- The Hegemon
- |
- Exalted Member
We gotta go to the crappy town where I'm the hero.
Frankly, I think it has more to do with Bungie not wanting anyone else to screw up Halo. Halo Wars was beautiful in the cutscenes but everything else was kinda crappy. The story was mediocre, and the characters were two-dimensional stereotypes. Bungie's probably in the "If you want to get something done right, you gotta do it yourself" mindset.
As for a new IP, They're probably working on that sort of thing, but you have to remember that it takes time and money to develop a new IP and Microsoft owns the Halo IP. I'm sure we'll hear about a non-Halo Bungie game in the future, but for the time being we've got plenty of non-Halo bungie games to play. You know, Pathways, Myth, Marathon. Good, enjoyable games? If you don't like playing games with old graphics, well, a few people remade Pathways in the Doom 3 engine, but I don't really know about the others. I guess you'll have to settle for sprites. Oh well.
Halo is still Bungie's baby, as much as they don't want to admit it, and there's a lot of ground for them to cover, and a lot of money for them to make. It's a business as much as it is a fanservice. Frankly, HALO: REACH looks interesting because it's completely seperate from the events of the Halo trilogy whereas HALO 3: ODST is not.
What I mean by that, is HALO: REACH presumably takes place during events only mentioned in the books and alluded to in the games. HALO 3: ODST takes place in New Mombasa directly after the events of HALO 2. In other words, Bungie is taking a different approach to a well-defined universe. If they really wanted to milk the Halo franchise they'd just use the same formula again and again and again, but they aren't. They (hopefully) keeping it original and intriguing.
Has anyone else noticed that the HALO: REACH teaser image looks a LOT like a movie poster? Is it just me or has Bungie started to employ a more cinematic presentation to their stuff?