I am 2 eagerly awaiting The Last of Us 2 and Horizon 2... :v

Neil Druckmann (Naughty Dog) has a neat interview with Hermen Hulst (Guerilla) on the origins and design process that went into creating Horizon Zero Dawn (with some commentary on The Last of Us' development and challenges).
Some great back and forth between two of the top people involved in some truly memorable and iconic experiences.

The whole interview is under 25 minutes, but I wish it was longer. :<

- No text -

"6 year dev cycle".

They got to take their time with this game, and it shows in every single way. When Neil Druckmann is saying "how did you make a game that looks this good!?" you've done something right :)

"6 year dev cycle".

They got to take their time with this game, and it shows in every single way. When Neil Druckmann is saying "how did you make a game that looks this good!?" you've done something right :)

Meanwhile Des2ny is coming a mere 3 years after its predecessor.

- No text -

"6 year dev cycle".

They got to take their time with this game, and it shows in every single way. When Neil Druckmann is saying "how did you make a game that looks this good!?" you've done something right :)

Meanwhile Des2ny is coming a mere 3 years after its predecessor.

Not to diminish the insane amount of work that goes into any AAA videogame, but sequels are usually built off work done for the previous game in many ways. They usually inherit much of the visual design, gameplay elements, world-building, etc. Much of the tech behind the game is already established. All of this stuff obviously gets tweaked or updated, but the team rarely needs to rebuild any of this stuff from scratch.

To be clear, I'm sure there are people at Bungie who would love to have more time to work on Des2ny, but 3 years is not a totally unreasonable amount of time to create a sequel.

To be clear, I'm sure there are people at Bungie who would love to have more time to work on Des2ny, but 3 years is not a totally unreasonable amount of time to create a sequel.

And, controversially, on the long side for the majority of mainstream franchises.

To be clear, I'm sure there are people at Bungie who would love to have more time to work on Des2ny, but 3 years is not a totally unreasonable amount of time to create a sequel.

And, controversially, on the long side for the majority of mainstream franchises.

But, pretty much par for the course for Bungie (with ODST being the outlier).

To be clear, I'm sure there are people at Bungie who would love to have more time to work on Des2ny, but 3 years is not a totally unreasonable amount of time to create a sequel.

And, controversially, on the long side for the majority of mainstream franchises.

Yup. Most franchise games are in the 1-2 year cycle. 1 year if it's a sports type game where it's really just a small feature add and a roster update most years, and a major overhaul every 2-4 years. Call of Duty is a 2 year dev cycle where two different devs work on a staggered schedule so a game can still come out every year.

BUT these games are all being made on existing game engine code that someone else already developed. If you're in-house dev-ing the engine (a'la bungie), you're adding a huge amount of work to your dev cycle well before most of the other team members ever get started. I think 3 years for Destiny 2 is pretty reasonable given where they're jumping off from. Destiny 1 had enough time, too, but because of mistakes made early on in the design of the engine (really the backend toolkit design) and disagreements with/lack of coherent direction, they backslid a lot. That aside, it sounds like they know where they're going with Des2ny and I expect it will far outshine the initial offering.

Back to the topic at hand, the 6 years for HZD could be a very long time if they used someone else's engine, or a very quick time if they made it all from scratch. I didn't watch the interview so I can't really say.

They made their own engine. Kojima is using it for Death Stranding.

To be clear, I'm sure there are people at Bungie who would love to have more time to work on Des2ny, but 3 years is not a totally unreasonable amount of time to create a sequel.

And, controversially, on the long side for the majority of mainstream franchises.

Yup. Most franchise games are in the 1-2 year cycle. 1 year if it's a sports type game where it's really just a small feature add and a roster update most years, and a major overhaul every 2-4 years. Call of Duty is a 2 year dev cycle where two different devs work on a staggered schedule so a game can still come out every year.

CoD switched to a three-year dev cycle after 2014, with Sledgehammer, Treyarch, and IW each putting out a three-year product since then (Advanced Warfare, Black Ops 3, and Infinite Warfare, respectively).
That said, Treyarch (as always) seems to be the only dev putting out a high-quality game each time, with Sledgehammer and IW putting out minor tweaks to each other's formula (and mediocre content as a result).

If you're in-house dev-ing the engine (a'la bungie), you're adding a huge amount of work to your dev cycle well before most of the other team members ever get started. I think 3 years for Destiny 2 is pretty reasonable given where they're jumping off from. Destiny 1 had enough time, too, but because of mistakes made early on in the design of the engine (really the backend toolkit design) and disagreements with/lack of coherent direction, they backslid a lot. That aside, it sounds like they know where they're going with Des2ny and I expect it will far outshine the initial offering.

Not to mention that they've had an entire game to see where their weaknesses have been, and what has worked to fix those weaknesses...

Back to the topic at hand, the 6 years for HZD could be a very long time if they used someone else's engine, or a very quick time if they made it all from scratch. I didn't watch the interview so I can't really say.

As CheapLEY pointed out, they use their own engine (Decima), though they did have to overhaul it because it was built with linear gameplay in mind.

Also, it's indeed the one being used by Kojima Productions in Death Stranding; there is a neat story to go with that too...

And what specifically led to the adoption of Guerrilla Games’ Engine?
Kojima: I visited many studios all around the world, meeting many great people. Guerrilla Games in Amsterdam: their technology was just a league ahead of everywhere else. Even though they have an open world they are able to render very rich scenes with many objects. As you know their upcoming game Horizon Zero Dawn, which is coming out in February, has an artistic sensibility, particularly with regards to the use of color, whereas we’re looking for a very photo-realistic sensibility.

Their engine is built for their purposes, for the game that they wanted to create, and as I said we wanted to create a game that even at the very base levels looks very different from that, so we needed to test it to see how far we could tune their engine to fit our purposes.
Usually when you go to use, buy or borrow an engine, someone will say, “Lend us your name,” or of course ask for payment. We had no contract with Guerrilla Games, but when we met them they suddenly gave us a box, a very pretty box. When we opened the box, there was a USB dongle inside that had the source code for the engine.

Keep in mind we had no contract or anything at this stage, yet still they handed over what was basically the crystallization of their efforts over many years. They simply said, “Mr. Kojima please use this engine,” and we thought these people are incredible.
There was one condition though, that Kojima Productions doesn’t just use the engine, but that we develop the engine together with Guerrilla Games, that it should be a collaborative effort. So we were really blown away by their stance on this and being so open with the engine and we thought “Wow, these are the people we have to work with.”

Not to diminish the insane amount of work that goes into any AAA videogame, but sequels are usually built off work done for the previous game in many ways. They usually inherit much of the visual design, gameplay elements, world-building, etc. Much of the tech behind the game is already established. All of this stuff obviously gets tweaked or updated, but the team rarely needs to rebuild any of this stuff from scratch.

How will we feel if Bungie reuses some of Destinys public hubs in Destiny 2?

We know for sure that "A Tower" will be invaded and blown up? We suspect that we will finally get to adventure in The City? There is the old rumor that some of the story will take place on Saturn or some of its satellites?
There will be new play spaces, but what if some of the new playspaces are accessible through the old public hubs we have been playing in for the last 3 years?

Example:

• To get to one new Cabal mission on Mars we land in the same public area from Destiny and travel to an area that had a previously closed/locked door, which now branches into a brand new unexplored playspace
  
  
• To get down to The City we have to start in the exact Tower from Destiny 1 and go through some previously locked gates or corridors to discover an elevator or lift (down).
  
  
• A mission send us back into the old Plaguelands area to re-investigate the ongoing SIVA outbreak/containment

Obviously some of the old playspaces might get prettied up for 4K/HDR(I would hope!), enlarged with new things added, or bombed out, grunged up, and destroyed for a new spin?

...and if not in D1, than in D2.

Keeping it in its current role is such a waste.

- No text -

...and if not in D1, than in D2.

Keeping it in its current role is such a waste.

I would actually be able to say "I've gone to the lighthouse" Then! I mean, it would be ash in my mouth, but I could say it!

It's a sequel and we are starting over. Everything should be brand new. Everything.

The old hubs exist in Destiny 1 should you care to revisit them.

...and if not in D1, than in D2.

Keeping it in its current role is such a waste.

You are operating under the assumption that the space only does its job if it is seen by everyone. By your logic, there is no place for secrets in games even though it greatly enhances the world. Just because you build something doesn't mean the player should see it.

In fact when you think about it secrets only do their job if the player hasn't found them all. The moment you have found everything, the limits of the game are known and the mystique is gone. This is also why tracking secrets or completion percentage is a flawed idea.

...and if not in D1, than in D2.

Keeping it in its current role is such a waste.

You are operating under the assumption that the space only does its job if it is seen by everyone. By your logic, there is no place for secrets in games even though it greatly enhances the world. Just because you build something doesn't mean the player should see it.

I think what he means is. If we keep the lighthouse for what it is (a surprise for people who achieved something great) for D2, it wouldn't have nearly the impact because it doesn't have the same surprise. If you instead migrate it to a social space and make another new "lighthouse" it would be better. This way, people who have gone to the lighthouse don't get the same ho-hum place and the people who haven't gone get to actually see the place (like me)

It's a sequel and we are starting over. Everything should be brand new. Everything.

It's a sequel and we have been set back. Lots of things will be brand new. The very definition of a sequel means everything won't be new.

The old hubs exist in Destiny 1 should you care to revisit them.

But they are still part of the game world, and now they have meaning behind them. If they fit and can be used, I say use them.

Don't get me wrong, I love new stuff but it's also a total waste to give a place meaning and then throw it to the curb.

It's a sequel and we are starting over. Everything should be brand new. Everything.

It's a sequel and we have been set back. Lots of things will be brand new. The very definition of a sequel means everything won't be new.

The old hubs exist in Destiny 1 should you care to revisit them.

But they are still part of the game world, and now they have meaning behind them. If they fit and can be used, I say use them.

Don't get me wrong, I love new stuff but it's also a total waste to give a place meaning and then throw it to the curb.

Depends on how they are used. If they are used as hubs again, that is, as landing places for missions, then yes, that would be a let down. Most of us have landed in these locations a gazillion times already. On the other hand, it would be nonsensical and disappointing if those places could not be revisited, if the story demands it. Such revisits, if handled well, could add a lot to the game for legacy Destiny players.

Imagine: you find a Vex time gate that transports you back to the breach the day you died. The cars aren't rusted. The civilians are still alive and scared. You fight a battle in which you know the outcome but now you know context--what specifically you're sacrificing yourself for and why.

...and if not in D1, than in D2.

Keeping it in its current role is such a waste.

I would actually be able to say "I've gone to the lighthouse" Then! I mean, it would be ash in my mouth, but I could say it!

This made me laugh, but it would. There's a reason my bungie.net status is what it is.

It's a sequel and we are starting over. Everything should be brand new. Everything.

It's a sequel and we have been set back. Lots of things will be brand new. The very definition of a sequel means everything won't be new.

The old hubs exist in Destiny 1 should you care to revisit them.

But they are still part of the game world, and now they have meaning behind them. If they fit and can be used, I say use them.

Don't get me wrong, I love new stuff but it's also a total waste to give a place meaning and then throw it to the curb.

Depends on how they are used. If they are used as hubs again, that is, as landing places for missions, then yes, that would be a let down. Most of us have landed in these locations a gazillion times already. On the other hand, it would be nonsensical and disappointing if those places could not be revisited, if the story demands it. Such revisits, if handled well, could add a lot to the game for legacy Destiny players.

Imagine: you find a Vex time gate that transports you back to the breach the day you died. The cars aren't rusted. The civilians are still alive and scared. You fight a battle in which you know the outcome but now you know context--what specifically you're sacrificing yourself for and why.

I totally agree, I don't think they should use them as is. But it would be amazing if they used them in a twisted version of what they are. I could just see myself doing a mission that is brand new, and in the middle of it you go through a section of one of those places. I would do a cartoon skid to a stop and be like "Oh shit, this is totally enter social space!"

I love things like that in sequels. Like in Borderlands two, you could totally go back and fight in the original town from borderlands one. I loved that! If you looked carefully you could totally have the nostalgic feel of what it looked like before.

It's a sequel and we are starting over. Everything should be brand new. Everything.

Nope.
In Borderlands 2, while 99% of everything in the world was brand new, you do get to go revisit the starting town from the first game near the end. Everything is changed, but the town's remains are still as you remember them, and they don't flat-out tell you that it's Firestone at first, so when it hits you, it's a great moment in the game, and one I appreciated.

I'd love to revisit some of the old patrol regions for story's sake (Ishtar Archive, Rasputin's Bunker).

Imagine, if the crazy plan that the Vanguard come up with is to send the Dreadnaught's Core straight at the Cabal's base of operations outside of the solar system, so you land back on the dreadnaught, and while it's the same spawn point as before, the area looks different (Guardians have cleared the place of Hive and Taken, and have probably been working to clear the debris around the Cabal ship). You go to reactivate the Cabal ship that had crash-landed on it, transfer the Dreadnaught's core (with the Cabal's bombs still strapped to it) to the ship, and escape while Cabal come in from the large hole, just like the Prosecutor defense chapter in Republic Commando. Or we could load up a ton of explosives or Guardians onto one of the Golden Age colony ships in the Cosmodrome and shoot up into space like the Sabre launch sequence in Reach... The ways that you could justify revisiting old areas is endless, and really only limited by the developers' imaginations...

The old hubs exist in Destiny 1 should you care to revisit them.

And some should exist in Destiny 2 to remind you of how much has changed...

And how much has changed is not limited to the passage of time in game, but possibly even the advances in their own development. Old playspaces as larger, contiguous playspaces.

And how much has changed is not limited to the passage of time in game, but possibly even the advances in their own development. Old playspaces as larger, contiguous playspaces.

One of the great examples of this is MGS4, when you go back to Shadow Moses, and you can visit much larger portions of the map without a loading screen or navigation limitations...

Podcast: The Voice of Horizon: Zero Dawn (link is to the Kotaku post, not the actual podcast)

Jason Schreier and Kirk Hamilton talk to Ashly Burch about working on Horizon in their latest episode of Splitscreen. Nothing groundbreaking, but still a neat look at the process of doing voice work in video games. The interview starts at about the 29 minute mark.

I don't know what happened, but this became a trend. Maybe starting with BL2, idk, but Ash does not have the range of guys like Nolan North or the other ubiquitous voice actors in games.

After LIS, when I play games she's in, I notice it's her immediately and become annoyed, which is weird since I never disliked her for Hey Ash Whatcha Playin or anything, or indeed at Chloe. *Shrug*

But thanks, I'll listen to this.

- No text -

I love going back to old areas and seeing how they've changed and/or I've changed.

Destiny missed the mark in a major way by setting this up with mission 1 (ends with ghost saying "we'll come back when you're ready" as a Kell emerges from the wall and you fly away... This would have been a great set-up for us coming back at level 20 with exotic gear for a major showdown with that Kell... But instead we come right back in mission 2. So dumb. I guess we were ready all along, eh ghostie? Laaaaame.

But for Destiny 2 to have us revisit a location like the tower, only to find it destroyed, that would be great. "Here's Rahool's corpse. Oh, look, his body has evidence of his engram forgery scheme where he spraypaints green engrams blue and blue engrams purple and then sells them."

I hope it's not re-used area models, but all new models of currently existing areas, just as small sections of larger levels.

And how much has changed is not limited to the passage of time in game, but possibly even the advances in their own development. Old playspaces as larger, contiguous playspaces.

One of the great examples of this is MGS4, when you go back to Shadow Moses, and you can visit much larger portions of the map without a loading screen or navigation limitations...

And guess what? The first three chapters were the best parts of the game. Shadow Moses revisited was when it started to go downhill.

And how much has changed is not limited to the passage of time in game, but possibly even the advances in their own development. Old playspaces as larger, contiguous playspaces.

One of the great examples of this is MGS4, when you go back to Shadow Moses, and you can visit much larger portions of the map without a loading screen or navigation limitations...

And guess what? The first three chapters were the best parts of the game. Shadow Moses revisited was when it started to go downhill.

And what does your picky opinion have to do with the fact that areas from the previous entries in a game can be greatly improved from a technological standpoint, while being presented in a different context?

I don't know what happened, but this became a trend. Maybe starting with BL2, idk, but Ash does not have the range of guys like Nolan North or the other ubiquitous voice actors in games.

After LIS, when I play games she's in, I notice it's her immediately and become annoyed, which is weird since I never disliked her for Hey Ash Whatcha Playin or anything, or indeed at Chloe. *Shrug*

But thanks, I'll listen to this.

I didn't even recognize her as Chloe until this podcast pointed it out.

I don't know what happened, but this became a trend. Maybe starting with BL2, idk, but Ash does not have the range of guys like Nolan North or the other ubiquitous voice actors in games.

After LIS, when I play games she's in, I notice it's her immediately and become annoyed, which is weird since I never disliked her for Hey Ash Whatcha Playin or anything, or indeed at Chloe. *Shrug*

But thanks, I'll listen to this.

I didn't even recognize her as Chloe until this podcast pointed it out.

I didn't either until it wasn't pointed out much later.
I mostly know her as Tiny Tina and Orendi (Battleborn) and I never watched anything else's time that she's in.
I think there's plenty of contrast between the roles that I do know her for, though...

In Fallout 4, the first time I heard Carla or whoever the wandering merchant was, I'm like "ahh fuck it's Chloe." Then I helped out the girl's brother in that one vault. Fucking Chloe. NBD. I'll play Rise of the Tomb Raider. Go to a bloody locker to find a lost remnant called Nadia. FUCKING CHLOE.

Seriously search Youtube for her characters. It's just growly Chloe voice or high pitched Chloe voice, or Chloe voice.

In Fallout 4, the first time I heard Carla or whoever the wandering merchant was, I'm like "ahh fuck it's Chloe." Then I helped out the girl's brother in that one vault. Fucking Chloe. NBD. I'll play Rise of the Tomb Raider. Go to a bloody locker to find a lost remnant called Nadia. FUCKING CHLOE.

Seriously search Youtube for her characters. It's just growly Chloe voice or high pitched Chloe voice, or Chloe voice.

That's crazy. I've played all of those games, and none of those characters made me think of her. Maybe she sounds like someone that you know personally, so it sticks out more... who knows?

And how much has changed is not limited to the passage of time in game, but possibly even the advances in their own development. Old playspaces as larger, contiguous playspaces.

One of the great examples of this is MGS4, when you go back to Shadow Moses, and you can visit much larger portions of the map without a loading screen or navigation limitations...

And guess what? The first three chapters were the best parts of the game. Shadow Moses revisited was when it started to go downhill.

And what does your picky opinion have to do with the fact that areas from the previous entries in a game can be greatly improved from a technological standpoint, while being presented in a different context?

I'm not arguing against that. I am arguing over including them in the first place. It's almost always better to go with new than to revisit or retread.

Perhaps for you. But the revisit was a quite popular aspect for my social circles.

Honestly, I would have to say I have your experience when it comes to Nolan North more often than I do with anybody else. Well, who is a VA by trade. "Celebrity" VA performances don't count.

Perhaps for you. But the revisit was a quite popular aspect for my social circles.

So was the retread that was the force awakens. Immediately afterward everybody loved it an found it fun. But as time has revealed, the film is not remembered so fondly anymore.

You need to be careful when leaning on nostalgia. You can revisit so long as you move forward and don't just do it for the reminder. It has to extend somehow.

So was the retread that was the force awakens. Immediately afterward everybody loved it an found it fun. But as time has revealed, the film is not remembered so fondly anymore.

Has it though? Opinion seems to be split about the same as it was at launch from what I've seen.

You need to be careful when leaning on nostalgia.

You need to be careful about using your anecdotal experiences as hard facts.

FWIW, I think you're right. Sure, seeing old areas could be neat. Not as neat as seeing brand new areas, though. I'd be pretty disappointed if they spent time remaking things I've seen instead of brand new areas I haven't thought of.

So was the retread that was the force awakens. Immediately afterward everybody loved it an found it fun. But as time has revealed, the film is not remembered so fondly anymore.

Has it though? Opinion seems to be split about the same as it was at launch from what I've seen.

You need to be careful when leaning on nostalgia.

You need to be careful about using your anecdotal experiences as hard facts.

FWIW, I think you're right. Sure, seeing old areas could be neat. Not as neat as seeing brand new areas, though. I'd be pretty disappointed if they spent time remaking things I've seen instead of brand new areas I haven't thought of.

That's really all I am saying.

Honestly, I would have to say I have your experience when it comes to Nolan North more often than I do with anybody else. Well, who is a VA by trade. "Celebrity" VA performances don't count.

As ubiquitous as Nolan North is, it was a huge surprise (for me, anyway) when it turned out that he voiced David in The Last of Us, since it sounds nothing like Nathan Drake (both Naughty Dog games):

Are you able to pick up on it?

Maybe it's part of my "everybody sounds the same to me" isms...

- No text -

- No text -