Slashdot Mirror
New Halo 2 Maps April 25th
Gamespot.com has word that the first set of new Halo 2 maps will be available for download on April 25th, with a second set being made available on June 28th. From the article: "The two free maps are titled Containment and Warlock. Containment is a massive level blanketed with snow, and Warlock was influenced by the Halo: Combat Evolved map Wizard. The Killtacular Pack will include Turf and Sanctuary, and it will sell for $5.99."
According to Bungie, the Killtacular map pack will be free just two months after its release.
(I have a vacation in May, so I think I'm waiting!)
As for the update, it's already been pushed to everyone (yesterday). It's changed the game dramatically, encouraging a lot of grenade play.
Other items of note:
Videos of the maps, and a 3D [QuickTime] rotating picture of Warlock here.
Video Game News, FAQs, etc
I hope when they add the new maps to matchmaking they have a bit of a spring clean of the existing game modes. The same old gametypes gets boring after a while, especially as some are just crap anyway (any objective game on Midship, 4v4 games on Coagulation[1]). Some more variety would be nice, I hope they don't just stick the new maps in and leave all the old setups in place.
Now, I'm planning to get the retail disc version, now should I buy the first two premium maps anyway? Decisions, Decisions...
[1] Starting with something a bit meatier than an SMG would help as well.
10 PRINT "LOOK AROUND YOU ";
20 GOTO 10
They are selling new maps??? Is this a first, other than (real) expansions? At least expansions usually include new features, as well.
One man's Funny is another man's Offtopic.
This is a much needed expansion. The old maps do get a bit boring after playing on them so long. I think I might just wait out the maps that aren't free, especially if they're going to become free anyway.
Halo2 is Xbox only. Just keep releasing maps and mods until the cows come home. If it was on PC, they would have alot more trouble getting more revinue from the game.
Well I could buy the 2 maps for $5.99 a piece and then later buy the other maps for $11.99 totaling $23.97, or I could wait two months and get a cd with everything on it (therefore if my box went down or i mess something up i still have the cd) for $19.99, or just buy the map pack and download the rest for $11.99... I don't think they have thought this one through. Sure they are going to squeeze some money out of some people with that kind of talk, but I'm sure most people can wait. I mean $6 for a map that will be free in under two months, you can't even buy halo 1 for less then $10 of its origional price! Anyways this map pack is way overdue, i think most people will believe that they can wait, especially for something that probably should have been in the origional game.
redvsblue.com
::BANG!::
Sarge: Did you just shoot yourself in the foot?
Simmons: Yeah I do that sometimes now..
(For those of you who don't play Halo 2: when you play online in a random game, you can't choose the map.)
And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
Clearly not you!
Unless you plan on canceling your Xbox Live subscription before June 28, you're going to get 4 new maps whether you bother to learn them or not. (The first 2 are free immediately, the other two become free on June 28 if you read the report.)
Unfortunately, it doesn't say whether the last 5 will eventually be free as well.
"Containment is a massive level blanketed with snow"
A massive level blanketed with snow, huh? Hmmm... sounds a lot like Sidewinder to me.
Let's hope this new winter wonderland turns out to be a Sidewinder equivalent.
You may not like the Counter-Strike gameplay, but boy, giving the SDK away does WONDERS to increase the amount of content. It's not just Source -- there are some good things for Doom 3 and UT'04 as well.
But, naturally, on a console, you get a tiny little trickle of upgrades and maps, all "official".
I'm sorry, but if you've got the hardware, HL2 is just a better deal.
Half-Life 2, for $50, gets me:
- five or ten great games
- free online gameplay
- free upgrades
- two official maps a month
- custom content
- custom servers
- new games
Halo 2, for $50 + $5/mo, gets me:
- one great game
- online gameplay (not free)
- upgrades (not free)
- two official maps every six months
So, for now, I'll just borrow my friend's xbox now and then.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
I see most your other points, but the audio argument is weak.
For maybe one year's worth of xbox live if you're a REALLY poor shopper, you can find a Sound Blaster Audigy. Surround is built in.
I got an sblive awhile ago. Sounds good on some surround PC speakers I got at the same time. It was ridiculously easy -- color-coded and everything. It'd be somewhat more complicated with a real surround setup with an amp and all, but not as much as you'd think.
Ditto with the HD video out. My monitor resolution is set to 1600x1200. If my video card can handle that, do you really think it wouldn't be able to handle your widescreen?
Mouse on xbox will never be as good as on pc. For one thing, the adapters all have to emulate a joystick, so people would be better, but not that much -- not as much as if you could play against some actual PC port.
The $60 a year I would notice, because I'd spend it on the yearly version of UT. Maps, mods, unlimited net play, and native Linux support.
Also, I hate supporting Microsoft, especially on this. The reason there are good games for the Xbox is that Microsoft can pay people to do "only on xbox". No one else has a slogan like that. Also, I'm sure they've reserved the right to change the price at any time and not tell you about it, or to disable certain games or otherwise screw you over.
If enough people were to boycott Xbox Live (not that they ever will), Microsoft would be forced to abandon this approach, and developers would be forced to develop for real platforms. Not that I actually have a hope of that happening, but I'd like to be able to play Halo 2 without spending over $100 on a console.
I do enjoy kicking back on the couch with a console and some friends, playing Mario Kart 64 and the like, but I wish I could do that (with split-screen and everything) on a PC. I'd want it hooked up in the TV room anyway, so I could invite some Otaku over for an Anime marathon. (Good, undiscovered Anime can really only be gotten through fansubs.)
But, I'm about to be a starving college student anyway, which means I'll just have a PC and maybe a PS2 for DDR, if I can find somewhere to play. No subscriptions, barely any new games, and maybe a RAM upgrade every couple years. So this is all hypothetical.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
Yeah, lots of games have more popular maps. CS:S is dust and iceworld 24/7, but you can still find a good game, and the steady flow of "official" maps makes it always possible to find a good server with good ping.
I like being able to find a server playing a map that I want to play.
I also like being able to create a server with negative gravity, or unlimited redeemers, or... See where I'm going with this? Halo 2 has some interesting custom options, but not even close to what you get with even the tamest of PC FPSes. I'm addicted to admin_slap, with the pimpslap mod...
Microsoft's monopoly? Absolutely. I don't want to put money into a company that has a monopoly over anything, and I really don't want to give them an edge in the console market -- if anyone has a monopoly on that, we'll all be subscribing to play single-player games at MMORPG-like prices.
A middle of the road machine from 2001? You're right, I'd never try Doom 3 on that. And neither should id, which is why I call it a half-assed port. It's the port that was never meant to be.
Counter-Strike for Xbox -- now that was a laugh. They MUST have been able to do better than that.
You're right that developers aren't being smacked down by Microsoft's legal team. I'm pointing out that I don't see the same thing happening anywhere else. Not that it doesn't happen, but I keep hearing more and more stories of people jumping ship to the xbox, and not the other way around. Which seems dangerous.
Also, given the resources, what developer wouldn't want to do all three consoles? Or at least ps2/xbox/pc?
I'm curious. If Bungie had gone along without Microsoft, would Halo have gone anywhere? Probably not, but the most addicting thing about Halo was the level design and gameplay, which is something that doesn't cost as much money as pretty graphics. And Halo is successful enough right now that Bungie could easily stand alone as a separate company.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
Microsoft's monopoly? Absolutely. I don't want to put money into a company that has a monopoly over anything, and I really don't want to give them an edge in the console market -- if anyone has a monopoly on that, we'll all be subscribing to play single-player games at MMORPG-like prices. This is one of two things I have issue with. You can't really concern yourself with stuff like that. Do you really know who you are supporting when you are doing any given thing? There are so many people who are involved with the creation of any product that I guarentee you somwhere along the line someone was related to something that did something you didn't like. I've learned to just buy on one factor, if the product itself is worth my money, not if whatever corperation is caught up in scandal. If what they are doing is wrong, karma will come back and bite them in the ass. I'm curious. If Bungie had gone along without Microsoft, would Halo have gone anywhere? Probably not, but the most addicting thing about Halo was the level design and gameplay, which is something that doesn't cost as much money as pretty graphics. And Halo is successful enough right now that Bungie could easily stand alone as a separate company. So let's see here. Microsoft has single handedly raised Bungie from some obscure company that made some awesome games but didn't get any attention to one of the leading names in the gaming industry. And then you're saying that Bungie should basically turn around and say "fuck you" to the people who gave them their big break, just so they can start making games for the PC? Bungie probably would have gone under had it not been for Microsoft's intervention, and I'd much rather see Bungie stick around. We have too many game development houses dying or being assimilated already.
I'm the guy with the unpopular opinion
There's a huge difference between not supporting things I don't agree with, which are obviously bad, and scrutinizing every single product to make sure no one involved was evil. And if more people thought the way I did, we'd still have plenty of bad things in the world, but the bigger ones (Microsoft, for one) would fall.
I like being the karma. Or, as Gandhi said, "You must be the change you wish to see in the world."
You'd rather see Bungie stick around. So would I. And they have been assimilated, haven't they?
No, what I'm saying is that they've already contributed a lot to Microsoft, so I'd consider MS more than payed off for raising Bungie from obscurity. The same thing should apply to them which applies to me. If they don't like the way Microsoft does business, then they should not continue to support Microsoft.
Maybe some people at MS would take that personally. Maybe they should wake up, too, and split off. Hell, if Microsoft split into one company for each of its departments, it'd probably be better for the consumer, especially if the top people (Gates, Ballmer, etc) were tarred and feathered. But, IANAE (I Am Not An Economist.)
I'm also saying that it's entirely possible that Bungie could have made things work without MS, because once you get past the pretty graphics, the thing that really stands out about the Halo games is the gameplay and the level design, which could have been done without nearly as much cash.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!