It was revealed yesterday that a major new IP from Microsoft Game Studios is going to be announced in the near future, with the European Xbox event X06 most likely to be playing host to the news. Fresh information obtained by SPOnG today reveals Bungie will be announcing a brand new IP in the near future, with the X06 announcement likely coming from the Halo-famed studio.
Speaking to a Microsoft source close to the management of the entire Xbox 360 project today, we were told that, "As far as things stand, Halo 3 is the last game [in the series] and it's more than just 'a thing to say' which I know came as a surprise to everyone [at Microsoft Game Studios not involved with the decision-making process] when it was announced. A new game from Bungie, not Halo 4, will be announced soon and pre-production has begun. So if you're looking for what to expect at X06, you should be looking at that."
Interestingly, the fact that Halo 3 is officially the last game in the series seems to have been totally overlooked by Xbox 360 fans to date. It was fair to assume that the claim the most important Xbox IP to date was to be killed off was little more than hyperbole on the part of Microsoft. Though awkward genius Bungie seems pretty clear on the matter: " Bungie Shocks World with Surprise Game Announcement. Bungie announces Halo 3, the third and final game in the Halo Trilogy. Halo 3 will be released for Microsoft's Xbox 360 in 2007," it said on its site during E3, a joke aside to the fact that Halo 3 was a clear cert from the off.
Further confirmation has come in the form of recent interviews, with Halo audio art director Marty O'Donnell telling the BBC, "We all want Halo to be the great ending to an epic trilogy. We look at what Peter Jackson did with the Lord of the Rings films - which each film bettering the previous one and that is what we are aiming for."
For the record, SPOnG has heard that Halo 3 will be last game in the current Halo Trilogy. Another trilogy, likely a prequel, will be announced at some point in the next 12 months. Nothing solid on that yet, though we'll keep chipping away at the leaky places and let you know as soon as we hear more.
Catch up with everything to date on Halo 3, including all videos of the game released thus far, by clicking right here.
Speaking to a Microsoft source close to the management of the entire Xbox 360 project today, we were told that, "As far as things stand, Halo 3 is the last game [in the series] and it's more than just 'a thing to say' which I know came as a surprise to everyone [at Microsoft Game Studios not involved with the decision-making process] when it was announced. A new game from Bungie, not Halo 4, will be announced soon and pre-production has begun. So if you're looking for what to expect at X06, you should be looking at that."
Interestingly, the fact that Halo 3 is officially the last game in the series seems to have been totally overlooked by Xbox 360 fans to date. It was fair to assume that the claim the most important Xbox IP to date was to be killed off was little more than hyperbole on the part of Microsoft. Though awkward genius Bungie seems pretty clear on the matter: " Bungie Shocks World with Surprise Game Announcement. Bungie announces Halo 3, the third and final game in the Halo Trilogy. Halo 3 will be released for Microsoft's Xbox 360 in 2007," it said on its site during E3, a joke aside to the fact that Halo 3 was a clear cert from the off.
Further confirmation has come in the form of recent interviews, with Halo audio art director Marty O'Donnell telling the BBC, "We all want Halo to be the great ending to an epic trilogy. We look at what Peter Jackson did with the Lord of the Rings films - which each film bettering the previous one and that is what we are aiming for."
For the record, SPOnG has heard that Halo 3 will be last game in the current Halo Trilogy. Another trilogy, likely a prequel, will be announced at some point in the next 12 months. Nothing solid on that yet, though we'll keep chipping away at the leaky places and let you know as soon as we hear more.
Catch up with everything to date on Halo 3, including all videos of the game released thus far, by clicking right here.
Read More Like This
Comments
Showing the 20 most recent comments. Read all 37.
tg0006 28 Jul 2006 21:42
18/37
bout time, i was starting to fear that bungie would overplay the story of halo and accidently ruin it.
RiseFromYourGrave 28 Jul 2006 23:45
19/37
"halo = average" - idiot
"you cant say halo = average" - dick
its not a bad game. it just didnt turn my world upside down. it revolutionised little and didnt grab my balls. like other average games.
"you cant say halo = average" - dick
its not a bad game. it just didnt turn my world upside down. it revolutionised little and didnt grab my balls. like other average games.
more comments below our sponsor's message
realvictory 29 Jul 2006 09:12
20/37
How many reasons is it possible to have for something not being amazing? What it is, is a lack of reasons why it is amazing!
This particular discussion is mostly about opinion, anyway, so I don't understand how someone can be criticised for giving an opinion.
Listing the games is irrelevant - the point is, I just like other games more. I could list any of them and you could say you don't like them, whatever they are.
Yes, I understand the good aspects of Halo, like I originally mentioned, but just because some of it is good, does not make it amazing.
This particular discussion is mostly about opinion, anyway, so I don't understand how someone can be criticised for giving an opinion.
Listing the games is irrelevant - the point is, I just like other games more. I could list any of them and you could say you don't like them, whatever they are.
Yes, I understand the good aspects of Halo, like I originally mentioned, but just because some of it is good, does not make it amazing.
vault 13 30 Jul 2006 21:37
21/37
I don't think a game (ex. Halo 1) can be called average when it singlehandedly held up the X-Box for a whole year. it was the only good launch game and the only good game to come out from November 11, 2001 - November 11, 2002. That's a whole year Microsoft relied on a sole IP to carry their system. That my friend, is no average game.
If you don't like it, don't like it but don't go and tell people how to feel about certain games. Some people are just not fit to judge games. Saying that all console FPSes suck, is disregarding that they exist. Companies are still producing them and someone has to review them. There is also the fact that one game has to be the pinnacle of that genre, regardless of your prediliction toward it. And I believe as do most people that Halo 1 and Goldeneye are #1 and #2.
If you don't like it, don't like it but don't go and tell people how to feel about certain games. Some people are just not fit to judge games. Saying that all console FPSes suck, is disregarding that they exist. Companies are still producing them and someone has to review them. There is also the fact that one game has to be the pinnacle of that genre, regardless of your prediliction toward it. And I believe as do most people that Halo 1 and Goldeneye are #1 and #2.
realvictory 30 Jul 2006 22:07
22/37
No one said Halo was bad, nor that all or any console FPSs "suck".
A game doesn't have to be amazing to sell... neither does "amazing" sales make an "amazing" game.
What I know is that it did not "amaze" me, and that is a fact, and I can't argue about it - I am not saying Halo is a bad game at all, either.
I hope at least some other people also didn't find it amazing ("not amazing" != "bad", don't misunderstand) because, otherwise, I have to come to the conclusion that everybody else has been brainwashed, or that I don't find things as impressive as I "should".
A game doesn't have to be amazing to sell... neither does "amazing" sales make an "amazing" game.
What I know is that it did not "amaze" me, and that is a fact, and I can't argue about it - I am not saying Halo is a bad game at all, either.
I hope at least some other people also didn't find it amazing ("not amazing" != "bad", don't misunderstand) because, otherwise, I have to come to the conclusion that everybody else has been brainwashed, or that I don't find things as impressive as I "should".
RiseFromYourGrave 30 Jul 2006 23:57
23/37
youve got a friend in me, realvictory. and a couple of people i know too.
and vault 13. some people mustnt be fit to join forums; you have somehow managed to misread everything and as a result started to spout nonsense.
no one disregarded console fps's, or said that halo was bad. we didnt try and make anyone else agree with us either.
and as for halo propping up the xbox, the general public arent all 'hardcore' gamers, people who have played a good number of games in all genres for all but their entire lives - since back when a game constituted a handful of pixels way up to now with millions of polygons in my case - and in their own mind can honestly say thay know the full difference between a great and an average one. some absolute s**t gets in the charts, games that either pander to these morons or just fell short of the mark during development and got bought anyway. official licenses help here, as EA full well know.
so no, halo propping up the xbox means nothing. i frigging hate the 'if so many people buy it it must be good' argument. a lot of people can be wrong or make a collective mistake. bush was voted in for his second term, are 50-whatever percent of americans right? are they f**k, not on that one.
and vault 13. some people mustnt be fit to join forums; you have somehow managed to misread everything and as a result started to spout nonsense.
no one disregarded console fps's, or said that halo was bad. we didnt try and make anyone else agree with us either.
and as for halo propping up the xbox, the general public arent all 'hardcore' gamers, people who have played a good number of games in all genres for all but their entire lives - since back when a game constituted a handful of pixels way up to now with millions of polygons in my case - and in their own mind can honestly say thay know the full difference between a great and an average one. some absolute s**t gets in the charts, games that either pander to these morons or just fell short of the mark during development and got bought anyway. official licenses help here, as EA full well know.
so no, halo propping up the xbox means nothing. i frigging hate the 'if so many people buy it it must be good' argument. a lot of people can be wrong or make a collective mistake. bush was voted in for his second term, are 50-whatever percent of americans right? are they f**k, not on that one.
LUPOS 31 Jul 2006 04:23
24/37
What you two seem to be missing is that someone said "haloe is a pretty average game". That is the main point of discussion and what started the furver hear. I am not accusing you ofg saying it sux and even if you had i think i would have been more exceptign of that as an opinion. Callign it average however is a statment of complete inacuracy. The game excelles in nearly every category be it controls, graphics for the time, pacing, score, characters, story, multiplayer and inspite of its numerous cliche's a great deal of originality.
To say you didnt like it is one thing, an opinion your welcome to. To say that a game that sold on par with the GTA games (who console of choice has litteraly a 5 times larger instal base) is just absurd.
I will say again, i have listed numerous reasons why the game is not "Average" where as all the two of you can manage is a few "flaws" that most halo fans will easily bow to and the fact that your opinions of it are low. Your opinion of a games does not make it average.
Average: adj. Usual or ordinary in kind or character.
At the time of its release there was nothign usual or ordinary about that game.
My opinion doesnt make you average does it? j/k ;)
________
To say you didnt like it is one thing, an opinion your welcome to. To say that a game that sold on par with the GTA games (who console of choice has litteraly a 5 times larger instal base) is just absurd.
I will say again, i have listed numerous reasons why the game is not "Average" where as all the two of you can manage is a few "flaws" that most halo fans will easily bow to and the fact that your opinions of it are low. Your opinion of a games does not make it average.
Average: adj. Usual or ordinary in kind or character.
At the time of its release there was nothign usual or ordinary about that game.
My opinion doesnt make you average does it? j/k ;)
________
realvictory 31 Jul 2006 08:10
25/37
Your arguments for it being amazing are the same as the arguments for it being average - opinion. Except "everyone bought it..." "everyone agrees... therefore it must be true".
Good graphics, good gameplay, originality, blah, blah, whatever you decide review a game based on - those are all subjective. I believe I have seen better, not just to the extent that I would say "I believe" but to the extent that I would say "it is the truth, and people who disagree with me simply don't understand what I mean", because I don't just think I believe, I believe I know that better games exist, and Halo is not bad, but saying it is amazing is disrespectful to other games which are much, much better.
This is not something that can be logically proven, so I don't see why people bother trying to argue - that is what I mind most of all - it all depends on what you think a game should be, how high your standards are, and what you like.
I believe what I say, and that is no worse than what anyone else has done. If opinions are invalid, then I may as well not post a single thing - however I am a customer to Halo, therefore it should be valid. I paid to have an opinion on it.
Anyway, the point is, you can compare whatever you like, but whether it is amazing or average is only ever going to be a matter of opinion - arguing is not necessarily a waste of time, but arguing a lot of things is - and not that either is wrong, which I feel is a misunderstanding.
Here's a quick example - when you read a review in a magazine or website (whichever is your favourite), it is never a scientific 100% objective analysis of the game, ever. There is nothing stopping you basing your entire life on magazine reviews. Yet, on the other hand, neither can you say it is wrong, because it never claimed to be the ultimate truth - it will always ever be a matter of opinion.
Good graphics, good gameplay, originality, blah, blah, whatever you decide review a game based on - those are all subjective. I believe I have seen better, not just to the extent that I would say "I believe" but to the extent that I would say "it is the truth, and people who disagree with me simply don't understand what I mean", because I don't just think I believe, I believe I know that better games exist, and Halo is not bad, but saying it is amazing is disrespectful to other games which are much, much better.
This is not something that can be logically proven, so I don't see why people bother trying to argue - that is what I mind most of all - it all depends on what you think a game should be, how high your standards are, and what you like.
I believe what I say, and that is no worse than what anyone else has done. If opinions are invalid, then I may as well not post a single thing - however I am a customer to Halo, therefore it should be valid. I paid to have an opinion on it.
Anyway, the point is, you can compare whatever you like, but whether it is amazing or average is only ever going to be a matter of opinion - arguing is not necessarily a waste of time, but arguing a lot of things is - and not that either is wrong, which I feel is a misunderstanding.
Here's a quick example - when you read a review in a magazine or website (whichever is your favourite), it is never a scientific 100% objective analysis of the game, ever. There is nothing stopping you basing your entire life on magazine reviews. Yet, on the other hand, neither can you say it is wrong, because it never claimed to be the ultimate truth - it will always ever be a matter of opinion.
GamesAreFun 31 Jul 2006 12:02
26/37
Halo 1 for me was a fun little FPS game. It wasn't a mindblowing, edge-of-my-seat, action-packed, ride of a lifetime but it was good. Then came Halo 2. It was a boring, overhyped piece of crap. Every level was a mess of terrible level design and worthless A.I. The whole staying in one spot, killing enemies, waiting, killing some more, then moving to the next part to do it all over again was just to pad the game's length. The vehicles were a downgrade from Halo 1. Never was driving a Ghost so boring than in Halo 2
Its a real shame that there will be a Halo 3 and the world may never see a Beyond Good and Evil sequel.
Its a real shame that there will be a Halo 3 and the world may never see a Beyond Good and Evil sequel.
TwoADay 31 Jul 2006 13:21
27/37
RiseFromYourGrave wrote:
and as for halo propping up the xbox, the general public arent all 'hardcore' gamers, people who have played a good number of games in all genres for all but their entire lives - since back when a game constituted a handful of pixels way up to now with millions of polygons in my case
Are you seriously suggesting that only "Hardcore" gamers have opinions that matter? Or only those people who are old enough to play Pac Man can have a "correct" perspective?
I happen to have played games since they were text based. Does that make my opinion more valid than yours, as I've been (presumably, based on your above discription) playing games longer than you?
"Hardcore" gamers can be like "Movie Buffs" in that their opinions are usually no better than any one else, and in some cases, horrible. Having just seen Six String Samurai based on some recommendations, I can say that "Movie Buffs" can often have their heads up their asses.
Halo 2, in my opinion, was barely above average, as the level design was terrible, and made all the "yes, I finally get to control this vehicle" from Halo 1 more chore-like than enjoyable.
However, the thing that sets Halo 1 apart from other console FPSes is the thought and polish that went into the game. Was it revolutionary? no. but it did totally change the gaming landscape. Halo 1 will not age as well as some of the old classics (NES Mario games, for example), but for its time it was fantastic.
RiseFromYourGrave 31 Jul 2006 13:31
28/37
what i am saying, in a unapologetic categorisation, is that most of the general public are inexperienced idiots who wouldnt know a fantastic game if it came up and bit them on the arse
i used to play text based games too, on my bbc micro. although i have never really thought of them as games.
i used to play text based games too, on my bbc micro. although i have never really thought of them as games.
GamesAreFun 31 Jul 2006 14:47
29/37
Why didn't anyone buy Psychonauts? That was a fantastic game :(
LUPOS 31 Jul 2006 16:05
30/37
GamesAreFun wrote:
Why didn't anyone buy Psychonauts? That was a fantastic game :(
i bought it... and loved every secodn of it... well almost every second.
_________
RiseFromYourGrave 31 Jul 2006 19:16
31/37
ive only played bits of psychonauts, it was pretty cool. ill have to get hold of it for a proper session.
vault 13 1 Aug 2006 01:03
32/37
RiseFromYourGrave wrote:
what i am saying, in a unapologetic categorisation, is that most of the general public are inexperienced idiots who wouldnt know a fantastic game if it came up and bit them on the arse
I totally agree and also more cohesive than I did. If Emril Lagassi were to one day start ranting on about video games, I'd punch him if I see him. I'm not saying you guys don't have any credibility to discuss and critique video games, but as with everything, there takes a certain degree of qualification to do it successfully. It's why Penny Arcade comes off as so enjoyable and usually agreeable in my opinion. That and they're not conceded pricks!
Question: If Halo sucks, then what is the best or even an example of a good FPS?
RiseFromYourGrave 1 Aug 2006 01:26
33/37
well mate, halo doesnt suck.
but i guess good examples of fps's would be wolfenstein + doom (of course, our lineage must be respected), some Quake game, HL1, Far Cry, HL2, Doom3 (but only as an extension of doom, which makes it kind of hard to add to the list but what the hell), Metroid Prime 1 + 2, System Shock 2, Perfect Dark..
theres others like AVP 1 + 2, but their quality can be contested in certain areas
i always found turok a weird one, from the first two incarnations it seemed like a game that couldve had it all but f**ked it up at the last minute.
but i guess good examples of fps's would be wolfenstein + doom (of course, our lineage must be respected), some Quake game, HL1, Far Cry, HL2, Doom3 (but only as an extension of doom, which makes it kind of hard to add to the list but what the hell), Metroid Prime 1 + 2, System Shock 2, Perfect Dark..
theres others like AVP 1 + 2, but their quality can be contested in certain areas
i always found turok a weird one, from the first two incarnations it seemed like a game that couldve had it all but f**ked it up at the last minute.
vault 13 1 Aug 2006 02:50
34/37
I do like all those games you mention and do think there some of the greatest, but you can easily dismiss any of them.
Doom 3 for it's ridiculous use of monster closets.
Quake for it's lack of cohesive story or real atmosphere
Half-Life for it's well, it's ummm, errr..., overabundance of headcrabs?
Well maybe they all can't be disputed...
Doom 3 for it's ridiculous use of monster closets.
Quake for it's lack of cohesive story or real atmosphere
Half-Life for it's well, it's ummm, errr..., overabundance of headcrabs?
Well maybe they all can't be disputed...
RiseFromYourGrave 1 Aug 2006 18:07
35/37
totally, doom 3 didnt do much that was original, it was just doom but prettier and scarier. thats enough for me to like it though. definitely not a brilliant game when you think how far other shooters have come gameplay-wise since the days of doom but a game i enjoyed as a massive doom fan.
the raymaster 5 Oct 2007 14:02
36/37
will there be a halo 4? if so, when is it coming out?
vault 13 7 Oct 2007 04:11
37/37
the raymaster wrote:
will there be a halo 4? if so, when is it coming out?
It's coming out next Thursday. You can preorder here, in my pocket..., that's where the money goes.