148
rate

New Halo Wars info!

June 06, 2008 in News comments 8

Halo Wars is certainly starting to gather interest as it takes form, and the latest issue of Gamepro adds some new tidbits of information to add to the pile.

Basically the game is going to be fast, real fast. In fact the developers say you can be in combat within 10 seconds of starting the game (though this is likely a exaggeration) and a list of units confirmed so far is also included.

Courtesy of this month's GamePro, which is as you read this working its way to subscriber's mailboxes. While the cover feature promises news on all future Halo titles, it only dishes out hard information (and gorgeous new screens) on Halo Wars. But that's OK. We'll take it. Because a console RTS is a new experience for Ensemble, they've stripped back their traditional playstyle in favour of something a little more Halo-esque. Which means only one economic unit - "supplies" - and fast, fast, fast battles, with the team promising you can be fighting "within ten seconds" of hitting the battlefield. Also revealed is at least a partial list of the units that'll be available.
Bale Fire via kotaku.com »
Favourite this article Add source
| More
Report!
News story attached to:

Comments

Register as a member to subscribe comments.
  • 0
    Existenz Jun 7, 08
    Is it just me or is this game just going to fail because it is yet again trying to take on a genre full of much better and fleshed out games... Command and Conquer, World in Conflict, Age of Empires and even Company of Heroes, these are what RTS is meant to be and only one works on the consoles so far and that is Command and Conquer.

    The fact that they state the game is going to be really fast is just a turn off, i hate in C&C when you play online, a 8 year old with no patience just rushes you before you have build a war factory, RTS is about patience and strategy... It seems that they are trying to make Halo Wars an RTS with FPS pacing and that is just going to be poor, i for one am going to hate this game i know it.

    Maybe the new breed of RTS is geared towards the impatient but maybe i'm too old school to accept these changes, i prefer the 16 hour battles that can ensue in Command and Conquer and the day long battles in Age of Empires, if fighting starts after 10 seconds i find i will complete the game within a few hours, any structured old school RTS player probably will, and they better have some form of Skirmish mode, not just story modes.
    • 0
      Slumpy monkey Jun 7, 08
      Halo wars isnt your average RTS.

      Its objective based. It has no base building so rishing would be pointless.

      There building this from the ground up for consoles, So of course its going to work well. Halo wars isnt massive battles and a more units win RTS. Its actually more tactic based.
      • 0
        Existenz Jun 8, 08
        Even so, World in Conflict isn't base building based, but is still slow and much more interesting than say, the game starting and a fight almost instantly occuring...
  • 0
    Mia Jun 7, 08
    Instead of Wars they should have made the series go to five or six. The game was good, but Wars is going to screw it up.
  • 0
    Kevin Jun 7, 08
    I honestly don't think this game is going to be too great. Looks like Bungie is just trying extend to life of their Halo Series as long as they can
    • 0
      Slumpy monkey Jun 8, 08
      Actually ensamble studios(age of empires) approached Bungie to take on the project.
      • 0
        Existenz Jun 8, 08
        And that instaly means the game is going to be good? I know you didn't say that but just because a developer that is good at making period strategy games based in the 13th century, doesn't mean that they will be good at making a futuristic strategy game, i will await the results but i am not hopeful.

This news story is archived and is closed to comments now.