Slashdot Mirror


Bill Van Buren Talks Half-Life 2

node writes "Pixel Kill has up a summary of the talk Bill Van Buren recently gave in London on the development of Half-Life 2. It's an interesting insight into some of the design decisions that resulted in such a fantastic game, plus there are some bits about the direction they're taking the upcoming expansion."

22 of 295 comments (clear)

  1. Did you know? by JeiFuRi · · Score: 5, Funny

    Half Life 2 = 1 whole life

    1. Re:Did you know? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yes, and two albums by 50 Cent = 1 dollar.

    2. Re:Did you know? by mek2600 · · Score: 5, Funny

      You still overpayed.

  2. In case of Slashdotting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful


    Listening to Bill Van Buren talk about Half Life 2 I realised a key reason for its excellence - it shows you the story rather than telling you, just like a good author showing you rather than telling you scene details. it doesn't parade the story in a cut-scene but rather puts you right in the middle of it.

    It's little surprise only Valve have really gone down this path properly as it clearly took a lot of work making the "cut-scenes" unbreakable by the player. The powerful scripting system did often allow the designers to create scenes without the assistance of animators or story boards - they just threw together a rough cut with existing animations and rough voice over files (apparently Marc Laidlaw created some great ones, so much so they were tempted to leave in his Father Grigory).

    As you may be aware they spent a lot of time getting eyes right - how they focus and even how your eyelids dip when looking down. They also used real people as character references (I wish I had a photo of the slide, it was really interesting to see the comparisons), though they ended up stylising them somewhat as having them too realistic was "just creepy" as Bill put it. They're continuing to move forward in the area of facial animation and have even hired Bay Raitt who worked on Gollum's facial animation.

    Their character animation system is particularly impressive too - at one point Eli Vance was running, looking to the side and typing (!), all blended in real time. To create a scripted scene you kind of layer things (an eyebrow movement here, a wave there and so on) and adjust line graphs to alter movement intensity. It's all extremely intuitive looking stuff so the designers can more easily get on with making the game.

    One thing I didn't realise was that Half life 2 rewarded the inquisitive - players who looked around not only saw newspaper clippings and photos but in doing so triggered revealing comments from other characters.

    Someone pointed out how much time was spent alone in Half Life 2. Bill replied that they were aware of this and were working on keeping NPCs with you for more of the time in Aftermath. This brings with it the problem of ever-present characters becoming irritating, but they're aware of that and working to address it so they're helpful rather than annoying.

    One final interesting detail - they narrowed the field of view from 90 to 75 in Half Life 2, narrowing it even further to around 50 during the final cut-scene with Breen.

    It's pretty evident just how much attention Valve pay to details and how eager they are to keep moving forward with new ideas. Aftermath can't come soon enough.

    1. Re:In case of Slashdotting by Alpha+Soixante-Neuf · · Score: 5, Insightful

      All in all, what good is a game if you can't play it? At 50 bucks, and 4 to 5 hours just to install it, this game is a serious waste of money. And poorly designed to boot. The game was made for newer retail technology. If you don't want to pay for the newest gadgets then don't expect to play the newest games without complications. You can play it in two years and it'll still be a great game then. I don't have a super great computer but it didn't take 4 or 5 hours to load and played just fine (albeit at a fairly low res to keep the frame rate up, but that's exactly what I was expecting).

      --
      "The world is a tragedy to those who feel, and comedy to those who think." -- Shakespeare
    2. Re:In case of Slashdotting by Mac+Degger · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Such a low /.id and so little luck with a simple gfx driver install/uninstall?

      Frankly, I'm stunned. First off, the only reason your install could possibly have taken so long was if you paid Valve on the day of release and tried to autheticate and download whilst half the world was doing the same. A single day of waiting (or buying retail, which meant a disk install which /can not/ take hours) and you'd've had no problems.
      And for all the idiots shouting 'yeah well, Valve should have expected that! I( had to wait hours on release day!': you should have expected that. Whining about it is like me whouting 'I wanna million dollars'; it just work that way in the real world.

      As for the reformat...I've gone through a couple of vidcards and numerous drivers...never have I had to re-format and I've never heard of anyone who had to do that for gfx drivers (well, maybe in winME, but that's winME :)).

      --
      -- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
    3. Re:In case of Slashdotting by Will+Sargent · · Score: 5, Informative

      A low slashdot id is not a sign of intelligence.

  3. Field of view by The+Amazing+Fish+Boy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    One final interesting detail - they narrowed the field of view from 90 to 75 in Half Life 2, narrowing it even further to around 50 during the final cut-scene with Breen.

    Anyone know why this would be? For artistic purposes? I don't play first person shooters, so I don't really understand why someone would want this...

    1. Re:Field of view by the_weasel · · Score: 5, Informative

      My guess (without having played) is for dramatic impact. A shorter field of view means you are more focused on what is in front of you. You have to turn more often, and you get paranoid about your surroundings.

      Take it too far and its just annoying - done right, and its super scary.

      The scariest scenes in Alien (and other horror movies) take place in tight narrow hallways and crawlspaces for some of the same reasons.

      --
      - sarcasm is just one more service we offer -
  4. Too Much Realism? by Lemurmania · · Score: 5, Interesting
    In the article, they recound how they had to tone down some of the facial tech since too much realism was "just creepy." I would be fascinated to see it in action. How, exactly, does it creep the gamer out?

    Would I hesitate to kill a combine soldier if the face was too real? Would I develop a pathetic geek crush on Alex? I'm really curious about this. And I want to see this level of realism that they deemed to be too much.

    1. Re:Too Much Realism? by aliens · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I think people had the same reaction to such animated movies as Polar Express. The animation was very close to looking real, but there is always something lacking in the models.

      I've heard multiple people complain/mention this, best way I've heard it described is that they seemed like zombies.

      I guess there is something in the mind that no matter how realistic something looks the fact that you know there isn't a heart inside the thing invokes something of a disgust. Making it harder to form attachments to the character and ruiing the story.

      It should be an interesting study for some post-grad.

      Oh, and I am sure there are plenty of geeks with a
      crush on Alex regardless.

      --
      -- taking over the world, we are.
    2. Re:Too Much Realism? by Hockney+Twang · · Score: 5, Informative

      Have a look at this rather in-depth analysis of the topic you mention. Not certain if the author is a post-grad or not. I'm also fairly certain that this is only one of a growing body of works on the subject.

    3. Re:Too Much Realism? by markh1967 · · Score: 4, Interesting
      This is a problem in robotics known as the uncanny valley.

      Basically, people have no problems with robots that are reasonably similar to real people but tend to react negatively to robots that are very realistic but subtly wrong.

      --
      Input error. Replace user and press any key to continue.
    4. Re:Too Much Realism? by Have+Blue · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's called the "uncanny valley". As depictions of humans get more and more human, they look better and better- but only up to a point. Between "kinda like a human" and "exactly like a human" there's a space where people start to get creeped out. The depiction resembles a human corpse more than it does a real live human, since it's missing subtle things like eye movements or breathing. You wouldn't develop crushes or sympathies but you'd be uncomfortable while playing the game, which is not something Valve wanted.

      The Polar Express is a good example, as someone else said. So is the Final Fantasy movie. This is the reason Pixar, for example, does not try to create photorealistic humans even though their artists are quite capable of it.

    5. Re:Too Much Realism? by Smiffa2001 · · Score: 4, Interesting
      I've often pondered this one too, and noticed from friends and relatives watching characters like Gollum from LOTR, there's more of an 'impressed' reaction. It's something I think I've noticed in most CG-based non-human characters, the less human they look, the more 'accepted' they seem to be. With all the sub-surface scattering and all that Weta used, Gollum's relative different to 'human standard' meant that they probably got the balance right there. After all, objects like vehicles, landscapes and stuff seem easy to be able to pull the wool over peoples eyes. Other little effects I've seen are the CG characters affecting the 'camera' more, with the best example recently in War of the Worlds where at some point a tripod's gushing fluid everywhere and it splatters the 'camera'. Nice touch I thought.
      Oh, and I am sure there are plenty of geeks with a crush on Alex regardless.

      Sorry about that...
    6. Re:Too Much Realism? by Ingolfke · · Score: 4, Funny

      Would I develop a pathetic geek crush on Alex?

      I can't speak for you, but I know Netcraft has shown that 82% of regular /. readers will develop a geek crush on as little as two flesh-colored pixels.

  5. Whatever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Is it just me our was that article about as informative as something not very informative?

    More interesting to most slashdoterd would be the recent completion of the Alyx nude skin. You can get that here http://www.hl2world.com/bbs/160-vt16821.html?postd ays=0&postorder=asc&start=2385.

    1. Re:Whatever by toddestan · · Score: 4, Informative

      Since this thread is otherwise worthless without pics, here are some I found in the forum from the parent's link:
      (By the way, Captain Obvious says, "Not work safe!")

      One
      Two
      Three
      Four
      Five
      Six
      Seven
      Eight

  6. How about the... by BAILOPAN · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ... state of current Half-Life development?

    While Valve has always liked people developing closed source mods for their messy, buggy, and poorly organized SDKs, they've been downright evil with mod-independent development for Half-Life 2. (Note: I'm talking about engine plugins, not entire mods).

    With Half-Life 1, the engine was very "open" in terms of API and functionality, and because of this, tons and tons of mini-mods sprung up for popular games like Counter-Strike. In fact, you could attribute the massive success and continuing livlihood of Half-Life 1 to this.

    However, Valve's new stance with HL2 is that mods shouldn't be, well, moddable. They've threatened developers and locked out hugely potential functionality. The level of PR Valve does to ease this over makes my blood boil. They've been uncooperative, rarely listen to the community, and let _known bugs_ go unfixed for months and months, even after numerous release cycles. Read the hlcoders mailing list sometime. You'll hear Valve employees like Alfred Reynolds say that mod developers are "hackers holding Valve hostages", with regards to trivial things like printing to the screen. I'm not kidding.

    It's not fun. Before Half-Life 2, I was a Valve fanboy. Now I can't stand them. I've had Doom 3 mod developers brag to me about the level of control they have with the Doom 3 SDK. Maybe I'm programming for the wrong game.

    Also, with regards to the expansion... they've released one screenshot, and an onlooker realized it was actually a screenshot from HL2 Single Player. Oops. I guess we can file the expansion with VAC2 and DoD:S, which will be released on the Tweltfh of Never.

    My name is Bail, and I'm a distressed Half-Life modder. *sits back down*

    --
    If you say "here goes my karma" I will bite you!!!
  7. Half Life 2 and the Rights of Users by Zombie+Ryushu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    My big beef with Half Life is the restrictive level of its liscence. I realize its just game, but I hate the dangerous precident it states in showing how easily the entertainment industry can control us. They can actually convince us to pay money to take our digital rights away from us, and the population will not resist.

    At a time when we are facing an orwellian future of DRM, the cost of our digital civil rights is: Playing a game.

    This is tragic in nature. Its a betrayal of free thinking principals by the population itself. The popuation of people who were willing to - without a second thought, buy this game when the full knowlege of what buying and installing this game meant as far as DRM goes is an unpardonable crime.

    Half Life 2 proved that the public was willing to suffer major digital freedom loss to play a game. The evidence was right in front of the viewing public and the consumer ego mass still made the bad choice anyway.

    I didn't buy HL2. (Don't Run Windows) but the fact that I made the choice not to really doesn't matter. It was the fact that the majority of computer using consumers who will buy freedom destroying software did so.

    The choice that the consuming public makes affects everyone by what is availible in the future. I'm sure HL2 is an excellent quality game, but the terms of the game are simply cruel and malicious.

    Again, its not about whether or not *I* choose to buy the game or not, its about what the majority of the consuming public was willing to do, and it is with the consuming public the fault lies.

    There was a choice. They made the wrong choice and we will all pay for that choice years down the road.

  8. Hyped AI by @madeus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    From the article:

    "It's little surprise only Valve have really gone down this path properly as it clearly took a lot of work making the "cut-scenes" unbreakable by the player." Rather, they just ignore you and run through the script regardless (even if you shoot them, drop heavy objects that should kill them onto them or block their path with items they should not be able to move).

    For example, if you block a path the game doesn't want you to (including dynamically 'in game', not just 'in cutscenes') the game would completly disregard the usual rules of physics and simply walk through pushing aisde any and all obstacles like they were made of cardboard (making setting interesting traps impossible in some area's, it's clear your supposed to 'stick to the rails' - like so many games thinking outside the box is not encoraged).

    Of course playing with things like grary's modshows this isn't a limiation of the HAVOK physics engine - the best thing about Half Life 2 IMO, and which is entirely 3rd party - it's just the way Valve implimented it.

    Half Life 2 is nowhere near as impressive as the origional was for the time IMO. Admittedly the origional had lots of distinctly tedious jump puzzles towards the end, but in the first half it had far more atmosphere and felt much more immersive to me. This is not just a case of seeing it through rose-tinted glasses either, I've played it through again recently and it's still head and shoulders above HL2 IMO.

    To me, it just seems like Half Life 2 is riding entirely on it's use of the HAVOK physics engine, which of course lots of other titles have used (Halo 2, Ghost Recon, Max Pane 2, Full Spectrum Warrior, and many more) it's just that Half Life 2 use it _so_ extensively and happen to give the player a really fun toy to use to manipulate objects.

    Sure I think the artwork in HL2 was okay, but the underlying engine quality was poor IMO - with kludges like the use of 2 sprites and careful map design used to try to cover up problems with a lack of proper LOD handling (with large objects like whole ships just appearing and disappearing at random in front of you on the beach, and things like tree's being redered as 2D sprites - Yuck!). The lack of a decent lighting model was pretty prevolent in some areas (something well discussed), though I was equally urged by dodgy map design featuring such delights as points where enemies could infinately spawn from points apparently in mid air (the sort of crap Doom 3 pulled and that is a big no-no in my view).

    I found it particularly disappointing because we know they are capeable of better.

  9. Re:What I liked most about the game's story... by Ingolfke · · Score: 4, Funny

    Why yes it's true... even geeks can kick ass in the video games and movies created by geeks. Why just the other day I imagined I took out an entire cell of terrorist ninjas who had formed an alliance w/ alien invaders.

    W. Mitty