Bungie.net Community
This topic has moved here: Subject: Bungie's Jason Jones Being Bit of a Hypocrite
  • Subject: Bungie's Jason Jones Being Bit of a Hypocrite
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • of 3
Subject: Bungie's Jason Jones Being Bit of a Hypocrite
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Jason Jones isn't a hypocrite. He was a young developer when he did that interview. Also he had very little to do with Halo games after Halo 2. He even left between Halo 2 development to work on Phoenix. Whether or not he dislikes making sequels (even now) is unseen. It depends on creativity and ideas I suppose; sequels tend to lack that.

[Edited on 02.03.2012 5:49 PM PST]

  • 02.03.2012 5:43 PM PDT

Quod Erat Demonstrandum.

If you're interested in Halo's music, check this out.

Posted by: x Foman123 x
Speaking of chuckles, let's all lol at IonicPaul, who makes friends with bugs to make up for his lack of human contact.

It's very easy to defend Jones's statement.

This article was made after Pathways and before Marathon. 1993. Nineteen years ago. Marathon had sequels on Bungie's, and Jones's, own collective will. This was before he had made sequels, before he had firsthand experience with it. It's possible for a person's opinions to change, especially with experience.

I don't see the problem here.

  • 02.03.2012 5:50 PM PDT

In a time long past, the armies of the dark came again to the lands of men. Their leaders became known as the fallen lords, and their terrible sorcery was without equal in the west.
In 30 years they reduced the civilized nations into carrion and ash. Until the free city of Madrigal alone defined them. An army gathered there, and a desperate battle was joined against the fallen
Heros were born in the fire and bloodshed of the wars which followed and their names and deeds will never be forgotten


Posted by: IonicPaul
It's very easy to defend Jones's statement.

This article was made after Pathways and before Marathon. 1993. Nineteen years ago. Marathon had sequels on Bungie's, and Jones's, own collective will. This was before he had made sequels, before he had firsthand experience with it. It's possible for a person's opinions to change, especially with experience.

I don't see the problem here.


I think Jason meant that he didn't think sequels could ever be as good as the original. And a Pathways into Darkness remake does not make sense for the story it had.

  • 02.03.2012 5:52 PM PDT

Quod Erat Demonstrandum.

If you're interested in Halo's music, check this out.

Posted by: x Foman123 x
Speaking of chuckles, let's all lol at IonicPaul, who makes friends with bugs to make up for his lack of human contact.

Posted by: spartain ken 15
I think Jason meant that he didn't think sequels could ever be as good as the original. And a Pathways into Darkness remake does not make sense for the story it had.

Semantics. Either way, he can't be called hypocritical for either point of view we've suggested, and that's my point.

  • 02.03.2012 5:53 PM PDT

Key

You honestly think that he was ACTUALLY criticizing sequels? Sequels. The thing that exists in every known medium of media, without which we would have an excessive amount of underdeveloped "universes" (as it were) in our world?

Stop sounding ignorant for a second and think about what you're saying.

Without sequels all of the following would be true:

We'd have only one Lord of the Rings book.

We'd only have ever had one episode of Star Trek.

Star Wars would have ended with the death of Obi Wan.

Rocky would have ended with a 0-1 record.

Harry Potter would've only finished one year at Hogwarts.

We would have to settle for just these "2 Great Feature Length [...] Thrillers" from Peter Parker

He was obviously not against sequels as an way to further the story of a universe, franchise, etc. Think, please.
Posted by: RigZ Boi
Read my reply to Ken.

And how is it not hypocritical? I can infer that he criticzes those who make sequels and the sort, and then he, with his company, create a complete Franchise of games. Sequel after sequel, an expansion and even a prequel.

I don't care about the deal with Microsoft. Jones and Bungie knew exactly what they were entering in to. If they wanted to remain independent and keep making fresh games, they wouldn't have made the deal. But they did. They earned a huge cash sum because of it.

Yup.

Posted by: Gl0ry Jo3
I don't find his statement hypocritical at all. He's just stating what's true in this industry. Sequels are normally subpar of the original game, but sometimes, some rare times, the sequels does just as good or even better.


[Edited on 02.03.2012 6:00 PM PST]

  • 02.03.2012 6:00 PM PDT

Join the Bungie Kids Podcast Group!

Listen to our podcast and listen to us talk about the latest Bungie news and Halo: Reach updates!

When I grow up, I want to be just like goofenhour.

It might be hard to believe, but yes, a lot of things have changed in the world of gaming since 1993.

Back in 1993, there were a lot of games that were coming out with sequels every year (Mario, Sonic, Metroid, Mega Man, etc.) that usually had a lack of quality from the first one. It was definitely a trend at the time.

Now (and even 10 years ago), there are legitimate companies that put a lot of time to come out with an extremely high quality sequel (Valve, Blizzard, Bioware, Epic Games, etc.).

Plus, a TON of stuff has changed in gaming since 1993, from both a corporate perspective and a gaming perspective.

And just to add something, I would not want to be accounted to something I said 5 years ago (let alone 19 years ago) and consider it to be a statement of faith.

[Edited on 02.03.2012 6:15 PM PST]

  • 02.03.2012 6:11 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

http://bungie.me/sig/dot2/DEUCE+MORELLI.png


Posted by: RigZ Boi
Yes, times do change. However, I find it odd for a co-founder of Bungie to completely depart himself from a principle of his.


Twenty years ago, sequels were cookie-cutter operations: Super Mario 3 came out - a new game that was the same previous outing just in a new map with new features (flying). Sonic went from being a hedgehog that spun into one that could do burnouts and get bubble shields, then could fly if he got the flame bubble.

Twenty years ago, sequels in games were like movies - keep the formula the same as the original but make it flashier. Sometimes they worked - Die Hard, Lethal Weapon, Ninja Turtles, etc., but many times they didn't - Ghostbusters 2, Mega Man and Super Mario, for example.

Much different now - in reference to Bungie, Halo, Halo 2 and Halo 3 may have had new "features", but the games were not true sequels, but episodic arc stories, like soap operas, Sci-Fi shows like Stargate Universe and Star Trek DS-9 and Enterprise, et.al. Each one continued a story, and had updated interfaces and graphics packages. Not hypocritical at all.

Yes, money is a large factor, however, if Bungie and Jones desired to stick to their roots as much as they're praised for doing, surely they could have navigated their way out of this?

See above

Your analogy involving music is flawed. Principles are something which a person, or group of people asscoiate themselves with for a lifetime. Music is a form of an entertainment, something to be enjoyed and thus people's opinions on music are always changing.

Same thing with gaming theory and design. Halo and other Bungie Games were not like Call of Duty - new stories and the same old crap (excluding Modern Warfare series) - they were continuations of the same game. Granted, ODST was a one-off "sequel/expansion pack," Reach was a one-off prequel/sequel, but both expanded on and explained the origin of the main protagonist of Halo - Master Chief. If you want to see an example of what Jason was commenting on, it isn't Halo, it's Halo Wars, the Halo cartoons and the abandoned Halo projects Microsoft commissioned.

Nowhere did I state Bungie shouls start all over again due to this quote by Jones. I simply stated my opinion, and the fact that I find this quote to be very hypocritical.

See above

Note: I completely understand why Bungie did go for sequels and entered into a contract with Microsoft - to strengthen their fanbase, gain more money and be able to produce multiple AAA games.

Microsoft BOUGHT Bungie; the only contracts were tender offers to buy or exchange the shares of Bungie Software Products Corporation (BPSC, the original name for Bungie)shareholders in exchange for Microsoft Corporation shares and/or cash. It was not a production contract, it was a PURCHASE CONTRACT.

It was likely part of the Bungie LLC/Microsoft Corporation spinoff agreement that required Bungie to produce ODST and Reach, but there was most likely no separate "production contract" to do so.

As was mentioned previously, BSPC was in financial trouble because of the bugs in Myth or ONI (whatever game it was they bought back and replaced all the discs); Microsoft looking for a game to grab market share from Sony PlayStation, and a marriage made in heaven occurred. But I'm certain Jason et. al. did not want to fall into the InfinityWard and Treyarch map of just being a one-trick pony, making nothing but Halo Games that led to the spinoff/independence from Microsoft.

Yes, (now) Bungie Incorporated's ethos is to make games they want to play and make money off them. Will that rule out cookie-cutter sequels? I'm sure of it, since Jason's principles likely haven't changed in 20 years. Instead, they'll make continuations of their popular games, since gaming studios, if they want to stay in business, make episodic games with open-ended stories until the story is complete.

Bungie is not TreyArch - they're not going to make one-off crap games and sequels under the same game title.

  • 02.04.2012 1:00 AM PDT

Have A Nice Day!

Commander, CammCam's Queensguard; Sapphire Mod; 34th Seat, Table of Avalon(Exiled);Captain, HAND

yolo? -blam!- that! YOLTOSS!! You Only Live Twice or Some -blam!-


Posted by: RigZ Boi
Bungie's Jason Jones Being Bit of a Hypocrite


Would you say the text between the indicated marks of this quote sums up Halo's life in Bungie's hands?

Jones: I don't think that Bungie will ever publish a game called Pathways into Darkness II. There's a lot of reasons for that, one of them being that I tend to dislike sequels. *Many times when a publisher comes out with a sequel to a game, it means that they made a lot of money on the first one and they're going to continue to publish similar games until everyone gets sick of them*.Sometimes those games are actually fun, and the people who liked the first one also like the second one, but sometimes they're not.

Link to the orginal interview

I found this interview after reading a recent post here in the community forum, and found it a very interesting read. However, when I saw Jason criticzing developers (to a certain extent) who release sequels, prequels and the sort, it made me wonder about the question I've already posed to you.

Although, Jones does save himself slightly when he states that sequels can be successful, I still find it amusing that he, himself, when taking such a view of sequels, partners with Microsoft and releases: Halo Combat Evolved, Halo Combat Evolved (PC), Halo 2, Halo 2 (PC), Halo 3, Halo 3: ODST and Halo: Reach in under ten years of Halo's beginnings.

Funny thing... money.


The key to the quote is that he said *publishers* want to see sequels. I infer that he, as a *developer*, doesn't like doing it. But when the *publisher* pays the *developer* to make a sequel, then the *developer* does it, or tries to fund their own games.

  • 02.04.2012 1:04 AM PDT

I acknowledge my user name is stupid. However, I promise I'm not.

Disclaimer: The latter is a lie.

Woah, -blam!-. This flamed up big time. No need for the personal insults, fellas.

I still think he has been hypocritical. No new arguments are rising, just recycled arguments about how things change over time etc. which I only buy in to to an extent.

Now calm down, gents.

Edit: @Crazysnipe: You don't understand my post... I enjoy sequels, I just find Jones' statement here a bit amusing and hypocritical.

[Edited on 02.04.2012 8:17 AM PST]

  • 02.04.2012 8:16 AM PDT

Key


Posted by: RigZ Boi
Woah, -blam!-. This flamed up big time. No need for the personal insults, fellas.

I still think he has been hypocritical. No new arguments are rising, just recycled arguments about how things change over time etc. which I only buy in to to an extent.

Now calm down, gents.

Edit: @Crazysnipe: You don't understand my post... I enjoy sequels, I just find Jones' statement here a bit amusing and hypocritical.
I misunderstood nothing. You posted an not-well-thought-out statement that you legitimately thought to be true.

I can infer that he criticzes those who make sequels and the sort,

That statement is wrong on so many levels. You cannot infer that in any way whatsoever. Even if we can assume, just for a second, that the outrageous claim that Jason Jones was against the institution and implementation of sequels in general... people's ideas change over the coarse of TWENTY YEARS!!!

If I were to say, in 1997, that I -blam!-ing despised twinkies. I hated them with every fiber of my being. But then, in 2007, I had a revelation, tried a twinkie just one more time, and absolutely loved them. Would you call me a hypocrite? No. You would call me someone who got a new opinion. That happens, believe it or not.

  • 02.04.2012 8:31 AM PDT

lolnope.

I find this thread and Jason Jones' comment on prequels and sequels as a very appropriate moment to say the following.

>_>
<_<

LOLREACH

>_>
<_<

That is all.

  • 02.04.2012 8:57 AM PDT

I acknowledge my user name is stupid. However, I promise I'm not.

Disclaimer: The latter is a lie.

Hahahahahaha. Stop taking bungie.net so seriously mate. Jesus.

Agree to disagree. Now give up. Because it obvious that neither us are intent on altering our opinions.

Posted by: CrazzySnipe55

Posted by: RigZ Boi
Woah, -blam!-. This flamed up big time. No need for the personal insults, fellas.

I still think he has been hypocritical. No new arguments are rising, just recycled arguments about how things change over time etc. which I only buy in to to an extent.

Now calm down, gents.

Edit: @Crazysnipe: You don't understand my post... I enjoy sequels, I just find Jones' statement here a bit amusing and hypocritical.
I misunderstood nothing. You posted an not-well-thought-out statement that you legitimately thought to be true.

I can infer that he criticzes those who make sequels and the sort,

That statement is wrong on so many levels. You cannot infer that in any way whatsoever. Even if we can assume, just for a second, that the outrageous claim that Jason Jones was against the institution and implementation of sequels in general... people's ideas change over the coarse of TWENTY YEARS!!!

If I were to say, in 1997, that I -blam!-ing despised twinkies. I hated them with every fiber of my being. But then, in 2007, I had a revelation, tried a twinkie just one more time, and absolutely loved them. Would you call me a hypocrite? No. You would call me someone who got a new opinion. That happens, believe it or not.

  • 02.04.2012 10:20 AM PDT

Key


Posted by: RigZ BoiI'm not taking Bungie.net seriously. I'm not mad.

You're just taking his words far too literally.

  • 02.04.2012 10:23 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Fabled Legendary Member

ODST Expeditionary Force I The WorkPLace I Mythics
Technically Mythic
Posted by: Cobravert
I just saw a green monkey nut shot a small tan lizard(?) in a gunny sack.

If you have one big story to tell, and break it up into different games spinoffs, then I don't consider them sequels. It's telling different parts of the same story.

  • 02.04.2012 11:05 AM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • of 3