Article: Gearbox Giveth; and Gearbox Taketh Away (2 of 3)
In this article I discuss the remainder of the changes that might be necessary for Gearbox to deliver the Halo experience to the PC uncompromised. The final article will compare the Xbox and PC versions directly and help you determine if Halo is worth buying for the first time, second time, or not at all.
One of my first questions when I heard that Halo PC was going to have a completely new multiplayer, online gaming system, is whether Gearbox would be forced to use Microsoft's MSN Gaming Zone. From a business and internal corporate political view, Halo could be one of the major games that the Zone carries. Although such games as "Age of Empires" and all its expansions and successors dominate the gaming arena right now, the fact is that for most gamers, Zone uses outdated technology.
No matter how hard Microsoft tries to make the ActiveX controls more beautiful, the fact remains that once everything's all said and done, and "Start Game" is pressed, all that happens is an exchange of IP addresses, much like a regular TCP/IP game. The only benefit of using the Zone is to facilitate matchmaking between players of the game.
Now we know that GameSpy has snagged the rights – or "privilege", if you will, to become the matchmaking and connection software for Halo PC. This is a situation where Gearbox could have done better, and they could have done worse. Worse would be to use the Gaming Zone exclusively for multiplayer; better would be to create their own server listing application, devoid of the advertising and popup windows common to those who reject GameSpy's requests for payment. Users will not like being told that they owe $20 per month to not have their screen bombarded with advertisements, after they've just purchased a new game.
A final negative aspect that I feel deserves mentioning is Gearbox staff's recent postings on the Halo PC forums. Effectively, they state that there are a number of technical reasons why certain vehicles (such as the Banshee) cannot be on certain maps (such as Timberland), because it would be too overpowering, or due to technical reasons. EvlG goes further to state that "At some point, the end-user can be overwhelmed with too many options. This confuses users trying to host a game (not knowing what to setup) and it also confuses users trying to join a game (not knowing what rules to expect when the game is running)."
Unfortunate, really, that the whole "options is good" philosophy mentioned later in the same thread doesn't seem to apply in this case. I've played plenty of horrible games on the Xbox version, and Chiron TL34 seems to be the factor. Alternative, I've played a game of "invisi-flag" on Sidewinder: standard CTF, all players invisible, with no team indicators. Nobody got anything done because unless you cheated by looking at other people's sections of the screen, you wouldn't know whether you were sniping a teammate or an enemy.
To this extent, Gearbox deserves the right to retain control of the game. After all, they're the publishers and we're the consumers. That still doesn't mean users should be completely prevented from creating horrible settings. While I think most people would agree that sixteen Scorpion tanks in Battle Creek -- per team -- is a setting that would qualify in the books as "atrocious", the fact is that console versions of games are about stability; whereas PC versions of games tend to be about options.
My last bit of constructive criticism is about the recently introduced team indicator. Along with the HUD that accompanies this red or blue dude, something appears definitely out of place. The health bars are crunched together, and the shield status has been made larger. Why bother with the change at all when a perfectly good HUD was present in some earlier screenshots?
Personally, the older-style HUD appeals to me. As long as Gearbox continues their focus on "options are better", hopefully the team indicator can be disabled. It's just another thing to get in the way of victory.
So what is Gearbox doing that will improve Halo, and take it to a level to what we've never seen before? First of all are the new weapons. The Fuel Rod Gun (previously only usable by the Hunters and Special Ops Grunts) is now accessible in the multiplayer version of the game. It's the first "indirect hit" weapon, and I have no doubt that skilled players will be able to lob plasma into the Blood Gulch bases for easier capturing of the elusive flag. The weapon will also help flush out those players who like to make like a mole and hide out in little crevices. The fact that a moderately good pistol-user will be able to take out a user of this device balances the fuel rod's capability to launch five blasts before overheating.
The Flamethrower, an original weapon that Bungie wanted to implement in the Xbox version, has returned. It's been quoted as being "very effective against ground troops", and in the IGN.com video above, it seems quite ineffective against the approaching Banshee. Newcomers should take note of this now: it's like firing assault rifles at an opponent from opposite ends of Blood Gulch. It just doesn't work.
The Shade turret from the single player campaign may now also spawn, allowing for effective defense in Capture the Flag and King of the Hill modes. A variant of the Warthog has also been introduced; the Rocket Launcher Warthog trades in the chaingun for a mounted rocket launcher that can fire off three missiles before reloading. A few other surprises are rumored before the game is released.
On the technical side of things, enhanced resolution is the name of the game. Although I personally have never had a monitor and graphics card combination that is capable of a blisteringly high resolution, like 1600x1200, hardcore gamers will certainly appreciate the added enhancements. Personally, I'll run the game at a slightly lower resolution, and activate anti-aliasing for a more polished picture. Casual gamers, or users with video cards in the DirectX 7 generation might be happy with 800x600 or 640x480; after all, this isn't "Halo: Slideshow Edition."
Gearbox also claims Marty O'Donnell's sound experience from Halo Xbox will be "uncompromised". Although approximately half of the space on the original Xbox DVD was taken up by audio, compression methods that are lossless or imperceptible to human hearing can be used. If the target installation is only two CD-ROM discs, it's quite possible that this claim will be fulfilled.
A positive thing that Gearbox has also done by taking something away, in the transition of Halo to the computer world, is the long loading times for levels that were so common to the Xbox. A one second load time seems too good to be true; for both "Assault on the Control Room" and "Two Betrayals", we won't be able to take too much of a break at the beginning, unless we'd like our character to repeatedly be killed.
What else has Gearbox taken away that will be beneficial to the game of Halo? How about latency? In the final part of this article, I discuss the new networking protocols; and more importantly, help you decide what you want to be doing when the game goes gold: running to the store; waiting until the first price drop; or giving this one a pass and sticking with the Xbox version.
View Part One
View Part Two
View Part Three
Parts in this article series: 1 | 2 | 3
One of my first questions when I heard that Halo PC was going to have a completely new multiplayer, online gaming system, is whether Gearbox would be forced to use Microsoft's MSN Gaming Zone. From a business and internal corporate political view, Halo could be one of the major games that the Zone carries. Although such games as "Age of Empires" and all its expansions and successors dominate the gaming arena right now, the fact is that for most gamers, Zone uses outdated technology.
No matter how hard Microsoft tries to make the ActiveX controls more beautiful, the fact remains that once everything's all said and done, and "Start Game" is pressed, all that happens is an exchange of IP addresses, much like a regular TCP/IP game. The only benefit of using the Zone is to facilitate matchmaking between players of the game.
Now we know that GameSpy has snagged the rights – or "privilege", if you will, to become the matchmaking and connection software for Halo PC. This is a situation where Gearbox could have done better, and they could have done worse. Worse would be to use the Gaming Zone exclusively for multiplayer; better would be to create their own server listing application, devoid of the advertising and popup windows common to those who reject GameSpy's requests for payment. Users will not like being told that they owe $20 per month to not have their screen bombarded with advertisements, after they've just purchased a new game.
A final negative aspect that I feel deserves mentioning is Gearbox staff's recent postings on the Halo PC forums. Effectively, they state that there are a number of technical reasons why certain vehicles (such as the Banshee) cannot be on certain maps (such as Timberland), because it would be too overpowering, or due to technical reasons. EvlG goes further to state that "At some point, the end-user can be overwhelmed with too many options. This confuses users trying to host a game (not knowing what to setup) and it also confuses users trying to join a game (not knowing what rules to expect when the game is running)."
Unfortunate, really, that the whole "options is good" philosophy mentioned later in the same thread doesn't seem to apply in this case. I've played plenty of horrible games on the Xbox version, and Chiron TL34 seems to be the factor. Alternative, I've played a game of "invisi-flag" on Sidewinder: standard CTF, all players invisible, with no team indicators. Nobody got anything done because unless you cheated by looking at other people's sections of the screen, you wouldn't know whether you were sniping a teammate or an enemy.
To this extent, Gearbox deserves the right to retain control of the game. After all, they're the publishers and we're the consumers. That still doesn't mean users should be completely prevented from creating horrible settings. While I think most people would agree that sixteen Scorpion tanks in Battle Creek -- per team -- is a setting that would qualify in the books as "atrocious", the fact is that console versions of games are about stability; whereas PC versions of games tend to be about options.
My last bit of constructive criticism is about the recently introduced team indicator. Along with the HUD that accompanies this red or blue dude, something appears definitely out of place. The health bars are crunched together, and the shield status has been made larger. Why bother with the change at all when a perfectly good HUD was present in some earlier screenshots?
Personally, the older-style HUD appeals to me. As long as Gearbox continues their focus on "options are better", hopefully the team indicator can be disabled. It's just another thing to get in the way of victory.
So what is Gearbox doing that will improve Halo, and take it to a level to what we've never seen before? First of all are the new weapons. The Fuel Rod Gun (previously only usable by the Hunters and Special Ops Grunts) is now accessible in the multiplayer version of the game. It's the first "indirect hit" weapon, and I have no doubt that skilled players will be able to lob plasma into the Blood Gulch bases for easier capturing of the elusive flag. The weapon will also help flush out those players who like to make like a mole and hide out in little crevices. The fact that a moderately good pistol-user will be able to take out a user of this device balances the fuel rod's capability to launch five blasts before overheating.
This screenshot was taken from IGN's "New Weapons in Multiplayer" video, illustrating the use of the Fuel Rod cannon. Download the video and see for yourself.
The Flamethrower, an original weapon that Bungie wanted to implement in the Xbox version, has returned. It's been quoted as being "very effective against ground troops", and in the IGN.com video above, it seems quite ineffective against the approaching Banshee. Newcomers should take note of this now: it's like firing assault rifles at an opponent from opposite ends of Blood Gulch. It just doesn't work.
The Shade turret from the single player campaign may now also spawn, allowing for effective defense in Capture the Flag and King of the Hill modes. A variant of the Warthog has also been introduced; the Rocket Launcher Warthog trades in the chaingun for a mounted rocket launcher that can fire off three missiles before reloading. A few other surprises are rumored before the game is released.
On the technical side of things, enhanced resolution is the name of the game. Although I personally have never had a monitor and graphics card combination that is capable of a blisteringly high resolution, like 1600x1200, hardcore gamers will certainly appreciate the added enhancements. Personally, I'll run the game at a slightly lower resolution, and activate anti-aliasing for a more polished picture. Casual gamers, or users with video cards in the DirectX 7 generation might be happy with 800x600 or 640x480; after all, this isn't "Halo: Slideshow Edition."
Gearbox also claims Marty O'Donnell's sound experience from Halo Xbox will be "uncompromised". Although approximately half of the space on the original Xbox DVD was taken up by audio, compression methods that are lossless or imperceptible to human hearing can be used. If the target installation is only two CD-ROM discs, it's quite possible that this claim will be fulfilled.
A positive thing that Gearbox has also done by taking something away, in the transition of Halo to the computer world, is the long loading times for levels that were so common to the Xbox. A one second load time seems too good to be true; for both "Assault on the Control Room" and "Two Betrayals", we won't be able to take too much of a break at the beginning, unless we'd like our character to repeatedly be killed.
What else has Gearbox taken away that will be beneficial to the game of Halo? How about latency? In the final part of this article, I discuss the new networking protocols; and more importantly, help you decide what you want to be doing when the game goes gold: running to the store; waiting until the first price drop; or giving this one a pass and sticking with the Xbox version.
View Part One
View Part Two
View Part Three
Comment