Halo 4 Won't Launch the Next Xbox Console

[Waaghpowa]

Look at battlefield 3, how much they had to cut back, cut every corner possible to get that game running at a half decent state on the consoles, and what did the (admittedly not all) console community do? slate dice because they couldn't have 64 players, larger maps etc... from my understanding that is a console limiting a game from a technological pov and from a game play pov...

Did you also play the beta and witness all the console players whining about how the game didn't look that good? There are some people who play on consoles who know next to nothing about the limitations of their choice of platform. Some of them beleive that they're some magical box capable of producing mind blowing graphics, greater than anything. It's baffling really.

 

[karloss01]

i think the console life should be at least 10 years and around the 8/9 introduce the next gen successor.

A-are you being serious...?
Can't be... either that or i've misunderstood what you said.

Anyway... Eh, Another Halo, another... not Xbox.

Why not? PS2 was supported for 10 years, the tech is good enough for an enjoyable experiance.

 

[silverbullet1989]

Look at battlefield 3, how much they had to cut back, cut every corner possible to get that game running at a half decent state on the consoles, and what did the (admittedly not all) console community do? slate dice because they couldn't have 64 players, larger maps etc... from my understanding that is a console limiting a game from a technological pov and from a game play pov...

Did you also play the beta and witness all the console players whining about how the game didn't look that good? There are some people who play on consoles who know next to nothing about the limitations of their choice of platform. Some of them beleive that they're some magical box capable of producing mind blowing graphics, greater than anything. It's baffling really.

Yup thts pretty much it...
Pc community is no better...my self included, as much as i love bf3 (on the pc of course =p ) i have this horrible thought in the back of my head all the time telling me " the maps are smaller, made for consoles, this could have been so much better grrrrr " but i learn to live with it and try to enjoy the game as much as i can

 

[andreas_souterami]

no worries about nintendo starting a 'get your new console out phase'. they proved with the wii that they are either incapable or not interested in fighting it out with sony and microsoft for the title of best gaming console, they just want a family console which is no threat to either of their 'competitors'. I say leave it until the actual technology needed for the next consoles is cheap enough to mass produce and sell at a feasible price.

 

[Sizzle Montyjing]

Why not? PS2 was supported for 10 years, the tech is good enough for an enjoyable experiance.

Was it?
I had a PS2, and i don't think it lasted 10 years...
Simple reason: Software, Hardwar, all the wares
They're just not good enough, i'm going to go with the PC guys on this, they just can't do as much.
To be honest, 5-6 years is long enough.
New consoles every 5 years means a more enjoyable experience for everyone.

 

[dickywebster]

Well its not like halo needs a new console, considering they rarely bother with anything new from game to game.

As for new consoles, idk, has the tech really advanced enough to justify it?
Besides, even if a new console (ignoring the WII U) was announced, itd take at least a year or 2 for it to be released and its unlikely that microsoft could go that long without another halo game to make money from.

 

[SmokePants]

Stupid move from a development point of view. They have to waste resources working with Bungie's engine, rather than on their own next-gen tech. They will have little opportunity to set themselves apart from the Halo games that already dwell on the platform. And their "trilogy" will be broken up across generations, meaning it will probably wind up being remade or re-released in a few years. Microsoft must be cracking the whip to get a Halo game to fill the 2012 void. It's a shame. 343 will never achieve its potential if they are a studio that simply does what it's told.

 

[Something Amyss]

*gasps* i know, how dare they sink assets into anything else besides prettfin every thing, to hell with a vast world to explore, or depth, just make it pretty, that makes it better by default.

*rolls eyes* it disgusts me to a degree that THESE are the people that get catered to who know how many truely good games have been 86ed because it wasn't a sure bet.

but what i do i know right? i've only been gaming 26/30 years

To be fair, if you can make Brown Shooter: Modern Version 3 and break records, there's no real incentive to put effort into it.

Well, not to be fair, because I still think it's stupid and lazy, but it sells. And Final Fantasy sells. Final Fantasy, for years, has epitomised the whole "polish a turd" thing to me.

Not to completely hate them, because at least they're not six maps and a couple campaign spots, but still.

 

[Something Amyss]

Why not? PS2 was supported for 10 years, the tech is good enough for an enjoyable experiance.

PS2 was supplemented in year six, whereas you were promoting a 8-9 year cycle of support.

It looks like you're dicing between two things here: Primary console and console support.

The PS2 was the primary console for about 6 years. It has received continued support for over ten years now, but it's not the primary console.

The Xbox 360 will not be dropped immediately, and it will already be seven years by the time the successor drops. So it looks like you've already got your way. Unless one year matters, and that's still one more year as a primary console than the PS2 had, so it seems kind of dishonest to complain.

 

[Something Amyss]

So by labeling me a pc fanboy who cant be reasoned with your making yourself sound better how?

1. It's "you're." I normally don't play with grammar, but you make so many typos in this one post that my browser actually sighed when I clicked "quote" and it had to spellcheck you.
2. Who said anything about making myself sound better? Oh, you. Nobody else. Hmmm.

It's quite possible I don't care one bit.

but until tht happens were gonna get swamped with games like call of duty, recycling the same game on the same engine year after year, but im sure you would like that -_-

See, it's kind of hypocritical that you get offended by being called a fanboy, but rail about me for things I don't support. "your [sic] making yourself sound better how?" Come now, don't preach what you can't practice.

I mean, it's bad enough you're blaming samey shooters on the hardware, but "your" sure that I would like something I've demonstrably stated I don't like. In this very thread, no less. That, my hast friend, is fanboyish behaviour. The kind of rabid fantaticism that says "if you're not with us, you're against us." Worse, it says "If you are not with us, you are the polar opposite and stand for everything I despise."

So...Aside from demonstrating fanboyish behaviour and double-standards, what have we established? That the same samey shooters which permeate the PC as well would magically change if consoles were updated, despite the lack of any real need to change. Well, that makes sense.

Except I bet we're going to get swamped with games like Call of Duty, recycling the same game on the same engine every year, just like before.

Why?

-Yearly iterations generally demand corner cutting. COD is exempt, as it really is every other year per developer.

-Most of the effort is going into visuals, not systems. This will likely mollify the fanboys, though, as it has in the past.

-Call of Duty and similar titles sell phenomenally. There's no real reason for effort.

-Lazy programming is a big problem.

-The last few major titles with PC as the lead platform still had many of the same problems.

It's convenient, perhaps, to blame consoles, but there are a lot of problem you ignore in the process. The toxic nature of the yearly dev cycle being one of them. It's one of the driving reasons for "cutting corners."

 

[Lunar Templar]

*gasps* i know, how dare they sink assets into anything else besides prettfin every thing, to hell with a vast world to explore, or depth, just make it pretty, that makes it better by default.

*rolls eyes* it disgusts me to a degree that THESE are the people that get catered to who know how many truely good games have been 86ed because it wasn't a sure bet.

but what i do i know right? i've only been gaming 26/30 years

To be fair, if you can make Brown Shooter: Modern Version 3 and break records, there's no real incentive to put effort into it.

the truth to this is depressing, more since it looks like a copy and paste job with a slightly different texture pac

Well, not to be fair, because I still think it's stupid and lazy, but it sells. And Final Fantasy sells. Final Fantasy, for years, has epitomised the whole "polish a turd" thing to me.

Not to completely hate them, because at least they're not six maps and a couple campaign spots, but still.

and FF games tend to be prettier to. the glorious irony of an FF game looking 'more realistic' then the 'realistic shooter' or i the only one that notices how fake those games look.

and ... i think we're WAY off topic now *points to the small spec on the horizon* yup its way the hell over there, good place for it, since it was just about Halo, the reason for all the dull brown shooters we have today .....