Gamasutra: The Art & Business of Making Gamesspacer
View All     RSS
October 30, 2014
arrowPress Releases
October 30, 2014
PR Newswire
View All





If you enjoy reading this site, you might also want to check out these UBM Tech sites:


Interview: Guerrilla's Hulst Talks FPS Tropes In  Killzone 3
Interview: Guerrilla's Hulst Talks FPS Tropes In Killzone 3 Exclusive
June 8, 2010 | By Brandon Sheffield




Killzone 3 is one of the bigger games coming from the Sony camp for E3, with the PlayStation 3 exclusive shooter trailing stereoscopic 3D visuals and the promise of bigger, badder everything.

Gamasutra got to talk with Hermen Hulst, managing director of Dutch franchise creators Guerrilla Games ahead of the show, and put him on the spot regarding familiar FPS tropes (why is melee more powerful than guns?), 3D (do you design around it?), and regenerating health.

The newest Killzone [YouTube teaser trailer] promises a deeper story, more environments, and more freedom of gameplay, but how do you introduce this to new players, when you start right where the last left off? Hulst has some of the answers, mixed with just a handful of "wait and see."

One thing that Iíve noticed in FPS games in general is that the melee is more powerful than shooting -- you can shoot a guy for 30 seconds before he dies, but you hit him once with a rifle butt and heís done. Do you ever think about justifying this in the game world?

Hermen Hulst: Thatís something that weíre balancing continuously. As soon as thereís a new system like this brutal melee system that comes in, and thereís new variances within that, weíre pulling that through play testing straight away. You gotta balance that immediately.

If you have a knife kill that somebody could finish the entire game with, thatís not good, right? So you want to go back and make sure that youíve got some encounters that really require you to either take your pistol or rifle out to finish him.

Of course, here with this gunplay that weíve got requiring you to hop through from iceberg to iceberg, youíre gonna be shooting from the air, so thatís already an example of where you canít just use a brutal melee or close combat.

How early do you start playtesting for things like this?

HH: We start it almost straight away. As soon as we got a level that is some sort of functional indication of what itís gonna play like, we get guys from the team, we get guys from the street, through Sony, in London and we also do it here stateside. Playtesting is a huge thing for us, so we do it all the time.

It seems like a lot of the more successful FPS developers are advocating aggressive play testing. Obviously Valve does it from first prototype stage.

HH: I think, frankly, in Killzone 2, it was kinda the first game where we did a lot of playtesting, though we started a little bit too late, I think. So you had some pretty severe difficulty spikes in that game still. And I think thatís the reason why we did that, and thatís kind of our development philosophy.

Look at the previous installment in the franchise, look at the areas that could be improved and try to turn those around and make them the best parts of the game. Getting the pacing right, the difficulty balancing right; itís a huge focal point for us from day one essentially.

Deep Story Or Deep Confusion?

I get the sense that from the gameplay perspective, that mechanics are becoming more accessible as the franchise evolves, but the story is becoming narrower -- anyone who didn't play Killzone 2 will need to catch up. But do fans really care about story in this genre?

HH: I think youíre asking two questions. I think they do care -- we get a lot of mail, a lot of ideas from the community, within story, dialogue, and characters and all these elements obviously are tied into each other. I think itís very important, in particular after releases like Uncharted 2 that really raised the bar on storytelling. Itís become an area that you just canít neglect, you really have to pay attention to it.

I think in terms of your other question, on if itís becoming narrow -- weíre actually trying to go a lot wider. On Killzone 2, I think a lot of it was constrained, setting-wise, since it was based in the urban areas, the first half of the game. This game weíre actually setting ourselves up so we can actually explore the Helghast culture a lot more. We have a very rich backdrop in the universe that we created and the storyís very rich; thereís a lot of stuff in there. And we feel that we havenít really fully explored all of that.

So in this game, weíre mostly visiting various areas of the planet. Weíre also giving you a flavor of the Helghast culture by replacing the one nemesis with two guys that are actually competing for power, because of that almost like civil war thatís happening in the background. You get to experience a lot more of what those guys are like. So actually weíre trying to make it richer rather than narrower.

I guess itís kind of a fine line between "richer" and "stuff that only guys that know this thing will care about" -- to me, unfamiliar with the story background, I see a lot of terms and names that players need to be invested in that universe to understand. But I see what youíre trying to do.

HH: Absolutely, every game needs to be a great experience in its own right. You try to set it up with a great introduction to the game in the opening, in order to establish the mood. And the mood for this game really is that the tables have turned. In Killzone 2, you were part of this invasion fleet and you felt overpowered, you were sent in there, you were gonna take him out in about a month. This time around, youíre outgunned, itís much more like Inglorious Basterds almost. A couple guys that need to scavenge for weaponry of the enemy. It has a different feel to it.

Invincible David

Earlier, you called this a David vs. Goliath scenario. I definitely understand that from a story and conceptual standpoint, but how do you make that work when your character is the only guy that can regenerate his health and has access to this crazy weaponry? In fact, heís the invincible character in this universe, practically.

HH: The character can die, and your buddy thatís much more healthy can revive you. Itís like a small group of characters. You and your buddies, the lead characters, that together are outgunned and out powered, theyíre David. Compared to the previous game, your backup has been almost annihilated, and at the same time, your enemy has progressed -- technologically [has] evolved, they're much bigger. I canít disclose some of the other features that we have in other levels. But you've shrunk, and they've expanded, and thatís why you get that experience.

As long as you can make that happen in a moment-to moment scenario, it can work.

HH: Oh yeah, that will be ready, visible in some of the setups that weíre creating in the minute to minute gameplay, not just in the overall themes and settings.

Itís something of a struggle within the genre -- you've got these soldiers that can regenerate and are ultimately supermen, versus their enemies which are finite and can die permanently.

HH: Itís not really an option to kill the player indefinitely -- it could potentially be a very short game! Expensive purchase.

I wonder why youíve chosen to compare yourselves to Uncharted 2 and God of War III, which are very, very different experiences. Obviously, theyíre other very closely Sony-affiliated studios...

HH: Thatís part of it. We talk to those guys a lot, theyíre within Sonyís group of worldwide studios, people that we can share ideas with. But I mentioned Uncharted 2, for their huge effort in upping the storytelling, the character-driven experience.

And I think thatís actually a game change in what theyíve done there. God of War... weíre also looking at this increased scale. Those guys, wow, thatís a boss on top of a boss on top of a boss! Thatís a boss in a third degree, right? So when we see that, damn, [we need] to be bigger. Those are specifically two notions.

Killzone 3D

How hard did you find 3D to implement for this?

HH: Actually, remarkably easy. I get a lot of questions about that and people presume that weíve almost had some new galactic TV experience in order to enable that. Itís not all the case, particularly since weíve done it from the beginning.

Weíve got to be ready to implement it, and itís been a very smooth process to getting it to where we are today. I think itís fair to say that weíre also, in many ways, kinda lucky, since itís easier than making a movie in 3D; the world is already in 3D. In Killzone, the particles are already in 3D.

What makes 3D more convincing is when thereís a lot of stuff coming at you, for instance. We're making a shooter, youíre being shot at, so thereís a lot of stuff coming at you. I think the world that weíre making is already rich, so -- I think a lot of happy decisions that weíve took in the past come in handy now when weíre implementing 3D.

How big of an element to 3D do you find the audio?

HH: I think 3D audio is huge for 2D and 3D. As I say, weíre always improving, in terms of the execution, the sense of immersion, and I know itís a horrible word because everybody uses it. But itís still hugely important in Killzone, because it has such an effect on making this world believable.

This is sci-fi realism with a twist, it's grounded. We go through a lot of trouble to design everything as it could be designed in real life. Audio is just one area where weíre trying to do that. The depth of field that Iíve talked about is very important, it discriminates between whatís important and what is mostly contextual backgrounds.

If youíve got 3D visuals and 2D sound coming from the speakers, how does that interact?

HH: Yeah, itís a marriage of these things. You already have the very intense combat experience, a very visceral experience. Then you have that great looking world with all the variety, you make that in 3D. Then, on top of that, youíve got depth of field audio, and I think itís adding all these things together that make it a cinematic experience that one can possibly create, and thatís what weíre doing.

Seems like 3D just adds one extra layer of design considerations, even more than technical considerations. I know a lot of people have talked about how itís really difficult to do 1080p and 3D at the same time, that thatís where we are now, itís not really that feasible. Just in terms of design, you have to pay a lot more attention to your textures now, youíve gotta make sure that if people have 5.1 surround that what theyíre seeing is exactly what theyíre hearing, thereís a lot more to think about.

HH: Game design, level design...every decision weíve made weíve made for the bread and butter of the game, which is the regular 2D experience still, right? 3D is a layer on top of that, which makes it even more immersive, makes it even more cinematic. I think at this point weíve made all the calls to make a great Killzone 3 game. I donít think any of the design decisions, specifically, have been made to show off 3D.

I think, again, weíve been very lucky and it kind of comes in organically. But what we do is things like, you know, youíve got the close combat, we gotta make sure that thatís more visually designed, youíve gotta blur out the left hand because thatís not where the knife is and it would be very distracting.

Other visual design considerations are the HUD for instance, which you see when you go to watch a 3D film - well, you probably donít, because you see all the movies here in English. When you live in Europe, you see all the movies with subtitles, and they kind of hang there in the middle of the screen, itís very awkward. So we put a lot of focus on making sure that the crosshair sits at the right distance. And all of these things are good considerations.

That might give you a leg up in terms of understanding HUD presentation, that experience.

Thatís a big area focus for 3D, making sure that these things work. And if they donít work, then youíre breaking that suspension of disbelief.


Related Jobs

CCP
CCP — Newcastle, England, United Kingdom
[10.30.14]

Senior Backend Programmer
Guerrilla Games
Guerrilla Games — Amsterdam, Netherlands
[10.30.14]

Animation System Programmer
Nexon America, Inc.
Nexon America, Inc. — El Segundo, California, United States
[10.29.14]

Localization Coordinator
Petroglyph Games
Petroglyph Games — Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
[10.29.14]

Producer










Comments


Jacob Pederson
profile image
Hulst is really downplaying the transition from 3d to stereoscopic 3d here. Judging by my experience playing 3d-Vision games, a lot of the stuff you see on screen, especially effects, just aren't really 3d. You have lighting and shadow layers popping out, laying flat on the screen, or rendering deeper than they should. You have huge background elements, like skyboxes, 3d skyboxes, or straight up sprites floating there awkwardly. Particles are another huge area that ends up rendering at the wrong depth. The smallest incorrect render depth makes your eyes go nuts, rendering the game unplayable. He does mention Hud, which is HUGE. Sterescopic 3d games are unplayable with a 2d crosshair.



I'm not even getting to the Big Deal, which is that stereoscopic 3d doubles your rendering cost (not to mention HDMI bandwith). The consoles aren't gonna have the SLI option to deal with that. That extra umph has to come from cuts elsewhere. Your gonna see games cutting their framerates or resolutions in half to make up the difference. A game like wipoutHD has some wiggle room, as it's allready running at 60 fps. However, Killzone is running at 30 allready. I'm interested to see how they can pull it off.

A W
profile image
Not even speaking on the 2d to 3d transition... I think the sequel to the first game suffered from an identity crisis. The company played the me too approach trying to make use of things that where already staples in FPS and not really improving upon them. This was a shame given that they could have made an all new identity for themselves in the game play department given they had the graphic fidelity nearly nailed, but the difference just wasn't apparent enough. Everything seemed contrived and it only looked like a showcase of things the hardware could do but not things the player could choose to do to complete a given task.



For instance, why was there only one level for the tank, one level for collapsing a building, one level for shooting down ships, one level for moving in a mecha. It just seem like the teams where thinking independent game play mechanics that where like game x rather than integrated game play that would make the KZ experience that much more exciting. Hopefully this time around KZ gets an identity over the me too game play. Add 3d to that, and we may have a contender.

luke ward
profile image
>>"So you want to go back and make sure that youíve got some encounters that really require you to either take your pistol or rifle out to finish him." <<



Some experiences? Like 95% of the game should be about shooting your rifle, not only sometimes. In Killzone 2 you could run around and kill everything quicker by meleeing it. It is a retarded system.


none
 
Comment: