| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (121)

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 6:22PM spin cycle said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Microsoft: One Halo game every three years 'probably not [profitable] enough'

Posted: Sep 24th 2010 4:20AM Phoenix654 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@spin cycle So, Bobby Kotick is working for Microsoft now, I see...

Why, why does gaming have to be a business? I know, everyone needs money, everyone needs a job, but it leads to situations like this. I love Halo, but let's not annualize it, please? Halo 3 is STILL an amazing game, 3 years on and it's still being supported by Bungie, and I'm sure they will do the same for Reach. I can't see Microsoft supporting a new game every year in the same way. We shall see...
Reply

Posted: Sep 24th 2010 7:28AM fais said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@spin cycle

Master Chief prepare to be skull raped.
Reply

Posted: Sep 24th 2010 12:39PM jsx92 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Phoenix654 It's called business. When you grow up you'll stop demonizing people like Kotick because you'll realize you ARE people like Kotick and that the food in your belly and he roof over your head cost money, and the harder you work and the better your skills get the higher your standards for food and roofs get. Stop fooling yourself, all people are alike and business is the cornerstone of economy which is the cornerstone of society and civilization. Either move to a mountain of the grid or stop whining like childish brats.

Peace and love.
Reply

Posted: Sep 24th 2010 4:43PM canada said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@spin cycle i got reach for $60. black ops is $80. i dont know about you guys, but ill buy a new game for $60 any day
Reply

Posted: Sep 24th 2010 5:12PM Phoenix654 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@jsx92 I understand the need for money and being slightly greedy, but not things like this. I just do not want the Halo series to become a "quantity over quality" kind of thing. A lot of crappy games over a short period of time do not leave the same mark as a ridiculously well crafted experience once every three years.

And, as an adult who owns a house and works hard so that he may enjoy his free time, I also understand there is a limit to how far you can push people in terms of spending money before they decide not to buy what you're selling anymore. The Halo hardcore fans will get everything that Microsoft pushes out, but that's not why Halo's successful. It's successful because new players keep coming into it to experience the goodness therein. Some stay, some don't, but there's a better chance of them staying involved if the game they get into is a damn good one, rather than an "off year" Halo.

Oh, and I don't really have to demonize Kotick, he does it on his own, taking the fun out of games development, selling us cutscenes and raping the Guitar Hero franchise until it bleeds Van Halen. That is all.
Reply

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 6:23PM Air King said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I wouldn't mind a new game every two years, but I think a new game every year would be too frequent.

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 7:34PM swooded said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Air King
This. I would also say the franchise/universe could benefit from those 1 every 2 years being different genres & not just strictly FPS. If done well of course...
Reply

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 7:50PM Laivindil said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
@Air King

What the post fails to mention is that activision only does it every two years. Treyarch/IW
Reply

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 8:26PM jeepgun said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Laivindil

Don't forget about Guitar Hero though.

Reply

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 11:14PM Riley said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Laivindil Activision is the distributor for all the CoD games, you're thinking of IW
Reply

Posted: Sep 24th 2010 9:49AM XperimntNterror said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Riley Publisher
Reply

Posted: Sep 24th 2010 4:07PM Fermie Prime said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Air King
Then exercise your free-market power of choice and DON'T BUY THE GAME if you think its coming out too frequent. Problem solved. Millions of people don't agree with you BTW.
Reply

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 6:25PM Come on Chang said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Don't you mean size 13 Mjolnir armor boots to fill ?

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 6:26PM ThatStuffsLethal said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Oh boy. Here we go...

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 6:30PM Morph156 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@ThatStuffsLethal
My thoughts exactly.
Reply

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 6:27PM LaughingTarget said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
When you sell 15 million copies or so, I bet Microsoft wouldn't mind releasing one every 3 months to that kind of sales volume.

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 6:27PM Uncle Jesse said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Reach is absolutely massive with endless possible game modes and things to do. It will be played for a VERY long time. I don't even think they need to release another Halo game this generation. (Well, I guess it ultimately depends on how long this gen goes on for). Then it would give them a lot of cushy room and enough time to work on what Bungie accomplished, perfecting a brand new Halo game that could launch with the new Xbox.

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 6:30PM Victoryismine52 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Uncle Jesse
Once Again Uncle Jesse is right
Reply

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 6:33PM Emil K said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Uncle Jesse I totally agree. Reach is the culmination of all the Halo games made to date. The multiplayer is, unbelievably, even better than any previous installment! I expect to play Reach multiplayer for another 3-4 years, honestly.
Reply

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 6:41PM Liquidfingers said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Emil K

Same here. Halo Reach is honestly a very complete package, so I think releasing another Halo game in 1-2 years would be foolish. That is, unless that Halo "game" is a compilation of Halo 1 and 2 remastered in HD with Live support. *drool*
Reply

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 8:20PM isotrex said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yeah, +1 for Uncle Jesse. I completely agree but if these corporate dudes behind the scene get greedy... who knows?!... maybe they'll be releasing it annually... heck even quarterly... xD lol... moving and franchising to their mobile apps especially that WP7 is almost here. haha.
Reply

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 9:08PM FreedomProject said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Liquidfingers my thoughts exactly
Reply

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 6:29PM BlackedOut said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
If 343 try to make Halo games as we know it, they'll never succeed.

But I'd love to play a full game of Halo: Space Combat w/ multiplayer,
Throw in upgradable ships and a few more game mechanics and you might be on to something

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 7:19PM MGTrey said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@BlackedOut: A lot of 343i is comprised of many former Bungie members, including Frank O'Connor, who is more or less the "father" of Halo as we know it.
Reply

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 10:30PM Snaek said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@MGTrey Except he started there between Halo 1 and 2...
Reply

Posted: Sep 24th 2010 1:15AM jlhatch said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@MGTrey Lul. O'Connor started out writing the Weekly Updates for Halo 2 and other community management items. It wasn't until later he went on to write for the series. To say he's the "father" of Halo is as erroneous as it gets.
Reply

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 6:30PM Mr Cool711 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Halo: 2011...Halo: 2012...?

Posted: Sep 27th 2010 6:15PM KAL326 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Mr Cool711 I was thinking Halo of Honor or Call of Halo. I mean if they are going to crank out slightly improved/reworked games every year or so that are just a few levels beyond DLC they might as well go with a proven naming scheme.
Reply

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 6:31PM Emil K said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I'm not excited about playing a Halo game NOT made by Bungie. That's just me.

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 6:40PM Mach2 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Emil K

It's not just you.
Reply

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 6:55PM Punkrawk Bbob said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Emil K

add me to the "screw that" list.
Reply

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 9:40PM OzCueball said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Emil K

Kinda one of those where you have to poke it with a stick to see if it's alive or dead to you.
Reply

Posted: Sep 24th 2010 12:58AM BizarroPunisher said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Emil K
I'm not even that big of a Bungie fan and I still don't plan on picking up another Halo game after Reach. At this point I feel like they've done everything they could with the franchise. I'm just happy Reach didn't leave me feeling angry like ODST did. Actually, it's done the opposite, and I plan to enjoy Reach for a long time to come.
Reply

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 6:34PM HannibalLeon said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Hoorah for non-original games!!!

/sarcasm

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 6:34PM KenobiEagle said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
He's kidding right? I mean, I don't think anyone had any problems waiting for Halo 2 or waiting for Halo 3 or waiting for Reach... We were plenty content playing the most current Halo game of the time. I think the quality of the game matters more than the quantity of games out on the market.

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 6:35PM Kinjiro said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Microsoft is taking inspiration from Activision? Oh boy....

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 6:43PM copa said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Kinjiro

Look, you can't argue with results. Activision has lovingly nurtured Infinity Ward so that their most talented developers can continue to deliver Call of Duty titles to us for years to come.
Reply

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 7:06PM FrodoTBaggins said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Kinjiro
Haha, I imagine they are gonna draw "inspiration" from their pricing plans too...Which basically means chuck another $10 on everything.
Reply

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 7:08PM mbarriault said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@copa You mean they "nurtured" by ripping off and forcing out most of the actual programmers and designers who made the game, pretty much leaving the same team in name only?
Reply

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 8:36PM Spunky Monkey 190906 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Kinjiro

You sure? I was thinking more along the likes of Pokemon, add new aliens and guns to collect in each game and give you several versions to buy at release.

Halo Yellow and Pink
Halo Pearl and Diamond
Halo ODST and TSDO
Halo Reach and Don't Reach

I love Halo, but this is getting a little silly, lol
Reply

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 10:02PM leemahi said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@copa
Infinity Ward was a great name. I associated that name with quality for the last 8 years. Now thats all over.
Reply

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 6:35PM AnimaOnline said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
No, it's about make good games and not trying to maximise profit at the cost of quality. I wont deny that I think Microsoft is going to ruin Halo somehow. It may not be in the next few years, or even the near future but they just wont have the overall image Bungie will have had. I guess we'll see.

Anyway, developers should take as long as it takes to make a game good. If that means setting and unrealistic release date and then delaying the game then so be it. It took at least three years for Bungie to make each of the Halo titles which made them so famous among the industry. One a year, or anything even close to that, seems pushing it. Not only that, Halo is well known for its multiplayer. I don't know if I want that to be completely replaced every year. As a big Halo fan, it's certainly not what I'm use to.

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 6:37PM Blackbird said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"Kudos to Activision because they've done a good job building a good game, continuing to release each year and I think the fans feel like it's a good thing that they do that."

Yes, because the fans love having to spend $60 every year for the same crap, this time with a different number after the title. Since Activision took control of the Guitar Hero only three years ago, they've released nine sequels, not even counting "Warriors of Rock", the band hero spin off, or the cell phone versions.

So three Halo games every year seems to be what they're aiming for.

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 6:40PM Misanthropic Gamer said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
They'll turn Halo into the Madden of FPS games - annual releases with minor updates. Seems a likely fate for the series now that Bungie is out of the picture. Whatever happens, it'll certainly remain profitable; we've all seen how well Pokémon has done.

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 6:58PM Punkrawk Bbob said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Misanthropic Gamer

That's unfair. Pokemon is over a decade old. They've only released 4 games, going on a fifth. They re-released two of them, but those shouldn't count. Those are just kind of a director's cut of old titles. So that's roughly the same one game every 2-3 years rate that Halo is on.
Reply

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 8:22PM Sly C said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Misanthropic Gamer

Yeah, putting pokemon in the same league as madden is unfair. Main games in the series release years apart and bring big changes. Side games release frequently, but everyone knows the main series is best.
Reply

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 6:40PM Stevetrop Man of Mystery said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
@spin cycle

Cha Ching

I have always seen myself as a moderate fan of the halo franchise. It's good and I do have fun with it when I play it with friends. I just feel if I begin to see it being churned out regularly I will lose all interest into the franchise.

Posted: Sep 23rd 2010 6:40PM copa said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
"I used to look at annual releases of non-sports games as people just trying to milk me," Spencer said. "Then I remembered, hey, I like milk. It's cool, and frothy, and white. So what if, instead of them milking me, I was milking all of you? Now, that sounds a lot better!"

"So from now on, bitches, just call me the milkman."

Posted: Sep 24th 2010 4:17PM Fermie Prime said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@copa
lol
Reply

Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

TUAW

TUAW

Massively

Massively

WoW

WoW