will blow us away. I still don't understand how KP got a field of moving flowers, with particles and effected by character movements etc working on the PS2.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Both these examples are referencing games not out yet! Might be worth holding back until PS3 Far Cry and MGS are running on the same hardware to see what devs have achieved with it

 

[Darkon]

I don't think Ubi has achieved the world he's looking for and I don't think anyone will for a long time.

Close enough minus the AI, but FC 2 isn't out yet as shifty pointed out, so forget it.

I still don't understand how KP got a field of moving flowers, with particles and effected by character movements etc working on the PS2.

Meh, zone of the enders battle at Aumaan Crevasse, now there is something to be impressed about.

 

[deepbrown]

Close enough minus the AI, but FC 2 isn't out yet as shifty pointed out, so forget it.



Meh, zone of the enders battle at Aumaan Crevasse, now there is something to be impressed about.

I've experienceed a 30 minute walkthrough of Far Cry 2 and it's not what Kojima was talking about.

Meh? There's lots of impressive games out there. But, Meh for MGS3? I say Pft.

 

[Darkon]

I've experienceed a 30 minute walkthrough of Far Cry 2 and it's not what Kojima was talking about.

Meh? There's lots of impressive games out there. But, Meh for MGS3? I say Pft.

No, it was more or less, don't make me dig up old interviews.


mgs3 was somewhat impressive except for the part what you described

 

[deepbrown]

No, it was more or less, don't make me dig up old interviews.


mgs3 was somewhat impressive except for the part what you described

OK. MGS3 is kind of impressive except for the ending with a huge field of flowers reacting to every movement, with petals flying everywhere. Ook.

Replaying it now - it's not only impressive on PS2, it's giving "next-gen" games a run for their money in foliage interaction.

 

[Darkon]

OK. MGS3 is kind of impressive except for the ending with a huge field of flowers reacting to every movement, with petals flying everywhere. Ook.

Replaying it now - it's not only impressive on PS2, it's giving "next-gen" games a run for their money in foliage interaction.

I’ll give you a point on the petals but vegetation reacting to your movement was throughout the fucking game, further more that environment was one of the tiniest in the game and only had 2 characters + wildlife.

Now lets compare it to another area in the game, Syvatogornj East(sp?), that area is bigger then the flower field, the area itself is more varied/packed, has more wildlife , more characters (up to 7 guards on extreme ) and it rains there.

Can you see why I’m not impressed with the flower field part …

Seriosly play ZOE 2 now that was impressive

 

[deepbrown]

http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=9974&Itemid=59

About its story, which visits more locations and embraces more styles than any MGS to date. About the things it lets you play with, like a certain highly fashionable consumer gadget.

Exciting

He refers, of course, to the series’ notorious cinematics, which return here longer and wordier than ever. “When creating a title for PS3, as a final chapter in the Metal Gear saga, I asked myself what people would expect. Now, the easy answer is an upgrade, of graphics and sound for the new hardware. But that alone isn’t it. This is the last game in the franchise, so people want more than they’ve ever had before. They want volume.” But that, he adds, took so much time and capacity – his recent ‘too big for Blu-ray’ remark isn’t without merit – that he almost came to regret it.

MGS was what? 8 hours? MGS2...12hours? MGS3...16hours? MGS4....possibly longer.

It’s not just that the enemies in MGS4 are clever, able to deviate farther from patrol routes and form improvised search parties. Nor is it that the Gekkou, able to peek around potential hiding spots and drop grenades with tentacle probes, can reshape the battlefield in realtime. It’s that, as promised from day one, there are simply fewer places to hide. Yes, Snake Eater’s camouflage-scoring system has been transformed by Octocamo which, after a second’s pause, maps adjacent textures on to your sneaking suit. Yes, you can form brief alliances with warring soldiers by fighting alongside them or wearing their garb. And yes, the new barrel item lets you waddle and roll past, and even over, the average guard. But nothing, certainly not the safety of walls and shadows, feels assured.

This is certainly the best written preview I've read.

Oh and don't remember seeing this before:

 

[Nesh]

That was from one of the cut scenes

I’ll give you a point on the petals but vegetation reacting to your movement was throughout the fucking game, further more that environment was one of the tiniest in the game and only had 2 characters + wildlife.

Now lets compare it to another area in the game, Syvatogornj East(sp?), that area is bigger then the flower field, the area itself is more varied/packed, has more wildlife , more characters (up to 7 guards on extreme ) and it rains there.

Can you see why I’m not impressed with the flower field part …

Seriosly play ZOE 2 now that was impressive

The final battle was still impressive in its own way. The amount of flowers/vegetation was unbelievably a lot more and reacted much more realistically to your movements than the other occasions. I was impressed more than the other environments by it