Top
960°

OXM rumor: Gearbox developing Halo 4 as launch title for next Xbox

Remember back in February when Gearbox Software big boss Randy Pitchford teased his studio's next project as something "big"? Well, not just "big" but something that was "even bigger" than anything Gearbox is currently working on? Well, the kids at OXM sure remembered and they sent their spies deep undercover into Gearbox territory and came back with one heck of a rumor for their October issue: Gearbox is working on Halo 4 as a launch title for the next Xbox (NextBox?).

With Bungie admittedly uninterested in creating Halo games ad nauseum, and Gearbox one of the industry's top FPS developers, we've certainly heard crazier rumors. And there are few licenses that would get a studio chieftain to inadvertently slam his own games in development. Whatever the project is, Pitchford has said he'll be directing it himself, adding, "When you find out what this is, you'll likely agree that I can't oversell this one." Nope, you probably couldn't Randy. Overselling Halo is Microsoft's job anyway; you guys just make with the shooting of the aliens ... no, the other aliens.

The story is too old to be commented.
morganfell3704d ago

Well well, I have only posted this news on this board 4 times that I can count.

TheColbertinator3704d ago

Yeah I have heard this rumor myself.Hopefully Microsoft isn't getting the next console ready for next year because I think the 360 has not yet reached its limit so it would be unfair of Microsoft to rush things simply for profit

XboxOZ3603704d ago

SO, it doesn't mean it can't be approached ina different fashion, simply because someone else has mentioned it perhaps a different context.

If that was the case, no news of any kind would get legs or increase as once it's posted, then by your definition, it shouldn't be discussed again . .

SOrt of misses the point really.

If you did post items on it in the past, that's great, but perhaps more ppl are now aware of it, and have different views on it and want to share those views. I'd be adding my views on it if I had of already posted an item on it in a similar way beforehand. As many may not have read the earlier one . . .

Just share your news rather than worry about who did what when and who beat who to the punch. If we want to stay informed, we need to be kept up todate with news, even if it's only slightly newer news.

Share with us, don't pout in the corner

GameDev3704d ago

it is you who is missing the point, MOrgan's point is that it was ignored by the xbots because he is a PS3 supporter.

Kratos Spartan3704d ago

Your opinions are not facts. Stop trying to convince people otherwise. You provide no links for your claims.

XboxOZ3603703d ago

It's really hard to give links to the printed media mate, so I'll direct you to two publications, and if you can be bothered to read them, you'll find the information in there that i've quoted or mentioned.

They are Opening The Xbox and Xbox 360 Uncloaked, both written by renowned game journalist Dean Takahashi . . . who was given complete access to MS records and information when he secured the the go ahead to write the books on the xbox platform.

Not ALL things are on the net, and not all things ever will be, Not every book published is available on the net in full content, so not supplying a link does not automatically make a "statement" false of untrue.

ANd no, I don't ignor his post because he's a PS3 supporter, in actual fact, if you read, I amed him for MORE comments rather than to shut up. Perhaps other "may" have,but not all Xbox supporters are like that, just the same as not all PS3 fans are like that.

If you're a "gamer", then you will be open to everyone's opinions and comments, so it applies to both sides of the fence mate.

We've had news items blocked and reported so they get shut down by groups of PS3 supporters, simply because the item was Xbox related. So it applies to both sides. Gamers, in the real sense of the word will be open to listening to all information, fanboys on the otherhand, irrespective of the platform they support are blinkered fools and are a right pain in the arse.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3703d ago
BubblesDAVERAGE3704d ago (Edited 3704d ago )

i would hope for another 4 years with the 360...its a special system that will fair better than the 360 who cares if they end up in third as long as they profit

Arsenic133704d ago

This doesn't really say that the 360 is being phased out soon. The next game is just slated for the next Xbox. I think its a good job, maybe Halo can finally be a serious and more engaging game.

Snukadaman_3704d ago

It takes about that long to make a game....maybe 3 years....4 years with the extra work ...its possible.

BubblesDAVERAGE3704d ago

Why not this gen...I mean graphics this gen did not make the same jump as last gen so w8ing a while console games wont care unless the i think for at least 7 years because graphics aren't moving as fast as they once were i mean look at cyrsis and then gears of war and metal gear they look better but not those 3000 dollar computer better ..simply it just aint worth it

Bnet3433704d ago (Edited 3704d ago )

It's a rumor guys, calm down.

Edit: @ Bubbles

Why not this gen? Well, a Halo game at launch would sell systems like crazy. It would be a smart move by Microsoft and give them a huge boost.

n4gzz3704d ago

Hmm !! could be better or worse. Either way its good for me 'coz i really tried to like halo but its just didn't appeal me. I played Halo 1 for about 2 hours and I gave up. Didn't even try 2 or 3. If the game mechanism is different on 4, i might give it try again. After all its such a big franchise. Now, I am not saying Halo is bad game, in fact it is great game. Most of my friend, they are in love with Halo series. I just have different taste when it comes to FPS.

RemmM3704d ago (Edited 3704d ago )

AGAIN I was right....Halo 4 coming to X Box 720 :) I predict FF7 Remake is coming for PS4.

XboxOZ3603704d ago (Edited 3704d ago )

There is a distinct difference between a "life cycle" of a gaming console, and a "viable sales period before new tech being included"

The first Xbox was simply designed as a stepping stone to introduce the platform to developers, and most importantly, to get XboxLIVE off the ground and in peoples home PRIOR to releasing the 360.

Which btw, was being designed and built from as early as 2003, not long after the 1st-Gen Xbox was released in Nov 2002. The x720 began its life two weeks before the release of the 360 in Nov '05 (US release) when the main team was split in half. Half went with J Allard onto the ill-fated Zune Project, the other half went straight into the designing and building of the x720 (seems that's the official code name for it btw). Source: Opening The Xbox and Xbox 360 Unleashed by Dean Takahashi.

The "Life Cycle" of the 360 is around 10 years, MS has said this and they mean it, but that does not mean a new console will not be released during that time, which in turn has its own life cycle, so that each overlap the other. There needs to be overlap to allow for merging of games from one to the other, so that developers get to grips with one and then have time to get to know the new one, rather than waiting 10 yrs and then making a new console.

The next x720 should be with ups as early as Nov '09 or as late ast last financial quarter of '09, which is early 2010.

The new unified GPU/CPU motherboard called Valhalla will be the motherboard for the x720 and is earmarked for release in that window just mentioned. That would fall inline with Gearbox working on a Halo Project (FPS) and allow both the game and the x720 time for development.

Please don't confuse life cycle with development cycle. The two are completely different, and need to treated as such. We can't have such a long period between design cycles now as we once had, if they did (Sony, MS, Nintendo) they would be behind the eight ball within a few years to a point they simply couldn't catch up.

The older release cycle of 5 yrs or more on console is now dead, at best it will be 4 yrs for the majors. SOny ARE working on the PS4 as we speak, and have been for some time, and if you check, you'll find job applications looking for designers and programmers working of the "next iteration of Sony gaming hardware" dah . .!

The Wii will have a rebuild as well, that's agiven . .as Nintendo to NOT hold on to the belief youhaveto have a console, be it handheld of shelf, for a 5 yr period. They re-released a new DS every 2 years, and they sold big time.

XboxOZ3603704d ago

To those that disagree, how can you disagree with 'facts' . . . duoh, some people simply disagree to disagree ... Fact is, MS IS making the x720, Sony ARE making the PS4, Nintendo IS making a Wii second iteration.

Fact is, MS will be using the Valhalla's unified Motherboard on the new x720. Which is due for release lat '09 or early 2010. Which means

That the x720 will be released around that time - hello.

Sony's PS4 is planned for release around mid to lat 2010 if all goes well, they started on it no sooner than the second wave of PS3's were released, and Ken K was "retired" from Sony.

So how can one dispute fact. The only rumour about the issue is, will Gearbox's IP be the new Halo (whatever number it is) and when will it be released.

My best bet scenario is for the first quarter of 2010 alongside the release of the x720. As this would fit in perfectly with the time needed to develop the game, which they are no doubt already working on and have been for some time. That would give them at the very least 3 years all up to work on the project. It's not as if it's a whole new concept, so the normal 4-5 yr period for game development is shortened somewhat.

They will use a few game releases before then to continue the growth of the 360, but be holding off on a few "big guns" for the x720 release. The x720 will not complicate earlier games at all, and will simply ad enhancement to the current games available . . . no emulation etc, just drop in and play, but may well look and run better.

The Playstation platform did much the same thing as the Xbox did. The first Playstation was a test case, they found out what they needed to know and moved to the next logical console, which is the one they then gave a solid "life cycle" so as to carry the platform into the obvious next iteration (PS3).

The 1st-Gen Xbox was the initial test unit, had a simple life span of 3-4 yrs tops, to be completely phased out once the 360 got in the door, usually 12mth after release. Guess what, 12 moths after the 360 was released, production stopped on the Xbox. It didn't fail, it did it's job, just like the very first Playstation did.

There's some excellent books out there that if you read them (yes, I know, it's a new concept not many have grasped yet - reading that is) that if you did read, you'd find most of this information there is for your use and knowledge . . .

AAACE53704d ago (Edited 3704d ago )

The 360 should continue along the same path as the ps2. The xbox 1 was just a problem for MS which is why they left it behind. Too much has been invested in the 360, and MS won't let that pass.

Once the new console comes out, the 360 will be targeted more towards kids like what happened with ps2!

Remember MS wants to achieve what Sony did with the ps1 and ps2, so logically that means they will follow what was done in the past!

***Oh, you guys want a rumor, I got one for ya... The next Halo games story will revolve aroung the female character Nichole(from DOA 4), and will have totally new enemies, environments and gameplay!***

InMyOpinion3704d ago (Edited 3704d ago )

Most people on N4G prefer fiction before facts. Maybe they just can't deal with the truth? I think many Sony fans get upset by your comment cause they firmly believe that Sony aren't going to release a new console in 10 years, hence the ten year lifespan they are bragging about. It's a statement full of ambiguity. Most of us realize that they will be forced to put out a new console as soon as Microsoft decides to do it. Bubbles for writing great comments!

Bangladesh3704d ago (Edited 3704d ago )

That was a very interesting read, and I think your points are not only valid, but should be obvious to anyone that keeps up with gaming.

You spoke of the x720 using a CPU/GPU hybrid. This troubles me because I have yet to see a hybrid chip that was any good. The Emotion Engine was a hybrid, and the Cell was originally going to be a hybrid (the RSX was added after Sony spent 3 years trying to make it perform to the level of current generation GPU's to no avail) , neither of which have proven to be an overly good game development solution. Don't you think the use of a hybrid would ruin any chance of current generation 360 games being backwards compatible next generation?

edit- also is there somewhere that I could read up on this hybrid chip?

jspc19893704d ago

Finally someone who has something inbetween their ears! lol.

But!, at the same time you were wrong about one thing. Msoft didnt discontinue the original xbox purely because that was just a test run, they discontinued it because Nvidia stopped making the graphics chips which means Msoft didn't really get much choice in the matter.

Think about they lost around $4 billion last gen, do you honestly think they just shrugged that under the carpet by choice. The fact is the last xbox could have still been going today just as the ps2 is, had msoft not relied on third party hardware manufacturers.

Fortunately Msoft isnt exactly brittle when it comes to the size of the companies very deep pockets, so the xbox brand isnt going anywhere, which I for one am happy about :-), as apart from hardware faults which are in a way - inexcusable - overall they are a company that likes to deliver, even if they more focused on profits than anything else (which is understandable as there isnt a single company on earth that isnt).

masterg3704d ago (Edited 3704d ago )

How in the world can anybody take this as good news. (If true)

If Halo 4 is in development for the next Xbox, it would mean MS had given up on this gen. It would mean they are trying to rush out the next console just like they did with this one.

It means Gears of war 3 is going down the same road.
It means the best IP's the 360 has to offer is no longer coming with new games to the 360.
It means every body with a 360 would be left in the dust just like they did with the original Xbox.

How in the world can anybody take this as good news.

People need to remember that technology advancement made from 2000 to 2005 is way higher than the technology advancement made from 2005 to 2010. Processing power is not doubling every year like it did back then.

TheExecutive3704d ago (Edited 3704d ago )

3 more years for the 360? well if they overlap systems and still support the 360, then yes. But SIX years for just the 360? wha? The technology is already starting to look a little older, 3 more years of it? I HIGHLY doubt it. Sales have progressively gone down from the 1st year to the 2nd and I am almost positive that they will sell less this year than they did last year.

The numbers just dont add up to the xbox3 coming out in 2012. I would say Q3 2010 at the earliest and Q4 2011 at the latest. If MS tries to hold out for 3 more years its gonna be in trouble.

ABSOLUTELY no one could possibly argue that the 360 was built for a 6 year lifecycle. It just wasnt built that way. There is nothing wrong with the hardware choices the 360 made unless they try and last for 6 years.

Bangladesh3704d ago (Edited 3704d ago )

No, to your whole post. If that's the case then the PS3 is outdated as well. If you remember correctly, the PS3 was scheduled to release Spring 06 (3 monthes after 360). But was delayed because of licensing issues with blu-ray and poor yields on blu-ray diodes.

You can't buy a 360 for $129, so there is plenty of life cycle left. 360 will be around 10 years.

dantesparda3704d ago

Um, Im I the only one who noticed they said that "Gearbox" is going to be making it!?

TheExecutive3704d ago (Edited 3704d ago )

bangladesh??

10 years of DVD? are you serious? So you are telling me that MS is going to support the 360 for 10 years? I dont think so. The 360 was never, ever, built to last that long.

So no to your whole post. Please explain to me who will be playing games on a 3 core, DVD format system in 2016? That is f*cking insanity. The 360 CANNOT STAND BY ITSELF until 2012. There is no way that will happen. It may be SUPPORTED but the 720 will be out by 2011 at the latest.

Secondly, I never mentioned the PS3. That is a different console with different goals.

johnnypatras3704d ago

XboxOZ360, very nice writing ;-) but you've also written some things that are not right(no offence, please).
Just to clarify things, the unified GPU/CPU motherboard, code-named Valhalla, is not the next XBOX. It will ( at least, according to rumors) be just further shrinking of the Xbox 360, leading to cost reductions, less heat dissipation, less power consumption,possibly integration of the power supply in the box etc. etc., making the console more profitable.
I would expect the new XBOX to ship around 2011, personally.
Sorry for my English guys, not my native language.

XboxOZ3603703d ago (Edited 3703d ago )

Thanks mate, re the graphics chip change.

As early as Spring '03, MS Xbox-Div went on the hunt for a new CPU/GPU for the 360 . . yes, that early, as they had to sign up thousands of contracts for parts from the simplest screws, right down to the main casing once a design was accepted. (there ended up being 9 final designs btw)

One of the BIG reasons MS changed was that Nvidia were not willing to look at alternatives in the areas MS were, and most importantly, not willing to allow MS to have rights over the chip once produced. MS wanted Nvidia to construct a "custome designed chip, but to have the cost kept within a certain budget so as not to blow the final Retail Price off the scale.

As quoted by Marv Burkett, chief financial officer at Nvidia at the timer "They wanted a custom design, but they didn't want to pay the price".

The both chip companies were vying for the deal right up until the very last minute, and in fact Nvidia actually thought they had the deal, only to find out that IBM had beaten them to the punch with a last minute pitch to MS Xbox-Div by offering MS ownership over their chipset and the commitment to work on a Unified Chip for the x720.

Intel had a chip in the works at the time that code named Tejas, a Pentium4 that promised to run at speeds faster than 4ghz, due to arrive in '05, but Intel never offered the Tejas, but MS did ask for it, but at a far lower price than Intel were willing to sell it for in '05. Plus the fact that test showed that a chip running that speed would need significantly more cooling than they had planned, again, raising the end cost in production.

Neither Intel or Nvidia were willing to sign over rights for their chips to MS. By not doing so, it meant that the final cost would be higher on the finished item, as they would control the production, whereas if MS owned it, they (MS) could use their own plants to build the chips, saving huge amounts on the finished product.

So in walked IBM and ATI who were willing to do just that, (there were being pitched at the same time as the others as an alternative, so all parties knew everyone was vying for a slice of the MS 360 pie. They (IBM/ATI) could see the advantages of being in millions of end users lounge rooms by 2010. But this meant a change in direction regarding 1st-Gen games playing on the 360. Which is another story.

@ johnnypatras :

Not doubting you mate, or your English mate. However, the Valhalla is the last of the current series of motherboards which will be preceded by the two final ones for the 360, Jasper and Opus. The Valhalla is the one which is supposedly carrying the new unified MB which they began looking into as early as 2003.

I's release is to correspond with the new x720 in or around late '09 or early 2010. While the Jasper (which replaces the Falcon and due in Fall of '08) and Opus MB's will be fitted in between that period and the x720's release, as they reduce the over costs on production and reduce the size and thus production costs on the MB's.

In fact, the name Valhalla is not the actual name of the Motherboard per se', but the name of the "Super Chip" which will be mounted on the unified GPU/CPU motherboard which is yet to be actually "named", but scheduled for release in the x720.

The last MB in this current series will most likely be the Opus due out in '09.

But I hear some saying, yeah but that only gives the Opus a short life span as the Superchiped Valhalla will be out by late '09 early 2010.

Yes, it will, but the Valhalla equipted motherboard is for the x720, NOT the 360. The Opus will be the last MB for that series, and will last the remainder of years in the 360 and the Valhalla equipted MB will be the initial MB for the next iteration of hardware.

So while one ends, yet continues, the new is introduced and heads the way. Get it . . . you can't just drop one and start a new one, there MUST be overlap and there must be two version on the market to offer choice and a transition period between models. 360 - x720 etc.

@ jspc1989 :

Not tryingto ruffle you mate, however, Steve Balmer and Robbie Bach both signed off on a budget that allowed around 6.3 billion loss over the next 7 years from the release of the 1st-gen Xbox as a worse case scenario, but at a best case scenario, they could come home with a profit as early as mid '08 if everything went their way.

This was outlined in a 80 page white paper released by the heads of Xbox-Div in 2003 called XE 03. So yes, they were willing to simply right that amount off. At the time, MS had over $US32 billion of cash assets (liquid assets) while Sony had just $US3 billion. They (MS) could see thatthey could afford the possible loss of that amount in the greater scheme of things, and when Bill Gates and Steve Balmer as well as Robbie Bach read the XE 03, and did the numbers, they could see the "possibilities" and signed off on it.

Up until that point, the 360 was still on paper, but not a solid fact regarding budgetary expenses. The MS Xbox-Div had to meet targets and budgets in order to get further funding during the design and early stages of its conception.

If anyone wants some detailed info on these facts or information, then I'd suggest reading just two major works by Dean Takahashi called, Opening The Xbox and Xbox 360 Unlcoaked. Both excellent reads and give some very detailed insights into the console as a platform. You'll find them at Amazon.com or any online store. I managed to get a signed copy from Dean several years ago.

+ Show (16) more repliesLast reply 3703d ago
etownone3704d ago

that sucks... it should be released within this console's lifespan.

anyways... i see rumors for halo 4 and it bring me back to last year and the flood of rumors, news, and pics before the release of halo 3

lodossrage3704d ago (Edited 3704d ago )

I say this because this might be a bad move. When the original creator is taken off of a franchise and it's given to a new developer, it loses a great deal of its personality and style.

Look at what happened to crash bandicoot when Naughty Dog sold it

Look at what happened to Spyro when Insomniac sold it.

I'm not saying Halo will suffer the same fate. Gearbox is a good group. But regardless, the possibility of Halo loosing some of its substance is very real if Bungie isn't the developer working on it

Of course, for now this is just a rumor. So we have no idea how much of this is true (if any of it at all)

etownone3704d ago

"Look at what happened to crash bandicoot when Naughty Dog sold it

Lot at what happened to Spyro when Insomniac sold it."

I didn't know those were the original teasm behind those games... PS3 could have had some major console exclusive platformers, and judging by the latest work from those developers, those games could have been sick.

r2kcipher3704d ago

this may be good if true! hopefully they add the strategy element to it. allot like BIA. but it probably wont include master chief. cause hes a loner. that means the combat will be more realistic than the others too. wich is a good thing, and what the series needs imo.

lodossrage3704d ago

but at the same time it MIGHT not. To me, this is a gigantic risk. Even more so because Halo is MS flagship franchise. If it works out, it will payoff big. But if it doesn't work out, the fall might be devastating.

But for now, we'll just have to see if the rumor holds true or not.

Bnet3433704d ago (Edited 3704d ago )

Gearbox did Halo PC.

@lodossrage

True. But it's not the same as Spyro and Crash situation.

lodossrage3704d ago

But we aren't talking about a simple port here.

Now we're talking about a full fledged game of their own. Big difference

r2kcipher3704d ago

i completely understand what ur saying. this is a different company. and they have a much different style then bungie. so there is a chance this game may fail. but to me BIA has better gameplay than halo 1-3. so i would like to see halo 4 be developed by gearbox. and of course i am the minority. more people like the simple halo gameplay they have come to expect. but i think its time it evolves.

lodossrage3704d ago

Hey, I'm all for any game evolving. Improving is always a great thing. But yeah, like you just said r2k, Gearbox favors more realistic styles of play. That MIGHT make the next Halo less accessible for some people. OR, like you said, it could raise it to the next level.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 3704d ago