Polygon:
If you've played PvP in the last decade or more in anything from Halo to Call of Duty or even Destiny, you will have witnessed a very strange act. You die and your killer runs to your corpse — and then crouches, stands, crouches, stands, crouches and stands before running off to kill again.
The act in question is "teabagging." It's a taunting sign of disrespect, a way to rub salt in the wound by actually rubbing salty, virtual balls on your wounds. I, for one, find it downright infuriating.
A new Call of Duty game that isn't Modern Warfare 4 may be coming, and the surprise re-emergence of Warzone Mobile could be crucial to it.
Halo will make its PS5 debut with a massively modernised remake of the original Xbox game, Combat Evolved.
That’s according to the Halo Leaks account on X (or Twitter), which has accurately outed information about the franchise in the past.
Replies(1)I expect this to be announced pretty soon. Can't wait, this game was awesome. I wonder how of a remake it'll be though, hopefully not a remaster because we already have that lol.
it will be running on unreal engine 5, so it will look good. The question is will it run as good as it looks
I think they teased it a few months back when they announced Halo studios. It does look quite incredible graphically but as Hennessy says above, how it runs is gonna be a different story given UE5 track record.
it would probably be like the gears of war reloaded. Which was a remake of the remaster of the original.
...this gen is getting confusing with so many re-whatevers.
@S2K: “ It needs to be a complete redo of graphics or else it’s not my cup of tea.”
I completely agree with you and would add a VR mode as well🥺
oh yeh, theres like a showcase soon, maybe they'll announce it there.
or at the game awards
but ue5 only looks pretty. the games run ..
abit weird.
It's being shown at the Halo World Championships which they had already announced a few weeks ago.
Better reboot than another re-touch (remake after an already remaster) .... but 343/Halo is incompetent now, so .... guess this is best they can do with help of Coalition
So much memories with halo.
The original Xbox was my first console (actually 64 but barely played) and the first game was halo. Me and my brother use to play coop almost everyday.
We eventually traded in for a PS2 because of kingdom hearts lol
I played the first 2 Halo games. That's Bungie's Halo.. I do not know whether 343's Halo is as good as Bungie's.
Either ways Halo is one of Microsoft's big franchises. So many rumours so it's becoming more likely it'll come to PS5
Halo 3 is Bungie's game... so is Reach and ODST. 4, 5 & 6 (Infinite) are 343's. They aren't bad... just different. The original trilogy story ended and should have finished there. But MS wanted to 'Star Wars' this franchise and came up with new stories that sort of just sit there.
Microsoft reportedly lost over $300 million in Xbox and PC sales by putting Call of Duty on Game Pass, raising concerns over the subscription model’s long-term impact.
There are some reports that in March 2023, Microsoft told a court, "Game Pass prices will not increase as a result of the [Microsoft-Activision] Merger."
If true, massive hypocrite .
If this one franchise is the reason for the game pass price increases, then just leave it off game pass and not make people who don't play COD foot the bill for a game they will never play, like me.
Talk about stupid business decisions.
Honestly fuck em dude, they are constantly trying to monopolize the industry instead of just competing.
Exactly. Keep putting their regular games on GPU day one but big budget games that are very popular like COD should not release on GPU day one, maybe 9 months or a year later once they profit from sales.
I don't know if this is a stupid decision. Hear me out. I saw someone comment that it was time to cancel GP and MS would do a 180 like usual. It may be too late this time. It's the history of those other 180s that gives me some doubts about them doing it again or this being a stupid decision versus a cold calculation.
Despite never being the dominant brand, Xbox has at various times tried to push wildly unpopular changes on their customers when they thought they were in a position to get away with it. The 180s came because they overplayed their hand. Customers had options. They lost customers to PS because of the Xbox One launch plans. Anyone who moved to PS4 and stopped gaming on Xbox was a total loss for Xbox.
Customers still have options. The problem for GP subscribers is that most of those options are better for MS than continuing to offer GP as it was before and at the old pricing. Their fans cheered on their acquisitions. Some petitioned regulatory authorities to let the ABK merger happen. Congrats. They are now a dominant 3rd party publisher. Those other options gamers could threaten them with before now work to Xbox's favor.
Other than quitting their games entirely, which now includes ABK, Bethesda, and whatever else they gobbled up, what are upset GP subscribers going to do about it? You can suck it up and eat the price hike. They win. You can cancel GP and buy Xbox games instead. They come out ahead. You can switch to PS, Nintendo, or Steam. So? You'll be paying more for their games their than you were paying for GP, and are they really that committed to continuing to manufacture hardware (in the traditional sense) anyway?
Edit: Making matters worse is that this is likely being driven by pressure from MS, which has increased scrutiny of Xbox since the ABK acquisition.
The price would have increased anyway, which was already planned, with or without COD. They didn't lie about anything. You just misunderstood the answer.
@maximusprime:” There are some reports that in March 2023, Microsoft told a court, "Game Pass prices will not increase as a result of the [Microsoft-Activision] Merger."
If true, massive hypocrite .“
.
.
The problem is that you can buy a bakery and tell the community you won’t raise the prices because of the purchase then turn around and raise the prices then say it’s because the ingredients prices when up and be technically telling the truth.
.
Unless the courts would had a agreement in paper that the prices wouldn’t go up for example 5 years there’s no way to enforce it
Edited for typos
If this is true, this might be a case of taking a big risk gone wrong.
Is that why they always say revenue and not profit??
My question is, even though they lost 300 million in sales, were they able to offset it.
We might never know.
I don't know about you all, but, while that is a lot of money, that's less than I would expect. The totality of game pass users on two platforms playing Call of Duty results in just 300M?
Am I crazy to say that feels like an unusually low amount of revenue?
It is but for pc gamepass only works on the Microsoft store. Majority of pc gamers don't use any other storefront other than steam. So they wouldn't of sold much on the Microsoft store anyways.
That leaves Xbox one and Xbox Series. $300m does seem low.
Well, being that Microsoft is the lowest out of the platforms that sell the game..
Buying Activision, in long term, made up the loss of game sales of said game. By a mile.
But, being cod is tanking as of right now, will be interesting to see if Microsoft can actually save a franchise rather than destroy it.
They just raised the price of GamePass knowing they would piss off their customers.
You now know - they didn't offset it.
I’ve been saying for years, you just can’t trust MS period.
1 simple rule, don’t trust MS, act accordingly.
The price would have increased anyway, which was already planned, with or without COD. They didn't lie about anything. You just misunderstood the answer.
Which is an even bigger reason as to why you can't trust them, they play with semantics instead of being honest and straight forward. Your comment doesnt help their case by putting the blame on the consumer for what and how they said what they said.
Good, I had hoped Microsoft would be better for Activision and Blizzard than Kotick running the show but that would be expecting Microsoft to be competent at managing studios.
Saw the title, then looked at the source...not surprised.
It only bothers me when I'm squad wiping and all of sudden someone wants to teabag when they FINALLY kill me. Its always the ones I've been demolishing the whole game.
This kind of stuff is just one of the reasons I never buy competitive shooters. The communities are just toxic and filled with immature people. (not that I am in anyway claiming to be the paragon of maturity) It's bad enough to be a sore loser but it's just twice as bad to be a bad winner.
Anyways I prefer my competitive games to be in environments where people say things like good fight at the end of matches and appreciate the people on the other side for being there to share the fun.
I don't like it the teabag in every FPS. I'm fine with that, but if it too much i'm done.
I say bring it on. If you t-bag me. I will t-bag you back. Want to know what burns a little worse? Getting t-bagged by the guy who you just t-bagged.