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

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.

Comments

Probably won't make a difference

[Kanpai]

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.

Re:Probably won't make a difference

[imitier]

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

[colman77]

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

[escher]

Any bets on if Halo 3 will end with the Master Chief about to Press The Button what Blows Up The Aliens and then it'll end and then we'll get Halo 4: Press The Button and Blow Up The Aliens?

Re:Probably won't make a difference

[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? That's the question.

Re:Probably won't make a difference

[badasscat]

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.

Master Chef

[AtariAmarok]

Sorry, I can't look at the character's name anymore without thinking "Master Chef"

BAM!

Re:Master Chef

[Anonymous Coward]

Really, I can't think of that without thinking of "Chef Inspector Dreyfus"

Re:Master Chef

[Anonymous Coward]

When I read this I wondered what you were on about, so I scrolled back up and read it again and saw that it actually didn't say Master Chef! I totally read it as that.

It's simple

[Rousterfarian]

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

Re:It's simple

[superpulpsicle]

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

[Rousterfarian]

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

[mattACK]

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.

Re:It's simple

[Babbster]

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).

Re:It's simple

[Headcase88]

In other words.

I'll give the benefit of the doubt and say he or she was referencing this.

Re:It's simple

[Ericn484]

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.

Re:It's simple

[Rousterfarian]

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.

Re:It's simple

[Rico_Suave]

Past performance - especially when it's based on a sample of 1 - is not indicator of future performance.

Re:It's simple

[Cabriel]

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.

Re:It's simple

[Anonymous Coward]

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

Never heard of Dreamcast, huh?

Re:It's simple

[nightski]

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

[SetupWeasel]

It will matter to developers though. Less time to make the game. Less time to sell the game.

Re:It's simple

[unclethursday]

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). Has a POS Thomson drive in it, the drive is now so bad it barely reads anything anymore. MS wants $80 plus shipping to fix it, which will be better for me than buying a new one and losing all my game saves. Total price after I send it in for repairs: $420+shipping costs, $280+shipping costs if we don't count XBL costs.

GameCube: $200, launch day unit, no problems. 2 memeory cards at $20 each. Total cost: $240.

As far as not counting the game costs, or controller costs (I've had to replace 2 Xbox controllers so far because they just decide to stop reading when I pull down on the left analog stick sometimes, and 1 GC controller that got thrown to the ground and the A button stopped working), by your logic, the GameCube has been my best value. I spent less for it than my original PS2, and have had it longer than my Xbox, yet it hasn't cost me any extra money because of disk drive problems.

And I'm not the only one who has had bad experiences with Sony's shoddy disk drives, they did lose a class action lawsuit that forces them to fix or replace any PS2 with Disc Read Erors for free, after all. And I'm also not the only one who has had problems with Microsoft's use of Thomson DVD drives in older Xboxes, either. Google Xobx Thomson problems and see how many hits you get. I'll give you a hint on that one, Google says "about 49,800" hits.

The PS2 has hardly been a "better value" for me, or for the thousands of others who have had it die in less than two years of use because Sony's QA has gone to shit over the past decade or so for consumer electronics.

Re:It's simple

[mcc]

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

[Anonymous Coward]

It's simple. It's 'in other words,' not 'another words,' you clod.

Re:It's simple

[jimi the hippie]

Never heard of Dreamcast, huh?

Never heard him say "successful console," huh?

Re:It's simple

[Anonymous Coward]

Because staring at a big ugly box is worth $6.25 a month... What, you say I need to buy games?

Strangly early to anounce this

[FidelCatsro]

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

Re:Strangly early to anounce this

[bigman2003]

Yeah..because Sony has a great track record of getting games like Gran Turismo delivered on time.

Re:Strangly early to anounce this

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, because the Halo games have always been released on time.

When was Halo 2 originally supposed to have been released? I seem to recall originally hearing 2003, not "the end of 2004".

Almost every game (short of, possibly, "EA offical-sports-license year") gets released behind schedule. Guessing a release date almost a year in the future (and an unknown date, at that, unless Sony's actually said something and it's now more than just people guessing "late 2005/early 2006") isn't good, and serves to do little more than keep IGN's traffic up.

Re:Strangly early to anounce this

[bigman2003]

And where exactly did you hear '2003'? Was that from Microsoft, or Bungie?

Back in January of 2004, they first announced the 'fall 2004' date. Prior to that, it was just "when it is done."

Then, in May, they gave the November 9th date.

So you might be barking up the wrong tree with the Halo 2 release date. They told us 6 months ahead of time the DAY it would be released. And they hit it.

Re:Strangly early to anounce this

[Anonymous Coward]

You're right, I did more searching (as I said, I just did a quick search), and found 2003 plastered everywhere in old archives, but never as an offical release.

(Now, as for hitting the Nov. 9th date: Given how early they started the publicity campaign, I get the feeling the game was well on the way to being done by then. After all, I Love Bees was registered in June, and you don't start running stuff like that unless you know when the game is going to be released. Unless, of course, you're John Romero.)

Re:Strangly early to anounce this

[Dizzle]

Funny, I got mine a few days earlier from this really nice guy on the street. I think it was broken though... it was all French.

I'd never have thought...

[Bin_jammin]

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?

[MagicDude]

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.

Re:WTF?

[MBCook]

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?

[gl4ss]

then you should know that it can take just that 1 generation for the tables to turn.

Re:WTF?

[SuiteSisterMary]

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....

Re:WTF?

[MBCook]

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?

[MBCook]

Um... no. The difference between my example and yours is this. My example assumes that the X-Box 2 is out there but not huge, and so they pull this stunt to try to undermine Sony's launch which would otherwise (and I say even if MS does this) huge.

YOUR example is from a the N64 which launched months after the PS and Saturn and by then the PS was already a very big story, Nintendo had already had their thunder stolen. If the N64 was launched at about the same time as the PlayStation, your example would hold more water.

A better example would be Nintendo launching the DS when it did to try to undermine the PSP (I doubt that was why, but that would be a better example).

Now I'm not saying that the PS3 will be the best, it could bomb. I was only talking about the size of the launch hype and press attention, not the eventual success of the console.

And, for reference, Nintendo DID launch with only one game (to a large degree) for months (and months).

Re:WTF?

[DeadScreenSky]

Um... no. The difference between my example and yours is this. My example assumes that the X-Box 2 is out there but not huge, and so they pull this stunt to try to undermine Sony's launch which would otherwise (and I say even if MS does this) huge.
And that's why it's so silly, and why people are calling you on it. You have no reasonable way to guess that the Xbox2 will not be huge right now (we don't even have a launch date, real hardware specs, a list of launch games, or even knowledge of its controller). It very could 'pull a PS1', especially considering the massive momentum the Xbox 1 has in the US, Canada, and much of Europe right now.

Re:WTF?

[Worminater]

uh... did you jus tocmpletely agree with him as a method of disproving him?

Great tactics there:p

Re:WTF?

[MBCook]

Yes, it could. But the PS1 "pulled a PS1", and the PS2 was huge and managed to avoid being dethroned by the X-Box and the GC (by a HUGE margin). I'm just saying the safe bet is that, at least for the first few months, the PS3 will be hot and I don't think that simply launching the X-Box2 and Halo 3 at the same time will steal all that thunder.

They can go ahead and prove me wrong, I just think the odds are in my favor (but not by an overwhelming margin).

Re:WTF?

[DeadScreenSky]

I still think that before the consoles have even been revealed is just too early to really guess anything. Even Revolution might end up being the obvious front runner after E3. Just a few more months to wait...

Re:WTF?

[SuiteSisterMary]

And the moral of the story, not to mention the PS vs the Saturn, the DreamCast vs the PS2, and what not, and Nintendo vs Sony, is that the market is fickle, and sometimes technical specs don't matter; sometimes they do. Sometimes, being *the* market matters, and sometimes the new guy is in the right place at the right time with just the right idea.

My hopes for this.

[SnoopJeDi]

Hopefully:

-We won't see a third RING in space
-People will stop enjoying running things over in the same engine over and over


But what are the chances?

I hate consoles anyway. I'll wait for Halo3 and GTA:Whatever to come out on PC and buy them (and subsequently trash them)

so what?

[torpor]

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 ..

Re:so what?

[Anonymous Coward]

the hardware, however, doesn't get made with pixie-dust ..

Oh, I thought they made it all work with magical server pixie dust.

Re:so what?

[Metapsyborg]

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 news for ya Microsoft: Sony is good at this!

Postscript: I would like to see sony "win" the next console war, only 'cause I don't like Microsoft; but I'm gonna be playin' The Revolution!

Re:so what?

[illumina us]

Nope. I bought an XBox and Halo just so I could play it at LANs. Thnx

Re:so what?

[Metapsyborg]

Well then microsoft didn't make any money off you, they probably lost money, because they make the cash off the games and not the hardware.

Re:so what?

[Anonymous Coward]

the Halo Cult is well-known and well-respected.

And if by "well-known" you mean regarded as being the lowest common denominator, and by "well-respected" you mean as to having no taste when it comes to FPS and that no one in their right mind would listen to or believe anything they say, then yes you are right.

But wasn't...

[bluemeep]

...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...

[ivan256]

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?

Re:But wasn't...

[UWC]

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?).

Re:But wasn't...

[Rico_Suave]

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.

Re:But wasn't...

[colman77]

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 beat by any other xbox game.

Re:But wasn't...

[hobbesx]

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 people to figure out that the crowd at the mall they were walking through was the line for GameStop and had to go back.

God help us!!!

[mooreBS]

Save Earth from Sony!

Yeah and let Bill take over. My ass.

Re:God help us!!!

[mooreBS]

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 propogate the belief that their next product will change the world, be bug free, and be secure. I think Pete Loshin, columnist for CPU expresses it best, "Linux isn't for everyone." To that I would amend "Windows isn't for anyone."

Re:God help us!!!

[mpaon]

Yeah and let Bill take over. My ass.

Oh man, you had me scared for a second... I didn't notice that comma.

Re:God help us!!!

[G-funk]

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...

[Headcase88]

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.)

i think OP has this backwards

[rabbot]

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."

Re:i think OP has this backwards

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, microsoft isn't very successfull is it?

Re:i think OP has this backwards

[alienspanke]

I would have to disagree that halo is the only game keeping the xbox afloat. While halo does play a large part in it, the Xbox houses plenty of great games just like sony. And one area the Xbox does better sony is in the graphic region. Any game released on the Playstation will hands down look better on the xbox. for example, splinter cell, and even the madden sports games are cleaner looking on the xbox. These days, most games are released on both systems so i dont think 1 single game is keeping any system alive. Rather its a matter of preference for the individual as to which console they choose.

Interesting!

[Tom7]

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...

[Wraithfighter]

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)

Re:Oh come on...

[Anonymous Coward]

See how no one responds to your post if it makes sense? This game forum is so transparently anti-Microsoft. Unbelievable...

I agree with you, by the way and I'm also a Mac guy.

Re:Oh come on...

[Anonymous Coward]

Couldn't agree more but can't say I didn't see this line of comments coming.

Historically people are going to choose one console or the other based on games no matter what crafy marketing tactic they use on launch days.

IMHO this round of console launches will come down to who's online presence is better and more refined. The way things look right now, that is clearly M$ with XBOX Live. They only have to slightly build on what they have now while both Nintendo and PS2 have to create something from the ground up and get it 100% correct with version 1, possible but not probable.

Re:Oh come on...

[Anonymous Coward]

I am not a Sony loyalist and I own all three systems, but they are not really going to win anyone if Halo is the "best" thing they can come up with to covert people over.

Re:Oh come on...

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Yeah, IE has really responded well to the threat from Mozilla.

Um...

[mooniejohnson]

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.

Halo 3?

[Anonymous Coward]

See what people don't understand here is that this probably won't be a sequel. It will probably be the rest of Halo 2. With all the crap fixed. (IE: no pop-up, won't look like ass)

Of course, they'll charge you full price for another half of a game but I guess thats the way it's supposed to be.

Of course Halo 3 is in the works....

[HiredMan]

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 concluding chapter to a chapter 2 scenario which was clearly written by someone who didn't write the original. They threw out ALL interesting parts of the first story:
-the Halo is an ancient one of a kind artifact - no, our bad there are a bunch of them.
-the enemy is a mindless horror you can't reason with - oops now you can chat with them over AIM anytime after 6.

Check out how many Bungie personnel from the original group that transfered to Microsoft are still around. The ones who quit and refused to move over to Microsoft originally were the smart ones.

=tkk

Re:Of course Halo 3 is in the works....

[XenoRyet]

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.

Re:Of course Halo 3 is in the works....

[Blakey Rat]

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.

Re:Of course Halo 3 is in the works....

[Anonymous Coward]

I write for a living and think Halo 2's story is unusually resonant. I could not agree less with your post. And, isn't there another word besides "suck" in your vocabulary? "Suck" is how people who flunked English describe things they don't like. Do you think anyone will be persuaded by using the word "suck?" It instantly brands you as stupid.

Re:Of course Halo 3 is in the works....

[Anonymous Coward]

that's why Halo 2 sucked. Well, that's why the "story" sucked.

Sorry??? It's a FPS for pete's sake!

Do you think Doom, Duke Nukem, Counterstrike, bothered with a story? The idea is that you shoot things to progress. Unless you're playing online / LAN, in which case you shoot other people. Repeatedly.

No-one gives a damn about "stories".

In other news...

[BigWhiteGuy_27]

Evel Knievel sues Slashdot user for using "knieving" when he meant "conniving".

Re:In other news...

[Headcase88]

Yeah well, accept for that one miner mistake, the spelling was grate.

Ok

[Lord_Dweomer]

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?

Who gives a shit?

[slot32]

I mean really? I played and finished Halo2 and said 'meh'... Halo 3 (Which might have an eding - horay!) vs PS3 and Metal Gear Solid, Grand Turismo (WITH online this time), Wipeout (akin to Wipeout Pure for PSP), Final Fantasy, etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc... No-one but the die-hard fanatical xblob fanboys care... Really... All this means is xbox2 will be $200 by the time PS3 comes out. It will make more people buy a XBLOCK2, but *not* make LESS people buy PS3s... Lets face it, it's a fight to control DRM and the space under your TV... Nothing else...

I bought Halo2 for multiplayer

[CrazyJim1]

I liked it at first, but it really seems like some element of depth is missing.

No.

[DeadScreenSky]

But wasn't ...Halo 2 received with a collossal "meh"?
It really wasn't. It also still remains the most popular Xbox Live game even now, 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.

Why Halo2 OR ps3?

[Anonymous Coward]

I think I'll purchase Halo2 and the PS3 on the same day. Give it enough time and I'll be playing Halo2 on the PS3 while running Windows, OSX, and brewing a perfect cup of Joe in my supercomputer powered Sony coffee maker!

Not the first I've heard this

[nicksthings]

I actually heard this rumor awhile back, from a few sources. Sounds fun!

it's about awareness

[Alban]

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.

Re:it's about awareness

[Trepalium]

As an added bonus, both can end up selling fewer units because of it.

Re:Master Chef makes no difference

[cainpitt]

Doesn't matter. Iron Chef Morimoto would kick Master Chef's ass.

Huh?

[nobodyman]

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 released for psone several years after ps2's introduction. Same will go for xbox2 (EA already has stated that the first wave of xbox2 games will have xbox1 versions).

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

Re:Huh?

[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.

Re:Huh?

[nobodyman]

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:Master Chef makes no difference

[decaying]

Rokusabaro Michiba > *

Did you even play Halo2?

[MMaestro]

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 horror', try reading the manual. It was also implied that the Flood had intelligence in Halo 1 as well (they wielded rocket launchers). In one of the levels Cortana even tells you that the Flood tried to escape Halo by sneaking onboard the disabled covenant cruiser before it launched.

Either you played through both games with the sound off all the way, or you're just ignorant considering some of these facts are repeated numerous times through the game.

Re:Did you even play Halo2?

[XellDx]

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.

Underthinking the problem...

[Hamster Lover]

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...

Re:Underthinking the problem...

[ken kenobi]

Mod parent up 5,000,000 Insightful

Louis Wu is an egotistical cock goblin.

[Anonymous Coward]

dissapointing ending

[Blurredplacebo]

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? your never told just on to the next mission. after killing norman soth was there any real motovation for what he had done? just walking to the van is not a satisfying ending

And the point is....

[Anonymous Coward]

Who the heck has an XBOX anyways?

more like Halo 2.5

[sbma44]

This rumor has been reported elsewhere previously -- see here. 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.

Really?

[j.bellone]

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.

And so it begins

[superultra]

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 unintelligent crap like this.

Console fanboyism is as rabid and narrow-minded as racism on a KKK level, only it's about things that don't f-ing matter at all.

Dear Fanboys: Stop Being a Tool

[superultra]

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 good games
* Instead of wasting your precious time posting on forums about which console is better, play good games,
* Buy the next system when you've given enough blood and saved enough lunch money,
* Buy more good games,
* Find an issue that really matters.

To all those points to Square-Enix as Sony savoir-

[XellDx]

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. Most defenitly not 3 FF games announced at the same time, and lots of the other stuff that we saw early on for with the PS2 from them.


*Taking the HD out of the PS2 redesign, dragging ass releasing the HD in the states.
**Which may or may not see the light of day outside JPN, who cares?

Competition is GOOD

[Winterblink]

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.