Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
XBox (Games) First Person Shooters (Games) PlayStation (Games)

Halo 3 In the Works, Set To Crush PS3 Launch? 110

Posted by Zonk from the file-under-s-for-suspicious dept.
IGN has an article claiming to reveal a few rumours from around the industry. The most interesting of these rumours is the possibility that Halo 3 is in the works already, and what's more is being targeted at the PS3 launch date in an effort to undermine Sony. From the article: "The release of Halo 3 at the precise launch of PS3 is a pure, military tactical move, similar to the PS2's greatest lineup ever launching simultaneously with the launch of the Xbox and GameCube. It's designed to counter Sony's upcoming launch with the best weapon Earth has on its side, Master Chief." I'd take this one with a big helping of NaCl.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Halo 3 In the Works, Set To Crush PS3 Launch? More

Halo 3 In the Works, Set To Crush PS3 Launch?

Comments Filter:

  • Probably won't make a difference (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Kanpai ( 713697 ) <KanpaiWai.gmail@com> on Monday February 28, 2005 @04:33PM (#11806167)
    The way i see people buy video games and consoles these days, gamers will simply rejoyce and buy both the PS3 and Halo 3 together. After all, they were going to get both of them eventually, same release date or not.
    • Or, since Microsoft will print a zillion copies of Halo 3 and the PS3 is (knowing Sony) likely to be in short supply, gamers will get the PS3 first, and then calmly, at their leisure, get Halo 3. If this is true, it sounds like a recipe for rushing Bungie (by, in effect, letting Sony set the release date) and getting another game without an ending, or worse.

      • Re:Probably won't make a difference (Score:4, Insightful)

        by badasscat ( 563442 ) <basscadet75@@@yahoo...com> on Tuesday March 01, 2005 @11:46AM (#11812698)
        If this is true, it sounds like a recipe for rushing Bungie (by, in effect, letting Sony set the release date) and getting another game without an ending, or worse.

        Come on, say it - it sounds to me like a recipe for disaster on MS's part, not just a recipe for rushing.

        Seriously, does MS expect that they're actually going to make a dent in PS3 sales on launch day? These are by nature early adopters, people who are willing to sit in lines for hours on end, willing to pay $300-$400 for a system just so they can hit the internet and tell everybody how l33t they are.

        At best, MS can hope for some residual sales from PS3 buyers who will also pick up Halo 3. But beyond that, a lot of Xbox-only owners will simply stay home on the PS3 launch day rather than deal with the crowds (those who really want Halo 3 can just order it online, and many will). The end result is going to be that the Halo 3 release will just get lost in the shuffle; can you remember what PS2 games were released on the day of the Xbox launch, or what Xbox games were released on the day of the GameCube launch? Every time a console is launched, one or another competitor (usually whoever's newest in the industry, and/or the most desperate) tries to pull out their big guns, and every time they fail miserably.

        MS is still learning. They're making all the same mistakes that their predecessors did before them. You don't try to take on a competitor directly on launch day. Not with a game, that's for sure, no matter how big of a game it is. For the experienced players in the market (which includes Sony now), a competitors' launch day is a time to lay low... everybody's gonna have their day in the sun, and there's really nothing you can do about it. It's in everybody's best interests to let a launch day be a launch day.

        The only way MS could hope to slow down PS3 launch day sales would be to launch Xbox 2 on the same day (though that's just robbing Peter to pay Paul, since it'd cut into their own sales too). Short of that and they're just committing market suicide with whatever they put out that week.
    • Maybe, but...
      These things are NOT gonna be cheap! These consoles will probably launch with pricetags around $350-$400. At that rate, I know I won't be getting two, and when it comes down to it, I'll choose xbox over ps3 solely because of the Master Chief factor.

      <Halo 2 rant>
      "I'm gonna finish this fight." WHAT KIND OF AN ENDING IS THAT???
      </Halo 2 rant>

    • Re:Probably won't make a difference (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      You're missing the point. TFA didn't say anything about Xbox360, NeXtBox, Xbox2, whatever launching the same time as the PS3.

      In fact, it's been estimated that the Xbox2 is due for release later this year, well before the PS3.

      Releasing Halo 3 at the same time as the PS3 is much different than releasing Xbox2/Halo3 at the same time as the PS3.

      People will already have the Xbox2, or those who did wait, will now choose: Halo 3 and Xbox2 or PS3 and... Kingdom Hearts 2.

      Spend $50 bucks on Halo 3 or $350 on PS3

  • Master Chef (Score:3, Funny)

    by AtariAmarok ( 451306 ) on Monday February 28, 2005 @04:40PM (#11806237)
    Sorry, I can't look at the character's name anymore without thinking "Master Chef"

    BAM!

  • MS can't sell consoles in Japan. Sony can. PS3 will outsell the Xbox2 easily.

    • Re:It's simple (Score:4, Insightful)

      by superpulpsicle ( 533373 ) on Monday February 28, 2005 @04:46PM (#11806306)
      Knowing Xbox had the shortest life cycle in the history of any successful console. I'd say Xbox2 will be in the market for almost 2 years before Xbox3 arrives.

      Another words you get a way better bang for your buck with PS3. Yes, I too agree Xbox will probably never win in Japan.

      • Re:It's simple (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Rousterfarian ( 841732 )
        Glad to see I am not the only one amazed by this. PS2 = $299 for 6 years Xbox = $299 for 4 years PS2 was easily a better value.

        • Re:It's simple (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Babbster ( 107076 ) <aaronbabb@NoSPaM.gmail.com> on Monday February 28, 2005 @05:28PM (#11806799) Homepage
          Perspective: $300 over four years is $6.25/month. If that's too much money for you, I can only suggest one thing: Get a friggin' job.

          I have all three consoles but this nonsense about Xbox somehow being a bad deal because its time from introduction to new console is too short is ridiculous on its face...not to mention the fact that anybody who bought EITHER the PS2 or the Xbox at launch was a tool of the evil marketing drones. The PS2 launch lineup was a horror and the Xbox had ONE decent game (personally, I'm not a big Halo fan so I wasn't even up for that). At the time of the PS2's release, you could have bought a Dreamcast and a few GOOD games for the same price (or, if you already had the DC, you could have just bought a bunch of good games).

          • It will matter to developers though. Less time to make the game. Less time to sell the game.
          • Perspective: $300 over four years is $6.25/month. If that's too much money for you, I can only suggest one thing: Get a friggin' job.

            An alternate suggestion would be to simply not buy an XBox 2, thus saving $300.

            That would be easier than getting a job.

        • Re:It's simple (Score:2, Informative)

          by Ericn484 ( 713920 )
          I am sorry but trying to measure out the value for how many years the item was out is not really a good way to think about it. The thing to look at his how much time did you enjoy on each console. If your PS2 sat in the corner while you were playing your Xbox all the time, then the Xbox was a better value and vice versa the other way around. But then again, when I buy a console I am not exactly looking for a "Value". I am looking for what I am going to enjoy more.
          • Look guys all I was trying to say is if you bought bought consoles at launch then you are going to get more total years of life out of the PS2 then the Xbox. This is a fact. As for which one I play more, that's the PS2 also. It has the best library of games. I do own all three major consoles,FYI.
            • I would disagree. My PS2 became cursed with the Disc Read Error after nearly two years. My Xbox is still going hard and I've been playing it more or less every day since I got it three years ago. So, given this, the XBox has clearly been the better deal - not only has it lasted longer, but it has also kept my interest longer.

              The only thing I want a PS2 for now is DMC3, but I can live without it.
            • I totally disagree. Just because the Xbox 2 is coming out doesn't mean I have to buy it and stop using the Xbox. I could get 10 years of enjoyment out of my Xbox if I wanted. What? Sony doesn't provide upgrades very often so that is supposed to be a good thing? With all the hype around the cell I will be amazed if it is half the system they say it is. Peace out - and please, enjoy whatever system you like. Because it doesn't matter which is "better", just which one you want to play.

        • Re:It's simple (Score:3, Insightful)

          by unclethursday ( 664807 )
          My own experience has been:

          PS2: $300, died a year and a half later with constant Disc Read Errors on any disk put in it, finally bought a slim PS2 for $150 a few months back to replace it after borrowing my friend's for over a year and a half (since he never played it). 4 Memeory cards at @$20 each: $80. Total Price: $530.

          Xbox: $200 (bought well after launch, just two weeks before the JSRF bundle was announced) plus $150 total on XBL ($50 on XBL launch, $50 after first year, another $50 this year). Ha

      • Another words you get a way better bang for your buck with PS3.

        You can always tell when someone doesn't read enough. Strange little phonetic alterations like this pop up and add +5 retard to my internal filter.

        In other words. This concludes the asshole portion of this post :).

        XBOX 3 will not launch in two years. I don't agree with MS reasoning on a quick launch of XBOX 2, but I can follow the reasoning and see the logic.

      • Knowing Xbox had the shortest life cycle in the history of any successful console. I'd say Xbox2 will be in the market for almost 2 years before Xbox3 arrives.

        Sorry, I failed to catch your logic train.

        • First off, I don't see how conclude that the xbox2 will have a 2 year cycle when the xbox had a 4 year cycle.
        • Next, you've associated console cycle time with "bang for the buck". Did the ps1 suddenly stop selling after the introduction of ps2? No, quite the opposite in fact. Games continued to be re

        • Re:Huh? (Score:1, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward
          However, you're right on the final point -- you can't sell a "gaijin" console in Japan.

          Er... "gaijin" means "foreign person". It cannot be applied to electrical appliances. The word you're probably not looking for (but I'm going to give you it anyway) is "gaikokusei".

          Your claim is somewhat dodgy apart from that. In the 1970s, nobody thought you'd ever be able to sell Japanese cars in America. The American auto makers were thought to be completely safe from foreign competition. Hmm.
          • Well, that's why I put it in quotes: it was a tongue-in-cheek reference that, while incorrect literally, got the point across. Perhaps you overlooked this in your zeal to create an "insightful" post.

            Of course, I'd love to be proven wrong. Feel free to jot down the comment id and shove it my face in a couple years if the Xbox2 ends up being the "Kuso".

      • Re:It's simple (Score:1, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Knowing Xbox had the shortest life cycle in the history of any successful console.

        Never heard of Dreamcast, huh?
    • Past performance - especially when it's based on a sample of 1 - is not indicator of future performance.
    • The Xbox can't chew gum. The PS3 is like a banana. Therefore, I am a fanboy with nothing better to do that decry good video games everywhere.

      Come on, can we at least save the one lined "PSx ROXXOR, XBOXX SUXOR!" until we've actually seen the games and consoles? Is that so hard?

      Honestly - the worst part about this stupid cycle is just when you think the fanboy chatter has retreated to the furthest reaches of the xbox-is-my-god.com forum posts, they start crawling out into the light muttering unin

  • Strangly early to anounce this (Score:3, Insightful)

    by FidelCatsro ( 861135 ) <.fidelcatsro. .at. .gmail.com.> on Monday February 28, 2005 @04:41PM (#11806244) Journal
    It gives Sony plenty enough time to counter with a release title such as another a gran turismo or perhaps several other A1 titles, rather than holding off the big guns till initial sales dwindle .So this could infact end up hurting the sales of halo 3
  • that a major company would get into a marketing battle with another major company. After all, when a company introduces a successful product, it's in the entire corporate world's best interest to not introduce a competing product. It's the American way.

  • WTF? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MagicDude ( 727944 ) on Monday February 28, 2005 @04:43PM (#11806274)
    It's designed to counter Sony's upcoming launch with the best weapon Earth has on its side, Master Chief. Go, John 117, go! Save Earth from Sony!

    Oh for fucks sake IGN, why don't you just glue your lips to Bill Gates' ass.

    Seriously though, are competing releases really a big deal for video games? I mean maybe it can be an issue on whether you want to spend your $300 on Revolution, PS3, or XBox 2. But one game is not going to derail the premere of a new system. It's not like movies where you're competing to get weekend and holiday crowds, since once those time frames are over, you lose a significant portion of potential customers and thus sales. Video games stay in stores for months. They compete with each other in terms of content and awesomeness, not in terms of who edges who out by a day or two.
    • The PlayStation was the biggest console of the last generation. The PlayStation 2 is the biggest console of this generation. Short of giving away XBox 2s, MS is not going to undermine the PS3 launch unless Sony does something spectacularly stupid (like launch with only one game: Tetris and not have any others available for 6+ months), which isn't going to happen.

      Cute tactic, won't work. "PlayStation" is becomming the new "Nintendo", that is... the word people with no clue use as a generic for "video game".

      • Re:WTF? (Score:3, Insightful)

        by gl4ss ( 559668 )
        then you should know that it can take just that 1 generation for the tables to turn.
        • I agree. But I'm not talking about the whole generation, just the launch hype. Even though the console could end up bombing (doubt it), there will still be TONS of hype and interest at launch no matter what MS tries to do to undermine it. Short of something like giving away X-Boxes for 2 cerial boxtops or something, Sony's hype will be huge.

      • Re:WTF? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by SuiteSisterMary ( 123932 ) <slebrunNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Monday February 28, 2005 @05:01PM (#11806510) Journal

        The Nintendo was the biggest console of the last generation. The Super Nintendo is the biggest console of this generation. Short of giving away Playstations, Sony is NOT going to undermine the launch of the Nintendo 64 unless Nintendo does something spectacularly stupid (like launch with only one game: Mario 64, and not have any others available for 6+ months) which isn't going to happen.

        Oh, wait....

  • so what? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by torpor ( 458 ) <ibisum.gmail@com> on Monday February 28, 2005 @04:47PM (#11806320) Homepage Journal
    if we are expected to believe that halo3 is being used as an offensive weapon, why should we not be expected to believe that sony won't have a defensive strategy in place, which nobody knows about, which is to create another total kick-ass next-generation FPS that "putsches Cell", so to speak?

    its not like Halo itself isn't itself a total rip-off. you think sony can't rip-off too? duh, hello, the Halo Cult is well-known and well-respected.. and certainly not the first of its kind.

    this is just sensationalist tripe in a reactive market (gamers). grow up folks, its only a video game. the hardware, however, doesn't get made with pixie-dust ..

    • Shhh!

      Microsoft's master plan is to release Halo 3 on the same day as the PS3, that way people will run out and buy the Xbox just to play halo instead of buying a PS3.

      Seriously though, aren't people already either gonna have an xbox or not, and have their minds made up what they want? I think Microsoft is trying its strongarm approach against the wrong type of company. Gates & co. are used to crushing weak opposition, and using their huge size advantage to overshadow the opponent (like Apple).

      I got n

    • Microsoft, realizing that Sony would have a defensive strategy for Halo 3, then responds by launching Halo 4 and 5 simultaneously. Sony replies with a salvo of Grand Tourismo 5 and Final Fantasy: Who Gives a Fuck. Microsoft, in a visionary move, rolls out Halo: Live, featuring gun shaped controllers that fire live rounds of plastic bullets. The Xbox 360 attachment is required, similar to 3D goggles. Sony parries the thrust with the Sony Kikkosan Anal Pumper...

  • But wasn't... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by bluemeep ( 669505 ) <bluemeepNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Monday February 28, 2005 @04:49PM (#11806340) Homepage
    ...Halo 2 received with a collossal "meh"? I mean, it flew off the shelves, but after a few days all I was hearing was a melange of "What the hell?" and "That was the lamest thing I've ever played." After that, is #3 really expected to be such a blockbuster?

    Maybe I just don't hang out with enough XBOX players. I dunno...

    • Re:But wasn't... (Score:3, Insightful)

      by ivan256 ( 17499 ) *
      I know people I work with camped out before midnight in front of their local game shop to get the "special edition" version because they were going to be sold out. The EB near me still has 5 copies of the "limited" release on the shelf...

      Between that and the paid-for newscasts I really have to wonder how much of the Halo 2 hype was real, and how much Microsoft bought.

      How could anybody have possibly worried that they weren't going to be able to get a copy of Halo 2 on release day were it not for the FUD?
      • Did anyone seriously believe that Halo 2 would be sold out?

        I mean, come on- there were preorders for it more than a year before it came out! Why do people preorder anyways? While a line of 300 people waited for more than two hours to pick up their copy that morning,
        I walked into an FYE that was at the end of the line in the mall. There was one person in the entire store (the girl behind the counter). She had three cases of Halo 2 behind the counter, and it took less time for me to get it than it took for p

    • Re:But wasn't... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by UWC ( 664779 ) on Monday February 28, 2005 @05:00PM (#11806493)
      The thing is, just as Halo 1 introduced the console world to the LAN party, Halo 2 is now the driving force behind Internet multiplayer gaming on consoles right now. There are countless hours of play time beyond what is apparently an underwhelming single player experience. And yeah, I know there were many Live-enabled games before Halo 2, but Live subscription rates surged dramatically at Halo 2's release.

      The problem now is figuring out if there's anything new that Halo 3 can bring to the table other than a conclusion of the story and improved graphics (I guess we're all assuming this will be on the next XBox?).

      • Exactly. Single-player is NOT what these games are about, despite what some people think. Halo 1 was a string of LAN parties for me. I bought a copy of the game and hardly ever played the single-player mode. Yet, I played the game for hours every weekend, holed up in someone's basement surrounded by friends and soda. Halo 2... there is no doubt that the single-player mode sucks. It was a waste of my time. Bungie should have released the game without it, because playing multiplayer on Live can't be be

    • Re:But wasn't... (Score:4, Informative)

      by Rico_Suave ( 147634 ) on Monday February 28, 2005 @06:09PM (#11807236)
      I don't know who you've been talking to, but Halo 2 was received with anything other than a "collossal 'meh?'" - except from the Sony fanboys.

    • No. (Score:3, Informative)

      by DeadScreenSky ( 666442 )
      But wasn't ...Halo 2 received with a collossal "meh"?
      It really wasn't [gamerankings.com]. It also still remains the most popular Xbox Live game even now [xbox.com], so it obviously has some longevity.

      I would agree that it was hardly a perfect game, but it's crazy to suggest that most players were unhappy with it.

  • God help us!!! (Score:3, Funny)

    by mooreBS ( 796555 ) on Monday February 28, 2005 @05:18PM (#11806677)
    Save Earth from Sony!

    Yeah and let Bill take over. My ass.
    • In reply to my own post (modded as flamebait).

      I have no love for either Sony or Microsoft.

      Sony has evolved from the quality hardware manufacturer to the mediocre hardware manufacturer to the company it is now. They can't decide whether they're a hardware manufacturer or a content provider.

      I think the best things Microsoft has done is to hire good marketing and they got in bed with IBM and kept it an open marriage. I have little respect for a company that produces a string of flops and continues to propo
    • Yeah and let Bill take over. My ass.

      Oh man, you had me scared for a second... I didn't notice that comma.
    • eah and let Bill take over. My ass.

      Ouch! Tho, I suppose "judge not lest ye be judged". Good on you, for showing your true colours.

  • I usually don't do this but... (Score:4, Funny)

    by Headcase88 ( 828620 ) on Monday February 28, 2005 @05:25PM (#11806756) Journal
    This just in! Successful game with a cliffhanger ending gets a sequel designed to gain leverage against the competition! In other news, Walmart will continue selling items in their stores, in a knieving plot to gain revenue!

    The problem with this plan is that 99% of console FPS fans already have the XBox/XBox2 as their consoles of choice. Halo 3 will let Microsoft keep their fan-base, but it's not going to do much to expand it, much less "crush the PS3"

    And if I worked for IGN, I'm sure I'd make up some story about Halo 3 being released on the XBox2 as well. Why wouldn't I? It's a pretty sure thing. Then I guess I'd slap on a header like "Here are two rumours you haven't heard anywhere else" like I'm a revolutionary for guessing that Halo 3 will come out at about the same time as the PS3 launch.

    (I hate IGN.)
  • If anything this will hurt sales of Halo 3. It's hard to believe that people are going to say "Hey! Why should I buy this new system by a hugely successful company when I can get the new XBox since the new version of the only game that keeps Microsoft afloat in the console market came out today."

  • Interesting! (Score:3, Funny)

    by Tom7 ( 102298 ) on Monday February 28, 2005 @05:37PM (#11806901) Homepage Journal
    The most interesting of these rumours is the possibility that Halo 3 is in the works already

    Uh, really? You mean they're working on a sequel to their best-selling series of games? The one that ends abruptly with a total cliffhanger? That is an interesting rumor!

  • Oh come on... (Score:3, Informative)

    by Wraithfighter ( 604788 ) <mtgfighter@yahoo.com> on Monday February 28, 2005 @05:48PM (#11807020)
    Ease off with the Xbox bashing. If there's one thing I've learned about Microsoft in the last five years is that when they have competition in an industry, they do some really good work.

    This is a smart move by Microsoft. Lets face it, the only thing that kept Xbox afloat for the first year was Halo. When Halo 2 came out, Xbox live subscriptions jumped through the roof. What do you think is going to happen when Halo 3 comes out?

    Microsoft is going to have to play all of its cards in order to have a chance against Sony, and doing a competitive release of Halo 3 against the PS3 may get some Sony loyalists to get the Xbox Next, especially if they do the marketing blitz strategy that worked so well in October.

    Oh, and before anyone says I'm a Microsoft fanboy, I'm a mac user. Don't rule Microsoft out just because they're a US company (which many people seem to love doing)

  • I like how IGN listed it as a "rumor you won't hear anywhere else." Halo was and continues to be the Xbox's "killer app," and I can't see Bungie leaving the series off with so many questions unanswered. Not to mention the large amount of cash it will get Microsoft.

    In other words... Halo 3 coming? We KNEW that.
  • that's why Halo 2 sucked. Well, that's why the "story" sucked.

    Remember the original story line shown at the preview?
    "You're defending Earth in a last ditch stand against the horror!"
    Now notice the cut scenes that made no sense and then suddenly the story plot is left open ended?

    Bungie was ready to conclude the Halo story with 2 and move onto something new (as the did with their other story lines) but Microsoft insisted that there be a Halo 3 for XBox 2. Against Bungie's wishes the plot was changed from a
    • Actualy Guilty Spark hinted and the existence of multiple halos several times. The Flood was a mindless horror, but the Covenant never was. I don't think 2's story is at all inconsistant with the first story. Granted the ending is rather disconcerting, but I think Bungie was always going to do this in three stages, maybe more.
    • Yes, but Arbiter kicks ass. That's almost enough to make up for the abrupt ending.

      SpecOps Leader: This armour suits you, Arbiter. But it cannot hide that mark.
      Arbiter: Nothing ever will.
      SpecOps Leader: You are the Arbiter. The will of the Prophets. But these are my Elites. Their lives matter to me, yours does not.
      Arbiter: That makes two of us.
      SpecOps Leader: Mm.
    • On the first mission the humans are LOSING and the covenant aren't even using their main fleet. Two space stations down (at least), countless ships lost (theres at least one fleet in the area but a covenant ship still breaks through...), and nearly every marine on the Cairo (the station you're on) is killed. Uh yeah, I'd say the human race is getting fu*ked.

      Halo was never a 'one of the kind artifact'. They tell you that in Halo 1. Its in a cutscene, you can't miss it.

      The covenant was NEVER 'a mindless horr

      • Addmenudium: If you read the books, especially the one dealing with Halo, there are things not mentioned in the Game.
        #1 - The second "Reclaimer", a marine not listed on the Pillar of Autumn. #2 - The flood are sentient, and some humans infected retain some degree of expression.
  • People will buy Halo 3. It will probably be VERY pretty, but I'm really not expecting much in terms of gameplay improvements.

    Sony has always had plenty of interesting and varied titles for the PS on launch, and the PS3's total sales still outnumber Xbox easily if you count Japan, which is NOT a country to forget about in terms of total sales.

    And what makes people think PS3 won't have some killer launch titles? Gran Turismo 5 anybody? Final Fantasy XIVIXIX?

  • I bought Halo2 for multiplayer (Score:3, Insightful)

    by CrazyJim1 ( 809850 ) on Monday February 28, 2005 @06:58PM (#11807669) Journal
    I liked it at first, but it really seems like some element of depth is missing.
  • I actually heard this rumor awhile back, from a few sources. Sounds fun!

  • it's about awareness (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Alban ( 86010 ) on Monday February 28, 2005 @07:57PM (#11808198)
    It's not about halo3 changing someone's mind about buying a ps3.

    Did you see the marketing campaign for halo2? It was almost like a new console was being released.

    Now think about it. No matter when halo3 comes out, Microsoft will back it up with a huge marketing campaign. So why not make it coincide with the ps3's release? This way, halo3's marketing campaign will accomplish two things:

    1) sell a ton of halo3 copies, which is the goal of any marketing campaign.
    2) burry sony's marketing campaign under their own.

  • i always thought halo 2's ending was great especailly with cortana and gravemouth at the end on the covenant cruiser after the credits.

    for a bad ending im suprised nobody is whinging about splinter cell:pandora tomorrow now there is a game with no real ending at all no cliff hanger like halo 2, no real conculsion beyond a few lines of text and a really bad cut scene. what had happened to dera dan doah after you captured thier leader (i cant remember his name right now) infact what happened to him at all? y
  • This rumor has been reported elsewhere previously -- see here [teamxbox.com]. The idea is that the release will more-or-less be a Halo 2 expansion pack, with the engine optimized to take advantage of the new hardware. It'll be the same basic game, though.

    Not that Halo 2 was so different from Halo 1, though. So perhaps they will call it Halo 3, anyway.

  • No shit, I just thought Halo 2 sucked because they were ending the series. So now it sucked because they want me to buy the new edition on the new system? Psh.
  • Look, our agenda should be good games, not who's going to smash whom. Let's be honest, if we're blowing our time reading games.slashdot.com, most of us will probably - eventually - own all three systems anyway. So why the bantering? Let's start now, be proactive about this thing so come Christmas we're not throwing monkey poo in the shape of our favorite console at each other.

    A Simple To Do List for Fanboys, 2005-2006

    * Pick a console that you will pay $300 that has the best games you like,
    * Buy g
  • Don't.
    Sony has been kind of bending SE over as of late*, and I wouldn't blink twice if SE starting making more of their RPG's multi-console. They've already announced a fairly interesting looking PC -only- MMO** this year. ALso, the many GBA/DS/Cell phone games that SE has announced, with nothing yet offical for the PSP?
    I'm not saying that SE is going to do nothing with the PS3, hell no. What I highly doubt we'll see is anything on the scale of that FF8 demo that bitch slaped everything else at the time
  • Whatever makes Microsoft pull tactics like this to compete with the PS3 will also make Sony (and Nintendo) be innovative with their hardware and software lineup at launch. The winners in the end? The gamers. Not our wallets though, but that's a different story.

Slashdot Top Deals

All seems condemned in the long run to approximate a state akin to Gaussian noise. -- James Martin

Close