This generation has probably been the biggest and best generation of console gaming we have ever seen. With Nintendo bringing a whole new dimension to gaming with the Wii and Microsoft and Sony bringing us High Definition gaming, it has been an extraordinary few years in gaming history.
The Wii is now a retro console. Let’s get nostalgic about an often maligned system.
Crazy to think the WII is to the Switch 2, as the NES was to the WII back then. 20 Year difference.
My wife asks me to bust it out (heh) everyone once in a while to play bowling and tennis with the kids. There was a ton of slop on it but some good stuff as well.
Wii was great but boy howdy did it cause Microsoft to go on a dark walk with the Kinect and the disastrous XBox One launch that they arguably never recovered from.
Not nostalgic for me.. I was there.. anyone who wasnt a little kid realized it was a gamecube with shit tacked onto it, it was the "joke" system and was well below even the switch in terms of comparing it to the latest machines at the time. The machine was well loved by young people and "casual gamers" who now remember it 20 years on, or in most cases more of its sales came in the 15-20 years ago range not right at launch- but again its not nostalgic for people who were "gamers" then really, just for those who ended up with one in their house, the games , graphics, interface and online features were archaic already in 2006.
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.
Gears of War's creator has spoken out against the trend of turning established franchises into live services, urging developers to focus on single-player experiences.
Too bad he didn't have this opinion when he chased trends with Lawbreakers. Or when he chased trends with Radical Heights.
He learned from the mistake or he wouldn’t be advocating for more single player experiences. I find this refreshing in a world where we often see people so stubborn that they tend to double down on a mistake which results in making things even worse. Seriously, good for him!
@Popsicle
Oh for sure, better late than never. And better to somewhat own up to your mistakes, rather than just blaming your release window, or advertising partners, or gamers lol.
@Popsicle
Of course we will never know his intentions, but it's hard to believe he is just a naive agent that is learning from his mistakes.
He could have done one himself after Gears of War but he did Lawbreakers…look how that turned out.
Jawbreakers would have been a better name! Heck, I might just go and trademark that right now.
You're missing the point. His studio's short lifespan is what *inspired* him to make this comment in the first place.
Oh I know the point...I'm just stating the obvious and how stupid he was in the beginning to jump on a trend he had no real experience in. A first person hero shooter with heavy GaaS elements is a lot different than the multiplayer in Gears of War.
He'd have been better creating something like Gears of War again, a great single player story and a good online mode.
-"A first person hero shooter with heavy GaaS elements is a lot different than the multiplayer in Gears of War."
I mean... you're kinda muddying terms when Gears has always had a strong multiplayer component. Even if I grant you that, Cliffy B started cementing himself at Epic with Unreal Tournament, which was among the earliest shooter series to have "proto-GaaS elements" (downloadable maps, cosmetics, special editions that bundle stuff together). Lawbreakers and Radical Heights (were it finished) weren't major career shifts to him like they would be for, say, Fumito Ueda.
Regardless of that, it's still kinda useless to state the obvious when CliffyB himself made his comments with the benefit of hindsight already.
Look, these a-hole publishers can do this, in fact I want them to, so they can f*ck around and find out and fail hard scaring away everyone else from doing this live service push.
This industry is run by some of the dumbest corporate pieces of sh*t I’ve ever seen. They spend stupid amount of money with literally nothing that stands out from games from the previous generation (look at Arkham Knight to the $200 mill Suicide Squad comparison vids), you’re overpaying devs, and you focus on games as a service to milk consumers that a lot of them grew up off traditional games. We’re not idiots, we sniff this sh*t out and won’t touch it.
So, what’s your answer to not getting a ROI? Raise game prices and double down on GaaS so you can suck your consumers dry. That model only works for some games and even then how in hell do you expect it to work with multiple games!? They’re ruining the damn hobby with this corporate greed.
Cut back on dev budgets, cut back on how much your staff is getting paid, until sales for games bring in a profit. That’s the answer and make some games that feel like there’s passion behind them, not some cookie cut up game that feels like the entire existence behind it is to offer as little as it can with repetitive bullsh*t and selling off all this content throughout its life. It’s gross.
Games do bring in a profit, it's the greed that is killing the industry. Here is a fact, live service games overall make more, significantly more money than single player games
What you should be asking is executives not wanting continuous growth or firing them. Saying devs should be fired when those who are fitting the bills and setting unrealistic expectations would make things worse. What do y9u think would happen if they released say, 30 single player games and over half of them fail? You are going after the wrong crowd.
About time he learned. I guess he finally stopped blaming everyone else and took accountability for his mistakes and realized that people really don't care that much for trends or live service.
Halo 3? Come on. It's a great game, but innovative??
Halo 3 may not have been innovative in itself, but its influence on the Xbox 360's success is great.