Are They Going Too Far With Halo

we all know halo is a great franchise and will make msoft and bungie a bomb but i think they should have put halo to bed after 3 and made no more i know people will say but what would microsoft have and i dont know but im sure they are capable of making a new ip for the xbox

i think they should of stopped after halo 3. I was never really impressed with halo anyway.

I don't see why they didn't stop at 3. I would love for Bungie to do some other work.

I don't think they should end the franchise, but I do think they need to give it a long rest and bring it back once we've had a chance to get nostalgic over it. They should really start working on a new IP to carry through yet another trilogy (just because people usually get tired of things around the third installment) and then look at revisiting the Halo universe. As it is, they are dangerously close to pushing the entire franchise to a point of saturation where the story is no longer innovative or interesting and all the levels just blend into mind-numbing repetition. All Halo games have the potential to be story-driven, but it takes a lot of time to write the story up front before developing any of the game, but I doubt Bungie will take the time to take that approach. And they've not helped themselves by letting Eric Nylund write books for them...

I would much rather see Guitar Hero die then Halo. Halo games can be spiced up since they don't all have to be FPS's. I would really like an RPG Halo.msuspartan11

I agree completely. Although, I don't mind keeping something like Guitar Hero and Rock Band around so long as they don't attempt to release new versions more than once every two years and if it will keep them from releasing things like Lips and the DJ rhythm game.

I'll have to wait and see how good the games actually are before I can make this judgement.

Right now, I think it's at the border line. I love Halo, but I think that it should really stop after Reach.

It's funny how they're making a game called Halo Reach...because that's exactly what they're doing...REACHING, they need to quit milking a great franchise that's already past its prime.

I think they should of just gone straight to Halo 4. Stuffed_Monkey

Same. I'm not into Halo but I do agree that the franchise looks a bit weird now. If 1, 2 & 3 were all so good then why not just make a 4th one? It makes sense. And it would make me a bit less confused lol.

For comparison, let's look at some other shooter franchises. My numbers here include expansion packs, and I don't claim thatthese figures are exhaustive:

• Doom: 6 games total, 4 full (Doom, Doom II, Final Doom, Doom 3), 2 expansions (Thy Flesh Consumed, Resurrection of Evil)
• Quake: 9 games total, 5 full (Quake 1/2/3/4, Enemy Territory), 4 expansions (Scourge of Armagon, Dissolution of Eternity, The Reckoning, Ground Zero)
• Half-Life: 6 games total, 2 full (Half-Life 1/2), 4 expansions (Opposing Force, Blue Shift, Episode One/Two)
• Unreal: 7 games total, 6 full (Unreal, Unreal II, Unreal Tournament 1/03/04/III), 1 expansion (Return to Na Pali)
• Rainbow Six: 13 games total, 7 full (Rainbow Six, Rogue Spear, 3, Lockdown, Critical Hour, Vegas, Vegas 2), 6 expansions (Eagle Watch, Urban Operations, Black Thorn, Covert Ops, Athena Sword, Black Arrow)
• Call of Duty: 7 games total (I know I'm missing some here), 6 games (Call of Duty 1/2/3/4, World at War, Modern Warfare 2), 1 expansion (United Offensive)

So why the hell should Halo stop at four games? Really? You're on here picking on Halo, thread creator; why aren't you picking on one of the more than half dozen shooter series' that have far more games?

Stop at three Halos? **** that. I like Halo and want to play more Halo games. If you think it should stop at three (now stay with me here), don't buy the new Halo games.

Well, it doesn't really matter what anyone here thinks, it is all about if people are buying or not. You can all say that Halo 3 bombed and that it wasn't really that great of a story, but it still made them loads of cash. They're not worrying about if a group of people whom dislike the franchise because it has loads of followers don't want them to continue making games, they're only worrying about those loads of followers.

The second they create a Halo game that doesn't make them a huge profit, is the day that Bungie and Microsoft will let it die.

I personally wouldn't mind if they started to work on something different and dropped the Halo title, but they won't be doing that any time soon. At least not from what I am gathering with them creating two new ones in the next two years in ODST and Reach. I am hoping that they'll use the Halo universe but perhaps change up the type of game. Hopefully next time we see an actual RTS created by Bungie and not some developer that hasn't even helped in making any of the series. Perhaps even an RPG using the same world as Halo, that would be pretty sweet.

All I am saying is that I doubt that this franchise will be dead any time soon, and so I highly doubt they'll stop creating games based on it until people stop buying their product outright or there is at least a significant drop of people rushing out to buy it the first day. It isn't really going to be dryed-up until people let it be.

Just think if they'd make a bad MGS or GTA... would everyone run out and say it's time for them to stop? I doubt it.

For comparison, let's look at some other shooter franchises. My numbers here include expansion packs, and I don't claim thatthese figures are exhaustive:

• Doom: 6 games total, 4 full (Doom, Doom II, Final Doom, Doom 3), 2 expansions (Thy Flesh Consumed, Resurrection of Evil)
• Quake: 9 games total, 5 full (Quake 1/2/3/4, Enemy Territory), 4 expansions (Scourge of Armagon, Dissolution of Eternity, The Reckoning, Ground Zero)
• Half-Life: 6 games total, 2 full (Half-Life 1/2), 4 expansions (Opposing Force, Blue Shift, Episode One/Two)
• Unreal: 7 games total, 6 full (Unreal, Unreal II, Unreal Tournament 1/03/04/III), 1 expansion (Return to Na Pali)
• Rainbow Six: 13 games total, 7 full (Rainbow Six, Rogue Spear, 3, Lockdown, Critical Hour, Vegas, Vegas 2), 6 expansions (Eagle Watch, Urban Operations, Black Thorn, Covert Ops, Athena Sword, Black Arrow)
• Call of Duty: 7 games total (I know I'm missing some here), 6 games (Call of Duty 1/2/3/4, World at War, Modern Warfare 2), 1 expansion (United Offensive)

So why the hell should Halo stop at four games? Really? You're on here picking on Halo, thread creator; why aren't you picking on one of the more than half dozen shooter series' that have far more games?

Stop at three Halos? **** that. I like Halo and want to play more Halo games. If you think it should stop at three (now stay with me here), don't buy the new Halo games.

Palantas

My main beef is that people are saying ODST pretty much should have been a downloadable extra for Halo 3. And why the hell did they make Halo Wars? RTS games aren't what Halo are about. It was a really weird step to take in the completely opposite direcion to what made Halo so popular in the first place.

They didn't make Halo Wars. Also, from what I've been hearing on here the past couple of days (and I can be wrong here) it has been said that ODST isn't even going to just be an expansion any longer.

EDIT: Just going with that, you didn't seem to really attack it. My fault.

They didn't make Halo Wars. Also, from what I've been hearing on here the past couple of days (and I can be wrong here) it has been said that ODST isn't even going to just be an expansion any longer.

EDIT: Just going with that, you didn't seem to really attack it. My fault.

Commando015

http://uk.gamespot.com/xbox360/strategy/halowars/index.html?tag=result;title;0

Lol don't worry about it. And I'm just going by what other people have said on here. Maybe I got the word off some unreliable people. But Halo Wars has been made, whether or not it's made by the same guys who made Halo 1 to 3 is irrelevant to me. As far as I know, people who like FPS games are less likely to like RTS games. The pace of the two games is so different. Plus, slapping a Halo sign on an entirely different product does still seem weird to me.

[QUOTE="Commando015"]

They didn't make Halo Wars. Also, from what I've been hearing on here the past couple of days (and I can be wrong here) it has been said that ODST isn't even going to just be an expansion any longer.

EDIT: Just going with that, you didn't seem to really attack it. My fault.

Murj

http://uk.gamespot.com/xbox360/strategy/halowars/index.html?tag=result;title;0

Lol don't worry about it. And I'm just going by what other people have said on here. Maybe I got the word off some unreliable people. But Halo Wars has been made, whether or not it's made by the same guys who made Halo 1 to 3 is irrelevant to me. As far as I know, people who like FPS games are less likely to like RTS games. The pace of the two games is so different. Plus, slapping a Halo sign on an entirely different product does still seem weird to me.

Yeah, it was quite weird, but it was made by ensemble studios while the creators of the more popular FPS Halo 1-3 are all made by Bungie. I am not really that clear on why they let them hack at their game and turn it into a pretty bad RTS, but for one reason or another they did. I liked it, but it was easy and super short, plus they only used the Halo name to try and lure the people who enjoyed the regular halo and I think that is why it got such low marks.

Would have been fine for a game if it wasn't based on the Halo world and didn't use the Halo name.

My main beef is that people are saying ODST pretty much should have been a downloadable extra for Halo 3.

Murj

I think we'll best be able to make that determination once we've played ODST.

And why the hell did they make Halo Wars? RTS games aren't what Halo are about. It was a really weird step to take in the completely opposite direcion to what made Halo so popular in the first place.

Murj

Why do you care? If you don't like RTSs, then don't play Halo Wars. Once again looking at precedent, the Halo universe isn't the first one to include games in multiple genres, not by a long shot. I'm sure I don't need to publish another list todemonstrate this.

For comparison, let's look at some other shooter franchises. My numbers here include expansion packs, and I don't claim thatthese figures are exhaustive:

• Doom: 6 games total, 4 full (Doom, Doom II, Final Doom, Doom 3), 2 expansions (Thy Flesh Consumed, Resurrection of Evil)
• Quake: 9 games total, 5 full (Quake 1/2/3/4, Enemy Territory), 4 expansions (Scourge of Armagon, Dissolution of Eternity, The Reckoning, Ground Zero)
• Half-Life: 6 games total, 2 full (Half-Life 1/2), 4 expansions (Opposing Force, Blue Shift, Episode One/Two)
• Unreal: 7 games total, 6 full (Unreal, Unreal II, Unreal Tournament 1/03/04/III), 1 expansion (Return to Na Pali)
• Rainbow Six: 13 games total, 7 full (Rainbow Six, Rogue Spear, 3, Lockdown, Critical Hour, Vegas, Vegas 2), 6 expansions (Eagle Watch, Urban Operations, Black Thorn, Covert Ops, Athena Sword, Black Arrow)
• Call of Duty: 7 games total (I know I'm missing some here), 6 games (Call of Duty 1/2/3/4, World at War, Modern Warfare 2), 1 expansion (United Offensive)

So why the hell should Halo stop at four games? Really? You're on here picking on Halo, thread creator; why aren't you picking on one of the more than half dozen shooter series' that have far more games?

Stop at three Halos? **** that. I like Halo and want to play more Halo games. If you think it should stop at three (now stay with me here), don't buy the new Halo games.

Palantas

I am not really that clear on why they let them hack at their game and turn it into a pretty bad RTS, but for one reason or another they did.

Commando015

You're not sure why Bungie let Ensemble "hack" their game? Do you have the slightest concept of how games are made?

I liked it, but it was easy and super short, plus they only used the Halo name to try and lure the people who enjoyed the regular halo and I think that is why it got such low marks. Would have been fine for a game if it wasn't based on the Halo world and didn't use the same name as the FPS versions.

Commando015

I'm not sure what you're definition of "such low marks" is, but Halo Wars has an 81% at GameRankings, and an 82 at Metacritic. In any case, I want to be clear on this: You think that if you substituted some generic scifi setting for the Halo setting in Halo Wars, and left the gameplay alone, it would have been a better game? Why?

[QUOTE="Murj"]

My main beef is that people are saying ODST pretty much should have been a downloadable extra for Halo 3.

Palantas

I think we'll best be able to make that determination once we've played ODST.

And why the hell did they make Halo Wars? RTS games aren't what Halo are about. It was a really weird step to take in the completely opposite direcion to what made Halo so popular in the first place.

Murj

Why do you care? If you don't like RTSs, then don't play Halo Wars. Once again looking at precedent, the Halo universe isn't the first one to include games in multiple genres, not by a long shot. I'm sure I don't need to publish another list todemonstrate this.

I think your ODST comment is fair enough.

It's all fine and dandy to say that I shouldn't play it if I don't like it, but I'm not talking about whether I like the games or not. The move from FPS to RTS doesn't really make much sense to me is all. And yeah it would have sold a lot because it had 'Halo' in the title but the game was definitely lacking. And again, trying to market an RTS towards a fan base of FPS players doesn't sound smart to me. Even if it is called 'Halo'. Yes there are some FPS players who like RTS's that's a given; but I still think a majority of FPS players don't like RTS's that much. Especially people who play Halo, which is usually a fast paced game.

It's all fine and dandy to say that I shouldn't play it if I don't like it, but I'm not talking about whether I like the games or not. The move from FPS to RTS doesn't really make much sense to me is all. And yeah it would have sold a lot because it had 'Halo' in the title but the game was definitely lacking. And again, trying to market an RTS towards a fan base of FPS players doesn't sound smart to me. Even if it is called 'Halo'. Yes there are some FPS players who like RTS's that's a given; but I still think a majority of FPS players don't like RTS's that much. Especially people who play Halo, which is usually a fast paced game.

Murj

In the same paragraph, you say that Halo Wars would have sold a lot, but also that the whole project was ill conceived. That doesn't make sense. Also, any faults in the gameplay have nothing to do with the fact that it's set in the Halo universe.

Again, I don't see what the problem is here: If fans of Halo don't like RTSs, then they shouldn't buy Halo Wars. If someone who bought Halo Wars was expecting a shooter, then they're a moron and we don't care about their opinion. I'm not sure why you think Halo Wars was intented exclusively for fans of the Halo shooters. It was a project to tune RTSs to console, and is aimed at console RTS fans as much as Halo fans. How well it pulled off the RTS-on-console concept, again, has nothing to do with the game's fictional setting.

i think ODST will flop, but reich (sp?) has a cool story, if im correct, isnt that where most of the spartans died?DaveyBoy123

Reach does seem interesting however I will pass for ODST. ODST seems like a game made simply to bring in more revenue (read: milk the series for all its worth) while Reach might actually contribute to the larger, interesting story.

That's my take anyway.

yes. halo isnt that impressive, and it certianly isnt an imaginitive universe. i probably wont play reach, halo wars, OR ODST. halo 3 was my last try with halo

Personaly I don't really care, what really bugs me is that they are makeing a secound mythic map pack specificly for ODST, complete with skulls. You cant get the brainpan achivement whithout buying the secound mythic map pack! Bungie just wants money because they haven't had a hit game like this since Marathon, even in Halo they are still cocky with it, what with all the Marathon references in Halo. Halo will die out (as if it hasn't already) and fade into the minds of those who actually believed that the franchise really mattered but I agree that if you don't like Halo, DON'T BUY THE OTHER GAMES. After Halo Bungie will TRY to make another hit game, or keep on milking Halo dry of all substance untill you see its 10th game with a 1.5 on a Gamespot review. Bungies next game will be a surefire hit if they make another, but in the end it will go the way of Halo and be milked to far. Bungie and Microsoft (especilly Bungie) care less about the games and more about the money, Bungie just can make good games but they wouldn't do it so will if it weren't for the fact Microsoft is riding the gravy trian with them. I want to see Bungie make a game ALONE, with no help from Microsoft Game Studios, than we will see how "hit game responsible" Bungie really is. They got to much money to start with, now they think the're on a role here but the'er not. Oh and for the record, when you people who said that Bungie came out with Halo Wars, they didn't it was a completely unrelated studio.

[QUOTE="Commando015"]

They didn't make Halo Wars. Also, from what I've been hearing on here the past couple of days (and I can be wrong here) it has been said that ODST isn't even going to just be an expansion any longer.

EDIT: Just going with that, you didn't seem to really attack it. My fault.

Murj

http://uk.gamespot.com/xbox360/strategy/halowars/index.html?tag=result;title;0

Lol don't worry about it. And I'm just going by what other people have said on here. Maybe I got the word off some unreliable people. But Halo Wars has been made, whether or not it's made by the same guys who made Halo 1 to 3 is irrelevant to me. As far as I know, people who like FPS games are less likely to like RTS games. The pace of the two games is so different. Plus, slapping a Halo sign on an entirely different product does still seem weird to me.

You do know that Halo was origonally going to be an RTS game right? That is how Halo Wars came about. Anyway no they are not milking Halo, if you want to see milking go look at Call of Duty where a game is released EVERY year, or look at Mario, now that is milking. Kojima said MGS4 was going to be the last MGS game, now there are like three more in production, no different than what Bungie is doing. As long as the Halo games are relavent with the Halo universe and Story, and the games continue to be great, I have no problem with more Halo games.

Personaly I don't really care, what really bugs me is that they are makeing a secound mythic map pack specificly for ODST, complete with skulls. You cant get the brainpan achivement whithout buying the secound mythic map pack! Bungie just wants money because they haven't had a hit game like this since Marathon, even in Halo they are still cocky with it, what with all the Marathon references in Halo. Halo will die out (as if it hasn't already) and fade into the minds of those who actually believed that the franchise really mattered but I agree that if you don't like Halo, DON'T BUY THE OTHER GAMES. After Halo Bungie will TRY to make another hit game, or keep on milking Halo dry of all substance untill you see its 10th game with a 1.5 on a Gamespot review. Bungies next game will be a surefire hit if they make another, but in the end it will go the way of Halo and be milked to far. Bungie and Microsoft (especilly Bungie) care less about the games and more about the money, Bungie just can make good games but they wouldn't do it so will if it weren't for the fact Microsoft is riding the gravy trian with them. I want to see Bungie make a game ALONE, with no help from Microsoft Game Studios, than we will see how "hit game responsible" Bungie really is. They got to much money to start with, now they think the're on a role here but the'er not. Oh and for the record, when you people who said that Bungie came out with Halo Wars, they didn't it was a completely unrelated studio.

For comparison, let's look at some other shooter franchises. My numbers here include expansion packs, and I don't claim thatthese figures are exhaustive:

• Doom: 6 games total, 4 full (Doom, Doom II, Final Doom, Doom 3), 2 expansions (Thy Flesh Consumed, Resurrection of Evil)
• Quake: 9 games total, 5 full (Quake 1/2/3/4, Enemy Territory), 4 expansions (Scourge of Armagon, Dissolution of Eternity, The Reckoning, Ground Zero)
• Half-Life: 6 games total, 2 full (Half-Life 1/2), 4 expansions (Opposing Force, Blue Shift, Episode One/Two)
• Unreal: 7 games total, 6 full (Unreal, Unreal II, Unreal Tournament 1/03/04/III), 1 expansion (Return to Na Pali)
• Rainbow Six: 13 games total, 7 full (Rainbow Six, Rogue Spear, 3, Lockdown, Critical Hour, Vegas, Vegas 2), 6 expansions (Eagle Watch, Urban Operations, Black Thorn, Covert Ops, Athena Sword, Black Arrow)
• Call of Duty: 7 games total (I know I'm missing some here), 6 games (Call of Duty 1/2/3/4, World at War, Modern Warfare 2), 1 expansion (United Offensive)

So why the hell should Halo stop at four games? Really? You're on here picking on Halo, thread creator; why aren't you picking on one of the more than half dozen shooter series' that have far more games?

Stop at three Halos? **** that. I like Halo and want to play more Halo games. If you think it should stop at three (now stay with me here), don't buy the new Halo games.

Palantas

u forgot my fav rainbow six, RavenShield.

:P sorry, just being anal retentive

I will never ever buy another Halo game . They did good with the first two games, but then Halo 3 was terrible.

I think that the only Halo games out should be Halo: Combat Evolved, Halo 2, Halo 3, and Halo: Reach. I think ODST (especially since it's an expansion pack for $60) and Halo Wars was unnecessary and made it seem like there are too many Halo games out there. But then again, people who have already posted also have apoint about how many other fanchises bombarded the market as well. I don't know though. I think if was just the four I listed, it would seem more special, no?

You know the same could be said for Metal Gear or Final Fantasy or splinter cell or Mario or Tomb Raider or Sonic or CALL OF DUTY...etc. . I think the bottom line is there is still a lot that can be done with that Universe and millionspeople would love to see it fleshed out more. Hell, Halo Wars sold a ton so why wouldn't they keep crakning them out. As long as the love is still going in to them and they try to improve upon the fomrula and take it in different directions, expand on the lore and give the community what it wants, then they should continue to make them.

they are headed in a new direction for the series now, ODST is supposed to be very non-linear, and offer a slant on the gameplay. and Reach is supposed to be more along the lines of the tension of the call of duty series. Halo has the best AI I have ever seen in a game and a very strong online community but if the masses start getting bored with it, then yes, they should regroup and look to ohter IP's.

You know the same could be said for Metal Gear or Final Fantasy or splinter cell or Mario or Tomb Raider or Sonic or CALL OF DUTY...etc. . I think the bottom line is there is still a lot that can be done with that Universe and millionspeople would love to see it fleshed out more. Hell, Halo Wars sold a ton so why wouldn't they keep crakning them out. As long as the love is still going in to them and they try to improve upon the fomrula and take it in different directions, expand on the lore and give the community what it wants, then they should continue to make them.

they are headed in a new direction for the series now, ODST is supposed to be very non-linear, and offer a slant on the gameplay. and Reach is supposed to be more along the lines of the tension of the call of duty series. Halo has the best AI I have ever seen in a game and a very strong online community but if the masses start getting bored with it, then yes, they should regroup and look to ohter IP's.

Awsaum

Really? I thought the AI in Halo sucked, at least in terms of my troops. They can't drive or pilot, and they die easy. Everytime I went into battle with them, I found myself alone in three seconds.

guys just give bungie & microsoft a chance...they only want the xbox360 owner pleased with their console

I'm not sure how people can honestly complain about Halo when series like Guitar Hero, Final Fantasy, Rockband, Call of Duty, Mario and Pokemon are out releasing one or more games a year. They don't catch near as much flack as Halo. Halo has been around for eight years and so far there have only been four games. There might be two games this year, but they were by different developers.

None of the Halo games have been bad, so why would anyone complain? Don't want to buy the new Halo games? Then don't. But there are plenty of people who'd like more. More Halo games was inevitable, Bungie or no Bungie. Halo is Microsoft's biggest Ip, they'd be stupid to drop it. Like Nintendo would be stupid to drop Mario.