CHUD.com Community › Forums › VIDEO GAMES & RPG › Video Games › Yet another Halo 2 rumor thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Yet another Halo 2 rumor thread

post #1 of 62
12/29/03 at 4:20pm
Thread Starter 
The latest issue of EGM just showed up in my mailbox, and in *three* separate articles they mention that H2 is apparently being pushed back yet again. The somewhat-reliable Quarterman hints that we might be looking at a Fall 2004 release, but "definitely before next Christmas." At the very least, the late-February release date rumors are seeming more and more unlikely.

And this is just the shittiest thing ever.

Fuck, just release a "Halo Online" with 20 or so online maps already. I paid $50 for the not-so-fun Counter-Strike, which is online only. I'd gladly do the same for Halo. Throw us a goddamned bone. I can't take this waiting.
Reply
post #2 of 62
12/29/03 at 4:25pm
As said in the earlier Halo 2 rumour thread, the idea to release a multiplayer demo of Halo 2 or even just maps of Halo (the PC version) to play on Live would be great. This delay, however, just raises my hopes that Bungie is trying to produce a game that will totally destroy and chance of any other platform dominating (what looks like now) the second half of 2004.
Reply
post #3 of 62
12/29/03 at 4:33pm
Thread Starter 
Here's what I'm wondering...Microsoft has said that they're planning to debut the Xbox 2 at one of the gaming shows this spring...maybe E3? Isn't the turnaround from releasing console specs to releasing the actual product usually less than a year?

If the Xbox 2 is going to debut next October--which is kind of unlikely, but still possible--then I wouldn't be surprised at all if Halo 2 is being held back and retooled to be the heavy hitter for their next generation. Which, again, would suck.
Reply
post #4 of 62
12/29/03 at 4:40pm
I don't get it, Halo is definitely a brilliant FPS... but why make the same mistake twice? You CAN'T sell a console with an FPS as it's flagship, perhaps with LIVE support it will help, but I just don't see it.

Most FPS fans are PC users, who wouldn't pay $350 for the privilege to play one.

Out of curiosity, is '05 to be the year the next generation consoles will be unleashed? I don't pay much attention anymore, usually get them when they die off. For instance, I'm probably getting a GameCube in February for Crystal Chronicles. For now my SP and Dreamcast are enough console goodness to last me a long, long time.
Reply
post #5 of 62
12/29/03 at 4:41pm
Xbox 2 will not be out next year. 2005/2006 is the anticipated timeframe for the next generation.
Reply
post #6 of 62
12/29/03 at 4:43pm
Wanna take bets as to what time MooMoo comes in here ranting about PC FPS's vs. Console?
Reply
post #7 of 62
12/29/03 at 4:44pm
Love not getting in jokes, reminds me of The Zeppo.
Reply
post #8 of 62
12/29/03 at 4:45pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Slater
Isn't the turnaround from releasing console specs to releasing the actual product usually less than a year?
Not always, the PS2 specs came out a very long time before the product hit stores. Everything I've read so far puts the next system releases in 05 or 06.
Reply
post #9 of 62
12/29/03 at 5:08pm
'06 has my money. The fabriation plants don't even have the complete parts breakdowns yet, so they couldn't begin a run even if the specs were done.

That aside, it seems like the big three FPS games are all waiting for the other ones to set a hard and fast release. Realistically, the only games that would give competition to Halo 2 are Doom 3 and Half-Life 2, which are both on PC. With the whole Xbox/PC thing aside, what other game would/could compete? Seems like the manufacturers can take their time (good thing), as they're not racing anyone else to market.
Reply
post #10 of 62
12/29/03 at 5:09pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by otisthecat
Not always, the PS2 specs came out a very long time before the product hit stores. Everything I've read so far puts the next system releases in 05 or 06.
Good. That's what I'm hoping.

And Monkaholic, I think Microsoft could most definitely sell a metric assload of Xboxs with a new Halo game as its killer app. Something like 40 percent of Xbox owners also own Halo. Neither Nintendo or Sony has a current mascot that can claim that kind of awareness. Halo 2 would be EXACTLY the type of game that would sell their next-gen systems.
Reply
post #11 of 62
12/29/03 at 5:17pm
If I had to guess I would say Halo 2 around Christmas 04 and a new X-box and Halo 3 Christmas 06.
Reply
post #12 of 62
12/29/03 at 5:21pm
Thread Starter 
Yeah, that would be my guess, too. It just fucking sucks.

Me wantee now.
Reply
post #13 of 62
12/29/03 at 5:25pm
They could at least dump a playable demo on us. Best Buy had a video demo that is supposed to have some new stuff on it but it was 12$. Fuck paying for a non-playable demo.
Reply
post #14 of 62
12/29/03 at 5:32pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Slater
And Monkaholic, I think Microsoft could most definitely sell a metric assload of Xboxs with a new Halo game as its killer app. Something like 40 percent of Xbox owners also own Halo. Neither Nintendo or Sony has a current mascot that can claim that kind of awareness. Halo 2 would be EXACTLY the type of game that would sell their next-gen systems.
Ehhh... If you say so, the XBOX to me is a dissapointment. They dumped ridiculous sums of money, and posted a loss on every system sold for a while (if that's still not the case). They have the most powerfull system out there, yet they battle for second with Nintendo worldwide.

If the first Halo-an amazing game by all accounts-wasn't enough to get the XBOX to even compete with Sony, why should Halo 2 be any different?
Reply
post #15 of 62
12/29/03 at 5:53pm
Thread Starter 
Because the PS2 had a one year head start, and was the follow-up to one of the most wildly successful consoles of all time. Something like 6 million people owned a PS1. That's a HUGE established fanbase, and it's hardly surprising that Sony is still #1.

But the fact that an untested console publisher is beating Nintendo in hardware and software sales every month is pretty impressive. The Xbox is doing just fine. Personally, I don't give a shit which console is "Number One." All I care about is that they all stay in business and keep making games for me to play.
Reply
post #16 of 62
12/29/03 at 6:12pm
Quote:
Ehhh... If you say so, the XBOX to me is a dissapointment. They dumped ridiculous sums of money, and posted a loss on every system sold for a while (if that's still not the case). They have the most powerfull system out there, yet they battle for second with Nintendo worldwide.
Every console sells for a loss, except perhaps for Gamecube at launch. (No way it costs less than $99 to produce now, though.) Regardless, yes, MS did take a bath with its investment in the system. And it was definitely an unmitigated disaster in Japan. But as far as market- and mindshare goes, I think they're doing at least as well as they had realistically hoped. Remember this is the first time the market has ever supported three consoles, and if any of the systems were temporarily in danger of a premature demise, it was Gamecube.

Quote:
If the first Halo-an amazing game by all accounts-wasn't enough to get the XBOX to even compete with Sony, why should Halo 2 be any different?
Only the next GTA game is more killer-app than Halo 2. But no one can compete with Sony right now. They have to fumble first; the market is theirs to lose. PS2 launched with virtually nothing and still sold a bajillion units. There was no catching up by the time Xbox and Gamecube launched. The next generation launches will probably be simultaneous, so the results will be interesting. But if PS3 launches with GTA4, the "war" will be over before it started.. again.
Reply
post #17 of 62
12/29/03 at 6:17pm
Thread Starter 
I'd gladly go the rest of my life without another GTA game if I could have Halo 2 RIGHT NOW. But yeah, that's still Sony's crown jewel.

Speaking of GTA4, the same issue of EGM reports that 50 Cent and Eminem are both appearing in the game as themselves. Kind of weird...
Reply
post #18 of 62
12/29/03 at 6:18pm
Beating Nintendo in hardware and software? Odd... normally it's the other way around. Perhaps it's due to the Japanese ignoring it. Usually I see the XBOX bairly ahead of the GameCube in North America, and then ridiculously far behind in Japan. Haven't seen European numbers though, so perhaps I'm mistaken? Can't imagine the brits being anywhere near as biased as the Japanese though.

Anyway, my point wasn't about beinig number one, my issue was choosing an FPS as your flagship title. The genre just isn't big on consoles.

Ahhh... GTA... runs away... I just don't get them.
Reply
post #19 of 62
12/29/03 at 6:19pm
Funny that I just can't get into an incarnation of GTA. And yet I still am here salivating for flipping Fable.

Hell I'd take Ninja Gaiden right now if I could.
Reply
post #20 of 62
12/29/03 at 6:35pm
Thread Starter 
I'm just talking about the Gamecube here, by the way. If you factor in that piece of shit Gameboy Advance, I think Nintendo is actually either tied with Sony or very close to beating them. In terms of market domination, Xbox is second in America and Europe, while Gamecube is second in Japan. But seriously...none of that matters. All three consoles are surviving. We're gonna get more good games for all three systems. That's all that matters.
Reply
post #21 of 62
12/29/03 at 7:01pm
Quote:
Originally posted by MoNkaholic


Anyway, my point wasn't about beinig number one, my issue was choosing an FPS as your flagship title. The genre just isn't big on consoles.
But HALO is big-selling title. So, uh. Yeah.
Reply
post #22 of 62
12/29/03 at 7:24pm
Oh, I was talking about the Gamecube only too, throw in the GBA and it's probably ahead of the PS2 in consoles sold. Nintendo's portables sell far more than one would reasonably expect.

And yeah, sure, Halo sells a lot. I've probably underestimated it, I just never think of it as a game people buy systems for, but perhaps people do. Though I wonder how much of it's numbers are due to the fact that it was the only game worth a damn for a long, long time. I mean hell... Splinter Cell-of all games-sold a million copies on the XBOX.

Oh, and can I claim ownership over the word "beinig"? That word just rules.
Reply
post #23 of 62
12/29/03 at 7:57pm
Thread Starter 
I've played Halo AT LEAST once a week for over two years now. I've probably put more hours on that single game than on every Gamecube and Playstation 2 game I own *combined*. Don't underestimate the sheer fanaticism that some people have for this game. I'd buy whatever Bill Gates told me to buy if it came bundled with the latest version of Halo.
Reply
post #24 of 62
12/29/03 at 8:07pm
Egad, I'm not bashing Halo, in fact I think it's one of the best FPS' I've ever played. I just don't think console when looking for an FPS, nor do I think the genre is big enough in the console market for it to carry a system. That's all.
Reply
post #25 of 62
12/29/03 at 8:12pm
The Japanese don't respond well to FPS's correct?
Reply
post #26 of 62
12/29/03 at 8:15pm
Not sure, but it's hard to tell. It's not like there are all that many console FPS'. Hell, the only non-PC related FPS' I can think of are Golden Eye and Metroid Prime.
Reply
post #27 of 62
12/29/03 at 8:41pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Michael 'Verbal' Rabattino
Wanna take bets as to what time MooMoo comes in here ranting about PC FPS's vs. Console?
I hope its soon, because I'm about to mess my pants.

Oh oh oh and then I hope he tells us how "kiddie" games mean you're a communist.
Reply
post #28 of 62
12/29/03 at 11:14pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Godzuki
I hope its soon, because I'm about to mess my pants.

Oh oh oh and then I hope he tells us how "kiddie" games mean you're a communist.

Quote:
Will possibly be posted by MooMoo

LOLOLOL!!!!111 i HEARD THE XOBX (HUEG LOL!!1) REALLY HAS A 386 INSIDE AND THAT THE ONLY REASON IT LOOSK GOOD IS BECAUSE M$ PAYS THE DEVELOPERS TONS OF $$$$!!!!111 ALSO, M$ HAS TO SPEND $50000 PER XBXO (HGUE LOL!!!!!111) BECAUSE INTEL DOESNT MAKE 386S ANYMORE!!!!1111ONEONEONE M$ IS SOOOO DUM AND THEY SUX!!!!!111

ALSO MY PC IS WAY 1337 AND COSTED TONS OF $$$$!!!!111 GOOD THING MY DAD IS RICH AND HAS A BIGR DIK THAN UR DAD!!!!!1111
Reply
post #29 of 62
12/30/03 at 12:06am
Well that was impressive.
Reply
post #30 of 62
12/30/03 at 2:38am
The interesting thing about the next-gen consoles is that they are standardizing, to some degree. IBM has all 3 contracts - Cell with Sony and Toshiba and possibly PowerPC with Nintendo. There was speculation that, because IBM has chip fabs that contract with AMD to produce the A64, that the A64 will be the next X-Box chip. Then again, there's also speculation that it will be PPC or Cell too. Who knows at this point. On top of that, ATi will be providing graphics for Nintendo and Microsoft as well.

Will there really be much difference in the next generation, or will it come down to games? It was fairly noticable this generation - Sony looks the worst, X-Box the best, but Nintendo has the portability. They'll probably be different just like Dell, Gateway, and HP are different - in looks only.
Reply
post #31 of 62
12/30/03 at 4:52am
If you think about it, competing consoles don't normally differ much in performance. Outside of headstarts by Sega, I can't think of a time when consoles had drastic differences in performance.

If that remains to be the case, I have to assume that Nintendo will put the most care in the construction and execution of their system, but restrict the expandability of the console and the diversity of it's titles. Microsoft will give the users everything and the kitchen sink, but lack foresight, and Sony will just continue to be the IBM of the group, you'll never have to take shit for picking them.
Reply
post #32 of 62
12/30/03 at 5:07pm
Quote:
Originally posted by MoNkaholic
Ehhh... If you say so, the XBOX to me is a dissapointment. They dumped ridiculous sums of money, and posted a loss on every system sold for a while (if that's still not the case). They have the most powerfull system out there, yet they battle for second with Nintendo worldwide.
The thing is, I read an article (Time maybe?) before the X-Box was even released that stated that Gates was aware that the X-Box was going to lose money and he'd even budgeted the estimated losses in. His intention was never to make money with the X-Box, his intention was to claim the market with the X-Box 2 using what they learned from their mistakes with X-Box 1 to have a far more successful system. Based on that background, the X-Box has far exceeded what Microsoft had hoped.
Reply
post #33 of 62
12/30/03 at 5:09pm
Having seriously watched the level of excitement on this, its either going to be released as the second coming, or its going to flop harder than the E.T. the Movie game that Atari released in the 80s. Sayin.
Reply
post #34 of 62
12/31/03 at 12:31am
Once in a while I have a dream that I get an unmarked disc in the mail from my uncle who works for Microsoft with a note to pop it in my XBox. It's an unreleased Halo 2 demo. Yeah, that would be cool if it wasn't a dream.
Reply
post #35 of 62
12/31/03 at 1:11pm
Quote:
Originally posted by prala is just for jk
Having seriously watched the level of excitement on this, its either going to be released as the second coming, or its going to flop harder than the E.T. the Movie game that Atari released in the 80s. Sayin.

Impossible. Not that Halo 2 will flop (as remote as it seems), but NO game will ever flop harder than ET. The geniuses at Warner Communications (which bought Atari in the late 70's/early 80's) manufactured more ET games than there were Atari consoles.

It'd be kind of hard for Microsoft to mess up THAT bad. Even a re-hash of the first Halo with new levels and X-Box Live support would sell millions.
Reply
post #36 of 62
1/3/04 at 2:03am
These constant delays do suck, but I find there are plenty of good games out (and on the near horizon) to keep us going until then.

And, Slater, pick up Rainbow Six 3 will ya.
Reply
post #37 of 62
1/3/04 at 3:07am
Quote:
Originally posted by MoNkaholic
If you think about it, competing consoles don't normally differ much in performance. Outside of headstarts by Sega, I can't think of a time when consoles had drastic differences in performance.

If that remains to be the case, I have to assume that Nintendo will put the most care in the construction and execution of their system, but restrict the expandability of the console and the diversity of it's titles. Microsoft will give the users everything and the kitchen sink, but lack foresight, and Sony will just continue to be the IBM of the group, you'll never have to take shit for picking them.
Man do I think you've got it all ass backwards.

Nintendo has had the worst hardware in the last two generations. The 64 and GC are behind the times in many ways. The GC is in fact failing just as the 64 did.

Microsoft doesn't have foresight? Wha? They have the deepest pockets and the largest assemblage of R&D brainiac engineers than the other two combined. Bill knows how to win. He isn't the richest man in the world for nothing. The losses were expected by MS. Bill said he was going to support the XBox no matter what financial state it was in for a full 5 years before rethinking anything.

Sony, never take shit? They build shit. Their games are getting almost as redundant as Nintedos at this point.

Microsoft by far has the best library of AAA titles among all the consoles.

I am a MS fanboy and always have been since I'm big into PC gaming and have been for over 20 years. Still, it's just common sense.
Reply
post #38 of 62
1/3/04 at 4:04pm
Odd, I said Nintendo would show the most care in the construction and execution of their system, because quite frankly, the other systems always have issues in these areas. Of all three systems, if I had to choose an enclosure, it would be the Gamecube by far.

Nintendo has issues getting third party software, and often don't look into expanding their system into other arenas, but the hardware all around is usually quite solid.

Quote:
Originally posted by Floydian Trip
Microsoft doesn't have foresight? Wha? They have the deepest pockets and the largest assemblage of R&D brainiac engineers than the other two combined. Bill knows how to win. He isn't the richest man in the world for nothing. The losses were expected by MS. Bill said he was going to support the XBox no matter what financial state it was in for a full 5 years before rethinking anything.
They released a system with DVD playback, but one that only works with a seperate remote. They release that abominable controller. And the system is ridiculous in proportions. These are things they should have figured out before release, not after.

Quote:
Originally posted by Floydian Trip
Sony, never take shit? They build shit. Their games are getting almost as redundant as Nintedos at this point.
Yet they're still #1, by an even farther margin than any system before it IIRC. And your quality title arguement is subjective, so theres really no reason to go into that.

In the end, it's ok to be a Microsoft fanboy, but you shouldn't disregard the merits of the other vendors while simultaneously forgetting Microsofts own blunders.
Reply
post #39 of 62
1/3/04 at 8:17pm
I haven't seen Microsoft make any blunders. 2 Years young and they've done quite an impressive job imo.
Reply
post #40 of 62
1/4/04 at 3:10pm
Impressive, in units sold, it's third worldwide, while sporting the best hardware (performance wise) and easiest development platform out there.

Perhaps it's because I remember the hype generated around the XBOX before it's release-how they were to challenge the PS2-that makes me look at the XBOX so harshly.
Reply
post #41 of 62
1/5/04 at 11:26am
MS built the Xbox with a harddrive and with Xbox live in mind. It's all integrated and they had a very laid out plan for the execution of the system. Sony had to catch up and add these components to the PS2. They had the headstart of course, but I hardly think you can say MS didn't have foresight. Integrated online and HDs will be standard here on out.`
Reply
post #42 of 62
1/5/04 at 12:03pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Slater
And Monkaholic, I think Microsoft could most definitely sell a metric assload of Xboxs with a new Halo game as its killer app. Something like 40 percent of Xbox owners also own Halo. Neither Nintendo or Sony has a current mascot that can claim that kind of awareness. Halo 2 would be EXACTLY the type of game that would sell their next-gen systems.
Selling a new console to early adopters is a given. Xbox tends to have a more hardcore gamer customer base already, and most of those will buy Xbox 2 on launch anyway.

Where the software comes into play is in enticing the mainstream consumer to part with their cash, to crossover from a games role to a more general entertainment role, and that's where Sony have excelled while Microsoft and Nintendo have struggled.

And Halo 2 will be a gamers game. Doesn't matter how amazing it looks or plays, a first-person shooter won't convince your average Joe Schmoe to slap down $400 for a console.

New consoles are sold on the back of driving and fighting games (twenty-something males) and platform games (children and families).
Reply
post #43 of 62
1/5/04 at 12:08pm
Lets not forget sports Dan. I agree with your assessment though, people that I know who own xbox are all early adopters of everything and are generally more sophisticated technology-wise than other people.
Reply
post #44 of 62
1/5/04 at 2:55pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Imperator GAC
MS built the Xbox with a harddrive and with Xbox live in mind. It's all integrated and they had a very laid out plan for the execution of the system. Sony had to catch up and add these components to the PS2. They had the headstart of course, but I hardly think you can say MS didn't have foresight. Integrated online and HDs will be standard here on out.`
Yeah, but think about it, how integral to this generation of consoles was integrated internet play or hard drives? Did it sell the XBOX on release? How long did it take before Live started to draw it's customers? It made much more sense to release a system that could play online (sort of like those HDTV ready TV's), than to release a system that could by default. There simply wasn't enough demand to warrant it.

Now that it is, were suddenly talking about XBOX 2's and PS3's.
Reply
post #45 of 62
1/5/04 at 4:28pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Floydian Trip
Microsoft by far has the best library of AAA titles among all the consoles.
Well now that's just silly. All three systems are about equal in console exclusive, must have games.
Reply
post #46 of 62
1/5/04 at 6:22pm
I don't care for Bill Gates, but here's the tally:

PS2's bought - 3. PS2's broken (without having me throw anything at it) - 3. The first PS2 I bought was defective - it wouldn't read any disks and scratched the fuck out of GTA:VC.

X-Box bought - 1. X-Box not broken (and not through lack of trying - I threw my controller at it all through PRINCE OF PERSIA) - 1.

Video game parties held because HALO multiplayer kicks all level of ass - 4.

Video game parties for PS2 - 0.

X-Box rules.

And as far as I know (to stay on topic) - HALO 2 is coming out in April. All the stores I've contacted still list this.

Is there more specific information than the magazine that says it's been pushed back?
Reply
post #47 of 62
1/5/04 at 6:35pm
I've never understood how people break their systems. I play a shit load of games, use the DVD players on both systems all the time, and have never had any problems. I still have my original PS and N64, both work fine. If I dug around my parents house I probably still have a SNES and an original NES that, as far as I know, still work fine. The only thing that has ever broken on me was the rumble feature from a third party PS controller. What the fuck do you guys do with your shit?
Reply
post #48 of 62
1/5/04 at 6:41pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by Dan Whitehead
Selling a new console to early adopters is a given. Xbox tends to have a more hardcore gamer customer base already, and most of those will buy Xbox 2 on launch anyway.

Where the software comes into play is in enticing the mainstream consumer to part with their cash, to crossover from a games role to a more general entertainment role, and that's where Sony have excelled while Microsoft and Nintendo have struggled.

And Halo 2 will be a gamers game. Doesn't matter how amazing it looks or plays, a first-person shooter won't convince your average Joe Schmoe to slap down $400 for a console.

New consoles are sold on the back of driving and fighting games (twenty-something males) and platform games (children and families).
I disagree. I actually don't think launch games are very important for selling consoles. Look at the Playstation 2 and GameBoy Advance launches, which are probably the two most successful console launches of the last decade. With the possible exception of SSX (which--at the time--was a very "under the radar" game), neither console even had any GOOD games, much less the type of games that average joes were talking about.

I think systems sell based on the strength of their last console. The Super NES was popular, so the N64 sold well on launch day. The N64 was *not* popular, and the Gamecube suffered on launch day. The GBA and PS2 didn't sell well because they had good games (because they didn't) or because they had impressive hardware (because they didn't)....they sold well because the original Game Boy and Playstation 1 consoles were insanely popular.

Will Halo 2 attract average consumers who have never picked up a controller before? Of course not, but I don't think Tekken 24 or the latest Ridge Racer game will either. Consoles have become too damn expensive, and I doubt many curious consumers will drop $400+ on launch day just to see what all the fuss is about, regardless of whether it comes packaged with a new Mario game or not. I think this next generation of console wars is going to be directed squarely at the hardcore gamers, the 20-something males who have disposable incomes and monkeys to feed. And in that arena, at least, Microsoft is doing pretty damn well. I don't think Gates has anything to worry about yet...
Reply
post #49 of 62
1/5/04 at 6:45pm
Quote:
Originally posted by otisthecat
I've never understood how people break their systems. I play a shit load of games, use the DVD players on both systems all the time, and have never had any problems. I still have my original PS and N64, both work fine. If I dug around my parents house I probably still have a SNES and an original NES that, as far as I know, still work fine. The only thing that has ever broken on me was the rumble feature from a third party PS controller. What the fuck do you guys do with your shit?
That's the thing. I didn't do anything to my PS2s. I played DVDs on them and I recently heard that decreases the life of your system (which sounds damn retarded to me). They just stopped reading discs one day.

My X-Box, on the other hand, plays them fine. And no read problems for any games.

Side note: the reason I play DVDs on these systems is because they make for nice players when you're watching TV and you want to put something on for the kid in the other room.
Reply
post #50 of 62
1/5/04 at 6:48pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Nordling
They just stopped reading discs one day.
You did try a $7 cleaning disc before buying a whole new machine right? Cause my PS2 and X-box get disc read errors every now and then but have always played them fine after running a cleaner.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Video Games
CHUD.com Community › Forums › VIDEO GAMES & RPG › Video Games › Yet another Halo 2 rumor thread