According to EGM's Rumor Mill:

"Microsoft may start a war - word is they're making a massively multiplayer online first-person shooter for the 360.  Hmm, wonder what Bungie is up to."

Hmmm so Huxley is going to have some competition eh.

More of the same for the 360 *Yawn*

Hasn't the 360 got enough 1st person shooters by now? seriously, way to over do it.

Massive Multiplayer online euhm....HALO 4?

but, massively mean wth a lot of player+vehicule
something like :

100 vs 100 + tank+aircraft+turrel etc ... ?

"Halo 4: Start another fight"

I wonder what the next halo game will be.  Sure, the story arc for master chief and 'halo' is done, but MS isn't going to let another opportunity to make boatloads of money go away. 

MMOFPS will become a very important genre in the future (as well as a MMOGTA) but it will be a genre plagued by inadequate games that fail to even approach expectations for years. I'm not speaking about this game (or any MMOFPS) in particular, but after playing Planetside it became clear that it was going to take a long time before someone figured out how to mix PVE and PVP gameplay in a MMOFPS in a way that was actually interesting.

Hopefully they pull it off. I've wanted a good MMOFPS War game for ages.

One that incoporated a good FPS shooter system, with vehicles and a fighter/bomber system.

Throw in bots, Ai that goes up or down based on how one side is doing, "quests" that help your nations productivity or hurt the others. (Like bombing factories in WW2.)

That'd be awesome. I'm sure this will be of a lesser scope but it's a step in the right direction.

How would they handle a "war" though?  You die, you respawn.  Endless supply of warriors.

If they made it a contest where you had to fight for each territory and the winning team got the territory, that would be cool though...

Kinda like "COD 3's" War modes.... but massivly.  Get the most checkpoints in a territory and it becomes "yours".  Each territory gives your army more resources and therefore more troops to hold lands until the other group is bottlenecked into their last couple territories where they get blitzed.

Everyone who gets enough EXP gets larger squads, and can drive things like troop transports which decides who gets what amount of support, leading to strategy to make sure somebody doesn't break through your line and drive themselves deep taking a chain of territories headed for your main support territory. 

It's an endless supply of warrirors.  But the Bots and constant fighting back and forth decides it.  As do resources which I would have decide the level of your AI allys equipment, the amount of ammo drops and weapon drops in your lands at depots.  The speed at which they ressuply and what they proved.  Deaths would also cost you resources. 

The winning side will be better equipped, and have more AI allies.   While the otherside would have better AI to even it up just so people don't jump on one side to crush the other and it becomes broken.  A back and forth war until one side breaks through and makes the difference.  Then once one side is defeated it starts all over again, everyone keeps their ranks,  and one side has some serious bragging rights. 

Or atleast that's the way i'd do it... with the hope that a good "war" could last a couple months atleast.  Throw in some "quests" for groups "behind enemy lines" like assassanations but limit their effectiveness by making you require an adjacent territory to take a territory and I think you've got the start of a well rounded game.  I've got some more ideas i'd do to continue the balance increase gameplay and such, but I think that's a good start.