Love it or hate it, Fuchal at NextGG.com takes a look at what makes the Xbox 360's controller so appealing...
Remakes of the campaigns featured in Xbox Game Studios' Halo 2 and Halo 3 are currently in development, according to a new rumor.
That's Microsoft's gaming division for you...kill off developers making new ip while trying to capitalize off some long lost glory that has no hope of ever being what it once was thanks to recent decision making favoring unrealistic profit goals and greed. What a joke.
So much bitterness. Why be upset over something like this. Just don't buy it and stick with what you prefer.
Give it rest medman..., take a deep breath and try to not sound so invested in something no one is forcing you to read, buy, or play.
"Console war"is over, Sony won, be happy.
@thesoftware730
I'm invested in people losing their jobs and their livelihoods while Microsoft execs tout record profits for their gaming division. Not sure why you wouldn't be invested. Could be you one day. Good luck.
So what’s their solution to having multiplayer? Wait until Halo 7?
That was one of the most memorable parts of Halo..
I'm not sure spending the heavy investment in time to recreate the multiplayer here is the answer either though.
Remaking the campaigns is a great idea to bring the new players up to speed. But if the multiplayer is included in each it'll just fracture the player base of each release.
I think it might be better to turn these campaigns out quicker and have 1 multiplayer game to keep everyone in one place
Maybe having an Halo Online and just release the Combat Evolve maps. And when Halo 2 releases have those maps release. I don’t know but I would like to play a newer version of Halo multiplayer. I know times have changed, and Fortnite is all younger kids really play. But back then it was Halo and you connecting 6 Xbox’s together lol.
I agree. I think that'll segment the playerbase and once 7 comes out, players might realize it sucks and go back to the older games. Especially if 7 is live-servixe, they'll be shooting themselves in the foot on the one good leg they have to stand on.
Kinda surprised they didn't just port MCC.
Maybe more $ to by made with separate remasters
Wouldn't have that problem if it were MCC being released. Gotta wait for 7 to be disappointed with MP all over again cause if they half baked Infinite what makes people think they won't half bake the next game? MP works in past HALO games not cause of nostalgia but because it's MP that isn't concerned with the endless service approach.
There is so much cognitive dissonance over Infinite. People say they didn't like it because it was a live service. Yet if you look at what the criticisms of it were at the time it came out and when the playerbase started falling off, the primary issue people had was a lack of updates. In other words, it wasn't enough of a live service.
Which is really an encapsulation of the problem with multiplayer today. So many people think that they want to go back to the "good old days" of mid-2000s multiplayer (The first few Halos, Socom, the first few Battlefields, CS 1.6, etc), but in reality if a multiplayer game like that came out today, people would whine about the lack of content within a month of launch and go back to a live service with a grindy progression system.
Why not just port the MCC? 🤔 That was the easiest layup ever and you completely missed it
I thought the same thing, then I realized that they wouldn't include the remakes in that edition. We may get a different version of Halo MCC in the future with all of the remakes included. I just want them to include Halo 5 at some point for PC.
I wonder if Microsoft will port Reach over to Playstation I quite enjoyed that game. I played Halo 3 and it was not bad I have Halo 2 on the OG Xbox I just need some cables to hook up to my tv to play it.
In honour of PlayStation's 30th birthday yesterday in the US, data company Circana has dug out figures showing the top 20 best-selling PlayStation video games ever (date-range Jan 1995 to July 2025). Don't get too excited.
This is a great reminder of how game sales have become more concentrated in a smaller number of games/series over time. In the PS1/PS2 era a game was a success if it sold a million or a few million copies. The GTA games (3/Vice City/San Andreas) were pretty big outliers in selling as much as they did during the PS2 era. So in the minds of a lot of gamers something like FF VII feels like it was as big of a PS1 game as God of War 2018 was for PS4, but in reality far fewer people bought it (though it has obviously reached additional people through remasters, etc.).
What this says to me is, not many people are buying a PS to play PS exclusives. Like so many false narratives, like Xbox gamers don't buy games! It seems Playstation as a default system is a vanilla system to play call of duty, Minecraft, GTA games and a sports games.
if you look back into the PS history, it has always been the 3rd parties who sells the most games. it was just that the PS1 and PS2 were so dominant that many of those 3rd party games were exclusives. so, back during the PS1 and PS2 days, the strategy was "to sell as many consoles as possible in order to sell more 1st party exclusives" to ride on that wave. The strategy to push many 1st party exclusives to sell consoles only started with the PS3 when many of those prior 3rd party exclusives went multiplat but more accurately, it started with the PSP.
Sony saw with the PSP, which was being trounced in sales by the DS, that 3rd party exclusives are hard to come by if you're not dominating the market. So they started building more 1st party games and when the PS3 were facing difficulties in sales, they knew they had to rely on their own to differentiate the PS3 from the 360. So the strategy back then changed to "release more 1st party exclusives in order to sell more consoles".
the only manufacturer that is still consistently selling their hardware to play 1st party exclusives, is Nintendo, and that was because they gave up the armrace for power thus they can't rely on 3rd parties anymore as all multiplats play better on competing consoles. AND that's also why they are the most ominous in going after emulators and also patent trolling!
so, you're not wrong there, but not an "aha!" moment or anything. it has been this way since the last, at least, 15 years for Playstation.
@zerobalance
So... what this tells you is that Call of duty, being the absolute check writer that it is, has been outsold by Last of us, God of war, 2 Spider man games..... Saying Playstation exclusives doesn't sell is like saying call of duty doesn't sell because they have outsold some of iterations. Does that make sense to you?
Test Drive Unlimited Dev Hits Back, "It's not representative at all"
I wonder how much Horizon 5 impacted that since thier are very few aracde racing games on the ps5 and While I loved Unlimted 1 and 2 solar crown has been a dumpster fire for me.
Very few arcade racing games? So Xbox has how many more? 1? Wait Forza is on PS so the same amount. Also it’s there, not thier, which is actually their.
I don't understand this comment. No body is talking about Forza at all and even if Forza were to outsell this game how would that change the story (Steam concurrents compard vs PS5 community size)? Its like Tourette Syndrome for Xbox fanboys.
I mentioned this SO much, people who put more weight on steam concurrent players but ignore consoles is weird. Or using steam drop offs as if no one’s playing something on multiple systems and has cross play. It’s just not the best metric for the complete story
And every time someone makes this argument, I'll always go back to the response: we can only use the data available to us. It's the same with the weekly UK physical game sales charts. Do we know they aren't perfect/complete? Yes. But should we ignore the available data just because we don't have all possible data? No. And that's particularly true when we aren't going to get the rest of the data because the other platforms are hiding it.
You say people focus on Steam but "ignore" consoles, but that implies that the console player data is available, which it isn't. Usually when people say this, what they actually mean is that think people should assume, based on no evidence, that a game they happen to like is performing radically differently/better on PS5/Xbox than it is on Steam. I'm willing to entertain that theory if the dev provides sales numbers, or even if you can make a colorable case that a specific game's primary audience is historically tied to console rather than PC. But I'm not just going to randomly assume that a game that bombed on Steam has a huge PS5 and Epic Game Store audience just because fans of that game wish that it had sold better.
@JEECE, you make of the data what you wish to, but big giant gaps in the information available to you should limit what conclusions you draw from it.
@derek
Yeah, I mean I'm never going to try to estimate exact lifetime sales based solely on launch weekend Steam concurrents. But I will use the information I have to make educated estimates. Like if a game completely underperforms similar titles in terms of its Steam numbers, I'm going to assume it is underperforming on console too, unless there is some rational reason not to (i.e. game launched on GP, the game is from a series that is closely associated with PlayStation and doesn't have a strong history on PC, or the PC port is widely known to be buggy ahead of of launch, etc.).
@Nacogi
I guess you are trying to contradict me, but you are just supporting my position of using whatever data is available to make estimates. If I have Steam concurrents, I'll use those. When the UK physical sales come out, I'll factor that in. When the Monthly PSN charts come out, I'll look at those. And when Circana (NPD) puts out its monthly and yearly charts, I'll look at those and use the games I do know the sales totals of on those charts to estimate the sales of others above and below.
What I won't do is ignore every piece of information I get that points a certain way and just scream that "it's not the full worldwide picture on all platforms so it doesn't matter." Which is what most of these people who get sad about Steam concurrents (or the UK charts) do.
But we know steam data and have free access to check how many players are playing while on consoles we don't. I hope in the future we will get consoles player access too
Not every game is big time on consoles and same for pc. As pc gamers we just have more options on how we play but it seems consoles are starting to offer more freedom likes mod support
it's not that people put more weight on it. It's the only platform that allows the tracking of player numbers unless the game specifically has it built in.
Steam can highlight trends but you're 100 precent right its not the full story far from it games that have more traction on console show drops on steam and vice versa
Well yea, we don't have access to player statistics on other platforms freely compared to steam. It's up to devs to release that information.
This. If I have some data available, and the people who could provide me with full data elect not to do so, I'm going to use the data I do have to make educated estimates on the full picture. I'm not just going to assume that the hidden data paints a completely different picture than the available data.
Again, if there is some logical reason to go against the Steam data, I'll consider it. Like if a game launches on Gamepass, I'm not going to compare its steam numbers to games that didn't launch on Gamespass; instead I'll compare it to the steam numbers of other games that launched on GP, thus accounting for that variable.
Replies(1)
The keypad add-on is pretty cool too!
cool article, I love the 360 controller imo it is WAY better than any other dualshock controller
this is opinion again, there been 1000 posts like this, and opinions are NOT NEWS!
i must agree, i love the 360 controller, best one for a while
seeing as they made the worst controller ever for the original xbox they new what to do for the next one