Google+

22 comments

  • ThatFanInThePeacoat - March 6, 2012 7:45 a.m.

    It seems like 343 Industries is trying to flesh out Master Chief more. I like that. As someone who has been following Halo since ~2002, Halo 4 needs to really be something on its own in order to catch my interest. I have to admit that my inner fanboy is screaming: "Forerunners! I want Forerunners!"
  • jmcgrotty - March 6, 2012 6:27 a.m.

    I know I'll take flack for how I word this, but... While I am not a fan of Halo (though I own 1, 2 and 3) and despise the cretins that play FPS'ers, this thing is gorgeous. For the sake of the industry, I hope it turns out looking this good when it is released.
  • AGENTJORRRG - March 5, 2012 7:44 p.m.

    The problem with games like Halo or Gears or any big franchise is that you've already given it a pre-emptive 9 in your head. Has Halo ever actually been that great?
  • FlyinHawaiian13 - March 5, 2012 7:48 p.m.

    It had to be great in the first place. Also these games are typically better because big name publishers won't let them fail. You can hop on the hate train all you want, but games like Halo, Gears, and Uncharted are great because their development team is given all the resources they need because they know the game will make money.
  • AGENTJORRRG - March 5, 2012 8:04 p.m.

    I'm not trying to hate, I just don't understand the love* I don't think these big titles are typically better, I just think they are marketed better. Halo 1, for example, is a pretty generic shooter except for regenerating health. It's an average game, as far as I can tell, but with an impenetrable story, so what's the deal? Just because it has more resources doesn't mean it's better. Some of the best, most innovative games since 2000 have been made by a handful of people. Actually, I think a guarantee of profit works in the games detriment! Publishers like to keep the games the same over and over and churn out as many as possible as quickly as possible. They play it safe for the sequel dollar. *except for Uncharted, which is pretty awful
  • CaptCOMMANDO - March 6, 2012 3:04 a.m.

    They are good games. It's solid game-play with pretty graphics. And a lot of people have fun. Does that not equate a 9?
  • igothitwithabulb - March 6, 2012 8:37 a.m.

    But you also have to keep in mind, everything Halo 1 did at the time was brand-new. This was coming off of console shooters being as basic as Perfect Dark, where controls were complex and not nearly as intuitive as PC controls. Halo was the game that standardized dual-stick control, regenerating health, split-screen multiplayer, carrying two weapons at once, hitting the enemy with your gun, vehicles on maps, and tons of other innovations that are in every modern FPS now. Of course it feels standard to us, but it wasn't always this way.
  • EwoksTasteLikeChicken - March 5, 2012 2:52 p.m.

    “We’re absolutely creating multiplayer levels from scratch. These are not play spaces that are recycled from the campaign.” YES, YES, YES!!! I HATED THAT ABOUT REACH I LOVE ALL THE BACKSTORY THAT BUNGIE USED TO PUT INTO THEIR MAPS! *jizzes all over computer*
  • Zeos - March 5, 2012 2:49 p.m.

    Damn that gave me a boner.
  • kistler - March 5, 2012 2:37 p.m.

    i'm hoping for an open beta
  • ZidaneAlcor - March 5, 2012 1:11 p.m.

    As Godly and beautiful as this is, I really hope I'll be able to customize my Spartan's look, a la Reach. I know it's not much, and rather trivial, but I adore cosmetic customization... Just a little something to set me apart from my teammates... Other than that, the only other thing I have to say is SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY.
  • TheHalfanese - March 5, 2012 1:55 p.m.

    Agreed - I'm a sucker for customization, honestly. I don't think they'd take a customization feature out of this game when it has already been well-established in Reach and CE Anniversary. That'd just be a step backwards to me.
  • D0CCON - March 5, 2012 3:03 p.m.

    Looking at screen 16 of 52 makes me think they'll keep the customization. That clearly isn't the chief, so that means there will be multiple Spartans in the story, customizable armor in the multiplayer, or both.
  • DictatorStan - March 5, 2012 4:53 p.m.

    That is what every single Spartan in the multiplayer segments looked like though. I'm positive they won't can customization though.
  • TheHalfanese - March 5, 2012 12:06 p.m.

    My God, I was skeptical about this at first, but now I'm practically sold on the look of the Spartan IVs alone. It's looking great so far!
  • SveedishFeesh - March 5, 2012 10:01 a.m.

    A reason as to why Red and Blue Spartans fight? Sounds interesting, especially since the multiplayer models will be Spartan IVs, whatever this may mean differently... Also, Cheif's going to be fighting Forerunner remnants. I'm calling it.
  • CrashmanX - March 5, 2012 11:22 a.m.

    Well Spartan IVs were essentially the stripped down version of the Spartan IIs like Master Chief. They're not supposed to be as strong or fast. Their armor is also supposed to be A LOT weaker, but it had a active camo built in (Not a very good one). So I dunno.
  • CrashmanX - March 5, 2012 12:36 p.m.

    Er Spartan III's were supposed to be like that. My bad.
  • JADENkOTOR - March 5, 2012 7:02 a.m.

    Heres to hoping you can get in that badass Mech Suit.
  • NicVargus - March 5, 2012 8:20 a.m.

    Funny, I had the exact opposite reaction.

Showing 1-20 of 22 comments

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