only two games in that series are truly bad. Otherwise they are ok to awesome.

Bad Company IS awesome

I'm not a big fan of Halo online, but i love it for the story and the offline co-op, but i really hope they put a lot more work into that mode with Halo4. But Halo3 is a great game, the game is also one of the best looking games this gen too. And i own the game but never found the theater mode and used it until i had played the story mode about 5 times. This mode was really great and i hope they expand on it for the next Halo.

JaggedSac said: starcraft said: Leetgeek said: I predict that Halo 4 will not look this good: Is that Goldeneye 64?   I wasn't impressed with Resistance 2.  That big monster battle was not very good.  The thing was incredibly slow and seemed to just look at you.  It picked you up a couple of times and you shoot it in the mouth and it puts you down.  Really lame.  I was, however, impressed with KZ 2.  The graphics looks great and the shooting looked great too.

Yeah, I have to agree with that one. However, it's still going to be ~3 months before the game comes out and we are talking about Insomniac here so you never know what the actual game will look like.

OT: What I would like to see in Halo 4 (or whatever it's called) is 10-12 player co-op with 64-player online matches and a single-player campaign that doesn't totally suck. I don't know if it's a fact, but it seems to me that a lot of the reason Halo sells so well is because of it's awesome storyline, which is better than Star Trek and possibly even better than Star Wars. This is not to say that Halo games don't have good multi-player, but I can hardly imagine that nearly 10 million people bought Halo 3 only because of it's multi-player, which is clearly inferior to CoD4's offering. I think M$ (and possible Bungie) may have lost sight of this important fact. If they make a great multi-player/co-op game, but sacrifice the single player, they are walking away from the aspect of the game that makes it great. I just hope they don't do that.

Right. So we should understand and establish that milking a series, by producing many new games in the series, even spinoffs, may (or may not) be a bad thing. What matters is that care and quality is put into the title. This defines some series such as Battlefield from the Mega Man series - one has endless extras that are cash-ins, while the other has a decent bit of quality.

Going forward, Halo only has 3 shipped titles, and 1 this year. As long as Halo Wars, despite being an RTS, is quality, it will be great. What if HW is the best console-side RTS in the history of gaming? How will this be a bad thing? We should appreciate MS and Halo, and Ensemble, if HW is quality, because Microsoft/Bungie will have done the right thing: Use a blockbuster series to further promote innovation in genres.

Two words:

Cluster. Fuck.

Even getting four experienced players going full steam ahead in Halo 3 is unwieldy at times. People are dying left and right from friendly fire, simply because so much is happening at once. It gets really chaotic later in the game.

Still, I'll give 8 player co-op a go and even if it doesn't work that well, it should provide for some hilarious moments.

I get really tired of this. I've been playing shooters since Wolfenstein and Halo does what it's supposed to do and does it very well.

The style of play may not be your cup of tea but saying that it has succeeded based on its advertising budget is ridiculous.

Personally, the series would have a hard time cracking my top ten shooters of all time list but that's entirely based on my personal preferences. I won't slight the game for not providing the exact experience I prefer. I accept it for what it is and appreciate how good Bungie is at what they do.

If you need confirmation that Bungie is a top-tier developer in the run-n-gun FPS genre, just go play a game like Haze. Free Radical tried to take on Halo head-on and failed miserably in every regard.

I hope they're making that rumored darker game in the Halo universe.... I'd be interested in playing a game without the Master Chief and Cortana.

Still, I thought Bungie said that they were tired of making Halo games and that's why they split from Microsoft, but still make games for them.

But there is a major difference between the co-op mode of Halo and the Co-op one of R2.  The Co-op mode in Halo is the same exact story that you pay in single player, the R2 campaign is made around the 8players not the other way around.  Each player will also have the chance to play as different units, Medic, sniper, sec-ops, engineer and what ever else there is.  The Co-op mode also relies on team work and if you don't work as a team you will die, this will not turn into a clusterfuck.

EDIT: You will also earn exp points to level of up your character and earn special things, maybe classed based or whatever.

Pushing the boundaries "even further"?  Maybe relative to the Halo games. 

Resistance 2, KZ 2, and MAG will already be out.