Amy Hennig and Naughty Dog Part Ways

[Frenetic Pony]

Knights of the old republic, x wing/tie fighter and dark forces/jedi knight were all ok or better for their time (though possibly most of them don't necessarily hold up). Sure there are more interesting ways to go, but it doesn't implicitly mean any game made in that setting is automatically going to suck.

 

Shadows of the Empire, Rogue Squadron, Jedi Knight 2... Star Wars had the absolute best licensed games ever for like, almost a decade.

 

Now if they could just resurrect Star Wars 1313 with the actual creative director of Uncharted at the helm.... mmmmm yeah.

 

Star Wars is the most flexible IP ever made. You just think of something, anything cool at all, and it'll just work in the setting. It's the only place where you can tell a good story and have a wizard swordfight a cyborg in space with laser swords! And if you don't think that's cool, then you're wrong and can shut up.

[Murdoc]

I think it's more the subject matter and "IP"  that synthetic might be against. With Star Wars, it's such an institution that it might not allow a lot of room to grow and do some of the interesting things Hennig has been known to do. 

 

I still enjoy Star Wars and I especially enjoy the best parts of that series (empire strikes back, kotor) but even in it's greatest examples it's still pretty narrow in scope and tone that stays on point for the "brand". 

 

Also forget 1313, it's dead, it was a different team, a different company, and would have been behind the times by the time this new game is released; it's gone now, let it rest in peace.

[Frenetic Pony]

I think it's more the subject matter and "IP"  that synthetic might be against. With Star Wars, it's such an institution that it might not allow a lot of room to grow and do some of the interesting things Hennig has been known to do. 

 

I still enjoy Star Wars and I especially enjoy the best parts of that series (empire strikes back, kotor) but even in it's greatest examples it's still pretty narrow in scope and tone that stays on point for the "brand". 

 

Also forget 1313, it's dead, it was a different team, a different company, and would have been behind the times by the time this new game is released; it's gone now, let it rest in peace.

 

This is my fear over Abrams new Star Wars. There were parts of the prequels that were cool taken in isolation. Pod Racing (another great N64 game!) was roman chariot racing taken to the ridiculous, and it was awesome. And yet Star Wars allows Roman Gladiator pits and chariot racing to exist alongside WW2 dogfighting, robots, wizards, Samurai sword fights, cyborgs, and anything else you can imagine. Anywhere else it might be dumb, should be dumb that guards will wield giant axes in a world where frikken laser pistols are common. But it just works in Star Wars.

 

It's why Star Wars has the biggest expanded universe in the world, it's just easy to imagine and place whatever the hell you want in it. If it's cool then it works. I just hope Abrams isn't so obsessed with what the original trilogy was that he gets blinded to the fact that Star Wars is just whatever seems cool mashed together. It's what made all those games from like 94-2002 work so well, they didn't copy the movies at all, they just went off on their own and it worked.

[syntheticgerbil]

I think it's more the subject matter and "IP"  that synthetic might be against. With Star Wars, it's such an institution that it might not allow a lot of room to grow and do some of the interesting things Hennig has been known to do.

Yeah, I mean, I'll most likely end up playing this game. I guess I was just hoping for something more.

[Murdoc]

Yeah, that's fair, it's pretty much how I feel every time a good director or actor gets signed on to make a super hero movie. I'm sure it'll be a fine super hero movie, but it's still a super hero movie.

[Frenetic Pony]

Yeah, that's fair, it's pretty much how I feel every time a good director or actor gets signed on to make a super hero movie. I'm sure it'll be a fine super hero movie, but it's still a super hero movie.

 

What's wrong with Superhero movies? The Avengers was a heck of a lot of fun. Are you guys seriously calling Uncharted the height of "art and integrity"? It's Indiana Jones in the modern age! It's the cheesy silly schlock adventure movies brought to video games. Everyone involved from Lucas and Spielberg down to Naughty Dog themselves proudly acknowledged as much. And Star Wars is just that but for sci-fi. This is perfect, perfect.

[Twig]

I definitely won't end up playing this game, precisely because it's Star Wars. Unless it's, like, really super goddamn awesome. Enough to get over the hurdle that is Star Wars.

[Murdoc]

What's wrong with Superhero movies? The Avengers was a heck of a lot of fun. Are you guys seriously calling Uncharted the height of "art and integrity"? It's Indiana Jones in the modern age! It's the cheesy silly schlock adventure movies brought to video games. Everyone involved from Lucas and Spielberg down to Naughty Dog themselves proudly acknowledged as much. And Star Wars is just that but for sci-fi. This is perfect, perfect.

 

I'm not going to get into what's wrong with Super hero movies because it's been talked to death and it probably boils down to personal choices for entertainment. 

Didn't say Uncharted was the height of anything, but it did forward the medium in a lot of ways, so it would have been nice to see the director apply that and tackle new challenges to help propel the medium further. Which she may, but there are fundamental knows with Star Wars where they won't be that much better than what she has done in the past.

[Frenetic Pony]

I'm not going to get into what's wrong with Super hero movies because it's been talked to death and it probably boils down to personal choices for entertainment. 

Didn't say Uncharted was the height of anything, but it did forward the medium in a lot of ways, so it would have been nice to see the director apply that and tackle new challenges to help propel the medium further. Which she may, but there are fundamental knows with Star Wars where they won't be that much better than what she has done in the past.

 

I guess I'm just not sure how I see Uncharted as breaking any new ground anywhere. It was a technically and thematically executed much better than many other third person shooters. But nothing in the gameplay (third person cover shooter), story (long cutscenes and feeling like an action movie was already nailed by Half Life 1) or anything else really felt new.

 

I want her to go do what she does best, which is to ensure the above, a great execution of thematics married with gameplay.

[syntheticgerbil]

It wasn't only a shooter though, you are forgetting the platforming and world interaction, which also has it's roots in certain sections of Soul Reaver. Levels in Uncharted have tended to flow in service of the story instead of constantly ramping up difficulty and keeping a game that should otherwise be systematic new and fresh. However, I'd argue in Uncharted 3, this is somewhat of a detriment to the game as well. I liken the success of Uncharted closer to a hybrid of all of the good bits of Sands of Time and Metal Gear Solid. But I think you've already made up your mind.

Also Half Life (1 and 2) is ugly and has super awkward character acting and animation sooo....

 

But seriously, ask yourself this: if Uncharted 2 were a licensed Indiana Jones game, would it have been anywhere as good?

[Gamemore]

Nope, it would have been better since Nazis > Dudes from the Ex-Soviet-Union. (As baddies in non-cold-war related media at least. In reality of course it was all Dudes from the then current Soviet Union > Nazis).

[gray117]

... if nothing else I think she's played the role of a 'role model' not only very well, but pretty honestly and without personally using it as 'leverage' in any exploitative way.

 

That her exit from naughty dogs remains somewhat murky is probably a reasonable indicator that neither side parted on the best of terms, but that also neither could professionally leverage any complaints against each other, and that each owed the other a good deal.

 

Personally uncharted was far too hammy for me, although 'repackaging' this is still something of a challenge that I think is easy to under estimate I would be far more interested to see if Amy will perhaps get/want the opportunity to exhibit a new tone and perhaps even take a more directorial role in the game - something I feel (most) writers never really get to do to great effect.

 

This might all be totally counter to the events already under way, perhaps even Amy's own preference; but I think it would be fascinating to see. I also think Amy is in a relatively unique position of authority and circumstance to really push large game/team development structures as a writer should she want to... Of course, if this never happens it could be equally revealing to hear from her more as a representative of a team as to why this was not something she would want to pursue so directly as an individual writer.

 

It's a little unfair perhaps to look orward to such things from one person - but I think Amy Hennig is [perhaps in part due to fortuitous timing/chance] in an extremely interesting, able and powerful position that perhaps someone like, say, Rihanna Prachett or Kim Swift have yet to either get the chance to, or been able to, encompass completely. (That's not a slight on them, two very accomplished individuals, but both who I believe have at least suggested, if not stated, frustrations at structural/directorial walls they had to work with/around.)

[Frenetic Pony]

It wasn't only a shooter though, you are forgetting the platforming and world interaction, which also has it's roots in certain sections of Soul Reaver. Levels in Uncharted have tended to flow in service of the story instead of constantly ramping up difficulty and keeping a game that should otherwise be systematic new and fresh. However, I'd argue in Uncharted 3, this is somewhat of a detriment to the game as well. I liken the success of Uncharted closer to a hybrid of all of the good bits of Sands of Time and Metal Gear Solid. But I think you've already made up your mind.

Also Half Life (1 and 2) is ugly and has super awkward character acting and animation sooo....

 

But seriously, ask yourself this: if Uncharted 2 were a licensed Indiana Jones game, would it have been anywhere as good?

 

Probably. I swear it's literally just Indy with some stronger female presence. There's Sully, aka Sean Connery. Sala, AKA your current foreign friend. They're missing a Marcus Brody, but I digress.

 

The platforming is utterly basic at best, the levels "flow" just like Half Life, in that it's a series of really cool things to do.

 

I'll admit, almost solid stealth in small parts is nice touch. But it's barely there. I don't think I've seen anyone besides a few people on here call Uncharted groundbreaking. On the other hand Seth Rogen directly called Uncharted "Just Indiana Jones" when he refused to direct a movie adaptation.

 

I'm really not trying to detriment Hennig or Uncharted. Uncharted 2 was a heck of a lot of fun, and 3 was solid enough. It just feels like you're calling both Star Wars and Indiana Jones a bit bullshit, two of the most popular and successful IP's in history; while holding up Uncharted as some breakthrough in gaming. While I can point to any number of reasons and people that would say it's practically in the same genre and spirit as Indiana Jones, and that there are a ton of great Star Wars games that "pushed" things forward as well as any Uncharted game did.

 

Heck I'd say they did even more in their heyday. Jedi Knight had morale choices, first person sword combat (of a sort), an rpg like system in a shooter, and attempted to tell a relatively complex story in a first person shooter way back in 1997. That was friggen mindblowing back then, heck it would be rather unique even today. I get why you might not like Star Wars, but Hennig isn't necessarily going down some hole of staid, forever doomed products just because you don't like the IP personally.

[syntheticgerbil]

Well yeah, Star Wars is bullshit, complete and utter bullshit. Sure there were some meritable and creative ideas put forth in some respect in nearly every movie but that's all I'm going to give it. There's enough of that franchise for eons now. Indiana Jones just as much, except with that there has been less saturation in merchandise, bad ideas, and ugly fans on that front. I don't rate IPs based on how "successful" they are in monetary and popular, so this conversation between you and I is just not going to work. I also don't really give any credence to you trying to cram Half Life in to this conversation when it basically has nothing to do with anything being talked about here, in terms of gameplay style or cinematic form.

 

Yeah existing IPs, especially those owned by Disney or whatever megacorp are limiting to whatever artist or creator who may be dipping their pen in to it. There's no other way around it. I don't know if this is shocking to you or what, but stating that dumb tripe like The Avengers sold well so therefore it's always a good idea is unconvincing (to me at least, since I also really dislike anything by Whedon.) Obviously I understand sometimes the right creators can make something interesting or unconventional with the IP, but that's not a very high percentage.

 

I still have yet to use the word "breakthrough" to refer to Uncharted, but you seem to insist that this is what I'm saying. I do think the series did some really interesting things and (outside of the first game) did them well and broke a convention or two despite how obviously derivative they are. I can't understand whether you are more upset about the gameplay or story, but as far as the Indiana Jones tropes go, the character archetypes are there, but the fact that Elena is a real character who is there for all three games instead of being written out for the next hot starlet shows what kind of thought was put in to the story more than a usual Hollywood screenwriter could come up with. That single fakeout of the Indiana Jones trope in Uncharted 2 when you meet back up with Elena and the quip of "last year's model," is extremely cool.

 

Also you seem pretty hung up on being angry about Uncharted. I'm guessing you have never played a Legacy of Kain/Soul Reaver game, which were successful enough around the turn of the century to get very confusingly named sequels and have a cult following of their own for earlier action/adventure gameplay mechanics and story as well.

 

I get why you might not like Star Wars, but Hennig isn't necessarily going down some hole of staid, forever doomed products just because you don't like the IP personally.

I really think you need to chill out, every message you've put here tends to be some narrative in your head of things I never said.

 

My actual predictions from this news, given the gargantuan IP at hand and Disney money, will involve Hennig either leaving before the project is complete or sticking around until the product is shipped for the sake of credit and then leaving anyway.

[Merus]

I liked Uncharted. Sure, it was a narratively-driven series, or more accurately a tone-driven series, but it handled that well, it had reasonably good quality writing apart from the problem people always bring up with Uncharted, and it knew when to put the mechanics down to give the world a moment to breath. Sure, it's basically Indiana Jones with a more diverse cast, but that's exactly what they were trying to achieve.

 

Part of the problem with Star Wars is that it's beholden to the license, and for the past couple of decades the owner of the license spent a lot of time convincing people he didn't understand the appeal of the setting. The new owners may or may not; on the one hand, buying Star Wars feels like a cash grab; on the other hand, it seems like Disney have some institutional investment in ensuring the appeal of a character or setting is observed by the rest of the empire. (I remember when they unveiled the 'Princess' Merida design, and then walked it back pretty quickly after people complained Merida wouldn't doll herself up like that.)

[Gormongous]

Part of the problem with Star Wars is that it's beholden to the license, and for the past couple of decades the owner of the license spent a lot of time convincing people he didn't understand the appeal of the setting. The new owners may or may not; on the one hand, buying Star Wars feels like a cash grab; on the other hand, it seems like Disney have some institutional investment in ensuring the appeal of a character or setting is observed by the rest of the empire. (I remember when they unveiled the 'Princess' Merida design, and then walked it back pretty quickly after people complained Merida wouldn't doll herself up like that.)

 

To jump into this conversation at its least useful point, I think that the power of not having an aging filmmaker whose principal desire is to make films his kids would like cannot be underestimated for the vitality of a franchise. Whatever their other many evils, corporations are ageless and never have the kind of crisis that Lucas clearly had throughout all of the prequel Star Wars movies.

[SecretAsianMan]

To jump into this conversation at its least useful point, I think that the power of not having an aging filmmaker whose principal desire is to make films his kids would like cannot be underestimated for the vitality of a franchise. Whatever their other many evils, corporations are ageless and never have the kind of crisis that Lucas clearly had throughout all of the prequel Star Wars movies.

 

To jump onto this least useful point, I agree.  I think Star Wars in general has some neat ideas and possibilities that suffered from poor execution.  Lucas pretty much had final say in everything, which is totally his right, but maybe that wasn't the best idea for the final product.  I'm optimistic it can get better, or maybe I'm just hopeful.

[Architecture]

If we're talking about the franchise at large, I have full faith that JJ Abrams and his team of collaborators will make something at least worth watching. I greatly enjoyed both of his Star Trek films.

[Frenetic Pony]

If we're talking about the franchise at large, I have full faith that JJ Abrams and his team of collaborators will make something at least worth watching. I greatly enjoyed both of his Star Trek films.

 

Into Darkness kinda sucked, I tore into the script and sent into to Bad Robot (spoiler follow, duuuuuh): http://intodarknessscript.blogspot.com/

 

Basically, one of the biggest problem is that both bad guys sucked. One you actually empathized with and felt sorry for until he just goes all completely maniacal out of left field. The other doesn't seem to have any motivation or even screen time. The second problem is we are constantly told what's happening instead of being shown it. Khan is evil... because he says he is. We don't see him killing tons of people, we're just told he kinda wants too. The other bad guy, admiral what's his name, doesn't do almost anything at all except cackle evilly. It only works if you cackle evilly after like, blowing a planet, not just because.

 

But I've watched Abram's first Star Trek like 10 times. It's basically Star Wars. I hope Kasdan et. al. can help him put together something more like that. And it's not like Disney has "ruined" the Avengers/Marvel if you're into that. The Winter Soldier is supposed to be awesome, The Avengers was awesome, and they even gave Shane Black Ironman 3. Most studios would've balked at a guy like Black going anywhere near a tentpole, so I can't be that pessimistic quite yet.

[Architecture]

Frenetic, your takedown of Star Trek Into Darkness is pretty misguided and you seem to have either missed the intent or misinterpreted the information being presented to the point that you assert things that simply aren't true.

 

It's also laughably odd to say that studios would wish to disassociate themselves from Black--at one time the highest-paid writer in Hollywood, famous for his action-packed tentpole scripts--who took a hiatus from the film world of his own accord.

[Bjorn]

I just got around to watching Black's Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, and that's just a terrifically goofy, wonderful film.  I don't think it's terribly surprising that he got IM3 with a positive history with Downey Jr, and being involved in one of the projects that helped Downey get his feet back under him and to have other directors have faith that he wouldn't meltdown mid-shoot.  If Downey had any input in director, then Black likely had a huge bonus in his favor.

 

In Naughty Dog news, another big name has left though studio, although Nate Wells had only been there a couple of years. 

[Frenetic Pony]

Frenetic, your takedown of Star Trek Into Darkness is pretty misguided and you seem to have either missed the intent or misinterpreted the information being presented to the point that you assert things that simply aren't true.

 

It's also laughably odd to say that studios would wish to disassociate themselves from Black--at one time the highest-paid writer in Hollywood, famous for his action-packed tentpole scripts--who took a hiatus from the film world of his own accord.

 

Huh... Bad Robot seemed to like it. And you just say I "misinterpreted it" without explaining. But there's nothing to misinterpret, the bad guys weren't bad enough and there's simply too much telling and not showing, unless somehow the relatively disappointing box office results are incorrect?

 

Black is also a throwback to the eighties, and studios like "moving on" in terms of audience. It was an unusual choice for Hollywood believe it or not. Hollywood almost exclusively chooses recently financially successful directors, regardless of how their movies were actually taken by audiences, and generally disdain people that haven't been around for a while.

 

I didn't say it was a BAD choice. It obviously wasn't. Or even a particularly bold choice, but it's just not how Hollywood works usually. To Hollywood Black was a relative risk because he hadn't had a blockbuster in around 20 years. EG Schwarzenneger and Costner have come out of semi retirement, but they aren't headlining anything huge because Hollywood is tentative about whether they still appeal at all. Meanwhile Johnathon Leibsman gets a hundred+ million to make Teenage Mutant Turtles because Wrath of the Titans kinda made some money. Nevermind that it has a 5.8 on IMDB and only made money because it was a sequel with trailers that showed a large budget and Liam Neeson + Ralph Fiennes.

 

EG Hollywood likes recent money (cough, why M. Night Shamylan kept getting gigs and funding) and doesn't usually recognize anything else, including success in the past. James Cameron had to fight to get Avatar finished with the budget he wanted, heck at one point the funding was pulled entirely. And he's James fucking Cameron.

[Architecture]

If you really want to get into it, I can break down your critique of Into Darkness point-by-point, but I did not have the time at work to launch into it and personally don't see what purpose it would serve other than fueling my ego. But to complain about something Kirk's revival via Khan's blood because it wasn't telegraphed to the audience is incorrect--McCoy mentions its regenerative properties after injecting some into a dead tribble after Khan's apprehension on Qo'noS. I also think both villains have astoundingly clear motivation and while I am not a huge fan of Orci & Kurtzman's work at large, both of their Trek scripts have been pretty damn smart and tightly plotted, all things considered.

[Frenetic Pony]

If you really want to get into it, I can break down your critique of Into Darkness point-by-point, but I did not have the time at work to launch into it and personally don't see what purpose it would serve other than fueling my ego. But to complain about something Kirk's revival via Khan's blood because it wasn't telegraphed to the audience is incorrect--McCoy mentions its regenerative properties after injecting some into a dead tribble after Khan's apprehension on Qo'noS. I also think both villains have astoundingly clear motivation and while I am not a huge fan of Orci & Kurtzman's work at large, both of their Trek scripts have been pretty damn smart and tightly plotted, all things considered.

 

It was just another obvious McGuffin that didn't really feel needed, I wasn't really that bothered by it so much as felt it was unnecessary. I do look forward to whatever else you have to say about it when you have the time.

[SecretAsianMan]

It was just another obvious McGuffin that didn't really feel needed, I wasn't really that bothered by it so much as felt it was unnecessary. I do look forward to whatever else you have to say about it when you have the time.

 

I hate derailing threads like this, but I would also be interested in hearing about it.  I suspect I agree with Architecture but am still interested in reading the thoughts.