Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

New Halo 2 Maps April 25th

Zonk posted more than 9 years ago | from the more-places-to-cause-pain dept.

XBox (Games) 41

Gamespot.com has word that the first set of new Halo 2 maps will be available for download on April 25th, with a second set being made available on June 28th. From the article: "The two free maps are titled Containment and Warlock. Containment is a massive level blanketed with snow, and Warlock was influenced by the Halo: Combat Evolved map Wizard. The Killtacular Pack will include Turf and Sanctuary, and it will sell for $5.99."

cancel ×

41 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

They will be FREE on June 28th. (3, Informative)

larsoncc (461660) | more than 9 years ago | (#12283658)

According to Bungie [bungie.net] , the Killtacular map pack will be free just two months after its release.

(I have a vacation in May, so I think I'm waiting!)

As for the update [stageselect.com] , it's already been pushed to everyone (yesterday). It's changed the game dramatically, encouraging a lot of grenade play.

Other items of note:

Videos of the maps [ign.com] , and a 3D [QuickTime] rotating picture of Warlock here [bungie.net] .

Re:They will be FREE on June 28th. (2, Informative)

Have Blue (616) | more than 9 years ago | (#12286054)

There's more to the story...
  • April 25th: Bonus pack free (2 maps), Killtacular pack $5.99 (2 maps).
  • June 28th: Killtacular pack free, third map pack $12 (5 maps), DVD $19.99 (all 9 maps and offline extras).
  • "Late summer": All 9 maps free over XBL.

Cool, but... (2, Interesting)

Fred Or Alive (738779) | more than 9 years ago | (#12283662)

I hope when they add the new maps to matchmaking they have a bit of a spring clean of the existing game modes. The same old gametypes gets boring after a while, especially as some are just crap anyway (any objective game on Midship, 4v4 games on Coagulation[1]). Some more variety would be nice, I hope they don't just stick the new maps in and leave all the old setups in place.

Now, I'm planning to get the retail disc version, now should I buy the first two premium maps anyway? Decisions, Decisions...

[1] Starting with something a bit meatier than an SMG would help as well.

Sell? (1)

Reignking (832642) | more than 9 years ago | (#12283667)

They are selling new maps??? Is this a first, other than (real) expansions? At least expansions usually include new features, as well.

Re:Sell? (2, Interesting)

larsoncc (461660) | more than 9 years ago | (#12283766)

Actually, no, this isn't new even for XBox. Some titles that have pay content are MechAssault, XBox Music Mixer, Live! Arcade, and some others.

Don't worry though, they've said that the maps will eventually be free, either in late summer or later in the year.

They got a sponsorship from Mountain Dew. I do wonder how that will shake out - it could be that you're presented with some manner of banner ad before you're allowed to download the maps.

On April Fool's, Bungie had a pretty funny update about how the new maps would all be branded with Mountain Dew tags, and that you could have tags on your soldier saying Mountain Dew. In typical fashion, people freaked not realizing it was a joke.

Re:Sell? (1)

MilenCent (219397) | more than 9 years ago | (#12284627)

In typical fashion, people freaked not realizing it was a joke.

I don't blame them, what with "the great taste of Sprite" invading Anarchy Online (great title Zonk!). Or with in-game advertising considered to be such a fast-growing opportunity right now.

There are things that are irrational to get freaked about, and then there's this. What with everyone and his brother in the game industry falling all over themselves to brand game elements (even Nintendo put branding in Pikmin 2!), I'm not surprised it's a touchy issue for some people.

Re:Sell? (1)

Walker_Boh_Druid (864617) | more than 9 years ago | (#12283852)

Yeah, SC: Pandora Tomorrow had some content that had to be payed for too. A real bummer, I couldnt get onto my live account before i bought it. Seems kind of unfair, really.

Re:Sell? (1)

LordNimon (85072) | more than 9 years ago | (#12284389)

That content for SC:PT is now available for free.

Re:Sell? (1)

Fred Or Alive (738779) | more than 9 years ago | (#12283918)

Yep, they're selling the new maps (although they'll eventually become free, assuming you subscribe to Xbox Live[1]). We are talking about Microsoft, they're in it for the money, and know a certain portion of their market will indeed pay for new maps. They seem to want to do more of this with the next generation. Of course making maps isn't free, but some other companies do seem to absorb the cost of their free addons.

Personally I'm planning on getting the disc version of the maps, seeing as I do play a lot of Halo 2, I do want to play the new maps early, plus I'm interested in the extras. I'm not sure if I'll buy the first two premium maps though...

I'm not sure if other Xbox Live games charge just for maps / levels (some content is free of course), but I don't have many games with premium content. I do have Project Gotham, and it's premium content for adds some new cars as well as new cities to race in.

[1] Conspiracy theorists might note that it appears the maps will become free at about the same time the Xbox '360' comes out... Make of that what you will...

Re:Sell? (1)

bigman2003 (671309) | more than 9 years ago | (#12287280)

So is Microsoft a bunch of money-grubbing assholes for charging for these maps...

Or is Microsoft a monopolist, who is using their bankroll by under-writing the cost of the Xbox.

Just trying to get the story straight...god knows I want to be up to date on my groupthink!

Sounds Good. (1)

Walker_Boh_Druid (864617) | more than 9 years ago | (#12283790)

This is a much needed expansion. The old maps do get a bit boring after playing on them so long. I think I might just wait out the maps that aren't free, especially if they're going to become free anyway.

So thats why... (2, Insightful)

Irashtar (836973) | more than 9 years ago | (#12283952)

Halo2 is Xbox only. Just keep releasing maps and mods until the cows come home. If it was on PC, they would have alot more trouble getting more revinue from the game.

Uh...Who Gives A Shit? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12284140)

A kiddie fps on a piece of shit console is getting some new maps?

Wow!

$$$ doesn't add up (1)

pretzelsofwar (770401) | more than 9 years ago | (#12284455)

Well I could buy the 2 maps for $5.99 a piece and then later buy the other maps for $11.99 totaling $23.97, or I could wait two months and get a cd with everything on it (therefore if my box went down or i mess something up i still have the cd) for $19.99, or just buy the map pack and download the rest for $11.99... I don't think they have thought this one through. Sure they are going to squeeze some money out of some people with that kind of talk, but I'm sure most people can wait. I mean $6 for a map that will be free in under two months, you can't even buy halo 1 for less then $10 of its origional price! Anyways this map pack is way overdue, i think most people will believe that they can wait, especially for something that probably should have been in the origional game.

Re:$$$ doesn't add up (1)

hollismb (817357) | more than 9 years ago | (#12284623)

The two maps aren't 5.99 each. You get both maps for a single charge of 5.99. So technically, you save money by purchasing them over Xbox Live.

Re:$$$ doesn't add up (1)

imitier (674794) | more than 9 years ago | (#12284646)

It's $5.99 for a pack of 2 maps (Sanctuary and Turf). That's $5.99 for both, not $5.99 for each.

Re:$$$ doesn't add up (1)

MBraynard (653724) | more than 9 years ago | (#12285364)

If you already payed for them and screwed up/formatted your xbox, you would be able to re-DL them for free.

Re:$$$ doesn't add up (1)

bigman2003 (671309) | more than 9 years ago | (#12287305)

How many people pre-ordered Halo 2?

They'll be paying for the maps.

One reason for not getting the new maps ... (4, Interesting)

LordNimon (85072) | more than 9 years ago | (#12284461)

... is if you're not a frequently player of Halo 2 online. Memorizing the map is a great way to be a better Halo 2 player. Infrequent players, like myself, have no chance against the hard-core players, because we'll never memorize all the maps. Chances are, the more advanced the player, the more likely he'll get the new map, because he'll be bored with the current ones. This means that if you don't have the new maps, you won't be able to join games with the players that do. This improves your odds of playing against people who know as much as you do about the map you're on.

(For those of you who don't play Halo 2: when you play online in a random game, you can't choose the map.)

Re:One reason for not getting the new maps ... (1)

Erbo (384) | more than 9 years ago | (#12285250)

Also, in order to use the new maps in online matchmaking play (i.e. ranked games or training games), Bungie would have to add gametypes that use the new maps to the default playlists. Which I gather they won't do until they're pretty sure the new maps are in wide distribution. News is forthcoming "shortly" on the update of the matchmaking playlists.

Re:One reason for not getting the new maps ... (1)

hollismb (817357) | more than 9 years ago | (#12286025)

Well, sorta. The two free maps will soon be in the regular matchmaking playlists, but there will also be a 'premium only' playlist for people who payed for the maps. Eventually, by the end of summer, they'll all be re-merged into the same playlists once the mapps are all available for free.

Re:One reason for not getting the new maps ... (1)

Erbo (384) | more than 9 years ago | (#12287192)

Sounds reasonable to me (and a good reason for me to go ahead and get the new maps right away), but I'm hoping to see some confirmation of this soon on bungie.net.

(Of course, I still pretty much suck at multiplayer Halo 2, so whom am I kidding? :-) )

Re:One reason for not getting the new maps ... (1)

hollismb (817357) | more than 9 years ago | (#12287285)

There already was confirmation in the weekly update [bungie.net] that announced the new maps. I was pretty much paraphrasing:

We're still finalizing our plans but we can give you a general idea of what to expect. The existing core playlists will remain intact. The first two free maps, Containment and Warlock, will be integrated into the appropriate existing playlists. Since the 2 premium maps are "premium" and won't necessarily be on everyone's Xbox right away, we can't add them to the core playlists without creating all sorts of problems. Instead, we will be rolling out a special short-term playlist that will only be accessible for people who download the premium maps. Players interested in getting into matchmade games on Turf and Sanctuary will be able to do so via this special playlist. Eventually, as Turf and Sanctuary become free for everyone, they will be added back to the core playlists and the premium playlist will go away.

When the remaining premium maps become available in June, a similar process will occur except we will have more than one premium playlist to accommodate the 5 new maps. Over time, as those maps become available for free, they will be integrated into the core playlists and the premium playlists will be phased out.

Re:One reason for not getting the new maps ... (1)

Erbo (384) | more than 9 years ago | (#12287352)

OK, that's the basic info, but looks like there will be more details later. Good deal. (Apparently, they're doing more than just integrating the new maps into the existing playlists...they'll be adding a new 2-on-2 playlist, among other things.)

Or you could wait and get it for free regardless.. (1)

MMaestro (585010) | more than 9 years ago | (#12286314)

For those who can bear waiting, the Killtacular Pack will be free on June 28.

Unless you plan on canceling your Xbox Live subscription before June 28, you're going to get 4 new maps whether you bother to learn them or not. (The first 2 are free immediately, the other two become free on June 28 if you read the report.)

Unfortunately, it doesn't say whether the last 5 will eventually be free as well.

Hmm... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12285484)

It's too bad that halo 2 is the fucking gayest game ever released. Who the fuck plays this horseshit and calls themself a man? No one, that's who.

Re:Hmm... (1)

hollismb (817357) | more than 9 years ago | (#12286264)

Clearly not you!

Deja vu... (1)

Schrockwell (867776) | more than 9 years ago | (#12288843)

"Containment is a massive level blanketed with snow"

A massive level blanketed with snow, huh? Hmmm... sounds a lot like Sidewinder to me.
Let's hope this new winter wonderland turns out to be a Sidewinder equivalent.

Compare to CS:S (0, Offtopic)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 9 years ago | (#12289378)

You may not like the Counter-Strike gameplay, but boy, giving the SDK away does WONDERS to increase the amount of content. It's not just Source -- there are some good things for Doom 3 and UT'04 as well.

But, naturally, on a console, you get a tiny little trickle of upgrades and maps, all "official".

I'm sorry, but if you've got the hardware, HL2 is just a better deal.

Half-Life 2, for $50, gets me:
- five or ten great games
- free online gameplay
- free upgrades
- two official maps a month
- custom content
- custom servers
- new games

Halo 2, for $50 + $5/mo, gets me:
- one great game
- online gameplay (not free)
- upgrades (not free)
- two official maps every six months

So, for now, I'll just borrow my friend's xbox now and then.

Re:Compare to CS:S (2, Interesting)

rhuntley12 (621658) | more than 9 years ago | (#12289653)

I won't argue that HL2 isn't good, I don't have it, but you forget to mention on Halo 2. -Couch and coffee table to hold beers for comfort -Stereo system I spent several thousand on -Large screen TV -Ability to just plug it in and almost instantly play with friends/relatives

Re:Compare to CS:S (1)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 9 years ago | (#12290058)

TV/Sterio can be hooked to a computer, too. That's what a TiVo is, after all.

Using Hibernate, I would argue that it's almost as fast for me to get into a CS game as it is for me to get into a Halo 2 xbox live game. I think my xbox live takes way longer than normal to sign in, but that wasn't my fault, so it's still no excuse for all the logos and crap and bad networking that go into it.

Plus, I can upgrade the computer to make it go faster. I can't upgrade the xbox, except to buy a new one later.

I suppose that if you don't have a good computer, the inscentive isn't as great, but I'm an avid gamer and programmer, so I would much rather spend less money and focus a few minutes a week to avoiding spyware and such, or trying to get games to work under Cedega, than spend $5/mo to Microsoft for a game that just isn't that great, once you get done with the campaign.

Many people will disagree on that, but the campaign had tons of varied situations, and I always seem to get into the exact same situations in multiplayer. Plus, I liked the story. But the only thing good about the xbox controller vs. WASD is that WASD doesn't fit so nicely on a couch.

Couch isn't quite as practical, you'd have to get some sort of lap/tv dinner table for the keyboard/mouse, but I'm usually bettew with those anyway.

I get easily bored playing with friends/relatives. I mean, it's a great feature, but still, I want to play with good friends/relatives, which means that they have to own the game.

Oh, and one last shot: I can add multiple video cards to the computer, and thus use multiple screens. I don't know if any games will take advantage of this, but I think you could easily do a split-screen type thing on a Linux PC, with multiple kvm terminals. I usually prefer to hang out with people who have their own boxes anyway, but it'd be an interesting project.

I'm not knocking Halo 2 -- it's a great game -- but for purely economic reasons, I would never buy it, only rent or borrow an xbox.

Re:Compare to CS:S (1)

rhuntley12 (621658) | more than 9 years ago | (#12290409)

The problem with hooking a stereo upto your PC is, your sort of limited on the surround sound, as I have mine in my living room, be awkward having a PC setup in there for the surround sound and what not. Also some audio snobs claim PC will ruin the sound, my ears aren't that good.

I'm not saying I don't like PC gaming, I love it. Most of my time is spent playing on PC. It's nice to just lounge on the couch and be a bit more comfortable. While controller isn't as accurate as keyboard/mouse, it's much more comfortable to kick back and use a controller. Also once you get used to it can get really good with a controller, you can't tell difference between people with controller and mouse.(Smartjoy lets you use mouse on xbox)

I agree with you, PC's are much more fun, but I also like getting on Halo 2 with my brothers and a few rl friends, drinking a beer and kicking back. Plus, a lot of less PC literate people, it's much easier to just hook up an xbox. Some games look gorgeous in HD and they are only going to get better. Plus on a 50+ inch widescreen?

As for Halo 2 campaign, I would never defend it, I hated halo 2. I like it purely for the Xbox live. If friends/family had other xbox games I like would much rather play them instead. Wolfenstein was sweet on xbox(Same as pc basically) and dead or alive ultimate is pure sex.

I guess what I'm trying to get at is they both have their places and good games. And working at 3am with nothing to do really sucks. While I don't like have to pay for xbox live, $60 for a year I don't even notice myself.

Surround? (1)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 9 years ago | (#12295578)

I see most your other points, but the audio argument is weak.

For maybe one year's worth of xbox live if you're a REALLY poor shopper, you can find a Sound Blaster Audigy. Surround is built in.

I got an sblive awhile ago. Sounds good on some surround PC speakers I got at the same time. It was ridiculously easy -- color-coded and everything. It'd be somewhat more complicated with a real surround setup with an amp and all, but not as much as you'd think.

Ditto with the HD video out. My monitor resolution is set to 1600x1200. If my video card can handle that, do you really think it wouldn't be able to handle your widescreen?

Mouse on xbox will never be as good as on pc. For one thing, the adapters all have to emulate a joystick, so people would be better, but not that much -- not as much as if you could play against some actual PC port.

The $60 a year I would notice, because I'd spend it on the yearly version of UT. Maps, mods, unlimited net play, and native Linux support.

Also, I hate supporting Microsoft, especially on this. The reason there are good games for the Xbox is that Microsoft can pay people to do "only on xbox". No one else has a slogan like that. Also, I'm sure they've reserved the right to change the price at any time and not tell you about it, or to disable certain games or otherwise screw you over.

If enough people were to boycott Xbox Live (not that they ever will), Microsoft would be forced to abandon this approach, and developers would be forced to develop for real platforms. Not that I actually have a hope of that happening, but I'd like to be able to play Halo 2 without spending over $100 on a console.

I do enjoy kicking back on the couch with a console and some friends, playing Mario Kart 64 and the like, but I wish I could do that (with split-screen and everything) on a PC. I'd want it hooked up in the TV room anyway, so I could invite some Otaku over for an Anime marathon. (Good, undiscovered Anime can really only be gotten through fansubs.)

But, I'm about to be a starving college student anyway, which means I'll just have a PC and maybe a PS2 for DDR, if I can find somewhere to play. No subscriptions, barely any new games, and maybe a RAM upgrade every couple years. So this is all hypothetical.

Re:Compare to CS:S (1)

Erbo (384) | more than 9 years ago | (#12294426)

Bear in mind that, for that $5/month, you get access to play all Xbox Live-enabled games, not just Halo 2. That means things like Project Gotham Racing 2, MechAssault, ESPN NHL 2K5, Tetris Worlds Live, and World Championship Poker (to use examples from my own game collection), all for one price.

Pretty good deal, if you ask me...and, the more games you have that are Live-enabled, the better a deal it is.

Re:Compare to CS:S (1)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 9 years ago | (#12295350)

Halo 2 is the only game that it's worth having an xbox for, or that it's worth playing on xbox. All other games at least have PC versions, and most games on the PC or PS2 have no subscription fees at all.

It's only a good deal if you don't have the gaming computer, or if you play Halo 2 professionally.

For my money, I'd rather put that $5/mo into a new game every year -- say, one of the UT line. Unlimited online gameplay, tons of kick-ass mods, and native Linux support -- and they release a new version every year.

For a racing game, the Midnight Clubs have unlimited free online gameplay -- on the PS2.

Re:Compare to CS:S (1)

AlexMax2742 (602517) | more than 9 years ago | (#12298658)

I'll pay the extra money for a much higher overall quality of connection, an integrated friends list in every single game, and voice chat in every single game. The PS2's online play is a joke. There are no standards, so it's up to the company making the game to put in online play to it's own satisfaction, and a good percentage of the time it's not so hot. And "Most games are on PC anyway" Have you taken a look at the XBox's library.....at all? Sure, a few of them get PC ports, but a quite sizable majority of the games avalable for Xbox are avalable only Xbox, or are avalable in inferior form on Gamecube and PS2. Or, is a PC port, which is nothing new to consoles (See the origional Deus Ex for PS2 or Unreal Tournament, which came out for both PS2 and Dreamcast)

Off the top of my head, I can only think of five games that started out on the Xbox and later got ported to PC and are worth buying on PC. KotoR I and II (easy ports since it essentially used a modified NWN engine), Riddick and arguably Thief III (for bugfixes and new maps) and Halo (most half-assed PC port ever, but Internet Play and custom maps might keep you interested) Might sound like a lot, but think about the hunderds of games in the Xbox's library, and it's really nothing special.

Re:Compare to CS:S (1)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 9 years ago | (#12301914)

There are no standards on the PC, either. I mean, standards are nice, but xbox live has problems, at least in Halo2. Takes something like two minutes for it to find and join a game, and standby glitches still work. The lack of custom servers means you are depending on Bungee to eliminate cheaters.

I'd rather not support Microsoft's monopoly on the games which are "only on xbox". I guarentee that not a one of those developers made the choice for any reason other than money from Microsoft.

There are plenty of games -- good games, unique games -- which are only on PS2, or only on PC, or only on Gamecube. I don't see a Final Fantasy or a Zelda or a MMORPG for the xbox.

Don't speak to me of half-assed ports. Doom 3 on xbox? 'Nuff said.

And, the "only on xbox" does help put games on PC anyway, because if you use that logo, you're not legally allowed to port it to any other consoles, so it can ONLY have an xbox and a PC port.

Anyway, what I'm really saying is, there's really only one game series that I would consider playing on the Xbox, and that's Halo. And I won't pay for it, because I hate the politics involved. Bungee was going to make a Linux port before they got bought out...

Re:Compare to CS:S (1)

AlexMax2742 (602517) | more than 9 years ago | (#12319968)

There are no standards on the PC, either. I mean, standards are nice, but xbox live has problems, at least in Halo2. Takes something like two minutes for it to find and join a game, and standby glitches still work. The lack of custom servers means you are depending on Bungee to eliminate cheaters.

Two minutes to join a game is a small price to pay to ensure that the entire community doesn't go the way of Halo PC (BLOOD GULCH CTF 24/7) or Unreal Tournament (Instagib CTF on Facing Worlds 24/7) And while standby glitches still work, they're nowhere near as useful, especially on team games. And there are still custom servers, that's why parties and friends lists were invented.

There are no set standards on the PC. Of course not. You usually don't pay to play games over the PC either. The closest we've got it Steam, and while I love Steam, it has some serious problems with things like Friends Lists and VAC.

I'd rather not support Microsoft's monopoly on the games which are "only on xbox". I guarentee that not a one of those developers made the choice for any reason other than money from Microsoft.

This is ridiculous. Aside from your laughable use of "Monopoly" (Microsoft has a monopoly on some things, sure, but on Exclsuvie games? Are you kidding me?) You have no way to back this up, and besides, all four major game playing systems have their own exclusives. You're acting like Microsoft is holding a big green bag of cash on a stick out in front of their exclusive developers. The burden of proof is on you to prove that they're only in this for the money.

There are plenty of games -- good games, unique games -- which are only on PS2, or only on PC, or only on Gamecube. I don't see a Final Fantasy or a Zelda or a MMORPG for the xbox.

Considering Xbox has only has one generation to build up mascot games like Zelda or Final Fantasy, I don't think you're making a very fair comparison. I guess Halo could be an exception to this, but then again, that's a huge anomoly. Somehow, even being the new kid on the block doesn't prevent the Xbox from getting great games like Jade Empire and Ninja Gaiden.

MMORPG's on a console? What are the alternatives? Everquest: Online Adventures (AHAHAHAHAHAHAH) and Final Fantasy XI (which is not my cup of tea, though I do understand it has a huge playerbase). And I'm not just an anti-MMORPG nut either, I throughly enjoyed World of Warcraft and EVE Online, as well as the MMORPG-like persistant servers of Neverwinter Nights.

Lack of quirky games? Chalk that up to lack of japanese developers. Games like Katamari Damancy are quicky as all get out, so the japanese developers will naturally develop said quirky game for the platform that will give it it's biggest audience, so it will have a greater chance of not tanking. Things are getting better though, I can't wait to pick up Super Monkey Ball Deluxe for the XBox, and to get all the SEGA/Smilebit classics that got put out on Xbox (If you want quirky, you can't get more quirky than those). And it seems like more and more japanese companies are jumping on the XBox bandwagon, which only means good news for the Xbox 2.

Don't speak to me of half-assed ports. Doom 3 on xbox? 'Nuff said.

Doom 3 was terrible for other reasons. And I would love for you to try playing Doom 3 on a middle of the road machine from 2001. (And no, the guy who ran Doom 3 on his 2x Voodoo2 doesn't count)

Also, Deus Ex on PS2. Now THAT was a joke. It was actually a great game on PC too...

And, the "only on xbox" does help put games on PC anyway, because if you use that logo, you're not legally allowed to port it to any other consoles, so it can ONLY have an xbox and a PC port.

I agree with you on this, but why is the legal terminology relivent? It's not like these developers really really strive to get their games on all three systems, but are smacked down by the almighty Microsft's legal team.

Anyway, what I'm really saying is, there's really only one game series that I would consider playing on the Xbox, and that's Halo. And I won't pay for it, because I hate the politics involved. Bungee was going to make a Linux port before they got bought out... So what? Halo was a totally different game pre-Microsoft buyout, and Bungie also said that if Microsoft hadn't bought them out, they would have probably had to have scrapped Halo completely. The pre-Microsft demo did look interesting, but I don't mind 'setteling' with what we got instead.

You're probably right. Mostly. (1)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 9 years ago | (#12322446)

Yeah, lots of games have more popular maps. CS:S is dust and iceworld 24/7, but you can still find a good game, and the steady flow of "official" maps makes it always possible to find a good server with good ping.

I like being able to find a server playing a map that I want to play.

I also like being able to create a server with negative gravity, or unlimited redeemers, or... See where I'm going with this? Halo 2 has some interesting custom options, but not even close to what you get with even the tamest of PC FPSes. I'm addicted to admin_slap, with the pimpslap mod...

Microsoft's monopoly? Absolutely. I don't want to put money into a company that has a monopoly over anything, and I really don't want to give them an edge in the console market -- if anyone has a monopoly on that, we'll all be subscribing to play single-player games at MMORPG-like prices.

A middle of the road machine from 2001? You're right, I'd never try Doom 3 on that. And neither should id, which is why I call it a half-assed port. It's the port that was never meant to be.

Counter-Strike for Xbox -- now that was a laugh. They MUST have been able to do better than that.

You're right that developers aren't being smacked down by Microsoft's legal team. I'm pointing out that I don't see the same thing happening anywhere else. Not that it doesn't happen, but I keep hearing more and more stories of people jumping ship to the xbox, and not the other way around. Which seems dangerous.

Also, given the resources, what developer wouldn't want to do all three consoles? Or at least ps2/xbox/pc?

I'm curious. If Bungie had gone along without Microsoft, would Halo have gone anywhere? Probably not, but the most addicting thing about Halo was the level design and gameplay, which is something that doesn't cost as much money as pretty graphics. And Halo is successful enough right now that Bungie could easily stand alone as a separate company.

Re:You're probably right. Mostly. (1)

AlexMax2742 (602517) | more than 9 years ago | (#12383534)

Microsoft's monopoly? Absolutely. I don't want to put money into a company that has a monopoly over anything, and I really don't want to give them an edge in the console market -- if anyone has a monopoly on that, we'll all be subscribing to play single-player games at MMORPG-like prices. This is one of two things I have issue with. You can't really concern yourself with stuff like that. Do you really know who you are supporting when you are doing any given thing? There are so many people who are involved with the creation of any product that I guarentee you somwhere along the line someone was related to something that did something you didn't like. I've learned to just buy on one factor, if the product itself is worth my money, not if whatever corperation is caught up in scandal. If what they are doing is wrong, karma will come back and bite them in the ass. I'm curious. If Bungie had gone along without Microsoft, would Halo have gone anywhere? Probably not, but the most addicting thing about Halo was the level design and gameplay, which is something that doesn't cost as much money as pretty graphics. And Halo is successful enough right now that Bungie could easily stand alone as a separate company. So let's see here. Microsoft has single handedly raised Bungie from some obscure company that made some awesome games but didn't get any attention to one of the leading names in the gaming industry. And then you're saying that Bungie should basically turn around and say "fuck you" to the people who gave them their big break, just so they can start making games for the PC? Bungie probably would have gone under had it not been for Microsoft's intervention, and I'd much rather see Bungie stick around. We have too many game development houses dying or being assimilated already.

Assimilated is the problem. (1)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 9 years ago | (#12385782)

There's a huge difference between not supporting things I don't agree with, which are obviously bad, and scrutinizing every single product to make sure no one involved was evil. And if more people thought the way I did, we'd still have plenty of bad things in the world, but the bigger ones (Microsoft, for one) would fall.

I like being the karma. Or, as Gandhi said, "You must be the change you wish to see in the world."

You'd rather see Bungie stick around. So would I. And they have been assimilated, haven't they?

No, what I'm saying is that they've already contributed a lot to Microsoft, so I'd consider MS more than payed off for raising Bungie from obscurity. The same thing should apply to them which applies to me. If they don't like the way Microsoft does business, then they should not continue to support Microsoft.

Maybe some people at MS would take that personally. Maybe they should wake up, too, and split off. Hell, if Microsoft split into one company for each of its departments, it'd probably be better for the consumer, especially if the top people (Gates, Ballmer, etc) were tarred and feathered. But, IANAE (I Am Not An Economist.)

I'm also saying that it's entirely possible that Bungie could have made things work without MS, because once you get past the pretty graphics, the thing that really stands out about the Halo games is the gameplay and the level design, which could have been done without nearly as much cash.
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?