It is somewhat of a long read The quotes are from the official unveiling thread.
This thread is purely about innovating KZ and (FPS in general) and fixes/improvements that ought to be made. And graphics are just an all encompassing wrapper.
Let's look at breakdown of strengths and weaknesses (from the official thread):
What follows are responses:
On a paradigm shift in design to make it next gen worthy.
In an ever connected world this would bring something new that fundamentally changes Single Player Campaign experience. Destiny is doing something like this I believe but it is P v E.
So what do you think and what are your personal views on how the franchise can come into next gen without resorting to graphics or motion controls?
This thread is purely about innovating KZ and (FPS in general) and fixes/improvements that ought to be made. And graphics are just an all encompassing wrapper.
Let's look at breakdown of strengths and weaknesses (from the official thread):
Strengths:
- Gun physics (KZ2) and the consequent feel.
- Response time (KZ3)
- Pacing
- Atmosphere (KZ2)
- Boss fights (KZ2). Radec truly had a presence I have seldom seen in a video game. Almost like Vader.
- Animation (hit reaction from KZ2)
- Attention to detail (environmental and audio)
- Multiplayer (KZ2)
Weaknesses:
- Lack of identity (KZ3) and soul imbued by the art style, its consistency and atmosphere of KZ2.
- Poor plot/story that fails to leverage the a multi-faceted struggle that defines the KZ universe, making it feel absolutely flat.
- Highly annoying, crass and meathead of a partner.
- Banal script. Another true disservice given how mighty the opening speeches have been.
- A general disconnect between what is to be done and why. This general lack of impetus is tied to the plot, character, their motivations and moment to moment objectives.
- Multiplayer (KZ3) (Edit: While not like KZ2, it is not the worst either).
- Lacking any memorable character (KZ3).
Potential Addendum:
- RPG elements- Arsenal and player unlocks, upgrades and customization.
- Dialog choices (Alpha protocol, ME) allowing for players to personalize the story.
- Co-op
- Ability to play as both Helgan and Vektan (to build upon a multi faceted story and explore the impetus for the actions of both sides) in the same campaign (think Snatch).
What follows are responses:
Great post i-Lo.
Personally, the direction I believe GG is heading with Shadow Fall is against the grain. My personal belief is admittedly probably wrong because it is radical for a number of reasons:
1) Remember the rumors of a fantasy-RPG developed by Guerrilla Games? Well, where is it? Also, the Shadow Fall team added 25 new staff for its development. What for, and its possible that the additional team GAF speculated about for the fantasy-RPG wasn't a new team at all but simply new additions to the Shadow Fall team.
2) Wait a minute, your probably thinking. Killzone is a FPS. Where are you getting this fantasy-RPG idea from, is another question you might be thinking. Well, first of all, the game title raises suspicions. Why not go with Killzone4? The obvious answer is because its set 30 years in the future featuring a new main character and reasonably a new supporting cast. Killzone2, however was set in the near future as well and supporting a main character and new supporting cast as well, yet it followed the number sequence. Its not hard proof but the title change can indicate a change in philosophy.
3) I'm saying they are transitioning away from the FPS either, but adding fantasy-RPG elements to Shadow Fall to deepen the gameplay. Posters have been drawing comparisons to Mass Effect with Vetka City. I've noticed the same parallels. Surely traversal is possible as well. I mean, from what we saw in the demo, it is possible those blue "highways" cars are traveling on our ways to freely move from one semi-open area to another semi-open area with numerous NPCs to talk to, story events waiting to be triggered, and secrets to find through exploration.
4) The story also is begging for this type of game to be made and what better universe is this type of game better for other than Killzone? You are a secret operative Shadow Warrior whose sole job is maintaining the peace between both factions. Obviously you are welcome on either side and probably know each sides political leaders because you are the peace keeper. Killzone always had a moral ambiguity about it especially with the ending of 2 and I think this type of game can explore this moral ambiguity even deeper. Shadow Fall could based on premise fit the description of a fantasy-RPG with shooting elements.
So, what do y'all think. It's obviously crazy town but its fun to think about. Killzone has always had so much potential to be one of the greatest FPS of all-time but for some reason it always finds a way to come up short in the writing and story department. That is why its so much fun for me to speculate over because its one of those games where I feel like I could write a compelling story for and design a game around. So what you essentially read is the game I would develop if I was the creative director.
Anyway, I'm going to keep holding my breath for this to come true because I've argued before that I'm still skeptical that this demo is actually in the final game but that its a demo showing the game and story concept.
EDIT:
5) Furthermore, based on the premise of the story, there is little wiggle room for their being any other environments other than the Vetka City and Helgan City. Why would you need to venture planet Vetka when it is clear the Wall dividing the two factions is the center piece of Shadow Falls story? Also, what is the point of designing an entire city that spans for miles in every direction with detailed geometry and textures for if you can't explore it? For pretty scenery is the obvious answer, but from what we know about the story its based on these two factions in heavy political and societal conflict divided by a Wall I want to know where else could the story take us that is relevant to this story arch?
On a paradigm shift in design to make it next gen worthy.
Gaffers, I have thinking about how we can take cues from Burnout Paradise and Journey as well as Demon's Souls and Dark Souls. Each of the two share a common theme. Let me show you:
Burnout Paradise & Journey: Seamless online integration and transition.
Demon's Souls and Dark Souls: Invasions.
A buzzword: Coincidental timing
This idea can also be implemented into other games. For this to work, being connected online is a prerequisite.
Idea:
As aforementioned, assume you have a SP campaign where you get to play both the Vektan and Helgan side. Or it can be two equally deep separate campaigns. In any event, retreading some of the same location has to exist. Now, imagine you are progressing through the story and as is par for the course facing a multitude (as always) of enemies with your AI team-mates. Here is the fun twist- One of those adversaries is a real player who is in his/her part of the campaign where he/she is playing as the other side retreading the same ground. If the player of one side dies, the mission restarts for him/her (as usual) now with either a new human player as one of the opposing forces member if available or just another AI driven drone. For the player who wins the fire-fight, he/she simply proceeds onward with the campaign.
The storyline would have to share the same timeline from both sides (once again, think Snatch) and multiple points of intersection woven into the fabric of the campaign. I also mentioned earlier that the story should be a touch more personalized and that it could be achieved via providing dialogue options like ME/Alpha Protocol. This way non linearity can be attained even in terms of locations chosen for fire fights from time to time. This means differing points of intersections and grounds for retreading.
Rationale:
- Current AI in games is no substitute for human player. Introducing a human element in the opposing team without foreknowledge presents an element of surprise and enriches the experience.
- Given limited non-linearity in choosing locations (eg: Player chooses to battle on Front A, over B or C), it weaves an element of replayability in the campaign itself without resorting to "item collection"
- Given no one has done it in a FPS before, it would be a tremendous way to move the series forward, not unlike the games mentioned at the beginning of the post. It will be a generational shift that is beyond graphics.
Caveats:
- Given this system relies on "coincidental timing" the net code would have to be sublime to filter things through continual monitoring for the following and etc:
- Player skill balance. This is a variable that is dependent upon the choice of the difficulty of SP campaign.
- Load times would have to be "tweaked" in clever fashion enforce the "coincidental timing" for potential match ups.
- Map design and triggers to move to next sections have to be designed with this in mind.
- Given the complexity of numerous variables, this seamless transition/invasion would be limited to a few maps.
In effect, this is a combination of single player and playing multiplayer with one player and multiple bots at the same time.
Good list, but i would like to add KZ3 to the multiplayer as well, since it introduced the Operation Mode. Personally i really liked that and i hope to see it in Killzone 4 as well
What did people find wrong with the Warzone Mode in Killzone 3 by the way? Personally i enjoyed KZ2 multiplayer more than KZ3 multiplayer, but i think it was only because of the different maps and lack of portable spawnpoints.
When I read this post the first thing that sprang into my mind was, "this idea is genius." Seriously I mean that. It is in the same direction that I was working to as well, except using Dark and Demon's Souls as a better example than Mass Effect.
The gameplay idea is great and as you already mentioned has its challenges. However, Demon's and Dark Souls has proven its possible. Guerrilla Games should piggyback off that idea.
It works even better when the player is given multiple directions to take to parts of the city on the Vetkan side or Helghast side depending on simple choices the player makes. This idea is based off of Dark Souls. I love how the player can role-play by making simple choices. In addition, my initial comparison to Mass Effect works as well because I love the way Mass Effect handled the story and side missions. Your vision and mine are very similar, and thanks to James Sawyer Ford for some of his ideas because they helped clarify what I think Killzone should do, but more importantly how there are possible hints of this coming true.
Your idea of invasions is amazing, although that is something I don't think FPS developers would have even thought of because it hasn't even been tested in a genre, or hell even a game other than Demon's and Dark Souls.
Let's get even funkier. I believe Furst said they are going to use voice commands during the Jimmy Fallon interview when they were going over the controller specs. Now, imagine if the player who invades can act as the squad captain, directing enemy AI troops around using simple voice commands similar to SOCOM. If the player takes out the invader the enemy AI kind of loses its shit for a moment.
In an ever connected world this would bring something new that fundamentally changes Single Player Campaign experience. Destiny is doing something like this I believe but it is P v E.
So what do you think and what are your personal views on how the franchise can come into next gen without resorting to graphics or motion controls?