Halo 4 Release too quick?

I’m thinking that releasing Halo 4 in December of 2012 is pretty quick. 2011 is almost over and Reach has almost reached it’s first birthday. I think if Halo 4 was release in the middle of 2013 I think that would be better because I think Reach is an awesome game and I think that it should have at least two and a half years life span.

> I’m thinking that releasing Halo 4 in December of 2012 is pretty quick. 2011 is almost over and Reach has almost reached it’s first birthday. I think if Halo 4 was release in the middle of 2013 I think that would be better because I think Reach is an awesome game and I think that it should have at least two and a half years life span.

It’s been in development for two years prior to being announced. I think it’s the perfect time to release it.

I’m ready to toss Reach to the side at any time.

Its fine, I would rather have Halo 4 tommorrow if I could.

True, but.

People will then play Halo:CEA.
For like a year, to find all the skulls, easter eggs and stuff.

To be honest, I can’t Wait. Don’t make it a Longer Wait!

It has been in development for years.

Halo 3 - 2007

Halo 4 - 2012

5 years is too much.

Other game releases should not affect the release date of any of the games in the games basic linear timeline with MC.

> It has been in development for years.

I know. But with Halo CEA and the TU coming I think that Reach has a year and a half minimum.

> Halo 3 - 2007
>
> Halo 4 - 2012
>
>
> 5 years is too much.
>
> Other game releases should not affect the release date of any of the games in the games basic linear timeline with MC.

Halo 3 - 2007

Halo 3 ODST - 2009

Halo Reach - 2010

Halo 4 - 2012

It has always been three years between Halo CE, 2, 3 and Reach excluding ODST since it was an expansion of 3.

> I’m thinking that releasing Halo 4 in December of 2012 is pretty quick. 2011 is almost over and Reach has almost reached it’s first birthday. I think if Halo 4 was release in the middle of 2013 I think that would be better because I think Reach is an awesome game and I think that it should have at least two and a half years life span.

Halo: Reach is a garbage game.
The only reason I have it, along with many other people who do not like the game, is because we spent money on it, thinking it would be the best new Halo game. Which it isn’t.
Halo: Reach isn’t a Halo.
They just through the word Halo into the title and called it there “swan song”.
Reach was not a swan song. It was garbage.

> > It has been in development for years.
>
> I know. But with Halo CEA and the TU coming I think that Reach has a year and a half minimum.

Most people can’t survive off that broken game for much longer though. Even with the TU, it’s still going to have AL, Bloom, AAs, low jumps, slow running, etc.

I can’t wait for some more info on Halo 4.

> > Halo 3 - 2007
> >
> > Halo 4 - 2012
> >
> >
> > 5 years is too much.
> >
> > Other game releases should not affect the release date of any of the games in the games basic linear timeline with MC.
>
> Halo 3 - 2007
>
> Halo 3 ODST - 2009
>
> Halo Reach - 2010
>
> Halo 4 - 2012
>
> It has always been three years between Halo CE, 2, 3 and Reach excluding ODST since it was an expansion of 3.

Linear storyline games with MC in it should not have their release dates affected by or changed because of a spinoff game not in the original Master Chief storyline. The fact that reach was just released last year and CEA is being released in a month and a bit doesn’t change the fact we haven’t had a new game with Master Chief in it for 5 years…

I’m going to side with the guys actually making the game. If they say 2012, why would I think differently? They certainly know a lot more about it’s development progress than anyone else would.

> > Halo 3 - 2007
> >
> > Halo 4 - 2012
> >
> >
> > 5 years is too much.
> >
> > Other game releases should not affect the release date of any of the games in the games basic linear timeline with MC.
>
> Halo 3 - 2007
>
> Halo 3 ODST - 2009
>
> Halo Reach - 2010
>
> Halo 4 - 2012
>
> It has always been three years between Halo CE, 2, 3 and Reach excluding ODST since it was an expansion of 3.

Desperate times call for desperate measures. Reach is broken, Bungie didn’t do anything to fix it, 343 is trying but even they can only do so much. Forgive me for throwing your opinion to the side but I am not waiting another year with Reach, Halo CE was amazing, Halo Anniversary looks and will be amazing, but like the Title Update, that can only go so far. It doesn’t take long to finish CE’s campaign, then to find all the hidden goodies will take a while but that won’t last a year, we get new maps, the maps look brilliant but it’s still Reach. Reach is broken. Forgive me and please don’t think I’m being disrespectful but I refuse to wait until 2013 for Halo 4.

Five years of waiting for a GOOD Halo story is enough. I’m ready to step into Chief’s shoes and blow away the villains again.

> Its fine, I would rather have Halo 4 tommorrow if I could.

Yeah I’m going to go with this.

> Its fine, I would rather have Halo 4 tommorrow if I could.

^ that.

- Jason Garwood

I agree with you OP, but now that they’ve given us a teaser they better deliever in December 2012. Also, all the newer Halos are going to come out faster, it’s just what microsoft has planned with it.

Waiting two years for a new game is much better than waiting three, COD fans get a new one every year.

i kinda agree with you OP, honestly i want 343 to take their time and get this game perfect if that means i have to wait an extra year or two then im ok with that, as long as this game stands up to the halo legacy

> Waiting two years for a new game is much better than waiting three, COD fans get a new one every year.

CoD fans also get the same boring experience every year, with a few little gimmicks added in… So personally, I would never want something like that to happen to Halo.

Bungie had a procedure with the first trilogy where they released the games every 3 years, and I think that worked really well. But now it’s been 4 years since MC’s last game (it will have been at least 5 by the time of release) so I’m too ready to get my hands on this game.

I’d rather not wait an extra 6mos-1 year if I don’t have to.

> > Waiting two years for a new game is much better than waiting three, COD fans get a new one every year.
>
> CoD fans also get the same boring experience every year, with a few little gimmicks added in… So personally, I would never want something like that to happen to Halo.
>
> Bungie had a procedure with the first trilogy where they released the games every 3 years, and I think that worked really well. But now it’s been 4 years since MC’s last game (it will have been at least 5 by the time of release) so I’m too ready to get my hands on this game.
>
> I’d rather not wait an extra 6mos-1 year if I don’t have to.

IDK why people say COD is boring considering how well the sales do…