In more than slightly late news on our part, the fine folks at Rock, Paper, Shotgun have posted up part 2 of their interview with Carlos “cman2k” Montero of the Black Mesa: Source devteam. And, yes, there is a bit of new BM:S media – but just a little bit! Read on.
Let’s get the cooler stuff out of the way first: part 2 brings us a brand new screenshot from the Questionable Ethics chapter, showing the infamous surgery room:
As you can see, the design of the surgery machine has been much improved – this time, it actually looks like a medical unit, instead of a… medieval torture contraption. That said, let’s take a look at some of the interview’s highlights:
RPS: What stage of development are you on at this point? Are you still designing content, or is it mostly polish now? And, if the latter, is it tempting to over-polish – to tweak every last thing relentlessly because you’ve already put so much work into the project, and anything less than perfection could be viewed as a failure?
Carlos Montero: There’s been a lot of speculation that we have been doing nothing but polish for the last year or longer. This is simply not true. There were and are still parts of the game that we are actively developing, because the game isn’t done yet. It is true that over the last year we have put a ton of polish into the game, but this has largely been because some members of the team are less needed on the forefront of development and have taken to polishing old things and trying to achieve quality and consistency across the board.
There is also work that some may casually classify as “polish” that is really more about making sure we are hitting the quality bar we want. If we are examining level flow, pacing, weapon progression, puzzle challenges, player intuition, where people get lost, or stuck, or confused, is that polish? Perhaps it is, but often I think many people are specifically thinking we are sitting around remaking the same assets over and over a little better each time, or trying to find and fix every bug so our game can be “perfect”. This couldn’t be farther from the truth.
This hasn’t been about polish for polish’s sake; it’s been about learning all there is to know about how to make great games, and using it to make a great game. There aren’t any shortcuts there. We just had to learn by doing, by making mistakes, by screwing things up and starting them over again. Sometimes along the way we have learned things that fundamentally changed our way of thinking, and sometimes we have gone back and fundamentally changed parts of the game to reflect that.
So no, I don’t think it is tempting to over-polish at all. We are all eager to get the game out. We are dying to get this game out and show everyone what we’ve been working on, but we aren’t so eager that we would sacrifice our values and what we believe will make this game great. We aren’t going to put out something that isn’t good enough for us.
Well said. I think people place too much weight on these kinds of terms. Although to be fair, we really do need better words for this sort of stuff. Sure, developers might not use them – but the press does.
RPS: OK, so Black Mesa’s no longer just a Source port of Half-Life, but what exactly are you changing? What, specifically, have you redesigned? Which systems, levels, weapons, etc?
Carlos Montero: First off – Black Mesa is a not a port. It is literally illegal for us to port anything. Black Mesa is mostly made from scratch, excepting a few assets from the SDK. Pretty much every sound effect, every texture, every voice-over – all of it. We didn’t have the luxury of porting a single thing from HL1. Not AI, not level design, none of it. So let’s talk about some of Black Mesa’s big bullet-point features:
- Play for free. You need not own anything!
- Feast your eyes on over 2,000 custom Models and 5,000 custom textures – more than HL2.
- Experience over 2,000 choreographed scenes and over 6,500 lines of dialogue from all new voice acting.
- Immerse yourself in an all new soundtrack and over 2,300 custom sound effects.
- Feel the impact of custom systems such as the Face Creation System, Custom Gib System, Deathcam and more.
These features are just the tip of the iceberg, really. We’ve put a lot of love into making this game an amazing experience. When it comes to systems, levels, and weapons, we’ve touched everything, because we made it all from scratch. We tried to keep what we felt was evocative of the original Half-Life, but when recreating these things we have inherently re-designed them. The combat, the puzzles, the mechanics and pacing of every level have been re-designed. The weapon strengths, animations, balance aspects – all re-designed. The systems, aside from being completely coded from scratch, have all been re-designed to some degree. There is nothing we haven’t touched, honestly.
He is completely right on the “play for free” point, by the way. Since the Source SDK Bases have been made available for all Steam users, this means that even a Steam account with no games attached to it (not even TF2 or Alien Swarm) will be able to play Black Mesa. Which is pretty awesome of Valve – shame the rest of their modus operandi on the SDK front is… pretty bad.
RPS: Black Mesa’s evolved from a Source port of Half-Life into a full-blown remake/modern redesign, but how do you keep that from devolving into a directionless fan tribute — especially while keeping the development process so insular? What are your main sources of inspiration design-wise? What keeps the whole process grounded?
Carlos Montero: I don’t think we’ve ever had any trouble keeping a direction. Our shared vision is very strong, and if we are straying from that too much it usually becomes apparent immediately. Everyone on our team is accustomed to being a part of the process, to speaking their mind and helping shape the game. If something isn’t jiving with the group, it gets exposed pretty quick and we have always made a point to do what is best for the game, even if it means sacrificing personal ideas or work.
What we have consistently looked to for inspiration and guidance are Half-Life 2, the episodes, and Valve’s work in general. Most everything we’ve changed from a design perspective has come from that. From playing, learning, observing, and from internalizing that knowledge to resolve what is best for our project. I’m sure many may jump to conclusions here but we aren’t making any major departures from the series. We are just looking for inspiration from our modern counterparts.
Sounds good! I think these guys might just be a lot more organized than we think they are. While they might not always be on time (just like Valve), I think they will get the job done in the end. And that’s the way it should be done.
RPS: Obviously, the Source engine’s evolved a lot since you started working on Black Mesa, and game graphics in general have come a long, long way since 2005. Are you afraid, at all, of looking outdated when you finally launch? What have you done to avoid that?
Carlos Montero: We aren’t afraid of looking dated at all. For one thing, we’ve gone through one engine change during development, which means we aren’t using the same version of the source engine we started with back in 2005. For another thing, throughout development we’ve pushed this version of the engine to its limits, often creating maps that just skirted the limits of the engine due to their complexity and visual fidelity.
I definitely believe we have visually made the best game possible with this engine, and recent Source engine games have certainly proven to me that art direction and gameplay provide a more important core element to any game than fidelity or resolution. Having an aesthetic that you stick to and wowing people within the confines of that aesthetic – that’s what I personally believe is important from any game, regardless of engine or platform.
Big words – I’ll certainly hold them to it when the mod is released. It certainly looks very classy, especially in terms of level detail, but whether or not it has the best visuals Source could possibly offer… not sure. I remain skeptical.
RPS: What’s been your biggest take-away from this project? In retrospect, is there anything you would have done differently – any specific thing that you can look back on and think “Oh, if we’d just done it that way to begin with, it would’ve completely changed how everything’s turned out”?
Carlos Montero: This project started as a “Half-life HD” of sorts, but it’s really grown into more of a re-imagining of Half-life with an emphasis on using what we as an industry have learned in the last decade. I feel that there could potentially have been a much more robust and fun experience if, from the very beginning, we had put more of a focus on “New, fun experience that is evocative of Half-Life” and less “Half-life HD”. It has confused our design approach and structure over the years, I think. There are probably people on the team who would wholeheartedly disagree with those sentiments though.
Interesting. I wonder if that particular issue might have led to the problems they encountered throughout 2009, albeit indirectly.
RPS: You’ve just spent an entire interview telling me why making promises and circling dates on calendars is a terrible, terrible idea. I am, however, a bit thick, so can you – in any way, shape, or form – narrow down some sort of release window? If not, do you have a release window for any sort of playable demo? Basically, when will people be able to get their hands on the game in some form? Soon? Soon-ish?
Carlos Montero: We’re working very hard to get something out to our fans in the soon-ish timeframe. I really won’t say anything more than that.
Soon-ish, eh? Well, that’s obviously a very lenient term, but it does sound at least a bit promising, no? At the risk of being laughed at, I just have to say that I definitely think we’ll have BM:S on our hard-drives by the end of the year. And, hey – since Dota 2 and CS:GO might both slip into 2013, and assuming we still don’t see or hear nothing regarding HL3 by December; then this will be just the right thing to keep us amused until Valve brings out the big guns.