This is kind of a random thought I was having, but I was wondering if anybody else was thinking the same thing. The way I understand it, Microsoft negotiated certain terms in granting Bungie's "seperation" from them. There are certain obligations that Bungie must fulfill, before they are truly independent. It's been a long time since the seperation actually took place, and I'm not sure of the exact details regarding their contractual obligations to Microsoft. I believe that Microsoft is guaranteed a certain number of games from Bungie. A certain number of that overall number are required to be Halo related. Also, the way I understand it, is that even after Bungie has fulfilled this obligation for a certain number of games, Microsoft still gets right of first refusal for an additional number of Bungie games.

Now, again, I don't remember the exact details, and I'm not even sure that these details were ever made public. I think it's more likely that I'm remembering stuff that was heard off the record when this whole thing went down. Fact of the matter is, there is actually a specific contract between MS and Bungie, and eventually, when Bungie fulfills all the obligations, they will be completely free and in the clear. Certainly, this will take them many years, but it isn't inconceivable to see them 100 percent free from MS in about 6 years.

Before the split, there were many rumors that Bungie was working on a major project that was completely unrelated to Halo. Also, supposedly, the main impetus for the split was the fact that alot of Bungie members were frustrated with being basically forced to continually make Halo games. Yet, two new Bungie projects have been announced since the split, and both are Halo games. ODST and Halo Reach. ODST seems to be a quickie deal that Bungie is whipping up to sneak another Halo game into the mix much sooner than anyone anticipated. At e3, we heard about Halo Reach, and we also heard 2010 for this game. Is it just me, or is Bungie trying to quickly fulfill the Halo portion of their departure contract from MS?

Not that this is a really big deal or anything, but I just wonder how inspired these games are going to be? We've seen this before in music, TV and movies in which certain creative people were under contract and required by that contract to spit out so many movies or TV shows or music CD's, within a certain time frame, and the artist or creative group complied with the contract, but it was basically an uninspired performance, and was nothing more than that person or company trying to quickly finish up a contract. I'm not so sure this is going to be the case with Bungie, because if the rumors are true regarding their split, Microsoft still has the next 7 or 8 Bungie games locked up before Bungie can even think about making games for any other platform, so there is really no need to worry about Bungie making a PS3 game or anything...

Just wondering if anybody else was thinking along similar lines when they first heard the Halo Reach announcement at e3 awhile back?

That's alot of thinking with not many articles to back it up. I would have thought Bungie would be happy to working with the deepest pocket publisher and one that isn't afraid to throw tons of money at greatness.

I do agree it is kind of shock to have two Halo's in such quick succesion.

Bungie has been split in to multiple teams internally now, and Marty has left main Bungie secret project and gone to work with the main Halo team. I'll try to dig up the article.....
Funny I can't find any articles about that I must be wrong.

Also don't forget Lego Halo. I have no idea how thats going to work, Flood don't seem kid or lego friendly

There is a lot of Halo content that "needs" to be explored. The ODST thing, to me, is the definition of a quickie to knock another Halo title off the list without too much effort. Reach however has the potential to be an essential, epic title that, if done correctly, could vault to the top of popularity charts for the series. This is, of course, based on how closely Bungie follows the existing canon.

Remember that a few years back, Bungie said that "Halo 3 represents the last title in this story arc." This means that they knew they were making more Halo titles, just ones that had little if anything to do with MC and the rings. ODST and Reach are two titles that fit this description. This statement occurred well in advance of Bungie announcing independence, although it stands to reason (of course) that Bungie knew far more than they announced, and well in advance of said announcement.

I don't really know therefore how much Bungie employees want to do other things than Halo. Knowing most developers, and Bungie in particular, they have teams working on far more content than we suspect. They have to--it takes too much time to create quality titles. That, and ODST and Reach are built on the H3 engine, which means that those teams don't have to reinvent the wheel to create good stuff. In the meantime, the other teams can continue to hammer on other titles.

We'll see. It should be fun.

Mark my words.. without Halo, Bungie will be another nobody developer. There were a nobody before Halo.. and they will be again a nobody after it.

You can have all the creative juices you want.. but in the end.. Money talks.. ******** runs a marathon.

juices....

bungie will probably double in size and have half their people work on teh haloz and the other half doin other sh!t. they're gonna hang on to halo cause its their breadwinner. they're gonna keep milking it (and thats not a bad thing).

Music artists do this stuff all the time. Crank out a crappy cover album or live album just to meet their contract obligations.

Mark my words.. without Halo, Bungie will be another nobody developer. There were a nobody before Halo.. and they will be again a nobody after it.


Is this a joke post? Halo was released in 2001... Bungie was founded in 1991. So that's 10 years of doing just fine. They released many games and did just fine. Myth was one of the best real time strategy franchises, and was very popular.

Lego Halo was an April Fool's joke.

They have to--it takes too much time to create quality titles. That, and ODST and Reach are built on the H3 engine, which means that those teams don't have to reinvent the wheel to create good stuff.

Can you give me an article that confirms about Reach being developed on Halo 3 engine? If that's the case I will definitely be dissapointed. Halo 3 engine is not really that great, especially when you see games that are coming out these days for Xbox 360. I'd expect them to completely revamp and build 1080p or at least 720p Reach that will look stunning and realistic in visuals. Halo 3 definitely isn't that.

I have HIGH hopes for Reach considering that I was a bit disappointed with Halo 3.

Can you give me an article that confirms about Reach being developed on Halo 3 engine? If that's the case I will definitely be dissapointed. Halo 3 engine is not really that great, especially when you see games that are coming out these days for Xbox 360. I'd expect them to completely revamp and build 1080p or at least 720p Reach that will look stunning and realistic in visuals. Halo 3 definitely isn't that.

I have HIGH hopes for Reach considering that I was a bit disappointed with Halo 3.

Nothing out there states that Reach is based on the Halo 3 engine. Only Halo ODST is and that was stated on a video walkthrough at E3. We don't even know what kind of Halo game this will be.

The OP is a lot of mental gymnastics to get around the idea that Bungie has expanded. Why on earth not have more output? What kind of sense does it make to be less productive when they can do more?

Bungie is no longer the keeper of Halo, that is MGS.
Bungie's Halo work is work for hire now and what they produce or don't produce is no longer solely up to them.

The reason we are seeing regular Halo releases queued up is because that is what Microsoft wants; it is pretty clear they intend to ship one Halo-related title per year every year as far as the eye can see:
Halo Wars simply missed its target of fall 08, which is why Ensemble as a studio is gone while the bulk of the actual coders remain.

If the various Halo contractors can keep to their schedules, we can thus expect to see:
2009 ODST
2010 Reach
2011 Halo Wars 2 or Halo 4
2012 ODST 2
etc

This is no different than what Activision is doing with COD; releasing a franchise title per year by alternating developers and settings. The Advantage with Halo is that the mythos allows for more than just FPS gameplay; we've already seen RTS do nicely in the Halo-verse and there is a steady clamor for RPG so that is a possibility down the road.

Like it or not, Bungie either plays in this environment or they go do something else; that's what independence is all about.

Smart money says they re-up for futher Halos because the big money is there and the money won't necessarilly be there for something else. After all, now they are responsible for paying their own bills.

I would love to see a Halo/Bungie ADVENTURE game....
I don't know about you guys but when I think RPG I think turn based grind a thons like Final Fanatasy and Grandia. I would love a Halo Adventure game. They same way Fable is more of adventure game (at least in my mind) then an rpg.



At the same time I'm excited to see what Bungie makes next Halo or not related.

Is this a joke post? Halo was released in 2001... Bungie was founded in 1991. So that's 10 years of doing just fine. They released many games and did just fine. Myth was one of the best real time strategy franchises, and was very popular.

Myth sold how many copies?

Myth made bungie how much money? And how long ago was that? And how successful are real time strategy games today.. especially on consoles which is clearly the largest segment of the video game market??

But please dont let me interrupt you from naming your LONG list of successful bungie titles.. (cough.. 1)




As I said before.. Money talks. Bullshyt runs a marathon.

Just because you and a couple of other nerds liked Myth a decade ago.. doesnt mean it pays the bills today. Especially in this economy. Bungie is alot bigger than they ever dreamed of being in the 90's.. and along with that growth comes big bills. As someone said before, they are responsible for writing their own paychecks now.. no more feeding off the big tit.

Without Halo, Bungie will go back to being a nobody developer.. thats IF they are even able to survive on their own. Look how many developers have already packed shop and gone home or been bought out by another larger publisher.

Wait, Bungie was a successful developer for 10 years, and worked on Halo for 3 years before being bought out by MS, but they are dead in the water if they don't just resign themselves to being a Halo factory from here on out? They came up with Halo on their own once, and they can't come up with any more successful ideas?

I really don't doubt Bungie's ability to make strong, new games, and find some success. Neither do they, that's why they left. I wouldn't want to work on 100% Halo the rest of my life either.

Wait, Bungie was a successful developer for 10 years, and worked on Halo for 3 years before being bought out by MS, but they are dead in the water if they don't just resign themselves to being a Halo factory from here on out? They came up with Halo on their own once, and they can't come up with any more successful ideas?

I really don't doubt Bungie's ability to make strong, new games, and find some success. Neither do they, that's why they left. I wouldn't want to work on 100% Halo the rest of my life either.

You are still looking at Bungie from 10 years ago.. maybe 15.

Imagine the scale of the staff they have currently employed, the resources, the property, and all things involved to run a successful business. That business being directly feed off the sales of Halo titles that have sold what.. 25 million copies @ $60 bucks a piece.

Im not saying they wouldn't be successful at making other titles, because who know what other talents are there.

But the same success that Halo has brought them, will be ridiculously hard to maintain on their own with MS backing them. Id say damn near impossible. Without Halo around to keep the bills paid I see them as shrinking in size every year until they finally die out or get bought out, whichever happens first.

One other little fact were forgetting.

How many games has Bungie made for the Wii or PS3???

All of their experience is MS related, so it makes it even more diffulcult for them to survive on their own. Other developers have almost a 4 year headstart on Bungie with the tools available to the Wii & PS3. And considering coding for the Xbox is thing they are most talented at, they still need blessings from MS to keep the non-Halo paychecks coming.




And hell for the record I dont want to work in IT for the rest of my life but it pays the bills. At the end of the day I still have to keep the lights, a roof over my head, and food on the table.

Im just saying Bungie has some pretty big lights to keep on, a pretty big roof to keep up and alot of freaking food on their table. With Halo gone.. they would have some AWFULLY big shoes to fill.

It's not about Myth or Marathon, Daekwan. It's about the fact that Bungie from the start has been a good developer who has found success multiple times across many different franchises and genres. They aren't some one hit wonder that was garbage before Halo.

It's true that Bungie will have to adapt and change the way they go about their business. I'd bet a shiny nickel, though, that they know that and thought long and hard about it before they made the move, and have set up a business plan for it.

I understand youre opinion differs from mine and I respect that. Im sure Bungie thought long and hard about cutting the lifeline too.. I guess we'll just have to wait and see how it pans out for them.

Yea, I think the issue here was, the people that made the games didn't want to make Halo forever and forever. They're tired of it. After all, it's possible people there had been working on Halo for almost 10 years. Halo 1 PC/Mac (original), Halo 1 Xbox, Halo 2, Halo 3.

It's true Bungie could've said "TS this is what pays the bills, get back to work", but then those people could just leave (it's good to have Halo on your resume), so you end up without the people that made Halo good in the first place. It's happened before.

I think the final outcome will be something closer to what Tronn suggested early in the thread.

"bungie will probably double in size and have half their people work on teh haloz and the other half doin other sh!t. they're gonna hang on to halo cause its their breadwinner. they're gonna keep milking it (and thats not a bad thing)."

Keep milking the Halo cow, just not as hard as before.. and continue the fight for independence so they can atleast use some of their vast resources to explore and develop other projects. Cutting the Halo cow off completely, just seems like suicide from a financial standpoint.

I doubt if any of their new projects will be on the Wii or PS3 though. Just seems like too much of an uphill battle to sink big dollars into learning those platforms this late in the game. If anything, I think they'd hold for the next round of consoles and try and develop something for the WiiHD or PS4.

Can you give me an article that confirms about Reach being developed on Halo 3 engine?

They've said on their podcast (and I'm sure it's in a few articles) that ODST is based on H3's engine. As it was designed to be an expansion, that makes sense. I'm making an educated assumption base on a short dev time that Reach will be also, although that's unsubstantiated. Having said that, it works.

If that's the case I will definitely be dissapointed. Halo 3 engine is not really that great, especially when you see games that are coming out these days for Xbox 360. I'd expect them to completely revamp and build 1080p or at least 720p Reach that will look stunning and realistic in visuals. Halo 3 definitely isn't that.

It's been said many times that there's a fine line between visuals and functionality. The game is pushing three years old, and if Bungie wants similar functionality to H3's online component, I could see a slight H3 modification, but essentially with that under the hood.

I have HIGH hopes for Reach considering that I was a bit disappointed with Halo 3.

Everyone expected Gears graphics with Bungie/Halo gameplay. I personally know which MP component I'd take.

.

It's true Bungie could've said "TS this is what pays the bills, get back to work", but then those people could just leave (it's good to have Halo on your resume), so you end up without the people that made Halo good in the first place. It's happened before.

Is that not happened with Rare after perfect dark. Alot of good people left and started free radical and now rare is a hollow shell of its self (for mature games anyways)

Halo 3 in my opion still has the best online experince. Its got so many opitions and game modes, the virtual couch, replay theater. etc etc oh yeah it works well to unlike the really popular BF 1943 online componet

Not just Rare.. many developers are struggling in this market.

It was just long ago that Take Two was looking for a bailout. They managed to hold out until GTA4 was released tho. Theres a reason why big publishers like EA, Activision, MS Studios, and Sony are snatching up developers left and right.

As other in this thread have surmised, I think Bungie knows what side their bread is buttered on and is gonna use their Halo connection to build up the company coffers for as long as it makes sense to.

Given how much games costs to develop these days, they've probably got the ability to survive two new IP related flops, at best, before they're all done. Hedging their bets by continuing to do Halo related side projects is a sure fire way to keep the studio funded.

I'm a big fan of the studio (And Halo) personally, so I hope they do well and that their new IP matches the success of the Halo games. I'd say they have a 50-50 shot of their new games hitting it big based upon their success rate prior to Halo and their well documented production woes during the Halo games themselves.

don't forget to add marathon 1 & 2 and oni to the list of great games by bungie

I would love to see a Halo/Bungie ADVENTURE game....
I don't know about you guys but when I think RPG I think turn based grind a thons like Final Fanatasy and Grandia. I would love a Halo Adventure game. They same way Fable is more of adventure game (at least in my mind) then an rpg.


Nowadays RPG means Mass Effect, Fallout 3, Oblivion, and yes, Fable.
(Upcoming; Alpha Protocol, Deus Ex3, Dragon Age, Mass Effect 2, Fallout Vegas...)
All western developed; No grindathons there.

What you are describing are JRPGs and to date not a one on any platform has really succeeded, this console generation.
Definitely not something one would hope Halo resources are diverted to.

On the other hand, an RPG chronicling the evolution of a young Spartan...

I don't know why everyone is assuming that Bungie can continue to do Halo titles from here to eternity. Bungie doesn't own the rights to Halo. Microsoft does. Microsoft has contracted with Bungie to do a certain number of Halo related games, but that doesn't mean that MS is required to have Bungie develop all future Halo games. In fact, MS has been organizing their own team for future Halo projects. Many people think that the "real" Halo 4 is going to come from this new team, and not Bungie.

The biggest reason that Bungie wanted to split from MS, is to not be required to have a Halo game by a such and such date. That was the grind that they've been on since they were purchased by MS. The reason we are seeing two more back to back Halo games from Bungie (ODST and Reach), isn't because Bungie is thrilled to be working on yet more Halo games, but because of contractual obligations related to the split. Once Bungie has delivered the Halo titles that MS has required, they will be able to work on whatever the hell they want. You can better believe that Bungie is counting the days until this happens. But, even when that time comes, MS has right of first refusal for a bunch more games.

Somebody mentioned that Bungie has more than one team working on games, and no question that is true. Having said that, Bungie isn't Insomniac, a developer that always has two teams concurrently developing either Resistance or Ratchet and Clank. Look at Bungie's track record. How many games have they released in the last 10 years? When is the last time Bungie has released games in back to back years? ODST is being squeezed out by using the Halo 3 engine, and unused levels and assets from the development of Halo 3. Originally, this game was going to be more of an expansion pack than anything, but as time went by they decided they could squeeze a bit more out of it and get a full $59.99 title on the shelves for holiday 2009. I seriously doubt that Halo Reach is using any engine technology that is radically different than Halo 3. I'm sure it will be slightly modified, and have a few new bells and whistles, but I also doubt it's going to compete with the most visually impressive work going on at this time.

I personally think that these two Halo games are being pumped out in quick succession, so that Bungie can get beyond the Halo part of their requirements as quickly as possible. Microsoft has to know this as well, but as long as the games are relatively decent and marketable, they aren't going to make it public that they are a bit displeased. I'm sure internally they are a bit pissed off that Bungie is trying to quickly throw together a few Halo titles, but they aren't about to sue for breach of contract or anything. If they really felt that Bungie was going all out, then ODST would have gotten way more play during e3, and Halo Reach would have been the grand finale to their conference. Instead, they were almost footnotes to Natal and MGS Rising.

Something weird is going on, but unfortunately, we won't hear about it till 10 or 15 years later when somebody is writing a tell-all book about it.

I don't get all the "thrown together" comments. It will have been three years since Halo 3 when Reach comes out. Three years is typical of a large triple A title. Halo ODST was a side story Bungie wanted to do in an effort to make a darker squad based Halo experience. I don't see how these things indicate some sort of throw together of Halo games.

I'm willing to bet that an ODST followup will be made on Reach technology once it's out as well.

I don't get all the "thrown together" comments. It will have been three years since Halo 3 when Reach comes out. Three years is typical of a large triple A title. Halo ODST was a side story Bungie wanted to do in an effort to make a darker squad based Halo experience. I don't see how these things indicate some sort of throw together of Halo games.

I'm willing to bet that an ODST followup will be made on Reach technology once it's out as well.

I hope you're right, cause the Halo 3 engine was dated even before the game was released. Bungie really needs to improve their tech. They know how to make very tight, and very fun games, but since the first Halo on Xbox, I haven't been impressed with their graphical prowess.

Also, my take in this thread isn't so much about Bungie throwing together Halo games. I'm more interested in the fact that Bungie has actually stated that some of their team members have been making Halo games for 10 years, and are looking forward to working on something besides Halo, and then they end up announcing back to back Halo games. To me, that doesn't add up, and it screams that they are just trying to fufill their current contractual obligation. Of course, I could be 100 percent off the mark, and that could be nowhere near the truth. But if you re-read some of the interviews they had right after the split with Microsoft, the last thing you would have been expecting them to announce was a Halo game. When they announced ODST, I was very shocked by it, but figured it was basically a cash in type situation in terms of taking advantage of already developed assets that they couldn't fit into Halo 3. Then with the e3 presser, and the announcement of Halo Reach, I was even more shocked. Again, I could easily be 100 percent off the mark with this, but it just seems really strange to me.

I hope you're right, cause the Halo 3 engine was dated even before the game was released. Bungie really needs to improve their tech. They know how to make very tight, and very fun games, but since the first Halo on Xbox, I haven't been impressed with their graphical prowess.

Halo 3 can be ass ugly at points, and quite good looking at others. It's also not a corridor shooter....it has gigantic levels, with an enormous amount of action going on. With multiple vehicles, 20+ enemies that still have great AI, nice lighting, and 4 player split screen. I would have gladly traded their pseudo HDR for AA and definitely better texture filtering(the option would be nice), but the game is not the dog everyone makes it out to be.

halo had their market share slashed in half by modern warfare

halo had their market share slashed in half by modern warfare

I will have to disagree with that statement. I think that many other games have suffered because of CoD 4 (GRAW, R6V, TF2, Battlefield, etc, etc,) as CoD shares that marketshare. Gears has its own following, Halo has its own following. I think that CoD 4-5 is the main reason for the somewhat lackluster sales of Resistance 2, and Killzone 2(it is currently outselling those games on a weely basis on the PS3 itself, for example). Halo 3 still outsells every other FPS on a weekly basis, with no signs of a slowdown. I really doubt that if there was no CoD series that Halo would have twice the number of users/sales, but the other games would definately be more popular.

With regards to the OP statements, I do not think that Bungie on any concious level would do anything to disrupt the formula/creativity of the Halo saga. I think that Halo is greater than either Bungie or MS, and Ensemble proved that with the Halo name, and some decent creativity, a non Bungie project can do great (and they have done very well with Halo Wars).

I actually think that it is good for MS and Halo that Bungie do less and less work as time goes by. Sticking with the same mindset, crativity, thought patterns will become stale, and eventually the series will loose popularity. By bringing in a new team, new ideas, and using Bungie as a consultant would in the long run pay off more dividents (ala a potential Halo 4), but at the same time by having Bungie do ODST, and Reach, keeps the series alive, brings gratitude from those loyal to Halo and Bungies, but long enough for them to pass the torch.

Its like an actor trying to do something other than what made them popular. Very few people other than Harrison Ford, or Sean Connary (took many years) were able to shed that persona. I think that Bungie will always be known for making Halo, and no matter what they do in the future will likely never have the same impact. I think that Epic will have the same issue with Gears of War in the future. If Bungie made Viva Pinata, or something like that it could possibly shed that persona, but I have my doubts they can do anything other than a FPS. I mean MS made Ensemble do a RTS, and if they ever make a Halo RPG, it will not be Bungie.

the game is not the dog everyone makes it out to be.

Thats true. Bungie obviously has to take into consideration many aspects of the game that have zero to do with graphical fidelity, and they have to make sure everything will work almost flawlessly for their multiplayer.

Still, as someone who bought an original Xbox the day it released, along with the first Halo, I just expect a bit more in the graphical department from them. The gameplay is phenomenal, I don't think anyone is arguing that. But the gameplay was phenomenal in Halo 1. The thing is, Halo 1 made you think that everytime Bungie released a Halo game, it would be the pinnacle of graphical fidelity. When I got Halo 2, I quickly realized that this might not be the case. Not that Halo 2 looked bad, but it wasn't the most impressive FPS from a visual standpoint at that time. When Halo 3 was first announced, considering it was on a new console, with all that development time, I figured that Bungie would return to the former glory of Halo 1, in which it reigned supreme not only in gameplay, but visuals as well. The results were a fantastic game with tremendous playability, and great multiplayer, and many different game modes, and a ton of depth, but graphically it was pretty weak if we are really honest with ourselves.

I still think Bungie will eventually return to the glory of Halo 1, and release a game that will blow everyone out of the water ala a game like COD4. I'm not so sure it will be Reach, considering it's coming out in 2010 and I just don't think thats a long enough development cycle for them to really drop a bomb on us.

Thats true. Bungie obviously has to take into consideration many aspects of the game that have zero to do with graphical fidelity, and they have to make sure everything will work almost flawlessly for their multiplayer.

Still, as someone who bought an original Xbox the day it released, along with the first Halo, I just expect a bit more in the graphical department from them. The gameplay is phenomenal, I don't think anyone is arguing that. But the gameplay was phenomenal in Halo 1. The thing is, Halo 1 made you think that everytime Bungie released a Halo game, it would be the pinnacle of graphical fidelity. When I got Halo 2, I quickly realized that this might not be the case. Not that Halo 2 looked bad, but it wasn't the most impressive FPS from a visual standpoint at that time. When Halo 3 was first announced, considering it was on a new console, with all that development time, I figured that Bungie would return to the former glory of Halo 1, in which it reigned supreme not only in gameplay, but visuals as well. The results were a fantastic game with tremendous playability, and great multiplayer, and many different game modes, and a ton of depth, but graphically it was pretty weak if we are really honest with ourselves.

I still think Bungie will eventually return to the glory of Halo 1, and release a game that will blow everyone out of the water ala a game like COD4. I'm not so sure it will be Reach, considering it's coming out in 2010 and I just don't think thats a long enough development cycle for them to really drop a bomb on us.

When people knock Halo 3 for graphics I just do not see. I have played COD4 and if you like brown then the game looks great. If you expect more colors in your world then it seems very washed out to me in many places. Even with the aliens Halo feels more real because it uses a more varied color spectrum.


To get to the OP's topic I do not see Bungie a trying to burn through games in their contract. I think they have split up in multiple teams and we are seeing produce more games in the same vein has Insomniac and Naughty Dog.

Microsoft has contracted with Bungie to do a certain number of Halo related games, but that doesn't mean that MS is required to have Bungie develop all future Halo games. In fact, MS has been organizing their own team for future Halo projects. Many people think that the "real" Halo 4 is going to come from this new team, and not Bungie.

The biggest reason that Bungie wanted to split from MS, is to not be required to have a Halo game by a such and such date. That was the grind that they've been on since they were purchased by MS. The reason we are seeing two more back to back Halo games from Bungie (ODST and Reach), isn't because Bungie is thrilled to be working on yet more Halo games, but because of contractual obligations related to the split. Once Bungie has delivered the Halo titles that MS has required, they will be able to work on whatever the hell they want. You can better believe that Bungie is counting the days until this happens. But, even when that time comes, MS has right of first refusal for a bunch more games.

I am thinking that you do not know what you are talking about. You have a lot to say about things which have not been made public. I mean, how the hell does anybody know the stipulations of Bungie's employees reacquiring their studio? Here is the most that I can find in any concrete, verifiable source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bungie#Independent_company), and yes, it isn't lost on me that the source is wikipedia.

On October 1, 2007, a mere six days after the release of Halo 3, Microsoft and Bungie announced that Bungie was splitting off from its parent and becoming a privately-held Limited Liability Company named Bungie LLC. As outlined in a deal between the two, Microsoft would retain a minority stake and continue to partner with Bungie on publishing and marketing both Halo and future projects, with the Halo intellectual property belonging to Microsoft.

So for a studio that you seem to think hates doing what Microsoft asks of them, they seem to have no problems with Microsoft continuing to own a stake in their direction. I don't see this "we just wanna do what we wanna do" message that you ascribe to them. All they've done since 2001 was cut cut and cut more and more stuff from their games that they could not work in, either due to lack of time (very typical) or for matters of synthesis or timing (just as common), why do you think that all of the stuff they could not give us with their previous games would not be perfect material for a new game? The games that we are in fact now getting?

I personally think that these two Halo games are being pumped out in quick succession, so that Bungie can get beyond the Halo part of their requirements as quickly as possible.

I personally think that you are pulling the details that you claim to know of their contractual relationship with Microsoft directly from your ass, as I see no evidence of this creative direction as some sort of rite for freedom. Seriously, where are you getting this? How come no other source in all the internets speaks anything about Bungie being required to continue with a certain number of Halo IP before Microsoft will divest them of the studio? Moreover, how come you seriously believe that a healthy development relationship with Microsoft as a publisher is not in Bungie's best interest?

I was also shocked to learn about the Halo's.... All this talk makes me want to bust out Halo 3 again and start playing.
So if Halo is being moved to Microsoft's internal team then why did they let Bungie go? I mean if Bungie wasn't going to making Halo anymore and were "free" to make what ever they want then what are we missing?

Were the heated arguments behind closed doors? Has Microsoft sized Bungie up to a lack luster company with out Halo???

I hope in someone makes a tell all book next year, not 10.

Bungie may have had an out in their contract. If they didn't, they could certainly negotiate with MS the terms of the out.

MS had nothing to gain by playing hardball. If Bungie staff doesn't want to work for MS pumping out Halo after Halo they don't have to. Those people could leave and form another studio. How much would Activision or EA or Sony or Square Enix or whoever pay to have the principals behind Halo working on games for them? Quite a bit. Then MS is left with another empty shell (like Rare) developer.

By MS letting them go, they gained first refusal on Bungie games and a contract to make X number of Halo games. It was beneficial to MS as well as Bungie.

edit: it's also worth noting that MS has been getting rid of studios the past few years. Ensemble, ACES, Carbonated, FASA, etc. So this fit in with what appears to be their new philosophy.

All 3 Halo's offered something groundbreaking to console gaming.

Halo CE - Set the standard for playing a FPS on a console. It also implemented vehicles well and made co-op play during a FPS campaign popular. The regenerative shield and health system were also firsts I beleive.

Halo 2 - More of the same, except with outstanding online MP that is still being benchmarked and copied now as to how to setup lobbies, in game voice chat, messenging, ranking, matchmaking and compiling statistics.

Halo 3 - All of the above.. with Forge, Halo Theater and access to Online Stats being the standout features.



That said Halo took ridiculous amounts of MONEY & TIME to create. The first one was absolutely grand slam, making it easier for 2 & 3 to follow up with less groundbreaking ideas. Halo 2 took almost 4 more years to arrive.. and Halo3 took almost another 3. Is a new publisher really gonna be that patient in between titles?

Im not so sure even publishers like an EA or Activision are interested in dumping HUGE amounts of money & time into new IP's that seriously may or may not flop. Look at the Sony side of the house.. Killzone2 took forever and day and some limbs to create. It was praised as the greatest project ever. And when its all said and done, COD still outsells it on a weekly basis.

One of the reasons all 3 of the major Halo projects were so successful was the patience of the publisher. Bungie had HUGE amounts of money & time at their resources. Resources that wouldnt be so easy to tap into with a new publisher. As someone said, remember Rare. They still have yet to deliver on the phenominal talent they showed a decade ago.

It is very hard to continue producing outstanding work in the gaming business forever. Consoles change, platforms change, genres change, even the people that play the games change. The Wii is a great example of that.

Even studios that were worshipped like Gods in past years have lost some luster today, At the top of that list would be Rockstar as it took a big hit when its last version of GTA was one alot of people would like to quickly forget.. its its last titles have been pretty meh.

Rare has access to the same resources Bungie has, yet where is Rare's Halo? Well, it came out in 1997, before MS even thought of putting out a videogame console.

It all comes down to talent. The talent that built up Rare left the station so they have struggled to match what they did on N64. I seriously doubt anybody running Activision or EA would pause for a half second when asked if they would like to work with the people that made Halo. You make Halo and you can write your own ticket. And Microsoft knew that.

There's a difference between saying 'Bungie wanted to branch out' and 'Bungie is being strangled by MS'. Bungie has been fairly vocal on their support of Halo and they know damned well that Halo is the secret to where they are now.

Marathon was a good series. On the Macintosh. It didn't bring huge riches, but it did bring notoreity and success. Oni was well-received, but hardly a giant success. Myth was Bungie's second big break-out hit. The first 3D RTS, afaik, and led to pretty darned successful. Myth II, of course, almost damaged the company when news of an uninstaller bug broke.

And then there's Halo. Remember when Halo was originally meant to be an RTS? Remember, it was from the makers of Myth, at that point....and Halo was going to be a Sci-Fi Myth (which is one of the reasons for the emphasis on vehicles). But then they reworked it into a 3rd-person shooter...remember, from the studio that made Oni. And this was a big hit for the Macintosh....you may recall their first big trailer for the game was debuted at....MACWORLD 1999. But then Microsoft bought them and the game was changed to a first-person shooter exclusive to the Xbox. Mac fans were enraged. Livid. But MS didn't care (and why should they?). It is a simple fact that Halo MADE the original Xbox. At one point, every second Xbox was sold with a copy of Halo. The game smashed sales records left and right and destroyed its competitors. Which is why we hear of 'Halo-killers' and not 'Max Payne-killers' or 'Unreal Tournament 2003-killers'.

Halo:CE sold over 5 million copies and didn't drop in price until Halo 2 came out. Halo 2 would surpass it, selling over 6.5 million copies (and can STILL be found on store shelves today). Halo 3 has, at last check, sold over 8.5 million copies by January 2008. Current estimates put the titles at 6.5, 8.3 and 9.89 million copies sold to date, but official figures aren't available, afaik.

The point is THIS: Bungie isn't rushing ANYTHING. They don't need to and wouldn't kill the golden goose. Those figures above don't include things like all the licensing dollars Bungie gets from action figures, comic books, novels [written by Bungie employees, I might add] and merchandise. It doesn't include things like revenue from DLC...which, just so you remember, started with Halo 2, not 3. Didn't have an Xbox-Live (these days, a Silver) account? No problem: just buy the Halo 2 Multiplayer Map Pack expansion disc....now downloading required.

Weekly multiplayer list updates. Periodic content pack updates. Anti-cheating patches. A for-pay service to work with Halo 3 movies/downloads? The annual 'Bungie Day'? For a company you think wants out of its obligations, they certainly are supporting it whole guns. You might say that they're merely acting in their own best intersests....and I agree. Which is why they wouldn't just toss out a piece of crap and call it a day. THEY KNOW BETTER.

Halo 3 ODST will be a short campaign that features every improvement Halo 3 had, a new multiplayer gametype that is sure to be a success and a single player (and I'd wager co-op playable) campaign that will satsify Halo fans. I would wager that the increase to full release is Microsoft's suggestion, not Bungie's...and that they've expanded the product mildly to embrace it.

Halo Reach is, most likely, going to be a Halo 3-based FPS. And based on the presented logo, I expect it to be a highly-polished one at that, based loosely on the novel (Written by Bungie alum Eric Nylund) "Halo: First Strike". It will follow and likely expand the canon, offer a few more features and try some new tricks...but it will not reinvent the wheel, because it does not need to. Given the title, an RTS is highly, HIGHLY unlikely. "The Fall of Reach", the first Halo novel...is the prequel to Halo:CE and may also be included. It's a logical assumption that Halo:Reach focuses on that event. Given the logo showing MULTIPLE spartans, it's safe to assume that players will assume their roles from the events detailed in one or both of the novels. Which means, very likely, that the Master Chief John-117 WILL be in the game at points. But that equally likely, you'll fill the roles of characters like Fred, Kelly and other important spartans involved in the Covenant's attack on Reach (and their quest for the holy artifact found there). A third-person shooter is possible, but not likely. Why compete with Gears of War on their home ground? Bungie has made it clear they want to use ODST to find new ways of telling stories within Halo's framework. A stab at a Mass Effect/Fallout clone is more likely, but again...why alienate your fan-base. Out of the following: Gears of War 2, Mass Effect, Fallout 3, Halo 3, Halo Wars....which do you think has sold the most? They're all successful, but let's be honest here. Bungie is NOT stupid. They don't want to stop making Halo...and they certainly don't want to lose money just to fulfill a contract. Remember, they get a cut of the profits; a crappy game hurts them. They just want to make MORE than Halo. That's another thing entirely.

well put Wizard..

Mark my words.. without Halo, Bungie will be another nobody developer. There were a nobody before Halo.. and they will be again a nobody after it.

You can have all the creative juices you want.. but in the end.. Money talks.. ******** runs a marathon.

Myth sold how many copies?

Myth made bungie how much money? And how long ago was that? And how successful are real time strategy games today.. especially on consoles which is clearly the largest segment of the video game market??

But please dont let me interrupt you from naming your LONG list of successful bungie titles.. (cough.. 1)




As I said before.. Money talks. Bullshyt runs a marathon.

Just because you and a couple of other nerds liked Myth a decade ago.. doesnt mean it pays the bills today. Especially in this economy. Bungie is alot bigger than they ever dreamed of being in the 90's.. and along with that growth comes big bills. As someone said before, they are responsible for writing their own paychecks now.. no more feeding off the big tit.

Without Halo, Bungie will go back to being a nobody developer.. thats IF they are even able to survive on their own. Look how many developers have already packed shop and gone home or been bought out by another larger publisher.


I know this has already been said, but I have to give my 2 cents also. Bungie pre-MS was not large, nor popular. This being due to only making games for the Mac. However, being large and making billions of $$ does not always mean you make great games, and being small and not making tons of $$ doesn't either. IMO, Myth was the best RTS of its time, and Marathon was clearly better than its Doom counterparts.

Also, clearly you have forgotten about "Pimps at Sea". When that baby hits, WATCH OUT!!:eek::D

I am thinking that you do not know what you are talking about. You have a lot to say about things which have not been made public. I mean, how the hell does anybody know the stipulations of Bungie's employees reacquiring their studio?

Well, at the time the split actually happened, there was alot of discussion about it on various gaming websites, podcasts, forums, etc, etc. Certainly, nothing was verifiable, but plenty of rumors emerged from that split. Because of the split, obviously there would be non-disclosure agreements up the ying-yang, and nothing would be officially said. If you look at Bungies comments, they are very careful not to say anything negative in regards to Microsoft.



So for a studio that you seem to think hates doing what Microsoft asks of them, they seem to have no problems with Microsoft continuing to own a stake in their direction. I don't see this "we just wanna do what we wanna do" message that you ascribe to them.

The reason they have no problems with Microsoft continuing to own a stake, is because it was one of the stipulations of their independence. Microsoft allowed them to regain their independence, but they aren't going to let them leave for nothing. Bungie and MS had to negotiate terms of seperation, and a minority stake was one of the sticking points. MS would have never allowed them to leave without it.



I personally think that you are pulling the details that you claim to know of their contractual relationship with Microsoft directly from your ass, as I see no evidence of this creative direction as some sort of rite for freedom. Seriously, where are you getting this? How come no other source in all the internets speaks anything about Bungie being required to continue with a certain number of Halo IP before Microsoft will divest them of the studio? Moreover, how come you seriously believe that a healthy development relationship with Microsoft as a publisher is not in Bungie's best interest?

Well, I'm not actually pulling this out of my ass. It's been quite some time since all of this went down, so I don't remember alot of the places where I heard or read about the "rumored" details surrounding the split. But I can say that my No.1 source was some 1upYours podcasts that happened while the split was still rumored, or just after the split took place. The members of 1upYours at that time, Garnett Lee, John Davison, Shane Bettenhausen and whoever was taking Luke Smith's place at that time, discussed the "real" underlying reasons why the split happened. Now, of course, their word is just "hearsay" in a court of law. But considering all three of them are really good friends of Luke Smith, it would seem that they would most likely have a better idea of why the split really happened. They didn't come out and say anything matter of factly, but you could tell by their vocal inflections that they knew the real reason, and they had to kinda dance around the issue, so as to not get their good friend in trouble. People in the industry, know the real reason this whole thing went down. You're pretty naive if you don't understand that. I'm not saying these 1upYours podcasts are proof positive of my original remarks, but basically take from them what you will... There were many other sources for the rumored reasons why this really happened, but I have to admit that since all this time has passed, I have no idea exactly where I read the different scuttlebut about it. You can guess that places like Kotaku, and places like that had some discussion about it at the time. Also, remember when Microsoft pulled the ODST announcement at the last second from e3 2008? Remember how pissed off Bungie was at that time? Again, when this situation happened, there was more discussion about Bungie and MS's "true" relationship. If you simply take the written press releases as face value, then, well.....

Well, at the time the split actually happened, there was alot of discussion about it on various gaming websites, podcasts, forums, etc, etc. Certainly, nothing was verifiable, but plenty of rumors emerged from that split. Because of the split, obviously there would be non-disclosure agreements up the ying-yang, and nothing would be officially said. If you look at Bungies comments, they are very careful not to say anything negative in regards to Microsoft.

So it's impossible that a good professional relationship with Microsoft is genuine?

The reason they have no problems with Microsoft continuing to own a stake, is because it was one of the stipulations of their independence. Microsoft allowed them to regain their independence, but they aren't going to let them leave for nothing. Bungie and MS had to negotiate terms of seperation, and a minority stake was one of the sticking points. MS would have never allowed them to leave without it.

a. This is all your speculation as you've not so much as a link, and
b. it ignores any benefits that Bungie receives.

Well, I'm not actually pulling this out of my ass. .... People in the industry, know the real reason this whole thing went down. You're pretty naive if you don't understand that.

You're pretty naive for not understanding why Bungie merged in the first place. A single bug in the first run of Myth very nearly destroyed Bungie utterly. Once they merged this was a headache the likes of which couldn't threaten them again. A whole host of business issues do not befall them, and as their expertise is creative, they're thankful for this--something the PC and Mac game geeks never (and still don't) understood. If you go from the very obvious route that they do not want to get bitten in the ass by publishing woes, or even to be bothered with it, what other publisher do you think can outpace Microsoft on any level? Seriously? EA? Activision? I honestly don't think that there is any publisher that can offer them what Microsoft has actually delivered on.

They didn't come out and say anything matter of factly, but you could tell by their vocal inflections that they knew the real reason, and they had to kinda dance around the issue, so as to not get their good friend in trouble. People in the industry, know the real reason this whole thing went down. You're pretty naive if you don't understand that. I'm not saying these 1upYours podcasts are proof positive of my original remarks, but basically take from them what you will...

So your primary basis for concern is a spotty memory and what you inferred from some vocal inflections on a podcast from some guys who used to work with a guy who went to work for Bungie right around the time of the split? I'm not really finding that as compelling evidence.

A quick googling turns up a lot of commentary when the announcement was made, but little direct speculation. At the GDC '09, Bungie specifically highlighted that they'd be working on Halo 3 for at least roughly 2 more years (http://www.joystiq.com/2009/03/25/gdc09-bungie-to-produce-more-halo-3-content-probably-for-two/). That would certainly match the two announced releases and then content support for them. This article on Firing Squad (http://www.firingsquad.com/news/newsarticle.asp?searchid=17728) indicates that Bungie's main source of contention wasn't Halo, but control. As a subjugate studio, they couldn't choose their own contractors, for example, and had to vet all major decisions through Microsoft. As an independent studio, they have more freedom. This article on eflux Media (http://www.efluxmedia.com/news_Why_Bungie_Left_Microsoft_09382.html) specifically quotes Bungie community spokesperson Frank O'Connor as stating that negotiations for the split had been ongoing for a YEAR (well prior to Luke Smith being hired at Bungie).

Conspiracy theory is all well and good, but I'm not really seeing any compelling argument for it. Even if Bungie did nothing after Halo Reach (and publicly stating you'll be working on Halo 3 content for 2 more years doesn't really broadcast 'meeting an obligation'), I'm sure they'd still be in the loop as design and story consultants.

As stated before, Bungie isn't being coy about saying they want to branch out. I don't see any indication that they're lying about it to protect some super-secret contract that's hamstringing them. Are they under NDAs? Almost certainly. But to assume that means that Microsoft was able to dictate draconian terms and Bundie were helpless victims is fairly naive. Remember: they started negotiation 9 MONTHS BEFORE HALO 3 SHIPPED. Bungie had a LOT of leverage there, because of the expectations Halo 3 was engendering...and the amount of money Microsoft had riding on it. Bungie could have stalled development or worse. Yes, they would have ended up damaging themselves...but in the face of MS doing them harm, I'm sure they would.

If you have some quotes or links or something to illustrate otherwise, I'm interested to see/hear them. But an implication of nudge-nudge-wink-wink and some vague connections don't strike me as the basis of maligning an entire company's reputation and history.

A single bug in the first run of Myth very nearly destroyed Bungie utterly.

Not disagreeing with you in general, but the bug was in Myth 2, not Myth....and only the PC version. I don't know that it nearly destroyed Bungie, but it hurt them. Rumor has it (though there is no proof to the contrary) that the cost of recalls and running to the factory almost was equal to the profits earned for the game.

In point of fact: Myth II was released in 1998. Microsoft didn't acquire Bungie until 1999 (remember Halo was shown at MACWORLD 99). Moreover, Bungie was financially sound enough that they traded some of their outstanding stock (being held by Take 2) in exchange for giving up the rights to the Myth franchise (which is why Myth 3 is from somebody else...and widely considered inferior to the previous two installments).

If you have some quotes or links or something to illustrate otherwise, I'm interested to see/hear them. But an implication of nudge-nudge-wink-wink and some vague connections don't strike me as the basis of maligning an entire company's reputation and history.

If I had the spare time to go back and relisten to all those podcasts, and try to research all the website discussion during that time frame to get you links, I would. I just don't have the time.

But the bottom line is that none of this is that big of a deal really. Anybody thats getting their panties in a bunch over this better check themselves. If you don't work for Bungie or Microsoft, then why would you even care that much about it? My original post was just me thinking out loud in regards to the Halo Reach announcement, and some other recent events, and putting 2 and 2 together. It's no big deal really. You can agree with my take or disagree with it, but it's not the end of the world either way.

As for my take maligning an entire company's reputation and history, you've got to be joking right?? Nothing I posted above is affecting the reputation or history of bungie. Let's not be ridiculous. If my theory is correct, and bungie is pushing out 2 Halo games real quick just to fulfill their contractual obligation to MS, who cares? I mean, is that really that earth shattering? Only reason I brought the subject up, was because I thought it would make for some good and entertaining discussion. Again, I was basically just thinking out loud, and wondering if anybody else was thinking along similar lines.

Regardless of my beliefs about the nature of these two upcoming Halo games, I still think both games will be well polished, and highly entertaining. Both should sell very well, and MS and Bungie don't have anything to worry about as far as their reputations go. Like I said in a previous post, we are going to have to wait for a tell-all book in about 10 years before we'll have any idea if anything of this nature really took place.

Yes it is earth shattering because as far as I'm concerned Halo Is the Lord of the Rings or the Matrix of gaming. There just isn't anything else like it.

Like someone else said COD4 is great but the game's whole colour scheme seems to be grey, green and brown.

Halo is colourful. Has so much vibrancy. Co-OP the only game that came to close to having the same level of immersion and vibrancy that Halo did was that third person shooter by digital anvil (Brute Force), wish they'd make another one.
I'm not comparing the games on how good they are to play but level of immersion and colour scheme etc. Not to mention they sounded fantastic.


If people didn't care about Bungie/MS split and how its effecting Halo we wouldn't have this huge thread.

Not disagreeing with you in general, but the bug was in Myth 2, not Myth....and only the PC version. I don't know that it nearly destroyed Bungie, but it hurt them. Rumor has it (though there is no proof to the contrary) that the cost of recalls and running to the factory almost was equal to the profits earned for the game.

So it was. I was going by memory of an article I read in XBM a few years ago. So my memory was fuzzy. But the article did in fact give a dollar figure to the amount of damage that Bungie estimated this caused, I'll not attempt to conjure it up short of reading the article again (I can probably find it in a day or two if you're curious) but let's just say that when it happened, it was pretty frightening to them.

And at any rate as WizarDru just showed, negotiations for the Bungie breakaway began a year prior to Halo 3 release which puts it in 2006. Somehow I don't think that plotting a course for "complete, total, not-developing-anything-for-microsoft" independence four years out is much of a rush-job to rid themselves of it all. And hey, if it is, you've only got another year to redeem yourself, right? ;)

I really think we are going to see a lot in ODST and Reach that was planned or thinkered earlier, but left undone or even unstarted due to time and resource constraints. Even the very first Halo game, as polished as it is, saw a massive cut in content, being originally planned as a 20-stage game.

Like someone else said COD4 is great but the game's whole colour scheme seems to be grey, green and brown.


Not sure why you guys are baggin on COD4 for the color palatte - it was designed as a realistic war game with quite a bit set in the middle east - the colors are spot on.

If people didn't care about Bungie/MS split and how its effecting Halo we wouldn't have this huge thread.

I don't really care how businesses operate, I just think that his suppositions are exactly that, I'd say most people agree given the lack of evidence.

from xboxic: "Microsoft has put forward their plans for the upcoming Comic-Con event in San Diego next week from July 23-26. The most interesting news is that they will reveal a brand new game and have said that it will be a “project from a renowned, top tier franchise.”"

i like the idea put forward that the over all plan is for 1 halo themed game every holiday season, with h3 in 2007, halo wars in 2008 (but late), odst in 2009, reach in 2010, etc.

so if they are announcing halo wars 2, where would it fit? it seems early to announce a 2011 game.

also, what is gearbox up to? i figured they'd be working on a halo 4, but i can't see ms announcing a non-bungie halo sequel right after bungie announces reach.

from xboxic: "Microsoft has put forward their plans for the upcoming Comic-Con event in San Diego next week from July 23-26. The most interesting news is that they will reveal a brand new game and have said that it will be a “project from a renowned, top tier franchise.”"

i like the idea put forward that the over all plan is for 1 halo themed game every holiday season, with h3 in 2007, halo wars in 2008 (but late), odst in 2009, reach in 2010, etc.

so if they are announcing halo wars 2, where would it fit? it seems early to announce a 2011 game.

also, what is gearbox up to? i figured they'd be working on a halo 4, but i can't see ms announcing a non-bungie halo sequel right after bungie announces reach.
I can't see any reason Bungie or MS lets Gearbox do Halo 4.

I can't see any reason Bungie or MS lets Gearbox do Halo 4.

they let them do Halo PC, and the gearbox ceo announced this:

In Development: ?? mystery ??

"I've started a new project. It's big. It's, like, 'look-at-our-line-up-and-imagine-something-even-bigger' kind of big. I'm directing it myself. I can't mention it publicly yet. When you find out what this is, you'll likely agree that I can't oversell this one."

- Randy Pitchford, Gearbox President, regarding this upcoming title!

they let them do Halo PC, and the gearbox ceo announced this:

In Development: ?? mystery ??

"I've started a new project. It's big. It's, like, 'look-at-our-line-up-and-imagine-something-even-bigger' kind of big. I'm directing it myself. I can't mention it publicly yet. When you find out what this is, you'll likely agree that I can't oversell this one."

- Randy Pitchford, Gearbox President, regarding this upcoming title!

That actually turned out to be the Aliens game that has since been canceled or postponed. The reason why Pitchford was so hyped about the game, calling it something that he couldn't possibly oversell, is his belief that Halo and Doom, and just about every other space marine based game was inspired by the Aliens movies, and that what's better than doing an offical Aliens game.

Not sure why you guys are baggin on COD4 for the color palatte - it was designed as a realistic war game with quite a bit set in the middle east - the colors are spot on.

Usually because the reverse is often cited as a detriment of the Halo series: specifically that it IS colorful and that it is not just grey, brown and drab green. Truthfully, I don't mind either way: I enjoy Gears of War's limited palate just like I enjoy Halo's brightly colored armors, aliens and effects. There's room for both.

Of course, games like Uncharted 2 show how you can do a warzone that's colorful AND realistic, too.

As for my take maligning an entire company's reputation and history, you've got to be joking right?? Nothing I posted above is affecting the reputation or history of bungie. Let's not be ridiculous. If my theory is correct, and bungie is pushing out 2 Halo games real quick just to fulfill their contractual obligation to MS, who cares? I mean, is that really that earth shattering? Only reason I brought the subject up, was because I thought it would make for some good and entertaining discussion. Again, I was basically just thinking out loud, and wondering if anybody else was thinking along similar lines.

I understand that and I was merely pointing out where your logic had flaws. I think you may be reading emotional investment where there really isn't any. My goal was to point out that your theory, while entertaining, doesn't really match the facts.

So far, your primary source of your theory is a podcast you vaguely remember where you specifically point out that the hosts didn't actually say anything to bolster your theory other than implying (or you inferring) that they knew 'the real story' behind Bungie gaining independence from Microsoft...and that the primary reason you gave them credit for now the details was that a former employee of 1up who used to host the podcast had gone to join Bungie almost a full year AFTER they began negotiations with Microsoft. All of which also ignores the fact that Bungie has already shed employees who worked on Halo twice already (all of whom went on to form their own studios, I might add).

A much more likely scenario is the one offered by agnartha, above: MS wants a Halo game EVERY YEAR. Bungie isn't dumping product, Microsoft is working the gold mine. And given that it's one of the most successful video game franchises in history, I can't really blame them. Microsoft isn't stupid...they see that Nintendo rides the Mario gravy train several times a year. But they also see that, by and large, most of Nintendo's Mario games are big winners. Mario Kart is one of the Wii's best sellers...and it's not just because it has Mario...but because it's a darned good game. By the same token, Halo Wars isn't just a cash-in: it's arguably the best console RTS available. The Halo name gets them to the door, but its the game that has to walk through it.

You're free to believe and speculate what you will...but I think you're off-base, judging from the facts we have at hand. I do think it unlikely (but possible) that MS is going to announce another Halo game next week, though...I think they would have teased that at E3 with the other two. Guess we'll see.

doot doot dunu dunu doot doot dunu doot doot doot doot dunu dunu doot doot dunu
http://snogirl.snoville.com/Circus/circus-tent.gif

I don't think Bungie wants out as fast as possibe. I mean for the Halo people @ Bungie, this is their life's work. They wouldn't want to kill the Golden Cross (I mean Goose).

If they wants out so fast, is it because they have so many projects in the pipeline that they can pimp to other publishers to go multi plat etc. Maybe. We probably won't know for sure till there's some sort of other game for all plats or just a whole new game period.

I will say though that I hate the Havock engine....

I hope we don't see PS3 and Wii Bungie Games.
I don't believe it helps xbox fans,microsoft, or the market. Imgaine if Mario was suddenly on PS3 or Xbox 360.... That would really mess up alligances of people and certinatly wouldn't help win the console war.

They wouldn't want to kill the Golden Cross (I mean Goose).



I've heard several people mention that Bungie doesn't want to kill the Golden Goose, but isn't it Microsoft's Golden Goose now? Bungie doesn't hold the rights to Halo, MS does. Sure, as long as Bungie is willing to work with MS, then MS will likely allow them to continue to work on the Halo universe, but it should be understood that the Golden Goose is owned by Microsoft at this time. In the long term interests of Bungie, although Halo lines their coffers, at some point they need to develop their own IP that can one day be their meal ticket. That should be their long term goal. As tempting as it might be for them to continue pumping out Halo games for MS, at some point breaking away from Halo is going to be in their (longterm) best interests.

http://www.n4g.com/News-365156.aspx

What other game gets this type of reaction. This is over 10 years of Halo and people think they are trying to hurry out of a contract?

i thought MS just bought some rights to the halo series themselves from bungie....

well either way... what ever they make and slap the halo bumpersticker on the case everyone is gonna buy it anyway cuz 99% of box fans are halo junkies fanboys. so they might as well get it over with with some quick titles and start making some good games.

don't get me wrong... halo has done a lot for xbox gaming... but after the first one you had to see the twinkle in microsoft's eyes... and the majority of people still coddle over anything with the word halo on it... i realize that halo wars wasn't as big as the original halos or anything but the masses are quite different ppl that are on the forums... i work at a game store and you would drop dead at all the people who try to return halo wars because they thought it was another FPS... masses don't think they can read 1 out of 100 words... and thats "halo" and their brain goes omgs >.>

i thought MS just bought some rights to the halo series themselves from bungie....

well either way... what ever they make and slap the halo bumpersticker on the case everyone is gonna buy it anyway cuz 99% of box fans are halo junkies fanboys. so they might as well get it over with with some quick titles and start making some good games.

don't get me wrong... halo has done a lot for xbox gaming... but after the first one you had to see the twinkle in microsoft's eyes... and the majority of people still coddle over anything with the word halo on it... i realize that halo wars wasn't as big as the original halos or anything but the masses are quite different ppl that are on the forums... i work at a game store and you would drop dead at all the people who try to return halo wars because they thought it was another FPS... masses don't think they can read 1 out of 100 words... and thats "halo" and their brain goes omgs >.>

Yet over a million people downloaded the demo prior to release :rolleyes:
Also it is one of the top 5 selling games of 2009 on the 360 so far this year.
Now matter how credible you think just because you work at a game store will your view of people bringing Halo Wars back for reasons you state represent the rest of the world.

Yet over a million people downloaded the demo prior to release :rolleyes:
Also it is one of the top 5 selling games of 2009 on the 360 so far this year.
Now matter how credible you think just because you work at a game store will your view of people bringing Halo Wars back for reasons you state represent the rest of the world.

What he said. The demo of the game was downloaded 2 million times in the first five days, according to Microsoft. It's sold nearly 1.5 million copies. Anecdotal evidence aside, its a well-reviewed and well-received hit. I expect its more likely that friends and relatives were the ones more likely to make the mistake of assuming what it was, given than Halo fans would be in tune with all of the hype and marketing (not to mention the demo) and would know what it was and was not. Mom buying a new Halo game from her son might only know the game.

The Halo games are up there for me in the top games that I've played the most, had the most fun with, and played the most with friends.

I don't see how anyone could say they'd want to rush out those games.

The only games that come close are Midtown Madnesss 3, Phantasy Star Online (dreamcast and xbox) and possibly Goldeneye.

I got shivers down my neck watching that Halo video. I'm going to play through all 3 games again.

Yet over a million people downloaded the demo prior to release :rolleyes:
Also it is one of the top 5 selling games of 2009 on the 360 so far this year.
Now matter how credible you think just because you work at a game store will your view of people bringing Halo Wars back for reasons you state represent the rest of the world.

i guess i was exaggerating XD
i really can only speculate based on the happenings at my local store which only really gives me a local opinion.

statement still stands though... at least where i am... a lot of people tend to return the game because they think it is totally something else, which doesn't happen nearly as often for any other game. you also get people complaining when they are selling the game that they thought it was an fps.

i don't think i'm necessarily more credible... that is an assumption you made, based on a observation I made.

The Halo games are up there for me in the top games that I've played the most, had the most fun with, and played the most with friends.

I don't see how anyone could say they'd want to rush out those games.

The only games that come close are Midtown Madnesss 3, Phantasy Star Online (dreamcast and xbox) and possibly Goldeneye.

I got shivers down my neck watching that Halo video. I'm going to play through all 3 games again.

well maybe bungie doesn't really want to do halo anymore... who knows there are a lot of reasons why they would want to and also why they wouldnt.

reasons why they would want to make halo games:
money
fan base
etc.

reasons why not to:
they could be sick of microsoft pushing them around "in regards to halo"
they want to make something different

maybe maybe not who knows.

bungie may not want to ONLY be known as the halo makers, they may and probably do have many other wonderful ideas they want to develop but are restricted by their contract with microsoft (at least that is how i am understanding this)

Michael Jordan might be a great baseball player.

The trouble is, we'll never really know, because he has so little chance of outperforming his basketball record on the diamond.

Now why did Michael Jordan quit baseball and go back to basketball again?

Bungie just might be Michael Jordan fans. You know?

http://www.gamerzines.com/xbox-360/news/bungie-working-on-new-ip.html

Bungie has confirmed to GamerZines that it is working on brand new IP, unrelated to the Halo universe.

360Zine Issue 28 For our latest Halo coverage, click here to download 360Zine Issue 28 for free.Speaking at a press event for forthcoming title Halo 3: ODST on Monday, Bungie's Lars Bakken admitted that "we are working on some new IP which we're not ready to talk about just yet".

Read our interview with Bungie (link just down and to the right there) to find out why fans of a certain cult sci-fi show should perhaps start getting excited.

read our interview with bungie (link just down and to the right there) to find out why fans of a certain cult sci-fi show should perhaps start getting excited.


Firefly confirmed!!!

:)

Gee, looks like Bungie is done with Halo once Reach is over:

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=220139


I can't say I'm suprised by this at all. Like I said originally, it's my opinion that Bungie is very interested in fulfilling all the obligations to their seperation contract with Microsoft as quickly as possible. Once they are done with that, they can get onto the real business of making the games that they are truly interested in making, and then eventually being able to do whatever the hell they want with their "own" IP. Xbox fans needn't worry though, MS still has the right of first refusal for quite a bit more Bungie games. You probably won't see any Bungie games on anything other than a MS platform for the next 5 or 6 years. After that, all bets are off.

Gee, looks like Bungie is done with Halo once Reach is over:

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=220139


I can't say I'm suprised by this at all. Like I said originally, it's my opinion that Bungie is very interested in fulfilling all the obligations to their seperation contract with Microsoft as quickly as possible. Once they are done with that, they can get onto the real business of making the games that they are truly interested in making, and then eventually being able to do whatever the hell they want with their "own" IP. Xbox fans needn't worry though, MS still has the right of first refusal for quite a bit more Bungie games. You probably won't see any Bungie games on anything other than a MS platform for the next 5 or 6 years. After that, all bets are off.

Surprised by what? That it is the last Halo game for the 360. Doesn't mean they are done with Halo for the next console whenever that will be.

Anyone else read that quote about ODST being open world

I can't wait for that, it's going to be so awesome.
They also said the game was done on there side and all resources are committed to getting reach finished (well of the people workingon a Halo Project)

Surprised by what? That it is the last Halo game for the 360. Doesn't mean they are done with Halo for the next console whenever that will be.


" In an interview with VGChartz.com Bungie’s Lars Bakken and Microsoft Game Studios Ryan Crosby answered questions regarding the future of the Bungie developed Halo brand after ODST’s successor “Halo: Reach,” adamantly stating:

“Reach will be our last Halo game. We are currently working on a new IP but obviously can’t reveal anything at this stage. Reach is it for us.” "



I don't know... seems pretty freaking definitive to me, lol.

" In an interview with VGChartz.com Bungie’s Lars Bakken and Microsoft Game Studios Ryan Crosby answered questions regarding the future of the Bungie developed Halo brand after ODST’s successor “Halo: Reach,” adamantly stating:

“Reach will be our last Halo game. We are currently working on a new IP but obviously can’t reveal anything at this stage. Reach is it for us.” "



I don't know... seems pretty freaking definitive to me, lol.


I guess I shall have to give you props!

they let them do Halo PC, and the gearbox ceo announced this:



Doing a console to PC port is something entirely different than doing a game from the ground up.