PDA

View Full Version : Halo 3... Confirmed?


Battlecruiser
05-15-2005, 10:39 PM
http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/05/15/news_6124592.html

Here is a quote from Time magazine
Note to the hard-core faithful: the next version of Halo will not, repeat not, be ready in time for the launch of Xbox 360. It will be part of the all-important second wave next spring. 'It's perfect,' Gates says, radiant with bloodlust. 'The day Sony launches [the new PlayStation], and they walk right into Halo 3.

It is said to come out next spring.

Nuts
05-16-2005, 7:10 AM
Two things spring to mind. One, that console looks absolutely amazing standing on it's end, especially with the mutli color led's. Secondly, I believe that Microsoft is slowly burying other consoles, and I applaud the person responsible for the timing of Halo3.

Jedi_Templar
05-16-2005, 1:53 PM
That's just brutal for Sony to have Halo 3 come out on the same day as the PS3. Oh well, Microsoft didn't get to it's position without busting some nuts... and violating monopoy laws.

/M1cr0$0ft 1$ t3h 3v!l!!!1!!

madman5
05-16-2005, 2:28 PM
Well isn't Microsoft being a bunch of assholes. Seeing as how Halo3 would most likly not effect the PS3, (software vs. hardware) Gates is just trying to seem like a tactical genius. Instead he will piss off a bunch of Playstation fans, and possibly lose buyers.

My end thought: Halo3 will be ready for launch, but will be delaid to "mess up" PS3 launch.

Darkslayer633
05-16-2005, 3:22 PM
Hahahahahahhahaahahahahah I laugh at your hopes to crush the ps3, with its outstanding cell processor and many games for focal point instead of little xbox or x360 saying play me I've got halo. The ps3 will own the x360 and any other system that attempts to rise it's head.

Spartan-II
05-16-2005, 11:38 PM
I think once again the Xbox360 will crush all Playstation opposition, and that means I have to save up about 300$ to get an X-360 and Halo3.. -_-

Wick3d
05-17-2005, 12:01 AM
BIll gates is a fool if he thinks his 360 can touch the ps3. The ONLY reason his 'box was minorly succesful over the ps2 was because he spent all the time touting hardware superiority. with the new systems being about equal in specs now, or even the ps3 being a little better, 360 will fail.

Jedi_Templar
05-17-2005, 12:14 AM
stfu fanboys! :)

It's all a matter of games. It doesn't make any difference if your system has X number of processors if the games suck ass.

Spartan-II
05-17-2005, 12:19 AM
I agree Jedi, it's a given that you should have good games to go with your system. The PS3 may be equal on specs with the Xbox, but i'm betting the 360 will bend it over one knee and spank it. That and the fact that Halo3 will probably bring in atleast as many copies as Halo2 did, leads to the inevitable fact that Microsoft > Sony.

SystemOfADown
05-17-2005, 7:53 PM
Spank that ass Microsoft!!!!!!!!!!!!:P

Calibur
05-17-2005, 9:02 PM
You are all fools. Can you people not see it, Microsoft and Sony are falsely advertising their own new sysytems so that behind the shadows they can develop a "hybrid" system that will rule the video gaming world for years to come. The new system will be so advanced that it will be the only electronic device you will ever need. Not only will it be able to play video games, cds, dvds, view jpegs, mp3 player, download games of the internet, but also be able to provide 500 cable TV channels including premium channels such as HBO and Stars, receive phone calls, text messaging, live video messaging, heat you dinner, vacum the carpet, shave your beard, walk the dog, pay your taxes, drive you to work, and even make love to your wife/significant other.

Yeah I know wishful thinking, but what the hey. As for which system is better I think I'll just wait for them to come out, then go to my local net cafe and play them both on 56" inch HD TVs with around 10 other people for only a dollar an hour. Then I'll judge which is better.

theblueknight
05-17-2005, 10:38 PM
ITS ALL A CONSPIRACY red and blue are the same. oops sorry wrong thing. but seriously all that matters is games. my favorite game to play on my PS2 is FINAL FANTASY. the original. end of story. i would play it on the NES, but i dont have one. all that matters is games.

Spartan-II
05-17-2005, 10:42 PM
Oh, since you said it in such a succint way, it must be true!

Darkslayer633
05-17-2005, 10:47 PM
hahaha xbox360 to quote Tv more like xbox 1.5. have any of oyu seen the trailer for killzone 2 on the ps3 It is above and beyond anything seen in the gaming world this far.
In my opinion it takes god of war's uber graphics and beats them by at least double.

Spartan-II
05-17-2005, 10:59 PM
God of War wasn't anything special, and of course, if you've had 5 years to strectch a systems capacity, you should have atleast decent graphics. Halo2 is still better though, play the first campaign level, and just watch the colors meld before you. Although the movies are a little choppy, Bungie sacrificed Uber crisp graphics so they could actually load the next level during the cinematic to create a smoother gaming experience.

Calibur
05-17-2005, 11:01 PM
hahaha xbox360 to quote Tv more like xbox 1.5. have any of oyu seen the trailer for killzone 2 on the ps3 It is above and beyond anything seen in the gaming world this far.
In my opinion it takes god of war's uber graphics and beats them by at least double.

Thats what they all say then two months later the competition comes up with something even more graphically stunning as so on and so forth. But thats competition for you, not that its a bad thing. The more competition the better the products.

Personaly I would like for both systems to stay at around the same level, because if one does manage to beat the other then they are free to boost their prices up with out the worry of competition, which will not be a good thing for alot of people except ofcourse them.


And todays Key Word is...........
(Hint starts with a "C".)

Battlecruiser
05-18-2005, 1:33 AM
hahaha xbox360 to quote Tv more like xbox 1.5. have any of oyu seen the trailer for killzone 2 on the ps3 It is above and beyond anything seen in the gaming world this far.
In my opinion it takes god of war's uber graphics and beats them by at least double.
I saw the trailer you are talking about. The whole thing is computer rendered... Thats why there aren't any crosshairs. Also IGN confirmed the whole thing is prerendered. So those graphics don't mean anything, and Killzone 2 will probably be as bad as the first one.

madman5
05-18-2005, 4:38 PM
Well guess what...I sure as hell hope that Bungie can get the fucking game out with damn good everything. The second Halo was a huge misstep with missing features and an ending that only 2 people liked. Bungie really did almost nothing special in Halo2 except for online play and more weapons & maps.

Forerunner
05-19-2005, 6:47 PM
PS3 vs XBox360

Winner? XBox360

Why? The PS3 controller looks like ass.

ZeroDarkStar
05-19-2005, 7:08 PM
PS3's single core "Cell" proccessor doesn't have ANYTHING on 3 3.0 ghz PowerPC proccessors. Even the high end Macs don't have a single 3.0 ghz proccessor, let alone three.

Apple's best Mac: http://www.apple.com/powermac/

Two 2.7s. X360 has THREE 3.0. Of course, all of this means nothing without games, which the X360 seems have in spades. :D

BlackHawk
05-19-2005, 7:36 PM
hahaha xbox360 to quote Tv more like xbox 1.5. have any of oyu seen the trailer for killzone 2 on the ps3 It is above and beyond anything seen in the gaming world this far.
In my opinion it takes god of war's uber graphics and beats them by at least double.

That trailer for Killzone 2 is obviously rendered. It's a cinematic, not the actual game. And what the hell does the "xbox360 to quote TV, more like xbox 1.5" quote mean? It's on par with the PS3, so if you're going to say that then it's PS2.5...

However I am neutral, I have an Xbox, but with the next gen consoles I'm not sure what I will end up getting. But I'm leaning towards Xbox 360.

Vhaeraun
05-19-2005, 7:38 PM
PS3's single core "Cell" proccessor doesn't have ANYTHING on 3 3.0 ghz PowerPC proccessors. Even the high end Macs don't have a single 3.0 ghz proccessor, let alone three.

Apple's best Mac: http://www.apple.com/powermac/

Two 2.7s. X360 has THREE 3.0. Of course, all of this means nothing without games, which the X360 seems have in spades. :D


Seems to me the Cell Processor is 8ghz on a single processor >_>

Which means, of course, that despite X360 having 3 3ghz, the Cell processor will come out of top.

However, no one will actually know how either system will stand up to the other, as official specs on PS3 have yet to be released. When those come out, then people can begin comparing closely <_<

ZeroDarkStar
05-19-2005, 8:56 PM
Seems to me the Cell Processor is 8ghz on a single processor >_>

Isn't IBM making the chip? If IBM had created an 8ghz proccessor when Intel's barely breaking 4, I'd put all my money in IBM's stock RIGHT NOW.

Thus, I seriously doubt it's clock speed is 8, most likely near 3.5 with the "Cell" technology improving overall speed and computing power.

BTW, 3 3.0ghz proccessors would still beat a single 8ghz in any computing problem.

Battlecruiser
05-20-2005, 5:02 PM
Guys.. this isn't a thread on the next generation consoles. Stay on topic please.

Forerunner
05-21-2005, 11:25 AM
PS3's single core "Cell" proccessor doesn't have ANYTHING on 3 3.0 ghz PowerPC proccessors. Even the high end Macs don't have a single 3.0 ghz proccessor, let alone three.

Apple's best Mac: http://www.apple.com/powermac/

Two 2.7s. X360 has THREE 3.0. Of course, all of this means nothing without games, which the X360 seems have in spades. :D

True, but the best mac is a 64BIT machine, not 32. This of course throws your entire argument out of whack. Among other things, this means mac's can break that 4Gb limit on RAM.

Anyway, to get back on topic, All of the next gen consoles look awesome. Im loving the shift toward wireless ocntrollers, assuming they work as well as the wavebird. The one problem with all of this is that I dont know about you guys, but I dont buy consoles for the heck of it. People generally buy consoles for the games. These machines can be superfast, but until IU start seeing sweet games for them, it's not entirely all that exciting. Not to say they dont sound awesome :-)

One thing though, did they say weather or not XBox360 was backward compatible?

IceFlare
05-23-2005, 5:20 PM
I thot this was about halo3 not xbox360 vs ps3 u spamming fanboys
and ps3 got nothing on xbox360 wont even touch xbox360 cuz its just that good. i mean come on wireless controllers, wireless headsets ya theyre addons to current systems but now they come default on the new ones. and talks of wireless power? thru bluetooth? and most likely xbox360 gonna have 64bit anyways cuz its new technology and microsfot with their bottomless pit of money can afford an investment into a new tech to see if its worthy. And its confirmed xbox360 is backwards compatible... cuz after playing halo6 on the xbox360 like a million times ud get tired and wanna stick it old school and play halo 1 boo ya

theblueknight
05-25-2005, 12:46 AM
but uh yeah is Halo 3 gonna happen? and is it gonna happen on time?



or should we all continue having nerdgasms over the PS3 and teh XBOX360? i mean why not just get the two systems in a hotel room together and get teh PBOX33 or some gay crap like that.

Forerunner
05-25-2005, 9:51 AM
or should we all continue having nerdgasms over the PS3 and teh XBOX360? i mean why not just get the two systems in a hotel room together and get teh PBOX33 or some gay crap like that.

:o Hehe, nerdgasm...

IceFlare
05-25-2005, 6:22 PM
my thoughts exactly

Sauvastika
06-15-2005, 2:37 PM
PS3's single core "Cell" proccessor doesn't have ANYTHING on 3 3.0 ghz PowerPC proccessors. Even the high end Macs don't have a single 3.0 ghz proccessor, let alone three.

Apple's best Mac: http://www.apple.com/powermac/

Two 2.7s. X360 has THREE 3.0. Of course, all of this means nothing without games, which the X360 seems have in spades. :D

Powerful processors means jack ****. It's all about the games, and seeing how many games for the Xbox 360 interest me (like 1), there's only the PS3 and Revolution in my sights.

btw: The whole Halo series is seriously overrated.

Markpyro
06-15-2005, 5:14 PM
Sauvastika- Have you beaten Halo 2 on legendary? Have you gotten an online halo account to level fifteen? If you havent even done one of those, I doubt you can judge the series truthfully.

Yes, I also believe that we should stop arguing over consoles. There is another thread where you can pointlessly argue over this. The subject of this thread is Halo 3, stop spamming.

IceFlare
06-15-2005, 5:56 PM
So your saying suav that you would rather play say final fantasy on the atari, its all about the games, the system specs apparently mean jack shit

Sauvastika
06-16-2005, 2:30 AM
Sauvastika- Have you beaten Halo 2 on legendary? Have you gotten an online halo account to level fifteen? If you havent even done one of those, I doubt you can judge the series truthfully.

Yes, I also believe that we should stop arguing over consoles. There is another thread where you can pointlessly argue over this. The subject of this thread is Halo 3, stop spamming.

I think that if I'm bored before I get there, then it's not near rewarding enough to continue playing.

So your saying suav that you would rather play say final fantasy on the atari, its all about the games, the system specs apparently mean jack shit

Look at the current systems, undoubtedly, the Xbox is the most powerful of the three, yet the games are at about the same level as the PS2 and Gamecube. I really doubt having a faster processor will magically make the games more fun. The minor technological differences between the current systems and between the next-gen system don't add up to a lot.

Comparing the Atari to a current console, there's a whole slew of differences that actually matter. Graphics, memory, etc. There's not just a processor difference there.

Edit: It's also about making the best out of what's given. Take the Gameboy for example, It was technologically inferior to it's counterpart at it's launch, the Atari Lynx, but it managed to win out due to popular games and marketing skill.

Forerunner
06-18-2005, 9:54 PM
Sauvastika- Have you beaten Halo 2 on legendary? Have you gotten an online halo account to level fifteen? If you havent even done one of those, I doubt you can judge the series truthfully.

Am I the only one that finds it odd that you put beating legendary on the same level as geting to level 15 on live? :shiftyr:

singo
06-18-2005, 10:56 PM
Am I the only one who finds it odd that you cannot judge the halo series without having X-box live?


"AHA!, I havelive so my opinion is more important!"



Live isnt the only part of the game you know.

Forerunner
06-19-2005, 7:19 PM
Am I the only one who finds it odd that you cannot judge the halo series without having X-box live?


"AHA!, I havelive so my opinion is more important!"



Live isnt the only part of the game you know.

Did I miss something or is this aimed at me? I don't know where you pulled all of that from, but I never even implied anything about live vs the rest of the game.

I just pointed out how :
getting to level 15 = easy
beating legendary = hard.

:poke:

Modred
06-19-2005, 8:23 PM
Did I miss something or is this aimed at me? I don't know where you pulled all of that from, but I never even implied anything about live vs the rest of the game.
I believe his general gist was the sentiment widely expressed around here that you cannot judge Halo unless you have wasted more than a year of your life playing Live.* Apparently, playing the campaign or split screen or system link does not count as playing.

I think Halo 3 releasing on the same day as the PS3 might do more damage to Sony than you think. Consider the almost violent support Halo has recieved in this thread alone, not to mention here on Warboards altogether. Multiply that several hundredfold to replicate the effect a new Halo has on the gaming market. The PS3 fans will avoid the stores just to avoid the brain numbing effects of "HALO IS THE MOST AWESOME GAME EVER!!! SONY SUCKS!!! NINTENDO IS FOR LITTLE KIDS!! SONY HAS NOTHING BUT FINAL FANTASY!!! XBOX360 IS TEH SHIT!!!" yelled all across the store.

*Slight exaggeration inserted for effect.

Spartan-II
06-20-2005, 12:45 AM
I'm not belittling those who don't have live, it's just a game-enriching experience and one of the only games that has held my attention for 6+ months.

ZeroDarkStar
06-20-2005, 1:50 AM
I believe his general gist was the sentiment widely expressed around here that you cannot judge Halo unless you have wasted more than a year of your life playing Live.* Apparently, playing the campaign or split screen or system link does not count as playing.

I think Halo 3 releasing on the same day as the PS3 might do more damage to Sony than you think. Consider the almost violent support Halo has recieved in this thread alone, not to mention here on Warboards altogether. Multiply that several hundredfold to replicate the effect a new Halo has on the gaming market. The PS3 fans will avoid the stores just to avoid the brain numbing effects of "HALO IS THE MOST AWESOME GAME EVER!!! SONY SUCKS!!! NINTENDO IS FOR LITTLE KIDS!! SONY HAS NOTHING BUT FINAL FANTASY!!! XBOX360 IS TEH SHIT!!!" yelled all across the store.

*Slight exaggeration inserted for effect.

That and the fact that Halo 2 was the highest single day selling game ever (not to mention the other fact that Halo 2 continues to sell extremely well to this day).