MirageDwarf
Member
Halo 3 was released in 2007. So new Halo game in 2010/2011 is kinda expected. After all nobody thinks MS will stop making Halo games, right?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Halo Reach: new game in the Halo Universe
- Thread starter Annoying Old Party Man
- Start date
EternalGamer
Banned
Shake Appeal said:
Except when you consider the latest four, Halo 3, Halo Wars, Halo: ODST, and this new one, Halo: Reach, that adds up to a lot of Halo in a few years.
This franchise already didn't have enough new ideas to justify 3 games in 8 years. Let alone this much milking.
Proelite said:
No, that isn't true. Mario Tennis, Mario Kart, Smash Bros., all these dozens of titles are milking. But they're all very good games.
It's milking when (among other things) you release a title in a completely new genre. (ie Halo Wars). That, combined with release frequency.
EternalGamer
Banned
MirageDwarf said:
Whether or not it is inevitable that MS would make new Halo games is not automatically justification for their existence.
Zeouterlimits
Member
It really really really is about time to hear what the Halo team were making.
Come on stage Frankie, show us your might.
Come on stage Frankie, show us your might.
proposition
Banned
He has got a point though. I mean in the first one you shoot alien dudes with guns. In the second one you shoot alien dudes with guns. And the third one? You shoot alien dudes with guns.WrikaWrek said:
Talk about unoriginal!
EternalGamer
Banned
WrikaWrek said:
You have your opinion, I have mine. I played through all 3 Halo games and was underwhelmed by how little changed in each one. Barely any new enemies or game play scenarios. A couple of new weapons in each. You compare that to the type of radical changes that occured in other major franchises such as Metal Gear, Final Fantasy, Resident Evil, etc, and it looks pretty lazy and uninspired.
EternalGamer
Banned
proposition said:
Rather it is you shoot the same alien dudes with the same guns using the exact same methods and strategies in environments that look mostly the same. The only cool new addition in Halo 3 were the Scarabs. But they needed alot more cool ideas/set pieces than just that.
Revelations
Banned
With that logic every franchise in this industry gets milked...proposition said:
RubberJohnny
Banned
Halo ODST is an expansion pack, essentially.
Halo 3: 2007
Halo Wars: 2009
Halo Reach: Unconfirmed
That's a pretty strange definition of 'milked', it looks strangely like the industry norms of an iteration every two years.
Stoney Mason
Banned
Sarcasm people. Do you speak it?
Cat in the Hat
Member
You know i'm thinking this might be what some would call, a reach
BLaZiN PRopHeT
Member
EternalGamer said:
why change a great formula? The people who continue to buy and play the game online dont seem to care.
Stoney Mason
Banned
RubberJohnny said:
Will it be priced like an expansion pack?
Serious question since I haven't followed the title.
For what it's worth I am also tired of the Halo formula but a lot of other people seem to like it so there will always be a need to satisy the existing fans and also build new fans.
EternalGamer said:
Lazy and uninspired? Say what you will about gameplay (which has become more refined and perfected with each iteration), but Halo 3's community and customization features alone annihilate the competition. Console devs will be struggling for years to match Halo 3's community features.
You could easily make arguments for lazy and uninspired with regards to Metal Gear, Final Fantasy, and Resident Evil. Good grief.
Stoney Mason said:
It's not an expansion pack. It's a brand new full-fledged single-player campaign that includes the entirety of Halo 3's multiplayer.
EternalGamer
Banned
GhaleonEB said:
What are these "many changes." Like I said, when I compare this franchises to other major AA franchises like Metal Gear, Final Fantasy, and Resident Evil, I see little evolution. Halo just aspires to create the same experience each time. Metal Gear 1 plays pretty differently from Metal Gear 3 plays very differently from Metal Gear 4. Final Fantasy 7 not much like Final Fantasy 10 not much like Final Fantasy 12. All have radically new gameplay additions, require new strategies, and have unique set pieces and bosses. In the Halo universe you fight the exact same five enemy types in the exact same ways with the exact same weapons plus one or two minor additions each time.
Stoney Mason
Banned
soldat7 said:
I'd prefer it to be priced accordingly then if the multiplayer is simply an existing plug in to a multiplayer that already exists but that's just me. I'm not trying to dog Halo. I respect the series. But I also fall into the group of people who would like to see them try some new stuff within the franchise a bit more. Hopefully Reach if true will do that.
We don't know. Bungie has been calling it an expansion and making it clear they don't consider it a release with the same level of content as a full game. But Microsoft controls the pricing. One hint about pricing may be in how Microsoft had Bungie hold three DLC maps for Halo 3 off to bundle with ODST (they were finished last fall). I assume they did it to make the "exclusive MP Halo 3 content" a draw as a way to pushing the price up. And it's showing up on various retail websites at full price. I'm expecting $50, minimum, most likely $60.Stoney Mason said:
Not really. But there's no point arguing with someone who's starting position is this far from the mark, in a thread on an entirely different topic.EternalGamer said:
Classic_Gs
Member
:lolHellraizer said:
EternalGamer
Banned
soldat7 said:
Then make the argument. Each of the bosses and set pieces in Metal Gear 3 are unique. None of them are repeated from Metal Gear 1. They added new play mechanics like the camoflage system, and allowed for a behind the camera perspective, which changes the stealth gameplay pretty radically. Final Fantasy XII's introduction of gambits makes it play nothing like Final Fantasy 10. They did away with random battles, made them all occur in the overworld and the need to issue commands in each battle. And both the Final Fantasy game and the Metal Gear game offer unique storylines and introduce unique characters in each and every game.
With Halo, 10 years later, I'm still circle strafing the same grunts, backpedaling while shooting invisible dudes with swords, and shotgunning exploding flood guys the exact same way I was 8 years earlier. I'm not denying the Halo games have SOME changes, but they are pretty minor when compared to the evolution most other major franchises undergo. It's like they are too afraid to really try anything new.
The Halo games are all solidly made games and it's clear the developers work hard on them. But that doesn't automatically make them original or inspired in terms of design evolution. You guys can keep saying "not really" when I point out the similarities, but instead why don't you explain to me what really is so radically unique about each Halo game and how they compare to the aformentioned evolutions in other major series that I noted above.
EternalGamer said:
It's the difference between franchises that focus on multiplayer and ones that focus on single-player. You only change the "formula"/core gameplay of a multiplayer game when it is bad. See: Killzone to Killzone 2. Otherwise you shouldn't try to fix what's broken. CS and CS Source were released years apart and hitboxes aside, their controls and mechanics are the same. Same for the CoD series and the Halo series.
D
Deleted member 21120
Unconfirmed Member
/facepalm
Stoney Mason
Banned
EternalGamer said:
This also isn't 100% fair because the fps genre is a more specific genre than those games. And a lot of people bitch about Resident Evil changing too much (I'm not one of those people however) That being said I think Halo has the potential to introduce more innovation on the gameplay side than it has.
But that will be my last Halo post. As I said I respect the franchise. I respect they treat the mulitplayer audience seriously unlike a lot of console games.
Revelations
Banned
It will be very different. You arnt playing a bio enhanced super soldier. Tact and evasiveness will be centered.soldat7 said:
EternalGamer said:
I'm not going to make that argument since I'm an ardent fan of the Metal Gear Solid series. However, for someone that might casually approach the franchise, they don't see anything different between 2 and 3, for example. Resident Evil on the other hand...lol...
I'm not blind to Halo's 'sameness' either. I really do with there were more enemies, more varied encounters, a better story, anti-aliasing, etc. BUT Bungie did so much with everything else, it's hard to say that they were lazy.
Yeah, for an expansion the core content and gameplay is looking to be quite a bit different, with an emphasis on stealth. The visual scanning, silenced SMG and nighttime/rainy setting all point to that. And as you said, the free-roaming hub world, and the missions that can be done in any order, from the perspective of different characters.soldat7 said:
It will still be a Halo game, but there are more core gameplay and design changes already known in this one that came over with Halo 3 proper. A rehash it isn't.
It's a Halo thread. I can't believe it took this long to go off the rails with blind rage.Cocopjojo said:
Revelations
Banned
GhaleonEB said:
Which accordingly defeats the notion that every Halo Game is the same.
EternalGamer
Banned
Stoney Mason said:
Your right that there is less real evolution in FPS genre in general. But Halo seems even more conservative than most. Gears of War 2 has some pretty unique set pieces that require you to approach situations differently (like the running between the teeth inside of the giant worm).
And even if it true that FPS games in general don't really evolve, then that is, to me, an argument more against sequels to FPS games in general. I can agree with the idea that "If it ain't broke don't fix it." But if "it ain't broke" then I don't need to buy a new version of it every 2-3 years. It has no real raison d'etre.
The Librarian
Banned
If only there were a Twitter post to support this rumor.
EternalGamer
Banned
soldat7 said:
I'm certainly interestedin what they do with ODST as it does have the potential to really change things up. But, given what the company has done so far, I'll remain skeptical until they prove they really can change things up.
Again, I respect the team as hardworking and they certainly do polish things well. When I was referring to "lazy" was referring to the design evolution, not the games as whole. They just don't seem to have any real vision or direction for the series that shows dramatic evolution the way many other series have.
EternalGamer
Banned
Orlics said:
For me, the 4 player co-op added enough that I was willing to play Halo one more time. But that is really what the gameplay experience felt like to me: playing Halo for the 3rd time. I dont' really want or need to play Halo for a fourth time unless it offers something truly unique in terms of gameplay.
I would love to see them sort of go back to the roots of their Halo design, for example. To make a game where you actually issued commands quickly on the fly to your teammates while blending that with a traditional FPS game. Sort of making a RTS and FPS hybrid.
EternalGamer said:
Metal Gear and Resident Evil went through radical changes in exactly what? (3 first games)
And final Fantasy....really? It changes everything, or almost everything with each installment, there's no continuity.
edit: Lol new camera in MGS3, you gotta be shitting me, in the subsistence edition.
I really don't want to get into this. But it's worth pointing out that Halo 3 added a pretty large number of core gameplay and content changes, including equipment, the heavy class of weapons (turrets, etc) and massive set pieces like the Scarabs, which are entirely AI-driven and not on a linear prescrpted path. There is nothing like the Scarab battles anywhere in the previous two games, in content or execution. And the Brute Chieftains make for some fearsome boss battles, and are likewise entirely AI driven.EternalGamer said:
And on the feature set front, they added Forge, saved firms, Screenshots, file sharing, online four-player co-op, the campaign scoring system, the skull modifiers and the ridiculously deep bungie.net integration. It is true that the core gameplay has been resilient through the three games. But that's because they nailed it the first time around. They expanded the gameplay feature set quite a bit with each game; comparing the content of the first game to the third highlights just how far it has come. It'd downright silly to claim otherwise.
ToyMachine228
Member
So I think we all agree that the screenshot of that menu on Bungie.net is fake. This rumor stems from two things.
A) This poster who is betting his account on Halo: Reach being legit.
B) That Twitter page posted in the Halo 3 thread which stated there are two Halo 3 expansions/spinoffs that exist. One being ODST. I don't think Reach would be considered a Halo 3 expansion however, as I BELIEVE that Reach was destroyed before the events of Halo: Combat Evolved.
A) This poster who is betting his account on Halo: Reach being legit.
B) That Twitter page posted in the Halo 3 thread which stated there are two Halo 3 expansions/spinoffs that exist. One being ODST. I don't think Reach would be considered a Halo 3 expansion however, as I BELIEVE that Reach was destroyed before the events of Halo: Combat Evolved.
Scottlarock
Banned
donotwant.gifEternalGamer said:
EternalGamer
Banned
WrikaWrek said:
Granted the first 3 RE game are bad examples. But even they did introduce numerous (not just one or two) new enemy types to deal with. I was referring more to the later evolutions of the series with 4 & 5 from one. As I mentioned, Metal Gear 3's camouflage and 'survival" system added some pretty unique elements and of course there were always the bosses in each game that required unique strategies. Similarly, Metal Gear 2 had some pretty unique set pieces, like the sniper silhouette escort mission, situations that add variety to the gameplay beyond just the standard stealth concept.
strikeselect
You like me, you really really like me!
I really hope Bungie isn't tied up with this.
No more focking Halo. Move on please.
No more focking Halo. Move on please.
MisterHero
Super Member
The Librarian
Banned
MisterHero said:
EternalGamer
Banned
GhaleonEB said:
I agree with you on the Sacrabs. They were a really cool addition and did require you to vary your approach. They were a great addition. But things like "file sharing" and the ability to mod levels by placing weapons etc. seems pretty minor to me. Playing through Halo 3's campaign, the counters with the scarabs were the only set pieces that stood out to me as something unique that I had not see before in the previous two games.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked