Bungie did not make that game.

Who said Bungie did?

But anyway for the 10th anniversary of Halo:CE 343 industries should released a new 360 version.   Really just thinking campaign, but make campaign online enabled.

AND.... Bungie aren't going to be making Halo 4 anyway

keep it how it is, don't make the game into how cod has turned out.

Before anything else, I want to see what a non-Bungie main Halo game will be like. While I remain optimistic that 343 will do a good job, I still need to experience it to know for sure. I hope they can deliver. 

As far as the frequency of releases, I feel that 2 yrs. should be the minimum.

I also like the idea of exploring more of the Halo universe, but I don't see that happening right away. Master Chief is on deck. 

I think every two years at least. I mean I was fine with every 3 years, that way they have enough time to polish and you get something like halo reach. If they do every year halo will turn into a crappy game. I think its safe to say guys that reach is probably the last good halo game. I don't like the way M$ is talking. I was already thinking that when bungie was leaving. It sucks that the best exclusive M$ has besides gears but that's not there's, is about to turn into call of duty. I do not care for call of duty at all. I don't want halo to be anything like call of duty and to hear them say there inspired by it." sigh" I guess we can all say good by to Halo its been a great 10 years.

On a side note though do you think we will get a halo 1 remake with online mutiplayer and better graphics next year?

The Chief should be in the next game certainly.  If he isn't people are going to be wondering wtf happend.

I would like to see something done with the forerunners and flood for sure, after H4.  But it certainly wouldn't feel like a a Halo game.  Maybe Master Chief gets sent back in time! :P  ok that doesn't sound too good.  But I really love the flood as enemies and hope they show up some soon.

Dude one Producer from Kojima Productions isn't some major talent being added. He's not Kojima.

And just like another member said, they could've easily have hired some pretty average programmer from iD Software or from Naughty Dog. Sure a lot of Bungie devs are at 343 and not saying 343 doesn't have the team or talent, just saying don't overreact to who hired who. It's not a big deal. Just because a dev for example Crytek gets this author who writes Sci Fi novels to write the story for Crysis 2 doesn't mean it's going to be good automatically or amazing rightaway.

While I do agree they could be picking up some no-bodies / mediocre programmers.  But with as many people as they have hired, odds are a lot of them are pretty good.  Simple fact of the matter is this, Microsoft is a software company and I am certain they aren't just going to hire no-bodies or weak programmers all the time just to save a buck.  So in general they probably have been recruiting some of the better "players" in the business.  

Microsoft didn't get where they are at with hiring only lower rung programmers.  

Of course. I know what you mean and it's most probably correct because MS is primarily a software company and they'd obviously choose people who know their shit. But I'm just saying that getting devs from Naughty Dog, Gearbox and saying that's amazing stuff really isn't much of a big deal. If it was such a deal, then I think you'd see a lot of publishers and devs brag about who they just recruited. For example imagine Sony bragging that Media Molecule just hired 3 devs from Rockstar or Valve braggin that they've just recruited 4 devs from Blizzard. Chances are that they're coming from big companies that are known to make big hit games are good devs but just because they're from a big company with a big name doesn't automatically mean they're always amazing and talented.