Crysis 2 Writer: Halo is "Full of Bullsh*t"

[SNIPERFOX ft. Harry P.Ness]

meh, he has his opinion and he can keepit

 

[Olorune]

When I first saw the headline, I was like "WTF?!? Why are all of Crysis 2's writers hating on other games, but after reading that...he's kind of right. I mean, I loooooovve Halo 1,2 & 3 and think that Halo: Reach will be their best to date, but they didn't have a story so much as a universe to fill in later. I'll have to seriously reconsider some of the games I thought were good now.

...oh and I loved Halo Wars!

 

[Evilproduct]

What is it with the makers of Crysis 2 and bashing other games. First they were disappointed with MW2, now theyre ragging on Halo and Bioshock. Hey here's an idea guys, how bout you not complain about other companies games and make one that doesnt make your hard drive explode when you try to play it for the sake of pretty environments.

 

[DoctorObviously]

I agree with this person, but I think the developers of Halo and IW really couldn't care less. It'll only spark up more hate from ignorant fucking fanboys.

 

[Xifel]

Well, he's got a point. I like the Halo books, it's a very interesting and (whats the word?) consistent universe. Most cultures is pretty convincing and many characters have interesting stories and backgrounds. Too bad they made the games that mess all that up.

Also Master Chief must be the most boring character in a long time. I mean It's cool to be a badass, but it he get a little stale after a few hours. It's like playing with a robot. And yes, a know he had all his training all his life, but he is still boring compared to other Halo characters.

 

[ModsDeleteThisAccountPlease]

calling this out on the trope "It's Popular so Now it Sucks". Considering his game is coming out near the time Reach comes out, it would make sense for him to bash Halo in general. So his opinion is pretty skewed.

 

[Arachon]

I'll just be reposting what I said in the other thread about this:

First of all, this guy is a sci-fi author, they say things like this, secondly, as Daniel Floyd points out in this video [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jdG2LHair0], video games are generally very poorly written, ripe with stereotypes and predictable plot twists. Even those that are considered to be very well written, pales in comparison with films or novels.

So in essence, Crysis 1 was somewhat [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/YourMileageMayVary] in the story department. But, it has nothing to do with this statement, it's not the same writer.

Interestingly enough, I actually stood at a bookstore the other day, holding "Altered Carbon" by Richard Morgan, didn't buy it though, but it seemed interesting, some kind of cyberpunk-ish neo noir.

EDIT:

calling this out on the trope "It's Popular so Now it Sucks". Considering his game is coming out near the time Reach comes out, it would make sense for him to bash Halo in general. So his opinion is pretty skewed.

It's not his game, he's an author, he writes novels, and from what I've heard, he writes pretty good novels. I don't think he'll give a rats arse wether or not Crysis 2 "makes it" commercially, he's already making enough dough of his real books.

And as previously mentioned, he has got a point.

 

[SenisterDenister]

Crysis 2 writer calls Bethesda out on their poor story telling and shit character design masked in a compelling franchise they've bought out.

 

[GrandmaFunk]

He's complaining about one-dimensional characters in video games. Hardly something that wouldn't exist. Or do you seriously want to argue that the characters in Halo or Modern Warfare 2 are oh so well developed?

why would I argue something that's 100% unrelated to my point?

 

[ddq5]

I do agree with him; in general, video game writing isn't very good. But Morgan is setting the bar pretty high for himself. At least he isn't mindlessly fellating these huge, popular titles like IGN and Gamespot do.

"Crysis 2 Writer: Portal's Storytelling was 'Only alright' "

 

[aemroth]

Spoiler

I agree with him 100%, but that kind of comment is best left to when your new game is out already and has raving reviews about fantastic characters and story lines.

If Crysis 2 doesn't deliver on both fronts then he will become a laughing stock.

I personally don't understand this. Why does the public view of his opinion on writing depend on how good his own writing is?

I honestly don't get how this is confusing.

If he says that Halo has poor writing publicly then he is basically saying, as a game writer, that he can do better. If Crysis 2 has poor writing then he will get laughed at because he tried insulting someone else's writing.

It's like being in school and laughing at someone for getting a simple maths equation wrong, and then answering '14' to the question "What is 3x5?". It's usually not a good idea to criticise someone unless you are in the position to.

In this case the position would be a game writer with a game that has critically acclaimed writing.

The phrase "Can you do any better?" being the gist of it. If he can, then he has every right to say what he wants, but that is yet to be proven.

Maybe I'm just looking at this different. Let's take me for example: I'm not a published writer, and while I think I'm good, I know I need improvement. Does that make my opinion on someone else's writing less valid because my own writing isn't up to snuff?

Well, if that would be the case, all critics of all forms of art and entertainment would be out of work, that's for sure. Problem his, he is a writer, ergo, people immediately expect him to back up his claims with his own work. Which i guess is normal. If he was a critic or an average joe, however, nobody would so much as bat an eye.

No matter what happens with Crysis 2, his point is perfectly valid. Will he be one of the few to break the pattern? We shall see. I hope so. I enjoyed Crysis immensely.

It's funny how people who share a passion for games, and shooters in particular, can be so far apart on this issue. Some of you, as noted, couldn't care less about the story. You just want to blow shit up. I, on the other hand, am having a terrible time forcing myself through Bioshock 2 because the story so grossly warps, ignores and bends over the original. It's killing the game for me.

I'm a big fan of Serious Sam. I'm a huge fan of Painkiller. But a great shooter paired with a solid, "real" story? That's the kind of combination that really makes an impact.

He does have a valid point, let's just see if he delivers. And no, Crysis was not that bad, the story was a cliché, yes, but it had a bit of sandbox to make up for that, and the graphics and nanosuit abilities helped too.

I guess the reason fps fans have such varying opinions has to do with generation clashes. The new blend of fps's, or as i like to call it, post-Halo, and the old school values of Doom, Duke Nukem, Heretic, Quake, etc. Plus, some gamers are all about the multiplayer, while others see it as a simple addition to a single-player game, and others don't care about it altogether, and in no other genre does this have such a big impact than on fps's.

And yes, there's the whole fun gameplay vs good story. The two aren't antagonists, but it's very hard to combine the two elements, specially in a twitchy genre such as the fps. And thus some gamers are more likely to adhere to one school rather than the other. In the case of fps's, gameplay, because even HL2 and Bioshock aren't perfect examples of good stories (HL2 dragged a bit, and Bioshock didn't develop characters all that well in the emotional side, only on the side of political and ethical ideologies side).

But it is possible, and as someone reminded me in another thread, it's kinda been done already: Strife!

btw: i don't know why another thread was needed on this topic, but it's good to see somebody explaining that the article was a bit out of context from is whole interview. I had elongated a bit more on that other thread, but i'll just drop a link [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.187765-Crysis-2-writer-says-Halo-is-bullshit?page=4#5762576] instead of copy/pasting.

EDIT: and by the way: i don't really think he's just trying to advertise Crysis 2, he simply got a lot of coverage because he's a novel writer going into games, which i don't think happens all that often. If some other novel writers with an interest in games, and even game writers were asked to be interviewed, i'm willing to bet some of them would have pieces of their mind to share as well. Thus said, he does have a bit of a big mouth, but objectively, i can't really criticize him for pointing out the flaws he did.

 

[Bassman_2]

Sounds like this guy is actually just trying to advertise the Crysis 2.

 

[bjj hero]

Crysis 2 better have an awesome narrative or he will be eating a lot of shit afterwards.

I'm interested on what he thought of Army of two, that got a lot of stick because Tyse and Rio talked about random guy shit.

 

[Kajin]

Jesus Christ almighty, are those direct quotes? Cause if they are I have no idea why this guy is complaining about story in games when he sounds almost exactly like a potty mouthed 10 year old on xbox live.

Maybe I want to play a game that has almost no story whatsoever? If I want story, I'll go play a JRPG like FF8 or maybe pull out my old copy of Planescape Torment. Maybe I'm playing an FPS like Halo so I can... Oh, I don't know... Shoot shit up? That seems reasonable enough to ask of an FPS.

 

[QmunkE]

Did everyone else play through the Halo series with their eyes and ears blocked off or something? It has a great story if you take the time to pay attention. The Monitor in the original Halo gives plenty of backstory if you listen to him as he hovers around. In Halo 2 the Gravemind gives more, and the Terminals in Halo 3 give loads of information about the first battle between the Flood and the Forerunner, and the birth of humanity.

Not to mention ODST's "radio play" side story.

Crysis, on the other hand, was a cliched action/sci-fi plot with basically no original elements...except normally a guy with an accent like Psycho wouldn't use the term "topographic map".

 

[Dyp100]

IDK, the guy seems like a bit of a douche to me, slamming on everything, probably just to get publicity.

But, if he is so confident in his skills, I'll pick up a book off his and see if I can read it through without getting bored, that should prove whether he is Godly as he seemed to make out to be.

 

[Slick Samurai]

I'm going to have to disagree with his opinion that the Halo series has bad writing.

While its characters are admittedly lacking much depth or polish on the surface, the background and world is extremely deep. Although, I can see that maybe he was criticizing the game itself, and how Bungee didn't put much effort into pushing the expanded universe in their games.

And on that point, I agree. However, their most recent games; ODST and hopefully Reach; have shown their willingness to really write these characters into their environment.

But if Mr. Morgan doesn't write an adequate enough story for Crysis 2, then I have to say that he will be the one criticized.

 

[Metal Brother]

Tomorrow: "Crysis 2 Writer says Gears of War is 'majorly fucking retarded.' "

He does seem to enjoy dissing mainstream games, especially their stories. I supposes Crysis 2 will have to prove that he isn't just talking out of his ass.

I was thinking much the same thing. He's definitely raising the bar against which Crysis 2 will be judged.

 

[Geo Da Sponge]

Personally I think most of the people here are acting like greater asses then this guy.

Where the hell does it say a guy (who actually WORKS in the videogame industry) is not allowed to blatantly say "Halo mechanics good, story and character dev. = bad"?

In a truly rational world people SHOULD turn around and say every standard of service, product, or political policy is 'shit' and can be done better. In fact, that's primarily one of the ways Humanity continues to develop both technologically and socially. By critically analysing the shortfalls of a mainstream product or service, so that one can attempt to create something BETTER.

Hats off to him. He's gunning to create a better experience than Halo provided ... (Which imho isn't that hard) ...

Every other naysayer is either a fanboy, or somebody who doesn't understand the fundamentals of critical analysis.

S. Y on 'Experienced Points' wrote a good article about this sort of displayed behaviour last week. Suggest you pick it up.

Taking the Yahtzee view that critics are the very embodiment of human development, eh? It's cool, I can understand that.

But there's quite a thick line between constructive criticism and just being an ass. Maybe if he'd refrained to referring to everything as 'bullshit'. If criticism is necessary, it should come from the audience, not from a very biased third party. Like when you were back in school, if the teacher suggested improvements that was fine, but if a fellow student dismissed your work because he thought he could do better he would just come off sounding like a prick.

This sentence pretty much summarises his arrogance:
"I understand that there are player who are like that," he said, "but if that's really all you want, crank up the PS1 and play Doom or whatever."
I'm sorry, gamers who are uninterested in story lines in your shooters, Richard Morgan has just declared you obsolete. No more current generation shooters for you.