• insaneshane - October 9, 2012 1:37 p.m.

    Dude you have to check this out!
  • RedOutlive. - October 6, 2012 6:31 a.m.

    Console manufacturers hit a wall, the next gen that will be considered a leap from the 360/PS3 (since we don't know how the WiiU will fare in that area) will be too expensive to sell for the "acceptable" price range for the mainstream audience. Developers are using all tricks on the book to keep 30FPS at 720p on the current gen. It is clear as day this longevity is artificial. Of course people will not abandon their consoles but they're more than ready to see what the future brings us.
  • Jacko415 - October 6, 2012 8:29 p.m.

    Yeah they keep sacrificing little things to maintain functionality while making it look like its an advancement. Compare halo 3's Anti-Aliasing to Reach's. Sure Reach looks grittier, but 3 looked a lot better as a whole.
  • Redeater - October 5, 2012 9:08 p.m.

    I love how much shit COD gets for churning out games all the time yet Halo rarely gets any flack. Halo 3, ODST, Halo Wars, Halo Reach, Halo Anniversary have all been released within a 5 year period....and now we have Halo 4. I'm not bashing Halo fans but I am suggesting they take a good long look in the mirror next time they rage post about COD. As for myself, I've pretty much been done with Halo after I finished Halo 3. I no longer support new purchases but I do pick them up for $15 in the bargain bin when I am bored.
  • PanicJester - October 6, 2012 2:57 p.m.

    Well, yeah but Halo wars wasn't a FPS, ODST was an add on and Halo Combat Evolved Anniversary was a remake. As where cod has had a completely new game(sorta) every year since 2003, But I'm not complaining I'm still enjoying both series.
  • Redeater - October 6, 2012 11:57 p.m.

    ODST was an add on the same way Black Ops was an add on. I'm guessing that is the logic you are using since both were full games with full single player, full multi player and both retailed as full priced launch games. Halo Wars was still a canon game that "progressed" the story matter how poorly written. As for Halo Anniversary? It was still a Halo game that launched for the same price as new Nintendo Games ($40) and according to Bungie it was like experiencing a new game...hence the hefty price tag. I understand what you are trying to say but by your logic annual releases don't exist. We have only had 2 MW games san MWBO1&2 and we have only had 2 Assassin's Creed games.
  • PanicJester - October 7, 2012 2:13 p.m.

    So your saying ODST wasn't an add-on because it had too much extra content? and unlike H3 was to H3:ODST, Black Ops wasn't called MW:BO nor did it share any content that a past Cod games had, Activision never even tried to perceive it as an add-on. As for Halo Anniversary I'm not sure why you would debate that it was a new game as it was all most exactly the same as Halo 1 and the cost of the game doesn't determine if it's a new game or not. My point with Halo Wars is that it is a totally different game genre as where Cod games are all the same game genre. Lastly, there is a difference in adding content to an existing game then just making a side game like Assassin's Creed did.
  • zombi3grim - October 5, 2012 8:47 p.m.

    I think hes right. Graphics can only get so good before they hit a limit and I think that limit is pretty much reached. Halo 4 looks AMAZING and if they can still pull that kind of graphical power off with the Xbox 360, I say there is NO need to rush the next gen.
  • Japanaman - October 5, 2012 7:42 p.m.

    Honestly, I don't see how current consoles limit a game potential.
  • ZenRobot - October 5, 2012 6:53 p.m.

    This just in: Microsoft employee says Microsoft is Microsoft!
  • Divine Paladin - October 5, 2012 3:39 p.m.

    Meanwhile, developers who have made many more games than 343 (a whopping 1) are saying that the consoles don't have much life left. I'm not sure who I believe. Given, Frank O'Connor worked on previous Halos, but I'm not sure I'll take his opinion over the mass opinions of developers.
  • zombi3grim - October 5, 2012 8:45 p.m. Tim Sweeney, CEO of Epic Games and creator of the Unreal Engine, which as you may know has also built a new one. If HE says there are still 6-8 years left in a console life cycle, since pretty much just about EVERY major game uses some iteration of Unreal, if you dont take 343 Industrys (which are made up of ex-bungie employees and other video game vets, its not their first game made, trust me) then you damn well better take this guys.
  • Divine Paladin - October 7, 2012 2:46 p.m.

    Unreal 3, yes, but Unreal 4 just came out. Let's face it, consoles won't be able to run Unreal 4, and now that it's out, I'm sure Sweeny will backtrack on his words and start saying that the next gen should just come already so that Epic can make money off of Unreal 4. However, you do make a point. I've seen most developers on one side of the fence, but a few trusted ones have opted toward the less-beaten trail.
  • zombi3grim - October 7, 2012 3:46 p.m.

    Um, he JUST said that. Look at the date. Why would he say that if consoles couldnt run his new engine? The Wii U will be able to run it. If the Wii U, which really isnt THAT much more powerful then current consoles, then Im sure current ones can run it.
  • Redeater - October 5, 2012 9:10 p.m.

    Your sound logic has no place on this website.

Showing 1-18 of 18 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000


Connect with Facebook

Log in using Facebook to share comments, games, status update and other activity easily with your Facebook feed.