Halo 2 Confirmed For Fall 2004

Jeremy Parish writes "Bungie has finally announced that Halo 2 will ship this Fall for Xbox, as relayed via 1UP. But to make up for this semi-distant release date, they've released the first Halo 2 multiplayer screen!" Over at Halo.bungie.org, they point out a Bungie development update noting the new screenshot is "...entirely representative of the lighting, polygon counts, bump-mapping and particle effects", and also refer to the original Bungie.net announcement, clarifying: "A number of people have been confused by the title of this news item. The game is NOT named 'Halo 2: In Reach of Fall'. This is just a reference to the title of novel The Fall of Reach.)"

Comments

Surprise!

[Tom7]

It looks just like Halo 1!

Re:Surprise!

[Anonymous Coward]

if i had mod points i'd mod this up insightful

Re:Surprise!

[cabra771]

no shit. I was hoping it was going to start using the Unreal Tournament engine and put Scooby Do in as the lead character.

half-truths

[Frac]

entirely representative of the lighting, polygon counts, bump-mapping and particle effects

Certainly not representative of screen resolution though, unless the xbox can display 1600x1200 on any TV.

Re:half-truths

[simoniker]

To be fair, Frank O'Connor did say, in the larger development update:

"The resolution is a little sharper thanks to the way screens are dumped from the frame buffer."

There just wasn't room to include that fact in the above Slashdot under-150-words synopsis.

Re:half-truths

[scot4875]

And is that method simply: dump from framebuffer to file, import into Photoshop, scale to 3200x2400, and then reduce back to 1600x1200 with some antialiasing filter?

--Jeremy

Re:half-truths

[Xzzy]

> unless the xbox can display 1600x1200 on any TV.

Doesn't really mean much, since it is in fact a "live" render. It's not like they set up that scene in blender and set the renderer lose on it for a few hours.

That image was created in real time, all those effects do in fact exist. The final resolution of the image is a bit of a non-issue.

Re:half-truths

[bigman2003]

Umm...because it is not competing against the PC, the Xbox is competing against the PS2 (and Gamecube).

In which case, it really does have 'amazing gaphics'.

Re:half-truths

[fredrikj]

In which case, it really does have 'amazing gaphics'.

Super Mario World has amazing graphics too. Better than Halo 2's if you ask me.

Re:half-truths

[Troed]

Their target framebuffer is most surely not larger than 480 pixels high. If they are reaching for full HDTV support, it _might_ be 720, but it's not likely.

Thus, the image is lying. It's not a framebuffer dump.

(To those who want to say something about 1080i here, note the 'i' .. )

Re:half-truths

[Anonymous Coward]

When did you play Halo 2?

Re:half-truths

[fredrikj]

I can tell uninspired design from screenshots.

Re:half-truths

[Phil Wilkins]

Blender? HAhahahahha....hahh......(sound of head falling off)

Re:half-truths

[Phil Wilkins]

Not necessarily. It's almost certainly rendered on the XBox, just not output on the display hardware. We do a similar thing for our PS2 game. One method is to render multiple viewports (either as tiles, or by pixel-fraction offset) of the scene, and then stitch them back together as a post-process.

It's still a reasonable indicator of the lighting, effects, and the detail in the models. Just not what you'd actually see during gameplay. However if you don't do this, then you get a million fanboys crying about "anti-aliasing".

Re:half-truths

[Anonymous Coward]

YHBT. YHL. HAND.

Oh man!

[Anonymous Coward]

Damn those Red and Blue guys! They're at it again!

When will they ever learn?

Re:Oh man!

[MrLint]

as i dont have an xbox seeing that screen shot all i could think was "wow rvb2 is gonna be sweet"

Hmmm

[Anonymous Coward]

It doesn't look any different from the first one. Will it have more than a handful of multiplayer levels? Will I be able to make my own mods with the engine? (for the PC version obviously) Is it going to be as damn repetitive as the first one?

Re:no thanks

[WormholeFiend]

in the mean time Unreal Tournament 2004 will come out in March, IIRC

Its going to get pushed back, you know it.

[Cap-America]

I'm sorry but I have a bad feeling that the game is going to get pushed back again. It always does, we get closes to the release date then bam, pushed back another 4 months.

On another note, I'm really not to impress by the screen shots It does look a lot like Halo 1. The big deal with Halo 2 for me was Xbox Live. But now with Halo for PC I'm finding myself careing less and less about Halo 2. I have everything I wanted for Halo on my PC and I don't have to pay for Xbox Live.

Whats the point of Halo 2 now that we ahve the PC version?

Re:Its going to get pushed back, you know it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Online multi on Halo PC sucks, Lag city, not worth it.

Re:Its going to get pushed back, you know it.

[SleazyC]

I don't see how you can want Halo PC over Halo 2. Halo PC is such a horrible port, and it came from a studio that had a pretty good name (Gearbox). Halo PC's net code is horrible -- I get lag and I'm running a P4 3.0c w/ a Radeon 9800 Pro.

Halo 2 will def. bring a lot to the table not just Xbox live support. Dual weapons, having the computer driving warthogs and other vehicles, being able to hijack vehicles. If Halo PC actually had been done right then I might agree with what you're saying, but the horrible port ruined it for me.

Re:Its going to get pushed back, you know it.

[SeaEye420]

"I'm sorry but I have a bad feeling that the game is going to get pushed back again. It always does, we get closes to the release date then bam, pushed back another 4 months."

Where have you been? This is the delay. Originally, it was going to be out last Christmas. On the main page at halo.bungie.net is this choice quote:

"So remember last year when we told you we don't announce release dates until we're confident well meet our deadline? Well now were confident. Halo 2 will ship in Fall, 2004. Please make a note of it."

Sounds like they're pretty sure this will be it...

Re:Its going to get pushed back, you know it.

[AKnightCowboy]

I have everything I wanted for Halo on my PC and I don't have to pay for Xbox Live.

I wonder why they don't just release Halo 2 directly to the PC at the same time as they release it on the Xbox. Oh right, nobody would buy it for the Xbox.

Re:Its going to get pushed back, you know it.

[Anonymous Coward]

But the last 10% coding of this 10% will take another 70% of the time to develop!

Re:Its going to get pushed back, you know it.

[Ceyan]

Wake up genius! Your chip and graphics card have no bearing on the lag you receive when playing online!

Re:Its going to get pushed back, you know it.

[MMaestro]

I wonder why they don't just release Halo 2 directly to the PC at the same time as they release it on the Xbox. Oh right, nobody would buy it for the Xbox.

No, thats called 'shovelware' and no one would buy it because the console version would run better than a computer, would be filled with bugs, and lack cool features like the ability to crank up the resolution up to 1600*1200 with a bunch of fancy graphic effects. As well as have crappy net code because the Xbox version would be made for broadband players only, would have to resort to third-party anti-cheating software because the Xbox has no cheaters, and would piss off millions of Xbox owners for not having the sequel to their greatest game being non-exclusive.

Just buy a Xbox and quit shunning it just because the Xbox is owned by Microsoft.

Re:Its going to get pushed back, you know it.

[Paradise Pete]

Wake up genius! Your chip and graphics card have no bearing on the lag you receive when playing online!

Perhaps, "Genius", he provided that information to eliminate them as factors in the lag, supporting his notion that it was the network code that was at fault.

Re:Its going to get pushed back, you know it.

[Cap-America]

Just buy a Xbox and quit shunning it just because the Xbox is owned by Microsoft. Helloooo Bungie is owned by Microsoft too.

Re:Its going to get pushed back, you know it.

[Cap-America]

Halo runs great on my PC, and I have a AMD XP 2600+ with a 128MB GeForce 3 and 640MB of RAM. and I've also never had any Lag playing Online or Network games.

Re:Its going to get pushed back, you know it.

[Rallion]

Mmm, yes. Halo PC was pretty bad.

But I liked it more than the X-Box version, at least.

Blech.

Re:Its going to get pushed back, you know it.

[Ceyan]

Do you have any idea how inaccurate that assessment would be? Quick lesson:

Lag is generated by the delay in recieving packets from the server updating the client on the progress of the game. One of the main reasons FPSs are so easily made mutliplayer is because there is very little data (in terms of size) that needs to be transmitted because you just have to transmit player locations and actions, everything else is usually client side. All the net code is reponsible for is tracking down servers, listening for packets, recieving packets and transmitting packets. That's pretty much it. Everything else is done by the rest of the game.

Essentially unless a FPS is seriously bugged and has a development team straight out of Kindergarden, it's damn difficult to screw up the net code so bad it will generate enough lag to affect the experience. Based on that alone, you can generally say he's blowing smoke out of his @$$.

But I'll give him the benefit of the doubt in that he really believes the net code is his problem. Do you know how many games on the level of Halo have multiplayer lag issues BECAUSE of the game? You can count them on one hand and have extra fingers to work with.

The problem isn't with the game, it's with his god damn computer and his connection. It could be that he hasn't defragged, it could be that his connection is crap, or it could simply be that most of the servers he's played on are several hops away. In case you didn't know each "hop" is a router that a packet stops at between point A and point B, each hop adds in a level of lag. That's not counting the dozens of other problems that could come up to cause a problem.

Re:Its going to get pushed back, you know it.

[aliens]

You can't really expect it to look that much different from Halo 1.

The original Halo pushed the Xbox's hardware pretty far. A sequel can't go much further.

Unlike Doom3 and HL2 which scale down to lesser PC's an Xbox, while like a PC is stuck with 3 year old hardware.

So now that people see what is possible with DX9 OGL2 hardware what would've been awesome 2 years ago is, feh.

Re:Its going to get pushed back, you know it.

[damiam]

Sorry, but you're wrong. For an extreme example, look at Multi Theft Auto, the unofficial multiplayer mod for GTA. On DSL, dual Athlon, and a Radeon 9700 PRO, there is still tremendous lag (and this is with everyone involved having a Obviously, since Halo's multiplayer isn't a hacked add-on (at least not in this sense), the same specific issues don't apply. But the fact remains that netcode can have a very real impact on a game's multiplayer performance. Unless, of course, you want to be anal and define netcode as only the lines of code involved in actually sending/recieving packets - which is just stupid.

Re:Its going to get pushed back, you know it.

[Ceyan]

What the hell are you smoking? You outright admitted that MTA is an "unofficial" mod for GTA. Do you honestly believe that they can do a mod to match a release by the developers of the game? Aside from that, there is a thousand and one other things involved in that process which can drag a game down.

Furthermore, the net code in a mod like MTA is a whole helluva lot more complex, since it's not integrated into the games engine.

Do you have any idea at all how a game works, on the code level? I'm not going to admit to being an expert, but I've got at least a bit of room to walk with. Your post seems to imply you've got no clue.

P.S.
On another note, I believe I specifically refered to the net code of an FPS. The game itself is (or at least should be) designed to do everything nessecary on the client side. The server is only responsible for being the central location for clients to update their actions and retrive everyone elses actions. That's why it's so easy to cheat on a FPS, because everything is done client side. When you enter in the realm of other games, there are some times when the whole process gets more complicated and the net code is more involved that the transmission of packets.

Maybe you should think of it like this, imagine your singleplayer game acting just like a multiplayer game. The core of the game, the engine, takes in the actions you input through the keyboard and mouse, and then processes them and returns the result (Of course throw in all the graphics processing and what not). In the multiplayer game you just add a middleman to the whole thing, the server. Your actions, along with the actions recieved from the server, are processed on your machine just like in the singleplayer. The only difference being you retrive and transmit the actions of the players (including yourself) to the server.

Again, it gets a lot more complex than that, I know, but it serves as an analogy.

Re:Its going to get pushed back, you know it.

[Ceyan]

Wait a second, I see a problem. Do you realize that the OS takes care of a lot of the hard work? Developers don't program in a whole new TCP/IP stack into a game, they use the OS to do all the hard work.

Re:Its going to get pushed back, you know it.

[damiam]

You outright admitted that MTA is an "unofficial" mod for GTA. Do you honestly believe that they can do a mod to match a release by the developers of the game?

Of course not. I don't expect it. I'm not complaining about the lag in MTA. I know that there are other reasons why MTA is slow, but when everything you do locally updates instantly, and other players moving around take upwards of a second to update, that does indicate the netcode is at fault.

Furthermore, the net code in a mod like MTA is a whole helluva lot more complex, since it's not integrated into the games engine.

While I'm sure that's true, it's irrelevent. It's still the netcode that's slow. I'm not comparing MTA's situation to Halo's, I'm just showing that, in one extreme case, the netcode can be the source of major slowdowns. It's not unreasonable to think that, in Halo, where the original netcode was designed for an XBox on a LAN, the netcode may not be as up to standards as in, say, Quake or UT.

Do you have any idea at all how a game works, on the code level? I'm not going to admit to being an expert, but I've got at least a bit of room to walk with. Your post seems to imply you've got no clue.

I've never written a networked game, but I understand the general concepts. I know that netcode should just take information from the server and pass it straight to the engine, but it's (of course) not quite that simple, and I can imagine plenty of opportunities to fuck it up. Given the general quality of the Halo Windows port, I wouldn't be surprised if there was actually some bug that impacted performance. Again, if everything local updates instantly, and you're playing with people and a server having decent pings, and you've got lag, there is something wrong.

Re:Its going to get pushed back, you know it.

[damiam]

Yes, I realize that (although most UDP-using games effectively end up implementing some TCP features anyway). There is still some point where the game recieves info from the network, and has to process it.

Re:Its going to get pushed back, you know it.

[Radius9]

Being a game programmer, and more specifically, having worked on the XBox, I have to say you are wrong. Halo 1 did not push the XBox hardware that much, the machine has a LOT more power in it. And as a game developer, sure I can do things on the PC that I can't do on any of the consoles, but I effectively have to write the game twice, once for the low end PCs, and again for the higher end hardware. Either that, or I have to cut out the lowed end PC market, at which point its probably no longer worth it. In addition, although consoles have technically lower specs than a PC, we can often do more with it, primarily because developing a game takes 1 to 2 years, at least. This means that on the PC, I am trying to write code for a system that doesn't even exist yet, I'm trying to hit a moving target. On a console on the other hand, its a static target, and the longer I work on a particular platform, the more performance I can I get out of the machine.

Re:Its going to get pushed back, you know it.

[daVinci1980]

Actually you're only sort of correct. There are three components to lag:

1) Network speed (ie, literally how long does it take the packet to go from player A to player B--or in the case of client/server, from player A to server and server to player B)
2) Network processing time (ie, how long does the networkling layer of code play with the packet, wait for other packets with complete information and convert the packet into useful game material)
3) Rendering time (the packet is now entirely in-game informtion, how long does it take to actually display the information to the user in some meaningful way

A very good client/server game will eliminate 2 and 3 as factors almost entirely. This is impossible in RTSes, which use peer-to-peer, and have to worry about silly tasks such as maintaining client synchronization.

Its funny actually, because everyone assumes that because Quake worked so well over network connections that all FPSs should. What this assumption fails to note is that Quake and Quake 2 --and to some extent Quake 3--were incredibly well written at the networking layer. They also had things like client interpolation of data and straight up guessing (which accounting for some funny things when the client guessed wrong).

At any rate, my point was that your graphics card and chip *do* affect the lag you experience in game, just as your CPU and network connection do.

Re:Its going to get pushed back, you know it.

[Ceyan]

Actually that depends on how you look at the situation.

A) The graphics card has NOTHING to do with the whole situation. It's constantly rendering graphics, and that never changes, about the only way you can fit it into the picture is you play with graphic settings set beyond what it's capable of handling, and then you always recieve lag even in SP games.

B) I'll grant you that the CPU does have a certain amount of influence, however, any CPU capable of running a game like Quake 3 or any of the recent FPSs won't have a problem keeping up with the load. The CPU doesn't do a whole lot while the game is running, most of the effort is put out by the GPU for the rendering.

So I will concede that you're right, both have an affect, but on the flip side unless he's intentionally creating lag for himself, both of them don't matter in this equation. That also means if they do matter in his situation, I've just been proved right because he's creating his own lag, and not recieving lag by fault of the code.

Re:Its going to get pushed back, you know it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Fuck off Rallion

Re:Its going to get pushed back, you know it.

[drinkypoo]

"Shovelware" means you have a physical medium with software on it, and you have some free space, so you throw some more software on it (usually various demos for your other products, or your partners' products) to make it look impressive. It's just try before you buy, like those SGI software samplers back in the day. Usually one or two of the included demo versions will be useful, and the rest of it is time-limited software, which is overpriced or crappy anyway.

It's 100% true that if Halo 2 PC and Halo 2 Xbox came out at the same time, sales of Halo 2 Xbox would suffer, but most of the people who own both an Xbox and a PC are going to get the PC version when it comes out, whether they buy the Xbox version or not, so it makes the most business sense to release it for Xbox well in advance of the PC version.

Personally I will buy Halo 2 on Xbox if it supports mouse and keyboard. Otherwise it can piss off. It's not likely to happen because Microsoft doesn't sell mouse and keyboard peripherals, but at least one Playstation 2 game supports HID keyboards, hubs, and mice, and the Xbox is basically a PC, so we all know it COULD be done, and there is precedent. I just doubt it.

I just played through Halo on the PC, it was not very technologically exciting, and it ended up feeling like one of those old NES platformers where if you fell down a level you spent a lot of time walking. Also it would be nice if the Warthog's tires felt like they were intended to have traction on any surface. The friendly AI always seemed pretty competent, and the enemy AI pretty lousy, but other than that it was pretty fun.

feh, not splitscreen

[kisrael]

feh, I was hoping to see how good it looks splitscreen...a tougher challenge in many ways.

Re:feh, not splitscreen

[Anonymous Coward]

I would venture to guess that it looks roughly 1/2 to 1/4 as good.

Single Player

[TheOnlyCoolTim]

Halo had a great single player in most every department, the major exception being indoor level design and "now go through the whole area BACKWARDS!"

Tim

Re:Single Player

[Anonymous Coward]

yeah, god forbid the game display some consistancy with the storyline.

Sure, they reused the maps, but they balanced the areas and encounters entirely differently. Was that 1/3 of the game less fun because you'd fought around that same hill, tree, and patch of ice a few hours earlier? Or is it ok to admit that so long as the game played differently when you moved through that same area again, it wasn't quite as bad as everyone would like to make it out to be. Or did you have absolutely no fun flying around with the banshees, just because you'd run through those valleys before?

An philosophical/artistic qualm with level design is not a valid critique of /gameplay/. I'd say the level design in most multiplayer UT/Q3 maps is lame rehash too. But the games played in those maps are still pretty damned fun.

Re:Single Player

[TheOnlyCoolTim]

To me it seemed contrived that the power generators were all located just above my previous path, disturbing my suspension of disbelief. The return to the Pillar of Autumn, however, was very cool even though it featured somewhat similar reuse.

The excellent gameplay mechanics persisted in the repetitive and indoor Halo areas, however - my only qualm with the gameplay was that on Legendary I sometimes noticed places where enemies would appear as if out of thin air (usually behind a door or something like that) or where infinite enemies would be spawned, which is something else that messes up my suspension of disbelief. I even grew to like the fact that you couldn't quicksave, which made completion of the game much more fulfilling.

Tim

Re:Single Player

[Maserati]

Call of Duty is guilty of that in two levels. I'm letting them off easy, because they are "shoot your way in and out" missions. But it *is* a short game, even without reusing maps to stretch gametime.

Nine month slippage?

[*weasel]

This is starting to feel an awful lot like Crimson Skies. Hoopla, playtesting, major rework, Hoopla, playtesting, major rework.

At least you know Bungie's not just rushing out anything wrapped in the Halo logo to capitalize on the buzz. And they're not blaming it on some half-baked code-leak or anything. (Really, what would Valve have to recode due the leak? the network encryption? That shouldn't take 6 months...)

Well, Crimson Skies turned out to be a damn fun game. So if they're holding Halo2 back to similarly refine the gameplay experience, good on em - I'd rather wait than have a glorified expansion sully the franchise.

I'm just hoping the (xbl) multiplayer is up to snuff, and they hit that 24/server xbl target.

Re:Nine month slippage?

[bigman2003]

A few months ago I upgraded my DSL service to 256k up. Solely to allow me to host bigger Xbox Live games.

256k may not be great, but it's a lot better than 128. It's even broaderband.

Occasionally I take my Xbox to work (around Christmas) and I love to host 16 player Crimson Skies games there. Things chug along great.

I would be happy with an 8 person game- but hopefully we will be able to do more.

The levels sucked too.

[Anonymous Coward]

too many borng indoor areas that looked the same.

Translation

[Anonymous Coward]

"...entirely representative of the lighting, polygon counts, bump-mapping and particle effects"

That statement screams "doctored picture". And on closer inspection there are a lot of things that don't make sense about that image:

(1) This is not a 1st person perspective picture. It's not representative of a 1st person shooter. The viewpoint is too low and there's no HUD. You will never see screens like this when you own the game.
(2) It's a bit too well composed. Almost like they paused the game, then moved the camera around to try and get the best picture. Or used photoshop.
(3) The blue player on the left appears to be shooting at the blue player on the right (with the shield effect). This is indicative of clueless compositing, unless all the players were completely incompetent.
(4) Note the faint motion blur on the ejected machinegun shell that's rotating in mid-air. Um.. motion blur? This suggests badly repaired interlaced video capture, not direct digital framebuffer capture.
(5) Odd stairstepping in places. Check out the antenna on the rear of the car. Why is it so blocky? Also look at the edge of the canyon wall on the right side of the picture - it's clear this image has been resampled. And resampled up - not down. This is most odd.

This picture definitely has some fishy elements to it - motion-blur and antialiasing at 1600x1200 not withstanding. The very early trailer video they released of Halo2 Xbox (which I believe was in-game since all the movies in the 1st game were) was basicly 640x480 with no antialiasing.

Re:Translation

[fowlerserpent]

the blue player on the left is not shooting at the blue player on the right. The blue player on the right is being shot by the red player on the right. Notice that the red player and the blue player are pointed at each other firing their weapons, thats how you can tell.

The weird blocky effect on the antenna is a result of the antenna "wobbling." Perhaps you'll recall the antenna on the scorpion tank in the original halo. It flopped back and forth. The antenna is apparently not supposed to be a stiff metal rod, but bendable. It wobbles when the vehicle moves. Load up Halo, get in a scorpion and check it out.

I loaded up the image in photoshop and dropped it down to 640x480. It looks a lot shittier, big duh.

Re:Translation

[MMaestro]

1. It could be a 1st person perspective. We just don't have enough information. Bungie could've simply disabled the HUD and had the picture taker have no weapons at the time. Simple as that. Considering its a shot taken by the developers, disabling the HUD is very very simple (they also had it disabled during the E3 gameplay screening).

2. 'Well composed' pictures are always used for media purposely. When you publicise a game, do you show the screenshot of the player crawling through a vent slowly, or do you show the screenshot of the player running away from a horde of hideous looking monsters while they tear the walls down?

3. I don't know how or why you managed to come to that conclusion. Its fairly clear that the red player on the right is shooting the blue player (with the shield effect) since there is no blur of yellow on his back (which in Halo 1 indicated a hit on a shield).

4. Um, thats not a motion blur. If it was then the machinegun shell would have had to rotate in midair because blur is facing from upper right to lower left, while the shell itself is facing upper left to lower right.

5. The antenna is wobbling back and forth. Go play Halo 1 and drive the Scorpion tank around, its antenna wobbles as well. If the image was resampled, why the hell would they make a mistake like that?

Everything you pointed is something that a quick, careless look would pick up. Not a 1st person perspective? Almost like they paused the game and the moved the camera? It was taken by the developing team, they could've added a "Midget" character in the game to obtain a very very low perspective point and we wouldn't know it. These points are really unfounded and unsupportable.

Re:Translation

[cabra771]

This is not a 1st person perspective picture. It's not representative of a 1st person shooter. The viewpoint is too low and there's no HUD. You will never see screens like this when you own the game.
FYI, Bungie has built in camera settings to their engine to stop any kind of action, move the camera where they want and take a snapshot. This really isn't all that new. Think of it similar to Quake 3 when playing online and being able to "fly" around the map when your not playing and watching the other players duke it out. This is the main method that companies use to create their press release stills and such. What did you think they do? Hold a camera up to the monitor and take a picture? Bungie had tons of pictures like this from the first Halo, and I believe that someone actually has created a small program or found out how to use this camera for taking pictures in the PC version.

Halo 2 and production values

[MBraynard]

In determining the quality of Halo 2, Exhibit A is the original Halo. However, just playing the game for most people can only give a partial picture about the production values of the game.

The official Xbox magazine has a demo disc and, for several months, this featured a series of discussions with the Bungie development team discussing in detail various aspects of what they went through in making Halo, giving a far greater appreciation for there work and revealig production values that I had not noticed, despite beating the game on highest difficulty.

They go into great detail about things I never would have noticed - like the way a wall and floor looks with the player's headlight turned on versus off and how ther are three layers of passthrough transparency.

I'm not sure how long we are going to have to wait, but the example Bungie set with Halo makes me anticipate another 'game of the year.'

disappointment

[Undefined Parameter]

Bungie never announced a release date for Halo 2 up until today, so nothing's been "pushed back" or "delayed." Still... FALL!? I recognize how much of the H2 demo played by the Bungie guys was scripted and limited in scope, but it was still an example of where the engine was.

The screenshot released today shows that they have functional multiplayer now, too. Beta testing should take a few months, but it seems to me that Halo 2 is clearly past the alpha stage at this point.

So why 8-10 months more? Even IF they're still in alpha, they've got to be in late alpha by now... I just don't see how it'll take that long. Maybe that's my fault... perhaps a lack of experience with game development and emotion are clouding my vision on this. I'm willing to accept that, and I don't think that I'm "owed" anything, even an explanation... but damn it, I'm disappointed and saddened by this news.

Even on the off chance that Bungie is just screwing with our heads, I've still lost some of my confidence in them. Hell, if they ARE screwing with our heads, I'll be angry at them for toying with their fans' emotions.

I'm going to go distract myself before I get depressed.

~UP

Re:disappointment

[dogbowl]

They're waiting because Halo 1 is still selling so well. Why kill off your only cash cow?

Too bad I'll probably never play it

[Lord Kano]

I have been boycotting all Bungie software since they were bought by Microsoft.

I can't really support their practices by buying any of their games.

LK

Re:Too bad I'll probably never play it

[Anonymous Coward]

And yet, you support things like this on your website:

Doing his part to defeat Microsoft

It's harder to patch a console game

[Jammer@CMH]

They're waiting so long because the first console release will be the release. For PC software, they can just slide out a 2.01 to cover up anythign that showed up after release. This is much more akward for a console game, the hame has to be right the first time.

Re:It's harder to patch a console game

[Squidgee]

Actually, you can patch via Xbox LIVE. Game do it all the time, and it's completely automatic.

Re:It's harder to patch a console game

[Anonymous Coward]

Lives users all Xbox users

Fall 2004? Sorry have that all scheduled

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, I plan on playing Rome: Total War during that time.

Of course, it'll be delayed too.

amazing

[metalmario]

blue and red men shooting in a blocky, empty enviroment. even the antenna is wobbling for joy. uhh... i'm not excited. only sleepy.

Uhm. . .

[M3wThr33]

One word comes to mind when I look at this image that makes other people go apeshit and that word is "plastic."

Re:Uhm. . .

[Anonymous Coward]

...Erm....who, exactly, is going apeshit?

you need to go outside.

[sw33tjimmy]

1- I can get a screen like that on just about any PC FPS game while I'm dead and ghosting around. I'm sure Bungie has the means to position a camera during gameplay. Besides, he never said it was a representative of the first person perspective; he said it was representative of engine effects we'd see in game. 2- I suppose they used their laptop from the grassy knoll to quickly load the image into PS and doctor it up before releasing it on the Net! Give me a break. You're just looking for something to be pissed about. 3- Eh, there's a red guy just on the other side of the blue shielded guy. Is there any likelihood you misjudged the angle by 5 degrees? Yes, I think so. 4- There is no 'faint motion blur' on the shell. It could be the cracksmoke residue on your monitor. 5- This point is counter-intuitive to your entire post. "The picture looks too doctored to be true! Except some of it looks really crappy!" Move along folks. There is no conspiracy here. We did land on the moon, the freemasons are not in charge of the world, and this is a picture from the Halo2 engine.

It will be good in HDTV

[mrshowtime]

I played the original HALO on my 65 inch HDTV set two years ago and was blown away; it was fantastic! Just for shits and giggles I disconnected the "HD" part and played the game in regular res. Boy did it blow. I just wish there was a keyboard/mouse adapter for the Xbox. I hate having to wait two years to play the game the way it really was meant to play (that is until Bungie was bought and what began as a computer game became "optimized" for the xbox.)

meh.

[sw33tjimmy]

why not find an original critiscm? I look at 8 bit mario and the word is "Pixelated". I have an idea, why don't you go ahead and create your own gaming development studio and show bungie how it's done?

Boycott them?

[MacFury]

I have been boycotting all Bungie software since they were bought by Microsoft.

Funny, you couldn't boycott them if Microsoft hadn't bought them...they would be out of bussiness.

I'm just as pissed as you, probably more (I'm a mac user).

Re:Boycott them?

[Lord Kano]

Funny, you couldn't boycott them if Microsoft hadn't bought them...they would be out of bussiness.

EA or someone else would have bought them before it came to that.

I'm just as pissed as you, probably more (I'm a mac user).

I used to be a Mac user. I remember seeing the previews for Halo at MacWorld like 5 years ago.

LK

The novelty has worn off...

[Chizzy]

I loved Halo 1 when I played it on X-Box... it was great. But that was only because i played it for a VERY limited time (20 minutes or so). Two years later, I was still basking in the warm fuzzy glow of Halo goodness, and found myself snatching up the long-awaited PC version. PROBLEM: I realized that once the novelty of Halo wears off, and after you watch all the Red vs. Blue, Halo is just a standard FPS... Quake 3 with unique vehicles. Anyways, the point I am making is that I am going to have to hear a LOT of rave reviews on Halo2 to even consider it. I saw the E3 video, and it looks just like the original with some new little novelties (hijacking vehicles, etc...). I just don't understand why this game is so intensely popular. Maybe as a PC gamer I expect a lot out of the multiplayer experience to satiate me, while console gamers put more points into singleplayer, thus overrating multiplayer??? Anyways, Halo is simply not online PC material.

Bungie can go fuck themselves

[caitsith01]

Mod this -5: flamebait if you must, but as a serious PC gamer, Bungie Can Go and Fuck Themselves.

The way they acted towards the PC (and worse, Mac) community regarding Halo was disgraceful. On top of that, Halo 1 really wasn't that good - the single player game was boring and repetitive, and the multiplayer was NOTHING on QIII, Medal of Honour or virtually any other half decent MP PC game. The saddest part was seeing all the fawning 13 year olds proclaiming Halo the 'greatest game of all time' and the gushing, sickening reviews of the eventual PC port on IGN and GameSpot.

Anyone who really cares about PC gaming will boycott this game. As was seen with the recent Deus Ex 2 debacle, console-ization of PC games is a recipe for mediocrity. Bungie's X-Box enslavement is the ultimate example, and should be opposed. Save your money, buy Doom III or HL2.

Stupid, Blind people

[BattleCry]

"It looks just Like Halo 1!" No, no it doesn't. "I've been betrayed by Bungie! Damn Xbox worshippers!" No, no you haven't, there a company, they make money, fans are second inline deal with it. "Lets Boycott them!" Yes, yes you will, you'll download the game like you normally do. God damn Guys, the game isn't out yet and you've decided its not worth what you stand in by accident in the park. Grow up and wait till it comes out, then judge.

Blind, stupid, People

[BattleCry]

"Its looks just like Halo 1" No, no its doesn't. "Damn bungie xbox worshippers! Lets boycott them" Yes, yes you will, like you did with Halo 1 when you got it copied or downloaded it. You guys need to grow up, wait till the game comes out before trying to give it all this "Oh look at that they promised 66 frames a second, but its just giving 33 and look at the pixels! It SUX BALLS!!!!1111!!!!!1, now were did a place pocket protector?"

Wow..

[Anonymous Coward]

Will this one go over 3fps?

Title Corection Marathon 5 not Halo 2

[Anonymous Coward]

Get it right people!

Ok Reality check

[AzraelKans]

Halo for PC is online, Halo for xbox is not online, xbox users will get online play, and PC users (when the pc version is released) will have the continuum of the history and some extra nice features (like hijacking, modding and better AI) you like the package? cool, go and get it, if you dont, dont buy it.
Seriously I think is seriously immature and stupic to claim immaturity or stupidity from anyone just because they dont share your beliefs and tastes.
Some people loved Halo (as the best console FPS) and want to have more of it, period.

Weither we like it or not, consoles are better business for developers than PCs theres less piracy (slightly), a lot more players some free advertising deals, etc. overall more money.(of course you have to invest more since you have to get official licenses and SDKs etc.)

I mean lets be honest how many casual gamers do you know that have a pc capable of playing halo? (I could blame 3d cards developers on this but.. honestly is useless)
That doesnt mean there wont be pc games at all, the PC(and MAC) is extremely unexpensive to work with, since you dont have to get licenses or even distributors to work in it. practically anyone can design and sell a pc game. Besides the PC will always be the top of the line laboratory for gaming, the level of technology a PC can achieve (by buying expensive hardware actually) will always be much superior than any console. Not even the next gen consoles will have the same level of quality you can have in a pc monitor, modding communities are still a dream far far away, (not to mention complex MMORPGs experiences) and tools. So I wouldnt worry too much, there will always be something under the soon for PCs besides we get to play console games (even emulate some) and our own without buying one.